Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
(OP)
Hi Group,
We've been approached by building owners and architects a number of times over the years, asking us to review building envelope, HVAC, and lighting designs that have been recently completed by other firms. They typically want our opinion on energy efficiency, whether it is to verify compliance with the energy code being enforced, for LEED accreditation, or just for another set of eyes on the effort to reduce utility cost. This usually happens prior to bidding, or at least prior to construction beyond site and foundation.
I've never had a problem accepting this work, as long as the folks we do the work for notify the original designers and ask them to cooperate with my firm. Only once did I find out that the owner did not tell anyone about what we were doing, so I quickly rectified that by calling them all myself. It has always been a solicitation that came our way out of the blue. We never offered this service to anyone or marketed it as a service.
Ethical question is: What are your thoughts about marketing this service to building owners and architects that I know are currently engaged in active designs? We might seem to be insinuating that the PEs and AIAs working on the design may give the client a less-than-optimal job. Plus, it might be viewed as interfering with a PE's existing contract.
Thoughts?
We've been approached by building owners and architects a number of times over the years, asking us to review building envelope, HVAC, and lighting designs that have been recently completed by other firms. They typically want our opinion on energy efficiency, whether it is to verify compliance with the energy code being enforced, for LEED accreditation, or just for another set of eyes on the effort to reduce utility cost. This usually happens prior to bidding, or at least prior to construction beyond site and foundation.
I've never had a problem accepting this work, as long as the folks we do the work for notify the original designers and ask them to cooperate with my firm. Only once did I find out that the owner did not tell anyone about what we were doing, so I quickly rectified that by calling them all myself. It has always been a solicitation that came our way out of the blue. We never offered this service to anyone or marketed it as a service.
Ethical question is: What are your thoughts about marketing this service to building owners and architects that I know are currently engaged in active designs? We might seem to be insinuating that the PEs and AIAs working on the design may give the client a less-than-optimal job. Plus, it might be viewed as interfering with a PE's existing contract.
Thoughts?
Good on ya,
Goober Dave
Haven't see the forum policies? Do so now: Forum Policies





RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
==========
"Is it the only lesson of history that mankind is unteachable?"
--Winston S. Churchill
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
TTFN
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering
"Belief" is the acceptance of an hypotheses in the absence of data.
"Prejudice" is having an opinion not supported by the preponderance of the data.
"Knowledge" is only found through the accumulation and analysis of data.
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
Good on ya,
Goober Dave
Haven't see the forum policies? Do so now: Forum Policies
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
My acquaintance consulted another doctor, reasonably well-known in his field, and asked what he thought, and this doctor said something along the lines of "Of course, I am ethically bound to support the conclusions of my colleague."
A couple of expletives later, my acquaintance asked "Whatever happened to a second opinion?"
The funny thing is that the second doctor considered this point, and then disagreed with performing the operation, suggesting that a wait-and-see approach was better given the risks involved.
There’s nothing wrong with independent judgment.
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
Dik
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
Dik
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
Dik
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
I would have done it as a courtesy anyway, but it's good to know there's a standard.
Good on ya,
Goober Dave
Haven't see the forum policies? Do so now: Forum Policies
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
Where the unspecified and ethnocentric nationality of "National" is the USA.
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
http://www.nceng.com.au/
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
Dik
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering
"Belief" is the acceptance of an hypotheses in the absence of data.
"Prejudice" is having an opinion not supported by the preponderance of the data.
"Knowledge" is only found through the accumulation and analysis of data.
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
Pamela K. Quillin, P.E.
Quillin Engineering, LLC
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
zdas is as usual correct in the sense that NDAs and other contractual issues can trump professional courtesy.
The client must always be informed that you will be speaking with the other engineer.
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
Likely not, if you are obligated to do something and you enter into a contract that contravenes that, you likley have what is called a 'Proscribed Contract' and it might only be worth the paper to make airplanes with.
If I'm ever brought up on an ethics violation for this, then it will be followed by a lawsuit against the board, because peer review is in the public interest and that clause is not.
You may want to check; it is likely in the public interest if you advise the other engineer of your actions...
Dik
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
I think that "professional courtesy" is just a smoke screen for "protecting incompetent jerks that should never have gotten through Engineering school". I've been asked to respond to a peer review on one of my projects and about 1/3 of the comments were legitimate issues that needed clarification (not wrong, just that I assumed a level of understanding that wasn't appropriate), 1/3 was because they ignored the statement that said the flow lines were being designed to ASME B31.8 and applied ASME B31.3 calculations, and the final 1/3 were style issues. I wrote my response, let it rest over night, and then threw out most of my comments and started over in a milder tone. The process would not have been improved had I known they were doing it.
David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering
"Belief" is the acceptance of an hypotheses in the absence of data.
"Prejudice" is having an opinion not supported by the preponderance of the data.
"Knowledge" is only found through the accumulation and analysis of data.
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
Where I live, there is a clear distinction between a standard mandate and reviewing mandate
For the first one, the engineer must be sure that is his the only engineer mandated. It's the responsability of the new engineer to verify that there is no previous enginner. if there is one, the new enginner to be sure that the previous engineer mandate is finished.
For Reviewing mandate, condition differ. And what constitute a Review mandate is clearly defined by LAW.
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
RE: Reviewing Another Engineer's Work
http://www.peo.on.ca/Ethics/code_of_ethics.html
"A practitioner shall not accept an engagement to review the work of another practitioner for the same employer except with the knowledge of the other practitioner or except where the connection of the other practitioner with the work has been terminated"
It does not say that the Reviewing Engineer must contact the Authoring Engineer. Since the Reviewing Engineer's relation typically is with the client it would be prudent for the Reviewing Engineer to obtain a letter from the client stating that either the Authoring Engineer was notified of the review or that the contract with the Authoring Engineer has terminated.
The above applies to Ontario. However, like PicoStruc said it is wise to check with your regulator.