By role
AI for design managers: follow decisions through the issue package
Choose one decision and follow its consequences. A useful coordination record connects the agreed change to the designers, documents and checks it affects.
Contents · 5
Organize around a decision and its dependencies
A design manager often spends more time establishing which information is current than finding information at all. AI can help compare discipline briefs, summarize unresolved comments and assemble a change register. Its useful output connects a decision to the documents and people that must act on it.
Choose one concrete change: moving an entrance, replacing an air-handling unit or changing a floor level. Ask which supplied documents still contain the previous value, which teams received the new instruction and where confirmation is missing. This is more reviewable than asking whether an entire folder is coordinated.
The assistant needs evidence of authority. A meeting suggestion, a client request and an approved instruction are different records. Keep proposal, approval, implementation and verification separate. No summary should promote a tentative statement into an agreed design decision.
Establish the current information set
Provide an issue register with document identifiers, revisions, dates, status and responsible discipline. Include superseded documents only when comparison is intended, and label them explicitly. Filenames and upload order are weak indicators of which document controls the work.
Give the team structure and the accepted approval route. The person who maintains a schedule may not have authority to change the underlying engineering value. Ask the assistant to propose owners where necessary, then confirm assignments with the actual project team.
For numerical comparisons, define the basis. Gross floor area, usable area and site coverage can all be described casually as “area.” Retain the project's definitions, measurement rules, units and rounding. An apparent discrepancy may be a difference in scope rather than an error.
An example: a revised equipment requirement
Suppose an approved equipment selection changes electrical demand and maintenance access. Supply the approved selection, services brief, electrical schedule and architectural plant-room drawing. Identify the source revision that controls the comparison.
Trace the approved equipment change notice CN-14 through the supplied issue package. Preserve document IDs and revisions. List old values still present, affected interfaces, missing acknowledgements and evidence needed for closure. Separate confirmed inconsistencies from possible dependencies. Do not infer approval from a meeting note or mark an action complete without a revised document.
The resulting register should distinguish the electrical load update from the access review. Both arise from the same change, but they have different owners and verification evidence. Ask each discipline to confirm additional consequences rather than treating the assistant's first dependency list as exhaustive.
| Record | Useful fields |
|---|---|
| Decision | ID, approved wording, authority and date |
| Input change | Previous value, new value, units and source |
| Dependency | Affected discipline, document and interface |
| Action | Owner, due date and required deliverable |
| Closure | Revised source and evidence of review |
Turn coordination meetings into decisions
Use AI to prepare an agenda from unresolved records. Group items by the decision needed, identify missing evidence and include the people required to resolve them. A long chronological transcript is usually less useful than a short list of decisions with supporting references.
After the meeting, keep quotations or source passages for disputed points. Draft minutes with separate decisions, actions and open questions. Ask participants to confirm the record before using it as a design instruction. A fluent summary can omit a qualification that changes the meaning of an agreement.
Where a decision affects multiple documents, define completion as a package condition. Updating the plan while leaving the schedule and brief unchanged is partial implementation. Assign the final coordination check and retain the relevant revision references.
Verify changes at the next issue
Compare the next issue register with the approved action list. Check that expected files arrived, that their revisions changed as intended and that the content supports the claimed correction. A new revision letter alone does not prove the action was implemented.
Retain unresolved interfaces in the issue decision. Missing inputs should not disappear when the register is summarized. Record who accepts a remaining assumption and what event will require it to be revisited. This makes later changes understandable without reconstructing an entire email chain.
Assess the workflow by total coordination effort: preparation, AI processing, review and correction. A shorter meeting is useful only if it produces clear decisions and fewer unresolved interfaces at issue time.
ARAI can help with an individual drawing question that supports coordination, such as checking the geometry affected by a revised brief. Prepare a coordination drawing task. For formal comment tracking, see AI for design review.
Ask ARAI about your project
Prepared by ARAI’s editors with AI assistance. Product information was checked against official sources as of the update date. Report an error at hello@arai.build.