Utilization Rate- sample question in ARE Handbook

Comments

4 comments

  • Avatar
    Paul Carson

    Great question Hannah ~ and from my experiences, RFI can come from a variety of angles; i.e. consultants, prospective clients or user groups, bidders, contractors or builders.  Hence, it would be my guess that there is not enough information in the question for you to assume that this would a request for information from a contractor of whom has already won the bid, and has already commenced the project, so there would be no way to define which project to which direct labor costs could be assigned.  I sure hope others can help us both understand this context more clearly soon, thx for the post.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Pierre Antounian (Edited )

    The sample question actually mentions RFP, (Request For Proposal) not an RFI.
    RFP is a pre-contract task whereas an RFI is typically a Construction Administration task. Paul, can you clarify a bit more on how an RFI may not be billable or direct labor? I always assumed RFI’s are billable because as far as I understand an RFI is in fact a contractual task assuming one was written for such tasks.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Paul Carson

    Hey Colleagues ~ Sorry, I took some sabbatical time, and didn't see this repost.

    I totally agree with Pierre, and his understanding is very clear and is received well.  Now that I see the question refers to an RFP, and not RFI; this makes more sense.  I have learned a lot since last year, and my notion back then was that c-a-r-b is out to trick us; hence, I "guessed" like I was doing on the exams...thinking, since so little information, my thought WAS that if it was an RFI, then yes directly billable; however, if it did not mention that it was for "that specific" project tasking, it couldn't be billed to that project.

    Seems as an oversight on my part, now that I look back; hence, pardon my idiocracy, and most certainly thank you for clarifying either way, I have learned a lot.  Well done crew!

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Paul Carson

    Here is another question I have regarding this exact topic, just a different question from n-c-a-r-b's ARE-50 Handbook: section-one, page 13-14, sample item #1:

    I understand this entire concept well; however, in the RATIONALE at the bottom on page 14, I feel the wording is creating a mind-block for me...in that, it uses these words: "...is ONLY charging 25% of their time to firm projects...this makes them the most appropriate choice to serve as "project architect."

    I am most positive that all employees/team members are better served with job security if they have a HIGHER Utilization Rate, RIGHT??? All other facts in this equation are understood and set aside...am I to assume that since the question is seeking for a "project architect", that architect would be working on other projects, hence only 25% to this project?

    * Should the wording be phased more more like: "although ONLY charging 25%..."?  I know, seems like my mind is playing symantec tricks on me; however, I take this stuff very seriously.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Powered by Zendesk