Project Teams do not always gel and maintain synergy – but when they do it can be exceptional. The resources of architectural and specialty design firms do not always match perfectly with a project’s requirements, despite the initial optimism of internal management and staff assignments. After design development, and as the CD’s evolve to the 100% milestone, coordination of the specifics within specialized systems can tend to break down. This is particularly true as Owner’s provide more input or affect the design. There is much reliance-on-others as the documents are published and cost estimates materialize. Resource efficiencies can degrade in feedback loops within value-engineering and other cost control efforts.
Resource management is mostly an opaque process in the dynamic triad of ownership, designer, and contractor. Design teams are assembled, responsibilities are delegated, work commences and product is generated. Assessment of that work quality lags, and most times with the creation of CD’s, the timeliness of the ‘Quality Control’ phase is often out of sequence with the Project’s timeline. This is particularly true with the coordination expected between disciplines and the emphasis on the Architect’s role as master coordinator. The pace and lagging QC efforts, often lead to more RFI’s and ASI’s – and hence risk.
There is a great deal of responsibility placed on the Project Architect (PA) of the Architect of Record. Principals of firms, tend to be focused on the business itself and not always project specifics. Generating documents from the design phase is delegated to their lead designers, the PA’s, drafts-people, interns, and others that affect the QC effort. Too few experienced PA’s to carry a project, or multiple projects, through to completion is a resource challenge that many architectural firms face.
The point is, that with the trend towards a declining base of experiential knowledge in the industry, it is increasingly rare that the overall, thorough coordination of multiple disciplines occurs and gets represented in the documents that are used to establish the construction Contract. Sub-consultants, such as mechanical, electrical, structural, etc. are usually so focused on their piece of the puzzle, that the cross-coordination process is either de-emphasized, neglected or compromised by the QC time lag. Thus there has been a trending tendency towards gaps in construction document quality in the industry. This is particularly true in the current economic landscape – where middle management staff has been laid-off or minimized in firms’ efforts to remain in the marketplace.
We believe that our focused services, effectively supplement the document QC review and coordination effort, in a very positive and value added way, to all parties involved.
MARTIN Development Services 