A judicial surgery....

I get troubled by huge legal fees in disputes, countless non-recoverable management costs, inappropriate use of adjudication, some immoral and unethical tactics and so on. Of course we must strive to avoid lengthy/costly disputes as best we can and only press the formal legal button as an absolute last resort, but once that button is pressed then that's it; you are in the grips of a process that isn't exactly designed to be time/cost effective. I can't see previous reforms have really made that step change difference in dispute resolution.

So here's some thoughts on how we could make it a more just process.....open a few 'dispute surgeries'. This is paid for by Govt who should get a good return on fewer formal disputes and less Court fees. The  'doctors' would be most likely be practical people - judges, the odd expert and so on. Their role (say 2 of these 'doctors' at a time) is to have a no more than say 60mins consultation with both parties in dispute (or at least one of them!). They would listen to the basic facts presented and how the parties would best like to resolve the dispute then make a decision as to the most appropriate means to resolve the dispute - it could be mediation, conciliation, adjudication, arm wrestling or straight to arbitration or litigation.

Rather than force us through adjudication which seems to me to be utterly inappropriate and massively abused in many instances I hear of, the 'doctor(s)' writes a prescription and the parties book an appointment at the chemist to get their dispute solving medicine. I would love the 'doctor(s)' to be able to say the sum in dispute is £100k so the parties cannot each spend more than say £40k in costs (or whatever) preparing for the hearing (or if they do they bear them). We get appropriate dispute resolution decided by sensible experts with a sensible cap on the input from both parties in getting to the truth as quickly as possible

Sensible or stupid; possible or impossible (as too many self-interests)?

How about capping/limiting legal costs in cases?

In the Ampleforth Abbey Trust v Turner & Townsend Project Management Limited, I've read a few commentaries on lessons learnt and none seem to come from the angle I'm looking from (not surprising some might say). Although there are no doubt some salutary lessons on letters on intent, limits of liability and all that stuff, that I can see the losers (weren't both parties losers really in this thing going to Court?) were told to pay the winners a few hundred thousand pounds. Where am I going with this, well it's all the other costs of course - legal fees, expert witnesses, the judge, the court, management lost time of both organisations and so on. I'm sure it might be easy enough to find out the legal fees in this case but it would not surprise me if these were many times the award amount.

Is this a problem? Of course it is! Apart from why do these sorts of cases have legal fees likely heavily outweighing the disputed amount, why are the parties and their advisers allowed to do this? Here's a thought, forget the highly dubious 'no win, no fee' and relying on justice through award of costs, how about costs recovery of the parties however incurred cannot be more than the sum awarded - or words to that effect, but you get my gist?

Where is the business case for spending more costs than the sum at stake, this from the perspective of the parties? I'm aware such costs can be sometimes clipped back but I'm talking about throwing the whole system upside down so the parties have to seriously think about the sum at stake, how much legal/management etc time/fees they can therefore commit and maybe, just maybe, realism will take a grip and we will have some sensible outcomes.

Just a thought, actually that prompts another thought....

Anti-collusion et al certificates

Another thing recently is someone asking where the NEC versions of eg anti-collusion certificates were located. They aren't. It then struck me, why do we have things like this from tenders basically saying, "...guvnor, we promise we have not broken the law...". Why would we want to do this, what on earth does it add to anything? Doesn't collusion = corruption = fraud = criminal offence (=maybe 3 good meals a day and an Xbox?!), or at least something along those lines?

There are a million certificates we could write promising not to break the law or act in a completely wrong manner. What is the point?

The intelligent client needs to weed out bad suppliers - maybe ask about Court convictions or the like for collusion, corruption, bungs and whatever else takes your fancy. Maybe this takes out the baddies from the tendering process and makes other smarten their act up. One thing I can say, it's a little bit late to find that you are in contract with someone who turns out has colluded, maybe good grounds for termination but the damage is done.

If we have legal/moral/ethical and other standards that suppliers must match up to before even been given a chance to tender, stick that stake in the ground and sort out those who can, from those who can't match up to such standards.

Rob

Letters of intent - part 2!

I remember having a rant about just how rubbish/bad/useless etc letters of intent are and some of you agreed. See previous blog below.

http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=491774513914518621#editor/target=post;postID=8930257740702719408

Then  we recently have Ampleforth Abbey Trust v Turner & Townsend Project Management Limited and that to me serves only to reinforce never ever ever using these damn things. There is absolutely no excuse not to use a standard form instead of a letter of intent if you absolutely must get on with something whilst we wait for ....for what, really what is the issue here, why can't people step up and do whatever they have to do to get the formal agreement signed? So, how about my golden rules for letter of intent:

1. Never ever ever use them
2. Bust a gut to get the formal agreement in place before proceeding
3. If it looks unlikely to get the agreement in place for whatever reason then really really bust a gut and do whatever you have to do to get the formal agreement in place
4. If this definitely cannot happen (which I just don't believe) then use something like NEC3 ECC to procure a bit of what you must have - use Option E if you need need some sort of random start now; Option A if you know what you want odering/doing now; Option C if you know what you want odering/doing now but there is an inherent amount of Contractor's risk in this
5. Once 4 occurs, as buyer you have definitely relinquished a bit of bargaining power - why would you want to do this? So dwell on 3 and make it happen.

What I would love to see is at least the professional bodies coming out and saying...."letters of intent are [choose from rubbish/negligent/bad practice/really rubbish]" and giving the Courts a helping hand. This of course won't happen. Lots of people make very nice incomes from the very chaos that letters of intent cause.

There, breath, rant over....

Do sellers carry out due diligence on buyers?

I have read a few cases recently and did a note to self 'make sure I never get involved with those cowboys', as you do! Anyway, I see masses of questions (pre-qualification, tender etc) from buyers to sellers (much of it not necessary but that's another story), but how often do sellers carry out some sort of due diligence on their buyers (at any level of the supply chain)? What is the legal status of the actual company I might enter into contract with, what sort of reputation do they have, what are their payment records to sellers, maybe something on culture, and so on? I bet people are wary of doing this, thinking it might 'upset' the buyer but that's tosh. What do people think, how frequently does this sort of check take place?

Rob

UK Govt Z clauses - fair payment

See link below to updated UK Govt Z clauses for consideration in any public procured contracts. Z1 and Z2 are slightly modified (replacing OGC with ERG), Z is as was (but in the process of being updated currently), Z4 is on hold (!) and Z5 is a new clause dealing with fair payment. That's more than enough Z clauses for anyone.....!

Rob

http://www.neccontract.com/amendments.asp

Built in Britain - BBC programme

An interesting BBC documentary on engineering challenges in Britain eg CTRL/Olympics. Great messages like our project, alignment of objectives, incentivisation and NEC. What more can you ask for...?!

Enjoy

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01ngs45/Built_in_Britain_Episode_2/

Starting work before the contract is agreed

Dear all,

Seems quite topical at the moment but I was wondering what sort of percentage of jobs actually commence without having a contract in place? I've never been involved in a job that hasn't had the award letter in place (and therefore a contract) before commencement, but a few that didn't have the formal agreement executed. To allow contractors to start without at least an award letter in place has to be bordering on negligence, or at least madness! Why would a contractor be motivated to knuckle down and agree a few outstanding matters once his feet are under the table and he has commenced work on site - he has the client over a barrel and who let him get to that position?

Would be interesting to see what people think on this, quite how many projects are without an award letter, and please don't refer to (what I think are utterly useless) letters of intent as we've had some banter on that before!

Rob

Article on getting programmes accepted

Dear all,

Link here is to a really good article on programme requirements for the NEC3 ECC with some handy tips on getting programmes accepted. Enjoy...

Rob

http://mag.digitalpc.co.uk/fvx/ces/12clr/?pn=54

Student NEC research

Dear all,

Maybe the last help needed for students this week. In the student's own words.....

Hi

My Name is Noel Martin I am a master degree student in Queens University in Belfast in Northern Ireland.My course is called construction project management. I am carrying out research for my final thesis on public private partnerships (P3 projects) specifically the special purpose vehicles/ entity which have many sponsors that are created to carry out each specific projects. I have prepared a questionnaire relating to risk, relationships and finance it can be completed in around 7 minutes.

If you could take a few minutes to assist me in my research i would be very grateful.

Regards Noel martin
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dHNWZlZVU1EzTDVTRWJhemJCQm5Pcmc6MQ

NEC student research

Dear all,

Another student survey to occupy your lunchtime if possible, this one on design management of fast track projects. In the student's own words.......

Dear Sir or Madam,

My name is Ahmed Rushdhie, and I am an MSc (construction project management) student at the University of Wolverhampton working under the supervision of Dr. Felix Hammond. As a part of my programme I am carrying out a study into the Design Management of Fast-Track project.

Completion of the attached questionnaire will take approximately 10 minutes, and all questions can be answered by following the simple instructions. Completion of the questionnaire is completely voluntary. All responses are anonymous, there are no correct or incorrect answers and respondents who take part will not be identifiable. If results of this study are published they will be a summary of all responses to ensure that your privacy is protected.

Should you choose to complete the questionnaire, once you finish it please click finish button to close questionnaire. By returning the questionnaire in this manner your anonymity is ensured, so please use no identifiable markings. Returning this questionnaire will be considered as your consent to participate in the survey.

Once completed a summary of results will be available at the conclusion of the academic year. If you wish to obtain a copy of these results, please provide your contact details. Please note that all data gathered for this research will be stored securely and destroyed after the dissertation has been submitted. My supervisor and I will be the only people who will have access to this data.

Thank you for taking time to consider this invitation and if you choose to participate in this research. I would like to extend my personal gratitude; your contribution is greatly appreciated.

Yours faithfully,

Ahmed Rushdhie.

http://www.esurveyspro.com/Survey.aspx?id=1b12460c-9b0c-4be6-a713-64e2cbe9e178

Student NEC research

Dear all,

Another student in need of 10 mins of your time please.....

My name is Shane Murphy and I am a Masters student in Queen's University, Belfast studying Construction and Project Management. I am currently carrying out a dissertation entitled "NEC Contracting and Proactive Project Management: A Critique of the Inclusion of Dispute Resolution Boards in lieu of Adjudication". I am currently at the questionnaire stage of the research project and I am looking for professionals views in order to get a broader perspective of the industry's perception on the topics. The questionnaire is a simple online submission based questionnaire which should take no longer than 10 minutes to complete.
Regards,
Shane Murphy

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dEt6Z2hKZDVFSlp1eTlRSFNlUWZSRlE6MQ

Hong Kong Government's video of successful NEC trial

Dear all,

An interesting video of Hong Kong Government's successful trials using NEC. Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDwbzFQXxeI

Adjudication, but not as we know it

I hear a good few horror stories with adjudication. Let's pile up as much stuff as we can and fire it over as our claim to the adjudicator, the other party follows and also shoves in a huge counter claim for the hell of it. Resources from both parties kiss goodbye to both their loved ones and sleep, each for 2 weeks at least. Just what is this hidden cost worth? I don't see the criteria of becoming an adjudicator is to be a clone of Superman so just how can any half decent adjudicator really sift through mountains of rubbish to determine truly what the facts are, the primary role as I see it? Too much is left to chance and errors surely are likely. Also, guess who the beneficiaries are as usual? Those who derive an income from this process, of course.

So why not strip out the quantum side of the claim at least, why not limit the submissions, why not go to a learned adjudicator on a point of principle only? Here's our submissions, have a good read through as they are fairly limited, talk to us, then determine the facts, apply the contract/law and come up with a sound, reasoned award that we can rely upon. Isn't this really what pure adjudication should really be all about? The parties surely then can much more economically determine the quantum arising once a sound decision is in place. Why would you really want an adjudicator at £lots/hr wading through countless spreadsheets of cost?

Too simple or too much of a lost opportunity to ambush/bushwack/win by default/earn ridiculous fees?!

Rob

Concurrency & prospective/retrospective delay analysis

If you get chance have a look at a good article by Lowsley/Sadler in Civil Engineering Surveyor July/August 2012 called 'Back to the future - the why and when of prospective delay analysis'.

There's a comparison of a few of the main forms of contract and how they deal with these topics. NEC3 ECC is of course a prospective approach and very sensible that is, though of course is far from easy. Best advice from SCL is the prospective approach too. The wait and see retrospective analysis in other forms of contract in my experience serves only to promote uncertainty, many issues merge into one and the elongated client side consideration does nothing to help this.

On the concurrency issue, lots of press on this at the moment, I like the authors' simple quote on this, in that concurrency "...can never feature under forms of contract such as NEC3, which only provide a prospective mechanism for their evaluation of additional time and money".

Simples....!

Joint working on quotations for compensation events

Sometimes we struggle to shake off the past. The Contractor bigs up his claim and the Client's side sit eagerly waiting with a red pen to carve through it.....remember all of this?

Hopefully this should not occur when using NEC3 Contracts and the proactive processes built in to them. I do though hear of postbox approach to preparing quotations, you have a go over there and we will have a look at it from over here.....

Why not get the PM/Contractor team to sit down together and work through the quotation together - then instantly formalising through the quotation submission/acceptance - saves time and hassle and maybe even the cost of a stamp! Being serious though, we don't have to have a 'them and us' approach to preparing quotations for compensation events. Many can just be agreed in minutes, some in an hour or so and others will need that bit more care - judge appropriate time for each and try to work together to achieve the goal of agreeing the time/cost of each compensation event as quickly as possible.

Rob

An interview with Dr Martin Barnes....

Dear all, take a look at an interview between NEC consultant Robert Gerrard and NEC creator Martin Barnes, discussing the inspiration behind the NEC and how it differs from other contract forms.

http://www.neccontract.com/about/index.asp

Preliminaries - (a few!) watch it points.....

Many times we are asked, "where's the prelims (or preliminaries) in NEC3 Contracts?" I would say, actually what are these and why do they even exist? These seem to have developed over the years in the building industry and they seem to me to be a complete mish mash of technical matters, pricing matters, conditions of contract, constraints, pricing notes and on an on. NEC3 Contracts do not provide for documents called 'Prelimaries' or 'Prelims' but most of the matters within them are generally required, but on the correct documentation/place.

So, with some careful thought, you can use the information but I would not incorporate such a document as such into tender documents.  Here's a few reasons why, looking at the most recent 'Sample NEC Preliminaries' I came across in relation to using the NEC3 Engineering and Construction Contract (ECC):

1. Project particulars referred to - isn't this exactly the function of the ECC Contract Data except we get people such as 'client' thrown in and the Principal Contractor and CDM Co-ordinator (shouldn't that be dealt with by separate communication, as required by statute) and the beloved 'clerk of works'. Of course I know what is sort of referred to but all we are doing is creating ambiguity because we are lazy.

2. Terms like tender and contract are used ad hoc, and tendering rules are thrown in. Surely you should never accidentally or deliberately bring into a contract document some tendering rules/terms?

3.  Terms like the Site/existing buildings - isn't that the purpose of the Site Information, in the main? If the Site Information merely points to the Preliminaries as does the Works Information, there's a real risk the two will become one and you've a real problem on your hands. The contract points to the right document for the right reason, to lug everything in one pot is fraught with danger.

4. Suddenly in this particular document was thrown in details of/reference to the NEC3 Engineering and Construction Short Contract. I'll leave you to wonder why, what ....!

5. Employer and Contractor, amongst others, are normalised not italicised so are they different to the identified equivalents?

6. Within the Preliminaries was reference to the Specification which in turn includes Preliminaries. No, I don't get that either.

7. A schedule of rates was asked for to be included - why, how will this be used, where are the changes to the contract to explain what/why etc? There is then a standard price book referred to as being the basis for 'valuation' - I can see some of you shaking your head now....

8. Provisional Sums - you knew they had to feature! NEC3 Contracts make no provision at all for provisional sums, so how can they just be thrown in?

9. And so on, you get the drift and this is just a watch it note!

Take care, think about the quality of documentation you need to prepare, use the like of the ECC Works Information as a template, do not just used random so called 'Sample NEC Preliminaries' without a great deal of thought and challenge those who produce these in the first place. Then maybe we start to produce better quality tender documentation.....

Rob

NEC student research

Dear all,

Another student survey if you could spare some time please, this one being iphone compatible so easy then......

Regards,
Rob

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/NEC_vs_other_contracts

NEC Student Research

Hi all,
Another student is doing an NEC dissertation. In the student's own words...

Is the Compensation Event Process an effective means of managing the impact of change during construction projects?

I am completing structured research and I wish to collect qualitative through a survey questionnaire which will be used to form the basis of a dissertation for a Masters Degree in Construction Business & Project Management through the University of Ulster at Jordanstown. Inefficiencies within the Construction Industry are well documented and project failures, with cost and time overruns, continue to fuel the poor image of construction as a profession.

It is suggested that Change is inevitable on construction projects, and whilst change can interrupt the flow of work and cause time and cost overrun, change orders provide an essential mechanism for ensuring the client’s needs are satisfied throughout the project and to respond effectively to errors and/or omissions in design, site conditions, construction methods, the external environment and contract documents.

Therefore, the means by which change is managed is critical to project success, in terms of defining cost and time performance. The title of my study is:

‘A critical analysis of whether the NEC3 Compensation event process provides Project Managers with an effective means of managing the impact of change during construction projects’.

This research aims to establish whether the NEC3 Compensation Event process, in practice, is an effective means of evaluating the impact of change in construction projects.

Please click on the link below to register and complete the survey.

http://www.quenshassociates.com/survey/index.php?sid=41521&newtest=Y&lang=en

SMM, NRM & NEC3 Contracts

Whilst on the subject on BoQs (ps, just how many projects these days use BoQs I wonder?!) RICS has fairly recently replaced SMM with the New Rules of Measurement (NRM), which is a toolkit for cost management. The attempt is to bring consistency to the cost management of construction and maintenance work, giving surveyors a set of rules for measuring and capturing cost data. Of course, this is aimed at the building industry (I'm not sure if it is worldwide or just UK, would be a shame if just the latter).

The good news is that this seems to have been written on the basis of contract neutrality so can be used with NEC3 Contracts. Care would have to be taken though to fully understand the new rules as they continue to cover traditional (and in my opinion completely outdated) practices of things like dayworks and provisional sums. The only use of BoQs with NEC3 Contracts are Options B&D of both NEC3 ECC & ECS - these both envisage remeasurement of an approximate BoQ. NRM seems to provide for firm and approximate BoQs, firm BoQs are not provided for in NEC3 Contracts.

In principle, with some care, the NRM should be readily usable with those NEC3 Contracts that support approximate BoQs.

Any other thoughts, comments, differences of opinion, someone extolling the virtues of dayworks (!) would be good.

Rob

CESMM4 & NEC3

Just a note that the Civil Engineering Standard Method of Measurement has been updated from CESMM3 to CESMM4. For the first time it has been written to be contract neutral and also brings the method into line with changes in industry practices and extends its usages into all new areas. Sample pages available at icevirtuallibrary.com/cesmm. The most appropriate NEC3 Contracts this would be used in are Options B & D of NEC3 ECC & ECS. Happy BoQ preparing....

IUK Infrastructure Cost Review 2012

In case you missed this, the IUK 2012 cost review has been launched. Interested reading, some good references and the ship seems still to be sailing in what I would call the right direction - towards better collaboration/more efficiency/less waste, or at least that's what the radar suggests! Some good references to NEC and good opportunities for NEC to be at the heart of much of what IUK wish to achieve. Enjoy....

Rob

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/iuk_cost_review_report2012_230412.pdf

IACCM 2011 top terms in negotiation

In its 10^th annual survey of the most frequently negotiated terms and conditions, IACCM once more reveals that business contracts are constraining the value that can be achieved from high-performing relationships. For the first time, the study also identifies the most common sources of failure in contract outcomes and this indicates the potential value that could come from a robust contracting strategy and competence. 

Limitation of liability is sadly still nr 1 followed by indemnification, and there's a noticeable trend back towards the penalty type provisions. If there was any way of measuring roughly how much effort went into such negotiations we would probably be amazed and actually do something about it. Maybe next report IACCM?

This is a very interesting read, the only slight downside is you have to register to get the report.  The link is below.

Rob

http://www.iaccm.com/library/?id=3958#top

IACCM most negotiated terms & conditions survey

Dear all,

Recently, The International Association for Contract & Commercial Management (IACCM) launched its 11th annual study of ‘the most negotiated terms and conditions’. I've found this to be really interesting in the past and will upload the results when completed. In the meantime please find time to complete this. IACCM say........

"This unique study is used by companies and advisors around the world to develop and inform their contracting and negotiation strategies. As a contributor to the survey, you can be among the first to know the results – as well as contributing to the status and understanding of our professional community.

This survey will take 5 – 10 minutes to complete. We ask you to tell us which terms you negotiate with greatest frequency, as well as your view regarding some key trends in negotiation. The results of this study offer insights to jurisdictional, geographic and industry perspectives, ensuring that it can immediately be put to practical use as well as inspiring new ideas and approaches to managing today’s complex negotiations environment."

Thanks,
Rob

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/topterms2012

Student NEC research

Dear all,

Another student in need of a bit of your time. The student says....

"I am currently in my final year of an Honours Degree in Quantity Surveying in the School of the Built Environment at Heriot Watt University. For my dissertation, I have chosen the topic "Does the NEC3 Contract improve the Client and Contractor relationship"

As part of my research I require input from within the construction industry from those who have had practical experience in using this contract. I am writing to you to ask for the link below to my questionnaire to be forwarded onto anyone who would be appropriate to contribute their opinions.This will assist me in gathering the research required to allow me to comprehensively complete my dissertation."
Rob

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/63PMBP6

The National Building Specification (NBS) launches procurement survey

Dear all,

The NBS would like to ask for your feedback about the construction contracts you use and any legal issues you may have encountered. This survey covers projects that were commenced, completed or went into dispute in 2011. It relates to UK based projects and international projects handled from the UK by UK based companies.

The questionnaire should take no more than about 10 minutes of your time, depending on your answers. All responses are completely confidential and will be treated in accordance with the MRS code of conduct; your personal details will not be shared with others.  All completed surveys can be entered into a prize draw for a chance to win an Apple iPad.

Thanks and good luck!
Rob

http://www.thenbs.com/support/survey/contracts-and-law/index.htm

Should the Fee be fixed in ECC target cost contracts?

A question from a client at the recent NEC Users' Group annual Seminar related to the thoughts of changing the variable Fee approach with target cost contracts. These are his further thoughts, a Newsletter article is likely but some opinion in the meantime would be very helpful.....

ECC target cost contracts (main Options C and D) provide a mechanism for charging Fee based on the tendered fee percentage x the cost (Defined Cost). This is a variable Fee approach.

A number of alternative approaches are being adopted by clients to either fix the Fee amount regardless of costs incurred (a lump sum Fee), or to “invert” the fee calculation to base the Fee on the target (Prices) rather than the Defined Cost. In doing so, this is thought to provide benefits of a “double incentive” to the Contractor to optimise or dilute Fee when costs are below or above target, to give the client better cost certainty of the amounts paid in respect of Fee sums, and not to “reward” the Contractor by way of additional fee recovery when costs exceed the target.

Comments, thoughts and soundings on these alternative approaches are welcomed. Are these alternative approaches commonplace throughout the  industry, are they seen as fair and equitable, are there any unintended consequences?

Rob

z clauses v Works Information

I see quite a few examples of very poor tender documents indeed - both in terms of conditions of contract (Contract Data with z clauses) and the brief (Works Information). The z clause part of the document is often very extensive indeed, to the point of wondering why bother using an NEC3 Contract at all. Apart from tackling this, I'm curious as to what users think is a realistic and sensible split of time/cost spent between preparing lets say z clauses against the Works Information, assuming NEC3 ECC is the contract chosen.

Although each contract/project has its own constraints/risks etc, I believe the intelligent client should probably spend 10 or 20 times more time/cost on producing a high quality, clear and comprehensive Works Information as opposed to z clauses. I sense the reverse is often too - that has to be madness!

What do you think?

NEC Users' Group Annual Seminar discussion

Hi all,

Hopefully many of you made the annual NEC Users' Group Annual Seminar last Monday, a really good turnout, event and plenty of debate as usual. If there's any follow up queries, something you didn't get chance to ask or not sure of any issue then by all means debate here or use the Users' Group helpline if you prefer.

What came across to me were problems associated with not following the contract or not using the correct language - both are extremely important and will put you in a better place than you would otherwise be.

Rob

Student NEC research

Dear all,

You can all have long lunches today!

More student research, this student says...

I am currently an Honours level student at Glasgow Caledonian University studying Quantity Surveying. As part of my final year dissertation I am conducting a survey of people in the industry with practical experience of NEC3 projects. The title of my dissertation is 'Dispute Avoidance and NEC3; to what extent has use of the NEC3 contract reduced disputes?' The purpose of the survey is to gather information from NEC3 users on their experiences of how successful the contract is at reducing disputes.

Thank you,

Rob

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/V7J8XXT

NEC student research

Another student looking for support with their research who says...

I am a student researching the role of the Project Manager on NEC contracts.

I would be most grateful if you could forward the link to my survey to the NEC Users' Group members.

Thank you.
Rob

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/FQTPWJK

Student NEC research

Dear all,

Another student survey if you would please. This student  aims to determine the impact of the gain / pain share mechanism specifically, in contributing to value for money in NEC contracting. Depending on whether the user is basing their response on the use of Options A / B, or C / D, a slightly different survey route will become available. He then hopes to be able to compare and contrast, and discover the impact this incentive mechanism (and its absence) has on value for money.

Thank you.

Rob

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/73S3QPF

Any good examples of use of X12?

We've had a few enquiries recently on the extent of use of secondary Option X12 Partnering in NEC3 Contracts. Maybe this is a sign of greater collaboration, let's hope so. Anyway, it's always a real problem trying to follow who is doing/using what and therefore are there any users out there who have successfully used X12 and would like to share:
- project details?
- experiences?
- benefits?

Student NEC research

Dear all,

Another survey to complete on your next tea break if you would be so kind.

The title is ......"Does the NEC help the project manager to act as a competent project manager?"

And the student says "The NEC (www.neccontract.com ) is advertised as a project management tool - but does it work? As part of my dissertation for an MSc in Project Management, I would be grateful if you could spend 5 minutes of your time to complete a short survey on the above topic. I hope to share my findings within the NEC and APM communities.

Many thanks
Ignacio Herrero
Graduate Engineer and Project Manager"
www.surveymonkey.com/s/ignacioherrero

Thank you,
Rob

Student NEC research

Dear all,

More student research on NEC3 Contracts for you to contribute to. The student is currently studying for an undergraduate honours degree in Quantity Surveying at Glasgow Caledonian University.
 

The topic of his research is “Investigating the Use of, and Effectiveness of the NEC3 Contract and its Secondary/Optional Clauses” and the main purpose of the dissertation is to investigate the relevant selection of certain secondary and optional clauses for inclusion in contracts procured using the NEC3 form of contract and to question whether or not a lack of knowledge of these clauses in the industry actually leads to the inclusion of clauses which have no implications on the project whatsoever?

The student says he seeks to observe the current industry opinion on these clauses and the relevance of their use therefore, it would be greatly appreciated if you could take the time to assist him in his research by completing this questionnaire - your knowledge, experience and opinions on the NEC3 Contract will prove invaluable.

 

Many thanks in advance,

Rob (& the student of course!)

 

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/2LX6MKY

Student NEC research

Dear all,

We have a request from an undergraduate collating NEC3 research and data for his dissertation, if you would like to take part and complete his survey it would be very much appreciated.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/2LX6MKY

Thanks,

Rob

NEC launches free ECC Works Information Guidance

NEC has marked the start of 2012 by publishing a new best-practice guide on preparing the all-important works information for NEC3 Engineering and Construction Contracts (ECC). The purpose of the guide is to help and encourage all NEC users to create better quality works information documents in their ECC contracts. This in turn will improve the outcome and delivery of projects, which is increasingly critical in the current economic climate. The link is below, let us have your feedback in use. Rob http://www.neccontract.com/documents/works_info.pdf