In architecture and in trade‑fair / event projects, conversations revolve around budgets, footprints, design and technology. What almost no client or project lead prices in: interfaces between trades are among the biggest cost drivers. It’s not the luminaires, loudspeakers or cables that blow budgets—it’s the lack of coordination between stakeholders.

This is where technical general planning comes in. A specialist planning office takes overall responsibility for all technical trades—from AV and lighting to electrical engineering and safety‑critical systems such as fire detection (BMA) and voice alarm (SAA). Instead of five contacts, there is one. Instead of conflicting scopes, there is one integrated concept.

In practice, it often looks different. A typical project might run like this:

• The architect hires a lighting designer for architectural lighting.
• The event agency brings in an AV firm to plan media technology and sound reinforcement.
• A traditional MEP office is responsible for electrical systems and power distribution.
• Fire protection and safety systems are handled by the installer or a fire‑protection planner.

Everyone works in their own world—with their own standards, schedules and often their own goals. The result: collisions are inevitable.

• Detectors are mounted where truss with fixtures will later be installed.
• Power is designed for steady loads but not the short‑term peaks of show technology.
• PA systems are planned to meet acoustic requirements—but ignore that voice alarm takes priority.

What looks minor on paper quickly becomes expensive on site.

10–15% additional cost due to interface conflicts is not unusual—that’s a figure reported by multiple construction information centres and research institutions. In trade‑fair builds costs can be even higher because delays bite immediately.

Typical examples from practice:

• Double planning: a section of emergency lighting is included both by the lighting plan and by the architect—both invoice their work.
• Change orders: a trade planner discovers during build that their solution collides with another. Adjustments must happen immediately—with mark‑ups and stress.
• Coordination burden: the client or project management becomes the go‑between for trades—without having the technical competence.

Experience shows: interfaces cost not only money but also time, nerves and quality.

This is where technical general planning comes in. Instead of five or six separate planners there is one central point of contact.

Tasks of a general planner:

• Integrated planning: from the first idea to detailed design, all trades are considered together.
• Interface coordination: conflicts are identified and resolved already in design.
• Tendering: scopes are clearly delineated and double positions avoided.
• Quality assurance: site supervision, acceptances and documentation from a single source.
• Communication: one regular with a single planner replaces five parallel alignments.

A leading industrial company planned a brand presence at an international flagship trade fair. Booth size: 1,500 m². The plan was a complex combination of media technology, lighting, show elements and safety‑critical systems.

Originally the idea was to contract each trade separately. Instead the team chose technical general planning. The result:

• 12% cost savings versus the first estimate.
• no change orders during build.
• significantly reduced build time because conflicts were resolved in advance.

The client’s project lead commented later: “For the first time we felt we had the technology under control—not the other way round.”

Of course, general planning is not a silver bullet. It carries its own risks:

• Dependence on a single partner: if the general planner is unreliable, all trades are affected.
• Breadth of know‑how: the planner must have sufficiently deep expertise across all trades.
• Planning costs: the fee initially looks higher because the planner carries more responsibility.

These risks can be managed:

• Choose by certification (e.g. DIN 14675 for fire detection, ISO certifications).
• Define scope and responsibilities clearly in the contract.
• Engage early—already in concept phase.

Technical general planning is not a cost centre but an investment. It reduces complexity, saves money demonstrably and secures quality. Especially in architecture and trade‑fair / event builds with hard schedules and tight budgets, a single point of contact is often the only way to keep control.

Those who shy away from general planning save in the wrong place—and often pay multiples later.