> Yeah, you are right. I'm afraid I've been involved in the exact same situation. I still believe it was a failure on the part of the MSO and the people I was working for to allow it to happen.I am a PM myself and got all caught in trying to fix it after the fact.The greed of all involved is the driving factor. Especially the MSO who refuses to pay for the work, but has no problem charging the customers for new services etc.
>
> > plantman, I agree with you. I have, however, been involved in a rather large project where QC took a back seat to the time factor, and it was a nightmare. The motivating force that "makes the world go around"----MONEY. QC was out front, on top of and behind the principal contractor, and all of the subs, and QC didn,t matter. I have documentation, I can take you for a ride out, walk out, phase by phase, node by node and just let you QC or just look. It dosen't matter, fiber, coax, aerial, underground, what ever you like. I have photos and video tape. Quite honestly, what I said is unfortunately true. In fact the electric utility co. jumped on the Cable Provider about plant integrety. (Pole loading, guying, and anchors) Things have changed, at least on paper, for the next phase---it remains to be seen. Lash
> >
> > > At no time in any type of construction does quality take a back seat to the schedule.It is that type of mentality that causes non payment and the opinion of a lot of MSO management people that contractors are not to be trusted.
> > > Part of proper construction scheduling is determining the correct number of workers needed to complete the build on schedule.This has nothing to do with quality.
> > >
> > > > Well, Some people have had their say, now it's to the bottom line, not to say that everyone's comment is valid, for they are, it's just that the "cable provider" has the final say. It is in essence whether or not the deadlines are the top priority or the quality in conjunction with a realistic deadline are the top priority. If the "cable provider is more concerned with the deadline date then quality takes a back seat. One must determine the priority list of the "cable provider". Corporate Executives have little or no idea what it takes to put "it" up or to cut "it" hot, the only priority on their agenda is their income, they are gonna see from the work preformed. You'll have to hammer on the " cable provider" in order to ascertain the criteria on which you'll proceed. If not you'll get your ass burned.
> > > >
> > > > > If you have an interest, I would be willing to share with you the features we programmed into our project management software program. In your message, you didn't identify from which perspectus you would be looking at QC, the operator side or the contractor side. Please feel free to reach me at 623 582-4240 daily. If I am out of town, leave a message and I will return your call.
> > > > >
> > > > > Alan
> > > > >
> > > > > > I am looking for feedback from construction project managers, walkout people, QC managers, QC technicians,etc. concerning any existing construction QC programs that anyone has used. What are you using? How well does it work for you? In your opinion, what does a good QC program need to do? If you can, send me a copy of your program. If that's not asking for too much.
> > > > > > Please send me your comments and ideas so I may include your feedback into building my QC program.
> > > > > > Please reply to e-mail address here.
> > > > > > Thanks for your help.
> > > > > > Mark Breithaupt
> > > > > > Breithaupt Enterprises Inc.
