h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I had just had to translate 30 pages (over 8,000 words) of a French 'Quality Assurance Programme' (within 24 Hours) that forms part of the 'front end' of a large building contract.

It made me realise the other reason that I got out of the architecting business, QA just buries everything under totally useless and unnecessary paperwork and explains why so many buildings, these days are finished way over time and billions over budget.

Essentially QA boils down to this:

1: Write down what you are going to do today and send copies to everyone, but especially the QA Manager.

2: Do whatever you were intending to do during the day.

3: At the end of the day write down what you have done and then send copies to everyone, but especially the QA Manager.

4: If there is an iota of difference between item 1 and item 3 you have to write detailed reports in triplicate, explaining why and send copies to everyone, but especially the QA Manager, and then wait to get your knuckles rapped with a piece of damp lettuce.
(I have yet to find out who checks the QA Manager).

Projects are now run by 'Project Managers' who are mostly nothing more than 'Quantity Surveyors' (building accountants) who reinvented themselves when the pocket calculator effectively did themselves out of a job. Building Owners fell for their totally spurious argument that THEY were the best people to run building projects as they could get things done 'REALLY CHEAP'. The only problem with the argument is that neither by their training or experience do they know damn-all about the immense complexities of 'construction' – just how cheap things are.

There are armies of them and they produce tones of paperwork and use immensely sophisticated 'project management' software, based on critical path analysis (always a dubious science), that nobody can possibly understand and allows project programmes to be manipulated at will by the underpaid clerk in the back office who actually puts in all the unnecessary information..

I am all for computer technology but nothing has ever managed to replace the completely idiot-proof 'bar-chart – a piece of paper that was stuck on the site office wall and showed when every 'task' on the job would start and finish.

Over thirty years I have worked in nine countries and well built over $600,000,000 worth of buildings (cost at time of construction – with inflation – it would now run to several billion).

Every single one one was completed 'on time and in budget'.
How and why?

Basically a building management system that I learnt in Lagos when I worked for Godwin & Hopwood. Bearing in mind that then (the late 70's) nothing worked and yet we managed to complete immensely complicated buildings efficiently – on time and in budget.

The system was very simple:

Once the contract had been signed there was a 'Pre-Contract Meeting'. ALL the minutes were written by hand with a carbon copy. I (the architect) kept the original and the contractor kept (and distributed as necessary) the carbon copy.

The first three items on the agenda were always identical:

Item 1: During the course of this contract there will be a site meeting on (day of the week) at (time). The main contractor and all sub contractors shall attend every meeting, unless otherwise agreed.

Item 2: Anything written in the minutes of the meeting shall be taken as an 'Architect's Istruction' within the terms of the contract. Such instructions will not be followed with an other communication.

Item 3: If the contractor or any subcontractor deems any such 'instruction' as having a cost implication, they shall inform the architect at the following meeting – if not – the work will be within the contract price.

Other than the monthly payment certificates, these site meeting minutes were (often) the ONLY correspondence throughout the entire contract.

Thanks for that summary, PBS, which has made me suspect that ANY science, apart from the physical sciences, which has any connection with business or with local services is - almost by definition - a self-serving pseudo-science given to politically 'correct' or 'incorrect' judgments. Marxism being the root of this distinction wherever it raises its ugly head.

And that any such 'science' that purports to underwrite judgments connected with this QA form of bureaucratic power *must* be flawed - or non-existent.


Jabs

Great rant

So much to comment on, so little space...



You've got it in one. I've studied mathematical network theory, and it's a little known fact that critical path analysis is indeed unproven, and may well be unprovable. The algorithm is an art, not a science. It just happens to work for simple cases. To prove it for complex cases becomes rapidly and exponentially difficult.

"ANY science, apart from the physical sciences".

I am no mathematician. I should have included mathematics, where misused, and the physical sciences 'where misused' as well.

Please do not let my own misuse of grammar imply that these practices, or 'sciences', (leaving aside whether mathematics is a science, as not relevant here), are globally inadequate once applied to this form of activity.

Thanks, Icy. My remarks have benefitted indirectly from your Post 3.

Well - that seems to have explored that argument in full!