Guild of Project Controls: Compendium | Roles | Assessment | Certifications | Membership

Tips on using this forum..

(1) Explain your problem, don't simply post "This isn't working". What were you doing when you faced the problem? What have you tried to resolve - did you look for a solution using "Search" ? Has it happened just once or several times?

(2) It's also good to get feedback when a solution is found, return to the original post to explain how it was resolved so that more people can also use the results.

Varying Procurement Methods on the Programme

14 replies [Last post]
Fri, 2006-03-10 05:11
Robert Burns
User offline. Last seen 5 years 4 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 8 Oct 2003
Posts: 24
Groups: None
I am interested in your thoughts on what impact (both positive and negative) the varying procurement routes have made to your Planning / Programming disciplines. The premis behind such a question is based on the use of Programmes as means to resolve disputes, BUT invariably there is a lack of cohesion at the outset of the Programmes construction, leading to problems further down the line.

I appreciate all comments and thoughts.

Robert
Top

Replies

Wed, 2006-03-22 06:09
#1
Robert Burns
User offline. Last seen 5 years 4 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 8 Oct 2003
Posts: 24
Groups: None
Andrew,

It’s basically a thought process of negating the requirement of a P.E. at the front end, but requiring the services when it all goes wrong at the back end = even more costs. Not that I am complaining.

Construction industry P.M’s, etc, do not see the Value for Money in P.E.’s, whereas other industry’s do, due to those tight margins. Saying that, in Civils work the margins are greater.

Anyway, P.E. as a whole is ,I feel, regarding with a certain amount of distrust (what you do not understand, etc, etc); ’the additional cost could go to other resources’ and not enough emphasis was placed on it’s effectiveness previoulsy. Things are changing though.
Top
Wed, 2006-03-22 05:28
#2
Andrew Flowerdew
User offline. Last seen 2 years 23 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 960
Groups: None
Robert,

The industry needs something, not sure what - I was going to say better profit margins buit a good P.E can save you money rather than cost you his salary, so maybe that’s not the answer.

Santa’s got alot of work to do I think although I’m not sure he’s the right person to ask for miracles from!
Top
Wed, 2006-03-22 05:23
#3
Robert Burns
User offline. Last seen 5 years 4 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 8 Oct 2003
Posts: 24
Groups: None
Andrew,

I agree whole heartedly with regard to the Planning Engineer producing what the Project Manager wants to see and not necessarily what is occuring. I understand that the P.M. may ’feel’ that althought the project is behing he/she may be able to bring it back. However, that derails the P.E.’s job and again takes me to a thoughht I have harboured for a couple of years - the need for the P.E. to be more agressive AND to have the backing of Directors, Contracts Managers, etc. Basically, the industry STILL needs to change it’s culture.

Although, as Christmas lists go the amount of culture change’s required in Construction wouldn’t fit in Sants’s sleigh.
Top
Thu, 2006-03-16 22:34
#4
Se de Leon
User offline. Last seen 2 years 36 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 321
Groups: None
Speaking of a mess programme:
I’m listing below some of the reasons why I think some execution programme is a mess:

1. Not enough time as stipulated in the contract to produce the programme. The contract is not so considerate of the realities in producing a complete and comprehensive programme.
2. The planner that produced the planning specification in the contract is not the same planner who will manage the programme. Moreso if the one who specified it is lacking the ability to produce an effective programme.
3. It’s also possible that during the preparation of the programme, the one evaluating the programme doesn’t know what he is doing. If the programme is not properly evaluated, all the errors made will eventually be known. This is where some project team members start to criticise the programme which deminishes the credibility of the programme during the execution phase.

There are other reasons but I only cited 3 for the meantime for discussion purposes.

On the issue of procurement in the programme. For me, as long as the programme is properly done, an effective procurement schedule can be produced and managed.

Cheers,

Se
Top
Thu, 2006-03-16 13:26
#5
Andrew Flowerdew
User offline. Last seen 2 years 23 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 960
Groups: None
Robert,

To quote yourself "why many programmes are a bit of a mess - i.e. no logic, out of sequence, not resourced, etc, etc."

The 64 billion dollar question?

I’m sure the capability is out there so why do we still see so much [stuff] produced? Bad planning and programming goes hand in hand with every claim, everyone know’s it, but still lets it happen!!!!!!!!!!!

I’ve given up trying to answer the question but my general thoughts are that political and commercial pressures from above often force planners to show what they are told to show rather than being left alone to predict what is going to happen and actually help the management of the project.

Unsurprisingly, it all goes pear shaped, everyone’s surprised because what’s been promised hasn’t happened - except the planner - then we get into cover your arse mode, each side wanting to blame the other for the delays and hey presto, a dispute is born.


Top
Wed, 2006-03-15 09:49
#6
Robert Burns
User offline. Last seen 5 years 4 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 8 Oct 2003
Posts: 24
Groups: None
Andrew,

Thanks for the response as it’s as I saw the situation also. As certain procurement methods are created to speed up the process’s, the Programming function , can invariably, suffer the consequences. I need to do more research, but as the requirement of a fully functional programme becomes more apparent in Claims (as you can professionally testify to), I am seeking avenues as to why many programmes are a bit of a mess - i.e. no logic, out of sequence, not resourced, etc, etc.

I am looking at the angles (sound like Johnathon Davies) from which Procurement methods effect the Programming role and function.

Cheers again.
Top
Wed, 2006-03-15 06:44
#7
Andrew Flowerdew
User offline. Last seen 2 years 23 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 960
Groups: None
Robert,

Totally agree that the method adopted will have an impact on the planning / programming of the job.

Traditional contract procurement has the design all done up front (sufficient to tender on anyway) and therefore the information is readily available and more advanced (in theory)whereas in a Design & Build or Construction Management type contract the detailed information will usually come along much later - but hopefully in time.

The fact it doesn’t, leads to the all too familiar problems and claims. You would have thought we would have learnt that even in traditionally procured contracts the claims for delay due to late information are common enough - when you’re starting out with very little information, then allowing sufficient time for it to arrive should be of paramount importance - but time and time again we don’t and the claims for delay keep on coming.

Shouldn’t complain, keeps me in a job!!!!!!!!!!!
Top
Wed, 2006-03-15 06:31
#8
Andrew Flowerdew
User offline. Last seen 2 years 23 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 960
Groups: None
Robert,

I agree, at that stage it is very global planning though and the decision as to which procurement method will be used should be based on Employer requirements such as:

Cost certainty or importance of to the Employer, hence
project type and unknowns in project leading to risk allocation analysis, leading to divisions of design and construct responsibilities, leading to contract type which may influence the cashflow requirements, etc, etc.

A planner will have some input but the decisions are ultimately commercial rather than planning.
Top
Wed, 2006-03-15 06:30
#9
Robert Burns
User offline. Last seen 5 years 4 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 8 Oct 2003
Posts: 24
Groups: None
Andrew,

I agree with your comments, however, if I may take the question back to a different level. The varying procurement methods, once chosen before any of the Project Team are otherwise informed, can have differing influences on the Planning / Programming approach. From this I infer the timing of design information does obviously change from PFI to say Management Contracting. We have all worked within structures where the information either flows freely, too much, gets blocked, etc and I waw curious as to you and others thoughts on what the differing procurement methods have on the Programming of projects.

Many thanks again.
Top
Wed, 2006-03-15 05:59
#10
Robert Burns
User offline. Last seen 5 years 4 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 8 Oct 2003
Posts: 24
Groups: None
Andrew,

In my experience I have operated at the risk analysis level, estimation, contract, etc and as such had hoped that other Planning Engineers had been at the forefront of the clients decision making process.

Corporate Planning is where we assist the Client in decision making , is it not?

Many thanks again.




Robert,

The procurement method chosen should be related to the risks the Employer wishes to take on and type of project rather than any programming expertise except possibly the cashflow.

Procurement is all about the Employers commercial needs rather than planning considerations except how long will it take to finish and possibly as above, the cashflow required. Planning in quite global terms at this stage
Top
Wed, 2006-03-15 05:21
#11
Andrew Flowerdew
User offline. Last seen 2 years 23 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 960
Groups: None
Robert,

The procurement method chosen should be related to the risks the Employer wishes to take on and type of project rather than any programming expertise except possibly the cashflow.

Procurement is all about the Employers commercial needs rather than planning considerations except how long will it take to finish and possibly as above, the cashflow required. Planning in quite global terms at this stage.
Top
Wed, 2006-03-15 04:46
#12
Robert Burns
User offline. Last seen 5 years 4 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 8 Oct 2003
Posts: 24
Groups: None
Thanks for the reply.

My point is this though - would it not be advantageous for a Planning Engineer to be involved at the procurement phase (as I have been in the past)? From this, being at the procurement phase, I would expect the Planning Engineer to have more input and thus, opinions.

Again, it would appear the Planning Engineer is actually withheld from the decision making process.
Top
Tue, 2006-03-14 12:48
#13
Andrew Flowerdew
User offline. Last seen 2 years 23 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 960
Groups: None
Robert,

At the end of the day the programme should do no more than reflect the procurement method chosen - which should be chosen to suit the needs of the project.
Top
Tue, 2006-03-14 05:03
#14
Robert Burns
User offline. Last seen 5 years 4 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 8 Oct 2003
Posts: 24
Groups: None
Hi ,

Does no one have an opinion on the impact the varying procurement routes have on their Planning methods?? Do my colleagues not have favourable ways within which to procure, whether it’s D & B, Traditional, etc, etc.....? I am looking to gauge your thoughts and comments as it would make for interesting data. The way we recieve project information, it’s clarity, it’s design logisics (i.e. how we recieve certain packages of works, realting to the actual sequence of works on site),...etc all make an impact on the effectiveness of the Project Programme. Therefore, what are your thoughts on the effect of Procurement methods on the construction of the Programme?

Again, any / all thoughts , comments,........witty remarks are always welcome.

Cheers,
Robert
Top