Handling of related issues in project settlement

Everything should be viewed from two perspectives. The owner’s repeated deductions from the settlement amount undoubtedly serve to reduce investment and may be an opportunity to engage in some underhanded tactics, but the Rationality of Party B’s budget is also questionable. The original poster might do everything strictly in accordance with the standards, but people like you are probably very rare these days. I’ve seen a case where something as small as a pinprick could end up having a budget as large as that of a bowl – is this an isolated phenomenon? I dare say it certainly isn’t the case, and it’s a common phenomenon; so aside from the factors I mentioned earlier, it’s not entirely unreasonable for the property owner to keep deducting amounts. My previous employer would approve budgets by deducting 20% first, without looking at anything else. But all the construction companies are competing to get the work; I think there’s no need for me to explain why. Recently, many posts have been discovered that discuss the phenomenon of standard distortion. I don’t want to comment too much on the realities of life; I just want to remind everyone that they should find ways to adapt to the environment in which they find themselves, rather than reacting negatively to it.

Reply to 2# Benben Xuan: Hello, Benben! A word I mentioned upstairs led to a misunderstanding on your part due to my improper description. By “standard,” I do not mean the “standards and specifications” in the construction field, but rather a uniform measure for determining whether something is right or wrong. This scale is often abused by property owners. I’d like to give you an example. There is a project for which the owner conducts an open tender, which is a type of tender requiring submission of fixed prices. Specifically, the quotation for the drawings includes a fixed price (all risks are covered, except for the main materials provided by the client). Any subsequent changes and the visa fee portion will be calculated based on the uniformly announced fee standards and a fixed discount rate. We chose to submit a quote at that time; although we thought it was risky, everyone was in the same situation, and there were no other options available. Regarding the bidding results, we offered the lowest price, had a good score in the technical evaluation, and achieved the highest overall score, so we won the bid. We originally thought that this price was the winning bid price. Not at all! Before it was determined that we would win the bid, many experts compared our quotes with those of other bidders on numerous occasions. They identified those items involving large amounts for which our prices were too high and considered them unreasonable (it’s quite simple – just compare the budgets for different projects on a computer, and it can be done quickly), and asked us to make the necessary corrections. We only know that we won the bid, but we are unaware of the specific quotes submitted by other bidders. We don’t know which of the thousands of sub-items we have priced low and which we have priced high; only by agreeing to make adjustments – in other words, by reducing our prices – can the final bid price be determined after the signatures are placed. We have been announced as the winning bidder. This should be the settlement price for the contents of our drawings, right? Not at all! ! Not at all! ! Once the project was completed, we prepared the settlements for the changes and change orders and sent them to the owner (there weren’t many change orders, and the owner was very strict with approvals). The amount involved was over 200,000 yuan, but it was slashed to just a few ten thousand yuan. What’s the reason? I won’t go into detail about the items listed on the visa here; a large portion of them are things that the owner believes should have been included in the drawings but weren’t done by us. In other words, the rock-bottom price we originally quoted is not final; any shortfall will be deducted. I asked the managers in charge of the site, and they said there wasn’t any We all did it. Owner changes are usually handled by issuing a request form. It was only through investigation that it was discovered what had happened: the owner removed the remaining materials after the project was completed. The owner treated this part of the material as something that was listed on the drawings, and amounts corresponding to work that we did not carry out were deducted. I’m furious – how can that make any sense? You’re the one who bought the materials, and it wasn’t me who came up with the plan. You bought too much, and I can’t use it all; is that my fault? It’s not my fault even if there’s too much design on the drawings! If deductions are made according to the drawings, I can still tolerate that to some extent, but there’s no way you can deduct things like this! ! There are many more such examples; I’ll tell you about them when I have the chance. This project is particularly memorable because it is currently in the process of settlement, so it was used as a subject for discussion.

The real skill lies beyond the poetry; the Chinese still value emotions.

Let me give an example of something that happened to me just a few days ago: I participated in the bidding for a project funded by an individual entrepreneur, and I had to calculate all the pricing figures manually. Additionally, I know one of the minority shareholders of the investor. But what was the final result? That boss doesn’t even consider the amount of work you need to do; he just gives a price, and that’s it – no discussion possible. To be honest, at that price, unless measures such as cutting corners are taken, it’s certain to result in losses. But someone will still answer. It’s an individual owner; if it’s a business, it’s probably in a different direction. What they are considering is not winning the bid at a low price, but *winning the bid on merit. What is the point of giving this example? Firstly, winning a bid at a low price is not necessarily advisable; there are already regulations to restrict this. Furthermore, in the current environment, it is likely impossible to carry out everything in an orderly manner. Take your example; I’ve experienced it too. The contractor, on the other hand, compensated for the financial losses incurred during the bidding process by obtaining various permits and making changes. So when things are moving in a different direction, try going in another direction – perhaps clarity will then emerge.

It’s really not easy; it seems we are quite “kind.” As long as the work is done, we will issue a visa and charge according to the established rates. For tasks that present difficulties, we will allocate additional labor or machinery as needed. If there are no specific rates specified in the guidelines, both parties will work together to calculate the costs and arrive at a fee that satisfies everyone, provided that the contractor is given a certain profit margin. The situations mentioned by the original poster are truly unacceptable for those who carry out the work – it makes no sense at all. At critical moments, it’s necessary for the boss to step in and facilitate communication; otherwise, the task cannot proceed. Otherwise, it’s essentially allowing the contractor to act arbitrarily. Our approach, as both parties, is to verify all amounts of work on-site, ensure that any changes are documented with a visa, and do so promptly. For anything not covered by the established rates, we agree on separate fee standards or resolve the issue through negotiation while ensuring a certain profit margin for the contractor. What a harmonious way of handling things! !

Recently, I participated in a bid for the atmospheric-pressure equipment in the desulfurization section of a 15-ton urea project, and I truly experienced the intensity of the competition. Currently, the price of Q235-B steel plates is around 4.5 yuan/kg. Including connectors, flanges, and other internal components, our estimated cost per kilogram for materials is 5.8 yuan/kg (taking one piece of equipment as an example). However, in their individual quotes, the material cost is calculated based solely on the price of the steel plates, while the other costs are fairly similar to ours. This afternoon, the company’s CEO held a special meeting to discuss the issue for several hours, but no solution was found. It’s really unclear how they manage to make a profit What is the purpose?

Reply to 7# zrm0806: I think it’s either a false report or the boss is pressing hard. There’s no time to do the calculations in detail; the boss doesn’t understand either, so just guess! Another possibility is that, for subsequent installation work, losses inside the dike are compensated by additions outside the dike, adopting a preemptive approach. Another possibility is that their source of materials is different from what you have; I heard there’s a big price difference between open-frame and standard frames! There are also many small manufacturing enterprises in various places that flatten and repair the old steel plates they acquire, using them as new steel plates in your equipment. You guys need to be careful! !

Carry out brand and model projects to enhance the corporate image and reputation, especially in the field of chemical machinery and equipment. By enhancing both its soft and hard capabilities, it makes others seek its services, as no one else can match its quality or lower costs. By then, you’ll be able to get your revenge.

Engineering isn’t solely based on calculations; proper review is also necessary. The key lies in your approach to management. Especially in situations where both sides have valid points, it’s important to strengthen emotional communication!

I completely agree; we have just finished a project involving the modification of acid oils. During the stage of three inspections and four determinations, the directors and technicians in the owner’s production workshop, as well as the operators themselves, keep making requests – asking for changes one day and more modifications the next. The owner’s attitude is that the design exists to serve production, so whatever changes are requested must be made, which puts the design team in a very passive position. The same thing happened at Sinopec’s Huangdao refinery. After this occurred, the project manager for the owner said, \"Why didn’t you do something earlier? Why wasn’t this mentioned during the design discussions? It’s too late to bring it up now; we’ll have to carry out the modifications during the major overhaul in three years. In the meantime, you’ll just have to make do with your production facilities as they are.\" In fact, most such changes can either be made or not; bringing them up now really shows that the operators on your end are too amateurish.