Blogs
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 “
Risk assessments- At Field's level of configuration Tables
Configuration tables usually store information such as company codes, plant codes or construction project codes, sales organisation or sales channels and other parameters that define the organisation structure of the company.In building design functions, other types of tables or databases can be used to store and manage design-related information, such as design specifications, building codes, material properties, and construction standards.These tables or databases (By whatever names they are called and not necessarily configuration tables)can be used to organize and manage the design process and ensure that the project meets the requirements and regulations.Software tools(like Building information modelling-BIM ) can support the design functions of construction projects and allow for creating and managing design-related data. Such BIM software can create 3D models of building designs and store relevant data about the building's components, systems, and materials. This data can then be used to support construction planning and decision-making.This blog covers the following aspects vis a-vis building design functions· Five activities for assessing risks at field choice levels, along with a template· Activities that can adversely impact business Five activities to asses risks at - Field Choice level of “Database” (or configuration table) tables1. Identify parameters that can influence the “Database” level (or configuration table) level RisksOnce “Database” (or configuration table) requirements /conceptualization have been done, the HOD/design functional team Identifies the consequences of incorrect accessing and use of specific /identified “Database” (or configuration table)vis-à-vis:· Adverse impact on Package specifications or Project package design· Negative impact on BOQ quality or construction quality· Adverse effect on Statutory conformance· Adverse effects on Project costs2. Design a Risk assessment template at the field choice level of the “Database” (or configuration table) level3. Software Programming of the Risk Assessment template4. Populate the field choice level of the “Database”(or configuration table) level risks in the template.5. Affecting changes in the field choices in above FunctionField “Choices” vis a vis each fieldCode for field choiceParameters influencing risk classificationRisk classification at the Field Choice levelDesign of ArchitectureStructureA01Incorrect designing of Architecture of unit, area, or buildingMediumCivil worksA02MediumFaçadeA03MediumExternal developmentA04MediumSoftscapeA05MediumAnd so on other choices in this FieldxxXXXXInterior DesigningFinishingB01Incorrect designing of the Interior of the unit, area, or buildingMediumFurnishing & FixturesB02MediumInterior design equipmentB03MediumArtworks etc.B04MediumAnd so on other choices in this FieldBXXXXXXDesign of MEPExternal electricalsC01Incorrect designing of MEP of the unit, area, or building Incorrect designing of any other package relevant to the unit, area, or buildingMediumInternal electricals,C02MediumAir conditioningC03MediumPlumbingC04MediumFire fightingC05Mediumfire protectionC06MediumAnd so on other choices in this FieldCXXXXXX A similar assessment is to be carried out for other Fields. Activities that can adversely impact business · Inappropriate levels/positions of “Design functions” team members with consequent inadequate skills for comprehending “Database” (or configuration table) level risks.· Inappropriate software development and workflow of risk templates make risk capturing at the field level of the “Database” (or configuration table) cumbersome and inefficient.· Inadequate understanding and hence inappropriate capturing of Consequence of Incorrect accessing and use of “Database” (or configuration table) in “Design functions” * · Inaccurate classification of Risk at “Field choice level” of “Database” (or configuration table)-High, or Medium, or Low by functional team member *· Non-periodic/non-timely review of previously populated risk template to incorporate changes in “Database” (or configuration table) 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 “Database” (or 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. “
How to develop a Quantification model to determine Risk Scores in design activities
How to develop a Quantification model to determine Risk Scores in Design activities & a way forward to minimize Risk ScoreList 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.Types of Risks in the building design processes (Architecture or Interior or MEP)Following are the 6 (six) types of critical risks that can occur in case design is not performed correctly or diligently or by inexperienced designers.1. Not meeting customer’s requirements2. Quality of building attributed to poor design causing occupant dissatisfaction3. Safety of building, e.g. Earthquake, fire hazards, etc4. Not meeting building codes or zoning regulations, or environmental requirements related to pollution, sewerage disposals, etc 5. Project Cost overruns and leading to non-competitiveness and funds constraints6. Delays in construction and Project delivery due to design errors needing reworks How to determine risksThe ultimate objective of risk assessment in design functions is to prevent risk occurrences by initiating countermeasures for avoiding risks.The activities to assess risks includei. Designate Risks Assessment team (CFT-Cross-functional team)ii. Identify aspects that can contribute to core activity level riskiii. Design a risk assessment template for the core activity leveliv. 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 quantification template will 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) The severity of impact in case of risk occurrence (10-point scale)ii) Detectability stage of risk being found out (10-point scale)iii) Occurrence -the 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 retentiond)Financial statement accuracye) Reliability/effectiveness of the design process being assessed Assigning severity scores· One is 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)· Stage 1) At the very 1st stage, i.e., by the designer himself/herself while initiating or creating the design · Stage 2)At the design review /peer review or approval stage within the design function or outsourced consultant vetting design · Stage 3) At the subsequent process/intermediate stage, e.g., the construction stage of the building · Stage 4) At the corporate (or in-house audit by the Project head) stage within the organization· Stage 5) At the customer end after the handover of the building area (outside the organization) Assigning detectability scores· One is 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:a) Skill level of the designer performing an activityb) Segregation of duty for activities/role confusionc)Completeness of execution of design activityd)Validation at each stage of the design activityd)Correctness of source data (e.g., customer requirements, Quality standards, statutory requirements)e) Adequacy of internal controlsf) 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, ethicsAssigning occurrence scores· 1 being very low i.e.least number of causes from the below list· Ten being extremely high, i.e., a large number of causes from the below list Determining 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 activityIn case, according to the design team, any of the activities marked as a), b), c), and so on onwards in points 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 the building structure,” but precisely 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 designActivity vis a vis Core ProcessIn “Designing of structure. “ Impact scoreOut of 100Exposure scores out of 10Risk Classification LevelDeveloping 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 75Say above 8HighVetting of design by proof consultantSay above 75Say above 8HighDeveloping GFC and specifications for various structural elements like capturing TMT bar sizes, RMC, etc. for various structural elements say 50 to 74Say 5 to 8MediumPreparing Tender (covering Tender drawings and specifications, technical specifications, Material brands, Quality standards, and so on) say 50 to 74Say 5 to 8MediumIssuing Structural stability certificateSay above 75Say above 8HighMaking Cost estimates for structureSay above 75Say above 8HighIssuing “As-built drawings” after the structure is complete and approved.Say 1-49Say 1-4lowAnd so on in case of more number of design activities The impact scores or exposure scores indicated in the above template are hypothetical and only for the reader’s understanding. The scores may vary considerably as per the actual situation at the designer's 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 and 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. “
Risk assessments: - At the organization level- Design Functions- Design of Architect, Interior designing, and Design of MEP
Activities for Risk assessment The ultimate objective of risk assessment in design functions is to identify such risk occurrences, analyse these, and initiate countermeasures for preventing risks.The activities include i. Designate Risks Assessment team (CFT-Cross-functional team)ii. Identify aspects that can contribute to organization-level risk mentioned iii. Design risk assessment templates for the organization-level risk. iv. Software programming of risk templates. v. Populating the “organization level Risks” template by the design functions in consultation with CFT 1.1 Organisation-level risks – Developing risk assessment templates The design of the risk template ought to be comprehensive and should capture the following in a document. i)Risk statements developed by each Head of Department-HOD of the design functions i. e. Chief Architect or & Chief Interior designer or & Chief MEP engineer as applicable vis a vis the aspects such as:· End customer’s changing needs · Competitor’s offerings · Statutory policies· Changes in economic, political, and social environments· IT (Hardware, software, network) outages impacting design delivery, etc. ii) Thereafter, each risk statement is to be analyzed to capture the likely adverse impact of each risk on the organization iii) After analysis of impact, HODs need to capture (in the same template) countermeasures, Timelines for implementation & responsibility for implementing countermeasures. This may require dialoguing/interfacing with HOD of other functions like sales, projects, purchases, and contracts, Finance & legal, IT, etc. iv) Top management comments on risk impact and countermeasures identified in the template. iii)Accordingly, categorizing the risk as High or medium, or low 1.2 Activities that can adversely impact business§ Inappropriate levels /positions of CFT members vis-à-vis “Design functions” and consequent inadequate skills for comprehending organization risks § Inadequate participation by a nominated member of “Design functions” in deliberation meetings of CFT for identifying organization risks. § Inappropriate software development and workflow of “organization level risks” template (standard for all functions) making risk capturing cumbersome and inefficient § Non-comprehensive review by CFT of all aspects vis-à-vis “Design functions -” that can contribute to Organisation risks in the Risk template resulting in inaccurate/non-comprehensive capturing of the following: * § Risk statements § Risk Analysis and implications· Inaccurate classification by CFT of risk at the organization level (High, Medium, or Low) vis-à-vis “Design functions” due to improper risk analysis and implications *· Inadequate time commitment by top management to review Risk template developed by CFT vis-à-vis “Design functions” and hence non-comprehensive or not accurate capturing of countermeasures *· Non-periodic/non-timely review of previously populated risk template in “Design functions to incorporate changes in business environments like customer demands, statutory changes, economy changes, and so on *The above-listed activities, that are marked* reflect activities that can have adverse statutory implications. Handbook of the author A template illustrating an approach for classifying risks as High, Medium, or Low at the organization level is included in chapter 10 (annex 13C) in the handbook of the author and titled” ETHICS in the real estate and hospitality industry, Volume 1- Architectural, Interior design, and MEP services “