OGL 481 Pro-Seminar I:

PCA-Structural Frame Worksheet

Worksheet Objectives:
1. Describe the structural frame
2. Apply the structural frame to your personal case situation

Complete the following making sure to support your ideas and cite from the textbook and other
course materials per APA guidelines. After the peer review, you have a chance to update this and
format for your Electronic Portfolio due in Module 6.

1) Briefly restate your situation from Module 1 and your role.

The current situation I want to describe is on my current project where the client
has asked us to start work without an IFC’d (issued for construction) design package. A
quick note about construction and the design drawings are that there are 4 parts,
Schematic Design (SD), Design Development (DD), Construction Documents (CD), and
Issued for Construction (IFC). As a rule of thumb, you do not start work until the final
design (IFC) is issued for construction by the engineer to avoid any issues with changes
in the design.
One of my key roles is to review drawings as early as possible to identify the
material that is needed for the scope of work. I will also identify any long lead items
based on historical date of material deliveries and reaching out to our contractor and
vendors for lead times. Doing so helps our team build and adjust the schedule
accordingly. As each package is issued for construction, I identify and changes in the
design and log the risk and change to take to the owner so that the risk is captured and
change orders can be issued for the change. As one can imagine, this gets expensive
quickly. Thankfully, we are avoiding a lot of issues by reviewing previous packages, spec
requirements, and collaborating with the owner directly to ensure that there are minor
changes to the design between CD and IFC.

2) Describe how the structure of the organization influenced the situation.

The structure of the organization that I work for has influenced the situation in a number
of ways, but first I would like to breakdown the structure a bit. On our current project we
have an Operation Manager and a General Superintendent who oversee our two projects.
Within each project, there are sub projects which have Project Managers and Project
Superintendents. Currently we have four Project Managers and four Project
Superintendents that manager their projects. Under each of them fall the project teams of
1
 Project Engineers, Office Engineers, Field Engineers, and Area Superintendents. I would
equate the setup to a simple hierarchy, where we have in this case the boss at the top (our
Operations Manager and General Superintendent). One manages the office side and
overall financials, while the other focuses on the field and what is being built along with
manpower. The simple hierarchy is where middle management reports to the boss, and
supervisors communicate the objective down (Boleman & Deal, 2021). Overall, we help
influence the situation by determining who is in charge of what project, i.e., which
project managers have what projects. The project managers then coordinate effort
through the project team and determine what is needed to make the project a success.

Currently, our organization influences the situation by constantly communicating

with the owner (stakeholders) the needs to comply the project. As we continue to work
through design issues, our organizations leaders need to communicate the risk, and
delegate those risk onto the owner. Anything that we miss after packages IFC, come out
of our contingency which affect our bottom line and profit margins. We must be vigilant
when negotiating risk and capturing them early before package buyout. Our project
managers take on the bulk of the negotiation with the help of our design teams.

3) Recommend how you would use structure for an alternative course of action
regarding your case.

I would use structure in an alternative course of action when it comes to assigning

project teams. Currently, our field teams are assigned one project that consist of multiple
packages, but it all falls under one building or area. The office teams are not set up this
way. Our office teams are assigned trade disciplines (Civil teams, structural teams,
process mechanical teams, dry mechanical teams, and electrical teams). The office team
manage their corresponding trade partners across all packages and buildings, rather than
just one area like the field team. I would like to structure the office team to reflect the
field team so that they can work more closely with the field team.
Additionally, I would keep one aspect of the office team the same, that is keeping
them assigned to specific disciplines. This allows them to focus on one specially and to
really understand the scope and work closely with the team to make sure deadlines and
material are arriving on time. Finally, I would assign everyone a project engineer which
will act as the teams lead to review and help team stay on track. Think of them as a
project manager, as they are responsible for all the funding on their specific package
within the project.

4) Reflect on what you would do or not do differently given what you have learned
about this frame.

Given what I have learned about structure, I would not go with my method. I would stick
with our current structure as it has proven to be affective. We have been working in the

2
 current structure for years and have been successful and continued to be awarded more
work. One thing I like about our current structure is the fact that the office engineers are
assigned specific trade partners to manage. Collaborating with the same individuals allow
for bonds and trust form between one another. It also allows for an area of specialties to
develop and allows for the trade partners to trust in your judgment calls.
I think that developing relationship with our trade partners is a key to success in
my line of work. If I were assigned a trade partner for only one package rather than their
entire scope across the whole project, I would not be able to develop camaraderie with
them. The final thing I would keep is how we manage all our trades funding needs across
all packages. The person that is assigned a trade is responsible for that trades funding.
This allows for one person to manage their money rather than multiple people, which
allows for cleaner bookkeeping at the end of the day. One of the backup measures we
have in place is that once pay applications have been set up, a different person reviews it
to make sure that all numbers align, and values are correct. Additionally, there is a final
review done by the project engineer who then sends it to the project manager for review
and signoff.

3
 Reference

Bolman G. L., & Deal T. (2021) Reframing Organizations Artistry, Choice, and Leadership 7th
Edition. Published by Jossey-Bass