One of the more interesting things about fiber construction is that two programs can be building the exact same network and have completely different outcomes. They use the same materials, hire similar contractors, follow the same specifications, and work under the same customer. One is program moves steadily from kickoff to completion while another seems to spend most of its time fighting delays, resolving confusion, and recovering from problems that never should have existed in the first place.

When people start looking for the cause, the focus usually turns toward construction.

• Production numbers get reviewed.

• Contractors get evaluated.

• Inspectors become more involved.

• Meetings increase.

• Additional reporting gets created.

Everyone starts looking for a field problem because construction is the most visible part of the project.

Every fiber project is really two systems operating at the same time. The first system is the physical network being built in the field. That is the part everyone sees. The second system is the flow of information required to support all of that work. Questions need answers.

• Permits need approvals.

• Field conflicts need decisions.

• Design revisions need reviews.

• Customers need updates.

• Contractors need direction.

• Schedules need coordination.

The physical construction only moves efficiently when the information supporting it moves efficiently.

What makes these issues difficult to identify is that information problems usually appear as construction problems.

• A crew may be sitting idle waiting for direction.

• A permit may be approved but nobody communicated the approval.

• A field change may have already been discussed but never documented.

• A contractor may be working from an outdated set of plans while another contractor is working from the revised version.

The visible symptom is a construction delay. The actual problem occurred somewhere in the movement of information.

Over the years I have noticed that most of these situations can be traced back to three simple areas, The program never clearly defined:

• who owns the work,

• who has authority to make decisions, or

• how information is supposed to move between people.

Those three items sound simple enough that most people assume they already have them figured out. In reality, they are often the source of some of the biggest problems on a project.

Ownership is usually where the trouble starts. Most organizations do a reasonably good job assigning titles. There is a Project Manager, Construction Manager, Design Lead, Permitting Lead, Inspector, Contractor, and various support roles. Everyone knows what their title is. What often remains unclear is who actually owns specific outcomes once construction begins.

Ownership is different than participation. A utility conflict may involve multiple people. The foreman discovers it. The Construction Manager reviews it. Engineering evaluates possible solutions. The Project Manager becomes involved because of schedule impacts. The customer may need to approve a change. Several people participate in resolving the issue. Ownership answers a different question. Who is responsible for making sure the issue moves from discovery to final resolution?

Without ownership, issues start bouncing between departments.

• Questions get forwarded.

• Meetings get scheduled.

• Conversations continue.

• Work slows down.

• Everyone is involved but nobody is driving the issue toward a conclusion.

Most delays are not caused by a lack of effort. They are caused by a lack of clear ownership. Once nobody is certain who owns the outcome, progress starts depending on whoever happens to push the hardest.

The larger a program becomes, the more expensive this problem gets. On a small project, people can often walk down the hall and solve issues face to face. On a large fiber program there may be multiple contractors, engineering firms, inspectors, utility owners, permitting agencies, municipalities, and customer representatives involved. Small questions quickly become large delays when ownership is not clearly established. A decision that should have taken thirty minutes can easily consume several days simply because people are trying to determine who is responsible for making it.

Even when ownership is defined, another issue often appears. The person responsible for the outcome may not have authority to make the decision necessary to move the work forward. This creates one of the most common bottlenecks in construction. Responsibility and authority become separated.

Think about a Construction Manager. Most organizations expect that person to coordinate crews, manage schedules, solve field problems, maintain production, and keep construction moving. That sounds reasonable until every field adjustment requires approval from someone else. At that point the Construction Manager is no longer managing construction. They are collecting questions and forwarding them up the chain.

The same thing happens throughout a program. An inspector identifies a problem but lacks authority to stop the work. A permitting lead understands how to resolve an issue but cannot approve the solution. A designer knows the field condition requires a revision but must wait for multiple approvals before making the change. None of these people are failing at their jobs. The system simply failed to define what decisions they are allowed to make on their own.

Decision-making authority is important because every approval process carries a cost. Most organizations only think about the direct cost of construction. They track labor, equipment, materials, subcontractors, and production. What often gets overlooked is the cost of waiting. A bore crew waiting for direction still costs money. An inspector standing by while an issue is being reviewed still costs money. Equipment rentals continue. Overhead continues. Project management continues. The meter keeps running whether productive work is occurring or not.

This is why small delays become major schedule problems. Very few projects fail because of one catastrophic event. Most schedule problems are created by hundreds of small delays spread throughout the life of the project. Each individual delay seems minor at the time. Together they create significant impacts to cost, schedule, and customer confidence.

The final piece of the puzzle is communication. This is where many programs unknowingly create confusion for themselves. Nearly every project begins with some form of communication plan. Roles are discussed. Escalation paths are identified. Reporting structures are established. Then construction begins and people start finding shortcuts.

A foreman calls an engineer directly because they worked together on a previous project. A subcontractor sends a text message instead of documenting an issue through the proper channel. An inspector communicates a deficiency to one group but not another. A customer receives an update before construction management receives the same information. None of these actions seem significant by themselves. Most are done with good intentions because people are trying to solve problems quickly.

The problem is that shortcuts create multiple communication paths. Once that happens, information starts moving through different routes at different times. One group receives updated information while another group continues operating from older information. Decisions become fragmented. Conversations become disconnected. Different people begin working from different assumptions. Eventually nobody is completely certain which information is current and which information is outdated.

Information requires a pathway. The strongest programs I have worked on treated information with the same level of discipline they applied to construction. Questions moved through a defined process. Decisions were documented. Updates followed a predictable path. Everyone knew where information originated, where it needed to go, and who was responsible for communicating it.

Many people reading this probably already understand these concepts. The challenge is rarely knowledge. The challenge is maintaining discipline once the pressure of an active project begins building.

• A crew wants a faster answer.

• A manager wants to avoid delays.

• A contractor wants to keep production moving.

• An engineer wants to help solve a problem.

The normal process gets bypassed because it seems faster in the moment. Then it happens again. Eventually the exception becomes the standard operating procedure.

That is usually the point where programs start drifting off course.

• Ownership becomes unclear.

• Decision-making becomes inconsistent.

• Communication starts taking multiple paths.

• Confusion grows slowly enough that people often do not notice it happening.

By the time the symptoms become visible, the program is already spending time and money correcting problems that should have been prevented.

The strongest fiber programs are not the ones with the largest budgets, the most experienced contractors, or the most sophisticated project management software. They are usually the programs where everyone understands what they own, what they can decide, and how information is supposed to move. When those three things remain clear, construction tends to follow. When those three things break down, the project often spends the remainder of its life trying to recover from problems it created for itself.

FIBER DONE RIGHT TRAINING

The things costing you money are avoidable…….

Over the years, I've had the opportunity to work in the field, manage projects, oversee construction, build training programs, and help contractors solve real-world problems on fiber projects.

One thing I've learned is that every contractor's needs are different.

Some need help onboarding new hires. Some need to improve production. Others are focused on reducing utility strikes, improving quality, passing inspections, or getting crews aligned before a major project starts.

Because of that, I offer OSP Fiber Training in several formats:

• Online / Remote Training (1 Hour, 2 Hour, 4 Hour, or Full Day)


• In-Person Training (4 Hour, Full Day, or 2 Day)


• Crew Performance Training


• Inspector Training


• Construction Manager Training


• Project Manager Training
  

  Training can be scheduled around project kickoffs, rain days, weather delays, permit delays, new hire onboarding, safety meetings, or specific challenges your team is facing.
  
  The goal is simple:
  
  • Install more footage
  • Reduce rework
  • Avoid utility strikes
  • Pass inspections
  • Improve profitability
  
  If you're a contractor, ISP, municipality, cooperative, or broadband organization looking to develop your workforce, let’s talk. Click here to schedule a time here
  
  Let's build better crews and lets do it right, Fiber Done Right