Practice Management Member Conversations

In the CCA Knowledge Community Town Hall meeting, a question was raised concerning recommendations regarding the architect's participation with Construction Management Software (CMS) and/or the need to have one's own software platform to manage administration of the contract for construction internal to the design team.

This blog post is a follow up to that question and intended to generate dialogue and perspectives on this topic. The dialogue and perspectives that are gathered by the post will contribute to the understanding of content that should be comprehensively addressed in a white paper on this topic, currently under development.

It is important to recognize, if the CM's/GC's CMS is the only software or process that is tracking the design teams obligations, then they are not only using the software for Construction Management, but they are creating and are in control of the "Record for Administration of the Contract for Construction" which can provide basis for claims.

When engaging with these platforms or deciding on investing in the use of a platform for the design team, there are 4 critical aspects associated with one's risk management in "administering the contract for construction" that are worth consideration.

1. Is participation in a CM's/GC's CMS a condition of your contract and does participation create risk by extending your obligations beyond your contract obligations?
2. Does participation in a CM's/GC's CMS have a negative impact on the design team's labor costs and efficiency?
3. Is participation in a CM's/Gc's CMS producing an accurate record of the "administration of the contract for construction"?
4. Does time spent in a CM's/GC's CMS benefit the design team's enterprise execution of "administering" contracts for construction?

------------------------------
Michael Zensen
Vice President
CannonDesign
St. Louis, Missouri
He/Him
------------------------------

I cant tell you how much time I have spent learning the CM software brought in by the contractor or the client for a project.

It is helpful for larger projects but needs standardization. And often times even the GC or Owners Rep does not know how to implement it.

Lynn Fritzlen AIA

Sent from my iPhone

Glad to see others that are struggling with this issue.  We are a small firm and find that GC's are constantly bombarding us with their management software's requests.  We have had to take the hardline position of saying 'no', and simply requesting PDF's of whatever the request is (be it an RFI, Submittal, etc.). Apologetically, we acknowledge to the GC/Client that these management software tools are great for the contractor, and we encourage their freedom to choose and utilize any/all tools available to them.  But forcing us to subscribe and then conform to their parameters is not what our role is in the projects (Contractually or Professionally).  It is already difficult enough reeling in the "text-RFI" from the smartphone from the truck, documenting it correctly, and then providing responses in a professional structure.  All those programs can generate a PDF which can be emailed and distributed accordingly; we have our standard correspondence set up to reply accordingly.  That should work for them.  Easier for them doesn't make it easier for us necessarily.

------------------------------
Craig Hausman AIA
Hausman Architecture
Sacramento CA
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 04-29-2024 05:53 PM
From: Lynn Fritzlen AIA
Subject: Construction Management Software- Participate in the Contractor's or Use Your Own

I cant tell you how much time I have spent learning the CM software brought in by the contractor or the client for a project.

It is helpful for larger projects but needs standardization. And often times even the GC or Owners Rep does not know how to implement it.

Lynn Fritzlen AIA

Sent from my iPhone

At my firm we've had projects that use CM software (one in particular) and other projects, including large projects that do not.  While there may be issues with these online platforms as noted in other emails, I've found they make completing construction contract administration far easier than emailing PDF's back and forth and tracking things in excel.  I believe these programs can add quite a bit of value for the whole team.

------------------------------
John Berendzen AIA
Fox Architects
Saint Louis MO
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 05-02-2024 05:03 PM
From: Craig Hausman
Subject: Construction Management Software- Participate in the Contractor's or Use Your Own

Glad to see others that are struggling with this issue.  We are a small firm and find that GC's are constantly bombarding us with their management software's requests.  We have had to take the hardline position of saying 'no', and simply requesting PDF's of whatever the request is (be it an RFI, Submittal, etc.). Apologetically, we acknowledge to the GC/Client that these management software tools are great for the contractor, and we encourage their freedom to choose and utilize any/all tools available to them.  But forcing us to subscribe and then conform to their parameters is not what our role is in the projects (Contractually or Professionally).  It is already difficult enough reeling in the "text-RFI" from the smartphone from the truck, documenting it correctly, and then providing responses in a professional structure.  All those programs can generate a PDF which can be emailed and distributed accordingly; we have our standard correspondence set up to reply accordingly.  That should work for them.  Easier for them doesn't make it easier for us necessarily.

------------------------------
Craig Hausman AIA
Hausman Architecture
Sacramento CA
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 04-29-2024 05:53 PM
From: Lynn Fritzlen AIA
Subject: Construction Management Software- Participate in the Contractor's or Use Your Own

I cant tell you how much time I have spent learning the CM software brought in by the contractor or the client for a project.

It is helpful for larger projects but needs standardization. And often times even the GC or Owners Rep does not know how to implement it.

Lynn Fritzlen AIA

Sent from my iPhone

We have added Procore Specific Contractor notes to our cover sheet. 

9.    GCs USING PROCORE SOFTWARE
9.1.    GC shall place "Ball in Court" issuances to the proper consultant engineer, including building engineer, for Fire Life Safety, and sprinklers. 
9.2.    GC shall issue RFIs and submittals as a complete and single document with all sketches and photos in PDF no .tiff or .jpg separate files will be accepted. 
9.3.    Submittal and RFI overdue reminders should  be turned off.
9.4.    GC shall describe in the title of the RFI or submittal the reason or purpose of the document. Additional information shall be included in the Description. 
9.5.    RFIs or submittals with multiple items shall be numbered to allow KAI to provide partial responses or review. 
9.6.    RFIs and submittals for areas outside the project scope shall be issued directly to the construction manager.

------------------------------
Guillermo Monter-Cervano AIA
Klawiter & Associates
Santa Monica CA
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 05-02-2024 05:03 PM
From: Craig Hausman
Subject: Construction Management Software- Participate in the Contractor's or Use Your Own

Glad to see others that are struggling with this issue.  We are a small firm and find that GC's are constantly bombarding us with their management software's requests.  We have had to take the hardline position of saying 'no', and simply requesting PDF's of whatever the request is (be it an RFI, Submittal, etc.). Apologetically, we acknowledge to the GC/Client that these management software tools are great for the contractor, and we encourage their freedom to choose and utilize any/all tools available to them.  But forcing us to subscribe and then conform to their parameters is not what our role is in the projects (Contractually or Professionally).  It is already difficult enough reeling in the "text-RFI" from the smartphone from the truck, documenting it correctly, and then providing responses in a professional structure.  All those programs can generate a PDF which can be emailed and distributed accordingly; we have our standard correspondence set up to reply accordingly.  That should work for them.  Easier for them doesn't make it easier for us necessarily.

------------------------------
Craig Hausman AIA
Hausman Architecture
Sacramento CA
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 04-29-2024 05:53 PM
From: Lynn Fritzlen AIA
Subject: Construction Management Software- Participate in the Contractor's or Use Your Own

I cant tell you how much time I have spent learning the CM software brought in by the contractor or the client for a project.

It is helpful for larger projects but needs standardization. And often times even the GC or Owners Rep does not know how to implement it.

Lynn Fritzlen AIA

Sent from my iPhone

Carefully review the language used in the CM's or D-B's platform to ensure it is consistent with the Owner/Architect Agreement's scope of services. We have seen software that does not reflect the Architect's standard of care and could at least confuse the relationship if not actually produce obligations that exceed the Architect's contract. For instance (a popular one) is to indicate that Architect's approval of a Contractor's submittal converts that submittal into a contract document that supersedes the Drawings and Specifications. This is being compounded by Contractor submittal management software that is AI driven and could generate Architect responsibilities that exceed their contract.

------------------------------
Philip Kabza AIA
SpecGuy Specifications Consultants
Mount Dora FL
------------------------------

We have struggled with this for several years. Our position has been to create our version of the project history in case the GC's version is not accurate. But, this has caused additional time, effort, and frustration. To date, I've not seen a claim that directly uses one version of history against the other. If you respond to the GC on "x" date, that date is captured regardless of whether the GC decides to leave the issue open for other reasons. It's frustrating and can be difficult to explain to the Owner. I appreciate Guillermo's effort to add specific notes to the drawings or specifications to address the issue.

A follow-up question: what software are other architects using? We have been using Newforma with mixed results.

------------------------------
Robin Bellerby AIA
Humphreys & Partners Architects, LP
Dallas TX
------------------------------