Reprinted with permission from the August 2007 issue of The Construction Specifier
Communication Breakdown
It’s always the same...
Successful projects have successful communications. While other elements are certainly important, without effective dialog and collaboration, the desired result can be elusive. Project team members—and their wider circle of consultant, subcontractor, and supplier teams—must sometimes work together for years to see a project done well. On the most basic level, the tenor of project relationships is reflected in how well we are communicating. Plenty of management books have been written on how to communicate in business, but here are a few ideas to carry around with your hardhat.

Educate the owner on what to expect

Only a few owners embark on major construction projects with enough frequency to have substantial experience in the process. The controlled chaos of construction is unsettling, and the types of risks owners face are broad. Frequently, they expect there will be no major problems, no mistakes, and especially, no change orders. Designers must take the responsibility to help the owner understand the risks of construction. This must be done very early, well before bidding. A discussion on the likelihood of change orders will be seen as self-serving if it takes place just after the contractor submits the first claim.

Be prepared to make decisions

Owners must understand they cannot be passive observers. There will be significant demands on their time for timely, firm decisions. Organizations should grapple with the fact that typical bureaucratic processes are high-risk propositions. As issues go unresolved, the potential rapidly rises for both delay claims and missed opportunities. For example, approval of change orders for unforeseen conditions usually cannot wait until the next regularly scheduled board meeting two months later. Owners should set up an efficient communication and decision-making process for the duration of construction. Specific individuals or small t eams must be given responsibility and authority to make decisions on the organization’s behalf, and to communicate important information internally.

Listen to the trades

Designers fail to recognize the abundance of practical knowledge experienced mechanics possess. Take advantage of this. Some may feel uncomfortable discussing ‘design’ with the guy up on the staging, but this is counter-productive. Most are happy to help when asked for their recommendation, and will explain as much as you have time for. Solving problems cooperatively with the person who has to build can be a significant contributor to the designer’s knowledge of construction.

Don’t hide the bad news

After the sinking feeling that occurs as you discover the latest error in the documents, the first instinct should not be to hope it goes unnoticed. Communicate the problem, seek appropriate input, and find a solution. The technical problem should be faced first, working with the contractor to determine the optimal result. Then assess the impact to cost and schedule, adjusting the solution as necessary. Delaying responsibility for resolving problems inevitably makes them worse.

Tell building occupants what’s going on

Projects in occupied buildings have a unique set of difficulties. Typical department managers, teachers, or judges have little knowledge of building construction and rarely any motivation to be accommodating. They have a job to do, and it does not involve the construction going on around them. What the building team considers a minor inconvenience may be a serious irritation to the occupant. The lack of regular informative communications to occupants is problematic. Keeping users well-informed prepares them for what is to come and they will have less reason to complain.
Prepare a rapid-response plan to deal with user’s complaints. As an example from this author’s own experience, an occupied elementary school had a very effective plan to address complaints about odors or other perceived health hazards. A certified industrial hygienist responded to complaints the same day (or immediately the next), did the needed testing, and talked to teachers and parents. Worries were addressed so quickly they never became a problem.

Listen twice, act once

Resolving contractor claims is not fun for the designer (and the contractor would undoubtedly prefer to avoid making at least some of them). One should resist the tendency to dig in to a position. It is far more productive to start by ensuring you have a full understanding of the issues the contractor is facing, and this requires careful listening. It is human nature to hold something back, so the contractor’s stated objection may not be the whole story. Thorough discussion of a difficult technical problem may turn out to have origins in schedule or staffing, or another seemingly unrelated technical problem. Armed with complete information, the issue can often be re-framed, and a resolution made apparent.

Give everyone their say

Do not assume everyone can readily articulate his or her concerns. This author worked on a high school project where the plumbing foreman insisted the acid waste drainage system did not meet the code. Though extremely conscientious and knowledgeable in his trade, he could not readily explain his concern. The plumbing engineer dug in—he was sure the design was right. After much discussion, it was determined the engineer incorrectly believed the plumbing inspector had agreed to a code interpretation during design that was, by any measure, quite a stretch. The plumbing foreman was right and the design was changed. Contractors, of course, ought to apply this same lesson to conversations with designers.

Get rid of the attitude

When it comes to attitude, there is plenty to go around. Some contractors think most designers have no idea how a building really goes together. Some designers think contractors do shoddy work and have no idea what good design is. When professionals come to the table with these types of mindsets, communications become so filtered by preconception that one cannot hear what the other is actually saying. Show respect for team members by starting with the presumption all have a common goal. Listen (as previously mentioned) and explain your position considerately.

Communicate with intent to clarify

Interpretations extending beyond what is reasonably inferable from the documents are occasionally used by designers to put pressure on a contractor who does not see things their way or—in some cases—even to retaliate. Contractors may use claims and Requests for Information (RFIs) out of frustration with the designer’s documents that they believe are incomplete. Both these types of communications are inherently dishonest, and are intended to incite disagreement rather than to foster understanding. RFIs and interpretations are a necessary part of the construction process, but their use should be constructive.
Effective job-site communications do not just happen. Individual participants must work hard to understand the dynamics of each interaction, and be committed to using clear and effective communications to resolve problems.