Medical Center Replacement WingFollowAUp Partnering Session
Medical Center Replacement WingFollowAUp Partnering Session
WHAT ORGANIZATION DO YOU WORK FOR?
WHAT ORGANIZATION DO YOU WORK FOR?
WHAT ORGANIZATION DO YOU WORK FOR?
SO FAR IN THE TEAM INTERACTIONS ON THIS PROJECT, WHATS WORKING?
SO FAR IN THE TEAM INTERACTIONS ON THIS PROJECT, WHATS WORKING?
SO FAR IN THE TEAM INTERACTIONS ON THIS PROJECT, WHATS WORKING?
- •GC and design consultants have continued to work well together
- •Communication
- •Communication is increasing however still needs work
- •Communication within the design team has ranged from good to excellent
- •Communication, verbal ans electronic
- •Communications seem to be open
- •Construction in the field - IOR, subs and Clark are working great together
- •Construction is proceeding well which has increased the level of cooperation among all parties
- •Field lever being the source of information
- •Field lever working together great!
- •Finger pointing
- •Getting used to the stress
- •Having the right players to make decisions
- •Hospital's Cooperation with All Trades
- •Identifying and working on high priority items/issues
- •Interaction between all parties concern
- •Interaction field lever
- •Jumping through hoops
- •Major design issues have been resolved in a collaborative fashion
- •Openness
- •Payment Processing
- •Putting our fires
- •Regularly scheduled meetings are on time with agendas and minutes
- •Relationship with the County Inspectors
- •Resolution of major design items
- •Respect
- •Some silos have disappeared
- •Staff Level Effort is working fairly well (could be better)
- •This project will be completed by the hard work of many people
- •Use of e-builder to manage document controls seems to be working
- •Working together to resolve issues that arise in the field
SO FAR IN THE TEAM INTERACTIONS ON THIS PROJECT, WHAT'S NOT WORKING?
SO FAR IN THE TEAM INTERACTIONS ON THIS PROJECT, WHAT'S NOT WORKING?
SO FAR IN THE TEAM INTERACTIONS ON THIS PROJECT, WHAT'S NOT WORKING?
- •Culture of blaming continues
- •Decisions are taken in previous meetings, but then to be railroaded in a later meeting
- •Delegation of decisions
- •Design decisions are not easily made and when they are, they can easily be changed, causing extra work and time
- •Design has fallen too far behind and all entities are burdened with picking up the slack
- •Executive Level Communication is difficult, at best
- •I still feel there are many silos in this project that slow the sharing of information
- •Ignoring priorities that are not the most important
- •Late/changing details by HOK causing excessive rework
- •Field lever working together great!
- •Level of Trust is still low, guarded interactions
- •Getting used to the stress
- •Mid management not sharing information with mid management
- •Not sure CDB receiving recognition for peformance greater than "minimum required" i.e. entrance landscaping, murals,etc
- •OSHPD Fire Life Safety Review/Approval
- •OSHPD FLS still has difficulties getting issues resolved with our team
- •OSHPD Phased Review
- •Overbearing Owner steps well beyond their responsibilities as owner's representative under the guise of "potential future work" and fear of replacement such that no one will question them
- •Project leadership is not setting an example for the rest of the team due to the culture of fear
- •REAL Teamwork/Collaboration
- •RGG and GBA relationship does not work
- •PSense of negativity is still prevalent
- •Still no trust among parties
- •Still silo issues
- •Resolution of major design items
- •Still some tension wrt success or lack of same on OSHPD permits and responsibilities
- •Streamkining of processes
- •Team functions (none) socializing
- •The owner's representative is standing in the way of effective communication with facility staff and the county
- •The team is not benefiting from the colocation
- •There is still a culture of fear - there are negative repercussions for speaking up (pointing out issues or suggestions for making the project better)
- •There seems to be no clear definition of the design deliverables or the submittal schedule - there seems to be a new surprise every day!
- •There's them and then there's us
- •Too many general meetings and no clear decisions to move forward
- •Too much blaming
IF YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED ITEMS AS NOT WORKING, PLEASE PROVIDE A SUGGESTION FOR HOW TO IMPROVE AT LEAST ONE ITEM
IF YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED ITEMS AS NOT WORKING, PLEASE PROVIDE A SUGGESTION FOR HOW TO IMPROVE AT LEAST ONE ITEM
IF YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED ITEMS AS NOT WORKING, PLEASE PROVIDE A SUGGESTION FOR HOW TO IMPROVE AT LEAST ONE ITEM
- •Provide additional resources if all manpower is tied
- •OSHPD senior leadership needs to remove the current FLS plan reviewer from the project
- •A revised approach will be implemented to review complete packages
- •Continue to communicate with all parties
- •Eliminate activities directed at finding "whose fault it is"
- •ie. mid management not knowing vcmc was going to use site over weekend to set equipment on roof, review be open,seam like rg group is missing field level staff
- •Increase communications, Even if that means over communicating
- •Item 1 is obviously impacting Item 2. Open and honest communication is needed to improve the level of trust and work on resolving issues in a collaborative fashion
- •Lunch and brain storm issues objectively, as opposes as business
- •Minimize general meetings and have more focused and productive meetings with right people that can make decision
- •Most projects have regular OAC (Owner/Architect/Contractor) meetings where all necessary parties are present to openly discuss both project progress and project challenges - and to work collaboratively toward the common goal of project success. That has not been happening on this project. Rather, there seems to be a foundation of mutual distrust
- •R to understand their role is to confirm design and construction conformance with the contract and BAFO while releasing their grasp on design. A architecture firm was assembled to design the project, while working with the contractors who will construct it. Each with their own respective experience and accreditation to adequately complete their tasks. Designers to staff appropriately with more drafters to have design catch up with the schedule. Actively collaborate with those around them. Deadlines and furiously working causes a person to loose perspective on the task at hand. Personal opinions, feelings and ego's need to be checked at the door and the goal of constructing and delivering a projet needs to be realized by the designers, from the top on down. Senior level staff at all organizational levels need to get on the same page. Put them in a room and keep them in there until they develop a positive working arrangement (and a clear way of resolving conflicts). Need to force people from the top down to play together. When they don't they should be "punished". Their performance should be directly tied to the overall performance of the project and the performance of the other senior staff
- •Stop asking team members to be removed from the project for speaking up. It harms the project process and ultimately the success of the project. Stop the finger pointing and blame game
- •The Design Team has discussed this issue and Clark is working on continuing solutions
ON A SCALE OF 1-10 WHERE 1 IS POOR AND 10 IS EXCELLENT, PLEASE RATE HOW THE ENTIRE TEAM IS DOING ON THE FOLLOWING GOALS:
ON A SCALE OF 1-10 WHERE 1 IS POOR AND 10 IS EXCELLENT, PLEASE RATE HOW THE ENTIRE TEAM IS DOING ON THE FOLLOWING GOALS:
ON A SCALE OF 1-10 WHERE 1 IS POOR AND 10 IS EXCELLENT, PLEASE RATE HOW THE ENTIRE TEAM IS DOING ON THE FOLLOWING GOALS:
| 1 Low | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 Average | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 High | N/A: I Don't Know | Rating Avg. | Count | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Safety-Zero incidents & recordables | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 4.55% 1 | 13.64% 3 | 50.00% 1 | 31.82% 7 | 9.60 | 22 |
| No unscheduled impacts to Hospital Ops | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 27.27% 6 | 13.64% 3 | 18.18% 4 | 13.64% 3 | 27.27% 6 | 8.25 | 22 |
| All OSHPD permits by December 2014 | 0.00% (0) | 5.00% 1 | 5.00% 1 | 5.00% 1 | 20.00% 4 | 0.0% (0) | 15.00% 3 | 10.00% 2 | 5.00% 1 | 15.00% 3 | 20.00% 4 | 6.56 | 20 |
| Make the Project FUN! | 13.64% 3 | 9.09% 2 | 13.64% 3 | 13.64% 3 | 13.64% 3 | 9.09% 2 | 4.55% 1 | 13.64% 3 | 4.55% 1 | 4.55% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 4.77 | 22 |
| Take something positive from this job | 0.0% (0) | 9.09% 2 | 4.55% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 18.18% 4 | 13.64% 3 | 18.18% 4 | 9.09% 2 | 13.64% 3 | 13.64% 3 | 0.0% (0) | 6.63 | 22 |
| Each is proud to be part of this team | 0.0% (0) | 9.09% 2 | 4.55% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 22.73% 5 | 13.64% 3 | 18.18% 4 | 13.64% 3 | 9.09% 2 | 4.55% 1 | 4.55% 1 | 5.80 | 22 |
| Make a fair and reasonable profit | 4.55% 1 | 9.09% 2 | 9.09% 2 | 9.09% 2 | 9.09% 2 | 18.18% 4 | 9.09% 2 | 4.55% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 4.55% 1 | 22.73% 5 | 5.00 | 22 |
| Win Win WIN! | 0.0% (0) | 9.09% 2 | 4.55% 1 | 18.18% 4 | 18.18% 4 | 4.55% 1 | 13.64% 3 | 13.64% 3 | 0.0% (0) | 9.09% 2 | 9.09% 2 | 5.70 | 22 |
| Make a positive difference for VCMC & Ventura County | 0.0% (0) | 4.55% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 4.55% 1 | 22.73% 5 | 18.18% 4 | 18.18% 4 | 27.27% 6 | 4.55% 1 | 8.14 | 22 |
WHAT ARE THE 2 MOST IMPORTANT THINS THIG TEAM MEMBERS SHOULD FOCUS ON IN THE NEXT 90 DAYS?
WHAT ARE THE 2 MOST IMPORTANT THINS THIG TEAM MEMBERS SHOULD FOCUS ON IN THE NEXT 90 DAYS?
WHAT ARE THE 2 MOST IMPORTANT THINS THIG TEAM MEMBERS SHOULD FOCUS ON IN THE NEXT 90 DAYS?
| 1 Low | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 Average | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 High | N/A: I Don't Know | Rating Avg. | Count | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) Quality and constructability of CDs | 5.26% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 10.53% 2 | 36.84% 7 | 15.79% 3 | 10.53% 2 | 15.79% 3 | 5.26% 1 | 0.00% (0) | 0.00% (0) | 5.73 | 19 |
| (1) Design issues closure | 5.00% (0) | 5.00% (0) | 5.00% (0) | 15.00% 3 | 20.00% 4 | 15.00% 3 | 5.00% 1 | 20.00% 4 | 5.00% 1 | 0.00% (0) | 5.00% 1 | 5.47 | 20 |
| (1) Peer reviews | 5.26% 1 | 5.26% 1 | 5.26% 1 | 5.26% 1 | 21.05% 4 | 10.53% 2 | 15.79% 3 | 21.05% 4 | 0.00% 0 | 0.00% 0 | 10.53% 2 | 5.58 | 19 |
| (2) Develop a set of principles of professionalism and camaraderie | 0.00% (0) | 14.29% 3 | 0.00% (0) | 0.00% (0) | 28.57% 6 | 4.76% 1 | 19.05% 4 | 9.52% 2 | 4.76% 1 | 14.29% 3 | 4.76% 1 | 6.25 | 21 |
| (2) New members educated with shared goals/objectives | 5.00% 1 | 5.00% 1 | 10.00% 2 | 5.00% 1 | 10.00% 2 | 0.00% (0) | 15.00% 3 | 15.00% 3 | 5.00% 1 | 5.00% 1 | 25.00% 5 | 6.06 | 20 |
| (3) Do a page turn with OSHPD reviewer for each submission | 0.00% 0 | 0.00% 0 | 5.00% 1 | 0.00% 0 | 0.00% 0 | 5.00% 1 | 10.00% 2 | 30.00% 6 | 10.00% 2 | 10.00% 2 | 30.00% 6 | 7.78 | 20 |
| (3) Weekly meetings with OSHPD | 0.00% 0 | 0.00% 0 | 0.00% 0 | 5.00% 1 | 0.00% 0 | 0.00% 0 | 5.00% 1 | 30.00% 6 | 20.00% 4 | 10.00% 2 | 30.00% 6 | 8.21 | 20 |
| (3) Monthly executive meeting with OSHPD - review schedule | 0.0% (0) | 0.00% 0 | 10.00% 2 | 0.00% 0 | 0.00% 0 | 5.00% 1 | 15.00% 3 | 20.00% 4 | 5.00% 1 | 10.00% 2 | 35.00% 7 | 7.23 | 20 |
| (3) OSHPD work session to establish work flow process | 5.00% 1 | 5.00% 1 | 0.00% 0 | 5.00% 1 | 5.00% 1 | 10.00% 2 | 5.00% 1 | 20.00% 4 | 5.00% 1 | 10.00% 2 | 30.00% 6 | 6.57 | 20 |
| (4) Defining problem solving priorities | 0.00% 0 | 10.00% 2 | 5.00% 1 | 0.00% 0 | 35.00% 7 | 5.00% 1 | 5.00% 1 | 30.00% 6 | 0.00% 0 | 5.00% 1 | 5.00% 1 | 5.94 | 20 |
| (4) Respecting others' priorities | 9.52% 2 | 14.29% 3 | 4.76% 1 | 0.00% 0 | 38.10% 8 | 0.00% 0 | 9.52% 2 | 14.29% 3 | 0.00% 0 | 9.52% 2 | 0.00% 0 | 4.71 | 21 |
| (4) Effective delegation and empowerment | 14.29% 3 | 9.52% 2 | 14.29% 3 | 0.00% 0 | 28.57% 6 | 4.76% 1 | 9.52% 2 | 19.05% 4 | 0.00% 0 | 0.00% 0 | 0.00% 0 | 4.66 | 21 |
| (5) Establish a distribution chain for communication | 5.00% 1 | 10.00% 2 | 5.00% 1 | 0.00% 0 | 35.00% 7 | 5.00% 1 | 5.00% 1 | 5.00% 1 | 20.00% 4 | 10.00% 2 | 0.00% 0 | 6.00 | 20 |
| (5) Develop a quick map of e-Builder | 10.00% 2 | 0.00% 0 | 0.00% 0 | 0.00% 0 | 10.00% 2 | 0.00% 0 | 15.00% 3 | 10.00% 2 | 15.00% 3 | 20.00% 4 | 20.00% 4 | 7.25 | 20 |
| Make a positive difference for VCMC & Ventura County | 5.00% 1 | 0.00% 0 | 5.00% 1 | 0.00% 0 | 15.00% 3 | 0.00% 0 | 30.00% 6 | 10.00% 2 | 10.00% 2 | 25.00% 5 | 0.00% 0 | 7.25 | 20 |
WHAT ARE THE 2 MOST IMPORTANT THINS THIG TEAM MEMBERS SHOULD FOCUS ON IN THE NEXT 90 DAYS?
WHAT ARE THE 2 MOST IMPORTANT THINS THIG TEAM MEMBERS SHOULD FOCUS ON IN THE NEXT 90 DAYS?
WHAT ARE THE 2 MOST IMPORTANT THINS THIG TEAM MEMBERS SHOULD FOCUS ON IN THE NEXT 90 DAYS?
- •90% CD Review and Final Design issue resolution
- •90% CD's
- •90% CDs
- •Be open/team effort
- •Complete and bring closure to the design
- •Complete CD's and get permits
- •Complete CD's and get permits
- •Complete documentation
- •Complete Excavation of site
- •Completing design and MEP coordination
- •Completion of 90% CDs and Peer Reviews
- •Establishing a common definition of project success - including all parties - so that real teamwork can commence
- •Feed the construction with the appropriate information and materials such that there is no schedule impact or undue difficulties
- •Finalization of the 90% CD drawings
- •Improve communications
- •inter action between trades
- •Meeting OSHPD MOU dates and receiving permits
- •Meeting tight deadlines
- •Mock-Ups
- •Objective problem solving
- •On site DT Meetings monthly
- •One goul
- •OSHPD Permits
- •OSHPD Permits
- •OSHPD Reviews and Approval of critical increments
- •Prioritizing based on the project as a whole
- •Safety
- •Seek OSHPD approvals
- •Starting Foundations
- •Starting the Type 2 mock:ups
- •Who's paying for it
- •Working together to meet the latest OSHPD submittal schedule
COMMUNICATION: RATE THE PROJECT TEAM'S LEVEL OF COMMUNICATION ON THIS PROJECT
COMMUNICATION: RATE THE PROJECT TEAM'S LEVEL OF COMMUNICATION ON THIS PROJECT
COMMUNICATION: RATE THE PROJECT TEAM'S LEVEL OF COMMUNICATION ON THIS PROJECT
| 1 Low | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 Average | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 High | N/A: I Don't Know | Rating Avg. | Count | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Collaboration on the job | 9.09% 2 | 4.55% 1 | 4.55% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 22.73% 5 | 9.09% 2 | 13.64% 3 | 18.18% 4 | 13.64% 3 | 4.55% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 6.09 | 22 |
| Openness of communication | 9.09% 2 | 4.55% 1 | 4.55% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 22.73% 5 | 9.09% 2 | 22.73% 5 | 13.64% 3 | 9.09% 2 | 4.55% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 5.95 | 22 |
| Timely responses to inquiries | 4.55% 1 | 4.55% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 9.09% 2 | 27.27% 6 | 4.55% 1 | 31.82% 7 | 18.18% 4 | 9.09% 2 | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 5.86 | 22 |
| Quality answers to inquiries | 4.55% 1 | 4.55% 1 | 4.55% 1 | 9.09% 2 | 13.64% 3 | 4.55% 1 | 31.82% 7 | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 12.50% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 6.09 | 22 |
| Ability to determine and/or contact responsible party | 4.55% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 4.55% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 9.09% 2 | 18.18% 4 | 18.18% 4 | 9.09% 2 | 27.27% 6 | 9.09% 2 | 0.0% (0) | 7.09 | 22 |
| Resolution of issues and disputes | 4.55% 1 | 4.55% 1 | 4.55% 1 | 4.55% 1 | 31.82% 7 | 22.73% 5 | 4.55% 1 | 18.18% 4 | 4.55% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 5.59 | 22 |
| Effective communication and dissemination of project information | 4.55% 1 | 4.55% 1 | 9.09% 2 | 9.09% 2 | 22.73% 5 | 13.64% 3 | 13.64% 3 | 4.55% 1 | 13.64% 3 | 4.55% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 5.73 | 22 |
PLEASE DESCRIBE ANY UNRESOLVED ISSUES WICH, IF LEFT UNRESOLVED, MIGHT IMPACT THE PROJECT IN EITHER COST, SCHEDULE, QUALITY OR SAFETY
PLEASE DESCRIBE ANY UNRESOLVED ISSUES WICH, IF LEFT UNRESOLVED, MIGHT IMPACT THE PROJECT IN EITHER COST, SCHEDULE, QUALITY OR SAFETY
PLEASE DESCRIBE ANY UNRESOLVED ISSUES WICH, IF LEFT UNRESOLVED, MIGHT IMPACT THE PROJECT IN EITHER COST, SCHEDULE, QUALITY OR SAFETY
- •COR's outstanding
- •Design and constructability of the documents
- •Design team & RGG changes to the building that affect coordination of MEP installation
- •Development of mock-up drawings
- •Getting project permits timely
- •Hospital staff act as if empowered to do as they please
- •Layout details and final product definitions clarifications on variance of devices responsible party so costs can be properly
- •Many of the major design issues are behind us. We need to focus on working collaboratively with OSHPD and further
- •OSHPD approvals
- •The lack of sharing and communication
ARE THERE DANGERS OR RISKS THAT MIGHT APPEAR IN FUTURE MONTHS THAT WE SHOULD EXPLORE DURING THE PARTNERING SESSION?
ARE THERE DANGERS OR RISKS THAT MIGHT APPEAR IN FUTURE MONTHS THAT WE SHOULD EXPLORE DURING THE PARTNERING SESSION?
ARE THERE DANGERS OR RISKS THAT MIGHT APPEAR IN FUTURE MONTHS THAT WE SHOULD EXPLORE DURING THE PARTNERING SESSION?
- •Burn out of key members if collaboration doesn't improve
- •Burnout
- •Completing all the mockups timely (Dec. 2014)
- •Difficulty with deadlines can impact project
- •Heavy traffic, employees need to reeled into Safety at all levels
- •Medical Equipment and IT
- •Commisions of design requirements, and Owner induced requests for additional considerations on basis of design
- •OSHPD FLS Approvals of Documents
- •OSHPD Structural Reviewer (R&C) may be understaffed and could affect permitting
ARE THERE OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN THE SCHEDULE, COST STRUCTURE, QUALITY OR SAFETY WE SHOULD VISIT DURING THE PARTNERING SESSION?
ARE THERE OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN THE SCHEDULE, COST STRUCTURE, QUALITY OR SAFETY WE SHOULD VISIT DURING THE PARTNERING SESSION?
ARE THERE OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN THE SCHEDULE, COST STRUCTURE, QUALITY OR SAFETY WE SHOULD VISIT DURING THE PARTNERING SESSION?
- •A pledge of open communication and a common definition of project success should be established
- •Don't pond safety on the other person, step up to the plate
- •Don't know
- •Have some fun
- •No
- •Quick coordinated resolution of issues will only enhance the schedule and cost of the project
- •Remove hanging birds at the children's playground, sheet metal "fins" on the exposed fainer connector beams and the trellis in the sunken garden
- •There are opportunities but the culture still does not support taking advantage of those opportunities
PLEASE RATE YOUR LEVEL OF COMFORT ON THE JOB FOR EACH OF THE FOLLOWING CATEGORIES
PLEASE RATE YOUR LEVEL OF COMFORT ON THE JOB FOR EACH OF THE FOLLOWING CATEGORIES
PLEASE RATE YOUR LEVEL OF COMFORT ON THE JOB FOR EACH OF THE FOLLOWING CATEGORIES
| 1 Low | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 Average | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 High | N/A: I Don't Know | Rating Avg. | Count | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trust of other project participants | 4.55% 1 | 13.64% 3 | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 22.73% 5 | 13.64% 3 | 13.64% 3 | 22.73% 5 | 0.0% (0) | 9.09% 2 | 0.0% (0) | 5.95 | 22 |
| Respect among project participants | 0.0% (0) | 18.18% 4 | 0.0% (0) | 4.55% 1 | 13.64% 3 | 18.18% 4 | 13.64% 3 | 18.18% 4 | 9.09% 2 | 4.55% 1 | 0.0% (0) | 6 | 22 |
| Openness to others' opinions & viewpoints | 4.55% 1 | 9.09% 2 | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 18.18% 4 | 18.18% 4 | 27.27% 6 | 4.55% 1 | 9.09% 2 | 9.09% 2 | 0.0% (0) | 6.23 | 22 |
| Ability to rely on other team members | 0.0% (0) | 9.09% 2 | 4.55% 1 | 4.55% 1 | 22.73% 5 | 18.18% 4 | 18.18% 4 | 13.64% 3 | 9.09% 2 | 0.0% (0) | 0.0% (0) | 5.91 | 22 |
IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR FEEDBACK YOU WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE ABOUT THE PROJECT OR THIS SURVEY,PLEASE FEEL FREE TO DO HERE:
IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR FEEDBACK YOU WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE ABOUT THE PROJECT OR THIS SURVEY,PLEASE FEEL FREE TO DO HERE:
IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR FEEDBACK YOU WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE ABOUT THE PROJECT OR THIS SURVEY,PLEASE FEEL FREE TO DO HERE:
- •I think we have the making of a Fantastic Project. We have self empowered individuals exercising there there existence the owners side
- •None
- •Ratings of the Design-Build Team would range form 8-10 for each of the above categories - the low scores above reflect the values of the owner's project management team
- •The relationship between the Owner's rep and the design build team has improved however is still an issue, interactions are guarded and the team feels defensive
- •Yes, it depends on the participants. It is not easy to answer the above questions because it does not apply to all project participants. For that reason, I can only say so-so