#10: Does Partnership Trump Leadership?

Does leadership really require leadership? Can’t we partner our way around it?  Not if we’re looking for results that exceed mediocre…

I can’t tell you how many owner-side construction managers I have met recently that have told me that they partner with their construction managers, therefore do not require any help with schedule review services.

I realize the CM agency design/build model is owner friendly. I have built large DB projects, both as a superintendent, and as a PM. I have partnered with owners. But I have also been called in as a CPM scheduling consultant – to build recovery schedules and train staff’s to perform them on failing projects of every contract type and delivery method.

I am not going to paint a picture portraying a scheming contractor. I’m not going to try to convince you that you need to be protected from a partner that is hiding his true agenda. No, it’s not that way.

It’s more organic than that. In fact, poor management is the most natural thing in the world. Just look around. It’s everywhere you look. Is the construction industry any different?

And when you’re building complex construction projects, poor management happens just as readily doesn’t it? Even when CM types  try real hard, and when they do their very best. Why is that?

History  shows that managers fail when they lack specific and required skill sets. Required for what?  Required to manage, facilitate, organize what brand of endeavor they are charged with. Intentions and best efforts are great. But specialized training and profound strategies that have been tested, proven, and continue to be improved upon – now that is something different altogether. As Ralph Moody wood say: That’s a horse of a different color.

So what do you need to be protected from?  What do you need to protect your employer from? It’s the honest, hard working guys/gals doing their very best. The problem is, that often times, their best just is not good enough.  Read Too Green – Too Few for more on that.

A scheming contractor would be easier to find and isolate.

The reality is that you have honest and hard working construction management teams in place that may even know more than you do about how to get a project built. And that is why you have put your faith and trust in them. I understand that you may have even built you career on this model. And good for you if it worked. But now your at the next level. And to move on from here, requires leadership.

It is time to help your contractors to achieve project outcomes that are beyond mediocre.

I can show you how to provide leadership that will make you Beyond Reproach. It’s a silver bullet. And to those of you who say there is no such thing – pay close attention.

I am grateful to have come across profound construction management strategies that demystify the CM process and make extraordinary project outcomes, not only possible, but almost automatic. And I am equally as grateful to be able to share them with you now.

I work with some of the most capable construction management consultants in the world. It is through association with them and through witnessing hundreds of millions in construction project failures and recoveries, that I can tell you with certainty that these strategies are golden.

You will have to follow the process. But the process is easy. Way easier than what your doing right now: Worrying your guts through, and chasing your tail, always in a reactive mode of operation,  Fighting multiple fires concurrently and going home every night wandering what surprise tomorrow will bring is no way to go through life. I know, because I did it for many years.

The good news is this industry is better than that. And your career is better than that too!  But in order to claim the better way, you have to embrace leadership.

If you have read any of my previous posts, then you already may know. Owner side construction management beyond reproach is locked-up in the CPM schedule/update review process. It’s where the rubber meets the road. And it single handedly, if you do it right, will more than make up  for many other oversights  that may occur along the way. That’s why I call it the Silver Bullet.

It has comprehensive effects on the project. It’s viral, in that it affects every activity on the project.  And more than that even, it effects the overall building approach, how work flows through the project.

You have to grasp the magnitude and the comprehensive impact of a valid schedule review process embedded into your project(s).

If you can’t feel the importance of that concept, then I suppose there is a bit of a catch, at least for you.

We all have a reservoir of life experiences that we use to filter and process new information and experiences that we are presented with and exposed to. We are all limited by the size and content of our respective reservoirs. I use to assume everything that I understood could be easily explained and understood by others. Now that my two oldest boys are in their twenties, I know that is not the case. A friend recently told me: You can’t give your experiences to someone else with words. That was helpful. But it was also scary. I asked: does that mean my kids have to make all the mistakes I made. He said: pretty much. Great…

So now I realize that some of you won’t have the required CM experience to grasp what I have said or what I will say next. If you fall into that category – you are going to have to keep trusting somebody, until you have the experience and the confidence to trust yourself. I would be happy to help you to find the right consultant.

If you do understand the magnitude and the quality of project that valid schedule review could bring about for you, then you need only jump over one last hurdle.

Within the context of a valid schedule review, you (or your consultant) can identify the flaws in the building approach. You can mandate the fixes. You can identify challenges that would have otherwise been missed until construction in that area is underway. The quality of the review is only limited by the construction experience of the reviewer.

There is no better way to protect momentum on-site. This amounts to a building approach review. A valid schedule review could just as well be called a building approach review. That lends a different perspective – a more accurate, more useful perspective to what we are saying here.

In other words, the project design may be sound, but the building approach may not be. A quick example is:  On a schedule that I reviewed recently, (50M renovation), there was a fragnet that was repeated 24 times (different areas) in the schedule that had the main utility lines/ducts/pipes being installed (inside the building) following interior wall framing activities. It should have been the other way around. This issue was relevant to crew loading, which in this case was being referenced in the subcontracts. Which means that if the schedule was not reviewed thoroughly, subcontracts crew requirements would have been inaccurate.

The schedule is the plan.  It should be the model for the construction approach. If you have (or can find someone who has) the where-with-all to validate the CPM schedule both:

1. From a construction sequencing standpoint (scalable from project to area) and
2. From a software organizational design concept and settings standpoint

Then -  it is game over. It’s difficult to build and maintain an accurate and intuitive Baseline model that communicates the actual building approach, and schedule updates that mirror what’s happening onsite. It requires a rare combination of talents. But if you can install and maintain such a schedule, it pays-off – big-time.  So big in fact, it facilitates extraordinary project outcomes. Part of which, is the elevation of project experiences for all the project stakeholders.

I know that few CM types have this ability. Reason being is that it requires both, extensive direct (super/PM) CM experience, combined with scheduling software expertise.

I also know that is impossible for someone without these skill-sets to recognize someone with them. And truth be told, I guess this is yet another catch … or could be. That is why my first post entitled Help Is On The Way, addressed this issue. You can find competent consultants. But you have to know how to look. Help Is On The Way, will tell you exactly how to find and qualify the right person.

Last but definitely not least – I want to cover the fact that the owner is hardly the only one who benefits from CPM schedule validation. I stated above that all stakeholders enjoy an elevated project experience. I find it especially ironic though, that the CM is positioned to gain the lion’s share of the credit for the extraordinary project outcome.

The irony is that the CM does not want the scheduling consultant reviewing his schedule. The owners are overly sensitive to this, and are hesitant to bring in consultants, not wanting to offend the CM. The whole thing would be funny, if it were not for the fact that these very dynamics are actually preventing valid schedule reviews and related advantages from happening on most projects being built today.

This interplay is costing owners millions and preventing proactive construction management from rooting and spreading throughout the industry.

Remember this:  The schedule is the heart of the project. It is the plan. At any given point, the schedule has to be valid. That means that it has to be current. Updates have to occur weekly for a schedule to be current. Current schedules foster proactive construction management. And only weekly oversight and rigorouse  monthly schedule reviews can ensure that schedules are being maintained correctly.

Inaccurate/invalid schedules are not used. When CPM schedules are not maintained and used to manage the projects day to day work, the CM team is forced into a reactive mode of operation.

Reactive construction management is a symptom of poor construction management. Detached look-ahead spreadsheets are not CPM schedules and are the fundamental framework (cause) for undermining successful project outcomes.

Why? Because detached look-ahead schedules fool everybody into thinking all is well until too much damage has been done. Too much time has been lost. This is about the time when fingers start pointing and change orders start surfacing.

Approving flimsy change orders to justify acceleration and or completion date delay, which was actually caused by poor planning and poor schedule performance – is not leadership.

It might be you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours. But as projects get more complex and challenging, and the numbers get bigger. The whole back scratching model becomes increasingly risky, inversely proportionate, the leadership model of valid schedule review, becomes increasingly the safe bet.

I look forward to hearing your feedback. If you finished reading this article, please consider sharing it with you friends.