A client is proposing to use Hrs/Submittal and Hrs /Request For Information (RFIs) to monitor Engineer performance on a construction program of projects. The program contains numerous construction contracts managed by CM consultants. As requested by CM, the Engineer responds to contractor submittals and RFIs.
Despite variables that can not be controlled by the CM or Engineer, the client insists on managing to fixed KPIs for reviewing Submittals and responding to RFIs. Consequently, the administrative cost to provide explanations on variances across nearly 40 construction contracts ranging in value from $30M to $700M is an administrative burden with no apparent benefit. Any suggestions?
Engineer previously explained to the client the variables that make the KPI inappropriate:
· Client’s General Conditions and CM’s Division 1 specifications for contractor Submittals and RFIs lacks the prescriptive requirements to assure all contractors provide uniform format and content for measuring KPI across contracts.
· Submittal metric is a function of the CM practices for managing the contract work, and the contractor’s submittal register, submittal packaging, the size and complexity of the documents and the review process determined by Engineer regarding technical, quality and safety requirements in contracts and governing standards, code and regulatory agencies.
· RFI metric is a function of the CM practices for managing the contract work, and the contractor’s content, the contract requirements and the request for answer(s) or services, the amount of documents involved, and the deliverables required to complete a response.
Submittal and RFI - KPI’s may be more useful to construction contractors managing expenses against standard metric based on prior projects that are similar in scope and magnitude, and where internal processes are often repeated more uniformly. Saving Changes...
I appreciate the insights and understanding on KPIs. I think the application of KPIs is also dependent on the project structure, form of contract, and project practices.
In the examples that I present, the current recipe includes, in order of authority during construction, the following chefs: Authority(Authorized Representative for contracts with team), Construction Manager (designated sole point of contact for contractors, Contractors (responsible to CM), Project Management/Management Oversight (support to CM), Engineer (support to CM), and Owner/Operator (company to receive constructed product.)
The work flow for construction documents is controlled by the CM while the KPIs are established and monitored by the Authority. Due to history of project development, the Owner/Operator is very hands-off.