Search

evaluation

The Final Step in Raising the Construction Contractor Accountability Bar

by

This is How the Construction Contractor Evaluation Works in the Real World

It’s time to bring this process of evaluating construction contractors to a conclusion. Like most things needed to run a successful business, this process of evaluating and holding the construction industry to a level of excellence isn’t as simple as we’d like it to be.

This doesn’t mean it’s not worth the effort.

We started this series by pointing out the fact that there is a problem and that construction contractors have a worse reputation than used car salesmen. Second, we discussed why a system for rating company’s and individual’s performance would allow us to move average toward excellent. Next, we looked at what the process would include and what would be rated. Last week, we concluded with how a numerical rating would allow for accurately scoring the performance of those being evaluated.

This evaluation system will give us some clear and concrete information to help us make better decisions regarding construction projects.

  • The first thing it will do is give our production team a clear understanding of what is expected of them.
  • Second it will give each company and/or individual a report for each individual project.
  • Third it will give production teams a rating to see how they compare to the standard of excellence.
  • Fourth it will let us as the general contractor see how we rate in comparison to our standard of excellence.
  • Finally, it will give us a process for comparing companies and individuals when we are going through the process of determining who will be doing specific construction projects.

Here are some examples of the evaluation process in action.

This process will start by providing companies and individuals with the evaluation process so they will know what’s expected of them. It’s unfair to have something expected without knowing what those expectations are. The contents of what is included in these expectations can be found in Part 3 and Part 4 of posts.

Let’s start by rating Painting Company A on the project that they just finished.

These are the areas to be scored, with each specific sub-section scored independently and averaged will give the score for each area.

_____ Time management – 54

_____ Attention to detail – 67

_____ Communication – 51

_____ Quality of work – 75

_____ Respect for the budget – 76

Overall project average – 65 meets standards

You can see that this company scored lower in a couple of areas and higher in others, ultimately scoring in the mid-range of meeting standards. When this company receives this report…there needs to be some attention given to the areas with the low scores.

The next thing we’ll look at is how the accumulation of scores given to subcontractors can give us, as the general contractor, a way to see how we rate in comparison to our standard of excellence.

Let’s say we’ve done a small bathroom upgrade that included a plumber, an electrician, a painter, and a carpenter. Here is each subcontractor’s overall project average score.

Plumber’s project average – 77

Electrician’s project average – 71

Painter’s project average – 65

Carpenter’s project average – 76

General Contractor’s project average – 72

This score of 72, while it falls within the area of “meets standards”, it’s below where I expect us to be. If we’re doing our job right and meeting our expectations…we should be scoring closer to 85

It looks like we have some work to do.

Finally, this system will provide us with a way to make the best choice when deciding between multiple subcontractors. For example, if we are looking for a painter to do a job, we can compare scores from previous projects or overall averages.

Painting Company A’s project average – 65

Painting Company B’s project average – 69

Painting Company C’s project average – 76

As you can see looking at these averages, there is a clear front runner. What you can’t see is what specific section scores make up these averages. For example –

Company B scored high in the areas of Attention to detail and Quality of work but scored low in Time management and Communication. While Company C scored a constant average in all areas. With this information, we, as the general contractor, can determine which painting company would be the best fit for the upcoming project.

There is no question that the construction industry has our work cut out for us to get the bar raised to excellence. Rome wasn’t built in a day and getting the bar raised that high won’t be either.

Remember, Rome was built by laying one brick at a time.

I hope this series of posts about the construction contractor evaluation has been enlightening and helpful.

We hope to have the finishing touches on this Construction Contractor Evaluation system done before much longer. When it’s ready we plan to make it available at Solution Building. Once it’s ready, get your copy and…

Join me in raising the construction industry bar.

Why We Need Numbers to Help Construction Contractors Achieve Excellence, Part 4

by

How Else are We Going to Know How High the Bar Actually is?

Over the past several weeks we’ve discussed how low the bar is regarding the construction industry and the need to raise it. We talked about how most people working in construction aren’t even aware that there’s a problem. Then we looked into how an evaluation system could improve those standards. Last week, we broke down what construction contractor excellence should consist of.

This week we’re going to look at the hard part of the process…putting numbers to performance.

The number of goals made or correct answers given provide a numerical value of a person’s accomplishments. Evaluating performance is harder, it’s about expectation and perception.

The variation of perception is one of the main reasons this process gets left undone.

What’s acceptable to me, may not be acceptable to you and vice versa. This is why a system for giving a fair evaluation is important.

The rating part of the process –  

  • This is an objective form of reasoning used to analyze and evaluate companies, contractors, and individuals in each of the five (5) different rating categories.
  • Evaluations must be based on the company’s or individuals actual performance, not the comments or opinions of others.
  • The evaluation must reflect the combination and culmination of events during the entire project. Single events of outstanding or faulty performance should be considered in context of the overall project.

The following tendencies need to be recognized and avoided in order to keep the ratings as objective as possible.

  • “Halo Effect” – rating the company or individual the same in every category based on a general opinion of their performance. Each category must be evaluated separately and objectively.
  • Bias – rating a company or individual based on whether or not the person doing the evaluation likes or dislikes the company or individual being evaluated.
  • Undue credit for length of service – rating a company or individual based on their length of service instead of the quality of their performance. In other words, thinking that they must be exceeding industries standard because they have been doing this work for 15 years.
  • Loose ratings – giving higher ratings out of a desire to please and remain in a positive light with the company or individual.
  • Tight ratings – rating companies and individuals below standards due to the person doing the evaluation being a “perfectionist”. If all the companies and individuals are rated too low, it reflects on supervision!

We need a consistent and simple way to score each of the five (5) areas of accountability that we discussed last week; time management, attention to detail, communication, quality of work and respect for the budget.

Each area was divided into various sub-sections that scored independently and averaged together make up the score for each area being evaluated. These five (5) scores then averaged together give us the overall score of the evaluation.

The following notes offer a further explanation of ratings and describe standards of performance. They should be taken as general illustrations of the standard expected rather than as comprehensive definitions. Evaluators should use their judgment in determining other factors which should be taken into account in particular situations.

Here is the numbering system for rating each area –

  • FAR EXCEEDS STANDARDS 4.7 -5.0 –

This is the highest level of performance. Few companies or individuals will score at this level. It is only attained by top performers, if ever. This performance rating is characterized by an exceptionally high quality of superior craftsmanship done in a timely manner. They constantly seek out and assume responsibilities above and beyond expectations and contribute new ideas or ways of improving operational and/or procedural matters.

  • EXCEEDS STANDARDS 4.0 – 4.7 –

Evaluations in this range are very desirable. Companies and individuals who score in this range demonstrate above average performance in their position. Performance approached that of excellent in craftsmanship and production. Require a degree of supervision that is less than typical of most companies and individuals. They make significant contributions to production and periodically seek out and assume responsibilities beyond expectations.

  • MEETS STANDARDS 3.0 – 3.9 –

Performs in a responsible and comprehensive manner, however, improvement should be expected on future evaluations. Requires a higher degree of supervision than should be needed. Performs work in a professional manner and makes acceptable contributions to production.

  • NEEDS IMPROVEMENT TO MEET STANDARDS   2.0 – 2.9 –

Companies and individuals scoring in this range are considered marginal. Performance of is barely adequate. Requires extensive direction and review to keep projects moving forward. Companies and individuals scoring in this group should be informed that if there isn’t improvement they will NOT be used on future projects.

  • FAILS TO MEET STANDARDS 1.0 – 1.9 –

Companies and individuals should never score this low. Performance in this range is nowhere near acceptable standards. The performance is low and chances for improvement are unlikely. Every project that this company or individual is on is sending a message to customers that job performance and quality are not important!

Once each of the areas has been rated based on the performance on the project and the overall average has been determined, that number is multiplied by 20 to give us the overall score.

These scores then will be as follows:

            94 – 100     FAR EXCEEDS STANDARDS

            80 – 93       EXCEEDS STANDARDS

            60 – 79       MEETS STANDARDS

            40 – 59       NEEDS IMPROVEMENT TO MEET STANDARDS

            < 40          FAILS TO MEET STANDARDS

Today’s post along with the three previous ones will provide a construction contractor evaluation system that will begin raising the bar to a level of excellence.

Like most things, this can seem a little overwhelming, but so did your first construction project when you started it.

Just start building the wall one brick at a time and before you know it…it’s done.

The key to building anything is having a good plan and following it. This construction contractor evaluation system is a part of such a plan.

Here at Timber Creek Construction, we’ve been looking for a process to hold ourselves and our production team accountable. Implementing this plan is how we’re going to do just that.

An Eye-opening Process to Hold Contractors to a Higher Standard, Part 2

by

The First Step is Raising the Bar High Enough So an Earth Worm Can Get Under It

I talked last week about how poorly the construction industry is viewed and the contractor’s unawareness of how low construction standards are. It’s pretty sad when the bar is so low that an earth worm can’t get under it.

We discussed how important it is for a professional builder to –

  • Communicate clearly
  • Listen intently
  • Respect other people’s time
  • Be responsive
  • Be accountable

And how we should live and work using the “golden rules for construction contractors”

As a general contractor I’ve allowed myself, sub-contractors and laborers the latitude to leave the bar where it is. When this is permitted as acceptable, it leaves the bar laying in the dirt.

Standard is just average. Average should not be what we’re striving for. Currently the industry average needs to be raised. Let’s work together to get the bar out of the dirt. We need to determine what acceptable standards are and then incorporate a process to evaluate performance as compared to the standard.

We should be working to achieve more than average. We should be striving for excellence.

Usually, we have every intention of doing better. Good intentions are easy, actually doing better is the hard part. It doesn’t help when we aren’t even clear on what’s expected. We need an accountability system to be designed and implemented. A process for sharing and explaining clearly what the expectations are and a way to evaluate how well they are being met.

Now the hard part begins…what is this evaluation system going to be, how is it going to work?

If no one knows what the standards are…it’s going to be hard to achieve them.

We need a way to evaluate the performance of everyone involved in the construction process. We need a system to –

  • Share what our construction business standards are and what is expected from ourselves, contractors and laborers.
  • Assist individuals and companies in making the best possible choices and decisions regarding construction projects.
  • Provide positive and constructive evaluation not intended to find fault, but to develop better contractors, laborers and companies.
  • Minimize differences in opinions and focus on the work done, not personalities and/or our differing perspectives.
  • Evaluate ourselves, contractors and laborers at the completion of each project.
  • Provide construction customers with the best work possible by not only working harder but also working smarter.
  • Reinforce appreciation for performing above and beyond industry standards while constantly raising that level of standard.

This system needs to have a way to rate each company and/or individual on their performance based on a culmination of events and actions of each project. These ratings then need to be accumulated in an overall performance rating to be used to compare to other companies and/or individuals when choosing who will do future projects.

We need to determine what areas we will be held accountable for and rated and reviewed in? We also need a numerical rating system for doing the evaluating.

We’ll get into these areas in the next post.

As I’m writing these weekly solutions, I’m developing an evaluation system that I’m going to implement at Timber Creek Construction. Once I get it finished, I plan to make it available at Solution Building for other companies that would like to help raise the bar in the construction industry standards.