Editing without a project.
A project is a unique activity that has a beginning and an end in time, aimed at achieving a certain result/goal, creating a specific, unique product or service, with given resource and time constraints, as well as quality requirements and an acceptable level of risk.
(c) Wikipedia
A project can be called both an idea for something, for example, conquering Everest, and a plan to build a house. For producers, the creation of another pop star is also a project.
But we will, of course, talk about those projects, according to which technical security systems of various objects are created. These documents, prepared in accordance with regulatory documents and technical specifications, are provided to the customer in paper form and become a guide for the work of installers, and then for the system operation services.
So, it seems to be so. But does this always happen in practice? Let me make a reservation right away: I am talking specifically about systems — to install an autonomous controller on the door of a small office, a project is naturally not needed.
But even when equipping many not so small objects, the project is often treated as useless papers, the only purpose of which is to ensure the approval of the TSB in government agencies. For example, in fire supervision agencies.
The cost of the project, as a rule, is about 20% of the total amount allocated for the equipment of the TSB facility. Such costs seem too high to many customers. Those who do not see a special need for the project believe that the project is an unjustified expense of money and time.
Indeed, such customers reason, can't the installers decide for themselves how and where to install and connect the equipment? The cable routes are obvious, and where to supply power is also clear. To connect the equipment, the technical description included with the delivery is sufficient. I would like to note that with this approach, the equipment and materials are selected at random, though with a reasonable reserve of 5-15%. It does not greatly affect the cost estimate, and is sufficient to cover errors in the calculations.
In the ideal case, everything will go smoothly: there will be enough materials, and the system will work. But reality is oh so far from ideal.
How does work without a project often look in practice? It all starts with determining costs and selecting equipment. The specification is drawn up hastily and very roughly, it is created based on the experience of similar objects, or even simply copied from them. The necessary materials, I am not afraid to repeat myself, are purchased with a reserve. From this designer, the installation team has to assemble what the customer wants to receive.
Is there a chance that a system installed in this way will work reliably and perform all the tasks assigned to it? Of course, there is, and I am sure that my colleagues can confirm this with dozens of examples. But you must agree that only highly qualified installers, whose work is organized by a knowledgeable and experienced manager, can achieve maximum quality with low losses in such conditions.
I agree that at small sites with simple architecture, you can do without a carefully thought-out project, completed according to all standards, with a cover, content, reference documents. Basic diagrams, equipment layout plans, and a cable log will be quite sufficient. After all, this is also a kind of project, but in a simplified form.
But let's not forget about the pitfalls. Such simplified projects are rarely fixed in contracts, therefore, neither money nor sufficient time are allocated for them. Therefore, they are carried out, as they say, in a hurry, i.e. without proper research, necessary calculations, which, most likely, will inevitably affect the quality of the work performed.
Often, the preliminary specification is an appendix to the contract, which means that all components used during installation must comply with it. However, during the work it may turn out that even with a reserve, additional materials are required. In this case, everything depends on how the contract is drawn up — there is a chance that the contractor will have to cover unaccounted expenses independently.
That is, saving on design is almost always a risk, both for the customer and for the installer. And if at small sites, where the cost of errors is not very high, this risk can at least somehow be justified, then at large sites the project is a necessity.
After all, the larger the object, the more unique its structure. A standard solution is not applicable to it, otherwise the error in calculations will be significant and will entail significant financial losses. Such objects require individual, well-thought-out projects with meticulous elaboration of details.
Large sums are allocated for the construction of large facilities. The customer does not always know whether this is a lot or a little. In order to get an idea of the cost and choose the most attractive option in terms of price, the customer announces a tender, according to the terms of which participating companies must develop pilot projects. A pilot project is a design solution for a given facility: structural diagrams, plans with equipment arrangement, specifications. Moreover, the tender is often won not by the organization whose project seemed optimal to the customer, but by the one that is ready to implement it at the lowest cost.
There are cases when customers implemented pilot projects at their facilities. The reason is the same — the desire to save money. Why, such customers must have thought, spend money and time on developing the main project when there is already a pilot one. What is worse about it? It has everything you need: a ready-made solution and specifications. The fact that the project is very rough is revealed already during installation, and all the headaches go to the contractor. Because it is he who bears the costs of adapting the pilot project, adjusting it to the customer's requirements and the conditions of the facility, and conducting the surveys necessary for installation.
So, why do you need a project?
This question can be answered as follows.
1. So that the customer clearly imagines the future system.
If he himself does not understand what he wants, he is unlikely to be able to get what he wants. The result will be uncertain and will be formed during the installation process due to errors, corrections and approvals. The path to the goal will be winding, with a loss of time and money.
2. To choose the optimal solution.
When the customer sees their idea in detail, they may adjust the goal. It will become clear that the functions that seemed necessary to them are not needed, and others are needed. It is easier and more cost-effective to make changes on paper.
3. So that the contractor understands what he is building.
The contractor cannot read minds and will not take into account what was not said, which seemed obvious to the customer. It is difficult to convey to the installers what is required of them. They will understand it in their own way and implement a solution that is not what the customer would like to see. In order to stipulate all the nuances, one contract with the technical specifications is not enough: you will not take everything into account in it, otherwise it will no longer be a contract, but something similar to a project.
3. Plan the work.
Without a project, the overall task is not always visible, which means it is difficult to correctly draw up a work plan, calculate the time and resources.
4. Estimate the costs.
Only as a result of designing can one obtain a specification that is as close to the real one as possible. With a normal approach to work, the project is first carried out and the cost of construction is determined on its basis.