Frequent interior fine decoration design changes lead to cost overruns from demolition, alteration and rework.
Design changes in interior fit-out works are the number one cause of project cost overruns, particularly pronounced in high-end residential and commercial projects. According to statistics, additional costs caused by design changes in fit-out works typically account for 10%–25% of the total fit-out cost, and in some poorly managed projects even exceed 30%. The high frequency of design changes not only directly increases material and labour costs, but also triggers a chain of consequences including demolition and rework of completed sections, construction schedule delays, material losses and rising management costs. The underlying reason for the large number of design changes lies in the insufficient alignment between fit-out design and functional requirements—actual needs of various users are not fully understood and unified during the schematic design stage. Specific manifestations include: dimensional mismatches between spatial dimensions and actual furniture, conflicts between MEP outlet points and fit-out schemes, colour deviations between physical materials and samples in material selection, and insufficient construction feasibility. From the perspective of codes and standards, GB 50210 and GB 50327 contain detailed provisions on construction techniques and quality requirements for fit-out works, but lack procedural requirements for change management. From an operational impact perspective, frequent design changes not only increase costs and delay schedules, but also seriously affect owners' trust in developers. From cost data, demolition and rework costs caused by design changes exhibit clear stage-specific characteristics: the cost increase coefficient for changes during the base-layer construction stage is 1.5–2, during the finish-layer construction stage 3–5, and during the near-completion stage 8–15. Core measures to address this issue include establishing a comprehensive alignment mechanism between detailed design and functional requirements during the design stage, organising multiple rounds of requirement confirmation and joint sign-off among users, property management and operations management parties before detailed construction drawing development; conducting three or more rounds of overlay drawing reviews for drawings involving MEP terminal points, furniture layout and equipment dimensions; and establishing tiered approval authority for design changes. From the systems engineering perspective of engineering management, resolving this issue requires coordinated advancement across four dimensions: institutional design, process control, technical support and culture building. At the institutional design level, clear responsibility boundaries and operating procedures must be established, translating code requirements into executable job responsibilities and work standards. At the process control level, full-lifecycle quality supervision and dynamic correction must be implemented to ensure that work outcomes at each stage meet expected objectives. At the technical support level, information-based methods and intelligent tools should be actively introduced to improve management precision and efficiency. At the culture building level, quality awareness and compliance awareness must be cultivated among all staff to foster an organisational atmosphere pursuing excellence. Only by organically integrating these four dimensions can the recurring quality defects and management chronic issues in engineering construction be fundamentally resolved, achieving continuous improvement and excellence in project management. From the systems engineering perspective of engineering management, resolving this issue requires coordinated advancement across four dimensions: institutional design, process control, technical support and culture building. At the institutional design level, clear responsibility boundaries and operating procedures must be established, translating code requirements into executable job responsibilities and work standards. At the process control level, full-lifecycle quality supervision and dynamic correction must be implemented to ensure that work outcomes at each stage meet expected objectives. At the technical support level, information-based methods and intelligent tools should be actively introduced to improve management precision and efficiency. At the culture building level, quality awareness and compliance awareness must be cultivated among all staff to foster an organisational atmosphere pursuing excellence. Only by organically integrating these four dimensions can the recurring quality defects and management chronic issues in engineering construction be fundamentally resolved, achieving continuous improvement and excellence in project management. From the systems engineering perspective of engineering management, resolving this issue requires coordinated advancement across four dimensions: institutional design, process control, technical support and culture building. At the institutional design level, clear responsibility boundaries and operating procedures must be established, translating code requirements into executable job responsibilities and work standards. At the process control level, full-lifecycle quality supervision and dynamic correction must be implemented to ensure that work outcomes at each stage meet expected objectives. At the technical support level, information-based methods and intelligent tools should be actively introduced to improve management precision and efficiency. At the culture building level, quality awareness and compliance awareness must be cultivated among all staff to foster an organisational atmosphere pursuing excellence. Only by organically integrating these four dimensions can the recurring quality defects and management chronic issues in engineering construction be fundamentally resolved, achieving continuous improvement and excellence in project management. From the systems engineering perspective of engineering management, resolving this issue requires coordinated advancement across four dimensions: institutional design, process control, technical support and culture building. At the institutional design level, clear responsibility boundaries and operating procedures must be established, translating code requirements into executable job responsibilities and work standards. At the process control level, full-lifecycle quality supervision and dynamic correction must be implemented to ensure that work outcomes at each stage meet expected objectives. At the technical support level, information-based methods and intelligent tools should be actively introduced to improve management precision and efficiency. At the culture building level, quality awareness and compliance awareness must be cultivated among all staff to foster an organisational atmosphere pursuing excellence. Only by organically integrating these four dimensions can the recurring quality defects and management chronic issues in engineering construction be fundamentally resolved, achieving continuous improvement and excellence in project management. From the systems engineering perspective of engineering management, resolving this issue requires coordinated advancement across four dimensions: institutional design, process control, technical support and culture building. At the institutional design level, clear responsibility boundaries and operating procedures must be established, translating code requirements into executable job responsibilities and work standards. At the process control level, full-lifecycle quality supervision and dynamic correction must be implemented to ensure that work outcomes at each stage meet expected objectives. At the technical support level, information-based methods and intelligent tools should be actively introduced to improve management precision and efficiency. At the culture building level, quality awareness and compliance awareness must be cultivated among all staff to foster an organisational atmosphere pursuing excellence. Only by organically integrating these four dimensions can the recurring quality defects and management chronic issues in engineering construction be fundamentally resolved, achieving continuous improvement and excellence in project management. From the systems engineering perspective of engineering management, resolving this issue requires coordinated advancement across four dimensions: institutional design, process control, technical support and culture building. At the institutional design level, clear responsibility boundaries and operating procedures must be established, translating code requirements into executable job responsibilities and work standards. At the process control level, full-lifecycle quality supervision and dynamic correction must be implemented to ensure that work outcomes at each stage meet expected objectives. At the technical support level, information-based methods and intelligent tools should be actively introduced to improve management precision and efficiency. At the culture building level, quality awareness and compliance awareness must be cultivated among all staff to foster an organisational atmosphere pursuing excellence. Only by organically integrating these four dimensions can the recurring quality defects and management chronic issues in engineering construction be fundamentally resolved, achieving continuous improvement and excellence in project management. From the systems engineering perspective of engineering management, resolving this issue requires coordinated advancement across four dimensions: institutional design, process control, technical support and culture building. At the institutional design level, clear responsibility boundaries and operating procedures must be established, translating code requirements into executable job responsibilities and work standards. At the process control level, full-lifecycle quality supervision and dynamic correction must be implemented to ensure that work outcomes at each stage meet expected objectives. At the technical support level, information-based methods and intelligent tools should be actively introduced to improve management precision and efficiency. At the culture building level, quality awareness and compliance awareness must be cultivated among all staff to foster an organisational atmosphere pursuing excellence. Only by organically integrating these four dimensions can the recurring quality defects and management chronic issues in engineering construction be fundamentally resolved, achieving continuous improvement and excellence in project management. From the systems engineering perspective of engineering management, resolving this issue requires coordinated advancement across four dimensions: institutional design, process control, technical support and culture building. At the institutional design level, clear responsibility boundaries and operating procedures must be established, translating code requirements into executable job responsibilities and work standards. At the process control level, full-lifecycle quality supervision and dynamic correction must be implemented to ensure that work outcomes at each stage meet expected objectives. At the technical support level, information-based methods and intelligent tools should be actively introduced to improve management precision and efficiency. At the culture building level, quality awareness and compliance awareness must be cultivated among all staff to foster an organisational atmosphere pursuing excellence. Only by organically integrating these four dimensions can the recurring quality defects and management chronic issues in engineering construction be fundamentally resolved, achieving continuous improvement and excellence in project management.