It's good to get (NEC) accredited.......

With the widespread growth of the (UK) construction sector and increasing confidence confirmed in the Chancellor’s summer budget last week, NEC has responded to an industry-wide demand for advanced project management.

George Osborne’s first budget of the new Government, announced last week, confirmed that manufacturing, construction and services all grew by 3% or more in 2014,  the first time since records began in 1990. This news, coupled with the vital role managers play in the success of NEC projects, means there is a greater industry need to set high level frameworks and benchmarks for those in leadership roles on projects.

NEC's two new advanced level accreditation programmes for ECC Supervisors and TSC Service Managers, aptly align with this need. Coupled with the hugely successful ECC Project Manager Accreditation, they form the NEC Accreditation Suite.

We need highly competent people to create brilliant outcomes in our industry - I hope that personal accreditation is just the basis we need to help shape a better future.

http://bit.ly/1HAaRDX

After discussing with the Contractor.......

5 brilliant words I've taken from the NEC3 Engineering and Construction Contract (ECC), clause 62.1. How many people actually use these prolifically I wonder in the management of compensation events?  What the clause actually says is...'After discussing with the Contractor different ways of dealing with the compensation event which are practicable, the Project Manager may instruct the Contractor to submit alternative quotations.'

Imagine that. Truly acting on behalf of the (your) Employer by discussing with the Contractor the fact that this particular Employer is really focused on time for this project, or cost, or whatever. Then getting a quotation for the normal resources etc for dealing with the compensation event, then an alternative (if possible) where maybe nights and/or weekends and/or double shifts/gangs or re-sequencing, or whatever, are utilised.

Then we can make a sensible decision on what's best in the circumstances. So please communicate with each other, it's a good, healthy thing and maybe we can achieve each others' objectives along the way too.

An anonymous question from a civil servant on the possibility of advanced payments.....

I've been asked to ask this question anonymously from a civil servant. Here's your chance supply chain members to raise clients' eyebrows and to try and bring about massive change in payment practice - from negative cashflow to positive cashflow, and please tell all of the potential savings/positive behavioural change and so on............

What commercial benefits would we (clients) gain if we used advance payrments on projects and would this have any challenges to NEC3 contracts? If money was paid up front a project through a project bank account would it interest you? Particularly would like replies from Tier 2 suppliers and consultants?

Just a thought on z clauses......

Having reviewed a few tender documents recently and the horrors of z clauses within them I was thinking just how much the z clause industry is costing the economy? How much time/cost is involved in preparing (hashing?) the z clauses, which passes to x tenderers to their advisers then all of their suppliers and tier 2 contractors and there advisers and on and on and on......The cost must be horrific and to what end? Nobody says NEC3 contracts are perfect and in an unamended form will always address all client's needs, but one document I reviewed recently had 40+ pages of these things, even including a z clause that deleted a secondary Option (rather than just not select it in the Contract Data) - who had that brainwave? Do you really have the right starting point when you end up with amends bigger than the original contract? Do advisers actually listen to how their clients wish to do business and ensure that their requirement is met, or do advisers tinker for their own ends? And what does all of this cost the taxpayer I wonder in public sector contracts?

So here's a (brave) thought for the second half of 2015.....

Clients about to engage advisers to write reams of z clauses.....stop. Don't do it. Leave the contract as is, give half of the money you would have paid the advisers to charity and invest the other half in making sure the Works Information (for ECC, Scope etc for other NEC3 contracts) is a quite brilliant document. This will lead to better behaviour, lower tender costs, sensible contract management and a better industry.....who's first up to give this a real go and let us know how you get on?!