| You
Get What You Pay For
Chief Engineer
|
The old adage “you get what you pay for” is never
more true than in the design and construction of a new HVAC system
or the purchase of a maintenance contract. Poor design or workmanship
can sabotage even the best equipment, making a remedy far more
costly later.
There are several potential problems inherent in a low-bid situation.
Often, the company which poses the lowest bid is the one whose
ability to provide accurate cost estimates is, well, less than
perfect. For example, if a person scouting the job misses details
like the need for scaffolding or some wiring to a unit that demands
the time of an electrician, and he begins to realize the cost
impact on his margins, he will look for some way to come back
to the customer for recovery of those dollars.
There are some contractors who make a habit out of bidding low,
securing the work and then discovering “surprises”
that they then use to solicit additions to the cost of the project.
A company whose bid is based on quality work will know how to
prepare thoroughly for each proposed project, visiting the site
at least once and learning all they can about conditions under
which they must work. Their proposals will clearly define the
proposed scope of work in order to avoid surprises after the project
is started.
Another problem inherent in selecting contractors based solely
on low bid is simply the quality of engineering and workmanship.
Design or engineering flaws may not be apparent immediately, and
by the time they do arise it may be too late to have any recourse
with the installing contractor. Similarly, inferior quality workmanship—substandard
welding, inadequate sealing of ductwork, etc.—may not be
obvious immediately but may become apparent later when it affects
system performance.
Extra costs are sometimes a justifiable factor in a job. Unforeseen
circumstances can occur which everyone will agree impacts the
scope of the project. Occasionally the owner will request a change
in the design of the project that will impact the cost. In these
circumstances, all parties will recognize the change in the scope
of work and agree to a cost adjustment.
Making price the primary consideration when looking at an HVAC
maintenance program can be even more problematic. It’s just
too easy for low-bid companies to get away without performing
the recommended maintenance.
If all a company has to do to be selected contractor is to be
the low bid, they can simply cut back on the maintenance being
performed. Maybe the filters get changed, but will it be noticed
immediately if bearings are not lubricated, or if coils are not
thoroughly cleaned, or if compressor oil is not changed? Chances
are these items will not be detected immediately but they will
ultimately result in unnecessary breakdowns, which will cost the
building owner far more than if they had just paid for preventive
maintenance to begin with.
Going with the low price may seem to be the easy way out for purchasing
managers or other decision makers. In fact, it seems to be a common
defense when things go wrong: “Well, I went with the lowest
price.” Progressive and insightful decision makers, however,
realize that often the low bid will end up being far more costly
in the long run. They will take the time to research all the issues
involved and will get “behind the numbers” to determine
exactly what they will receive for the price.
What they should be looking for is the best value—many times
it will not be the lowest price. |
|
