RFIs and Submittals

I find it interesting that many projects report number of RFIs, as if fewer RFIs equate a more successful project. It is equally interesting that eliminating submittals is a goal of many projects. While I understand that there is waste inherent in traditional submittal and RFI processes, I don't know that either should be thrown away. They exist for reasons outside litigation.

Earlier this week, where someone compared the submittal process to active listening.When a subcontractor creates shop drawings, they are really paraphrasing to the design team, "This is what I think you just said. Is that correct?"

At the same time, if an RFI asks an intelligent question, and perhaps suggests a solutions, is there really a problem?

I understand the position CYA behavior..and certainly agree that all processes can be improved (i.e. think of the time that paperless submittals create). But before we throw away our old processes for new, I don't think we should forget their purpose.

2 comments:

brad said...

Exactly! Both are communication...the current process is just silly though.

Christopher Hubbard said...

But I think what people really mean to say is RFI's due to missing or inconsistant information. We should classify RFI's in three classes (Maybe more)

1. Missing or conlflicting information
2. Field Conditions
3. Intrepretation 6 or half dozen