Two New Podcast Episodes: When to Speak Up—and How to Get Credit for Value
Two new episodes of the GBA Podcast Case History series are now available—each built around a real-world scenario that turns lived experience into practical, firm-protecting insight.
The March 17 episode explores what can happen when a project team pressures you to stay quiet and “just follow the plans,” even when conditions demand professional judgment. The March 31 episode features a “higher-ground” outcome—where smart field observations and innovative testing created major client savings.
Don’t Rush “Go Along to Get Along.” Don’t Get Bullied
In this episode about GBA Case History #89, a GBA member firm is retained for a geotechnical study and later construction materials engineering and testing services for a challenging building site. Early in construction, a “small” field issue reveals a bigger risk dynamic. The member firm recommends using clay—but that judgment becomes a flashpoint.
The firm is told to stop making field judgments, reminded that interpretation of contract documents “rests solely with the architect and its consulting engineers,” and effectively restricted to enforcing the plans and specifications “as written.” But after the winter season, the site’s sidewalks experience severe frost heave, and pavement distress follows.
This episode is a powerful reminder that the way you document, set boundaries, and structure contracts can matter just as much as technical competence when a project turns adversarial.
Challenge Yourself… Be a Consultant… Serve Your Client… The GBA Story
This episode features a “higher-ground” case history (#113) with a positive outcome—while still carrying lessons every geoprofessional should internalize.
A nine-story hospital on hilly terrain requires deep cuts and thick fills. Blasted limestone from cut areas is reused as fill, but clayey overburden soils become mixed into the rock during blasting—creating highly variable soil-rock fill and a tough problem for compaction control and pavement design.
The geotechnical report prepared by another firm recommends designing pavements for a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of 4—typical and conservative for clayey subgrades. But early field observations suggest the rock-rich fill should perform far better. With no local precedent for testing mixed soil-rock fill (and boulders up to 18 inches complicating matters), the GBA member firm faces a classic dilemma: accept a “safe” design that costs more, or carefully develop a defensible path to value?
What follows is an excellent example of innovative thinking anchored in sound engineering. The result: approximately $600,000 in savings for the owner.
Subscribe to the GBA Podcast
Want new episodes delivered automatically?
About the GBA Podcast
GBA podcasts were created by GBA’s Emerging Leaders Class and contain information and expertise from geoprofessionals around the globe. Series include GeoHeroes, Management Best Practices, Case Histories, Diversity, Equity & Inclusion, Leadership Lounge, and The 1st Word.