| |
![]() |
||||||||
| PikeNet
Dispatch, September 7, 2001 Vol 6 No. 92 (0503) "More than 9,000 subscribers" |
|||||||||
| Subscriber: |
||
| Previous Dispatch / Next Dispatch | ||
How
Can You Build Buildings Faster?... My August 23 Dispatch, New
Economy Lesson #99: It's Hard to Make Money Online, challenged
subscribers to describe their experience digitizing a workflow. This triggered a detailed response from Charlie
Kuffner, SVP and Northern California Region Manager for Swinerton
Builders, a major commercial builder in the West. Swinerton
has experience using three major project management applications: Buzzsaw, Citadon and ConstructWare.
"We calculated that a 'normal' RFI (Request for Information) process went something like this: RFI was handwritten by sub-supplier. Faxed to General Contractor. Reviewed, rewritten or covered with transmittal and faxed to architect. If it required a sub consultant review (structural, electrical, mechanical), faxed to sub consultant. If it requires sub-sub consultant input (lighting, acoustical), faxed. Evaluated by these parties. Responses formulated and documented. Faxed back to sub consultant. Reviewed by consultant and approved. Faxed back to architect. ... [Well, you get the idea.] ... The traditional RFI process averages one and one-half weeks ... our actual turn around time averaged one-half week. This is a two-thirds reduction in response time for each issue. On this project [a 440,000 sf, 18-story tenant improvement assignment], there were 124 RFIs. Any one of these issues could have potentially impacted the cost and schedule." ... Kuffner's case study, "The Birth and Development of a Collaborative ExtraNet," was written in the spring of 2000 and is a little dated. But it's still interesting reading. To view it, go to Swinerton's home page, then Online Project Management, and you'll see the title toward the bottom of the page. ... Or click here. --Peter Pike / ppike@pikenet.com |
||
| Peter Pike / PikeNet | Copyright © PikeNet
1996-2005 All Rights Reserved |
|