4 ms·

All these approaches have plusses and minuses and their own risks. The risks with the approach you have described are that: a) Unless very carefully managed, y

by Closi 5y ago

All these approaches have plusses and minuses and their own risks. The risks with the approach you have described are that: a) Unless very carefully managed, you can end up with contractors being incentivised to cut corners (i.e. We make more money if we buy the cheapest doors possible, regardless of if they only last a few weeks). b) If contractors have fixed profits at their bid-price, they will have zero incentive to accept any change requests (unless they come with additional margin, in which case, overspends will magically turn into change requests).

airstrike 5y ago
If those doors are still built-to-spec, then shouldn't you be fine?
- larkost 5y ago
  This assumes that every relevant detail is speced out. In many projects you don't know exactly what something is going to look like at the end of the project, so over-spec'ing is just as much a problem.
  - efsavage 5y ago
    On the types of projects I mentioned, and I assume to an even greater degree for spaceships, the details are in the spec, which is stamped by an engineer. If you're installing a curb, all of the dimensions are there, the finish on each side, how far below ground it goes, what type of gravel goes under it, the mortar you use to set it, and it will say what kind of granite is specified. If you want to change any of that, you need to get approval (and probably won't). This isn't software where you have hand-wavy goals written by people with no training and can refactor when your tests fail :)
  - airstrike 5y ago
    Every relevant detail should be speced out! The irrelevant stuff is irrelevant
    - Closi 5y ago
      In which case, why is it an open book contract? If the specification is that precice, the best fit is usually a fixed price contract. Typically open-book contracts is to account for uncertainty / flexibility / changes without having to raise endless CRs/WOs. Those fixed price contracts can still have gainshare mechanisms to identify joint cost saving.
- Closi 5y ago
  If you can write a specification that detailed, you can just get a fixed price.

by Closi 5y ago

airstrike 5y ago

If those doors are still built-to-spec, then shouldn't you be fine?

larkost 5y ago
This assumes that every relevant detail is speced out. In many projects you don't know exactly what something is going to look like at the end of the project, so over-spec'ing is just as much a problem.
- efsavage 5y ago
  On the types of projects I mentioned, and I assume to an even greater degree for spaceships, the details are in the spec, which is stamped by an engineer. If you're installing a curb, all of the dimensions are there, the finish on each side, how far below ground it goes, what type of gravel goes under it, the mortar you use to set it, and it will say what kind of granite is specified. If you want to change any of that, you need to get approval (and probably won't). This isn't software where you have hand-wavy goals written by people with no training and can refactor when your tests fail :)
- airstrike 5y ago
  Every relevant detail should be speced out! The irrelevant stuff is irrelevant
  - Closi 5y ago
    In which case, why is it an open book contract? If the specification is that precice, the best fit is usually a fixed price contract. Typically open-book contracts is to account for uncertainty / flexibility / changes without having to raise endless CRs/WOs. Those fixed price contracts can still have gainshare mechanisms to identify joint cost saving.
Closi 5y ago
If you can write a specification that detailed, you can just get a fixed price.