Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Snaptoggles
The other day I was tinkering with a Snaptoggle in the shop. Made by Toggler, this is a beefy version of the common drywall toggle hardware. While this version of hardware has never been my perferred type, these are specified to hold well over 300 pounds in 5/8" drywall, making them a nice option for hanging TV's or other heavy object in your wall when you can't tie directly into the studs.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Flex Chrome
While looking for some options for flexible chrome trim I ran across this
site. Flex Chrom is geared towards customizing hot-rods. I ordered the sample kit and was pleased by the selection. There is a wide variety - and all pieces adhere via VHB tape. Many profiles also bend in multiple ways, which can be tricky with molding.
Outwater also has some flexible metallic t-moldings, which are nice because you have a better anchor.
site. Flex Chrom is geared towards customizing hot-rods. I ordered the sample kit and was pleased by the selection. There is a wide variety - and all pieces adhere via VHB tape. Many profiles also bend in multiple ways, which can be tricky with molding.
Outwater also has some flexible metallic t-moldings, which are nice because you have a better anchor.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Commodity Items
The last lecture of my PM class (it went fast, and there are items I am still absorbing, so I am sure I will post more, but I do wish the class was more thorough – but I suppose there is much more to project management that you can gain from 10 weeks) discussed a variety of contracts / contract management. Of course while discussing this and the procurement process, awarding work based on the lowest bid came up. In the lecture – it was stated that this really only works best if it is a commodity. But I think that is a little too basic.
This would work if you were requesting bids, for example, on Dutchboy paint, Duraclean, Satin, Color “X”, 1 gallon. It is a specific product, with specific qualifications – and at that point the lowest price would be fine. But you can’t just say buy the cheapest paint you can find in “X” color. Obviously there are many cost differences – sheen, quality, binder, warranty. Sheen price differences occur even within the same brand. And the $9 a gallon paint just isn’t as nice as the more expensive stuff. It doesn’t cover as well, it doesn’t “flow” the same, its more chalky, it doesn’t clean as easy…. And if paint isn’t a commodity…..
There are thousands of examples – Dove Chocolate verses a Hershey bar. White Castle burgers versus epic burger or Max and Ermas. Papa John’s pizza versus my favorite pizza from Waldos in Kansas City, Mo, in which every time I make the 8 hour drive back to KC is the first place I visit. Freud may have said sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, but he obviously wasn’t purchasing one.
Plus, none of my above comments really deal with anything except for the product. Service for example is hard to quantify. It’s hard for a company to sell, it’s hard to “see”, and its something that you don’t want to pay for except for when you need it. For instance, the last time I bought tires for my car I went to a cheap place. Ever since then I have gotten crappy service – and when I replace my tires this time around I will probably go someplace that has better service.
Where I work now as a project manager, this discussion is relevant to me because my price for a “product” (a set, exhibit, etc) can’t really be compared based on price alone. The specifications are never thorough enough to look at my companies price, and another shops price and assume that both are not only apples, but granny smith apples from Michigan, picked at the best time of the year, shipped carefully, and free of pesticides.
From the theatre side, there are two different viewpoints. Some TD’s are purchasing their scenery (opera, ballet, broadway etc), and thus need to understand what goes into the bid & the qualifications to be able to evaluate the bids. The more specific the request is the better. But even for the average shop guy, its worth remembering that sometimes things are cheap for a reason – and sometimes that is okay, and sometimes it’s not.
This would work if you were requesting bids, for example, on Dutchboy paint, Duraclean, Satin, Color “X”, 1 gallon. It is a specific product, with specific qualifications – and at that point the lowest price would be fine. But you can’t just say buy the cheapest paint you can find in “X” color. Obviously there are many cost differences – sheen, quality, binder, warranty. Sheen price differences occur even within the same brand. And the $9 a gallon paint just isn’t as nice as the more expensive stuff. It doesn’t cover as well, it doesn’t “flow” the same, its more chalky, it doesn’t clean as easy…. And if paint isn’t a commodity…..
There are thousands of examples – Dove Chocolate verses a Hershey bar. White Castle burgers versus epic burger or Max and Ermas. Papa John’s pizza versus my favorite pizza from Waldos in Kansas City, Mo, in which every time I make the 8 hour drive back to KC is the first place I visit. Freud may have said sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, but he obviously wasn’t purchasing one.
Plus, none of my above comments really deal with anything except for the product. Service for example is hard to quantify. It’s hard for a company to sell, it’s hard to “see”, and its something that you don’t want to pay for except for when you need it. For instance, the last time I bought tires for my car I went to a cheap place. Ever since then I have gotten crappy service – and when I replace my tires this time around I will probably go someplace that has better service.
Where I work now as a project manager, this discussion is relevant to me because my price for a “product” (a set, exhibit, etc) can’t really be compared based on price alone. The specifications are never thorough enough to look at my companies price, and another shops price and assume that both are not only apples, but granny smith apples from Michigan, picked at the best time of the year, shipped carefully, and free of pesticides.
From the theatre side, there are two different viewpoints. Some TD’s are purchasing their scenery (opera, ballet, broadway etc), and thus need to understand what goes into the bid & the qualifications to be able to evaluate the bids. The more specific the request is the better. But even for the average shop guy, its worth remembering that sometimes things are cheap for a reason – and sometimes that is okay, and sometimes it’s not.
Saturday, June 4, 2011
Design and Performance Specifications
One of my PM class lectures discussed design specifications and that the buyer assumes the risk because they have specified the equipment. On the other side, if the buyer defines the performance desired, the contractor assumes more risk. An IT example was given where all of the IT parts were specified, but perhaps the system as a whole didn’t work well because of unforeseen conflicts.
I mostly receive a combination of the two when I need to provide pricing. The client may provide a variety of design specifications (almost always in terms of how something should look, unless we are doing the design, and sometimes with actual pieces of equipment), but also include the performance expectations. Awareness of performance expectations is inescapable since we are often providing labor to make an event happen or to install a working exhibit.
Almost always in most RFP or RFQ’s is a statement somewhere that despite any owner suggested products, it is the shop that is responsible for fully meeting performance expectations.
First, this can be tricky, because sometimes it isn’t evident that something that was owner specified won’t work until significantly into the process. At that point, a lot of various resources have been consumed. Many times when this happened it was a project that has a decent portion of R&D. When I worked on the Sunlight part of the Science Storms at the Museum of Science and Industry, the owner specified a specific light fixture hung in the ceiling to focus on solar panels on the main floor. In the advent that the day was cloudy, these lights would turn on, allowing the solar panels to operate and allow slot cars to race along a track. The exhibit had a variety of performance and design characteristics, and a lot of R&D to determine what would work. Since the area where the solar panels fit where part of the design, this wasn’t easily changeable. While the sun easily powered the cars through the solar panels, the lights at 70’ (ceiling to panels) would not. This led to the eventual repositioning of the lighting instruments on the lower part of the exhibit. This required a compromise between us as the fabricator and the museum, and was based on the fact that despite best intentions of how something could work, this was what it took to make the exhibit function as required. While we did get an eventual compromise, getting to this point was a costly endeavor.
The above example was a learning experience for both my company (and myself), and for the museum. However, sometimes we see projects come in where the design specs and the performance specs do not integrate. I think these can be the most challenging to bid. You can’t ignore your knowledge, but if you price the project based on what you know will need to be done to make it function – the price may likely be much higher. Perhaps the simple option is to not bid. The other option is to care with the client the issues – but here the risk is that you are potentially sharing proprietary knowledge. I have seen a number of cases where we come in with a technique that is proprietary, only to see the client share that information with other bidders to gain a price advantage.
Finally, while we have taken on projects were we have offered the client what they asked for – and given them a product that was what they purchased, in the long run, no one exited the project happy. We didn’t make a product we could feel proud about, the client paid (what they felt was) a lot of money for an end product that met design specs, but not performance spec. Inevitably the client wants us in the end to take care of the poor performance because it has to be our fault – it couldn’t possibly be their design. Sometimes we can do a change order, and at least minimize losses, but that will still make the client unhappy.
Thoughts about how to manage the conflict between these two types of specifications or how you have dealt with it in the past?
I mostly receive a combination of the two when I need to provide pricing. The client may provide a variety of design specifications (almost always in terms of how something should look, unless we are doing the design, and sometimes with actual pieces of equipment), but also include the performance expectations. Awareness of performance expectations is inescapable since we are often providing labor to make an event happen or to install a working exhibit.
Almost always in most RFP or RFQ’s is a statement somewhere that despite any owner suggested products, it is the shop that is responsible for fully meeting performance expectations.
First, this can be tricky, because sometimes it isn’t evident that something that was owner specified won’t work until significantly into the process. At that point, a lot of various resources have been consumed. Many times when this happened it was a project that has a decent portion of R&D. When I worked on the Sunlight part of the Science Storms at the Museum of Science and Industry, the owner specified a specific light fixture hung in the ceiling to focus on solar panels on the main floor. In the advent that the day was cloudy, these lights would turn on, allowing the solar panels to operate and allow slot cars to race along a track. The exhibit had a variety of performance and design characteristics, and a lot of R&D to determine what would work. Since the area where the solar panels fit where part of the design, this wasn’t easily changeable. While the sun easily powered the cars through the solar panels, the lights at 70’ (ceiling to panels) would not. This led to the eventual repositioning of the lighting instruments on the lower part of the exhibit. This required a compromise between us as the fabricator and the museum, and was based on the fact that despite best intentions of how something could work, this was what it took to make the exhibit function as required. While we did get an eventual compromise, getting to this point was a costly endeavor.
The above example was a learning experience for both my company (and myself), and for the museum. However, sometimes we see projects come in where the design specs and the performance specs do not integrate. I think these can be the most challenging to bid. You can’t ignore your knowledge, but if you price the project based on what you know will need to be done to make it function – the price may likely be much higher. Perhaps the simple option is to not bid. The other option is to care with the client the issues – but here the risk is that you are potentially sharing proprietary knowledge. I have seen a number of cases where we come in with a technique that is proprietary, only to see the client share that information with other bidders to gain a price advantage.
Finally, while we have taken on projects were we have offered the client what they asked for – and given them a product that was what they purchased, in the long run, no one exited the project happy. We didn’t make a product we could feel proud about, the client paid (what they felt was) a lot of money for an end product that met design specs, but not performance spec. Inevitably the client wants us in the end to take care of the poor performance because it has to be our fault – it couldn’t possibly be their design. Sometimes we can do a change order, and at least minimize losses, but that will still make the client unhappy.
Thoughts about how to manage the conflict between these two types of specifications or how you have dealt with it in the past?
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Mathmatical Decision Making
It may or may not be clear in my "blogger identity" that I am / can be a compulsive planner. This could / can be a negative - but can also be a positive, considering that planning part of my responsibility. i am also very interested in problem solving, and the techniques/process involved in solving problems.
Thus, it was interesting when an article called
Weighted Averages Method of Problem Solving came up in my project management class. I have used alot of techniques, but not this one. When planning vacations / expenses / budgets / shows, I often use hard numbers. Some problems warrant using the first, best option, then a re-evaluation as the problem evolves. Obviously problem solving is different in the planning stage than the doing stage.
But when planning, and using hard numbers - I have often been faced with a scenario where the numbers don't really tell the whole story. For instance, when going to USITT how important is it to stay at the conference hotel, versus another hotel in walking distance. A hotel in driving difference? That means weighing driving versus flying (I've looked at buses and trains, but they never seem to be good options for me). If you fly - and want to drive- then there is a rental car involved. How does that weigh in? All of these variables have costs which I can determine fairly accurately (I know the price difference in hotels, an estimate of gas & mileage, airfare, etc). What can't be calculated is the gut feeling or importance of where you stay. Staying further away adds a commute. perhaps having no transportation in a city w/o a good public transportation system will suck. Perhaps you have friends to visit, or want to see other things. Perhaps you want to entertain in your room or hotel. Perhaps there are evening events. There are situational issues to be considered above and beyond the mere cost.
In a production, a price point might point you in one direction of fabrication, but perhaps another alternative has better benefits that aren't financially apparent - perhaps it is more "green" or recyclable, or able to be reused in future productions.
While using weighted averages seems an obvious way of sorting this all out, I had never thought about it before. The article above gives a good introduction and explains how to use the process.
The second article,kepner tregoe Decision making offers a fuller approach to problem solving and also used weighted averages, and is worth the read also.
Finally, at the other end of the spectrum is the 70% Rule:
While this is used in a military context, when lives can be at stake, and what we do is rarely life critical, we will often operate in situations where we don't have all of the necessary information, and must make a decision and move forward before it is possible to completely analyze every scenario.
Thus, it was interesting when an article called
Weighted Averages Method of Problem Solving came up in my project management class. I have used alot of techniques, but not this one. When planning vacations / expenses / budgets / shows, I often use hard numbers. Some problems warrant using the first, best option, then a re-evaluation as the problem evolves. Obviously problem solving is different in the planning stage than the doing stage.
But when planning, and using hard numbers - I have often been faced with a scenario where the numbers don't really tell the whole story. For instance, when going to USITT how important is it to stay at the conference hotel, versus another hotel in walking distance. A hotel in driving difference? That means weighing driving versus flying (I've looked at buses and trains, but they never seem to be good options for me). If you fly - and want to drive- then there is a rental car involved. How does that weigh in? All of these variables have costs which I can determine fairly accurately (I know the price difference in hotels, an estimate of gas & mileage, airfare, etc). What can't be calculated is the gut feeling or importance of where you stay. Staying further away adds a commute. perhaps having no transportation in a city w/o a good public transportation system will suck. Perhaps you have friends to visit, or want to see other things. Perhaps you want to entertain in your room or hotel. Perhaps there are evening events. There are situational issues to be considered above and beyond the mere cost.
In a production, a price point might point you in one direction of fabrication, but perhaps another alternative has better benefits that aren't financially apparent - perhaps it is more "green" or recyclable, or able to be reused in future productions.
While using weighted averages seems an obvious way of sorting this all out, I had never thought about it before. The article above gives a good introduction and explains how to use the process.
The second article,kepner tregoe Decision making offers a fuller approach to problem solving and also used weighted averages, and is worth the read also.
Finally, at the other end of the spectrum is the 70% Rule:
This Rule states that if you have 70% of the data and have completed 70% of the analysis and if 70% of your gut feeling or instinct is in agreement with the first two, then go ahead and make your decision. In other words, you have a greater likelihood of making the best decision by using the 70% Rule than you would have had, if you had not used the 70% Rule.
While this is used in a military context, when lives can be at stake, and what we do is rarely life critical, we will often operate in situations where we don't have all of the necessary information, and must make a decision and move forward before it is possible to completely analyze every scenario.
Monday, May 16, 2011
Budget Conversations
In my PM class, one of my classmates shared a link about How to Finesse Budget Discussions. While as a TD in a theatrical situation, some of these options don't fit, the situation is still ripe for a scope to creep beyond the budget (time or materials) allotted for the show. It happens with the best of intentions - we all want the show to be a success. The range of options and the sampling I think could be effect techniques for theatre.
By giving options you can show how increasing the level of detail increases costs. However, we still have to be careful - a current production I am working on includes a caboose (a whole train really) - the caboose has vertical stripes. (the bigger story is that I interpreted the striped as engraved groove & my coworker thought they were dimensional (proud) trim - two different scenarios). It was offered that these could be painted instead of dimensional. If they were proud dimensional trim strips, you would save material costs by eliminating the trim. If they were grooved you would save time making the grooves. My vote is for grooves though - the cnc router can cut the panels to size and groove the plywood in 15 minutes. If they were painted only the painter would have to measure everything out and mask off the surrounding areas & ultimately spend more time than simply following the groove with the brush. Even the difference in proud trim versus paint is a marginal trade-off to me. If the lines weren't regular, or weren't prefect allowing the use of a paint stick. This leads into sampling - item A perhaps is a straight edge with brush stroke, item B is a groove and paint, and item C is an applied piece of painted trim. Each one of these would have different cost implication, especially once extrapolated into a square foot cost over a large area.
By giving options you can show how increasing the level of detail increases costs. However, we still have to be careful - a current production I am working on includes a caboose (a whole train really) - the caboose has vertical stripes. (the bigger story is that I interpreted the striped as engraved groove & my coworker thought they were dimensional (proud) trim - two different scenarios). It was offered that these could be painted instead of dimensional. If they were proud dimensional trim strips, you would save material costs by eliminating the trim. If they were grooved you would save time making the grooves. My vote is for grooves though - the cnc router can cut the panels to size and groove the plywood in 15 minutes. If they were painted only the painter would have to measure everything out and mask off the surrounding areas & ultimately spend more time than simply following the groove with the brush. Even the difference in proud trim versus paint is a marginal trade-off to me. If the lines weren't regular, or weren't prefect allowing the use of a paint stick. This leads into sampling - item A perhaps is a straight edge with brush stroke, item B is a groove and paint, and item C is an applied piece of painted trim. Each one of these would have different cost implication, especially once extrapolated into a square foot cost over a large area.
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Pert Time Calculations
Pert Charts are one of the tools PM's or TD's can use to track projects. While usually used for large and complex projects (For instance Disney could use this system while designing a new ride through implementation and final opening). Pert charts (as does critical path charts) focus on time, not cost as a project driver. Once all activities are entered, with time durations, and predecessors or successors, you can easily see the length of the project by seeing the critical path through the activities.
The critical path will be the path through the path that is the longest duration. There may be a variety of projects that need to be complete prior to project close, but sometimes they do not directly affect project length. There is a lot of information amount PERT charts, CRM, Gantt charts and network diagramming on the web, all of it much more thoroughly written then this so I would encourage you to do additional research.
When doing a PERT, Optimistic time (the minimum time needed) Pessimistic time (Worst case scenario) and Most likely time (best guess) is estimated for each task. What I just learned was how that gets translated into the Expected time duration:
Expected time=(Optimistic Time +4 X Most Likely Time + Pessimistic Time) / 6
Thus, the weighted average of the times creates a realistic duration. Since I usually do all of my estimating in excel workbooks, setting up these PERT calculations would be fairly simple (though perhaps tedious) to implement. It would be an interesting exercise to see if this ultimately leads to an increase in accuracy large enough to account for the additional estimating time.
One can argue that historical data and experience alone lead to better estimates, and to a certain extent that is true, but there are many variables that can affect the actual duration of any task.
Where I currently work we base our hours estimate on skilled labor doing the work. In many cases it is skilled labor that does the work, and the estimates can be fairly accurate. If the shop is full of work, and additional crew is hired, unskilled work (or lower skilled workers) may be put on the job, but their labor rate is also lower – so while the hours calculation will be wrong, the assumption is that the total amount being billed for the hours would work out due to the differences in labor rates. Sometimes this is true, and sometimes it is not. Historically we used to estimate based on who was slated to be assigned to the work. This lead to specific estimates based on the jobs leads capabilities. These estimates could be a little more specific, but were not generalizable, and were more time consuming. And despite being more specific were not any more accurate in the long run. Since we track the hours estimated vs. used, as well as the cost of labor estimated vs. used, it is interesting to see how these numbers can play out.
The critical path will be the path through the path that is the longest duration. There may be a variety of projects that need to be complete prior to project close, but sometimes they do not directly affect project length. There is a lot of information amount PERT charts, CRM, Gantt charts and network diagramming on the web, all of it much more thoroughly written then this so I would encourage you to do additional research.
When doing a PERT, Optimistic time (the minimum time needed) Pessimistic time (Worst case scenario) and Most likely time (best guess) is estimated for each task. What I just learned was how that gets translated into the Expected time duration:
Expected time=(Optimistic Time +4 X Most Likely Time + Pessimistic Time) / 6
Thus, the weighted average of the times creates a realistic duration. Since I usually do all of my estimating in excel workbooks, setting up these PERT calculations would be fairly simple (though perhaps tedious) to implement. It would be an interesting exercise to see if this ultimately leads to an increase in accuracy large enough to account for the additional estimating time.
One can argue that historical data and experience alone lead to better estimates, and to a certain extent that is true, but there are many variables that can affect the actual duration of any task.
Where I currently work we base our hours estimate on skilled labor doing the work. In many cases it is skilled labor that does the work, and the estimates can be fairly accurate. If the shop is full of work, and additional crew is hired, unskilled work (or lower skilled workers) may be put on the job, but their labor rate is also lower – so while the hours calculation will be wrong, the assumption is that the total amount being billed for the hours would work out due to the differences in labor rates. Sometimes this is true, and sometimes it is not. Historically we used to estimate based on who was slated to be assigned to the work. This lead to specific estimates based on the jobs leads capabilities. These estimates could be a little more specific, but were not generalizable, and were more time consuming. And despite being more specific were not any more accurate in the long run. Since we track the hours estimated vs. used, as well as the cost of labor estimated vs. used, it is interesting to see how these numbers can play out.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Unmanila Rope
UnManila Rope is a product I am using on a current project. While it will degrade under sunlight, it was important to look like authentic nautical rope, without splintering like hemp or manilla. While I wouldn't consider this for rigging, and it great for decoration, and it comes in a variety of sizes.
Monday, May 2, 2011
Project Management Skills
In many ways, the lists are similar from being a TD to being a PM. Since I am a management focused TD (as opposed to a master carpenter style TD), my views are skewed accordingly…
The largest differences I see is that dealing with clients is different (in some ways) than dealing with designers (or internal clients, as a PM text would say), and the need to write a proposal or scope of work that clearly defines what you are providing to your client and for what price.
In terms of technical skill there are some differences. I have always believed that the TD, by nature of their responsibilities and skills, is a management position, and therefore should understand all of the technical areas, needs, safety requirements, and so forth (and have the appropriate certifications), but they aren’t & shouldn’t be the best welder in the shop. You can’t spend 40 hours a week on a diversified set of job tasks and be better than someone who spends 40 hours a week welding. In project management, I feel like this is the same, but even more so – the department heads, have been doing their jobs longer than I have, and have very specific skills. I have a generalists knowledge – I have to rely on, trust, negotiate and motivate them to seek out the most efficient processes, and to innovate as needed.
Otherwise, there are the typical skills: drafting, drawing, communication (verbal, written, illustrative), problem solving, time management, stress management, budgetary, computer literacy, adaptability, flexibility and versatility.
Also, there are management skills: conflict resolution, negotiation, planning, human resources, legal issues (fair employment, sexual harassment, osha requirements, life safety codes), organization, and so forth.
Finally, there are leadership skills: being able to see details, yet see the large picture. Being able to forecast what’s coming and prepare. Manage change. Motivation of those around you. Create a culture of trust, respect, innovation, planned risk, and celebrate success. Provide an organizational structure that works, a humane place to work, meaning in the work place, and navigate office politics.
Of course the above is my opinions, and abbreviated at that. Many books are written about much of what I have stated above. What are your thoughts?
The largest differences I see is that dealing with clients is different (in some ways) than dealing with designers (or internal clients, as a PM text would say), and the need to write a proposal or scope of work that clearly defines what you are providing to your client and for what price.
In terms of technical skill there are some differences. I have always believed that the TD, by nature of their responsibilities and skills, is a management position, and therefore should understand all of the technical areas, needs, safety requirements, and so forth (and have the appropriate certifications), but they aren’t & shouldn’t be the best welder in the shop. You can’t spend 40 hours a week on a diversified set of job tasks and be better than someone who spends 40 hours a week welding. In project management, I feel like this is the same, but even more so – the department heads, have been doing their jobs longer than I have, and have very specific skills. I have a generalists knowledge – I have to rely on, trust, negotiate and motivate them to seek out the most efficient processes, and to innovate as needed.
Otherwise, there are the typical skills: drafting, drawing, communication (verbal, written, illustrative), problem solving, time management, stress management, budgetary, computer literacy, adaptability, flexibility and versatility.
Also, there are management skills: conflict resolution, negotiation, planning, human resources, legal issues (fair employment, sexual harassment, osha requirements, life safety codes), organization, and so forth.
Finally, there are leadership skills: being able to see details, yet see the large picture. Being able to forecast what’s coming and prepare. Manage change. Motivation of those around you. Create a culture of trust, respect, innovation, planned risk, and celebrate success. Provide an organizational structure that works, a humane place to work, meaning in the work place, and navigate office politics.
Of course the above is my opinions, and abbreviated at that. Many books are written about much of what I have stated above. What are your thoughts?
Friday, April 29, 2011
Project Management Organization Style
I am occasionally asked about the differences between being a PM and being a TD. There is a large difference that I usually don’t discuss, but that it important.
In a traditional TD position, the ATD, Forman, and crew are either directly hired by the TD, or are hired with input from the TD, and report to the TD as their direct supervisor. Even in a scene shop were multiple shows are being built at the same time, the TD balances the load between the shows needs and the staff directly. It depends on the theatre if the TD also controls paints or props, etc, or if that falls to the production manager, but it is a fairly linear chain of command.
As a project manager I don’t have direct control of the shop. There is a director of production, as well as department heads in Carpentry, Metals, Paints, and electrics. When I have a project that is in process the department heads assign me a job lead, chosen based on the type of project, shop schedule, availability, and so forth. This project lead reports to me, but also reports to the Dept. Head. Technical solutions are developed with the PM, job lead, and the department head. While the crews are committed to get every project done successfully, the department heads have to balance all of the jobs on the floor, not just mine. That may mean that while I would like item A to get built on Monday, if there is a more pressing need on a different project, my crew might be pulled off to help another job.
There are multiple things to consider here that is affected by this set up. First, multiple people (PM, Dept. Heads, job leads) need to be in on decision making, and kept aware or schedule updates, changes, and other information. Secondly, you may need to negotiate to get someone on your crew, or the job lead the help they need to complete on time. This is particularly true if the ship or installation date is far in the future as the shop can sometimes focus on the next show out the door. It also affects your leadership style as you can’t micro manage the shop floor, and you have don’t necessarily have direct authority. While the PM is not “powerless”, the PM’s management style, influence and reputation makes a difference in how willing people are to work with you and to work collaboratively.
In a traditional TD position, the ATD, Forman, and crew are either directly hired by the TD, or are hired with input from the TD, and report to the TD as their direct supervisor. Even in a scene shop were multiple shows are being built at the same time, the TD balances the load between the shows needs and the staff directly. It depends on the theatre if the TD also controls paints or props, etc, or if that falls to the production manager, but it is a fairly linear chain of command.
As a project manager I don’t have direct control of the shop. There is a director of production, as well as department heads in Carpentry, Metals, Paints, and electrics. When I have a project that is in process the department heads assign me a job lead, chosen based on the type of project, shop schedule, availability, and so forth. This project lead reports to me, but also reports to the Dept. Head. Technical solutions are developed with the PM, job lead, and the department head. While the crews are committed to get every project done successfully, the department heads have to balance all of the jobs on the floor, not just mine. That may mean that while I would like item A to get built on Monday, if there is a more pressing need on a different project, my crew might be pulled off to help another job.
There are multiple things to consider here that is affected by this set up. First, multiple people (PM, Dept. Heads, job leads) need to be in on decision making, and kept aware or schedule updates, changes, and other information. Secondly, you may need to negotiate to get someone on your crew, or the job lead the help they need to complete on time. This is particularly true if the ship or installation date is far in the future as the shop can sometimes focus on the next show out the door. It also affects your leadership style as you can’t micro manage the shop floor, and you have don’t necessarily have direct authority. While the PM is not “powerless”, the PM’s management style, influence and reputation makes a difference in how willing people are to work with you and to work collaboratively.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
