Gunter Dittmar was my icon in graduate school. He was a despondent German expatriate bombed into depression while growing up in Berlin during the Allied blitz. Amid his slow and thoughtful speech was a bit of genius. He understood that the "problem solving process" and the “problem seeking process” involved keeping the "levels of abstraction" aligned and not mixed up.

For example, you can't solve the big picture if you're focused too early on how many doorknobs and how much they cost each. Ultimately you care about the doorknobs, but only in the right sequence and at the right time.

          “The is nothing more worrisome that the wrong question answered well”            (quote from South American Architect on TED talks)

The reasons for the mix-ups are many are 1) participants competing for influence in the process and sowing mixed levels just to be in the conversation, 2) sometimes the logical structure of the issue is simply misunderstood and the conversationalists get down the rabbit hole, 3) the participating silos have standards of practice that run in opposition to one another, 4) the participants don't like one another, and 5) disorderly allocation of risk (hours of effort in dollars) etc .

In any event put first things first as you move from concepts to details.

(For purposes of this document, planning, design, construction, and development of real property (a.k.a. buildings) will be referred to as the “AEC” industry.)

It is common that many customers to services in the AEC industry seldom do business there and in many cases the project undertaken is a "one-off." Furthermore, these customers find themselves in the position of attempting to manage many intertwining contracts while all at the same time successfully operating the business that brought them to needing more in the way of property (buildings). These conditions, in and of themselves put up barriers to success, but there are more equally significant obstacles lurking at the outset.