Supervisors should avoid saying the “seven no’s” to construction units”
Thread Content
In addition to managing relationships with the owner properly, it is also essential for the supervisor to maintain good working relations with the construction contractor. So, what should supervisors pay attention to when dealing with construction companies? In summary, the “seven no’s” should be avoided. First, avoid being principleless and overly accommodating. The supervision engineer must strictly fulfill their duties within the scope permitted by regulations and the contract, take a fair stance, and independently resolve issues that arise in their work. Being ambiguous in one’s work and acting as a \"good guy\" by becoming a subordinate to the construction company defeats the purpose of having a \"third-party supervisor\" in place. The head of a large state-owned construction company once said, “We prefer to work with supervisors who are honest and strict in their conduct.” ”The second mistake is to be rude and act in a condescending manner. A few supervision professionals believe that by exercising project oversight on behalf of the owner, they are superior, and they look down on the construction workers who have to deal directly with dirty, strenuous, dangerous, and hard tasks. For supervisors, adopting the right mindset and treating the construction units, especially the workers on the job site, as equals is key to performing their work well. Third, avoid not offering any ideas and just pointing out faults. It is normal for supervision engineers to point out faults in their work, but doing nothing more than that is not sufficient. Pointing out faults is not the goal; the aim is to ensure that the construction party takes the faults identified by the supervision engineer seriously, makes prompt corrections, and learns from these mistakes to prevent similar issues from occurring in the future. Therefore, the supervision engineer is required to not only understand the problems identified in their work but also to understand why they exist, and at the same time to offer their own opinions. Additionally, one must pay attention to the methods and approaches in work. Fourth, avoid taking responsibility and shirking problems. When carrying out their work, supervision engineers should note that for issues within their own scope of authority, they should not use the owner as a \"shield\" to avoid responsibility by finding every possible excuse to shirk it. This is because when the owner entrusts a supervision engineer to carry out supervision, it means entrusting that engineer with coordinating and regulating the construction process. Therefore, supervision engineers must continuously enhance their abilities to identify problems, analyze them, and solve them, so as to build a positive self-image, increase their credibility, and earn the trust of the construction units. Five things to avoid: ignoring results and being picky about everything. It is understandable for the supervision agency to adopt a critical attitude toward the construction unit; however, if this critical attitude turns into viewing things through biased eyes, the result will only be counterproductive. Secondly, the fierce market competition of today has already shaped a group of strong construction companies with solid capabilities, good reputations, and advanced management practices. Their management methods and construction techniques are also things that supervision agencies should learn from, while the hardworking and optimistic attitude of construction workers is something that supervisors should emulate as well. Only by being able to consider issues from their own perspective as well as by practicing empathy can supervisors improve their professional capabilities and drive continuous progress in the field of supervision. Sixth, avoid pretending to know something when you don’t, and avoid applying methods mechanically. The geographical and cultural environment, the characteristics of construction projects, and the solutions required vary greatly. Attempting to constrain construction firms with purely theoretical and idealized models will render them unable to proceed. Only by adopting a work style that combines theory with practice and a pragmatic attitude toward addressing the various issues that arise during construction can supervision personnel ensure good cooperation with the construction units. The seventh taboo is failing to uphold one’s principles, leading to degeneration and corruption. In the current irregular construction market, some construction companies violate the rules in project bidding; after winning bids at abnormally low prices, they attempt to make up for their losses by reducing the quality of the work, submitting invalid change requests, or unjustifiably increasing the volume of work. If supervisors lack firm principles, professional ethics, and integrity, they are very likely to be deceived by such deceptive tactics. Furthermore, some supervision professionals have dishonest intentions; they either collude with a few unregulated construction firms on their own initiative, or they extort money and favors in a concealed or blatant manner. Such unhealthy relationships with construction firms are contrary to the principles of \"third-party supervision\". There are many issues to consider when managing the relationship between supervisors and construction units, but one thing remains constant: such a relationship must be built with effort by both parties, maintained through integrity, and governed by laws and regulations.
It seems there isn’t much that can be done; on the contrary, the majority of things involve taking responsibility. My job involves some aspects related to supervision; self-reflection, self-reflection.
It’s a great summary; it should serve as a code of conduct for supervisors
At least I haven’t seen any supervisor do that; on the contrary, they all make sure to remove the word “no”
Reply to 4# secretw: I’m deeply moved by what you said. Impartial law enforcement is certainly important. It depends on how to define fairness; from the perspective of the workers at the construction site, focusing solely on fairness and understanding is clearly not scientific enough. The supervisor is entrusted by the owner to be responsible for project management, and they carry out their supervision duties in accordance with relevant supervision standards. They must follow procedures and standards strictly when performing their tasks; it is not their role to try to understand the workers, nor to apply a subjective perspective in order to ensure fairness. Looking at the situation in Wenchuan, Sichuan, it makes every one of us who work in engineering feel a great sense of responsibility. Houses collapsed, people were displaced; families were torn apart, the land wept, and the whole nation mourned. So what if they suffer a bit in terms of engineering quality management? Understand the workers, understand the construction companies – and who will understand those who leave due to housing quality issues? During the construction process, it is necessary to strictly follow the construction acceptance specifications. Quality is life. If the construction unit does not have the capacity to address quality issues, then what are the technicians doing? As supervisors, it is necessary to offer suggestions during the process of resolving these problems and to ensure that the solutions put forward are adequate. Based on the solution proposed by the construction party, offer better suggestions; think of ways for the construction party, but who will oversee whether your suggestions are correct. I cannot agree with this either.
The key issue is that the construction entity has too much power; as a result, the supervision agency becomes an appendage of it and is no longer an independent third party.
All norms, standards, and systems are created by humans; they are mandatory, with strict requirements and constraints. Not only in the field of supervision, but also in other industries, there may be certain human factors and adaptations in practice, which are in line with China’s cultural characteristics and the current social trends.
The content is insightful and practical； The teacher is highly skilled; we will continue to work hard to learn the ideas, methods, and approaches taught by the teacher.
Most supervision personnel do not have a background in construction; for example, many of them come from the fields of civil engineering or design, and as a result they do not understand what is involved in petrochemical installation. Yet many of them pretend to know everything and try to apply rules mechanically. It causes a lot of unnecessary trouble for the construction company. Moreover, in the domestic situation, many supervisors are merely appendages of the project owners and fail to play any significant role; the owners need supervisors only to meet regulatory requirements. They supervise many private enterprises; the most important reason is MONEY, and as for the quality of the work, they don’t pay that much attention to it either.
I’ve never met a supervisor who doesn’t ask for bribes or favors. I only hope that the supervisor will, first of all, not apply the standards mechanically. Second, don’t fixate on minor issues. I’ve met several good supervisors; during construction, when problems arose, everyone would discuss them together to find solutions, and they offered us many good suggestions, which helped me learn a lot. Of course, we didn’t skimp on “hosting” them either. Hehe.
Actually, being a supervisor is quite difficult too; every day, even the smallest issues lead to being scolded by the client for ages. When you go to the site for an inspection and find things that don’t meet the standards, you say something, but the workers either listen or not; after you leave, they continue working in their own way, as if they didn’t take your words seriously at all ； It’s not good either to say there will be no suspension or resumption work notice; sometimes the owner wants to speed up the project timeline. If you say no notice will be given, they can hold you accountable if problems arise. In many cases, the supervisor’s role on site is mainly one of communication and coordination. There are many matters that the supervisor is supposed to oversee and take care of, but it’s not good to interfere too much. It’s sufficient to explain the situation to the management back at the project office. Especially in large construction projects, where numerous interests from various parties are involved (with interests from different stakeholders intertwined), how can a single supervisor possibly harm the interests of so many people? Staff from the quality supervision station (referring to the “Non-ferrous Metals System”) came to the site for inspections, and the project owner, the construction contractor, and the supervision unit were even required to give gifts. Fundamentally, there are indeed many irregularities in the work carried out by supervisors, but this is not a problem inherent to the supervision industry itself; rather, it is a problem with **our own systems. I think it’s extremely difficult for the supervision industry to regulate itself! I used to work as a supervisor on non-ferrous metal construction projects, but I have since resigned; the above are my personal opinions!