Value engineering refers to a specific set of methods and procedures designed to optimize the value of a product or service, based on the relationship of function over cost. Every product has a particular function for which it is intended; balancing a product’s ability to fulfill that function against the cost of producing that product defines its value, and maximizing value—maximizing function while minimizing cost—is the goal of value engineering.

If we consider each scenic unit as an individual “product,” the…ahem…value of value engineering becomes clear: a savvy technical director develops his or her bottom-up cost estimate based on construction processes and material choices that best achieve the perceived “function” of each unit, while minimizing its cost. In fact, it’s unlikely that any technical director worth their salt isn’t applying some adaptation of the value engineering process, even if he or she doesn’t realize they’re doing it.

SAVE International, an organization dedicated to the advancement of the value engineering process, details a six-step methodology for maximizing value:

1. Information Phase: Gather information to better understand the project.
2. Function Analysis Phase: Analyze the project to understand and clarify the required functions.
3. Creative Phase: Generate ideas on all the possible ways to accomplish the required functions.
4. Evaluation Phase: Synthesize ideas and concepts to select feasible ideas for development into specific value improvement.
5. Development Phase: Select and prepare the “best” alternative(s) for improving value.
6. Presentation Phase: Present the value recommendation to the project stakeholders.

[In engineering projects, we sometimes encounter a variant of these six steps in the four-phase design process, which starts with a design specification phase (similar to steps 1 and 2, above), a concept design phase (steps 3 and 4, above), a detail design phase (step 5, above), and a design for implementation phase (step 6, above). Though this process is often employed to minimize risk in a design—the possibility that a product will not perform its function effectively—if one includes material and labor costs in the initial design specification, the four-phase process can perform double duty as a value-engineering methodology as well.]

It is important to distinguish the “function” of a unit from what it physically does. Sure, a turntable’s function is to revolve scenic units on stage. But what is the “function” of 12” deep crown molding? This is an aesthetic function, not a physical one, but knowing the specific aesthetic goals is just as important to maximizing the value of this crown molding as knowing that a turntable revolves counterclockwise.

When applied during the bottom-up cost estimation process for a scenic project, the value engineering methodology requires a technical director to be in close contact with the set designer and the director in order to develop a well-defined function analysis. When approached properly, this process also helps to foster a collaborative relationship amongst the designer, director and technical director: by seeking clarity about how each unit works in the scope of the entire project, a technical director demonstrates a desire to achieve the aesthetic goals of the artists involved on the production, and to finding a way to accomplish them in the most cost-effective manner possible. This can be vital later on in the process, when decisions may have to be made to bring an over-budget project into a cost range that is manageable.

Frankly, this is where the value engineering methodology can really demonstrate its power. It’s never easy bringing an over budget project under budget—the process can often be perceived as adversarial, pitting artists against bean-counters. A technical director who has worked with the designer and director to clarify function and maximize value during the bottom-up estimation process has not only made it possible to enter into the cost-cutting process in a collaborative manner, he or she has also laid the foundation for an understanding of those elements whose costs are higher and those whose costs are lower. Both of these set the stage for leveraging the value engineering methodology for the entire project as a product.

By considering the whole of the set as a product whose value must be maximized during the cost-cutting process, participants are able to frame potentially contentious conversations about “what I want,” as much more productive, “what it does for the production,” questions. By examining how much value each unit adds to the entire set—given how much each unit or element costs, how much does it improve the function of the set as a whole?—the cost-cutting process that has to happen to bring an over budget set to something affordable can be a more collaborative process focused on the shared goal of creating a quality production.

Next week: But what about labor!?