Hi everyone,
This question is meant to open a discussion about the problems that a Method Statement can cause to a project. It should be a useful tool, but it often causes big problems.
In your opinion, what are the biggest problems related to this document? Does it happen in one of these three cases:
1. When a company considers the Method Statement as pure bureaucracy: The only goal is to finish it as fast as possible, any way they can, just so the works can start. This brings a low-quality, incomplete, and flawed document.
2. When there is a deviation from the approved document: When the actual works being executed on site are not in accordance with the approved Method Statement—whether intentionally or due to poor communication.
3. When Supervision misuses its right of refusal: When the Supervisor or Engineer bases their rejection on subjective opinions, nitpicking over minor details, or failing to provide clear guidance on what needs to be improved. This creates endless revisions and delays the project.
What do you think about this?
Could you share some interesting examples from your practice? I would love to hear your experiences and lessons learned, as they will be highly valuable for turning good practices into solid rules and procedures for the future.
Looking forward to the discussion!
