There are a number of CSI members who blog. One who sends out weekly thoughts on all things design and construction is Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI, CDT of Cincinnati, OH. If you do not recieve his weekly perSPECtives, drop him an email and ask to be included.
Recently, Ralph sent out his essay entitled "The Need" which points out the necessity of simple, open and honest communication between architects and their clients. I find most issues within the office, the chapter or on a job site can be solved through simple, open and honest communication. It is not always easy, but most issue can be resolved when all parties come together and talk. I hope you enjoy Ralph's essay!
PER-SPEC-TIVES
OTHER PERSPECTIVES, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS, IMPRESSIONS, THOUGHTS AND IDEAS ABOUT THE NOBLE PROFESSION OF SPECIFICATIONS WRITING-- OPEN FOR, AND SEEKING DISCUSSION
NO. 127 THE NEED
by Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI, CDT-- Cincinnati, OH
Congratulations! You’ve won the contest and have been awarded the contract. You have rolled out your best marketing effort from "silver-tongued prose" to PowerPoint presentation, to your glitzy brochure, and long list of clients. You have successfully projected your firm in a direct, truthful manner, aimed to the specific needs and project of the prospective client. You have shown that your firm is fully capable of providing all of the services required to produce a successful project for the client. Sorry! But NOW the real work begins!
It is highly advisable [and of increasing importance] that before the Professional Service Agreement is executed, that the design professional and client have in-depth conversations. These should address and resolve the issues of the package of services which are basic to the fee projected; the ability to adjust the scope of services with commensurate adjustments in the fee; the levels of services anticipated; and the creation of a fully understood agreement and relationship between professional and client.
Often with the array of delivery systems, the contractor takes a stronger and more direct route to the client and their relationship too often ignores the appropriate relationship and influence of the professional. While somewhat understandable, this is a most unfortunate situation and places the three primary parties to the project on an uneven basis.
The talks between professional and client, early-on, are not to prevent or obviate those of the contractor, but are advised primarily to ensure that the client is fully aware of the coming events, operations, interfaces, and relationships on the project. In addition, they clarify and set in exacting terms what the professional will do, and how such actions and activities impact the project and the other parties.
For example, a base fee may include a limited number of submittals. These may be only those of a crucial nature, specific to the project, and do not include those for highly standard products [hollow metal doors and frames for example]. It is important for the cline to know this so it does not appear later to be a shortcoming of the professional, but rather are recognition that the standardized work is generally acceptable and does not impact the project in a drastic manner, if slightly varied.
Also in regard to submittals, the client needs to know that in the event that the contractors submit improper or inadequately reviewed submittals, the professional will return them, without necessary action. Should the contractor claim disruption of the project schedule by this action, the professional is in a position to show that, indeed, improper action in submitting the submittals is the cause and not some errant effort by the professional.
Another emerging program is LEED or green building procedures. The professional is well advised to at least broach this topic with the client so there is ample opportunity to incorporate the program or reject it, on the part of the client. The client may have minimal information about the program and the cost and added effort involved, but should at least be offered the chance to consider it. To avoid this conversation could reflect adversely on the professional later in the project.
In essence, the suggested conversations are frank and open talks about aspects of the service contract that need full airing and understanding between the parties. With two separate contracts [minimum] for the project, it is to the mutual benefit of the professional and the client to have these conversations and reach the understanding. Fairness, of course, is a prime issue-- and works in a two-way manner! Certainly, this all serves to minimize if not avoid the vying for position or advantage on the project, and the pitting of one party against another. Cohesiveness and mutual understanding between the three primary parties is crucial to project success, and profitability for all. Mutual thinking and understanding, common goals, and a full "meeting of the minds" is essential to project success-- and IS required in addition to the contract!
The NEED? Simple, straight-forward conversation to reach, perhaps even more importantly, mutual respect!
