Technology in Architectural Practice

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Committee of Corporate Architects and Facility Management and Technology in Architectural Practice .
-------------------------------------------

I am a committee member tasked with redefining our in-house QA and QC programs. There are tons of "checklists" available on line, most customized to focus on specific project types. I am looking for general purpose guidelines flexible enough to apply to a broad range of projects and types. Then we can customize them for anything from standard TI fitout to 200 bed hospital projects.

I believe I am looking more for procedural information at this point and less for nitty gritty checklists. We have the usual AIA Handbook of Professional Practice which is a good start. Next there is ISO 9001 Standards! There has to be something in between... more digestible and practicable.

-------------------------------------------
Gregory J Szary, AIA LEED AP
Philadelphia and Malvern, PA
-------------------------------------------

Mr. Szary:

I believe you are right to be suspicious of checklists.  Most of the time a checklist is used after the mistakes have been baked into the project.  Many times the checklists are so long and so irrelevant to the actual project at hand that they become an annoyance and are not used.

To improve QA/QC you first need to understand where it is deficient.  Where are the problems that need to be addressed?  Misunderstanding the code?  Failure to properly implement ADA standards?  Poor coordination through the contract documents?  Not including the clients entire scope of work?

Years ago, when John DeLorean worked for Pontiac in GM he tried to change the QC processes there.  It seems the cars came off the assembly line as fast as possible, and any defects were attempted to be corrected before the cars left for the dealership.  DeLorean contrasted this with the Japanese methods of building quality into the assembly system, so that defects were harder to install in the first place.

I think the same approach applies to our practices.  Create a system that minimizes the possiblity of errors.  Study where the errors are, and focus on eliminating them.  It's often an unpleasant process, but necessary if improvements are to come about.

One book I found helpful on this topic is Managing Quality in Architecture, by Charles Nelson.  ISO 9001 is mentioned, but most of the book deals with what QA/QC is in an architectural practice, and how to implement it.  Case studies are included as well.

-------------------------------------------
Klaus Steinke AIA
Las Vegas NV
-------------------------------------------

Mr. Szary,

A few thoughts: nothing too original, as these problems have plagued architecture firms for decades:

While there are adequate reasons to be wary of checklists as the cure-all for AE firm quality management issues, they can be one useful tool in the context of an overall quality management program. However, they are not a starting point, and cannot be imposed from without on an established studio culture.

I recommend starting with an examination of your firm's quality deficits. Few firms conduct the kind of in-depth client surveys that other industries routinely perform - either they don't want to know the answers, or just don't think to ask the questions. Your clients' perceptions of what constitutes your firm's quality deficits may be much different from what yours are, and their's count.

As Mr. Steinke so wisely says: "study the errors." Study addenda, RFIs and change orders to identify document and design shortcomings. Fix the most common and expensive ones first. Engage the staff in this process and recognize individuals who make the effort. Make this a part of every week's work. In this manner, the growth of your quality management program can be funded by the projects benefitting from the results, and the staff will own the results, including the checklists they help develop and will be expected to complete.

If you have arrived at a determination that design process and document quality needs upgrading, I would suggest starting by determining the standard of practice. In this case, this is represented by, among others, the US National CAD Standard, the CSI Project Delivery Practice Guide/CDT certification program, the body of knowledge accumulated in AIA's MasterSpec, the Whole Building Design Guide, the codes, and the Professional Practice Handbook you already mentioned.

If your studio staff are adequately schooled in the contents of these resources, then your job will be much easier. They encountered none of them amidst their more lofty studies in architecture school, and have largely been schooled by whatever on the job training they absorbed at their first firm - training which in Deming's definition was likely half correct and half in error, but to which they are now strongly committed. A several year program of real continuing education (not just product lunches) is called for here, individually tailored to staff members' job descriptions and interests, and fitting the firm's objectives and goals.

Are your firm partners prepared to invest in ongoing staff training and to insist upon staff embracing a quality management program? Quality management requires a top-down commitment few firms are willing to make. But if they are supportive for the long haul, they will likely find that their end-of-year profit distributions will begin to increase, as they're not having to fund money-losing CA phase corrective activities, post-construction claims, and legal fees.

-------------------------------------------
Philip Kabza AIA
Partner and Dir Technical Services
SpecGuy
Charlotte NC
-------------------------------------------