For reporting purposes, the following new fields are required to be added to the Defect Notice (whether raised by Supervisor or Supplier) and included as available fields in the associated registers (Supervisor’s Defect Notifications, Contractor’s Defect Notifications, Master Defects Register and aggregated report (Master Inspection Defect) along with the closure date [a field which is already present but currently a notable and crucial omission from the defect registers and reports]. All of these fields need to be captured whilst raising the original defect but editable after the defect has been issued (up until the defect is closed) so need to be added to the Actions tab and editable there in accordance with configurable permissions (i.e. based on Party and Role):
Target correction date [There is no defined timescale within the contract that can be used to calculate this so it needs to be nominated by the person raising the defect but can’t be locked in because this is subject to mutual agreement and may change again by mutual agreement. We were originally looking for a way of reflecting whether the date is proposed or agreed without making this so onerous that most of the time people don’t actually bother. If the date is not a mutually agreed our MI is useless. In order to simplify the development it was agreed this should be updatable by the Supervisor (or as configured in permissions) and the onus will be on them to make sure the date they enter is mutually agreed and the onus will be on the contractor to dispute this via a Notification if they believe it has been captured incorrectly, hence the need to be able to update this retrospectively].
Location on site [Free text. Making this a configurable dropdown would be too onerous to maintain and we agreed that wouldn’t be necessary].
Engineering discipline [Will need to be tailored for different Frameworks so will need to be a configurable dropdown list (only one selection allowed per defect) - e.g. a sample set of dropdown values would be Civil, M&E, Subcontractor Civil, Subcontractor M&E, Cables, Commissioning]
Name of Equipment that is defective [Free text - mandatory]
Name of Equipment Supplier [Free text - mandatory]
Category [Two options: Major/Minor]
Is an outage required? [Two options: Yes/No]
Comments and recommended resolution [Free text]
Category of main probable cause [Dropdown (only one option can be selected). Potentially this could be a configurable list although the content of the dropdown below will be linked to the value selected here so that could be a challenge. It will probably be simpler to fix this as a list of items 1 to 6 list with configurable labels (in order to simplify the coding of the conditional dropdown below). Initial dropdown values: 1|Design 2|Manpower 3|Workmanship 4|Methods 5|Materials 6|[Spare] ]
Below will be configurable dropdown values. The expectation is that the options available will be dynamically adjusted according to the selection in the dropdown immediately above (i.e. if Option 1 (configured here as Design) is selected as the main category only the design sub-type options will be available for selection). Hopefully this can be be accommodated by a dropdown list that is filtered according to the dropdown selection above (or alternatively the form adapted to display a different secondary dropdown according the selection in the dropdown above). Six secondary configurable dropdown options are listed below. Only one of these should be available to the user at any given point in time depending on which of the options 1 to 6 the user selected in the dropdown above (although options 1 to 6 should appear under their configured labels rather than as numbered]. Secondary dropdown values to be pre-configured as:
1: Documents, Drawings, Specification
2: Competency, Trade skills, Lack of care and attention, Insufficient time, Insufficient number of operatives
3: Workmanship, Lack of resources, Lack of training, Competency, Experience, Incorrect/poor standard tools used, Lack of adherence to current processes, Not briefed/ lack of supervision
4: Following wrong procedure drawing, Incorrect sequence of operation, Procedure does not align to current work practice, Procedure out of date, Did not follow procedure, Policy and procedures do not align
5: Incorrect quantity, Poor quality, Not to specification, Incorrect item used/fitted, Delivery issued
The overarching requirement is the ability to report the following Key Performance Indicator: [Total volume of Major defects closed within the agreed timescale this period / Total volume of Major defects closed this period). To that end, it’s most crucial we get the [new] Target Correction Date, [new] Category (Major/Minor) and [existing] Closed Date fields into the Master Inspection Defect aggregated report by 01/04/2021 at the latest. Additional fields can be delivered later if necessary.