Boss keeping projects on "warming plate" 1

[SacreBleu]

What is with this policy? I realize that it is to maximize profits, but if a client is paying a substantial fee for complete and correct engineering calculations and drawings, isn't he being cheated? When all these projects are kept on the "warming plate" until they are due in 3 days, then there is the mad rush to do the engineering and drafting, there is absolutely NO way to do the job well.

 

[debodine]

Wow, you got me curious. Has the boss ever stated a rationale or expected benefits for running things this way? Are the customers absolutely terrible about supplying final required data or decisions, for example? Do your customers have a history of cancelling projects at the last second so your boss sees no reason to expend resources until he is sure the project is a go? How does waiting until three days before delivery maximize profits anyhow? (You can tell I am not in management or I probably would not need to ask these questions!)

What is your take on the reason why? Everybody always has a reason for what they do, even if it does not turn out to be a GOOD reason...

 

[SacreBleu]

These are for the structural design of building projects. The client is usually an architect. I realize that the architect usually changes things right up to the deadline, but trying to get things done in 3 days is impossible. I suppose the boss figures we will get projects done in (for example) 80 total hours instead of 120 hours. Therefore, the number of employees required to handle the work load is kept to a minimum.

 

[debodine]

I have always worked with aviation, not with buildings, so I do not have your experience with architects. I can only say I do understand the frustration of a mad rush to finish in three days what should have been thoughtfully considered and decided over a longer period of time, because that does happen in the aviation world as well. Just not at the hands of an architect, but usually at the hands of the airline marketing department requesting changes. )

 

[ewh]

I've often seen this happen with smaller firms experiencing growth. It sometimes seems that they can't get things done on a "normal" schedule, but have become very adept at "crisis management" (managing thru crisis').

 

[TFL]

wow do you work in my office?!

in reality in are office it is often a result of the architect taking months to fiddle with their part of a project and then finally finishing it and asking for something in a few days. it is also a management style. If i don't release the project to the staff they can't bill hours to it.

 

[SacreBleu]

TFL, I agree with your reasoning, but maybe I need 4 days instead of only 3. I spend 7 days answering RFI's during construction, so there goes the profit.

 

[whyun]

SacreBleu,

From numerous postings from you, I totally hear you about architects' demands on project dead lines and last minute changes.

Typically, I demand that all necessary information (affecting the structure) be provided to us by the architect 2 weeks prior to THEIR dead line. In addition, any changes that affect structural work after that point shall be provided in writing (alternately, clouded CAD version with a written narrative). I make an agreement with the architect that making these subsequent changes are not guaranteed, depending on the structural design impact.

What about last minute mechanical changes? After working so diligently framing out all the units, latest background indicates units shifted from your equipment support framing. I'm sure you've encountered this problem.

It is a good idea to develop a relationship with the architects that you work with to, in a way, train them to provide you with what you need in advance. It is not an easy task... It is an on-going process.

Regarding your 3 day dead line rush, I just want to say "You can't finish a 1000 hour job in 1 hour with 1000 engineers".

 

[HVAC68]

I have worked with Architects - they tend to change too many things too many times - No offence intended. But, they are supposed to be a creative lot and they do it that way, more often than not. Having said that, one could always work on the major part of the work and keep things ready and not start from scratch 3 days before the deadline. The mad rush to catch the deadline happens in almost every other industry too - I've been advise many times not to furnish details well in advance, even if I have finished - still can't figure out why !!!



HVAC68

 

[svanels]

I've been advised many times not to furnish details well in advance, even if I have finished

Too much information is dangerous!!!

Once I furnished details of a minor shutdown in Microsoft Project. Someone double-checked the schedule by summing the durations of the tasks. Needless to say that his completion time was different then ours

 

[HVAC68]

So, who was wrong ? Your or him ?

HVAC68

 

[svanels]

Both!!!, I gave him the worst case scenario , I finished 24 hours before schedule, He needed one week more.

"But according to the time needed you would be finishing on Friday" My answer sh.. I didn't acount the holiday on wednesday

 

[HVAC68]

Yes, sometimes furnishing too much of information is dangerous. I thought we were talking about furnishing of information in time and not at the last minute - You can still choose to furnish just the information required (nothing more, nothing less), but in time - not at the last minute.

What happens with the last minute rush is

(1) Chances of more mistakes.
(2) Somebody reviews it and asks for additional information/data, which is again required on war-footing basis - additional pressure - again chances of mistakes.


HVAC68

 

[ornerynorsk]

Sounds like you're dealing with a stress junkie. They think everyone else works well under pressure, also.

 

[Slugger926]

Some bosses hang on to the work and deal it out slowly trying to justify more headcount to his bosses. These are called empire builders. If you build enough of an empire, then you get a promotion due to the # of people working under you. You also get to promote your team leads to managers. Your bosses will also get promoted from directors to VP's.

Then when they are maxed out, they will hand the work out faster requiring more work per person to be done. Then chain of command will get bonuses for working more efficiently.

Welcome to the world of big business and beuacracy.

 

[SacreBleu]

Slugger,
Nope, this isn't a large company, nor do we have legions of managers. There are less than 10 engineers and drafting techs. All management is done by the boss-man.

 

[14159]

Could it be a desperate attempt by your boss to squeeze some profit out of jobs that don't have adequate fees? Can you get access to the fee somehow? It wasn't always easy at my last job, but I was usually able to get my hands on the fee one way or the other and then estimate how much we spent based on the hours spent on engineering and drafting. It's good to know that kind of thing -- changes one's perspective compared to the narrow view that one has while trying to get jobs done.

Your boss has probably also observed that engineers are like gases in that they will fill up whatever time is available. He might be taking this idea to the extreme and assuming that it goes both ways and that you're compressible.

This kind of stuff is why I gave up on building design and went back to school. I've told myself at this point that I'll work for anybody but an architect. The relationship is almost always disfunctional because the information and fee come down the same path -- from the architect to the engineer. It's different as compared to architect / contractor relationships. The info goes from the arch to the contractor but the contractor's fee comes from the owner. When the fee and info come down the same path, it's bad news. They can give you whatever they want whenever they want and if you don't like it, they'll hire somebody else. It happens. At my last job, we were that other firm in some cases. Architects told us that one of the reasons they hired us was because we would do just about the whole building without much of anything from them while others would not. They used our drawings to help create their drawings. My bosses loved this of course, but it was terribly difficult for people in the trenches (like you! and formerly, me).

14159

 

[14159]

whyun (Structural)typed:
"Typically, I demand that all necessary information (affecting the structure) be provided to us by the architect 2 weeks prior to THEIR dead line. In addition, any changes that affect structural work after that point shall be provided in writing (alternately, clouded CAD version with a written narrative). I make an agreement with the architect that making these subsequent changes are not guaranteed, depending on the structural design impact."

I'd like to know how you pull that off! I've seen that kind of thing tried countless times and the bottom line is still that "they can send you whatever they want when they want and if you don't like it they'll hire somebody else."

What's the recourse if they don't give you the stuff that you're demanding? It's not like you have any teeth to do anything about it, and the architect surely knows this. He also knows that he can get somebody else to do the work (like my old firm) if you become too demanding.

Can you actually get this to work? I've tried stuff like that but it becomes almost like a joke after a while. It's usually that they're so far behind that they can't give the info even if they wanted to, so they really need for the engineer to just do the best they can and send the drawings in this chaotic manner.

At my old firm, we had one huge client that was forced by the owner to use a local engineer on one project. They said that he did a decent job but that there's no way they'd use him again because he was too difficult to deal with when he had a lack of information. This could be a great thread all by itself -- how to get ahead of your competition by taking beatings better than the other guy.

14159

 

[whyun]

It is the agreement made not between designer level. It is a ground rule that is made between the "bosses".

Disgruntled design level architect does not have much impact on whether an architectural firm retains or releases their consultants.

Architect may ask "design me a house". Structural engineers asks "how many floors, what is the shape of the roof, with a basement, etc." It is not "possible" for us to design without 20 (or more) questions. Prudent architects actually know the extent of information they need to release to the structural engineer at various stages of design. I put them on the endangered species list.