Hello, everyone.

This is Enta.

I imagine that each company and individual has their own approach to construction management.

So, the same thing happens quite often, but,

"The management handled it because it was done during the last construction project."

There are actually some management items that aren't even listed in the spec sheet, lol.

 

We're doing this because we did it last time and it was very well received.

Or, thanks to that management, construction precision has improved, and quality has gone up!

If you put it that way, I understand perfectly.

That directly affects your score and will also have an impact on your future work.

 

On the other hand, there are supervisors who carry out unnecessary construction management without giving it any thought.

What's the point of measuring something like this?

When I ask that, most people just say, “Because the contractor from last year did it,” lol.

Or, since I did this administrative work last year too (pointless administrative work that wasn't even evaluated)...

 

The fundamental principle of construction management is the Standard Specifications.

In accordance with the Common SpecificationsList of Minimum Construction Management Items...is being done.

If there is anything specific in the Special Specifications, that takes precedence as well.

Next is the construction plan.

Presumably, there shouldn't be any unnecessary administrative procedures listed there.

If I had to put it that way, there’s no need to handle anything that isn’t specified in the construction plan, right?

The contractor will perform XX management at a frequency of XX. As long as the local government accepts this, there is no problem.

Surprisingly, quite a few people seem to think of the construction plan as just another document to submit, so please keep that in mind.

In construction, the construction plan is the core! It’s extremely important.

This is because we proceed with construction based on the plan, and whenever changes arise, we prepare and submit a revised construction plan.

There are actually quite a few directors who don't understand that.

 

And does that include “maintenance because it was done during the previous construction project”?

It probably isn't included.

And since the inspector wouldn’t notice any management procedures that aren’t listed in the construction plan, they’ll simply be overlooked.

The management practices that impress inspectors are, of course, documented in the construction management records, and the work is being carried out in strict accordance with those records.

There’s no way that kind of stopgap management is going to be appreciated, is there?

 

Rather than engaging in pointless, wasteful management,

It would be far more valuable to improve the accuracy of the management described (or written) in the construction management documentation.

 

If construction management tailored to the on-site conditions is necessary before making any changes, we will manage the project accordingly and make the necessary plan revisions.

Since quite a few inspectors place a high value on the "story" during inspections, they prefer sites and documentation that clearly show the workflow.

 

However, since factors such as the principal contractor’s supervisor’s experience and familiarity with inspections also play a role, there is also what is known as “supplementary management.”

This means that, since the main management process is inevitably confusing, we’ll handle it on a supplementary basis.

It’s hard to include this kind of thing in the construction plan, but the inspectors love it lol

That’s what we mean by meticulous management.

It's hard to get the balance right, lol.

 

Inspectors are pros, so they'll see right through this "management" thing in a heartbeat, lol.

Let's stop pointless, wasteful management and improve the accuracy of our current management practices!

 

See you later.