Replace assumed responsibility with named responsibility
A drawing may show a stair, a slab and a neat connection between them while saying very little about who designs the interface. The architect may define the appearance, a structural engineer the primary structure, and a specialist the metalwork assembly. Unless appointments and deliverables align, the connection can remain everyone’s assumption and nobody’s completed task.
Create a responsibility schedule that identifies the survey, structural design, connection design, finish specification, shop drawings, installation planning and final records. Record who supplies information, who reviews it and who can authorise the next stage. “By specialist” is not sufficient if no specialist has been appointed to that scope.
The RIBA Plan of Work provides a recognised framework for project stages, but a stage label does not settle individual contractual duties. Likewise, an architect’s review of a drawing should not be treated as a universal transfer of design responsibility. Agree the meaning of review comments and approval statuses within the actual appointments and construction arrangements.
Measure / record / reconcile
Build a reliable survey basis
Existing buildings rarely match an idealised model exactly. Walls lean, slab edges vary and finished levels may still be provisional. A useful survey identifies datum points, measured conditions, inaccessible areas and the assumptions that remain open. The aim is not to create an impressive cloud of information but to establish the dimensions needed for the particular assembly.
Coordinate tolerances across materials. Steelwork, concrete, stone and joinery do not arrive with identical precision, and an accumulation of individually acceptable variations can still produce an awkward junction. Deliberate adjustment zones, shadow gaps and accessible fixings can absorb uncertainty more gracefully than an unplanned trim added at the end.
For decorative screens, canopies and suspended features, consider the surrounding services, fire strategy, cleaning access and replacement route. An apparently non-structural visual element still needs appropriate support and safe installation. Its decorative purpose does not remove the need to identify loads, attachment conditions and maintenance obligations.
Interface review / conceptual only
↔ Building tolerance
↓ Supporting substrate
Use drawings to answer construction questions
Shop drawings should explain how the assembly is divided, joined, supported and finished. They need more than a reproduction of the design elevation. Enlarged junctions should show relevant build-ups, access to fasteners, movement allowances and the boundaries of adjacent work. If a dimension depends on another trade, make that dependency explicit.
A shared model can help locate clashes, but it does not guarantee that the information is current or complete. BS EN ISO 19650 addresses information management using building information modelling. Its principles of controlled information and clear status are useful reminders even on smaller projects: a beautifully coordinated model built from an obsolete survey can still be wrong.
Track revisions and close comments visibly. When a finish thickness changes or a support moves, ask which dimensions and samples must be revisited. An email saying “looks fine” is a weak substitute for a defined review record. The team should know exactly which issue has been accepted for which purpose.
Make the sequence a design tool
Fabrication, finishing and installation are not independent events. A large welded assembly may be difficult to transport or finish. A site weld can damage a completed coating and introduce additional safety controls. A hidden fixing may become inaccessible after a neighbouring wall lining is installed. Test the order while the design is still adaptable.
The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 establish duties in Great Britain, with guidance available from the Health and Safety Executive. The relevant dutyholders must address project risks through the appropriate arrangements. This article does not replace their risk assessments, lifting plans or installation method statements.
A fabrication sequence worth discussing
Establish the brief and scope
Record visual intent, use, exposure, responsibilities and exclusions. Avoid assuming that every supporting or finishing trade is included.
Verify the interfaces
Survey critical conditions and reconcile supports, levels, waterproofing, services and adjacent finish thicknesses.
Review drawings and samples
Use a representative junction to agree workmanship and surface expectations before authorising manufacture.
Plan workshop and site operations
Check assembly sizes, finishing constraints, delivery access, temporary stability and protection of completed work.
Inspect and hand over
Record agreed checks, resolve defects and provide relevant as-built information, care instructions and inspection requirements.
Allow time for decisions, not just production. Bespoke lead times depend on design development, material availability, workshop capacity, specialist treatments and site readiness. A universal delivery promise is less useful than a programme that identifies what each party must provide before the next task can begin.
The most valuable coordination meeting may concern a small corner: where a post crosses a floor finish, where a screen reaches a ceiling or where a stair lands on an existing slab. Resolve that corner honestly and the larger architectural gesture becomes more credible. Leave it vague and visual refinement is likely to be negotiated on site, under pressure.
Ask before fabrication