>
>>
>> "chickenwing" <bigbadbarry@adelphia.net>
>> ???????:1134445803.924359.118690@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> gy wrote:
>>>> Big Construction Companies mean Big Problem in our Construction
>>>> Industry.
>>>>
>>>> A big problem in our construction industry is that our government
>>>> allows the
>>>> construction companies to grow to unreasonably large sizes.
>>>
>>> I would not want the gov't to put a cap on how large a company can
>>> grow, to me this is anti-growth. A poorly run company is not poorly run
>>> because of it's size.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "sanjian" <millerkb@vt.edu> ???????:dnk5fm$t3i$1@solaris.cc.vt.edu...
>>> gy wrote:
>>>> Big Construction Companies mean Big Problem in our Construction
>>>> Industry.
>>>
>>> Ok, I can't touch this from a construction point of view, since I know
>>> only a semester's worth of construction, which is probably equivalent to
>>> five days real-world experience. However, I do have a heavy
>>> shipbuilding
>>> background, and can address it from a corperate point of view.
>>>
>>>> A big problem in our construction industry is that our government
>>>> allows the construction companies to grow to unreasonably large sizes.
>>>
>>> If they are unreasonably large, then they will fail, in a free-market
>>> system. However, if they are well organized, then they can grow to a
>>> fairly large size.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The property and construction market of Hong Kong is not a free market.
>> The
>> government has been controlling the supply to extort as much money as
>> possible from the new homebuyers. The new homebuyers have no choice
>> except
>> paying high prices for their new home, some of which may be of very low
>> quality. Construction companies build low quality buildings and carry out
>> works in unsafe manner. The government allows them to do so. Of course,
>> it
>> would do some superficial shows to please the political parties and the
>> public. Safety measures are implemented only where and when they can be
>> seen
>> by the relevant inspectors. Many engineers are shaking every day, because
>> they dare not blow the whistle, as it is very likely that they would lose
>> their jobs if they do so. (Some senior personnel of the big construction
>> companies say that the engineers should blow the whistle, but they cannot
>> tell what can be done to deal with the problem effectively if they do not
>> blow the whistle.) Bear in mind that construction works are labour
>> intensive
>> and therefore perfect monitoring of the works is not possible. The
>> government and the engineers of course understand what safety measures
>> are
>> necessary and they have perfect knowledge about the costs for such safety
>> measures. With such perfect knowledge, the government turns a blind eye
>> to
>> unsafe practice so that their relatives or affiliates, who run
>> construction
>> companies can save more money. Those who have carried out demolition
>> works
>> would know that there are cases, in which only about 80% or less of the
>> steel reinforcements as per drawings of the floor slabs of the buildings
>> to
>> be demolished existed within the slabs.
>>
>> gy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> It is quite simple to explain the problem with an example. Suppose a
>>>> construction company is currently carrying out construction works for
>>>> 50 different construction sites and it has one director (Here we call
>>>> him the boss.), a general manager and ten project managers working
>>>> under him for overseeing the construction works. As the boss and the
>>>> general manager have higher authority than the project managers under
>>>> them, they can override any decision of the project managers if they
>>>> have disagreement with respect to certain issues. Actually, the boss
>>>> has nearly the absolute power, as he can control his staff with his
>>>
>>> Any boss who wants to remain solvent will know when to use that power,
>>> and
>>> when to delegate it. If not, his company's bottom line will suffer.
>>>
>>>> money. Suppose further that the boss and the general manager work 6
>>>> days per week and 9 hours per day. (It is more likely than not that
>>>> their actual working hours is longer than that.) Simple arithematic
>>>> tells us that the boss and the general manager would only have
>>>> approximately one hour (or one and a half hour, if they are willing
>>>> to work harder) available for "understanding and monitoring" the
>>>> activities of each site per week. Under such situation, how likely
>>>> is it that the boss or the general manager can make good decision?
>>>
>>> They don't.
>>
>>
>> But, they can. For public interest, we must try our best to minimize such
>> risks. Construction works are related to the safety of every one of us,
>> unless you are happy to live under trees. As such, the government must
>> make
>> its best endeavors to enact laws to improve such safety.
>>
>> gy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> They run the company, not the sites. I would not expect Ron
>>> Sugar (who we didn't ever refer to as "Sugar-Daddy," no, not ever) of
>>> Northrop Grumman to come out to Hampton Roads to tell Tom Schivlebein,
>>> the
>>> head of NG's Newport News Shipbuilding sector how to do his job.
>>> Otherwise, there would be no need to have a sector president. And I
>>> would
>>> not expect Tom to tell any of his project managers how to do their jobs.
>>> They were put in that position because they were the most knowlegeable
>>> and
>>> capable for that position. He runs the sector, they run the projects.
>>> And that's why NGNN is the best shipyard (though Electric Boat gives us
>>> a
>>> good run for our money, but you didn't hear that from me).
>>>
>>>> Unless they are supermen with supernatural power (Actually, some
>>>> would pose as such.), they may not even be able to read through the
>>>> relevant documents for the works (There are 50 DIFFERENT sets of
>>>> project documents includings drawings, amended drawings, contract
>>>> documents including main contracts and sub-contracts and
>>>> correspondence that can easily fill up any office etc.) for 50
>>>> different construction projects and they have to spare time for
>>>
>>> Why would they? That's not their job. Do you think Ron Sugar read
>>> every
>>> work package I wrote for every pump that got replaced on the Enterprise,
>>> let alone all the ones on the Ike and every other project in the yard,
>>> as
>>> well as everything that went on in other sectors? He runs the company,
>>> other people run the projects.
>>>
>>>> tendering for new jobs, even though they sign many of the documents
>>>> willy-nilly with a "gentle" smile. What if they make the wrong
>>>> decisions and override the correct decisions of their project
>>>> managers?
>>>
>>> Then they're idiots.
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, they are idiots. But these idiots can survive, because the
>> government
>> turns a blind eye to their low quality works and unsafe practice. Many
>> directors of the construction companies in Hong Kong are without degree
>> or
>> even diploma qualifications.
>>
>> gy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Either that, or they need to get project managers they
>>> can rely on. If they think of their project managers as babysitters for
>>> subcontractors or trades, then they're wasting time, money, knowledge,
>>> and
>>> skill. And, if that's the standard in the industry, then it's an
>>> institutional problem, but a problem none the less.
>>>
>>> And if they've got reliable project managers, and they're
>>> second-guessing
>>> them, then they deserve to have their profits devistated by their own
>>> stupidity.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The successful and reliable project managers of many construction
>> companies,
>> including the big ones, have duties as follows:
>>
>> 1. To carry out construction works in unsafe manner to save costs and
>> 2. To assist their account departments to fabricate project documents for
>> tax evasion purposes and
>> 3. To invent all kind of excuses to withhold or delay the payments to
>> their
>> sub-contractors.
>>
>> gy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> Clearly there is collusion between the government and the big
>>>> companies.
>>>
>>> So... you're saying that big construction and the government are
>>> conspiring to reduce the profits of big construction? And, anyways,
>>> this
>>> is your first mention of government, how do you make the leap from the
>>> inefficiency of micromanagment to evidence of collusion?
>>>
>>>> Greed of the big construction companies is one of the main reasons
>>>> for the problems in our construction industry.
>>>
>>> I think you've got much bigger problems than greed if people are
>>> conspiring with the government to lower their own profits.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
|
|