INTEGRATED PROCESS FOR DOCUMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE 16 th LCI Congress - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
integrated process for document quality assurance
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

INTEGRATED PROCESS FOR DOCUMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE 16 th LCI Congress - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Nov 13, 2022 125 likes •943 views

LEAN CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE INTEGRATED PROCESS FOR DOCUMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE 16 th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014 YOUR PRESENTER DENIS J STROUP, AIA SENIOR ASSOCIATE 16 th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October

slide-1
SLIDE 1

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

INTEGRATED PROCESS FOR DOCUMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE

LEAN CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE

slide-2
SLIDE 2

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

YOUR PRESENTER

DENIS J STROUP, AIA SENIOR ASSOCIATE

slide-3
SLIDE 3

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Independent review by each discipline Design iteration team coordination Comments returned without dialogue Resolution through emails Lack of follow up can keep issues hidden

SILOED APPROACH DOESN’T FOSTER COLLABORATION… TRADITIONAL QA/QC PROCESS

slide-4
SLIDE 4

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

TRADITIONAL QA/QC PROCESS

slide-5
SLIDE 5

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

TRADITIONAL QA/QC PROCESS

slide-6
SLIDE 6

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

WHY AN INTEGRATED PROCESS?

  • High level of collaboration
  • Efficient
  • Direct line to clarify comments or get more information in real time
  • Diversity of group lends expertise, the untapped potential of the collective

experience

  • Deeper understanding of the “why” something is the way it is
  • Fosters an environment of team, builds trust
slide-7
SLIDE 7

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

What VALUE DO we get from an

integrated project review?

Traditional 3rd Party Review Lionakis IPR Added Value IPR’s Lionakis Vision Alignment

2 to 6 weeks for plan review comments Instant feedback Efficiency, coordination A single peer reviewing all

  • disciplines. At best one reviewer

per discipline. Reviewers of more than one perspective / expertise on each sheet. Design, coordination, rapport Questions marked on plans Dialogue as to “why?” Efficiency Silos of responsibility, reviewer not accountable, outside reviews are very expensive Buy-in from multiple decision makers, including owner, architect, & contractor Efficiency “Make these corrections” Knowledge sharing / mentoring Efficiency, coordination, rapport Client wondering why peer review had so many comments Client satisfaction Relationship building, Trust building

WHY AN INTEGRATED PROCESS?

slide-8
SLIDE 8

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Case study

  • Kaiser Vallejo Parking Lot
  • The Late Terry Robbish

(Marquis Systems) – “I’m a security designer. Why am I reviewing landscape and electrical drawings?”

  • Kit Neal

(Kaiser Napa Solano Area Director) – “ I would like to see this on all of our projects”

BEFORE – 90 SPACES AFTER – 92 SPACES

WHY AN INTEGRATED PROCESS?

slide-9
SLIDE 9

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

WHY AN INTEGRATED PROCESS?

Time Common Understanding CM/GC Hired Major Trades Hired

Pre-Construction Services

Architect Hired Engineers Hired ≤100% SD DD CD

Construction

Owner Concept Design Implementation Valid.

slide-10
SLIDE 10

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Time Common Understanding

WHY AN INTEGRATED PROCESS?

Common Understanding

CM/GC Hired

Concept Design Implementation

Construction

Architect Hired Engineers Hired

100%

Major Trades Hired

Pre-Construction Services

Valid.

Owner

slide-11
SLIDE 11

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

WHAT DOES AN INTEGRATED REVIEW LOOK LIKE?

slide-12
SLIDE 12

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

WHAT DOES AN INTEGRATED REVIEW LOOK LIKE?

1  2 3 4  5 6 

ALLOW 6 WEEKS

  •  Email #1 to Team

Members: – Proposed Date/Time/Place – Explain process & who is expected to show

  • Client
  • Consultants
  • GC
  • Major Vendor

 IPR

  •  Email #2:

– Team & Outsiders (if warranted) – Specific Agenda – Table Assignment – Project Descriptions

slide-13
SLIDE 13

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Agenda organization

– Project description – Who? – Assignments, value of looking at other people’s work

WHAT DOES AN INTEGRATED REVIEW LOOK LIKE?

slide-14
SLIDE 14

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Room setup

– Room reservations – Size / # of Tables

  • Clearly labeled & coordinated with agenda

sent out on invite.

– Wall space

  • Room for post-its

– Pens/Post-its – Butcher paper – Half-size/Full-size? – Partial set – Specs/reference set?

  • Lunch?

Sample Room Setup

Lunch

W al l S p a c e Arch Civil Struct’l Elec G1.0 A1.1 A1.2 S.1 S.2 E.1 E.2

Drawings by discipline

  • n marker board or paper

Individual sheets if 12 sheets or less OR Wall Space Lunch Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4

WHAT DOES AN INTEGRATED REVIEW LOOK LIKE?

slide-15
SLIDE 15

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

  • PM and facilitator

– Introductions around the table – Description of project by PM – Description of process by facilitator

  • Why is a separate facilitator good?

– Allows for detached control of the room – Allows PM to focus on project questions – Can fill in empty chairs (with fresh set

  • f eyes

WHAT DOES AN INTEGRATED REVIEW LOOK LIKE? Facilitation

slide-16
SLIDE 16

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Facilitation, cont.

  • “Go!” Monitor activity

– Watch for off-subject review – Watch for participation – How’s the energy? Time? – Offer to post the ‘Post-Its’ (or collect them for ‘iPad’ entry) – Listen in on specific conversations – Sit in here and there for absentees – Talk to client

  • Recap by table

– Speaker – (3) big things, or things that need more review

SAMPLE POST-IT

WHAT DOES AN INTEGRATED REVIEW LOOK LIKE?

slide-17
SLIDE 17

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

slide-18
SLIDE 18

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Accountability

  • Session follow up

– Enter in spreadsheet ASAP – Bring iPad and your Project Coordinator to enter as you go – Deliver comments to team within 24 hours (depending on project size)

WHAT DOES AN INTEGRATED REVIEW LOOK LIKE?

SAMPLE LOG INTEGRATED PROCESS FOR DOCUMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE | LCI | JULY 16TH & 17TH , 2014

slide-19
SLIDE 19

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Continuous Improvement

Plus (+) Delta (∆)

  • ½ size drawings.
  • Diverse group of people
  • Mentoring opportunity
  • People working on behalf
  • f project
  • Design all in one place
  • Contractors and designers in

same room

  • ½ size drawings
  • Not enough time for review
  • Would have liked more project

info ahead of time

  • Invite Facilities folks next time
  • Invite plan reviewer next time

Plus (+)l

WHAT DOES AN INTEGRATED REVIEW LOOK LIKE?

INTEGRATED PROCESS FOR DOCUMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE | LCI | JULY 16TH & 17TH , 2014

slide-20
SLIDE 20

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Continuous Improvement

  • 2 ½ hours is about the maximum amount of time a group can concentrate. Even within that time, there will be a fair amount of table

hopping.

  • The mix at each table should include at least one person familiar with the project and the set of drawings being reviewed.
  • If possible, the mix at each table should include at least one person totally unfamiliar with the project.
  • Be flexible….
  • If a table wants to focus on something in particular, let them.
  • If the all of the tables are pretty much done before the allotted time is up, either mix things up or finish early. Otherwise the time

is not productive.

  • Let individuals roam when they are restless and see what other tables are doing. This will happen naturally as questions arise for

different disciplines.

  • Sometimes the discussion of the Big 3 items can be as useful as the proceeding review time.
  • 3-4 people at each table works best. 2 people is too few, more than 4 too many.
  • If you have a lot of no-shows, consolidate the tables to maintain 3-4 at each.

WHAT DOES AN INTEGRATED REVIEW LOOK LIKE?

INTEGRATED PROCESS FOR DOCUMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE | LCI | JULY 16TH & 17TH , 2014

slide-21
SLIDE 21

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

“value is what you get.

Price is what you Pay.”

  • warren buffet

WHY AN INTEGRATED PROCESS?

INTEGRATED PROCESS FOR DOCUMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE | LCI | JULY 16TH & 17TH , 2014

slide-22
SLIDE 22

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

  • Very Small Projects - $0 for QC

– Little or no budget, significant value added

  • ver lunch
  • Hawaii CUP: no plan check comments

after sending comments to Interface

  • Mexican Consulate: significantly improved

submittal package prior to submitting

IPR – CASE STUDIES

  • Recommended QC budget

– Very Small Project: 8 hours x $150 =$1,200

TRADITIONAL QC WHAT DO YOU BUDGET FOR AN INTEGRATED REVIEW? UP TO $2 M CONSTRUCTION VALUE

INTEGRATED PROCESS FOR DOCUMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE | LCI | JULY 16TH & 17TH , 2014

slide-23
SLIDE 23

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

IPR – CASE STUDY

  • Recommended QC budget

– Small Project: 20 hours x $150 =$3,000

  • Kaiser Vallejo ($100,000 Fee)
  • Billable time:

$1,008

  • Cost of lunch:

$ 68

  • Cost of printing: $1,000 +/-
  • Grand total:

$2,076+/-

TRADITIONAL QC WHAT DO YOU BUDGET FOR AN INTEGRATED REVIEW? UP TO $10 M CONSTRUCTION VALUE

slide-24
SLIDE 24

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

  • Medium Project (< $500k in fee)

– Sacramento County Fire Barracks:

  • next time would invite plan reviewer
  • IOR suggested all projects should be

reviewed this way – Roseville Joint Union High School:

  • input from outside acoustical consultant
  • Owner revised scope and budget after

the meeting

  • $5000

IPR – CASE STUDIES

  • Recommended QC budget

– Medium Project: 40 hours x $150 =$6,000

TRADITIONAL QC WHAT DO YOU BUDGET FOR AN INTEGRATED REVIEW? UP TO $50 M CONSTRUCTION VALUE

slide-25
SLIDE 25

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

  • Large Project IPR (>$500,000 Fee)

– San Joaquin: facilities people appreciate

  • Prep time:

$ 1,080

  • Billable review time $ 9,500
  • Cost of lunch

$ 196

  • Cost of printing

$ 1,130

  • Grand total

$11,906 – High Desert: team working together for the project’s benefit

  • Costs were probably > $12,000

IPR – CASE STUDIES

  • Recommended QC budget

– Large Project: 80 hours x $150 =$12,000

TRADITIONAL QC WHAT DO YOU BUDGET FOR AN INTEGRATED REVIEW? UP TO $50+ M CONSTRUCTION VALUE

slide-26
SLIDE 26

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

What VALUE DO we get from an

integrated project review?

Traditional 3rd Party Review Lionakis IPR Added Value IPR’s Lionakis Vision Alignment

2 to 6 weeks for plan review comments Instant feedback Efficiency, coordination A single peer reviewing all

  • disciplines. At best one reviewer

per discipline. Reviewers of more than one perspective / expertise on each sheet. Design, coordination, rapport Questions marked on plans Dialogue as to “why?” Efficiency Silos of responsibility, reviewer not accountable, outside reviews are very expensive Buy-in from multiple decision makers, including owner, architect, & contractor Efficiency “Make these corrections” Knowledge sharing / mentoring Efficiency, coordination, rapport Client wondering why peer review had so many comments Client satisfaction Relationship building, Trust building

WHY AN INTEGRATED PROCESS?

slide-27
SLIDE 27

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Conclusion

  • Much of what we have presented

represents our best practice as we currently understand it…it improves every time we do it!

  • We improve our integrated process with

the feedback and ideas from the plus/delta.

  • What will you do on your next project?

WHY AN INTEGRATED PROCESS?

slide-28
SLIDE 28

This concludes The American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems Course

Lean Construction Institute info@leanconstruction.org

slide-29
SLIDE 29

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Lean Process For Digital File Exchange and Plan Review

  • Thursday Oct 9 1:40 – 2:20
  • Rob Purcell, Herrero Builders
  • Digby Christian, Sutter Health
  • Andy Sparapani, The Boldt Company
  • Arlee Monson, SmithGroup JJR
  • Juan Restrepo, Herrero Builders
  • Moderated By: Eli Mastin
slide-30
SLIDE 30

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Digital File Exchange & Electronic Plan Review

A Case Study of Lean Process Development for Regulatory Review of a California Hospital Project

slide-31
SLIDE 31

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Outline

  • Introduction
  • Understanding customer value
  • Develop workflow to deliver customer value.
  • Provide hardware and software
  • Develop and implement training
  • Execution
  • Resubmittal process
  • Approvals
slide-32
SLIDE 32

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Value to Sutter Health & IPD Team

  • Facilitates Collaborative Review
  • Streamline process – shorten duration of plan review
  • Smaller batches – receive comments real time rather than after months of

review

  • Allow us to continue to work while the review is in progress
  • Saves trees and backs
slide-33
SLIDE 33

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Value to OSHPD Plan Reviewers

  • Must be secure – no one can change their comments.
  • Should look familiar to and be organized like a printed set
  • Add color to plans for effective system identification
  • Provide custom tool chests for mark-ups that are frequently used
  • Mark up tools should be familiar, and easy to use
  • Facilitate comparing page to page (for large floorplates)
  • Automatic comment logging and collaboration (response) tool
  • Eliminates heavy plans, making plan review accessible to people of all abilities
  • Green initiative
  • Facilitates comparison of updated documents to originals
slide-34
SLIDE 34

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Our Proposal:

Execute a Proof of Concept Study in Digital Plan Review and Collaboration using Two Sutter Health Projects

slide-35
SLIDE 35

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Secure

  • Bluebeam enables secure collaboration among teams, from anywhere in the

world

  • Access restricted to only invitees
  • Only host can add or remove documents
  • Log in assigns toolbox and identity
  • Each reviewer owns their comments – no one else can change or delete them
  • The ownership of each comment is prominently marked
  • The history of comments, and responses and updates is tracked
slide-36
SLIDE 36

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Similar Sheet Organization

slide-37
SLIDE 37

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Customized / Color Coded Review Tool Sets

slide-38
SLIDE 38

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Single Sheet Floor Plans – Eliminates Page Turning

slide-39
SLIDE 39

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Full Sheets – Facilitate Panning Along Systems

slide-40
SLIDE 40

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Color Coded Sheets –Eliminates Manual Highlighting

slide-41
SLIDE 41

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Compare Sheets – For Coordination

slide-42
SLIDE 42

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Intuitive Markup Tools for Comments

slide-43
SLIDE 43

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Integrated Comment Log – Every Comment is Logged and Secure

slide-44
SLIDE 44

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Our Offer – Facilitate a Proof of Concept of Electronic Plan Review

We Agreed to Provide:

  • Hardware
  • Software
  • Process development and coordination
  • Coordination and collaboration with Bluebeam
  • Custom Tool Development
  • Training of OSHPD Plan Reviewers and their Consultant Peer Reviewers
  • One half sized set of paper drawings
slide-45
SLIDE 45

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

OSHPD Agreement

  • High level commitment to collaborate with Sutter Health on EPR
  • OSHPD leadership will support training, process development and

implementation

  • OSHPD will allow SH to provide technology and support to OSHPD on an

Demonstration Project basis

  • Will commit their team to start training immediately
slide-46
SLIDE 46

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Hardware and Software

  • 27” Touchscreen Computers –one per reviewer
  • 4G Wireless Access Ports (to avoid IT firewall restrictions)
  • Bluebeam Studio
  • Each computer was loaded with OSHPD’s standard documents, comments

and codes for easy access

slide-47
SLIDE 47

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Training

slide-48
SLIDE 48

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session - Full Screen Studio Session

Split Vertical, Split Horizontal, Unsplit Comments & Sync Pages & Bookmarks OSHPD Highlighters Tool Sets, Measurements Studio Session Main Toolbar

20

slide-49
SLIDE 49

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session - Thumbnail

21

slide-50
SLIDE 50

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session - Tool Set

22

slide-51
SLIDE 51

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session - Tool Set Functions

23

Page Review Complete Note

slide-52
SLIDE 52

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session – Colored Tool Sets

Architect BLACK Electrical GREEN Fire Life Safety Officer (FLSO) RED Mechanical/Plumbing BLUE Structural BROWN

24

slide-53
SLIDE 53

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session - Measurements

25

slide-54
SLIDE 54

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session - Measurements Scale

Radius Angle Diameter Perimeter Area Length

26

slide-55
SLIDE 55

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session - Comment Log

27

slide-56
SLIDE 56

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

  • D. Bluebeam Studio Session - Split Screen

Split Horizontal Split Vertical Unsplit

28

slide-57
SLIDE 57

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session - Split Vertical

29

slide-58
SLIDE 58

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session - Split Horizontal

30

slide-59
SLIDE 59

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session - Sync

Moves the two pdf’s simultaneously.

31

slide-60
SLIDE 60

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session – Open a Drawing

32

slide-61
SLIDE 61

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session – Marked Up with Comments

Marked up drawings with comments.

33

slide-62
SLIDE 62

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session – Mark Complete Icon Placement

34

slide-63
SLIDE 63

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Support

  • Weekly Check ins
  • Process Improvements
  • Refresher training
  • Training for new team members
  • Problem solving
slide-64
SLIDE 64

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Process for Resubmittal and Backcheck Review

slide-65
SLIDE 65

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session – Location of Revised Document Index

37

slide-66
SLIDE 66

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session – Revised PDF Sheet

Revised PDF sheet with NO comments in the comment log at the bottom.

38

slide-67
SLIDE 67

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session - Split Screen

Split Horizontal Split Vertical Unsplit

39

slide-68
SLIDE 68

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session - Split Vertical

40

slide-69
SLIDE 69

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session – Comments Tab

41

slide-70
SLIDE 70

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session – Comments Stay with Original PDF Set

Revised Sheet Original Sheet with Comments Original PDF set marked up with comments in the comment log.

42

slide-71
SLIDE 71

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session - Comment Log

By clicking on the sheet comment, you will be taken right to that comment on the comment log. In reverse, click on the comment/note and you will be taken to the comment on the sheet.

43

slide-72
SLIDE 72

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session – Reply Location

Comments made

44

slide-73
SLIDE 73

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session – Finding Associated Comment on Drawing

45

slide-74
SLIDE 74

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session – Status Comments

When a comment is highlighted, you have access to the green comment arrow and the Traffic Light button.

46

slide-75
SLIDE 75

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session – Comment Statuses

OSHPD Review Review Accepted OSHPD Confirmed Reviewer Rejected Comment Cancelled Comment Closed

47

slide-76
SLIDE 76

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session – Reply to Comments

Go to the Comment Log, highlight a comment you want to reply to and click. Reply Button

48

slide-77
SLIDE 77

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Bluebeam Studio Session – Comment Closed

49

slide-78
SLIDE 78

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Progress Report /Findings

  • Adoption by Plan reviewers is Inconsistent
  • Some reviewers use Bluebeam effectively and exclusively
  • Others continue paper review, then transcribe (extra work)
  • Plan reviewers have numerous printed projects in their queue – and the digital

review requires a change of routine

  • If they don’t use it frequently, they forget how – and get frustrated
  • We need to provide weekly support to keep them engaged
slide-79
SLIDE 79

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Conclusion: Plus

  • Digital File Exchange and Plan Review is feasible
  • Facilitates a more continuous workflow for design team – and working in

smaller batches

  • Facilitates exposing crucial review comments quickly
  • Facilitates collaboration
slide-80
SLIDE 80

16th LCI Congress | San Francisco, CA | October 7-10, 2014

Conclusion: Improvement Opportunities

  • Requires commitment by all team members- to learn, practice and implement
  • Requires regular support and retraining
  • Needs a critical mass to be successful – as more projects use digital file

exchange the plan reviewers become better skilled, and develop their own processes to streamline their work.