Let's Fix Construction
  • Blog
  • Why & Who?
  • Workshops
    • Upcoming Workshops
    • A & E Coordination
    • CDT Education Program
    • Let's Fix Construction
    • Social Media & AEC
    • Specifier/Product Rep
    • Specs 101
    • Young Professionals
    • Past Workshops
  • Contributors
  • Submit
  • Accolades
  • Donate
  • Contact

Defining Roles in Your Project

11/20/2017

7 Comments

 
Picture
Contributed by Jake Ortego
Construction projects can be highly complex and unique endeavors. A successful project relies on each person/company performing their function as required.  However, in many cases the exact roles and responsibilities of each entity is not mutually agreed upon, nor understood. Consider the following contrasts in expected functions.

  • Some architects say that their function is only to “convey design intent,” while many contractors and owners assume that the architect’s role is to design every nut and bolt on the project. 
  • There are contractors who only install what is shown in the design while there are architects and owners that believe the contractor should “know” what it takes to build something and account for inferable efforts in their contract price. 
  • A number of owners expect their architect and constructors to know what they want.  In many cases, however, the owner’s involvement is so great that it impacts the project.
 
Chances are that you have an opinion for each one of these examples.  These examples focus on the architect, owner, and constructor.  But that is only the tip of the iceberg.  There are many more parties involved in the construction process and each major group can be made up of multiple professions with a wide range of functions, as well as approaches, to accomplish their scope. This includes estimators, schedulers, specifiers, owner’s reps, material reps, accountants, and legal counsel to name a few.
 
As you read this, you are probably thinking that you already know who does what for the entire construction process.  And it’s possible that your views are shared by people within your company or some of your local professional groups. But the standards can vary between industries, geography, project complexity, corporations, and even between two people sitting next to each other.  To be clear, the primary definitions of many project roles can be agreed upon. Estimators estimate, schedulers schedule, engineers engineer, and so forth.  But gray areas of responsibilities do exist, and it is these areas that may be the root of disagreements that can derail a project.
 
So, what is the solution?  A universal standard may seem to be the easiest answer.  But imagine the complexities of having one standard that covers every possible industry, culture, and available resources for each project. Ideal…but probably not achievable.
A more practical approach is to take the time to talk through expectations and gray areas that exist for the project team members.  These discussions can address concepts such as:
 
  • The obvious triangle of cost, schedule, and quality – This seems so cliché, but it is rarely discussed by a project team.  Defining the priority of these items can greatly affect how problems are approached and who provides the solutions. 
  • Roles and Responsibilities - Another seemingly obvious discussion that does not often take place because everyone assumes they are all in agreement.  The major items are easy, but it is the little things that can turn into problems.  
  • Expectations of deliverables – The final construction product is more mutually understandable as it is a tangible object. The differences in opinion can vary widely for less tangible things such as as-built drawings, quality logs, monthly pay applications, details in change orders, review comments for the same change orders, submittal documentation, return comments for submittal documentation, and so on.  One of the biggest differences in deliverable expectations is in the design that is issued for construction (“IFC”). Architects, owners, constructors, subcontractors, bonding carriers, and legal counsel all have different thoughts on IFC. Potential ambiguities arise from the differences in what these less tangible products need to be and who is responsible for the pieces that may have crossover.
 
Discussions about the items above should not just happen once, but instead be part of continuous conversations throughout the project.  They are not always easy conversations to have, as many times it requires exposing a potential issue that one or more parties do not want to talk about. Many project teams may need to have formally scheduled deep dives into these topics.
 
Does this all sound like Projects 101?  Sure it does.  It's an easy, yet often skipped best practice.   Perhaps it is human nature to assume that we are all smart enough to skip the basics.  Many project teams do not develop a mutual understanding as it seems obvious and a waste of time.  The reality is that by skipping this step they are most likely missing an opportunity to create a more efficient team and have a reduced risk of disagreements. 
7 Comments
Daniel G Frondorf, CPE, CDT link
11/21/2017 10:12:14 am

Very good points, Jake; so it all comes down to communication. For as technical as the world of design and construction is, project success really depends on simple human interaction - perhaps the oldest of old school skills.

Reply
Evan Adams
11/22/2017 12:34:40 pm

And to add another twist many product vendors have instructed reps to circumvent the AED team and (sub)Contractors and directly approach owners. Something I think isn't the most ethical, but when you are talking about people who have billable hour requirements, sometimes it is the most efficient way to get product in front of customer & I've certainly learned that if a customer says "what about product X" then the designer +/- will think "great a decision I don't have to make"

Reply
Paul Gerber link
2/10/2018 10:56:06 am

Great points to consider Jake, and some that aren’t often discussed, let alone even considered. I think it’s the mentality of “this is how we’ve always done it” creeping in.

My only comment on the post relates to one of my “pet peeves” and that is terminology. (I’m a terminology “nazi” as I truly feel it enforces the knowledge and value we bring to the table and how others see us in a professional light). Your reference to “issued for construction (IFC)” documents needs to be used with great care. Although I am not as intimately familiar with contractual agreements in the US as I am in Canada, I do not think this is a term that is defined in any construction contract (at least not the AIA documents). In fact, the only contract I am aware of that has term such as this is the Canadian Construction Documents Committee CCDC 14 - Stipulated Price Design-Build Contract.

Otherwise, most other forms of contract deal with the Contract Documents. Particularly the Drawings and Specifications that are “Issued For Bid”, less the Bidding and Procurement Requirements (generally 00 10 00 to 00 40 00 series) and any Addenda or Post-Bid Addenda issued. Depending on the changes made to the Bid Documents during the Bid Call Period, the Owner or the Contractor may request an “issued for construction” set. A better term may be Issued For Consolidation (IFC), which should always be seen as a “convenience” or “housekeeping” set to consolidate any changes. However, the consulting team should be clear that their is no implied warranty of correctness and completeness with this set and all contractual issues during construction must be referenced back to the original Bid Documents and any Addenda issued.

Reply
Jake Ortego link
2/11/2018 02:25:56 pm

Great comments Paul.

While I am a notorious stickler for terms, I also am very aware of how inconsistent the design and construction industry is in using a unified set of terms. IFC is a term that is heavily used in the industrial EPCM world where CD (Construction Drawings) is more common in commercial. I have never seen the term “Consolidation” used in the US, but I have seen in other countries.

In the case of the article, it is the understanding that is more important than the term. I use IFC strictly within this article to convey a stage of the drawings rather than isolate contract specific terms. In the US, we have contracts from the AIA, Consensus, old AGC templates, and numerous custom formats. The terms vary not only per contract but per industry. Home builders use very different terms than oil and gas construction or health care construction. The article is intended for all those sectors and the ones in between.

I absolutely appreciate the input. It supports my very point in defining what the expected deliverable is. Assigning a mutually understood term is very important even if the term in not in the contract or spec. To take it step further, the unfortunate reality is that many of the people who are discussion the drawings being issued for construction have barely skimmed the contracts and specs if they have read them at all. I never assume that all parties use the same lingo. Instead, I take the make sure that everyone is on the same page…not with my acronyms and terms….but with the ones that appropriate for the project.

Reply
Ilan Feder link
4/5/2022 11:47:28 am

The solution to the anarchy in the construction market and the backwardness of this market Is not in sophisticated materials or fantastic construction methods.
The solution is in serious improvement in the management, the professionals and awareness of problems.
First, drastically improve the bid documents and plans and completely rule out silly methods such as "fast track".
Secondly the obligation of both contractors and government and developers, to employ engineers as project managers.
Which actually exists in many places in the world and unfortunately not in the United States.
Third, setting realistic schedules for projects.

Reply
Evan Adams
4/19/2022 02:34:56 pm

No every project I have with an engineer as a PM it is a disaster. Overt focus on management software, unrealistic timelines, and a general inability to be flexible.

Reply
Manuel
11/10/2024 06:28:04 am


I promised Great Odunga to always post his testimony and I really want to say "Thank You" to everyone who supported me through the years. My name is Manuel Franco, New Berlin, Wisconsin. My story of how I won the Powerball lottery of $768.4M is a bit of a tale. I was feeling very lucky that day because I had contacted Great Odunga to help me with the winning Powerball numbers. I really had that great great feeling that I looked at the camera wanting to wink at it. I only did a tiny part of it when he told me he would give me the numbers and trusted him. He gave me the numbers after I played a couple other tickets along with it for $10. I checked my ticket after the winnings came online and saw the numbers were correct including the Power play. I screamed for about 10 minutes because it felt like a dream coming into reality. I had won $768.4M. Thank you Great Odunga. Well, his email is [email protected] and [email protected] You can also call or Whats-app him at +2348167159012 so you guys can contact him


HE CAN ALSO FIX THE FOLLOWING PROBLEMS. RELIABLE AND TRUSTED

Lottery Spell
Love/Reunion Spell
Pregnancy Spell
Protection Spell
Marriage spell
Healing/Cure spell


Contact him for any of these today:
EMAIL: [email protected] OR [email protected] also Call and WHATS-APP HIM +2348167159012.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    About

    Let's Fix Construction is an avenue to offer creative solutions, separate myths from facts and erase misconceptions about the architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) industry.


    Check out Cherise's latest podcast
    Picture


    Get blog post notifications here

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    RSS Feed


    Archives

    March 2022
    May 2021
    May 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016

    Categories

    All
    Architecture
    Certification
    Collaboration
    Communication
    Concrete
    Construction
    Construction Administration
    Contract Documents
    CSI
    Education
    Estimators
    Fabrication
    Fix
    Manufacturing
    Misconception
    Myths & Facts
    Podcast
    Refresh
    Specifications
    Subcontractors
    Technology
    Training

    Tweets by FixConstruction
Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
  • Blog
  • Why & Who?
  • Workshops
    • Upcoming Workshops
    • A & E Coordination
    • CDT Education Program
    • Let's Fix Construction
    • Social Media & AEC
    • Specifier/Product Rep
    • Specs 101
    • Young Professionals
    • Past Workshops
  • Contributors
  • Submit
  • Accolades
  • Donate
  • Contact