Bishara

Cx quality of work is subjective on a project. For example, a surface level design plan review can be performed vs an in-depth review. In both conditions, Cx has satisfied the design review requirements. Naturally, it’s best for Cx to perform an in-depth design review.

I have a project that a PM calls me expressing his frustration with the Cx design review comments. The PM’s concerns are schedule and budget, as it should be. The PM’s reasoning for the frustration is in paying the engineer X dollars responding to the comments and most likely the contractor in change orders. Long story short, the comments got mostly ignored. In my mind, two things will happen. One, Cx process will be bumpy which will end up costing the project more. Secondly, building operator will be frustrated with the building nuances, and most likely soon after turn-over will allocate budget in fixing issues.

There is nothing I could or should have done differently in delivering the design review comments. I think the message is for the PM world needs to plan better for a productive and healthy Cx process avoiding frustration to the team. A Cx engineer does not want to hear that the design comments they produced are frustrating the team. PM’s can avoid this situation by having adequate budget and time allocated to complete the process.

Think of a car production line, does anyone want to drive a car that skipped two of the five quality control stations as it’s being produced!!

Share your thoughts and experience in relation to this topic.