Only an expert

If you don’t feel well, not quite sure wat is wrong with you, or if you feel you need a general check-up; do you go to your General Practitioner, a ‘random’ specialist or do you engage a full panel of specialists.

Unless you know exactly what is wrong you will probably see your GP, and even if you do (think) you know what the problem is you generally still go to a GP who will refer you to the right specialist.

In short, unless things are very clear (or you are rich as Croesus) you get advice from a generalist first before going to a specialist.

Now how about engineering.

Many projects start-off with an idea, a general plan. That plan needs to be developed, tested for technical and economical sensibility as well as environmental and social impacts.

At the start of that plan, with a clean sheet in front of you, what type of consultant, person or company, do you need?. If you want to design a new housing development, do you engage a planner and/or architect or do you straight away go to the foundation engineer, structural engineer, electrician and HVAC specialists. Assuming the town planner knows a little about building codes, (need for) foundations etc. you will probably use her first and only once you have a general plan start looking into the infrastructure followed by the building structures, power and equipment, all with an iteration step or 2 depending on complexity. In the end you have the real experts and specialists looking at all the details.

Seems logical right?

As logical as it seems but in the recent past I have seen what appears to be a demand for experts and specialist at project stages where they are not best employed. It may have been coincidence and not a trend but lots of prequalifications or tenders seem to require the submission of a (long) list of ‘experts’ with ‘a minimum of x years consulting experience of which a minimum of y in this specialist subject preferably on z number of projects with a minimum of x,000,000 value’. Now, if this was associated with a very clear and narrowly defined scope of work, say a detailed design after all the preliminary work has been done, this might be sensible but I guess you know where this is going.

This list of specialists is asked for projects in their investigatory / concept / preliminary / development stage when there are many unknowns and variables and multiple possible ways to move forward. Apart from the fact that there generally aren’t that many experts with such narrowly defined experience and there are even fewer companies with the whole list of them, particularly if spread over a lot of disciplines, it seems impractical. It seems like asking for an ear-nose, respiratory and allergy specialist and to have an MRI done when you have the sniffles. No doubt one of them will prescribe you a paracetamol and some rest but at considerable expense compared to your GP who would have ordered an x-ray or other test only if in doubt.

By the way, did I mention you wanted all these specialists for the same fee as your GP?

And while some specialist may try and suggest to first have a general check-up, business is business and if you are willing to pay they’ll draw the blood, make the scans and run the tests before confirming you don’t have pneumonia, it’s not an allergy and, yes, your sinuses are a bit unhappy and here is a $5 decongestant.

Off course you don’t ask a high-rise consultant to design a port, or vice versa, but there are quite a number of consultancies out there who can develop the initial design a port without the need for 27 experts with a minimum of 15 years of experience in design of sheds and lamp posts. Specialists and experts are useful and important, at the right stage of a project.

Again, not sure if the type of specialist requests has just been co-incidence or trend, would love to hear your own experience.