3.9.2 Operative Definition

Coordinating the work does not mean inventing information. It means:

• Securing relevant information from those responsible for generating it
• Fitting that information into the project requirements and confirming its appropriateness
• Communicating that information to those responsible for finally approving its incorporation into the project
• Distributing that information to all those requiring it, in order to allow them to complete their work at all those points where it interfaces with the information in appropriate time

In other words, it means finding, assembling, and distributing information. It is not making up information, or fixing the mistakes in the specification when they’re finally discovered. That’s the designer’s job.

Example. Two subcontractors both take exception to a certain item of work. After your own review, you conclude that each subcontractor actually reasonably inferred from their respective specification sections that the work would be done by the other subcontractor. The owner will therefore likely argue:
1. The work is specified twice; give me a credit, and
2. The GC should have “coordinated” the item; you determine who’s going to do it, and just get it done.
The appropriate response will be based on ideas related to those principles outlined above. You will demonstrate that:

1. You did coordinate; that’s what discovered the problem in the first place.
2. Each subtrade reasonably interpreted the specification to determine that the work was not included in their competitive bid (refer to Section 3.5.3, “Intent” vs. “Indication” and Section 3.5.4, “Reasonable Review”). The work was not, in fact, incorporated twice. It was not incorporated at all. A change order is therefore appropriate, but at an increase, not decrease, in cost.

Refer to Section 3.9.4, Sample Letter to Owner Regarding Lack of Design Coordination, as a further example of proper treatment.