The Coordination of Information from Various Specialists - Architect - Essay Example

The Coordination of Information from Various Specialists - Architect As Gray and Hughes (2000) have pointed out, the coordination of information from various different specialists, all of whom are involved in the building contract, could sometimes turn out to be a real problem. Where the architect is concerned, the changing of a design right at the mobilisation stage would be difficult to handle, because the formulation of a good architectural design for construction purposes requires that a clear policy is laid out at the very outset, which becomes the basis for all future decisions. Thus the architect’s role to some extent becomes a leadership role, although Hawk (1996) does point out that while most architectural training may involve some level of management training as well, it will not necessarily imbue him or her with leadership qualities. The architect, as an artist, has chosen the traditional timber cut roof and roof coverings and battalion insulation between the rafters. Using a steel trussed roof represents a substantial modification to the original contract, which in effect subordinates the architect’s managerial and leadership role because the client is in effect, taking over the design of the building by requiring a different material to be used. There is however, less stress for the architect as compared to other personnel, because his role occurs largely at the conceptual and design stages; once the construction commences, his role becomes largely peripheral. The new change would only require the architect to change one part of his design, but would necessitate him transferring information to the structural engineer. For the structural engineer, the change in design would involve considerable changes in production and the information provided by the architect would be vital in planning and executing the actual change in construction. This information would need to be provided within a specified time frame and the engineer would be the arbiter of the quality of work. It gives the designers an opportunity to (a) determine their work patterns (b) adjust their priorities within the time scale and (c) a flexibility that is compatible with the inherent freedom of the designers.(Gray and Hughes, 2000:138). The appreciation of the value of information ensures that its flow is carefully controlled and that construction is not delayed through the failure of others to appreciate the value of the information. The change in roof material and design is a complex one that could require extensive changes in production. As Hughes and Gray (2000:52) point out, procurement options in this regard will play a significant role, because it would help to make the design and construction process more interactive. This is essential to make allowance for the increasing specialization arising out of subcontracting. The actual execution of the changes that have been proposed by the client will require many of the subcontractors to implement changes to the original design plan in order to ensure that the building is constructed in accordance with the new requirements of the client. The client has communicated his new requirements to the contractor, so the contractor will play an important role in communicating these new requirements to the various sub-contractors. In implementing this change, the process that needs to be implemented for the contractor is receiving the communication from the client and ensuring that the new requirements are communicated to the subcontractors. The transfer of information will therefore play a vital role in the execution of the changes required by the client. The role of the contractor will be mainly to ensure such transfer of information and then to also make sure that information from the architect on the changes in design are then communicated to the other subcontractors such as the structural engineer and the quantity surveyor. The quantity surveyor will be the one responsible for the practical execution of the project, because it would be his job to draw up the tender, or the bill of quantities specifying how much steel and lightweight aluminium would be required to execute the task. The quantity surveyor’s task would commence after the architect has communicated the new design requirements to the architect and the architect has communicated the information on the new design requirements and materials to the structural engineer. The quantity surveyor would require the information, which would be the basis upon which s/he would determine what quantity of each material would be required to complete the task of roofing and where exactly the materials could be sourced from. Timescale and financial implications: The proposed change is likely to increase the time span for completion of the project, because steel and lightweight aluminium were not originally planned for the construction of the roof, and would not have been included in the original specifications. As a result, it would not be part of the production plan and the logistical plan of operations would have ensured advance sourcing of traditional timber rather than steel and aluminium. The contractor will now have to arrange with sub-contractors to source and supply the new materials and the subcontractors will need to wait until the material has been delivered before construction continues. All of this is likely to increase the time scale for project completion. From a financial perspective, the changes are also likely to make the project more expensive. As Sharieff states, replacing a traditional roof in a residential building with steel is likely to be a pricey proposition (www.ehow.com). As of October 2009, he states that steel roofs are likely to cost from $2 to $4 more per square foot when compared to conventional roofing systems. Moreover, since the material would have be sourced at the last minute, it is unlikely that this project could benefit from sourcing materials in advance and thereby saving on costs. Due to the pressures of time, and the urgency with which they are required, the costs of procuring the steel may be higher. The benefits of having a steel roof may manifest in the future, but in terms of the actual construction, it is likely to increase the costs. There are several advantages associated with the use of lightweight aluminium for insulation materials, such as durability, attractive appearance and formability. But as compared to using traditional timber and battalion insulation, the costs would be much higher. It may be noted however that since the client and contractor are likely to have entered into a JCT type contract the total costs for the project would have been determined much earlier. The contractor is the person who would now be called upon to bear the additional costs. Since there has been a change in the design parameters occurring towards the very end of the project, there will be the need for revising and reformulating the design and then procuring the materials and engaging the services of the appropriate subcontractors. All of this means that there is likely to be a delay in the completion of the contract and the construction of the building will not be completed by the specified time. This gives rise to the issue of concurrent delays. The escalation in financial costs of the project would be the direct result of the changes required by the client and therefore the client may be held responsible for payment of the additional costs, despite the fact that costs have already been predetermined. There are four common methods to determine who is responsible for delays in contracts which lead to escalation of costs and thereby assign responsibility. The method that can be applied in this case is the “but for” and the dominant cause approach, whereby the cause of the delay and the party responsible for the delay is determined (www.alway-associates.co.uk). It may be argued that while the client is responsible for the delay by changing the parameters of the roof during the concluding stages of the project, there are also delays caused by the architect, because s/he will have to take out the time to formulate the new design specifications. In this instance, the contractor may be entitled to some additional time available for delays without the need to incur the financial repercussions arising out of it. The reason for the delay is not necessarily the contractor, because it has not been caused by faulty execution of the project or any other lap[se in performance by the subcontractors. Hence the contractor cannot be held to be responsible for such delays , neither can s/he be expected to bear the financial repercussions of such delays. By the same token, it would be unfair to place the entire financial burden on the client because it would then provide the contractor with an opportunity to falsely pad the costs and present an inflated estimation of costs which the client would then be obliged to pay. In the interest of fairness and to preserve the rights of both the contractor and the client, it appears likely that a court called upon to adjudicate in this matter might require the additional costs to be shared between the client and the contractor in a certain proportion, such as for example, two thirds by the client and one third by the contractor. References: “Concurrent delay reviewed”, Retrieved June 9, 1010 from: http://www.alway-associates.co.uk/legal-update/article.asp?id=24 Gray, C and Hughes, W.P., 2000. “Building design management”, London : Butterworth-Heinemann * Sharieff, Malik. “The average cost of steel roofing”, Retrieved June 9, 2010 from: http://www.ehow.com/about_5575218_average-cost-steel-roofing.html Read More