09/04/26

Frank Abbott | Summit Preconstruction Consultants

Change orders are part of construction. Not every condition can be predicted, not every owner decision is made before work begins, and not every project unfolds exactly as planned.

But some change orders are different.

They do not begin with a truly unforeseen condition or a legitimate change in direction. They begin with an unanswered question, an unclear scope item, a conflicting detail, an assumption that was never confirmed, or a decision that remained open too long.

By the time that issue reaches the field, it may look like a construction problem. In reality, the problem may have existed long before construction started.

That is where disciplined preconstruction adds value.

Consider a fairly common project scenario.

Work is underway when a contractor discovers that an item needed to complete the installation is not clearly shown or assigned. The drawings suggest one condition, the specification suggests another, or two trades have interpreted the scope differently.

Work slows while the issue is reviewed. Questions are sent to the design team. The contractor evaluates the impact. Pricing is developed. The owner eventually receives a change order.

From the owner's perspective, the cost may appear suddenly.

The underlying issue, however, may have been sitting in the project documents for months.

This does not necessarily mean someone made a serious mistake. Construction documents are complex. Multiple disciplines are involved. Contractors price work based on the information available to them. Owners make decisions throughout project development.

The important question is whether the issue could reasonably have been identified and clarified earlier.

That is the difference between an unavoidable project change and an avoidable one.

A realistic preconstruction process should never be presented as a way to eliminate every change order.

Existing conditions can reveal surprises once demolition begins. Regulatory agencies may require modifications. Material availability can change. Owners sometimes decide to upgrade, expand, or revise a project after construction has started.

Those are legitimate reasons for change.

The concern is different when the project is paying a premium during construction for something that could have been clarified during planning.

An unresolved scope responsibility is one example. A contractor may assume another trade is carrying an item while that trade assumes the opposite. Neither assumption becomes a problem until the work needs to be installed.

Another example is an incomplete owner decision. A selection that appears minor during design may affect equipment, utility coordination, grading, drainage, access, lead times, or sequencing. Waiting until construction forces the decision can change both the cost and the available options.

The goal of preconstruction is not to predict everything.

It is to identify what can be known, questioned, coordinated, or decided before the project reaches the point where changing direction becomes more difficult.

Many avoidable change orders develop quietly.

A scope gap may exist because a necessary item is not clearly included in any contractor's responsibility. A drawing may conflict with a specification or another discipline's detail. A proposal may contain an exclusion that is easy to overlook when attention is focused primarily on the total price.

Assumptions are another common source of problems.

A contractor may price exactly what they believe the documents require. The owner may believe something slightly different is included. Both parties can move forward believing they understand the scope.

The problem is not necessarily bad pricing or bad intent.

The problem is that an assumption never became a documented decision.

Constructability can create the same kind of exposure. A design may be technically complete while still creating questions about access, sequencing, installation, temporary protection, or coordination with adjacent systems.

Those questions are much easier to discuss around a table than when labor and equipment are already standing in the field.

This is why effective preconstruction involves more than producing an estimate.

It is an opportunity to challenge the project information before construction challenges it for you.

Good preconstruction creates a deliberate period where the project can be examined from several perspectives before commitments become harder to change.

A scope review asks whether the work required to achieve the intended result is actually represented and clearly assigned.

A budget review looks beyond arithmetic and asks whether the cost aligns with the scope, allowances, exclusions, and known project risks.

A proposal review examines what each contractor is actually offering, not simply which number is lowest.

Constructability review considers how the work will come together in the field, including sequencing, access, coordination, and installation requirements.

The individual review methods are important, but they all serve the same larger purpose.

They turn assumptions into questions, questions into decisions, and decisions into documented scope before construction makes those decisions expensive.

That does not mean every issue will be found.

 It means the project has made a deliberate effort to identify the issues that could reasonably be identified before construction begins.

When an owner receives a change order, the most visible impact is the price printed at the bottom.

That number may not tell the entire story.

A change can affect procurement, sequencing, manpower, subcontractor coordination, inspections, supervision, access, and downstream activities. Work may have to be stopped, moved, removed, or performed in a less efficient sequence.

A relatively simple scope correction can therefore create effects that reach well beyond the cost of the material or labor being added.

Timing matters.

A decision made during preconstruction may involve changing a drawing, revising a specification, adjusting an estimate, or obtaining another price.

The same decision made after work has begun may involve demolition, expedited materials, additional mobilization, schedule extensions, or disruption to other trades.

The issue itself may be identical.

The cost of resolving it is not.

This is one of the most important reasons to invest effort in preconstruction. The earlier a project can identify uncertainty, the more options the team generally has for dealing with it.

Reducing avoidable change orders should not be viewed as an effort to shift risk from one party to another.

Owners benefit from stronger budget visibility, better understanding of what they are purchasing, and fewer unexpected decisions during construction.

Contractors benefit from clearer scope, fewer interpretation disputes, better subcontractor coordination, and less pressure to resolve incomplete information while trying to maintain production.

Design teams benefit when questions can be addressed before field conditions and schedule pressure limit the available solutions.

Everyone ultimately benefits when the project enters construction with fewer unresolved assumptions.

That does not require perfect documents or perfect information.

It requires a process that encourages the right questions early enough for the answers to matter.

Construction will always involve change.

The purpose of preconstruction is not to promise otherwise.

The purpose is to identify the questions that can be answered now, while the project still has time to evaluate options, understand costs, coordinate responsibilities, and make deliberate decisions.

Some change orders will always be necessary.

Others are simply expensive answers to questions that could have been asked earlier.

The more of those questions a project resolves before construction begins, the fewer preventable surprises it is likely to encounter after work is underway.

Clarity Before Construction.