Scenario: When one of Ron Coulter’s superintendents told him to expect delays and cost overruns on the Simonson house, he should have listened. The Simonsons had hired an architect to supervise construction, and combined with Mrs. Simonson’s tendency to change her mind, plus a rainy spring and scheduling problems with framing contractors and plumbers, the superintendent predicted an ongoing nightmare.
“It’ll be OK,” Ron told the superintendent. “I know how to work with architects, and we’ll help Mrs. Simonson through the selection process.” He couldn’t do anything about the rainy spring, but problems with contractors tended to work themselves out, and if not, he could find others.
At first, Ron’s optimism seemed justified. Mrs. Simonson had made her initial selections in a timely manner (only a week behind schedule), and the rains let up, allowing work to go forward. The first inkling that things were going wrong was during the second selection meeting. The Simonsons had asked their architect to attend the meeting, and the first thing they brought up was the construction delay. “We’re already a month behind schedule,” they told Ron.
“We are,” he replied. “But that was due to the rain. We’ll make that up now that the weather has turned nice.””You can’t blame it all on the rain,” the architect said. “I went by the site on nice sunny days and there was no one working on the house.”
“That happens,” Ron answered. “It’s the nature of construction. We try to schedule our subcontractors to move the house along as quickly as possible, but when delays occur it sometimes leads to scheduling conflicts. We’ve resolved those and are moving forward.”
But the Simonsons weren’t willing to listen to vague reassurances. And then they started in on the changes they wanted to make to the home, “since the house is delayed anyway.” The architect and client seemed to maintain a united front, with more demands, more complaints, and less cooperation. Ron decided that they had chosen the architect not for his expertise, but for reasons of psychological compatibility. They were all high-control, detail-obsessed individuals with little understanding of their own impact on costs and scheduling. It was all the builder’s fault, and they were going to make sure that he didn’t get away with anything on their project.
At one point in the meeting Ron even offered to let them out of their contract and just pay him only for the work done to date. He would be walking away from the anticipated profit, but if the rest of the project was going to be like this, he didn’t anticipate any profit anyway. But they refused. They just wanted things done “their way.”
What is Ron to do? Can he put his foot down with the clients, in an attempt to wrest control back again? Or will he have to muddle through as best he can, making accommodations along the way and hoping to eke out a tiny profit at the end?
Solution: At this point I think that Ron needs to bring in his own outside expert. He should consult his lawyer about what steps he can take. Can he threaten to shut down the job entirely until these issues are resolved or invoke a binding arbitration clause for termination of contract? These could be drastic steps, but unless the builder can regain control over the construction, he can kiss his profit and peace of mind goodbye.
Taking a firm stand at this point will establish the ground rules for the rest of the project. You don’t have to be confrontational, unless the clients will perceive amiability as a sign of weakness and use it against you. But you do have to set parameters that are non-negotiable: “This is the way we do business. To do things any other way would be unprofessional. As long as you can respect these procedures, we will try to work with you to provide the home you desire.”
Like the eternally optimistic Ronald Reagan, a builder must “trust but verify.” He must strive and hope for the best, but plan for the worst. Just as carrying an umbrella around seems to prevent rain, when you have procedures in place for dealing with unforeseen events, they tend to happen less frequently. And when they do happen, the consequences are significantly less devastating.
Al Trellis, a co-founder of Home Builders Network, has more than 25 years of experience as a custom builder, speaker, and consultant. He can be reached at altrellis@hbnnet.com.
