Correspondence is generally divided into three levels. The first level is routine, formalized processes, such as transmittal of forms, logs, etc. The second level is those communications that, although “customized” for a particular project, are actually substantially routine. These types of communications lend themselves to “form-letter” treatments that essentially retain the same content issue-to-issue and project-to-project. The third level is specific, custom communications, perhaps involving large amounts of unique and specialized detail.
The first two types of communication are treated in great detail throughout this Operations Manual. Each such communication has been designed to take advantage of the ideas of this section in that they are clear, complete, and address very specific objectives. These types are generated daily by nearly everyone in the organization. In order to measure their effectiveness, each one should be subjected to the set of rules that follow in order to best address content, correlation, efficiency, and clarity.
The first objective of any effective correspondence, then, is to communicate information. As obvious as this may seem, too many examples of correspondence lack obvious purpose, or at the very least are confusing in their apparent objectives. The final objective of each communication is to cause or compel an action on the part of the recipient.
In getting from the primary to the final objective, there may be any number of intermediate steps in the process. We are all familiar with communications that are long-winded, rambling, and confusing and that combine different subjects. It is not uncommon to see letters that contain sentences that are so “run-on” that an entire letter may contain only one period.
Following the rules below is one way of ensuring that your communications are direct, complete, and serve the intended purpose:
1. Keep each project separate.
It is not uncommon for contractors to have multiple projects with the same owner. In such cases, never combine discussions of two different projects in the same correspondence. Even if the same or similar issue occurs and for very practical reasons applies equally and in the same periods of time to different projects, keep them apart. The first reason for this practice is to avoid possible confusion, both on the part of the recipient and in the manner that the documentation will be filed and correlated with the project record. From there, the reason for this separation is to keep future developments focused and efficient. If the issue begins to develop in one way on one project, for example, those developments will not be allowed to confuse the second project. In contrast, if issues are allowed to be combined in a single letter, every discussion will remain unnecessarily complicated. If an owner representative, design professional, or anyone else should be included in distribution of the letter or by some other means should receive a copy, information regarding other projects is needlessly displayed. Finally, file and record management becomes cumbersome and more prone to error.
2. Confine the subject of the letter to a single issue, or to a small group of closely or logically related issues.
And keep your letters focused to the target issue. Keep separate or unrelated items in separate letters. Separate the items in order to allow direct focus and quick understanding of each issue, without unnecessarily causing distraction, confusion, and complication. The overall result will be a better chance of faster, more direct response, and reduced probability that the response itself will be confused or misdirected.
In contrast, a letter that contains several unrelated items may initially confuse or otherwise distract its reader. In beginning to deal with such a letter, its subjects must be separated from each other and individually treated. As each issue is individually researched, the separate reactions must be applied into an equally confusing response—unless the responder has the sense to separate the items into individual correspondences. Otherwise, both your letter and its response, each containing multiple unrelated items, must then be filed in each of the files corresponding to each unrelated issue. Separately filing the individual issues can become cumbersome and overly complex, with a very disproportionate risk that even the filing will not be properly done. Any resulting improper or confused filing is almost sure to cause some lost opportunity at a later time, thereby significantly increasing the risk that issues will not be resolved in the most optimal manner.
Finally, the worst condition will involve documents that contain multiple examples of unrelated information that wind up as evidence in litigation or arbitration that involves only one of the listed items. At the very least, expensive time will be consumed explaining why all those unrelated items do not apply to the discussion at hand. At worst, you may find yourself having to introduce information into an argument that you otherwise would prefer to leave out of the particular discussion.
3. Develop and use a consistent document format.
Be sure that every person in your organization develops correspondence that is consistent in appearance. This is not only beneficial from a company-identity standpoint, but also facilitates fast reference, efficient file and document management, and thorough research.
The “Reference” of each document should be simply the identification of the project, including appropriate contract numbers and any other necessary formality. The Reference should then be followed by “Subject” area. The Subject area is used for a number of purposes that are dealt with in detail throughout this Operations Manual. For purposes of this discussion here, the Subject area will at a minimum contain a concise description of the particular issue, and may also contain file references or other means to correlate the document with the project record. Keep the Subject description consistent from document-to-document, in order to facilitate quick research and understanding among the multiple parties.
4. Confine letters to a single page, if at all possible.
This correspondence rule is perhaps the most difficult of all to achieve (and may be most difficult to see the benefit of), but is actually possible in many circumstances. Remember that if your purpose is to compel action, the quickest way to achieve that result is through clear communication. Think of your letter as an executive summary written to influence the mind of the decision makers. Consider the attention span of busy individuals who must understand and respond to your letter. Consider your own reaction when you receive a long, laborious letter, and the work that you’ve got to go through just to make sure that you’ve understood the main points. Make your point(s) in your own letters clear. Get to those points fast. If the issue is complex, consider outlining the basics and steer the letter to its conclusion. Include separate attachments that support your contentions in an organized backup package.
Consider what happens in the other organization when it receives your letter. Different levels of authority may become involved with different issues. As your letter is passed from person to person and from level to level, the important, salient points distill down to the problem and (your) solution. As your letter moves up the chain in the other organization, executives at progressively higher levels are correspondingly less interested in the detail and more in the conclusion. Leave the detail in supplementary packages that support your position, but do not allow your own letter to ramble on with your intermediate supporting arguments within the body of the document.
5. Avoid redundancy and unnecessary references and repetitions.
If your letter format follows through with the recommendations of item #3 above, it will have included a clear project reference and the subject description that together create an unmistakable summary of the issue. There is no need to waste additional space and attention on repeating the same information in an introductory paragraph. Consider, for example, these two statements introducing the same letter:
“This letter is in response to your letter dated June 17, 2000 in which you advised that you will not accept the pricing that was submitted on June 10, 2000 for the Vacuum Sludge Dewatering System in the north part of the Regional Waste Treatment Facility Contract #56009.”
And
“This letter is in response to your letter dated June 17, 2000 regarding the subject.”
The first version will put you well on your way to writing a multiple-page letter. If instead, the “Reference” in your letter included the “Regional Waste Treatment Facility Contract #56009” (complete project description), and the “Subject” referred to in the second version included “Vacuum Sludge Dewatering System Change Order Pricing” (summary description of the issue), the second version is much more clean. It properly ties your letter to the correspondence chain in an organized manner but does not unnecessarily encumber the document with extraneous language that will dilute the main point.
The second common problem with redundancy is simply repeating a point at the conclusion of your letter that was made in the early part of the document. Instead, organize your thoughts, list your points in priority sequence, and make them once and in logical order.
6. Use outline form.
Admittedly, there are times when the “single page” objective discussed above is difficult if at all possible to achieve. Many types of communications do demand logical support for conclusions drawn in the body of the document. In these and other types of circumstances that ultimately demand a longer and more complex letter, you must still do your best to break down the document into manageable and understandable components. Even short letters that contain multiple issues should be treated in this manner.
After your short and clear introduction, organize your letter into a logical developmental sequence. Consider numbering your points and summarizing each with a short title. If the letter is a chronological development, for example, you might itemize it by date or event. Clearly identify each individual item. If you’re confirming several facts, separate each of them out of the body copy and number them as separate paragraphs.
If you are drawing several conclusions requiring two or more specific actions, reconsider the entire content of the letter. Look for ways to break the separate issues into individual components. List each item in outline form and number them. You may discover that it will be more appropriate to construct multiple letters from the information once all of the details have been so clarified.
Following the suggestions above will at first crystallize your own thought process. From that point, your representation of the facts should be much more understandable to everyone who will become involved either initially or at some later point in time. As the final advantage to organizing your letters in this way, research conducted at a later time or by others will be greatly facilitated. Attention will be allowed to be focused on the points without the need to wade through large and confusing amounts of extraneous information.
7. Keep each discussion simple.
This idea is much more important than simple application of the “KISS” formula. It begins with the recognition of the fundamental principle that the absolute value of total understanding drops dramatically as the number of people who must understand the particular issue increases. If, for example, ten people must be involved in the resolution of any given issue, it is all but guaranteed that at least three or four of these individuals will completely misunderstand the issue in their first consideration of it. Reasons for this effect may vary, ranging from the simple lack of attention to genuine lack of ability to grasp the concept. Whatever the true reason, however, the effect is very real.
The second idea is based in simple dilution of the issue. If the final decision maker, for example, is higher up (several levels above) than the initial recipient of your letter in their organization, that individual may be less inclined to (or interested in) understand and specifically address the detail—the minutiae—of the particular issue. The lower your issue is in terms of cost and organizational impact, the more distracted decision makers may be. Because of these two effects, it is necessary to make the issue as easy to grasp as possible in order for those busy, distracted individuals to see your point fast, recognize that it is backed up, and acknowledge that your position is supported by the project record. To the extent that all these things can be achieved with your short, clear correspondence, the point will be made to the higher-level bureaucrat that it will be a lot of work to even argue with you, much less prevail.
8. Use cause-effect style.
Develop the habit of requiring every word of your correspondence to have a purpose. Ask yourself if each sentence or phrase contributes to understanding or support, or simply adds verbiage. Arrange short, simplified statements as part of your outline presentation into logical sequence that methodically arrives at its conclusion. Don’t jump around, and don’t confuse your train of thought. Spend the time necessary to reconsider your draft to be sure that there isn’t a more direct route to the conclusion. Whenever you’ve had difficulty in working with longer sentences or otherwise clarifying confusing points, show your draft to an individual in your company who is removed from the issue. Work your language until that individual clearly understands the issue, your position, and your conclusion.
9. Stay factual.
A letter (or any other written document for that matter) is no place to display emotion, sarcasm, innuendo, or irrelevant criticism. In most instances, it is also no place for opinionated statements. Instead, keep each letter confined to the facts, accurate statements, and sensible, logical conclusions. Above all, be professional.
Leave out “facts” that really aren’t.
If it had for any reason become necessary to make some assumption in order to develop a position or to prepare a work product, clearly state the assumption made and the reason for it. Beyond this specific condition, do not speculate.
All of the above things may or may not have a place in verbal and off-the-record discussions, but they certainly have no place in a written bombshell that will be distributed around the planet to people with wide variations in understanding and dispositions—all without you there to explain it. Picture yourself one week from now sitting in a room with several people reviewing your written statements. How comfortable do you feel? How “professional” do you consider the letter? Do you see any justification for the other party to be insulted? Have you given your opponent any opportunity to “grandstand”—at your expense?
10. Avoid personal attack.
It’s been said that calling a person a liar will not make him or her honest. Don’t question the other party’s motivation, intentions, or competence. Don’t make accusations. Don’t make threats. Even if you do believe the other person’s motivations are “questionable,” open accusations or insinuations will more likely drive you further apart—at least initially. Avoid these unnecessary and overe-motional delays by leaving this type of language out of your letters altogether.
11. Stay cool.
Unfortunately, it is not all that unusual to receive a letter or otherwise be subjected to something that frustrates and angers you. Despite your hard work and continuing effort to be professional, you may simply be faced by an individual who does not respect the rules identified in the preceding section. Anger, insult, disgust, or any other emotion may too quickly divert your attention from the main point. If this happens, these emotions may cause you to respond inappropriately and at least delay resolution of your issue by allowing yourself to succumb to the diversion. In the worst cases, you may be prompted to fire off a hot return volley if you allow yourself to lose control.
If you do allow yourself to respond in such an uncontrolled manner, the unfortunate truth is such that your response will appear short-sighted and unprofessional. At worst, you may blurt out things that you will later regret. Somewhere in the middle of this range, your overemotional response is sure to anger at least one of your “opponents,” at one or more levels of your opponent’s organization. The only result (besides perhaps a short-lived feeling of satisfaction) is added delay to the resolution of your issue. You’ll have given your opponent something to “prove.”
In most cases, this type of response will never resolve the problem. You may get some degree of satisfaction from having “told them,” but you will have shoved them a little farther away from your position before you realize that now you’ve got to start bringing them back.
If after considering all these reasons you still feel the need for such a response, by all means write it. Get it down on paper in all its agonizing detail. But don’t send it. Set it down, and let it cool. Don’t ever leave it lying around on the top of your desk. Put it in your top drawer (get it off your desk in case some well-meaning associate sends it for you). Leave it in your drawer for a day (or overnight). If the letter looks as good in the morning as it did the moment that you wrote it, send it. My bet, though, is that the light of the new day (after you’ve had time to cool yourself off) will show you that the letter is too long, complicated, redundant, confusing, and maybe at least a little insulting. Rewrite the letter focusing on resolving the problem. File the first one (clearly noting on its face that it had not been sent); it probably does contain a number of useful pieces of information that you have researched during its preparation that may become helpful later.
12. Get to the decision maker.
Most often, the formal route of your correspondence distribution is determined by your contract working procedure. All letters will have been required to be addressed to a particular individual, with copies to certain others. If the highest authority (… the Commissioner …) is the addressee, the routine may provide that one of the cc’s (the Clerk of the Works) actually will deal with a letter first. If the addressee is the Clerk, however, the higher authority will be one of the cc’s.
Understand the specific internal procedure used in your opponent’s organization to review and respond to your correspondence. Know and understand the levels, if any, of cost or other issues that cause an item to be forced to another level in your opponent’s organization. Know who will make the final decision in order to allow you to determine the most effective format for your particular correspondence.
If a shorter time to the decision is needed, or if overturning a lower-level decision is desired, find a way to shift your letter out of the “routine correspondence” category in order to get to the decision maker’s attention directly. The contract itself may turn out to be the greatest help here. The dispute resolution clause may, for example, contain a procedure that “… the Commissioner will interpret the plans …” There may be a procedure that requires the movement of an issue through a prescribed program on the precise timetable. If such a program exists in your contract, follow it precisely and compel your opponent to do the same. Use the specific language in your contract to bring the decision makers directly to the plate, and address your problem directly if you can’t get the results you want at the lower levels.
13. Respect your contract.
Far too often, professionals, managers, and staff members create or respond to an issue because of assumptions made in the relationships, rights, and responsibilities between the parties. At the jobsite level, every job “feels” like most others administratively because each will have an architect, owner representative, and construction force. People will accordingly have a great tendency to deal with a problem the way it was done on the last project.
Contemporary construction contracts, however, deal with many varied forms of project delivery systems. Lump Sum General Contracting (GC), Agency Construction Management (ACM), Construction Management with Guaranteed Maximum Price (CM w/GMP), and Design-Build (DB) are the four basic forms of project delivery. From each basic contracting form, it seems that each new drafter of construction contracts has felt the need to customize these “standard” arrangements to significant degrees. Because of all of these things, the specific rights, responsibilities, and relationships in your particular contract are very likely to be somewhat different than they were in your last contract. The General Conditions of the Contract will be customized by the Supplementary General Conditions. The entire process will (supposedly) be orchestrated by the Working Procedure or other similarly titled section of the specifications. Add to all this the state statutes and federal public contracting procedures, and it becomes easier to see that you’d better be aware of the specific set of rules for each particular project. Don’t risk having your eloquent presentation being dropped into the circular file, or having to suffer the embarrassment of having to retract a position for being told that “you should have read your contract,” and that “you should have known better.” Because you should have known better.
14. Guide the decision.
Before you begin to draft a letter, know your issue clearly, and know your desired outcome. Don’t simply state your problem and close the letter. Just stating your problem and asking for an answer isn’t any better. Stating your problem and asking for the answer that you prefer may seem to be better, but it really isn’t—they already expected that you wanted that answer.
Your job in drafting the most effective correspondence is to state the issue or identify the problem and then give the contractually supported reasons why the answer must be as you see it. From there, all you should need is a confirmation of the proper interpretation from the appropriate authority.
Don’t, for example, simply state that:
“Both the steel and masonry subcontractors take exception to providing the welded portion of the masonry anchors. Please advise which subcontractor should perform the work.”
Instead, indicate after the first sentence that:
1. “Section 04200 3.3A provides that the Mason subcontractor include the fixed portion of all anchors.
2. Detail 6/S3 on the structural drawings shows the welded portion of the anchor on the columns.
3. General Conditions Paragraph 12.3 states the specifications take precedence over the plans.
“Therefore, in accordance with General Conditions Article 3 (the clause that says that the owner is the one who’s stuck with the responsibility to make the decision) please confirm that the subject work is included in Section 04200.”
Have your logical progression clearly supported by the contract specifics. In the case of a conflict within the plans and specifications, call attention to the contractual mechanism for resolving such complexity and apply it in your logical development. Use the contract to force the responsible parties to make (and remain responsible/liable for) the decisions. Don’t allow your opponent to force you to make decisions that you otherwise are not contractually responsible for.
15. Require specific action by a specific date.
After you’ve taken the steps necessary to guide the action toward the decision you need, state the specific decision as simply and as clearly as possible. After that, state the absolute date by which the action is required and pin onto it some kind of consequence for failing to meet that date.
Examples of effective remarks include:
- “Response after that date will interfere with the masonry work and delay the project.”
- “No action by that date will cause the contract work to progress beyond the work in question. In that event, cost and time needed to rework the area will be added to the cost of this additional work.”
- “Response after that date will cause the steel to be delivered to the site without the subject anchors. Even if the work is determined to be contractually the responsibility of the steel subcontractor, they will then be entitled to a change order to cover the extra cost of providing the anchors in the field, instead of fabricating the anchors in the steel shop.”
Above all, whatever you determined to be the consequence of late action, be certain that it is accurate and legitimate. Never use idle remarks or threats that you either cannot or will not be able to follow through on. Don’t risk your stature as a respected professional over this type of issue.
If the noted date passes without the required action, react quickly. Send a notice, second request, or whatever other type of correspondence is necessary to prompt the decision. Because your original remarks were accurate, including your follow-up notice that the event has occurred, it should be made clear that your opponent had better get moving now before it gets worse. As an example, you might say something like: “As of today, we have received no response to my letter of (date). The subject anchors have accordingly not yet been ordered, and the masonry work is now delayed by this issue. The total impact on the schedule will be analyzed after your response is finally received, and you will be advised at that time of related extra costs.”
16. Follow-up/follow through.
Before considering any type of deadline as recommended in item 15 above, think your entire scenarios through as clearly and as thoroughly as possible. Know the problems that you will face in all their specific detail if an adequate and complete response is not received in time for you to take your own needed action. Put yourself in that position on that future date and understand your new set of problems that exist without an appropriate response. Know the difference between effects and impact that “must” occur and those that only “may” or “can” occur in the event of an incomplete, improper, or untimely response.
After you have clearly identified and quantified these potential impacts, you will be in a better position to isolate those conditions and circumstances that will occur in the event of such improper or untimely response.
Before committing such consequences to paper, however, have your end-run decision made in advance. Do not indicate that a consequence will occur unless you are absolutely certain that it is so. If the consequence is an outside event that is beyond your control, so be it. If, however, the consequence is a specific action that you and your company will take in the event of any improper or untimely response, be absolutely certain that you and your company are thoroughly prepared to take the specific action unquestionably and without hesitation. If there is any question as to the resolve and/or your ability to take such action, do not threaten any such response.
Once having so prepared your response, keep close attention to the deadline indicated in your letter. When that deadline occurs, be sure to react immediately and decisively. Be sure to create and perpetuate your own reputation as one who says what he means and means what he says.
Post your comment on this topic.