Occupied Surgical Center: RFI Backlog, Verbal Changes, and a Compression Request
A general contractor is 11 weeks into a 22-week, $9.8 million expansion of an occupied outpatient surgical center. Work is phased so that two operating rooms remain in service at all times. The owner's representative requires a weekly one-page dashboard, but the project manager has been issuing a 30-page PDF monthly. There are 34 open RFIs, 9 of them older than 21 days; the contract requires RFI responses within 10 calendar days. The change order log shows $480,000 pending, including two owner-directed equipment changes that the superintendent began installing on verbal direction. The two-week lookahead is being updated by the superintendent alone, and three critical-path subcontractors say they have not seen it. The owner is now asking the contractor to compress the remaining schedule by three weeks to support an accreditation date, and suggests daily overtime. The PM believes the schedule can absorb the compression; the superintendent says the crews are already at 52 hours per week and productivity is falling.
1. What control failures explain the open RFIs and pending changes, and what specific corrective actions should the PM take in the next two weeks?
Read the worked answer
Diagnosis. The RFI backlog and verbal changes are symptoms of unclear decision rights, not just workload. Three controls failed: (1) no single RFI owner with authority to close; (2) no field directive process, so the superintendent accepted verbal direction without scope or price; (3) the lookahead is not a shared commitment tool, so the trades cannot plan.
Actions for the next two weeks.
- Triage all 34 RFIs daily: classify as schedule-critical, cost-critical, or informational. Assign a named owner and a required response date. Aging over 7 days goes to the owner's representative with a written impact statement.
- Stop accepting verbal direction. For the two equipment changes, issue a written confirmation of verbal direction immediately, with a reservation of rights and a request for a formal change order. Do not proceed further until priced or directed in writing.
- Create a decision log with one row per issue: date raised, decision needed, decision-maker, promised date, actual date, schedule/cost impact. Review it at a 30-minute weekly owner meeting.
- Replace the 30-page monthly PDF with the one-page dashboard the owner asked for, plus an appendix. Dashboard metrics: RFIs open/overdue, changes pending value, lookahead critical items, decisions overdue.
- Run the two-week lookahead with the three critical subcontractors present, not by the superintendent alone; publish it Thursday for the following two weeks.
Reasoning. The exam issue is that schedule and cost control depend on decision latency. Fixing the RFI and directive process reduces both the $480,000 pending exposure and the risk that verbal changes become disputed.
2. Evaluate the owner's three-week compression request. What analysis and recommendation should the PM make?
Read the worked answer
Analyze before committing. At 52 hours per week the crews are already above the threshold where fatigue and productivity loss typically appear; blanket daily overtime would add roughly 10 to 15 percent labor cost for the overtime hours and likely lose 10 to 20 percent productivity, so the net schedule gain is less than the hours suggest. A rough check: three weeks at five days, six trades, eight hours, at time-and-a-half is about 720 overtime hours; at $65/hour burdened that is about $46,800, before productivity loss, added supervision, and safety exposure.
Recommended sequence.
- First recover the decision-driven time already lost: close the 9 RFIs older than 21 days, resolve the two verbal equipment changes, and re-sequence the lookahead with the three critical subcontractors. This may recover 5 to 8 days at little direct cost.
- Model the remaining gap with a time impact analysis. If a true gap remains, use targeted second-shift or weekend work only on the controlling activities, not blanket daily overtime.
- Require a written owner directive and a priced change order before acceleration, including overtime premiums, added supervision, and a productivity factor. Preserve a reservation for constructive acceleration if the owner insists without a directive.
- Do not promise the accreditation date until the analysis is complete. Give the owner a dated decision: recoverable days, cost, and risk.
Recommendation. Decline blanket overtime. Offer a targeted recovery plan with a written directive and cost. The PM's belief that the schedule can absorb compression is not supported by the superintendent's productivity observation.