Is rework taking all of the reward out of the project?

By Gregg Schoppman, FMI Corp.

Checklists, testing, and manuals. If someone mentions anything about quality, those are the top mentions, and they are usually followed by a deep yawn. Quality control is certainly an essential part of any organization’s infrastructure. However, it does beg an important question – in an industry that is characterized by low margins and high risks, is leaving potential “rework” conditions until the end of a phase, project or work package, a reactive situation? First, it is important to examine the true cost of rework. While it is hardly an exact science, below is a brief summary of the potential cost multipliers that come with rework:

There is certainly the initial cost of putting the work in place that must be assumed but when one considers that rework could have a 10X multiplier, quality control seems somewhat defensive in posture. In the end, every time there is a mistake, there is a potential impact to more than the bottom line as is demonstrated by everything from employee morale to customer sentiment. However, how does a firm create a culture of quality assurance to complement their quality control function?

Migration from Checklists to Collaborative Tools

Checklists serve a function. Plans? Check. Specifications? Check. However, they tend to be incredibly superficial and with so many industry professionals that lack experience, there is a risk of simply “pencil whipping the checklist. Consider the following comparison:

Option #1

Option #2

A more experienced manager or field leader probably has considered all of the alternatives with option #1. Option #2 asks questions that forces the team to think through the options. For instance, consider the question of the compatibility of the form release and any painting or coating. There are probably plenty of instances where someone might not have asked this question early enough only to find out late in the painting process that entire wall systems needed to be power washed for fear of a paint not adhering to the substrate.

Red Teaming

Bryce G. Hoffman, author of Red Teaming, created a masterful concept for all businesses that builds upon the thesis that the military uses in its exercises. For instance, in any war games or simulation, there is always a team that plays the role of the enemy insurgent. Even in sports, the scout team will run the opponents plays and simulate an environment reminiscent of what the first team will see on game day.

Organizations can use a similar technique in several capacities to drive a quality assurance initiative. For instance, consider the following:

Red Teaming AFTER Preconstruction:

• Once the team that will build the project has developed an effective plan, a “Red Team” is organized to challenge the assumptions. They might include:
  • How will you protect the finished product from damage from other trades?
  • How will you manage to drive 1-2% to the bottom line?
  • How will you avoid a voluminous punch list?
  • How will you integrate our service department sooner?
• The intention is to create a stimulating yet “uncomfortable” set of questions to ensure the project team can effectively execute the work. An answer like “We’ll just do our best to protect the project from damage” should be a red flag to everyone involved (no pun intended).

Red Teaming DURING Construction:

• A small team is brought in to simulate a surgical strike at a random time on the project. The intention is to ensure the team is prepared BEFORE close-out. Too often, things are left until the end, leading to the aforementioned punch lists and ultimately annoyed customers. The Red Team’s focus is as follows:
  • Project cleanliness
  • As-built drawing and close-out documentation
  • “Next step” preparation – Put another way, does the team have the next 3-4 moves well calculated

Red Teaming DURING Close-out:

• To be clear this is not a separate punch list crew or team but rather another project team that is enlisted to be that extra set of eyes. How often does a project team wear that set of rose-colored glasses (i.e., “Well, if you look at the wall from this angle in this sun, you can’t see the imperfection…”). The Red Team attacks every aspect of the project from punch list to close-out documents. Certainly, this would be perceived as rework as any punch list would be but it is important to note that this is putting the Red Team in the shoes of the customer PRIOR to the actual customer close-out. While it is repaired, it does prevent repairing customer perceptions and ultimately truncating the close-out timeline.

Quality assurance has been around for many years and there are professionals that have dedicated themselves to providing QA and QC. However, there are also organizations that look at having dedicated professionals as a luxury or added cost. The intention of quality assurance in this vein is to provide proactive solutions with the project teams. Even the Red Teams are simply redeployed team members that could easily be on the other side, playing defense. Firms that integrate assurance into every aspect of their work, create the ultimate assurance in the end – profitability.

About the author: 

As a principal with FMI, Gregg specializes in the areas of productivity and project management. He also leads FMI’s project management consulting practice. He has completed complex and sophisticated construction projects in several different niches and geographic markets. He has also worked as a construction manager and managed direct labor. FMI is a unique and fast-growing firm of professionals passionate about creating a better future for engineering and construction, infrastructure and the built environment throughout North America and around the world. For more information on FMI, please visit www.fminet.com or contact Schoppman by email at gschoppman@fminet.com.