Technical Office Engineer Interview Questions

Describe a day, not a definition. Morning: check the RFI log for what came back overnight and what is about to go overdue. Then a batch of shop drawings to check before they go to the consultant, a take-off for an item the valuation needs, a response sheet for consultant comments on a submittal. Somewhere in the afternoon the site calls to ask whether the drawing they are holding is the current revision.

That last call is the job. The technical office is the one place on the project that is supposed to know which version of every document is live today.

They are checking you will not ask for a transfer to site in six months. Tie your answer to the work itself — documents turn into money here — and say you still want regular site time, because an office engineer who has never stood at a pour does not understand why site is shouting.

List them: the agreement, general and particular conditions, specification, drawings, bill of quantities, plus addenda and agreed correspondence.

Then the part that separates people. The order of precedence is not folklore you memorise; it is written in the contract. "The contract sets it, and reading that clause is the first thing I do on a new job" is the right answer. "Specs always beat drawings" tells the panel you have never opened one.

The number at the bottom matters less than the sheet above it. Lay it out the way a real take-off sheet looks: element, drawing reference, dimensions, number, result, and a deductions column. Talk while you work. When you deduct the stair opening, say why; when you leave the small drainage openings in, say why that too.

Then ask the question the interviewer is waiting for: what is this quantity for? A purchase quantity includes laps and wastage because you pay for them. A valuation quantity follows whatever method of measurement the contract names. Ask which one before you write the final figure, and you will have answered the hardest part of the test without being asked.

Because the same slab gives different billable quantities under different rules. Name the one you have used. If it's RICS NRM 2, know its basics: work is measured net as fixed in position, the extra material for laps, joints and waste is treated as part of that net item rather than added on top, and openings at the boundary of a measured area are always deducted.

On your project the bill may be written to a different standard, or to the project's own preambles. The strong answer says so, and says you read the preambles before you measure anything.

Under NRM 2, no: in-situ concrete takes no deduction for reinforcement, or for voids under 0.05 cubic metres (troughed and coffered slabs aside). Other rules can differ, so name the one you are quoting.

It depends on the contract, and the panel wants to hear that before anything else. On a remeasured contract the contractor is paid for what was actually built at the bill rates, so the quantity moves. On a lump sum the contractor generally carries quantity risk within the defined scope.

Then ask why it grew. If the drawings changed, that's a variation, not a measurement error, and it is priced differently. And either way the executed figure stands on joint measurement records signed with the consultant, not on your take-off alone.

More than the item description. The rate covers what the description says plus whatever the preambles and the method of measurement deem included: formwork, extra excavation, testing, depending on the bill. Read the item alone and you will either claim formwork twice or lose it once.

Money in the bill for work that couldn't be defined at tender. It's spent only on instruction and as the contract says. Treat it as a placeholder, never as margin.

"More detail" is the answer that fails. The interviewer wants to hear what the detail is.

For a concrete frame: full setting-out dimensions site can mark from; reinforcement detailed with cut lengths, laps and where the laps fall; openings and sleeves taken from the coordinated MEP drawings; levels; and the RFI numbers that resolved any clash on that sheet. In the title block, the drawing number, the revision, and the design drawing it was developed from.

Then the line that marks you as safe: a shop drawing does not change the design. If something has to change — a bar size, a level — that goes through an RFI or a proposal and gets approved first. It does not get slipped into the shop drawing in the hope nobody notices.

A fixed numbering system that carries the project, discipline and drawing type; a revision index that moves with every issue; clouds around what changed and a line in the revision table saying what and why.

Then the bit candidates skip: what happens to the old revision. It gets stamped superseded and pulled back from site against a transmittal. Issuing the new one is not enough. The superseded drawing still sitting in a subcontractor's drawer is the one that gets built from.

First, know what the status means on this project. Consultants commonly use lettered codes — approved, approved as noted, revise and resubmit, sometimes rejected — but the project's submittal procedure defines them, not habit. Say that before anything else.

Then: answer every comment in a comment-response sheet (done, or not done and why), and resubmit at the next revision. And the part that matters on site: nothing gets built off a revise-and-resubmit drawing, including the bits the consultant didn't comment on.

Manufacturer's data sheets, test certificates, samples where the spec asks for them, supplier details. The document that makes the difference is the compliance statement: the specification taken clause by clause, with what the product offers set against each one, compliant or not, and a page reference into the data sheet.

Fill the non-compliant column honestly. The consultant will find the deviation either way; the only question is whether they find it in your table or find it themselves and stop trusting your next submittal.

This tells the interviewer whether you understand the specification is part of the contract.

Prove the unavailability on paper: a letter from the supplier or a written lead time. Raise a substitution request with a clause-by-clause comparison of the specified product and the proposed one, plus the effect on cost and programme. Order nothing until it is approved.

Then the money question, which lifts a mid-level answer: if the substitute is cheaper, who keeps the saving? The contract decides, and it may be handled as a variation. Raising that unprompted sounds like someone who has sat in a commercial meeting.

Three questions that arrive separately and share one answer: what's a method statement, what's an ITP, and what's the difference between a hold point and a witness point.

The method statement says how the work will be done: sequence, plant, labour, safety measures, who is responsible. The inspection and test plan says what gets checked, when, by whom, and against what acceptance criteria. The ITP is where the method turns into signatures.

At a hold point work stops until the consultant attends and signs. At a witness point they are notified, and if they don't turn up at the agreed time, work carries on. Mix those two up and you have told the panel you have never waited for an inspector.

A live test in some interviews, sometimes with two printed sheets in front of you. They are not marking your English. They are checking whether the consultant could answer what you wrote.

A good RFI asks one question, not three. It gives exact references (drawing number and revision, grid, level, spec clause), describes the conflict without interpreting it, proposes a solution so the consultant can reply "agreed", and states a required-by date with the reason for it — "slab formwork starts Monday".

Write it in that order in front of them and say why the proposal is there: consultants answer a proposal faster than an open question.

An RFI log with sent date, required-by date, age in days, status, and the programme activity waiting on it. Then a written reminder, then the overdue items tabled at the progress meeting and minuted.

And the sentence they want: site does not build ahead of an answer because "they'll obviously agree". If site does, the technical office will be asked why it didn't stop them.

Describe the structure. It's cumulative: for each item, quantity executed to date, less what was certified previously, gives this period. Add materials on site if the contract allows it. Then deductions: advance payment recovery, retention, anything else agreed.

Then the supporting documents, which is where experience shows: signed measurement records and approved inspection requests, because work that hasn't been inspected and accepted doesn't get certified. Under FIDIC's 2017 Red Book, the Engineer measures the works and issues the payment certificates, and if they withhold an amount from an interim certificate they have to give reasons and show the calculation. In practice that means a good application leaves them nothing to withhold.

And before you submit, ask whether one disputed item could hold up the rest. If it could, split it out.

Three comparisons. Their quantities against what was measured and accepted. Their rates against their subcontract, not your main contract. And what they're claiming against what you claimed for the same work. If they're asking for quantities your client hasn't paid you for yet, find out why.

Then their deductions: advance, retention, and back-charges for anything the company paid on their behalf. Back-charges need paper at the time, not a list assembled at final account.

Don't trust the clouds. Things change without one.

Overlay the new revision on the old one — in AutoCAD if you can — re-measure what moved and compare it with the bill and the contract scope. A change in quantity, quality, scope or sequence is what makes it a variation. Then price it and put it in writing before site starts.

The panel is deciding whether you'll protect the company or let changes slide through quietly. A specific example answers that better than any principle.

The usual ladder: the bill rate if one applies, then a similar item adjusted for the difference, then a new rate built from scratch. Your contract sets which ladder is binding.

A built-up rate comes from components: materials from quotations, labour from productivity, plant, then overheads and profit. Say where each number came from. A rate analysis with no source for its productivity gets bounced on first review.

Under FIDIC 2017, the contractor gives the Engineer notice immediately, and before starting the work, that it considers the instruction a variation; the Engineer then has seven days to respond. Your contract may differ, so say which form you're quoting.

The principle travels to any form: notice comes before execution, not after. Building first and arguing later turns a variation into a claim, and a claim is a much harder thing to get paid.

On a lot of jobs it's combined services drawings: electrical, HVAC and plumbing laid over the structure on one sheet, with openings and sleeves checked with the structural designer before the pour.

Where the project runs a BIM model, clash detection is done in software — Navisworks' Clash Detective, for instance — and each clash is assigned to someone to resolve. Mention it if you've used it; if you haven't, say you know the idea. Clash detection doesn't fix anything. It gives you a list, and the fix is a coordination meeting.

A numbered record of what was issued, at which revision, to whom, when, and for what purpose: approval, information, construction. A year later, when someone asks when you received revision 3, the transmittal answers it, not anyone's memory.

Email moves the file. It isn't the record. Say where the record lives on your project, whether that's a document management system or a strictly numbered folder.

On day one of construction. Site red-lines changes on a marked-up set as they happen, and the technical office picks them up regularly. Anyone who draws as-builts from memory in the last month hands over drawings nobody believes.

They aren't a formality either: handing them over is often tied to taking-over or the final payment, depending on the contract.

The baseline is a complete copy of the approved programme, saved before the first update, which progress gets compared against. The update is the live schedule where actual dates and percent complete go in each period. Comparing the two tells you whether you're late, and where.

Connect it to your desk: your submittal log should know which programme activity each submittal feeds. That turns a consultant's late reply into a number of days instead of a complaint.

AutoCAD: open a drawing and pull an area off it with a polyline, handle layers and xrefs without getting lost, measure at the right scale. Excel: a tidy take-off sheet, formulas rather than typed-in results, a conditional sum by item. Typing a result into a cell by hand costs you marks even when the number is right.

If Revit or P6 is on your CV, expect a practical question on those too. Separate what you've used on a live project from what you did on a course.

The trap is that it invites you to complain about the consultant. Don't. Describe what you did.

Don't start with who's to blame. Start with what was built: does it match the submitted drawing, and are comments likely? Tell your manager in writing, and decide with them whether to notify the consultant now or push the approval through — but don't hide it, because the consultant will find it at inspection.

Then fix the cause. Why didn't site know the drawing wasn't approved? If unapproved drawings were within their reach, that's a technical office problem before it's a site one.

An integrity question dressed as a technical one. The only acceptable answer is that you correct it; how you do it is what's being scored.

Tell your manager first, with the figure and the cause. Correct it in the next application — valuations are cumulative, so the correction shows as a clear reduction, not a quiet edit. Then say what you changed so it doesn't recur: a second check, or tying the take-off to signed measurement records.

Sit down over the take-off, not the total. Ask to see theirs and go line by line: reference, dimensions, deductions. Often the gap is one line — a different measurement rule, or a different drawing revision.

What the take-offs can't settle gets written up and escalated, and split out so it doesn't hold up the rest of the valuation. And keep it impersonal: you will be sitting across from this person every month until the final account.

Don't say you'd work late. Say how you'd split it: the items that carry the bulk of the value get measured and priced carefully; small items get rates from previous jobs, adjusted. Supplier and subcontractor enquiries go out on day one, because they're the slowest part.

Then write down your assumptions and exclusions and submit them with the price, and raise every tender query before the query deadline. A price built on an assumption nobody wrote down is a loss waiting for the contract to be signed.