Last month we started this series talking about paralysis by analysis resulting in delaying projects until they are never done because the competition has eclipsed the concept that drove the project in the first place.

This month, we want to talk about another kind of money involved in projects.  We want to make sure we do projects as fast as possible.  That will save one kind of money--construction interests costs.

Which is a good place to stop and take a side path for a moment.  In recent years, construction interest costs have not been a particularly large worry--interest rates have been low.  Someday, perhaps sooner than we think, interest rates on construction loans are going to go back to traditional levels.  Levels where we will want to pay attention to them.  We have raised an entire generation of project managers who are unaware of this issue.  It will be interesting to see what happens when these rates recover.

Now back to the point of this month's column.  The kind of money we want to talk about today is design money.  Design money is economical and we receive good value from it when it is spent on CAD drawings.  Design money is expensive, disruptive and a cause for many other money wastes when we do what I call "designing in steel."  

"Designing in steel" occurs when there are errors in the office (CAD) design work, or even more simply, the design work in the office was never done and some brilliant manager thinks they can just wave their arms in the field, resulting in an optimized, marvelous design.  Never spend money "designing in steel."  It is always wasteful, it is always disruptive and it is tremendously expensive.

As far as correcting errors in the field because of faulty CAD design, I am surprised these still happen.  With all the interference checking that goes on today, problems in the field simply must be CAD operator error or poor office management (not getting information on time to complete the design before releasing for construction).  Honestly, I sometimes think we had fewer errors when everything was done manually.  Perhaps we were all more engaged back then?

Set up systems, checks and safeguards so that field design work and field correction work is kept to an absolute minimum.  And when I say set up systems, checks and safeguards, I don't mean just do this at the beginning of the project and expect them to work automatically from then on.  Audit them every week; make corrective adjustments to your methods as you go along if necessary.  Broadcast your changes far and wide so that all involved know what is going on.  I would go so far as to consider having a bonus incentive system for designers that produce low error work.

What is your opinion?  Drop me a line at jthompson@taii.com.  I would like to hear from you.