The Cost of Starting Fabrication Before Coordination Is Complete

The Cost of Starting Fabrication Before Coordination Is Complete

Fast-track delivery models have become common across commercial construction. Overlapping design, procurement, and fabrication is often framed as efficiency. In facade work, releasing material to fabrication is treated as a milestone that protects schedule.

Yet industry data repeatedly shows that late design changes and coordination failures are among the primary drivers of cost escalation and dispute (Arcadis Global Construction Disputes Report; HKA CRUX Insight Report). In glazing systems, where geometry locks in early and interfaces are dense, starting fabrication before coordination is complete concentrates that risk.

The issue is not speed. It is sequencing decisions before constraints are removed.

Fabrication Locks in Tolerance Assumptions

Facade systems operate within narrower tolerances than many structural elements. The Centre for Window and Cladding Technology (CWCT) has long emphasized that structural movement, slab edge tolerances, and facade tolerances must be reconciled early to avoid installation conflict. Where these tolerances are not coordinated before fabrication, misalignment becomes a field issue rather than a design discussion.

Similarly, AAMA guidance on curtain wall installation highlights the importance of confirming substrate conditions and dimensional accuracy before production commitments are made (AAMA Installation Guidelines).

When fabrication proceeds based on theoretical slab edges or assumed embed conditions, production effectively fixes a geometry that may not reflect actual field conditions.

Late Design Changes Are a Leading Cost Driver

Global claims data supports the financial impact of this pattern. HKA’s CRUX reports consistently identify late design information and design changes as top causes of cost overruns across projects. Arcadis’ annual dispute report similarly ranks design errors and incomplete design documentation among the leading causes of disputes worldwide.

In facade projects, what qualifies as a “late change” is often the delayed resolution of interface coordination—perimeter conditions, anchor spacing, firestop transitions, or thermal continuity. When these items are not fully resolved before fabrication, they reappear later as engineering revisions or site modifications.

At that point, cost is amplified because production has already begun.

Lean Research: Remove Constraints Before Production

Lean construction research reinforces this dynamic. The Last Planner System and related studies emphasize that production should not begin until constraints are removed and conditions are ready (Ballard & Howell; Lean Construction Institute).

Starting fabrication while unresolved coordination remains introduces variability into production, which directly impacts reliability. In facade work, variability manifests as anchor relocation, field shimming beyond design intent, failed air and water testing, or re-engineering of perimeter transitions.

Once fabrication locks in system dimensions, options narrow rapidly.

Fragmentation Increases Risk in Specialty Trades

McKinsey’s research on construction productivity identifies fragmentation between disciplines as a structural weakness in the industry. Specialty trades that rely heavily on prefabrication are particularly sensitive to coordination gaps (McKinsey Global Institute, Reinventing Construction).

Glazing sits squarely in this category. Curtain wall systems integrate structural, thermal, air, and water performance requirements across multiple contracts. When coordination is incomplete at the time of fabrication release, the project absorbs the risk that those systems will not align in execution.

The Financial Impact Is Predictable

The cost of premature fabrication is not limited to wasted material. It includes:

• Engineering revisions after release

• Field modifications to anchors and embeds

• Schedule compression downstream

• Dispute exposure tied to responsibility gaps

Industry dispute reports repeatedly show that coordination failures and incomplete design documentation are financially material contributors to project overruns (Arcadis; HKA). Facade packages, due to their precision and performance sensitivity, magnify these impacts.

Closing

Fabrication is a milestone, but it is not proof of readiness.

Research across dispute analysis, lean production theory, and facade technical guidance consistently supports the same conclusion: production should begin only after coordination constraints are removed. In glazing projects, where tolerances are tight and system performance depends on interface continuity, releasing fabrication before reconciliation shifts unresolved risk into a phase where correction is more expensive and less predictable.

Protecting schedule sometimes requires slowing it briefly. In facade work, that discipline is often the difference between controlled execution and reactive recovery.