Supervision of the project: additional service or basic option?

Supervision is a type of service to identify deficiencies and errors made in the course of the project. This service is sold as an extra. It consists in the fact that the author of the project periodically comes to the site to check how the construction process corresponds to the project and whether the contractor does not allow deviations from the plan. For this, the author of the project receives a reward from the customer. I have my own opinion about the supervision.

Supervision is a basic option, not an additional service

My opinion

My opinion about the supervision is fundamentally different from the generally accepted. It is considered that supervision is a special kind of paid service. The market actively convinces consumers, putting forward a number of arguments. I believe that the service in General should not be paid separately. In fact, supervision is a basic option, which is included in the package of services for the project.

Why I think so

During the supervision of the author of the project comes to control the execution of the project, and the customer pays him for it. That is, the author passed the project, and then asks for additional payment for the project to be correctly and without errors executed? I don't see that as a professional logic.

Designer- the author of the product (project). He is interested in the fact that his project was executed as close to the plan as possible, since he is responsible for the result on a par with the direct executor, that is, the contractor.

If during the implementation of the project defects are found, the author should eliminate them independently and without additional payment from the customer, as does any creator.

When new things do not perform their functions, we take them to the warranty repair, which is free of charge at the expense of the manufacturer. The author of the project is in the same conditions: he is the manufacturer of the product and must at his own expense eliminate the shortcomings of the product identified on the "warranty period", that is, during construction.

Therefore, supervision, in my opinion, can not be an additional service for some money. This is the basic option of the project, in the implementation of which the author himself is interested.

Argument: "for" and " against»

There are several main arguments, operating with which the author's supervision is allocated as a separate service. Let's understand.

"If changes are required, the author will make them to the project»

Changes may occur in the project, so the author's supervision is needed. But making changes to the finished project is an additional service, which is regulated by an additional agreement. You need a change? We will draw up the terms of reference, conclude an additional agreement and pay for it.

But if I see a mistake of the designer and demand to eliminate it, it is not changes in the project. This is a mistake that should be corrected at the expense of the author.

«Supervision is needed to prevent the contractor from changing the project»

Another popular argument: supervision helps the customer to avoid mistakes on the part of the contractor, if he decides to" optimize " the project. In fact, this is a doubling of the functions of the management company. Construction control to the technology of the project were observed properly, it is the management company. Of course, if she is competent and professional.

Duplication of functions hinders the normal course of the project and leads to budget overruns.

«Author's control is needed to prevent fraud on the part of the contractor»

The service of supervision has another side-it implies a deliberate expectation of fraud on the part of the contractor. But if you choose an unreliable contractor, the author of the project is unlikely to prevent abuse, since he appears at the facility once a week. If the contractor has a good reputation and a proper level of responsibility, he is interested in honest and transparent work, as it is part of his reputation capital and the project is quite enough current control by the management company. So in this case the author's supervision function is either excessive or does not correspond to the real need.

Additional service of supervision is needed in the absence of the management company

Cases where supervision may be an additional service

I can take the option of supervision, when the project simply does not have a management company, the customer does not know how to protect themselves from violations of technology. A separate service of supervision can also be justified in the sad case if the management company does not have sufficient competence and professionalism.

Then the author of the project can be attracted for some money for control and supervision of certain works. But in this case, he must come not once a week on a call, and be at the facility every day, as does the management company. Otherwise, it is simply impossible to provide the necessary level of control.

If there is a professional competent management company, the service of supervision should be excluded.

I summarize.

I think an additional service of supervision unnecessary. This distrust of the contractor, unjustified doubling of costs, as the functions of supervision duplicate the functions of the management company. The author of the project is interested in ensuring its most accurate execution by contractors. If in the course of the project there are errors due to the fault of the author, their correction is his duty and it should be done without any additional motivation.

Personally, it is important for me that each of my projects was implemented efficiently and without deviations from the plan, so the supervision is the basic option project management , I don't consider it as an extra service.