Experiment 03 / Research concept
Understand and shorten lead times
Examine the time between identifying a need and having the work ready to install.
An equipment delivery date depends on more than manufacturing time. Design decisions, submittal preparation, reviews, purchasing, production capacity, testing, transportation, and site readiness all contribute to the elapsed time.
We’re exploring how AI agents could examine that full sequence, identify where time is being spent, and develop practical ways to shorten it. That includes questioning whether a custom product, a bundled purchase, or a particular sequence is necessary to meet the project’s requirements.
The questionCan AI identify which time is necessary, which time is avoidable, and which changes would actually advance construction or turnover?
A principle across the lab
Valid and early signal.
Valid: establish the basis.
Use identifiable, current evidence relevant to the affected work. Keep confirmed facts, reported information, and AI inferences distinguishable. Identify missing or conflicting information.
Early: preserve time to act.
Identify a concern before a decision or commitment becomes difficult or costly to change, with enough time for the team to investigate and respond.
Prepare a useful response.
Explain what changed, the supporting evidence, what remains uncertain, the affected work, and when a response is needed to preserve the available options.
For this experiment, look for evidence that a procurement or delivery commitment may be at risk before the supplier revises the delivery forecast. An unresolved selection, an unconfirmed production slot, a component shortage, or a missed fabrication milestone could warrant investigation.
01 / The experiment
What we would test
Establish what is needed and when.
Connect each equipment or material package to its performance requirements, design information, procurement commitments, installation activities, and commissioning requirements.
Work backward from the date the package is needed for installation. Identify when selections, reviews, purchase orders, fabrication releases, and deliveries must occur. Check those dates against current supplier information and the construction schedule.
Find out what the quoted lead time includes.
Examine supplier quotations, submittal schedules, correspondence, purchase orders, and production updates to distinguish:
- Time spent preparing and reviewing technical information.
- Time waiting for decisions, funding, or authorization.
- Time waiting for materials or an available production slot.
- Time required for fabrication, assembly, testing, and transportation.
Identify when the supplier’s delivery period begins. A quotation may measure lead time from an approved fabrication release rather than from the purchase order date.
Where the basis is unclear, agents prepare specific questions for the supplier. Unconfirmed availability remains an open assumption.
Challenge what creates the long lead time.
Investigate which requirements drive customization, scarce components, special testing, or additional reviews.
Could a standard configuration meet the required performance? Could an available product be accepted through the substitution process? Could a package be divided so a stable portion can be released earlier? Could repeated reviews be consolidated around one coordinated submission?
Agents prepare alternatives and their consequences for the responsible designers, procurement team, contractor, and owner to evaluate.
Prepare decisions before they become urgent.
Continuously check approaching procurement milestones against unresolved selections, incomplete submittals, review comments, and supplier commitments.
Agents assemble the information needed for the next decision, flag conflicts across disciplines, and prepare proposed responses. When information changes, they reassess the affected purchases, installation work, and completion milestones.
Each finding identifies what changed, its evidence, the remaining uncertainty, and when a response is needed to preserve the available options.
Compare changes against the whole project.
Evaluate alternatives such as earlier purchasing, production-slot reservations, different suppliers, partial shipments, off-site assembly, and revised installation sequences.
Compare the expected schedule benefit with added cost, storage, handling, design changes, warranty implications, and rework exposure. Check whether the proposed change advances a controlling activity or completion milestone.
An earlier delivery has limited value if access, supporting construction, or the installation crew will remain unavailable.
Check commitments against actual progress.
Following authorization, agents track the agreed procurement actions, fabrication milestones, testing, shipment, and site preparations.
They identify missed commitments, investigate the consequences, and prepare recovery options. Actual durations and outcomes provide evidence for later procurement planning.
Where evidence is incomplete, agents prepare a targeted supplier inquiry or project-record check. Project professionals receive an assessed finding and proposed response, with enough context to apply their judgment.
02 / An illustrative scenario
A switchgear delivery date threatens energization.
The supplier’s quotation gives a delivery period beginning after approval for fabrication. The project schedule assumes that period begins when the purchase order is issued.
Agents identify the difference and trace the decisions needed to release fabrication. They also investigate which specified features require custom engineering or components with limited availability.
Could a different configuration or an earlier decision protect energization?
The agents prepare a comparison of the specified arrangement and available alternatives. The comparison identifies electrical ratings, dimensions, maintenance access, utility requirements, cost differences, and changes to related construction.
The electrical engineer evaluates technical acceptability. The procurement team confirms current availability and commercial terms with the supplier. The contractor checks installation and energization consequences.
The team receives a proposed procurement sequence showing the decisions required, the information supporting each option, and the effect on the project schedule.
03 / Evidence of value
What would establish value
Did the system identify a supported concern early enough for the team to take an effective action?
Evaluate the findings against the information available at the time. Record unsupported alerts, missed concerns, and the effort required to investigate them, alongside the results of accepted proposals.
- Less elapsed time from identifying a requirement to releasing the purchase or fabrication.
- Fewer procurement delays caused by incomplete or conflicting information.
- Earlier identification of unreliable delivery assumptions.
- Shorter delivery cycles where acceptable changes to specification, sourcing, or sequencing are available.
- Evidence that improvements advanced installation, energization, commissioning, or turnover.
- A clear accounting of added costs and risks, so acceleration does not create a larger problem elsewhere.