Lessons from the Gulf
The gulf oil spill has given those of us in the construction industry a valuable lesson. My guess is that if I took a straw poll of contractors, 99% of them would submit that they never cut a corner to reduce costs and speed up a project. While the vast majority of them would be telling the pollster the truth, I would estimate that quite a few would be lying to both the poll taker and themselves.
I am certainly no expert in prospecting for oil, drilling wells or collecting crude. In fact, I know very little on the subject. But I do understand intimately well the pressures that we all face to keep our projects on time, on budget, faithful to the drawings and specifications and accident free. Most of the time these goals are mutually inclusive and fit hand in hand with one another. Sometimes, though –extraordinary time or financial pressure exists to subordinate one of these fundamental goals to the others.
Don’t do it.
One of the great things about our industry is that much of what we are supposed to do is scoped out, drawn and specified for us beforehand. The better the bid package, the less confusion and opportunity to skimp on details exists. While this may sound like an advertisement for the American Institute of Architects, make no mistake that many important details are left out and remain up to the general contractor to faithfully execute. Most of these issues have industry standards as a guide, but again some are open to interpretation. When we sign a contract, our companies are given the fundamental trust by our clients to faithfully execute the bid documents and to perform all phases of the project to or above industry standards.
What the gulf oil crisis teaches us is that no time constraints or financial pressures are great enough to cause us to not perform our work to acceptable standards. Checks and balances must remain in place at all times and not ignored. Warnings from subcontractors must not go unnoticed. Problems cannot be simply buried under stories of earthen backfill, hidden behind a layer of ½” drywall or sunk below a mile of ocean water. These checks and balances exist to mitigate future damage or, especially sad in this case, eliminate the loss of life and property and the destruction of precious ecosystems.
Ours is an inherently dangerous endeavor. Powerful equipment, falls, etc. are all part of our chosen profession. Entire industries have sprung up to help make construction less dangerous and safer for our employees and clients. By making our projects safer, we save lives and property and build our reputation. But no industry exists to check and double check each and every phase of our work. That alone is up to us and our project teams. Each person must be empowered to have input. Each issue must be addressed. And above all, we cannot allow any of our fundamental goals to exclude the others. Doing so may cost us a bit more at the time, but the cost of skimping on quality and not constructing to or beyond acceptable industry standards will be paid for generations.
At the end of the day, we have a solemn duty to do what is right, not just what we can get by with. The scary thing is I understand where the pressure comes from. We are all under it nearly every day. I can put myself in the position of the project manager who is told it “should be good enough” by a subcontractor and struggles to balance costs, time and safety. Some instances in life are the kick in the mouth we need to avoid complacency and acceptance of anything less than our best. The photos of shrimp boats skimming for oil rather than shrimp is an image that should convince us that “sort of ok” is just not good enough.
As an industry, we simply cannot tolerate “good enough” or assume that problems, once buried, won’t have catastrophic consequences down the road.
Tags: AIA, Gulf, lessons, Management, Oil, plans, specifications
June 25th, 2010 at 1:53 pm
It is a very thin line – that line between keeping costs down and yet doing the job correctly and safely. It is an ongoing theme over decades. This phrase kinda jumped out at me when I read it…
“What the gulf oil crisis teaches us is that no time constraints or financial pressures are great enough to cause us to not perform our work to acceptable standards. ”
How true. We can all see the results of not working to acceptable standards. Our coast is an oily mess, toxic, ugly and forever spoiled I fear.
The “elephant in the room” discussion is this – at what point do you either mention issues or hold back in order to not make waves and keep your job? This economy has many companies cutting back on things they normally would not…..I’m not saying this is the case here as I do not know. But over the entire US today alone many employees are feeling that kind of “squeeze play” as they debate bringing up potential problems or trying to fix or minimize them so it does not put their boss in a tight situation of “knowing” about a potential problem. There is psychology at work here. When do you speak up? Are you afraid of becoming someone they will eventually let go because you cannot overlook issues that move a job forward?
The debate continues. The lack of jobs does play into people being more “silent” about potential issues. It is a sad, but true part of human nature – protect your job and your family first.
I hope we all learn from this and keep our standards and morals intact with all our business dealings. It is the right thing to do.
Thank you for this insight. Made me think a bit more about it today! – Janet, RMTracking.com
June 30th, 2010 at 11:05 am
You are right, Janet – it can be perceived to be a very thin line between being efficient and cutting corners. At the end of the day, as project managers and contractors we have to be comfortable that we are making good long term decisions.
The elephant in the room you mention is definitely alive. This stagnant economy has forced many construction company owners and managers to look for every possible cost savings in order to keep the company viable. Tone from the top is absolutely critical in cases such as those where you mentioned and this depends on the upper management of the firm. If the tone is one of strict adherence to drawings and the faithful execution of appropriate standards, then an employee has no problem bringing up issues. If the inverse is true, and the tone is to accept lower quality in order to reduce costs, the employee may have to fight the culture in order to bring up issues. In that case, they would probably be considered a “whistleblower”.
The lack of tranferability to other companies because of the slow economy and weak job market is a real issue. Cutting costs and hoping problems get buried is a real issue, too. Management must set the appropriate tone and not create a culture that fosters cheating. Efficiency and pursuit of profit are hallmarks of private industry, but not at the expense of accepted industry standards.
Thanks for the note.