ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry

Configuring User’s (Designer’s) traceability - Functions-Design of Architectural, Interior design, and Design of MEP

¯ Purpose of developing a user (Designer’s)traceability software Different types of key business activities are to be performed by building designers, such as below. · Core designing activities for various packages =225· Statutory activities w. r. t. package designs=56· Developing configuration tables=21· Developing master data tables=15· Performing risk assessments vis a vis above=123· Assigning access rights vis a vis above=60Sub-total=500 These are listed in my handbook. Of course, many more supporting activities are related to Budgeting, MIS, KPI SOP development, coding, and so on. If any of the business activities (out of 818 identified in chapters 1-17 in my handbook)go wrong, it is essential to trace the designer who performed such activities so that countermeasures, followed by training and development actions, can be initiated. Therefore it is essential to trace the following, specifically for any of the 500 key business activities which have gone wrong.· Who initiated the activity and when?· Who edited the activity and when?· Who approved the activity, and when?· Who deleted the activity, and when?· Who viewed the activity and when? Manually tracing these may be very difficult, cumbersome, and time-consuming. Therefore, it is desirable to develop a traceability software solution in-house or buy it, usually as a part of an ERP solution. Eleven (11) activities to develop a traceability software The following 11 activities are proposed for developing traceability software.1. Compile the list and codes vis-a-vis the following processes and activities designers perform and forward these to the IT team/agency responsible for developing user traceability software.· Core design processes, activities, documents, fields, manuals· Statutory processes activities, documents, fields, manuals· Process for developing Configuration tables, activities for developing, and table names· Process for developing Master data tables, activities for developing and tableNames· Risk assessment processes for organization level, Core process and activity level, Statutory process and activity level, Configuration tables, and Field’s choice level, Master data table levels, and fields,· Design Documents, specifications, and drawings· Processes and activities for assigning access rights to core processes and their activities, statutory processes and their activities, configuration tables and their fields, master data tables and their fields· Authorisation Profiles for core processes, statutory processes, configuration tables, and master data tables· Other supporting processes and their codes 2. Identify the list of designers/usersIn consultation with the HR team, a compilation of the list of architects, interior designers, MEP engineers, and other supporting team members in each design function engaged along with their function, team, level and position and forwarding list to the IT team/agency responsible for developing user traceability software.3. Compile user/designer-wise a list of various software licenses that are available in each function and forwarding to the IT team/agency to capture user access and traceabilityA few examples of software used are as under:i) Function-specific software, such as below, but not limited to the following:· Design Development software.§ ETAB§ STADD§ Auto cad§ Revit Architect (BIM),§ 3D Studio max§ Photoshop§ Idea spectrum, real-time landscape pro, NCH software dream plan, smart draw, pro modeling suit max§ Autodesk 3D’s§ Revit MEP, AutoCAD Electrical, Auto Cad HVAC, Ansys§ Quick allot,And so on · Project management-related software such as:§ Primavera§ MS Project§ CompassAnd so on§ Business application software or ERP software such as below:§ SAP§ Oracle§ Microsoft DynamicsAnd so on.§ MS Office or equivalent software§ RDBM software such as:§ Oracle RDBMS§ Microsoft SQL Server§ My SQL§ Microsoft Access etcAnd so on§ Utility software such as:§ Antivirus§ Back-up software§ Clipboard§ Compression utility And so on§ E-mail-related software such as:§ Microsoft Outlook§ Mozilla§ Apple Mail§ GmailAnd so on§ Access control software§ Operating systems such as:§ Microsoft Windows§ Apple ios§ Googles Android§ Apple mac§ Linux operating system etcAlso, identifying the list of workstations, computers, terminals and printers, mobile phones, or any other device used4. Develop software solutions in-house or negotiate and procure IT/ERP solutions having inbuilt “user traceability software” and activating operating system, as per requirements consolidated for each of the respective design functionThe proposed “user traceability software” must include the following features:· User’s (Designer’s) name and code· Function’s /sub-function name and code· Identification number or serial number of computer and terminal and printer or any other device used by the Designer for accessing processes, activities, configuration tables, master data tables, and fields · ERP/Software Transaction code or Navigation accessed· Date and time· Group identity name and code (in case of multiple users) where software license used by various designers. · flexibility for expandability/enhancement 5. Install “user traceability software” in development, testing, and production server’s in each of the respective functions:6. Identify and transfer pilot data and testing in the “test server” while ensuring no conflicts in accessing profiles, Core and Statutory documents and fields, Functional, Statutory, and similar type manuals, and other processes:7. Obtain training (along with the internal audit team) from IT team /ERP specialists for tracking the designer’s traceability8. Transfer validated legacy data to the live Production Server and integrated live data of each of the respective functions with user traceability software9. Utilise user traceability software to track user traceability as and when needed.10. Enhance features of user traceability software and improve its scalability as and when the number of designers and IT equipment or/and software 11. Intimate to the IT/ERP team for updating user traceability software as and when any changes occur in each of the respective functions vis-à-vis following,· Designer’s transfers or promotions or recruitment or leaving the organization · Responsibility changes and associated changes in accessing licensed Software· Profile changes· IT equipment’s physical movement’s intra-function or inter-function or inter-business and new acquisition or disposal Implementing the above 11 activities would enable building of a robust traceability software solution. Handbook of the author A template illustrating the list of activities to be performed for configuring user traceability is included in chapter 7 (annex 31B) in the handbook of the author and titled” ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services. “

03 Feb 2023,

Configuring audit trails -Design of Architectural, Interior designing, and Design MEP functions

The auditors usually examine the documents, computer files, and other records during an audit to determine the history of transactions and how these have been performed/handled by the company.Activities:An audit trail can be effectively implemented if prior coding schemes have been implemented for digitalization purposes.An approach for developing coding schemes is given in chapter 9 of my handbook, and this article would focus only on configuring audit trails, The following 13 activities must be performed to configure the audit trail for the three design functions.1. Consolidate and provide users and IT equipment-related inputs to IT/ERP teams· List of Designers (also called users here)and designer’s employee codes,· User’s level· User’s position· List of vendors, customers, and other business associates who access the functional software· User’s location, including remote location· IT equipment /computer /workstation unique serial number assigned to users and their respective locations,· Types /structure of audit reports required.· List and types of documents for design /drawings (annex 22A & 23A in the handbook2. Refer to authorization profiles vis a vis following:· Core design processes and activities (Refer to 1125 profiles given in annex 30A)· Statutory processes and activities (Refer to 325 profiles shown in annex 30A)· Configuration tables and fields (Refer to 95 profiles shown in annex 30A)· Master data tables and fields (Refer to 280 profiles shown in annex 30A)· supporting processes & associated activities such as Carrying out the risk assessment, assigning access rights, and all other supporting processes for design functions.The list of profiles, of course, can be expanded as required.3. In consultation with the Cross-functional team, the Internal Audit team, Finance, and Accounts teams propose features of “Audit Trail Software,” such as below, that need to be incorporated into the audit trail software.· The username (Designer’s name) who accessed the system along with level, position, and design function· The date and time when the system was accessed.· The duration (hours, minutes, seconds) of each such access.· The computer, terminal, machine, device name, and unique number are used for access.· Particulars of the workflows/ core design processes, statutory processes configuration tables, master data tables, data tables, and documents that were accessed along with “fields” accessed. · changes, if any, that were made to the above-listed aspects· The planned duration of keeping audit trailed data (days/months/years) per the company's IT policy.· Triggering communications to Architects or interior designers, or MEP designers as applicable owners for initiating countermeasures 4. Configure the operating system (OS) of the ERP system by the IT team to include audit trail features.5. Alternately negotiate and procure “Audit Trail Software,” as per required features meeting the needs of all functions6. IT team to install “Audit Trail Software,” procured in the development server7. Test “Audit Trail Software,” pilot data of each respective function in the test server8. Obtain training from the IT team/ERP specialists for performing audit trails.9. Transfer “Audit Trail Software” to the live Production Server for generating audit trails.10. Perform audit and submit audit trail-related findings/reports to the Designer’s HOD. The audit trail software must be configured to enable an audit trail of any of the following transactions performed (including changes made) during a specified period by any designer vis a vis the following numbers identified in the handbook and expandable as required. :§ Any of 225 Core design activities listed in chapters 1,2,3 of the handbook and annex 21A(2), 21A(3), 21A(4), at my website)§ Any of 56 statutory activities are applicable vis-a-vis 325 authorization profiles (chapter 4 of the handbook and annex 21B).§ Any field choices in 3 configuration tables vis a vis (chapter 5 of the handbook and list of t configuration tables in annex 24E).§ Any fields in 6 master data tables (chapter 6 of the handbook and list of master data tables in annex 24E).§ Any fields in 38 types of core documents in annex 22A (such as design brief documents, submission drawings, good for construction drawings, and tender documents( listed in chapter 17 of the handbook)§ Any fields in 31 types of statutory documents in annex 23A (such as statutory records/returns, statutory applications, licenses, approvals, etc.)It is pertinent to mention that design activities may be performed using any design software, such as the one below. Still, interfacing between the design software and the IT/ERP package would be needed to track design activities.· ETAB, STADD, Auto cad, Revit Architect (BIM),3D Studio Max, Photoshop, Idea spectrum, real-time landscape pro, NCH software dream plan, smart draw, pro modeling suit max, Autodesk 3D’s, Revit MEP, AutoCAD Electrical, Auto Cad HVAC, Ansys, Quick allot, or and project management software or an ERP solution for Design functions 11. Analyse audit trail reports and provide comments to the Internal audit team.This includes analysing the following etc., to identify suspicious or unethical activities.· Who inside the design function or outside the functions accessed the design software or its ERP solution and performed design activities?· Or Who made design changes (including circular changes to designs and drawings)?· How much was the time of access or duration, \· When were the design systems accessed?12. Initiate countermeasures to detect and prevent unauthorized or/and unethical transactions and enable benefits such as the below.· Quality of design and drawings· Customer’s design requirements· Meet statutory compliances· Project cost savings· Preventing funds leakages· Design Process efficiency enhancement· Accuracy in financial reporting13. Reviewing and recommending enhancement of “Audit Trail Software” features to improve design efficiency and quality and enable online auditing vis-a-vis each function. Handbook of the author A template illustrating the list of activities to be performed for configuring audit trails is included in chapter 8) in the author's handbook and titled” ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services. “

16 Jan 2023,

Developing performance dashboard or MIS for Design functions in Real Estate Industry

The objective of developing and implementing MIS or performance Dashboard in the Construction Industry is to enable a review of the actual performance of each function (on a pre-defined set of parameters ) vis-à-vis budget or targets and to initiate countermeasures for accomplishing the organization’s overall performance.Therefore, Dashboard or MIS must be prepared accurately, timely, and accessible to pre-identified team members responsible for functional performance and also senior management in the organisation.Preparing a Dashboard or MIS requires at least eight activities to develop & implement a robust Dashboard or MIS.Professionals can undoubtedly add more steps/activities per their needs/nature of business.The focus of this blog is primarily to provide inputs for developing and identifying some of the key parameters for dashboard/MIS of three Design functions, i.e., Design of Architecture, Interior, and Design of MEP.Dashboard /MIS should preferably be developed separately vis a vis each Project, such as:· Residential· Commercial· Hospitality· Other significant categories relevant to the organisationEight ActivitiesEight identified activities are listed below, and seven are usually common for all functions. Only one activity at Sr no 2 is unique for each function like Design, Construction, Quality control, Contracts, Purchase, sales and marketing, and so on for all functions identified in the book. .1. CFT (formed by CEO/MD) to deliberate and decide the following:· Designing structure/contents of MIS or Dashboard at Organisation level/Business unit level· Designing structure/contents of MIS or Dashboard at the Functional level· Provision for incorporating Budgeted or targeted KPI (key performance indicator) values· The frequency (like monthly or weekly) for which MIS or Dashboard must be prepared and released.· Timelines by which MIS or Dashboard must be released· Functional coordinator names for making and releasing MIS or Dashboard.· Recipients or persons who are to be given access to MIS or Dashboard· Periodicity for reviewing MIS or Dashboard2. HOD (Head of the department) of each of the functions to Identify the KPI for each functionThe choice of KPI within each function is determined by activities performed vis-à-vis core or & statutory or & other supporting processes that can impact business significantly. 3. HOD, in consultation with CFO/HR team, to configure Targets /KPI in the proposed Dashboard/MIS -for the desired period like Monthly and Year to dateThis can be done in customized software /ERP or hard copy based on the size of the construction organization.The listing of parameters must be aligned with the budget. 4. Functional coordinator in each design function to compute or measure actual values of KPI.This can be accomplished through the following steps.· Accessing key processes/activities, Documents, Configuration tables, Master data tables, and Data tables by functional teams· Analysing and consolidating the actual measurements · Including or populating the key findings in respective Dashboard or MIS· Reviewing MIS before circulating or providing access to Dashboard parameters to intended recipients· Using design package-related software and ERP to generate actual valuesSome of the KPI/Performance indices/parameters are as belowi)Sales Revenue related actuals:Saleable area in square feet in each construction project segment for new design developed.ii)Project costs related actuals:· The design package was BOQ costs in Architect, Interior, and MEP functions· Project costs in Rs (local currency) and foreign currency w. r. t. each type of saleable area in construction projects· Project costs in Rs /Square feet (local currency) and foreign currencyfor each type of saleable area in projects iii)Functional performance-timelines related indices -Actuals -New Construction projects· Actual timelines for accomplishing key activities vs. plan· Actual Performance timelines for developing new designs and commercial-design roll-out· Obtaining statutory approvals· And so on iv) Functional performance- timelines related indices -actuals -Ongoing Construction projects· Actual timelines for accomplishing key activitieso Actual timelines for accomplishing key activities vs. plano Actual Performance timelines for developing new designs and commercial-design roll-outo Obtaining statutory approvalso And so on v) Costs to be computed by Corporate finance and accounts for following· Actual Statutory fees for licenses· Other Charges paid to local government bodies· Fixed costs incurred, like permanent team member costs of function for which MIS/Dashboard is being prepared· Actual Overheads etc Architects, Interior, and MEP designers can add more parameters based on significance and importance to the organisation.5. Review of populated functional MIS or Dashboard by CEO.Review of actual values ( in the above activity vis targets) must be done during monthly/periodic meetings with the Design function’s HOD of design function and key coordinators6. Evolve and Share countermeasures by HOD of respective Design functions’. Action plans need to be shared with the CEO/MD on how to make up for the shortfalls in actual values vis-à-vis budget/targeted KPI values7. Make minutes of the review meeting and circulate them for action by persons identified in the minutes of meetings8. Periodic review by HOD of each design function with team members Activities that can adversely impact business.Incorrect capturing of actual values vis-à-vis various KPI or Dashboard parameters such as below by teams of Design functions, particularly those where accomplishment was low.· Outsourcing plan and timelines for hiring and engaging consultants for designs packages such as structure, building architecture, façade, Hardscape-external development works, landscape, Interior design, or MEP· Stage wise -actual timelines for completion of design activities vis-à-vis each package such as below but not limited to:§ Design of Architecture: Structure, Buildings, Façade, Hardscape§ Interior Designing: Furniture, fixtures, and equipment (FFE), Finishing works, Artwork§ Design of MEP function: Designing of Electrical - external and Internal works, Deigning of Airconditioning -Works, plumbing, firefighting, lifts, sewerage treatment plants, and so on for various packages · Statutory approval status vis-à-vis each of the above packages, if applicable· Readiness status of the Mock-up unit/sample room as also the Project’s 3D Model development on a specified scale· Status of approving design-related BOQ material samples before procuring and installing bulk quantities vis a vis each work in Design of Architecture, Interior Designing, Design of MEP services· Status of hiring /taking on board various design works-related contractors for initiating construction · Actual consultancy fees and reimbursements like travel/conveyance etc., vis-à-vis each package· Actual BOQ cost estimates @ Rs/square feet of FAR or saleable area vis-à-vis each package such as below but not limited to:§ Design of Architecture: Cement, RMC, Reinforcements-, Bricks-, Modular Kitchen-, Kitchen Appliances-, Internal Doors, External Doors, Door Hardware§ Interior designing- FFE, Finishing works, Artwork§ Design of MEP-Cables, Conduits, Pipes, Transformers, Air Circuit Breakers, Vacuum Circuit Breakers, Outdoor Units, Indoor Units, etc.· Actual manpower in numbers level-wise (higher, middle, lower) vis-à-vis each function· Actual cost estimates for each of the three design functions:§ New capital equipment like computers, workstations, test rigs, etc§ New software§ New skill acquisition or training§ Direct expenses incurred§ Overheads· Incorrect capturing of budgeted or targeted values in the KPI or Dashboard parameters to project a favorable comparison of target vs. actual values Handbook of the author A template illustrating the list of activities to be performed for developing MIS/Dashboard is included in chapter 14 in the handbook of the author and titled” ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services.

03 Jan 2023,

Developing Budgets in construction Industry

Budgeting in the Construction Industry enables the creation of financial and non-financial plans for various functions for a specified future period and is usually compiled and reviewed periodically.This requires performing at least nine activities that must be completed to initiate and implement a robust construction industry budgeting process.Eight activities out of nine identified below are identical in each of the functions except unique activity at Sr no 4, which is unique for each function like Design, Construction, Quality control, Contracts, Purchase, sales and marketing, and so on for 13 functions identified in the book. Professionals can undoubtedly add more activities per their needs/nature of business.The focus of this blog is three Design functions, i.e., Design of Architecture, Interior, and Design of MEP.Budgeting is to be done separately vis a vis each Project, such as:· Residential· Commercial· Hospitality· Other significant categories relevant to the organisationNine Activities1. CEO to constitute CFT (cross-functional team) deliberating and deciding the following· The format & contents of the Budget at the “Design function” level· The frequency (like annual) at which Design Function’s Budget must be prepared and reviewed, and released to identified designers· Timelines by which the Design team’s Budget must be released· Design team’s coordinators for making and releasing the Functional Budget· Recipients of the Design team’s Budget· Periodicity for reviewing the Functional of the Budget2. Capture key assumptions, w. r. t. following before identifying budget parameters· Competition· Economy· Political· Social· Government policies (Including GST, Taxes, and Statutory regulations)· Customer demands3. Capture corporate-level key budget parameters /Targets such as below vis-à-vis Company Vision for at current year under review and the next five years, year by year.Sales Revenue related Targets:a) Saleable area in square feet in each construction project segmentb) Amount in local and foreign currency w. r. t. each type of saleable area in construction projectsProject costs related Targets:a) Project costs in Rs (local currency) and foreign currency w. r. t. each type of saleable area in construction projectsb) Project costs in Rs /Square feet (local currency) and foreign currency w. r. t. each type of saleable area in construction projectsProfitability in local currency and foreign currency terms related to Targetsa) Existing construction projects /segments w. r. t. each type of saleable area in construction projects b) New construction projects /segments w. r. t. each type of saleable area in construction projects4. Make Budgets for Each Function Design of Architecture, Interior, and MEP) · New Construction projectsa. Plan and timelines for accomplishing key activitiesb. Performance targets for developing new designs and commercial-design roll-out plans. (vis a vis different stages of design)c. Estimated consultancy fees and expense estimatesd. Project costse. Implications of Union Budget of Central Government and State legislations B) Existing - Ongoing Construction projects -each Design function· Changes in earlier budgeted timelines for accomplishing key activities· Changes in earlier budgets of performance targets· transitions in earlier estimated consultancy fees and expense estimates· changes in earlier Project costs· Implications of Union Budget of Central Government and State legislations C) Costs to be included in the budget of Corporate finance and accounts · Statutory fees for licenses· Charges payable to local government bodies· Fixed costs like permanent employee costs· Overheads etc 5. Budget for the following (These are common to each of 3 Design functions) vis-à-vis both New and existing projects.· HR organization structure/manpower numbers and value — subfunction wise· Skill acquisition and up-gradation — subfunction wise· Technology investments (Rupees /Local currency and Foreign currency) to be made/assets to be acquired -names, quantity, values, and timelines· Expenses - local currency and foreign currency· Reimbursements in local currency and foreign currency towards identified cost elements 6. Review functional budgets in the Budget review meeting along with the HOD of Each Function.· Assumptions,· Resources required from top management to accomplish budget§ Financial§ Organization structure,§ Manpower-Numbers at different levels § Equipment/machines,§ IT Hardware and software§ New skills to be acquired§ Technology up-gradation, etc.· Strategies for accomplishing functional performance targets to corporate budgets along with responsibility and timelines 7. Post review, suggest amendments to be carried out in functional budgets and timelines by the HOD of Each Function.8. Submit the revised budget to the corporate Budget team9. Approval of functional budgets along with Corporate budget Coordinator and HOD of Each Function· Agreeing on amendments through catch ball process/suggestions and counter suggestions and acceptance process· Carrying out incremental changes in functional budget /corporate budget parameters· Final circulation of corporate-level budgets and functional budgets in a controlled manner for implementation Activities that can adversely affect Organisations 1. Deliberately keeping loose targets, such as projecting timelines/schedules for completion of plans and design briefs for each package, such as below but not limited to:· Design of Architecture: § Structure,§ Buildings,§ Façade,§ Hardscape§ Softscape, and so on· Interior Designing:§ Furniture,§ fixtures, and equipment (FFE),§ Finishing works,§ Artwork and so on· Design of MEP:§ Electrical - external and Internal works,§ Airconditioning -Works§ Basement Ventilation§ Plumbing§ Firefighting§ Lifts and elevators§ and so on 2 Teams of three design functions, deliberately incorporating incorrect assumptions of BOQ rate (of high-value items)vis-à-vis construction such as below but not limited to (whether owner supplied or in contractor scope):§ Design of Architecture:· Cement -Rate/bag, RMC rate /cubic feet,· Reinforcements-Rate/PMT, Bricks-Rate/unit,· Modular Kitchen-Rate/kitchen, Kitchen Appliances-Rate/kitchen,· Internal Doors-Rate/door, External Doors-Rate/door, Door Hardware-Rate/set· And so on§ Interior design –· FFE, Finishing works, Artwork§ Creation of MEP works-· Cables, Conduits, Pipes,· Transformers, Air Circuit Breaker,· vacuum Circuit Breaker, Outdoor units, Indoor units· and so on etc.· And so on 3. Incorporate and share false assumptions by the Budget coordinator of “three functions vis-à-vis aspects like :· Competition projects,· Economy,· Political,· Social,· Government policies/Statutory regulations,· Customer demands,· implications of the Union Budget of Central Government and State legislation 4. Deliberately Incorrect Estimation of % wastage allowed as usual on critical BOQ materials.5. Deliberately Incorrect Estimation of SITC (supply, installation, testing & commissioning) costs payable to outsourced contractors in Rs lumpsum and as aggregated Rs/square feet of saleable areas or super area as per policy guidelines for constructing the following areas:§ Design of Architecture: Structure, Superstructure, External works, Façade system, Landscape works (Hardscape), Landscape works (Softscape), Renovation/repair to existing architecture:§ Interior Designing: FFE works, Finishing assignments, Artworks§ Design of MEP: Electrical - external and Internal works, Airconditioning -Works, plumbing works, Firefighting works, and so on6. Deliberately Incorrect Estimation of Design fees and associated expenses for travel, conveyance, and out-of-pocket expenses in a lump sum and as aggregated Rs/square feet of saleable areas or super area as per policy guidelines for various packages such as below§ Design of Architecture:§ Structural consultant§ Architect consultant, proof-checking consultant, Code consultant,§ landscape consultant,§ Golf consultant, and so on § Interior Designing:§ Interior designers,§ FFE consultants,§ Arts consultant § Design of MEP:§ Electrical designer,§ Lighting designer,§ HVAC consultant,§ Fuel supply system consultant§ Firefighting consultant§ And so on7. Deliberate Incorrect Estimation of Contingency costs by three design functions8. Deliberate Incorrect Estimation of % Escalation on outsourced contractor’s scope of work costs and estimated design fees as captured above 9. Deliberate Incorrect Estimation of Taxes payable. 10. Manipulate or provide incorrect information to CEO/MD, such as below, vis-à-vis last year/past period actual accomplishment.§ Developed design plans and drawing releases timelines w.r.t ongoing projects.§ Project design specifications§ Consultancy fees§ Expense estimates§ Team size/organization structure§ Project costs and BOQ costs vis-à-vis each Architect package§ Hardware and software acquired11. Do Overprovision of the following aspects (common to all Design functions) vis-à-vis both New and existing projects.§ HR organization structure/manpower numbers and value -subfunction wise§ Skill acquisition and up-gradation, subfunction wise§ Technology investments (Rupees and Foreign currency) to be made/Assets to be acquired -names, quantity, value, and timelines§ Expenses: local currency and foreign currency other than direct SITC costs /direct package consultancy fees§ Reimbursements in local currency and foreign currency towards identified cost elements Handbook of the author A template illustrating the list of activities to be performed for developing budgets is included in chapter 13 (annex 35B) in the author's handbook and titled” ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services.

16 Dec 2022,

Assigning access rights to “Field choices in Configuration tables” for the Building designers in ERP environments

Configuration tables are data tables that store information representing multiple choices that exist in business and are required to be chosen frequently by building designers and project teams.To ensure the development of robust designs and avoid conflict of “Roles,” access to “Field choices ” in the “Configuration tables” need to be assigned carefully (based on the competence level of designers) in the Design of Architectural, Interior designing, and Design of MEP functions.Many functions can use configuration tables depending on the access assigned. Therefore, a separate chapter 5 is dedicated to developing Configuration tables in my handbook and hence not being duplicated. For developing “Roles,” a basic initial understanding of the following aspects is necessary.· i)Field choices in Configuration tables in ERP environments.· ii) Assessing risks in accessing Field choices in Configuration tables· iii) Segregation of duties (Abbreviated as S-O-D)· iv)Development of Authorisation Profiles or called profiles in this Handbook· v) Attaching Profiles to RolesThe summary of each of the above points is as below.i)Field choices in configuration tables in ERP environmentsA few examples of field choices required frequently by building designers and project teams are below.· Types of packages (e.g., civil, interior design, MEP, and further drill down within each of these packages)· Types of project organisation (Housing, Commercial, hospitality, etc.)· Types of vendors (e.g., consultants/contractors/service providers/business associates)· Types of business documents (Design brief document, sanctioned drawing, Good for construction, As-built drawing, etc· Types of materials /BOQ items for various works (e.g., civil, electrical, plumbing, etc.)· Types of inspection frequency for BOQ/Constructed packages (e.g., none, % sampling,100%, etc.)· Types of Inspection attributes (dimensional, metallurgical, chemical, etc. vis a vis BOQ in various packages) Of course, designers and project teams can add many more field choices relevant to the number of packages designed vis-a-vis construction projects in their respective organisations.ii) Assessing risks in accessing Field choices in configuration tablesWhat access right ( Create or edit or delete or view or approve as stated in the previous paragraph ) is to be assigned is influenced by the risk assessment of accessing the individual field choices, i.e., High, Medium, or Low.The methodology for classifying risks to fields is given in chapter 10 of the handbook and annex 15D, wherein 19 field choices have been identified as having Medium, risks and hence not being duplicated here.The methodology can also be accessed at my website blog: https://www.ethicalprocesses.com/blog_detail/risk-assessments-at-fields-level-of-configuration-tables. So at the time of developing authorization profiles, the designer must have prior knowledge of risk level as captured in the illustrations given belowiii)Segregation of duties S-O-D:The aspects related to S-O-D have been covered in one of the earlier blogs on my website and hence are not being duplicated (please refer to https://www.ethicalprocesses.com/blog_detail/Avoiding-conflicting-roles-amongst-Architects-Interior-and-MEP-designersThe S-O-D concept has been used for developing this blog as implementing S-O-D can enable avoiding conflict of roles amongst designers at different levels.iv)Development of Authorisation profiles -1 illustration having 5 “Field choices” in the configuration tableThe author proposes developing five authorization profiles for accessing each “field choice “in configuration tables.There must be a distinct option to choose from any one or combination of the following five activities.· Create or initiate a specific individual /identified “Field choice” for which access is to be given vis a vis Design of Architectural, Interior designing, and Design MEP function.· Edit or modify the “Field choice” within each Field · Delete the “Field choice” within each Field · View the “Field choice” within each Field · Approve the “Field choice” within each Field An illustration of the method of developing authorization profiles for 5 “field choices” in one configuration table in the Design of Architecture function is given below.This illustration contains all required information in a tabular form with a suggested profile code numbering scheme.The reader can change the proposed profile code numbering and information in each row at their discretion.Thus, the author proposes developing five authorization profiles for each field choice in the configuration table.Illustration for one configuration table Function: Design of ArchitectCode number of Configuration Table for SOD assignment =CT211Macro-level Risk for this table: Medium (previously assessed)Field name =Types of Civil package, Field Code=F501,Codes & names of Field choices in this Field F501 are as below: A01-Structure, A02-Civil works, A03-Façade-Risk, A04-External development (e.g., Roads, Gates, Drainage, etc.), A05-Softscape, and say ten moreRisk at these “field choice” levels=Medium (previously assessed)The coding schemes are given in the book of the authorProfile numbers Proposed for accessing “Field choice A01” in Field F501 in CT211: PT01001 to PT01005 (Compiled in Annexure 30C) DescriptionPT01001PT01002PT01003PT01004PT01005Key “Rights” vis a vis this Field Choice (RHS of this row)Column 1Create/InitiateColumn 2Edit/ModifyColumn 3Delete Column 4View* Column 5Approve Column 6Function assignedDesign of ArchitectDesign of ArchitectDesign of ArchitectDesign of ArchitectDesign of ArchitectTeam assignedNumber & nameT-1or T2 or T3 or T4 Architectfor relevant areaT-5ArchitectFor all areasT-6FunctionalRisk CoordinatorT-1*or T2* or T3* or T4* Architectfor relevant areaT-7function head Employee Level ProposedmiddleHighermiddlemiddleHigher Position who can perform Mgr.Sr Mgr.Sr. Mgr.Mgr.*GM Risk classifications for remaining field choices A02 -A05 are also assessed the same, i.e., Medium. Therefore, the SOD matrix (capturing Function, team, team member’s level & position) for these field choices are proposed to be identical to field choice A01 as above.The proposed profile numbers for the field choices identified in this table are below.· A01 -PT01001-PT01005· A02- PT01006-PT01010· A03- PT01011-PT01015· A04- PT01016-PT01020· A05- PT01021-PT01025 Thus 25 profiles have been generated as above using the SOD conceptT1, T2, T3….. represent team numbers within design function(e.g., structure, architecture, façade, etc.).The numbering schemes for configuration tables, Fields, field choices , Teams , Profiles, etc., are described in chapter 9 of my handbook and hence not being duplicated here. Based on business needs, the number of access profiles for accessing field choices in configuration tables can be determined/estimated per the following approach. · In the case of configuration tables, authorization profiles for accessing field choices need to be developed @5 profiles per field choice.· It means developing 95 authorization profiles (@5x19 fields identified). The author proposes developing 3000 profiles for design [email protected], 1000 per Function (Design of Architect, Interior, and MEP Design) for field choices.· The profile numbering can say starting from PT01001 to PT04000 iv)Attaching Profiles to RolesOnce configured, “HOD can attach Authorisation Profiles” so developed to various “Roles” (with the help of the IT team) depending on the roles planned based on team member level, hierarchical position, and skill levels relevant to function.The concept of roles has been mentioned in one of the earlier blogs on my website as below, hence not being duplicated.https://www.ethicalprocesses.com/blog_detail/How-to-assign-Roles-to-Architects-interior-and-MEP-designers-systematically--An-Illustration- In some ERP-driven business environments, like SAP, profile-generating software is also available wherein standards authorization profiles can be developed and attached to designers for transacting in respective design development modules. Once authorization profiles have been developed, the attachment of these profiles to roles is proposed in three steps as below, precisely similar to the steps described in the earlier blog for accessing fields in master data tables. a) Attach profile to roles in the development serverb) Test roles in test servers by ERP teams and designers c)Upload roles to the production server, after testing approval To ensure that no incompatible or conflicting authorization profiles get attached, the roles need to be attached to the production server by following P-D-C-A (plan-do-check-act) approachThe number of profiles and hence the number of roles can run into several hundred or thousands depending upon the following:· Size and complexity of the organization· the variety of Construction projects residential, commercial, educational, SEZ, etc· The skill level of designers· The technology of construction, design software,· The design organization structure and empowerment culture· The risk appetite of the company. These roles can then be assigned to different positions, independent of the names of individuals. Handbook of the author A template illustrating assigning access rights to Field choices is included in chapter 11 (annex 28C) in the author's handbook and titled” ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services.

08 Dec 2022,

Assigning access rights to “Fields in Master data tables” for the Building designers in ERP environments

To ensure the development of robust designs and avoid conflict of “Roles” access to “Fields” in the “Master data tables” need to be assigned carefully (based on the competence level of designers) in the Design of Architectural, Interior designing, and Design of MEP functions“Master data” is the core data that is used as a base for any transaction. In the current context of this article of designing, purchasing BOQ, and construction, whatever activity may be, it requires certain master data to be maintained.Master data tables contain “Fields” as per requirements as captured in the following paragraph.Depending on the comprehensiveness of the master data table, the number of master data tables, in any function, can be restricted to a reasonable number. Master data tables can be used by many functions, depending on the access assigned and a separate chapter 6 is dedicated to developing master data tables in my handbook and hence not being duplicated. For developing “Roles”, a basic initial understanding of the following aspects is necessary.· i)Fields in ERP environments (e.g., S.A.P)· ii) Assessing risks in accessing Fields in master data tables· iii) Segregation of duties (Abbreviated as S-O-D)· iv)Development of Authorisation Profiles or called profiles in this Handbook· v) Attaching of Profiles to RolesThe summary of each of the above points is as below.i)Fields in ERP environmentsFor simple understanding, the “Field” contains the data at the granularity level and can be used in forms, documents and tables and must have a number, and description, field length. Data type/data element /value can be assigned to the field as per the purpose of the field and governed by the design of types of tables designed in the ERP environmentsa list of Fields (in each of the master data tables) needs to be identified for which access rights are to be given. Examples of a few fields are as below· F504= List of Drawings & technical specifications for the scope of work, including for BOQ - Structure work packages· F505= Drawings & technical specifications - Civil Building works package· F506= Drawings & technical specifications - Facade works packageAnd so onA list of 109 such fields, identified by the author in the handbook as applicable for building design functions (as below) out of 428 fields relevant to construction projects is available in annex 1F,1G in the author’s handbook· Design of Architecture=27 fields ( for 5 packages)· Interior designing =23 fields ( for four packages)· Design of MEP functions= 59 fields (for 2 packages)Total fields identified=109 Of course, designers can add many more fields as relevant to the number of packages to be designed vis-a-vis construction projects in their respective organisations, and the number of fields may run into hundredsFor 13 functions in the real estate /hospitality Industry, 870 fields have been identified by the author in the handbook in Annex 1A to 1Gii) Assessing risks in accessing Fields in master data tablesWhat access right ( Create or edit or delete or view or approve as stated in the previous paragraph ) is to be assigned is influenced by the risk assessment of accessing the respective field ie High, Medium, or Low .The methodology for classifying risks to fields is given in chapter 10 of the handbook and annex 16D, wherein 56 fields have been identified as having High, Medium, or Low risks and hence not being duplicated here.The methodology can also be accessed at my website blog: https://www.ethicalprocesses.com/blog_detail/how-to-assess-risks-at-field-level-of-master-data-tables.So at the time of developing authorization profiles, the designer must have prior knowledge of risk level as captured in the illustrations given below.iii)Segregation of duties S-O-D:The aspects related to S-O-D have been covered in one of the earlier blogs on my website and hence are not being duplicated (please refer to https://www.ethicalprocesses.com/blog_detail/Avoiding-conflicting-roles-amongst-Architects-Interior-and-MEP-designersHowever, the S-O-D concept has been used for developing this blog as implementing S-O-D can enable avoiding conflict of roles amongst designers at different levels.iv)Development of Authorisation profiles -1 illustration having 5 Fields in Master data tableThe author proposes developing five authorization profiles for accessing each field in master data tables, and illustrations are given belowThere must be a distinct option to choose from any one or combination of the following five activities.· Create or initiate the “contents” within a specific individual /identified Field for which access is to be given vis a vis Design of Architectural, Interior designing, and Design of MEP function.· Edit or modify the “contents” within each Field · Delete the “contents” within each Field · View the “contents” within each Field · Approve the “contents” within each Field An illustration of the method of developing authorization profiles for five fields in one master data table in the Design of Architecture function is given in below table and is self-explanatory.This illustration contains all the required information with a suggested profile code numbering scheme.The reader can change the proposed profile code numbering as also the information in each row at his/her absolute discretion.Thus, the author proposes developing authorization profiles @ five for each field in the master data tableIllustrationKey Function: Design of ArchitectMaster data table considered for illustration =MT106Table name: Drawings/specification master-Packages in Civil worksMacro Risk assessed -for this table: HighCodes & names of Fields with High levels of risk are as below.· F504= List of Drawings & technical specifications for the scope of work, including for BOQ - Structure work packages· F505= Drawings & technical specifications - Civil Building works package· F506= Drawings & technical specifications - Facade works package· F507= Drawings & technical specifications - External development areas / Landscape /hardscape works package· F508= Drawings & technical specifications - Softscape works packageThe coding schemes are given in the book of the authorProfile numbers Proposed for accessing Field F504 in MT106: PM00501 to PM00505DescriptionPM00501PM00502PM00503PM00504PM00505Key “Rights” vis a vis this Field (RHS of this row)Column 1Create/InitiateColumn 2Edit/ModifyColumn 3Delete Column 4View* Column 5Approve Column 6Function assignedCode & nameDesign ofArchitectureDesign ofArchitectureDesign ofArchitectureDesign ofArchitectureDesign ofArchitectureTeam assignedNumber & nameT-1or T2 or T3 or T4Architectfor relevant areaT-5ArchitectFor all areasT-6FunctionalRisk CoordinatorT-1*or T2* or T3* or T4*Architectfor relevant areaT-7function head Level empoweredMiddleHighermiddleMiddleHigherPosition who can performSr. Mgr.GMSr. Mgr.Mgr.*ProjectHeadRisk classifications for remaining fields F505, F506, F507, and F508 are also assessed the same i.e. High. Therefore, the SOD matrix (capturing Function, team, employee’s level & position) for these fields is proposed to be identical to field F504 as above.The proposed profile numbers for these fields identified in this table are as below..· F504- PM00501- PM00505· F505- PM00506- PM00510· F506- PM00511- PM00515· F507- PM00516- PM00520· F508- PM00521- PM00525Thus 25 profiles have been generated as above using the SOD conceptT1,T2,T3….. represent team numbers with in design function(e.g. structure, architecture, façade etc).The numbering schemes for Master data tables, Fields, Teams ,Profiles etc are described in chapter 9 of my handbook and hence not being duplicated here . Based on business needs, the number of access profiles for accessing fields in master data tables can be determined/estimated as per the following approach. · Authorization profiles for accessing fields need to be developed @5 profiles per field.· It means developing 545 authorization profiles (@5x109 fields identified by the author).· For professionals' easier understanding, in annex 16D in the book, 280 authorisation profiles have been illustrated for 56 fields.· The author proposes developing 1500 profiles for design [email protected] 500 profiles per function, say, fields @ 100 in each of the Design of Architectural, Interior designing, and Design of MEP functions· The profile numbering can be,say, starting from PM00501 to PM02000 iv)Attaching Profiles to RolesOnce configured, “Authorisation Profiles” so developed can be attached by HOD to various “Roles” (with the help of the IT team) depending on the roles planned based on team member level, hierarchical position, and skill levels relevant to function.The concept of roles has been mentioned in one of the earlier blogs in my website as below and hence not being duplicated.https://www.ethicalprocesses.com/blog_detail/How-to-assign-Roles-to-Architects-interior-and-MEP-designers-systematically--An-Illustration- In some ERP-driven business environments, like SAP, profile generating software is also available wherein standards authorization profiles can be developed and attached to designers for transacting in respective design development modules. Once authorization profiles have been developed, attachment of these profiles to roles is proposed in three steps as below a) Attach profile to roles in the development serverb) Test roles in test servers by ERP teams and designers c)Upload roles to the production server, after testing approval To ensure that no incompatible or conflicting authorization profiles get attached, the roles need to be attached to the production server by following P-D-C-A (plan-do-check-act) approachThe number of profiles and hence the number of roles can run into several hundred or thousands depending upon the following:· Size and complexity of the organization· the variety of Construction projects residential, commercial, educational, SEZ, etc· The skill level of designers· The technology of construction, design software,· The design organization structure and empowerment culture· Risk appetite of the company. These roles can then be assigned to different positions, independent of the names of individuals Handbook of the author The templates illustrating generation of profiles for accessing fields in master data table are included in chapter 11 (annex 29C and 30D) in the handbook of the author and titled” ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services “

25 Nov 2022,

Assigning access rights to Architects, Interior designers & MEP designers for performing Statutory activities

As per the compilation of this author,56 is the number of statutory activities that have been identified as required to be performed by building designers out of 113 total statutory activities for a mid-size construction project.· By Architects=37 · By Interior designers =9· By MEP designers =10. Total=56 These 56 activities pertain to 5 key statutory processes as per details given in Chapter 1,2,3 of the handbook for each of 3 design functions· 1. Meeting RERA compliances · 2.Meeting statutory regulations & taxation obligations· 3.Obtaining licenses, approvals & maintaining statutory records w.r.t. statutory Acts· 4. Complying with IGST matters· 5. Deducting TDS on Consulting Services Of course, the number of statutory activities can be expanded by designers as required. The brief narration of each of the 113 activities can be found in annex 21B of this author’s handbook, wherein applicable statutory Act’s references are also provided This blog aims to provide essential insights into the process of assigning access rights to designers in ERP environments in 4 steps. This process necessitates clearly defining the following.· Function to be assigned · The team within the function proposed · The Employee Level · The team member position Four steps 1. Building Segregation of duties (Abbreviated as S-O-D) concept to avoid role conflict 2. Developing profiles, also named authorisation profile 3. Understanding the concept of roles 4. Attaching Profiles to RolesStep 1. Building SOD in the process The concepts related to SOD are captured in my earlier blog dated 13th July 2022 below & hence not being duplicated. https://www.ethicalprocesses.com/blog_detail/Avoiding-conflicting-roles-amongst-Architects-Interior-and-MEP-designers The “template design” of the illustrations indeed facilitates achieving SOD.Step 2. Development of profiles /Authorisation profiles -for accessing statutory activities -2 illustrations in tabular form in the templateEach profile signifies what can be accomplished vis a vis five activities listed below authorization profiles as below for each statutory activity · Create or initiate the statutory activity (col 2)· Edit or modify the above design activity (col 3)· Delete the above design activity (col 4)· View the above design activity (col 5)· Approve the above design activity (col 6) The template in illustration surely facilitates and ensures SOD for Generating profiles -Statutory activity 1 Function: As applicable Name of Statutory process for SOD development: Meeting RERA Compliances - Statutory Activity Description: Before construction starts, the developer obtains sanctioned plan approvals, as prescribed by competent authorities Risk Classification at statutory activity level: High Profile numbers Proposed for accessing this statutory Activity: PS00001 to PS00005 The coding schemes are given in the book of the author Description PS00001 PS00002 PS00003 PS00004 PS00005 Key “Rights” vis a vis this activity (RHS of this row) Column 1 Create/ Initiate Column 2 Edit/Modify Column 3 Delete Column 4 View* Column 5 Approve Column 6 Function assigned Design of Architect & Design of MEP Project legal & Secretarial Design of Architect Design of Architect & Design of MEP Top Management The team assigned number & name T5- Architect all projects T6-MEP all packages Respectively T3-legal licenses & approvals T6-Function al Risk coordinator T5*- Architect all projects T6*-MEP all packages T1 Project Head Employee Level Proposed Higher/Higher respectively Higher middle Middle Middle Higher Position who can perform GM/GM respectively GM Sr. Mgr. Sr. Mgr.*/ Sr.Mgr.* Project Head · 5 Profile numbers have been allocated as PS00001 to PS00005 to each set of Combination of Function +Team+ Level +Position vis a vis columns 2,3,4, 5 & 6 respectively for this statutory activity · The team levels as T1,T3,T5 &T6 are hypothetical for ease of understanding · The Profile code numbering (scheme given in the book) is only for understanding & can be changed by the reader at their absolute discretion or driven by the ERP package · The Employee levels and Positions given are hypothetical and only for easier understanding of the reader actually and will vary considerably at each organisation · The risk levels are as high as assumed/assessed earlier by the team and could be Medium or low for few activities Such development of profiles needs to be done vis a vis following based on business needs. · Above 56 Statutory activities (37 in Design of Architect, 9 in interior design, and 10 in MEP services. It means developing 280 authorization profiles (@5x56 statutory activities identified). The author proposes developing 2000 profiles for Statutory activities as several activities are performed by project teams as well as mentioned earlier. The profile numbering can be say starting from PS00001 to PS02000 Step 3. Understanding the concept of “Roles.”Roles mean what a particular professional (here, a designer) is authorised to do per a few examples below.· Developing a sanctioned drawing for seeking statutory sanction is one simple role · Integration of developed sanction drawing with, say, MEP design is another role, which is a relatively complex role · Obtaining sanction from statutory authorities is yet another example of the complex role A complex role can have many simple profiles attached to it A role can have one or more combinations of profiles (e.g., out of 280 profiles for 56 statutory activities or 2000 expanded profiles) attached to it to be called a “Simple or complex Role.” Based on the above-tabulated illustrations, the configured “Authorisation Profiles” PS00001 to PS 00005 so developed can be attached by the Concerned HOD, in this case, Chief Architect here HOD of Architect function to “Roles” (with the help of the IT/ERP team) depending on the roles planned at the granularity level.· Once all the 280 authorization profiles (for 56 statutory activities) have been developed (or expanded 2000 profiles as mentioned above), attachment of these profiles to various roles is proposed to be done in three stages as mentioned in step 4 below, mainly when the design organisation is operating in highly digitalized/ERP environments. Step 4. Attaching Profiles to Roles· Although the Number of profiles can run into hundreds or thousands, the number of designers in organisations is limited. Therefore, before the final attachment of profiles to roles, thorough testing is done to see that statutory design activities are carried out smoothly based on competency assessments at different hierarchical levels & positions by the persons who will perform such roles. The three stages are: § Attach profile to roles in “Development computer server”§ Test roles in “Test servers” by ERP teams and designers § Upload roles to the “Production server” for implementation after approval of testing of roles · To ensure that no incompatible or conflicting authorization profiles get attached, the roles, post-testing, can be connected to the production server by following P-D-C-A (plan-do-check-act) approach · The number of roles can run into tens or hundreds, which can get hundreds or thousands of profiles attached depending upon the following:· Size of team and complexity of the organization· the variety of Construction projects residential, commercial, educational, SEZ, · The skill level of designers· The multi-tasking role expectation of the organisation.· The technology of construction, design software,· The design organization structure and empowerment culture· The risk appetite of the company. · Some highly reputed ERP developers, like SAP, offer profile-generating software solutions wherein authorization profiles can be developed and attached to architects, interior, and MEP designers for design development. Advantage of attaching Profiles to Roles These roles are assigned to different positions rather than individuals, as the process is independent of individual-named employees. Such profile assignments are to be done digitally but must be done diligently, and each role as each role will have a multitude of authorisation profiles attached to it.Handbook of the author A template illustrating assigning access rights to statutory activities is included in chapter 11 (annex 27C) in the author's handbook and titled” ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services. “

11 Nov 2022,

Developing an internal audit checklist for 584 business activities in Building Design functions

How to develop an internal audit checklist vis a vis 584 business activities in Building Design functions- (57 checklist points illustrated ) In a typical, mid-size construction organisation, Architects, Interior & MEP designers perform at least 584 activities which are a combination of hardcore designing and +statutory +techno- commercial activities. The number of activities can grow considerably as the number of design packages increases based on the complexity of the project and the features of the building to be designed.The narration of 584 business activities (for developing internal audit checklists) can be seen by visiting https://www.ethicalprocesses.com: and clicking, on the landing page -Book-Business Activities-Index- annexure number and then download the same. The landing page leads the readers to various annexures which have 818 business activities out of which 584 are unique to design functions and another 234 are common to all functions and summarised below paragraph.The checklists of 584 activities include 225 core design and +56 statutory activities vis a vis the below design packages · Structure design · Building Architecture· Façade· External development areas · Landscape-softscape· Interior designing· External and internal electricals· HVAC Further, the checklists of 584 ,(in addition to 225 core+56 statutory )include 303 activities related to the following:· developing configuration tables + master data tables (21+15)· Carrying out risk assessment vis a vis core & statutory activities +Configuration tables & master data tables (123)· Assigning access rights to core, statutory activities,and fields in configuration tables and master data tables (60)· Budgeting, MIS/dashboard, and developing KPI for design functions(27+24+33) A ready reckoner of internal audit checklists In the table below, a checklist of 57 internal audit activities (10% of 584) has been illustrated and balance checklists can be directly developed by Internal audit teams directly based on the approach mentioned below. Considering the technical character of Design functions, it is proposed that the internal audit team should pursue secondment ie. temporarily taking on loan an Independent Architect or interior designer, or MEP designer (from any project different from the one being audited) to support internal audit team to perform the internal audit for best results. Alternatively, the technical part of checklists can also be outsourced to professional design firms. The 584 activities are captured in a Table enclosed at the end of this article.Internal auditors can get further inputs for enhancing checklists by reading blogs that have already been published on my website https://www.ethicalprocesses.com or listening to videos published on my YouTube channel reference given below. :https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCYQxIjcMIlQmpRrnRNi54CQ Customisation of checklistsFurther, the customisation of checklists of 584 activities mentioned in the handbook can be done based on the likely impact of each design/business activity vis a vis 10 aspects listed below (similar to those highlighted in blue color in 57 checklists)· Profitability/Revenue· Accuracy · Existence/inclusion· Completeness· Statutory compliance· Validity/validation · Measurement· Occurrence· Timeliness· Rights and obligations Therefore, internal auditors can add or delete the checklist of 584 activities applicable to the respective Architect or Interior or MEP design functions.Approach for developing Internal Audit checklists · Forming a cross-functional team (CFT) comprising of conventional internal auditor+ experienced but independent professionals from each of the Architect, interior designing, and MEP functions, (preferably from different project teams which are to be audited) · Alternately hiring these temporarily from 3rd independent design firms to ensure objectivity· Referring to the above proposed 57 checklists as ready reckoner or an SOP of 3 design functions and developing checklists to evolve the scope of design activities to be audited.· From the “Risk Register” maintained, identifying the risk level of each design activity as High, Medium, or Low risks, and accordingly planning frequency (Yearly, monthly, etc) and allocating internal audit resources to conduct internal audits. · In case organisations have not developed the risk registers, CFT can take guidance from Risk templates given in annex 13E,14D,15D, and 16D in the book · These 584 numbers include only Electricals & HVAC packages and will certainly increase based on the additional number of MEP / other packages. · 234 activities related to developing SOP(36), designing coding schemes(27), configuring user traceability (33)+ audit trail (39)+document management system(36 hard documents+36 soft documents)+ financial authority norms (27) are additional and not included in the above 584 internal audit checklists as such activities are common to other functions . Thus total activities performed are 818(584+234) as analysed above .The Way forward for performing the internal audit once Checklists are ready and internal auditors /resources identified The methodology to perform business activities can vary considerably from one organisation to another depending on the types of design software and ERP being used, size & complexity of construction processes, organisation structure/hierarchy, and degree of computerisation or digitalisation.Once the internal audit scope/checklists have been developed, the Internal audit team can develop an audit calendar and carry out the internal audit as per the usual methodology in their respective organisations such as submitting draft reports, discussing findings with auditees, and obtaining feedback from designers regarding countermeasures, and circulating the final report to all concerned including HOD and top management/board sub-committee for reviewing internal audit findings. You can read more about the 584 activities that can become part of the Internal audit scope from my handbook ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services “and refer to the website. Proposed ready reckoner table -57 internal audit checklists Sn Function wise -narration of Internal audit checklist-57 illustrations The proposed internal auditor/s Source -for developing checklist-i.e. Book chapter no/Website 1 Designing of Architecture of buildings Whether there is evidence that Concept designs and schemes are based on design calculations of PCC/Reinforcements requirements based on a factor of safety/Earthquake zone etc. and using software like STADD or ETAB.? Independent Architect Chapter 1, website Annex 21A(2) 2 Designing of Interiors of buildings Whether strategic plans for interior design are drawn comprehensively? Independent Interior designer Chapter 2, Website Annex 21A(3) 3 Designing of MEP services for buildings Whether Strategic plans for design aligned with the company’s vision of profitability? Independent MEP designer Chapter 3, Website Annex 21A (4) And so on a checklist of a total of 225 core activities (118+37+70 vis a vis design of architect, interior, and MEP respectively) to be prepared in continuation to serial no 1,2, & 3 above, directly by the Internal audit team members based on inputs from the website As above As above 4 Internal audit of statutory activities- Statutory Process: Meeting RERA Compliances whether the builder obtained sanctioned plans/statutory approvals before commencing construction & did the builder regularly/timely upload the prescribed approvals on the company’s website? Internal Auditor +Legal person Chapter:1,2,3 &4 +Annex 2.14,20B & 21B in handbook 5 Statutory Process: Complying with The RERA-Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act 2016 Whether evidence exists that the builder published on web site of RERA authority, Project wise details w.r.t projects registered, units booked, units under construction, list of approvals taken & pending vis a vis below aspects? Frequency = Q (Quarterly)and A (annually). Reporting Periods: Q3, Q4, Q1, Q2, F.Y. Target date: form & dates as announced/amended by statutory authority As above As above And so on a checklist of 65 statutory activities (46+9+10 vis a vis design of architect, interior, and MEP respectively) to be prepared (in continuation to serial no 4 & 5 above) directly by the Internal audit team members based on likely adverse impact due to statutory non-conformances and inputs from the handbook. As above As above 6 Internal audit of activities for developing configuration tables-All 3 design functions. Whether each of the 3 design teams Identified the key “Configuration Tables” given correctly? Internal Auditor + Independent Architect or interior designer or MEP designer Chapter 5 Annex 21C(website) 7 Whether each of the 3 design teams has Identified the “fields” for each configuration table appropriately and completely not skipped any? As above Chapter 5 Annex 1A,1F,1G (in the handbook) And so on, a checklist of 21 activities @7/ each design function to be prepared (in continuation to serial no 6 &7 above) directly by the Internal audit team members based on inputs from the handbook. As above As above 8 Internal audit of activities for developing Master data tables-All 3 design functions. Whether each of the 3 design teams has Identified the key “Master data Tables” correctly? Internal Auditor + Independent Architect or interior designer or MEP designer Chapter 6 Annex 21D(website) 9 Whether each of the 3 design teams has Identified the “fields” for each “Master data table” accurately/appropriately and not skipped any important field? As above Chapter 6 Annex 1A,1F,1G in handbook And so on, a checklist of 15 activities @5/ each design function to be prepared (in continuation to serial no 8,9 above) directly by the Internal audit team members based on inputs from the handbook. As above As above 10 Internal audit of activities for carrying out risk assessment at the ”Organisation level and core Process and core activity” levels Whether Cross-cross-functional (CFT) have been formed/exist for developing a risk management framework and are appropriate in terms of representation, levels/positions of members vis a vis each design function? Internal Auditor + Independent Architect or interior designer or MEP designer Chapters 10, & 1,2,3 and Annex 13B on the website 11 Whether aspects (such as competition, economy, political, social, building design substitutes, Govt policies customer demands, business associates, and Outages) considered for carrying out “a risk assessment at the “organisation level” comprehensive? As above As above 12 Whether the Template -design for classifying risks (at the Organisation level) as High, medium, or low, robust/comprehensive enough? As above Chapters 10 Annex 13C in handbook And so on, a checklist of 42 activities @14/ each design function to be prepared (in continuation to serial no 10,11,12 above) directly by the Internal audit team members based on inputs from the handbook. As above As above 13 Internal audit of activities for carrying out risk assessment at the ”Statutory Process and statutory activity” levels Whether parameters, such as those below, for identifying risk at statutory process/activity levels are Comprehensive and appropriate? · Organisation level risk assessed in annex 13B · Likely adverse impact due to non-compliance on Corporate Governance & organisation reputation Internal auditor+ legal professional 10 & 1,2,3,4 Annex 14B on the website 14 Whether the Template -design for classifying risks (at the statutory level) as High, medium, or low, robust/comprehensive enough? As above 10 & 1,2,3,4 Annex 14C in the handbook And so on, a checklist of 27 activities @9/ each design function to be prepared (in continuation to serial no 13,14, above) directly by the Internal audit team members based on inputs from the handbook. As above As above 15 Internal audit of activities for carrying out risk assessment at the ”Configuration table level and field choice levels” Whether parameters, such as those below, for identifying risk at the Configuration table level level-comprehensive and appropriate? · Likely adverse impact on cycle time /throughput time of process execution for which configuration table is relevant · Process (using specifically identified configuration table) not getting executed completely Internal Auditor + Independent Architect or interior designer or MEP designer 10 & 1,2,3,5 Annex 15B on the website 16 Whether the Template -design for classifying risks at the Configuration table level (as High, medium, or low) robust/comprehensive enough? As above 10 & 1,2,3,5 Annex 15C is in the handbook 17 Whether aspects, such as those below, for identifying risk at the “field choice level” of the Configuration table comprehensive and appropriate? · Field choice pertains to /and is relevant to business areas that can impact Project sales revenue or project costs or statutory conformance or project design or project quality or financial reporting · Implication of unauthorised accessing of “Field choice” or carrying out unauthorised amendment in “Field choice.” A few examples of field choices are as below: · Configuration/specifications of construction area or unit or building · Consultation consultant’s fee rate computation · Contractor’s rate computation · Payment terms with the consultants · Payment terms with the contractors and so on As above 10 & 1,2,3,5 Annex 15B on the website 18 Whether the Template -design for classifying risks at the Field choice level (as High, medium, or low) robust/comprehensive enough? As above 10 & 1,2,3,5 Annex 15D and 1A,1F,1G in the handbook And so on, a checklist of 27 activities @9/ each design function to be prepared (in continuation to serial no 1516,17,18 above) directly by the Internal audit team members based on inputs from the handbook. As above As above 19 Internal audit of activities for carrying out risk assessment at the ”Master data table level and field levels” Whether aspects, such as those below, for identifying risk at Master table levels Comprehensive and appropriate? a) Likely adverse impact on Sales revenue vis a vis field accessed from Master data table during any activity execution b) Likely adverse impact on Project costs vis a vis field accessed from Master data table during any activity execution c) Likely adverse impact on Package specifications or Project package design vis a vis field accessed from Master data table during any activity execution d) Likely adverse impact on BOQ quality or construction quality vis a vis field accessed from Master data table during any activity execution e) Likely adverse impact on Statutory conformance vis a vis field accessed from Master data table during any activity execution Internal Auditor + Independent Architect or interior designer or MEP designer 10 & 1,2,3,6 Annex 16B on the website 20 Whether the Template -design for classifying risks at the Master data table level (as High, medium, or low) robust/comprehensive enough? As above 10 & 1,2,3,6 Annex 16C in the handbook 21 Whether aspects, such as those below, for identifying risk at the “field level” of the Master data table comprehensive and appropriate? · Purpose or ingredients of the field in business activity in which the intended “Field “is used. · Consequences of populating field inaccurately vis a vis revenue or project costs or statutory conformance or project design or project Quality or financial reporting Some examples of Ingredients of Field that can influence the classification of risks in “Field” as High are as below in the case of · Design -Robustness & safety, non-robust design vis a vis statutory sanctioned drawing or & safety, not meeting customer requirement & saleability · Fee or rate -Paying higher amounts to the consultant · Scope of work - Reduction of the scope of work & consequent incomplete work or & higher costs due to reduction of the agreement amount And so on Some examples of Ingredients of Field that can influence the classification of risks in “Field” as “Medium” are as below in the case of · Terms in agreement- non-robust or & unfavorable own company · Scope of works- Compromising resulting in higher project costs · Approved Consultant or Service provider name -Deliberate change, in collusion or otherwise to unapproved name, thus compromising on the quality of BOQ or quality of construction or & speed of construction And so on Ingredients of Field that can influence the classification of risks in “Field” as Low are as below in the case of · Address · City · PIN code And so on As above 10 & 1,2,3,6 Annex 16D in the handbook 22 Whether the Template -design for classifying risks at the Field level (as High, medium, or low) robust/comprehensive enough? As above As above And so on, a checklist of 27 activities @9/ each design function to be prepared (in continuation to serial no 19,20,21,22 above) directly by the Internal audit team members based on inputs from the handbook. As above As above 23 Internal audit of activities for assigning access rights to Core activities -(@5 nos/each design function) Whether parameters for developing segregation of duties (S-O-D) been identified completely such as below as necessary for assigning access rights? 1. Function: 2. Process Code for assigning access rights (from Annex 26A on the website): 3. Name of the Core process for SOD development: 4. Code for the core process (from Annex 20A on the website): 5. Core Activity Code (from Annex 21A (2),21A (3),21A (4) as relevant on website: 6. Activity Description: Risk Classification at Core activity level (from Annex 13E) in the handbook: Provision for capturing of following in columns: 7)Profile numbers for accessing this core Activity 8) Access rights for Creating/initiating, Editing/modifying, Deleting, Viewing, Approving 9) Function number & name (from annex 12 in the handbook) 10)Team Number & name (from annex 12 in the handbook) 11)Employee Level 12) Positions within each level · Lower level-workmen, staff, Junior/Assistant manager & so on · Middle level-Manager, Senior Manager-Sr. Mgr. & so on · Higher level-General managers-GM, Directors- Internal auditor +IT/ERP professional 11 & 1,2,3 And Annex 26B on the website 24 Whether the Template -design for S-O-D comprehensive to capture all parameters? As above 11 & 1,2,3 And Annex 26C in the handbook 25 Whether software programming to populate the S-O-D template at annex 26C user-friendly, accurate /bug-free and robust, and scalable? As above As above 26 Whether S-O-D template at annex 26C populated objectively, correctly, and without any bias and not skewed in favor of some select position/ level only? As above As above 27 Whether periodic changes like employee transfers. Elevations, and new levels incorporated timely/promptly in the S-O-D before determining access rights? As above As above And so on, a checklist of 15 activities @5/ each design function to be prepared (in continuation to serial no 23,24,25,26 27 above) directly by the Internal audit team members based on inputs from the handbook As above As above 28 Internal audit of activities for assigning access rights to Statutory activities -(@5 nos/each design function) Whether parameters for developing segregation of duties (S-O-D) have been identified completely (parameters identical/similar to those listed at serial no 23 above and hence not repeated) necessary for assigning access rights to statutory activities? Internal auditor +IT/ERP professional 11 & 1,2,3 And Annex 27B on the website 29 Whether the Template -design for S-O-D comprehensive to capture all parameters? As above 11 & 1,2,3 And Annex 27C in the handbook 30 Whether software programming to populate the S-O-D template at annex 27C user-friendly, bugs-free /accurate, and scalable? As above As above 31 Whether S-O-D template at annex 27C populated objectively, correctly, and without any bias and not skewed in favor of some select position/ level only? As above As above 32 Whether periodic changes like employee transfers. Elevations, and new levels incorporated timely and promptly in the S-O-D before determining access rights? As above As above And so on, a checklist of 15 activities @5/ each design function to be prepared (in continuation to serial no 28,29,30,31,32 above) directly by the Internal audit team members based on inputs from the handbook As above As above 33 Internal audit of activities for assigning access rights to Configuration tables and field choices -(@5 nos/each design function) Whether parameters for developing segregation of duties (S-O-D) have been identified completely (parameters identical/similar to those listed at serial no 23 above and hence not repeated) necessary for assigning access rights to configuration tables and field choices? Internal auditor +IT/ERP professional 11 & 1,2,3 And Annex 28B on the website 34 Whether the Template -design for S-O-D comprehensive to capture all parameters? As above 11 & 1,2,3 And Annex 28C in the handbook 35 Whether software programming to populate the S-O-D template at annex 28C user-friendly, accurate, bug-free and robust, and scalable? As above As above 36 Whether S-O-D template at annex 28C populated objectively, correctly, and without any bias? As above As above 37 Whether periodic changes like employee transfers. Elevations and new levels are incorporated timely/promptly in the S-O-D before determining access rights? As above As above And so on, a checklist of 15 activities @5/ each design function to be prepared (in continuation to serial no 33,34,35,36,37 above) directly by the Internal audit team members based on inputs from the handbook As above As above 38 Internal audit of activities for assigning access rights to Configuration tables and field choices -(@5 nos/each design function) Whether parameters for developing segregation of duties (S-O-D) have been identified completely (parameters identical/similar to those listed at serial no 23 above and hence not repeated) necessary for assigning access rights to master data tables and fields? Internal auditor +IT/ERP professional 11 & 1,2,3 And Annex 29B on the website 39 Whether the Template -design for S-O-D comprehensive to capture all parameters? As above 11 & 1,2,3 And Annex 29C in the handbook 40 Whether software programming to populate the S-O-D template at annex 29C user-friendly and accurate/bugs-free and scalable? As above As above 41 Whether S-O-D template at annex 29C populated objectively, correctly, and without any bias? As above As above 42 Whether periodic changes like employee transfers. Elevations, and new levels incorporated timely/promptly in the S-O-D before determining access rights? As above As above And so on, a checklist of 15 activities @5/ each design function to be prepared (in continuation to serial no 38,39,40,41,42 above) directly by the Internal audit team members based on inputs from the handbook As above As above 43 Internal audit of activities for developing budgets --(@9 nos/each design function) Whether Cross-cross-functional (CFT) formed for developing Budgets appropriate /correct in terms of representation, levels/positions of members vis a vis each design function to decide the following aspects? · Designing structure/contents of Budget at Organisation level/Business unit level · Designing structure/contents of Budget at the Functional level · Deciding the frequency (like annual) at which the Budget must be prepared & reviewed, and released to identified users · Planning timelines by which the Budget must be released in advance of the budgeting period · Identifying Functional coordinators for making and releasing Budget · Determining recipients of Budget documents · Deciding periodicity for reviewing Budget And so on Internal Auditor + Independent Architect or interior designer or MEP designer Chapter 13 @ 1,2,3 Annex 35B on the website 44 Whether key assumptions, vis a vis below, for developing a budget appropriately, comprehensively and well supported with logic? · Competition · Economy · Political · Social · Building (Saleable area) substitute · Government policies · Customer demands · Investments · Market size Any other relevant to each function As above As above 45 Whether key budget parameters, as relevant, such as below being incorporated /included in the respective budgets of Design of Architects, Interior designing, and MEP functions? · Sales Revenue Targets · Project costs · Profitability in local currency & foreign currency terms Targets vis a vis i) Ongoing projects ii) New projects during the budget period As above As above 46 Whether common key budget parameters such as those below have been comprehensively included in the functional budgets? · HR organisation structure/manpower numbers & value -subfunction wise · Completion Timelines vis a vis each design package- based on design stages in each project · Technology up-gradation/Skill acquisition--subfunction wise · Investments to be made/Assets to be acquired -names, quantity, values, and timelines · Expenses - local currency & foreign currency other than direct BOQ/Contract costs/consultancy fees · Reimbursements in local currency & foreign currency As above As above 47 Whether Budgeting is done fairly, accurately, and objectively, keeping aside vested aspects? As above As above And so on, a checklist of 27 activities @9/ each design function to be prepared (in continuation to serial no 43,44,45,46,47) directly by the Internal audit team members based on inputs from the handbook As above As above 48 Internal audit of activities for developing MIS/Dashboard -DB --(@8 nos/each design function) Whether Cross-cross-functional (CFT) is formed /exists for developing MIS/Dashboard and is appropriate in terms of representation, levels/positions of members vis a vis each design function to decide the following aspects? · Designing structure/contents of MIS or DB at the Organisation level/Business unit level · Designing structure/contents of MIS or DB at the Functional level · Provision for incorporating Budgeted or targeted KPI (key performance indicator) values based on Annex 35B · Frequency (like monthly) for which MIS or DB must be prepared and released to identified users · Timelines by which MIS or DB must be released · Functional coordinators for making and releasing MIS or DB Recipients or persons who are to be given access to MIS or DB · Periodicity for reviewing MIS or DB Internal Auditor + Independent Architect or interior designer or MEP designer Chapter 14 & 1,2,3 annex 36B at website 49 Whether MIS incorporates KPI for each function vis a vis Core processes, supporting processes that can impact Organisation’s profitability, Revenue, market share, costs, end-customer satisfaction, and shareholder value? As above As above 50 Whether MIS actual values computed and captured accurately based on accessing business transactions through key processes/activities, Documents, Configuration tables, Master data tables, and Data tables by functional teams? As above As above 51 Whether MIS/Dashboard values are reviewed monthly/periodically/timely vis a vis Budgets/KPI by HOD /CEO/MD? As above As above And so on, a checklist of 24 activities @8/ each design function to be prepared (in continuation to serial no 48,49,50,51) directly by the Internal audit team members based on inputs from the handbook As above As above 52 Internal audit of activities for developing KPI/Key performance indicators --(@11 nos/each design function) Whether the design/structure of the KPI documents is based on input from the CEO/MD and includes important aspects such as below preferably in a tabular format. i)KPI description ii)Measure of accomplishment iii)UOM iv)% weightage v) Target vi) Actual vii) any other aspects Internal Auditor + Independent Architect or interior designer or MEP designer Chapter 18& 1,2,3 Annex 42B, Website 53 Whether for each design function, important KPIs such as those below, that can influence organisation level performance/profitability have been captured in the KPI document? · No projects to be designed · Timeliness of design activities · Meeting statutory compliances · Comprehensiveness & accuracy of design · Quality of design · Technical support to various project teams & contractors · Cost reduction As above Chapter 18& 1,2,3 Annex at Website vis a vis each function such as: 43A-For Architects 43B-For int. design 43C-For MEP 54 Whether KPIs have been appropriately & accurately converted into KRA Targets -Key result areas of functional team members separately and well documented? · Higher level- Directors-Dir, General managers-GM & so on as applicable · Middle level- Senior Manager-Sr. Mgr., Manager, & so on as applicable · Lower level-, Assist. manager/Junior Mgr., staff & workmen so on as applicable As above As above 55 Whether measurement and actual capturing of actuals against the KRA target accurate? As above As above 56 Whether a robust mechanism exists to review KRA target vs Actual accomplishments? As above As above 57 Whether Performance appraisal at different hierarchical levels done based on the occurrence of actual accomplishment of KRA? As above As above And so on, a checklist of 33 activities @11/ each design function to be prepared (in continuation to serial no 52,53,54,55,56,57) directly by the Internal audit team members based on inputs from the handbook As above As above

23 Oct 2022,

How to assess risks at Field level of Master data tables

In one of the earlier blogs, the purpose and process of developing master data tables were shared.This blog summarises key aspects to carry out risk assessment at the field level of master data tables as relevant for Design functions ie. (Design of Architect, Design of Interior, and Design of MEP) Purpose of risk assessment at the field level of the master data tableCorrect /Accurate selection of fields is vital to ensure that the design developed is robust, and would facilitates the accomplishment of the following,· Meeting customer requirements and thus higher sales. · Adherence to Statutory/sanctioned or approved design or & drawing· Meeting national building code standards or statutory specifications· No Compromise on safety· No Compromise on Quality Risk Assessment at - Field level of Master data tablesActivities to assess risks at field level of Master data table level1. Identify parameters that can influence “Field level” risks- w.r.t each Master data tableOnce Master data tables have been identified, HOD/functional team, in consultation with risk management or the Internal audit team, identifies a list of essential aspects that can facilitate the classification of “Field risks” as High or medium, or low.Some of the aspects are as below:· Purpose or ingredients of the field in business activity in which the intended “Field “is used.· Consequences of populating field inaccurately vis-à-vis project design or project Quality or project costs or statutory conformanceThis activity also necessitates the identification of Ingredients of Field that can influence the classification of risks in “Field” as High or Medium or low are as below in case ofi) Field populated inaccurately ii) Fields accessed or amended unauthorizedly2. Design a risk assessment template at the Field level vis-à-vis each Master Data Table3. Software programming of risk template for Field level4. Populate “Field” level risks vis-à-vis each Master data table5. Affect Changes in aboveFew illustrations of risk classification at the field level of master data table levels FieldConsequences if Ingredients of Field are inaccurate or unauthorizedly accessed & amended Risk classification proposed at the Field level Function: Design of Architect, Mater data table: Drawings/specification master-Packages in Civil worksDrawings & technical specifications for the scope of work, including for BOQ - Structure work’s packagesNot meeting customer requirements and thus leading to adverse impact on sales volume due to non-robust design vis a vis below aspects. i)Not meeting national building code standards or statutory specifications orii) Compromise of safety or &iii)Compromise on Quality or &iv) Statutory/sanctioned or approved design or & drawingHighDrawings & technical specifications - Civil Building work’s packageAs aboveHighDrawings & technical specifications - Facade work’s package. As aboveHighDrawings & technical specifications - External development areas / Landscape /hardscape work package.As aboveHighDrawings & technical specifications - Softscape work’s package As aboveHighAnd so on Function: Interior of buildings, Mater data table: Drawings/specification -master-Packages in Interior Design works Drawings & technical specifications for the scope of work, including for BOQ -Finishing work’s/packagesNot meeting customer requirements and thus leading to adverse impact on sales volume due to non-robust design vis a vis below aspects. i)Not meeting national building code standards or statutory specifications orii) Compromise of safety or &iii)Compromise on Quality or &iv) Statutory/sanctioned or approved design or & drawingHighDrawings & technical specifications -Furnishing & Fixtures related packagesAs aboveHighDrawings & technical specifications -Equipment packages, e.g. Gym, Bathroom, etc. As aboveHighDrawings & technical specifications -Artworks, Props, and other packagesAs aboveHighAnd so on Function: Design of MEP, Mater data table: Drawings/specification master-MEP Package Drawings & technical specifications for the scope of work, including for BOQ -External Electrical work Not meeting customer requirements and thus leading to adverse impact on sales volume due to non-robust design vis a vis below aspects. i)Not meeting national building code standards or statutory specifications orii) Compromise of safety or &iii)Compromise on Quality or &iv) Statutory/sanctioned or approved design or & drawingHighDrawings & technical specifications -Internal Electrical work As aboveHighDrawings & technical specifications -Airconditioning or &VRV or & Heating work As aboveHighDrawings & technical specifications -Basement ventilationAs aboveHighAnd so on Activities that can adversely impact business· Inappropriate levels/positions of team members of “3 Design functions” with consequent inadequate skills for comprehending field-level risks of Master Data Tables· Inappropriate software development and workflow of risk templates making risk capturing of field level risks at master data table cumbersome and inefficient· Inadequate understanding and hence inappropriate capturing of the consequence of Incorrect accessing and use of Master data tables in“3 Design functions” * · Inaccurate classification of Risk level High, Medium, or Low by team members of “3 Design functions” *· Non-periodic/non-timely review of previously populated risk template to incorporate changes in Master data tables level risks and so onHandbook of the author A template illustrating risk classification, as High, Medium, or Low at the field level of Master data table level is included in chapter 10 (annex 16D) in the handbook of the author and titled” ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services “

05 Oct 2022,

Risk assessments- At Field's level of configuration Tables

In one of the earlier blogs, the purpose and process of developing configuration tables were shared.This blog summarises key aspects to carry out risk assessment at the field choice level of the configuration table as relevant for Design functions. 2.1 Risk Assessment at - Field Choice level of configuration tables- Illustration of risks templates 1. Identify parameters that can influence “Configuration Table level” RisksOnce configuration table requirements /conceptualization has been done, the HOD/design functional team Identifies the consequences of incorrect accessing and use of specific /identified Configuration table vis-à-vis:· Adverse impact on Package specifications or Project package design · Adverse impact on BOQ quality or construction quality · Adverse impact on Statutory conformance · Adverse impact on Project costs 2. Design a Risk assessment template at the field choice level of the configuration table level 3. Software Programming of the Risk Assessment template 4. Populate field choice level of the configuration table level risks in the template Function Field “Choices” vis a vis each field Code for field choice Parameters influencing risk classification Risk classification at the Field Choice level Design of Architecture Structure A01 Incorrect designing of Architecture of unit, area, or building Medium Civil works A02 Medium Façade A03 Medium External development A04 Medium Softscape A05 Medium And so on, other choices in this field xx XXXX Interior Designing Finishing B01 Incorrect designing of the Interior of the unit, area, or building Medium Furnishing & Fixtures B02 Medium Interior design equipment B03 Medium Artworks etc. B04 Medium And so on, other choices in this field BXX XXXX Design of MEP External electricals C01 Incorrect designing of MEP of the unit, area, or building Incorrect designing of any other package relevant to the unit, area, or building Medium Internal electricals, C02 Medium Air conditioning C03 Medium Plumbing C04 Medium Fire fighting C05 Medium fire protection C06 Medium And so on, other choices in this Field CXX XXXX A similar assessment is to be carried out for other Fields. 2.2 Activities that can adversely impact business · Inappropriate levels/positions of “Design functions” team members with consequent inadequate skills for comprehending Configuration tables level risks. · Inappropriate software development and risk template workflow make Risk capturing at the configuration table's field level cumbersome and inefficient.· Inadequate understanding and hence inappropriate capturing of Consequence of Incorrect accessing and use of configuration tables in “Design functions” * · Inaccurate classification of Risk at “Field choice level” of configuration table (High, Medium, or Low) by functional team member *· Non-periodic/non-timely review of previously populated risk template to incorporate changes in Configuration tables level risks and so on * Handbook of the author A template illustrating risk classification as High, Medium, or Low at the field choice level of the Configuration table-level is included in chapter 10 (annex 15D) in the handbook of the author and titled” ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services. “

23 Sep 2022,

Ensuring statutory conformances by MEP designers during the designing process

In an earlier blog, it was shared that 48 key Statutory Acts are directly applicable (for 13 key functions in the real estate & hospitality Industry). In addition, there are 34 statutory Acts indirectly relevant through supporting functions like corporate Finance, Corporate Services, HR, etc. The number & provisions of Statutory Acts and activities listed in this blog are in the context of Indian Industry, and readers in countries other than India can modify these to meet similar type requirements of each country. For these 13 functions, eight types of statutory processes having 113 associated statutory activities have been identified as applicable. For the Design of the MEP function, four types of statutory processes (out of 5 types) are directly relevant, with ten key statutory activities (out of 113 identified) required to be performed as summarised below. · Process1: Meeting statutory and taxation obligations; Activities =2 as below 1. Publishing on web site RERA, Project wise details (The RERA Act,2016) 2. Summary of inward/outward supplies along with payment of tax (The GST Act,2017) GST · Process 2: Obtaining Licenses, approvals, and maintaining statutory records w.r.t Statutory Acts; Activities =3 as below 1. Complying with prescribed provisions of all applicable Acts & associated rules 2. Maintaining statutory prescribed records 3. Coordinating statutory inspections of business premises & documents · Process 3: Complying with IGST matters; Activities =4 1. Filing returns towards inward/outward supply of goods and services, ITC -input tax credit availed, output tax payable under section 35(1) 2. Complying with requirements w.r.t. imported goods or services under GST rule 56(1) 3. Complying with requirements w.r.t GST payable, collected, paid, and ITC availed under GST rule 56(4) 4. Complying with requirements w.r.t maintaining details of suppliers & customers with their GSTN registration number under GST rule 56(5) · Process 4: Deducting Income tax on services-TDS; Activities =1 1. Computing the TDS amount on service charges as per applicable income tax rules & deduction of the same from dues payable to the service provider/consultant At their discretion, the Central Government /statutory authorities may amend the applicability of statutory laws or various sections as mentioned in this blog. Given below is the list of 14 activities that can adversely impact business is as below (if these are performed unethically or without proper diligence) Statutory Process 1: Meeting statutory regulations and tax obligations and filing various key returns on the scheduled time =6 · Obtain “certification for adherence to statutory /approved sanctioned plans and project specifications and National Building code” through unfair means in case actual construction does not comply with sanctioned plans · Bribe statutory agencies to obtain a “Completion Certificate” even before construction is completed to customers and realize payments through construction areas not yet ready for possession. · Publish on website project details that are inaccurate vis a vis RERA-Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016 (inputs to Architect team) · Non-timely capture of details vis-à-vis summary return of outward and inward supplies and services along with payment of tax compliance in respect of The Central Goods and Service Tax Act,2017. · File returns inaccurately · File returns non-timely MEP teams usually give details /inputs for the above to Finance & accounts or the legal team for meeting statutory requirements. Statutory Process 2: Obtaining Licenses, approvals, and maintaining statutory records w.r.t Acts=2 · Bribe the statutory inspectors during their visits to the construction site to validate that construction conforms to statutory approvals · Not maintain or maintain and submit inaccurate statutory records and bribe visiting Statutory officials. . Statutory Process 3: Complying with IGST matters=5 · File return towards Inward and outward supply of MEP-related goods /services, ITC availed, output tax payable and paid under Sec 35(1) · Comply with requirements w. r. t. Imported goods or services under GST rule 56(1) · Comply with requirements w. r. t. GST payable, collected, paid, and ITC availed under GST rule 56(4) · Comply with requirements w. r. t maintaining details of suppliers and customers with their GSTN registration number under GST rule 56(5)- · Maintain record vis-à-vis inward or outward supply of MEP, design services, or inward collection of BOQ sample materials procured which are either incomplete or incorrect vis-à-vis amounts chargeable to GST or rate of GST or both MEP teams usually give details /inputs for the above to Finance & accounts or the legal team for meeting statutory requirements. Statutory Process 4: Deducting TDS-services=1 · Deduction of TDS (Tax deduction at source as per Income Tax Act,1961) at a rate different than prescribed. Handbook of the author You can read more about these 14 activities that can adversely impact business in Annexures 20B &21B and Chapter 3 of the author’s handbook ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services. “

19 Aug 2022,

Boosting the productivity of Architects, Interior, and MEP Designers- by developing & using Configuration tables

For efficient performing of designing related activities for large construction projects, the development and use of “Configuration tables” and “Master data tables” along with appropriate “Fields” s in design function are very crucial. This blog highlights aspects related to developing and using “configuration tables.” What are Configuration tables? The Configuration tables are primarily data tables that store information representing multiple choices that exist in business and are required to be chosen frequently by project teams and building designers, such as below. · Types of packages (e.g., civil, interior design, MEP, and further drill down within each of these packages) · Types of project organisation (Housing, Commercial, hospitality, etc.) · Types of vendors (e.g., consultants/contractors/service providers/business associates) · Types of business documents (Design brief document, sanctioned drawing, Good for construction, As-built drawing, etc.) · Types of materials /BOQ items for various works (e.g., civil, electrical, plumbing, etc.) · Types of inspection frequency for BOQ/Constructed packages (e.g., none, % sampling,100%, etc.) · Types of Inspection attributes (dimensional, metallurgical, chemical, etc. vis a vis BOQ in various packages) The configuration tables are usually created by ERP consultants when designing the overall systems for the organization, usually within the ERP systems (like SAP) or and “Customised Designed solution” as appropriate Activities to develop configuration tables: Usually, seven activities are required to be performed to develop configuration tables as below. 1 Identify the key “configuration Tables” names that need to be developed based on functional requirements 2. Assign a unique number to each identified configuration table 3. Identify the “fields” as relevant for each configuration table 4. Assign “field codes” as relevant. 5. Identify various “field choices” available for each field. 6. Assign “field choices” as relevant. 7. Design and Populate the contents of configuration tables having columns as proposed below · Col 1. Key function · Col 2. Configuration table number · Col 3. Description of “Field” · Col 4. “Field” number/code · Col 5. The Field choice description · Col 6. Choice code (as applicable) Active dialoguing is needed among designers (Architects, Interior, and MEP Designers) and the IT and systems team, Project functions, and other interfacing functions for designing the contents of respective Configuration table tables. This is because “Field choice,” though designed by a specific function, is often used by many functions besides design functions for enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of functions. Illustrations of contents of configuration Tables One illustration for each design function is captured below. The code numberings (for configuration table, field, and field choices) mentioned in the below illustration are simply for an easier understanding from a digitalization perspective. They can be changed 100% at organization’s absolute discretion. Coding schemes are usually configured by the ERP vendors/software solution providers. More details about coding schemes are included in chapter 9 of my book. . Key function Configuration Table Number assigned. Description of Fields in the configuration table and No tables with code range Field number Field Choices Abbreviation for Field Choice Designing of Architecture of buildings CT211 Type of packages in Civil works F501 Structure A01 Civil works A02 Façade A03 External development A04 Softscape A05 and so on AXX Designing of Interiors of buildings CT221 Type of packages in Interior design works F531 Finishing B01 Furnishing and Fixtures B02 Interior design equipment B03 Artworks B04 And so on BXX Designing MEP and Engineering services CT231 Type of packages in MEP works F556 External electricals C01 Internal electricals C02 Air conditioning C03 Plumbing C04 Firefighting C05 Fire protection C06 Lifeworks C07 Fuel supply C08 Sewage treatment C09 And so on xx Architects, Interior designers, and MEP designers can identify and develop many more configuration tables based on the above illustration. The number of configuration tables can be expanded to as required, say, @10 for each design function depending on the size /complexity of the project or organisation. Similarly, the number of field/field choices can be expanded out of more fields listed in Annex 1F in the handbook. Activities that can adversely impact business. Inaccurate fields and field choices configuration while developing/populating the configuration tables. Undiligent selection of “field choices” by the building designer, leading to inappropriate design of Architect or Interior or MEP. Not updating configuration tables in design functions promptly as and when changes occur in fields/field choices or additions/deletions take place in the number of packages vis a vis relevant function. Continue using conventional design methods rather than effectively using configuration tables (usually residing in ERP –modules) by not integrating ERP software with “Design software.” . Handbook of the author You can read more about the 21 activities(@7/function) that can adversely impact business as summarised below from chapter 5 of the author’s handbook ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services. “

19 Aug 2022,

How to assign Roles to Architects, interior, and MEP designers systematically? -An Illustration

This blog aims to provide essential insights into the process of assigning roles to designers vis a vis 225 identified core design activities performed by designers as summarised below and included in the handbook mentioned at the end of this blog. · By Architects=118- For designing Design of structure+ Architecture+ Façade+ external development +softscape works · By Interior designers =37 -For designing Finishing works +Furniture, fixtures, and equipment for interiors +Artwork · By MEP designers =70 -For Electricals (external and internal) +Airconditioning and Basement ventilation works This requires a basic understanding of four concepts as highlighted below i)Segregation of duties (Abbreviated as S-O-D) to avoid conflict of roles ii)Development of Authorisation Profiles or simply called profiles in this Handbook iii) Understanding the concept of roles iv) Attaching Profiles to Roles Four concepts i)Segregation of duties S-O-D: The aspects related to S-O-D have been covered in one of the earlier blogs on my website and hence are not being duplicated (please refer to https://www.ethicalprocesses.com/blog_detail/49 ). Implementing S-O-D can enable avoiding conflict of roles amongst designers at different levels. ii)Development of Authorisation profiles -Accessing Core activities -1 illustration The author proposes developing five authorization profiles for performing each core activity, and illustrations are given below It is suggested that, for each design activity (within each design stage), there must be a distinct option to choose from any one or combination of the following five activities · Create or initiate the design activity e.g., initiate concept design or draw sanction drawings or make a tender, and so on) · Edit or modify the above design activity · Delete the above design activity · View the above design activity · Approve the above design activity An illustration for the “Design of Architecture function”, is captured below in a tabular form with a suggested profile code numbering scheme (given in the handbook, chapter 9 and hence not covered here), which of course, can be changed by the reader at their absolute discretion. Function: Design of Architecture Name of Core process vis a vis activity for SOD development: Design of Structure Design Activity Description: Developing Concept designs and schemes (based on design calculations of PCC/Reinforcements requirements based on a factor of safety/Earthquake zone etc.) and using software like STADD or ETAB. Risk Classification for accessing this Core Activity: High. Profile numbers Proposed for accessing this Core Activity: PC02001 to PC02005(Compiled in Annexure 30A in the book mentioned below) Description PC02001 PC02002 PC02003 PC02004 PC02005 Key “Rights” vis a vis this activity (RHS of this row) Column 1 Create or Initiate Column 2 Edit/ or Modify Column 3 Delete Column 4 View Column 5 Approve Column 6 Function assigned Name (RHS of this row) (Design of Architecture (Design of Architecture (Design of Architecture (Design of Architecture (Design of Architecture Team assigned Number & name(RHS of this row) T-5 Architect For all areas T-6 Functional Risk Coordinator T-6 Functional Risk Coordinator T5 ArchitectFor all areas and other designers T-7 function head Employee Level Proposed (RHS of this row) Middle Higher middle middle Higher Position who can Perform (RHS of this row) Sr. Mgr. GM Sr. Mgr. Mgr. Project Head Thus for 1st illustrated design activity, 5 Profile numbers have been generated using the SOD concept as PC02001 to PC02005 to each set of Combination of Function +Team+ Level +Position vis columns 2,3,4,5 & 6, respectively. Team name, Positions & levels mentioned in this table are hypothetical for simple understanding of readers and can be suitably modified at the absolute discretion of the organisation Interior & MEP designers can directly develop similar tables per the above illustration for all other packages. Such development of profiles is to be completed for each of the 225 design activities as identified in the handbook. It implies developing 1125 authorization profiles (@5x225 activities identified). However, before assigning rights /functions/levels/positions to each profile, each of the 225core design activities must be thoroughly studied and individually classified as having High, Medium, or low risks as per methodology given in a separate chapter 10 of the handbook and illustrations in annex 13C The Number of activities can be much higher or enhanced as required based on the size of construction projects and design organisation. Thus assuming 400 design activities in each of Architect, Interior, and MEP design functions, 2000 profiles per design function (@5 profile per activity, i.e., @ 2000 profiles for each of 3 design functions totaling 6000 profiles, i.e., PC02001 to PC08000 as captured in the book. iii) Understanding the concept of “Roles” Roles mean what a particular professional (here a designer) is authorised to do as per a few examples below. · Developing a concept design is one simple role say simple role 1 · Simply drafting or generating drawings is another simple role say simple role 2 · Developing sanction drawings for statutory approval is another example of a simple role say a simple role 3 · Integration of designs say with MEP design is another role, which is a relatively complex role say a complex role 1 · Developing detailed design and also making tenders is an example of the complex role say a complex role 2 Based on the earlier tabulated illustration, the configured, “Authorisation Profiles” PC02001 to PC02005 so developed can be attached by the HOD-Architect function to simple “Roles” (with the help of the IT/ERP team) depending on the roles planned at the granularity level. Once all the 1125 authorization profiles have been developed (or higher say 6000 profiles as stated above), attachment of these profiles to various roles is proposed to be done in three steps as below, particularly when the design organisation is operating in highly digitalized/ERP environments. Thus, a role can have one or more combinations of profiles (out of 1125 profiles for 225 activities or 6000 expanded profiles) attached to it, to be called a “Simple or complex Role”. iv) Attaching Profiles to Roles Although the number of profiles can run into thousands (as mentioned above), the number of designers in organisations is limited. It is, therefore prudent that before the final attachment of profiles to roles, thorough testing is done to see that design activities are carried out smoothly based on competency assessments at different hierarchical levels & positions who will perform such roles. The steps are: a) Attach profile to roles in “Development computer server” b) Test roles in “Test servers” by ERP teams and designers c) Upload roles to the “Production server” for implementation, after approval of testing of roles To ensure that no incompatible or conflicting authorization profiles get attached, the roles, post-testing, can be attached to the production server by following P-D-C-A (plan-do-check-act) approach Thus, the Number of roles can run into tens & hundred (as profiles may be in thousands) depending upon the following: · Size and complexity of the organization · the variety of Construction projects residential, commercial, educational, SEZ, etc · The skill level of designers · The multi-tasking role expectation of the organisation. · The technology of construction, design software, · The design organization structure and empowerment culture · Risk appetite of the company. Therefore, to enable the digitalization for developing thousands of profiles, some ERP Vendors, like SAP, offer profile generating software, wherein standards authorization profiles can be developed and attached to architects, interior, and MEP designers for carrying out design development. These roles can then be assigned to different positions, independent of the names of individuals after factoring following: · Number of teams & design functions · Number of employee levels · Types of positions in the hierarchy · Competency level associated with roles (covered in earlier blog https://www.ethicalprocesses.com/blog_detail/46) Such profile assignments can be done digitally but must be done diligently, and each role may have a multitude of authorisation profiles attached to it. Soon, please look for separate blogs that will be prepared & published for assigning roles to Architects, interior, and MEP designers (titled “Assigning access rights” for performing other activities, such as statutory activities, accessing master data tables, and so on. Handbook of the author A template illustrating assigning access rights to activities is included in chapter 11 (annex 26C) in the handbook of author and titled” ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services “

15 Aug 2022,

How to develop a Quantification model to determine Risk Scores in design activities

The objectives of carrying out a risk assessment of core design activities are following.· To assign relatively higher competent designers to carry out High risk/medium-risky activities vis a vis low-risk activities.· Be ready with countermeasure plans to prevent such risk occurrences by implementing best design practices.· To work toward delivering design excellenceList of activities performed by Architects, interior & MEP designersBelow is a list of 225 activities usually performed by designers (for a typical mid-size construction project) during various design development stages. Architects: 118 design activities identified (For the design of the structure=7, building architect=65, Façade=22, external development=12, and softscape=12)Interior designers: 37 design activities identified (For the Design of finishing works, fixtures & equipment, and artwork)MEP designers: 70 design activities identified (For External &internal electricals=32 and Airconditioning using VRV and basement ventilation=38)A brief narration of these 225(118+37+70) design activities can be seen in annex 21A(2),21A(3 )&21A(4) respectively at the website https://www.ethicalprocesses.com The number of activities can be more or less than 225 at the discretion of designers/organisation, depending on the type of organisation structure, project size, number of design packages and software used, etc.How to determine risksThe ultimate objective of risk assessment in design functions is to prevent risk occurrences by initiating countermeasures for preventing risks.The activities to assess risks include i. Designate Risks Assessment team (CFT-Cross-functional team)ii. Identify aspects that can contribute to core activity level risk iii. Design a risk assessment template for the core activity level iv. Software programming of risk templates. v. Populate the “Risks” template by the design functions in consultation with CFT Proposed Quantification Model for risk assessment - The template for quantifications is to be populated by assessing the Impact on the following in case design activities are performed incorrectly or without due diligence The Impact is to be ascertained on the following scales. i) Severity of Impact in case of risk occurrence (10-point scale)ii) Detectability stage of risk being found out (10-point scale)iii) Occurrence -likelihood of risk occurrence (10-point scale) The severity score: Determined based on 10 a point scale based on impact /adverse implications on aspects as below: i)Severity - adverse Impact on:a) Profitabilityb) Statutory compliancec) The strategic value of the company/company image affects customer retention d)Financial statement accuracy e) Reliability/effectiveness of design process being assessed Assigning scores · 1 being the lowest adverse Impact on business. · 10 being the highest adverse Impact on businessii)The detectability score: Determined based on a 10-point scale based on the detectability of adverse Impact at which stage as below: Detectability stage (any 1 of 5 stages)a) At the very 1st stage i.e. by the designer himself/herself while initiating or creating Design b) At the design review /peer review or approval stage within the design function or outsourced consultant vetting design c) At subsequent process/intermediate stage e.g construction stage of building d) At the corporate (or in-house audit by the Project head) stage within the organization e) At the customer end after the handover of the building area (outside the organization) Assigning scores · 1 being the lowest adverse Impact on business (eg. Detection at Stage (a) above· 10 being the highest adverse Impact on business (eg. Detection at stage (e) above iii) Occurrence /likelihood score: Determined based on a 10-point scale based on design activity going wrong considering below cumulative factors: Assigning scores · 1 being very low i.e.least number of causes from the below list · 10 being extremely high i.e. large number of causes from the below list a) Skill level of the designer performing an activityb) Segregation of duty for activities/role confusion c)Completeness of execution of design activity d)Validation at each stage of the design activity d)Correctness of source data (e.g. customer requirements, Quality standards, statutory requirements) e) Adequacy of internal controls f) Robustness of systems and updated SOPg) Authorisation norms for design activities creation, editing, deleting, viewing, and approvalh) Designing Process Logic correctness/accuracy of design assumptions i) Other aspects: the complexity of business, change management, ethicsDetermining Risk score For this Impact, the exposure matrix is to be developed based on the score to be computed as per the methodology below:· Determining Impact score on a 100 Point scale (based on multiplication of score at (i) &(ii) above as per activity · Determining Exposure score on a 10 Point scale (based on the score at (iii) above as per activity In case, according to the design team, any of the activities marked as a), b), c) and so on onwards in point i), ii), iii) in the templates, that influence the score -determination are not relevant/not applicable, the same need not be considered for scoring. Illustration Template for one Key Core Process: The below illustration is based on design activities performed for one package i.e. “Designing of building structure” but exactly 100% of the same template/model can be adopted for assessing risks vis a vis any package in Design of architecture or Interior design or MEP design. Activity vis a vis Core Process In “Designing of structure “ Impact score Out of 100 Exposure scores out of 10 Risk Classification Level Developing Concept designs and schemes (Based on design calculations of PCC/Reinforcements requirements based on a factor of safety/Earthquake zone etc.) and using software like STADD or ETAB. Say above 75 Say above 8 High Vetting of Design by proof consultant Say above 75 Say above 8 High Developing GFC and specifications for various structural elements like capturing TMT bar sizes, RMC, etc. for various structural elements say 50 to 74 Say 5 to 8 Medium Preparing Tender (covering Tender drawings and specifications, technical specifications, Material brands, Quality standards, and so on) say 50 to 74 Say 5 to 8 Medium Issuing Structural stability certificate Say above 75 Say above 8 High Making Cost estimates for structure Say above 75 Say above 8 High Issuing “As-built drawings” after the structure is complete and approved. Say 1-49 Say 1-4 low And so on in case of more number of design activities The impact scores or exposure scores indicated in the above template are hypothetical and just for the reader’s understanding only. The scores may vary considerably as per the actual situation at the designer end based on the type of construction project, design software, and organisation. Way-forward to Minimize the Risks Score · Engaging professionally qualified designers · Ensuring design activities incorporate national &international quality standards· Reviewing design activities from health & safety perspectives before approving · Ensuring transparency (amongst designers) of design calculations · Applying good design practices · Using licensed software· Building internal controls to prevent giving and taking bribes· Developing the following SOP· Developing profiles at the granularity levels · Attaching profiles diligently · Implementing S-O-D (Segregation of duties) concepts while assigning roles · Assigning roles judiciously based on competency · Encouraging self-audit by designers· Continuous competency enhancement of designers at each level· Introducing performance measures through KPI Handbook of the author A template illustrating risk classification, as High, Medium, or Low at the core activity level is included in chapter 10 (annex 13E) in the handbook of the author and titled” ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services “

10 Aug 2022,

Enhancing the productivity of Architects, Interior, and MEP Designers- by developing & using master data tables

For efficient performing of designing related activities for large construction projects, the development of master data tables along with appropriate “Fields” s in design function is very crucial.The “Fields” in such tables are selected by designers but configured with the help of IT/ERP consultants while designing the overall systems for the organization.The master data tables need to be configured within the ERP systems (like SAP) or “Designing software” as appropriate, by whatever name so-called in the “Designing software.”This blog includes the following aspects vis-a-vis master data tables:· A) What is a field· B) 5 (five) Activities to develop master data tables that contain fields· C) 676 (six hundred seventy-six) fields that have been identified for different functions in the real estate industry· D) 6 (six) Illustrations for developing the master data tables· E) Activities that can adversely impact business This blog is intended to enhance the understanding of the Architects, Interior, and MEP designers to appreciate the significance of using Master Data Tables diligently to eliminate the multiplicity of efforts that, otherwise, designers will have to put in. A)What is a “Field”The master data tables contain “Fields” which carry important information, such as in the below examples given in the context of design functions:· Drawings and technical specifications, including that of BOQ. Fields are unique for each design works package like structure, architecture, Interior design package, MEP· Scope of work - Line items- unique for each design work package like structure, architecture, façade, etc.And many more (109 fields have been identified for design function as mentioned in the following paragraph) B)Activities to develop Master data tables: Usually, 5 activities must be performed to develop master data tables as below.1 Identify the key “Master Data Tables” names that need to be developed based on functional requirements 2. Assign a unique number to each identified master data table 3. Identify the “fields” as relevant for each Master data table4. Identify the “field codes” applicable to these tables for digitalization5. Design and Populate the contents of master data tables having columns as proposed belowCol 1. Key function Col 2. Master table’s proposed nameCol 3. Proposed table numberCol 4. “Field” name/descriptionCol 5. “Field” code Col 6. “Field” value (as applicable) Active brainstorming is needed among designers (Architects, Interior, and MEP Designers) and the IT and systems team, Project functions, and other interfacing functions for designing the contents of respective master data tables. This is because “Fields,” though designed by a specific function, is often used by many functions, besides design functions such as construction project function, Project quality management function, and commercial functions (as shown below) for enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of activities in different functions. C) 676(six hundred seventy six) Fields identified -function-wise summary i) Fields directly applicable to Construction Project functions=428 (Listed in annex 1F,1G of handbook named below) · Land buying & Selling =16· Designing of Architecture of buildings =27· Designing of Interior of buildings=23· Designing MEP & Engineering services=59· Appointing Project Consultants & Contractors=50· Construction of Buildings=50· Green Building Certification=7· Quantity Survey (QS) & Measurement=37· Project Material Management=35· Project Quality Management=55· Legal & Secretarial=9· Project Completion=15· Selling of Constructed Areas=45. ii) “Fields” common for all functions =98 (Listed in annex 1A of the handbook named below) (e.g., company type, name & code, category of Project name, location and code, employee name, code etc.)iii) “Fields” directly applicable to Management functions=107 (Listed in annex 1B of the handbook named below)· Finance & accounts=50,· Corporate services=25,· Legal & secretarial =16,· IT/Systems=16 iv) “Fields” directly applicable to other support functions =43 (Listed in annex 1C of the handbook named below)· Human resource=29· Administration=14 Total number of “Fields” applicable in real estate industry functions =676 (428+98+107+43)The “676 fields” above are just illustrations; these can run into several hundred. “Fields” can be planned and increased by Architect, Interior, and MEP designers or other interfacing functions, as required, as per the size of the organisation, number of projects, and complexity of the projects.D) 6 (six) Illustration of developing master data tables and “Fields.”A few illustrations of the contents of Mater data tables in three design functions are as below, along with a few identified “fields”: Name Design FunctionMaster data table name“Field” name“Field” Value @Architecture1. Drawings/specification master-Packages in Civil works Drawings and technical specifications - Civil Building works package, including BOQ Drawings and technical specifications - Facade works package Drawings and technical specifications – landscape works package Created or initiated by Date of creation And so on more “Fields” 2. Scope of work Master -Packages in Civil works Scope of work - Line items -Structure work packages Scope of work - Line items - Civil Building works packages Scope of work - Line items - Facade works packages Created or initiated by Date of creation And so on more “Fields” And so on more master data tables Interior design1. Drawing/specification master packages in Interior Design List of Drawings and technical specifications for the scope of work, including for BOQ -Finishing works Drawings and technical specifications -Furnishing &fixtures Drawings and technical specifications – Equipment e.g. Gym, bathroom related, etc. Drawings and technical specifications -Art work. Props etc. Created or initiated by Date of creation And so on more “Fields” 2. Scope of work Master -Packages in Interior design works Scope of work - Line items in Finishing works Scope of work - Line items in Furnishing and Fixtures. Scope of work - Line items in -equipment Scope of work - Line items in Artwork Created or initiated by Date of creation And so on more “Fields” And so on more master data tables MEP design1. Drawing & specification master -MEP packages List of Drawings and technical specifications for the scope of -including for BOQ -External electrical works Drawings and technical specifications -internal electrical works Drawings and technical specifications – Air-conditioning &VRV works Created or initiated by Date of creation And so on 2. Scope of work Master -MEP packages Scope of work - Line items in external electrical works Scope of work - Line items in internal electrical Scope of work - Line items in -equipment Scope of work - Line items in -Airconditioning &VRV works Created or initiated by Date of creation And so on more “Fields” And so on more master data tables Note: @ indicates that the “Field” values need to be populated by the respective Architect, Interior, and MEP designer as these are variable from project to projectE) Activities that can adversely impact business.· Inappropriate selection of “Fields” in the Master Data Table or and having overcrowding of “Fields” making retrieval of required information difficult · Inappropriate populating Master data tables in three design functions inaccurately vis-à-vis applicable “Fields” and their Values *· Authorised designers collude and make circular changes in “Field” values in the Master Data Tables and, after executing transactions /performing design, restore original “Field” description values. *· Simultaneously, disabling the audit trails by a designer to suppress the circular changes from the management, auditors, or statutory authorities and provide undue benefit to the business associate or team member. * · Not updating master data tables online as and when changes occur in specifications or scope of work vis a vis various “Fields” or addition/deletion of various “Fields” takes place.· Inappropriate authorisation of master data table and the “Fields” therein.· Not implementing the SOD-Segregation of duty concept for approving master data tables. The above-listed activities marked* reflect activities that can also have adverse statutory implications. You can read more about the 15 activities (@5/design function) that can adversely impact business as summarised above from chapter 6 (and annex numbers mentioned above) of the author’s handbook ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services. “

01 Aug 2022,