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.

Master Programme Approval

22 replies [Last post]
Fri, 2004-06-25 05:48
Forum Guest
User offline. Last seen 10 weeks 3 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 28 Jan 2009
Posts: 2
Groups: None
Is there really a need to get an "approval" of a master programme? What I mean of approval is, does a client need to formally approve a schedule? What if the client doesn’t want to approve it, he just want to acknowledge that the contractor has complied with the contractor’s contractual obligation to submit one, what do you think a contractor should do in this kind of situation? I don’t think acknowledgement is tantamount to approval. What do you think guys?

Top

Replies

Mon, 2006-05-29 16:58
#1
Rashid Iqbal
User offline. Last seen 17 years 26 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 3 May 2005
Posts: 94
Groups: None
Hi,

In my understanding there is nothing such as level 1, level 2 etc. The detail (level) of schedules is somewhat ’relative’. Simply put, if schedule is providing a good idea about the flow of the work then it is somewhere between level 2 and level 3 and if it gives an idea of flow of resources (crews) then it can be said as level 3 or even lower….. As I said earlier that it is all relative, my level 3 could be level 1 for my subcontractor.

In regards to your second query, I would say that as long as the master program provides a monthly budgeted quantum of work i.e. 100,000 cum of embankment and 2000 meters of pile etc then theoretically there should not be any urgency of a resource loaded schedule. The Owner or the Engineer generally wants to have the ‘yard stick’ in their hand, and a schedule that could spit out monthly target quantities, should do the needful.

Best Regards
Rashid
Top
Mon, 2006-05-29 15:10
#2
deys nassah
User offline. Last seen 6 years 51 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 28 May 2006
Posts: 23
Groups: Petro-Chem / Oil & Gas
Hi there guys!

Is it always preferred that the first programme submission from Contractor (say 4 weeks) after award be the Detailed Construction Programme(Level 3) or is it acceptable that client asks contractor to submit his Level 1 and 2 schedules within 2 weeks from award. This way the client can confirm that the schedule is in line with his milestone requirements.
Lastly, contractors here always ask that they resource load after receiving approval of the Level 3 from Client.
Are there any pitfalls in allowing contractors to do this??
What do you suggest?

Thanks in advance

Deys

Top
Fri, 2004-10-01 06:14
#3
Asif Anwar
User offline. Last seen 8 years 15 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 1 Oct 2004
Posts: 39
Groups: None
Dear Stuart/Daya

Thanks Stuart for stressing the need for the updating of the schedule and Daya for agreeing to it. I fully agree with Stuart of regularly updating it, usually on monthly basit, even though if it is not required contractually on some contracts. In most of the cases it really helps. Remember, when the client receives the updated programme he is obliged to response to it if it has got any objection to it, failing which this will help the contractor later in case of any claim for extension of time.

Put it this way, there was a delay in some works carried out by the contractor due to some late design information or late issuance of drawings by the client or client’s agent. The monthly updated programme is the best way in highlighting the impact on the contractor’s programme due to such delay. If the client has an objection to that, he must reply it within specified time (in most cases i have seen, the client will just keep quiet). This later on greatly helps the contractor in supporting its any possible extension of time or cost claims.

Remember guys, there is no harm in updating the schedules. It always safe to play this game.

Good Luck

Asif
Top
Fri, 2004-10-01 04:53
#4
Stuart Atkinson
User offline. Last seen 8 weeks 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 68
Groups: Civil Engineering
I believe the response to this question, is dependant on the form of contract used. Some contracts imply acceptance by there being no express acceptance, other contracts expressly require acceptance, but do not have many remedies in non-acceptance.Just my thoughts on a minefield - GETTING ACCEPTANCE by the Client or their representatives.

P.S. I personally nag them into giving me ’hard-copy’ acceptance.
Top
Tue, 2004-08-03 09:11
#5
Dayanidhi Dhandapany
User offline. Last seen 3 years 26 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 18 Mar 2003
Posts: 470
Groups: None
Good Shahzad,

Why not? to implement this.

Regards

Daya
Top
Tue, 2004-08-03 08:12
#6
Shahzad Munawar
User offline. Last seen 9 years 21 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2 Jul 2003
Posts: 551
Groups: None
Thanks Daya

You understood the stuart’s point. May you implenent this?
Top
Sat, 2004-07-31 03:21
#7
Dayanidhi Dhandapany
User offline. Last seen 3 years 26 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 18 Mar 2003
Posts: 470
Groups: None
Dear Stuart,

I got your point, for our self-defence, submission of schedule update is necessary eventhough the contract is not required to do so(just for an example).

Cheers!!

Daya.
Top
Fri, 2004-07-30 10:48
#8
Stuart Ness
User offline. Last seen 12 years 38 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Posts: 352
Groups: None
Hi Daya,
Even where the Contract does not specifically require the Contractor to supply regular updates, I always advise that it is good practice to do so. If you provide regular updates, then the Owner/Employer has no excuse for not being aware of any potential excusable delays that occur. If there are delays that are a result of failures on the part of the Owner/Employer, the Contractor’s case for entitlement to additional time (at least!) is very much strengthened by the fact that the Owner/Employer will have been regularly updated on actual performance. In effect, a regular update of the Schedule amounts to giving notice and therefore the Owner/Employer cannot later claim that he was denied the chance to mitigate the effect of a delay, and this strengthens the Contractor’s case for additional time and money.
Hope that this clarifies...
Cheers,
Stuart

www.rosmartin.com
Top
Fri, 2004-07-30 10:20
#9
Dayanidhi Dhandapany
User offline. Last seen 3 years 26 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 18 Mar 2003
Posts: 470
Groups: None
Dear Stuart,

A small question, If the contract doesn’t require the contractor to submit monthly update then what is the point of submitting schedule update to the client?. (But there is no doubt the contractor has to maintain his own internal schedule update to monitor his progress/control cost etc.)
The contractor has to strictly follow what the contract dictates to him. is it not?.

Thanks in advance for sharing your opinion.

Regards

Daya
Top
Fri, 2004-07-30 09:41
#10
Stuart Ness
User offline. Last seen 12 years 38 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Posts: 352
Groups: None
Guys,
I don’t want to burst your bubble, but.....
whether or not your Master programme is approved or revised or whatever by the RE (or anyone else, come to that!), it is vitally important that you do update your schedule on a regular basis (indeed, many contracts insist that you provide monthly updates).
Remember that the whole point of your Master Schedule is not (just) to have it approved/reviewed, but to use it as a fundamental basis of measuring progress (or lack thereof)! Your Master Programme is a tool for the project management team to refer to at all times throughout the project.
If you do not constantly update your programme, you will be unable to identify the impact of delay upon your performance and measure the updated programe against the original.
Incidentally, I note that this thread is turning into a bit of RE-bashing (which is quite OK in my opinion!). I for one, get really pissed off by an RE (usually English!) who is very condescending towards a Contractor from a developing country. I have seen it many times in Asia, Africa and the Middle East where an RE considers himself to be infallible and he demands that his interpretation and understanding of the Contract be applied.! Then I turn up......
Cheers,
Stuart

www.rosmartin.com
Top
Fri, 2004-07-30 09:17
#11
Dayanidhi Dhandapany
User offline. Last seen 3 years 26 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 18 Mar 2003
Posts: 470
Groups: None
Alex,

You are correct, no need to waste time and efforts to monitor such kind of works.

Anyway, Now-a-days it is quiet common that even for medium scale project there is a contractual requirement to give approval etc., if they don’t want to approve the master programme means then the client is not willing to expect quality output from the contractor.

Good Luck

Daya
Top
Fri, 2004-07-30 09:12
#12
Forum Guest
User offline. Last seen 10 weeks 3 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 28 Jan 2009
Posts: 2
Groups: None
Alex,

You are correct, no need to waste time and efforts to monitor such kind of works.

Anyway, Now-a-days it is quiet common that even for medium scale project there is a contractual requirement to give approval etc., if they don’t want to approve the master programme means then the client is not willing to expect quality output from the contractor.

Good Luck

Daya
Top
Fri, 2004-07-30 00:22
#13
Alex Wong
User offline. Last seen 11 years 27 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 874
Groups: TILOS
IMHO

If no approval is required then there is no point in updating your schedule once is seen by engineer.(Clients)

Like try to measure the length of a piece of string without a measuring tape.

Why spend the effort.

The only case I can think of is using in a small project that complete in a week.

Planners ... Any comments???
Top
Fri, 2004-07-30 00:13
#14
Shahzad Munawar
User offline. Last seen 9 years 21 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2 Jul 2003
Posts: 551
Groups: None
In my view, Master Programme approval is subject to Contract requirement. If no such condition exists in the Contract then no formal approval of the Master Programme is needed.

But as safegurad you may discuss this programme with the Client as a reservation for future claims.

Top
Thu, 2004-07-29 19:30
#15
Alex Wong
User offline. Last seen 11 years 27 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 874
Groups: TILOS
MK

Sound Familiar !!!

Alex
Top
Thu, 2004-07-29 01:17
#16
MK TSE
User offline. Last seen 4 years 17 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 27 Feb 2002
Posts: 550
Groups: None
Alex, your experience brings my memory on RE response.
RE marked "Approve, subject to comment" on submission response sheet. Then in the comment area, the wording is "No comment"
I don’t know how to classify it, out-of sequence or loop!!

(Remind there is a field "Approve, without comment", RE seldom select this option)
Top
Wed, 2004-07-28 02:51
#17
Dayanidhi Dhandapany
User offline. Last seen 3 years 26 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 18 Mar 2003
Posts: 470
Groups: None
Alex, your experience on Master Programme Approval was very interesting one. I did not come across such an RE in my life. But we will certainly have an idea of how to deal with such persons in future, anyhow in the contract documents there will be a time limitation might have been set for documents approval(master programme etc.,)is it not?. They can’t drag their approval on master programme for a longtime, at certain point in time they should close out their comments based on our reply or program amendments etc., since master programme is the basis for monitoring progress, making progress payments etc in many cases of the projects i believe, of course everything is depending on what the contract document dictates..........
Top
Tue, 2004-07-27 20:50
#18
Alex Wong
User offline. Last seen 11 years 27 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 874
Groups: TILOS
Well Done John!

I did had a very difficult clients once and on his reply he always add new comments to the programme.
1st reply
What about your plant delivery period
2nd reply
Installation activities are not detail enought
....
And the game just go on and on, we then issue a letter to the Senior engineer to stated the difficulty of not having the master programme approved (Because it is link up with a major milestone and payment) Same thing happen during the meeting the RE try to came up with new comments, and his boss said if you not issue your comments in the 1st instant it’s not for the contractor to accommodate our"RE" mistake.

And we finally got the programme approved.

RE always try to keep their options open. However, it is impossible to not approve the programme without any good reason.

Alex
Top
Tue, 2004-07-27 10:46
#19
John Whitney
User offline. Last seen 9 years 8 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 26 Jul 2004
Posts: 35
Groups: None
Some years ago I was on a project where the Contract called for the master programme to be approved by the client’s RE. The RE received and acknowledged the existence of the master programme we submitted, but never formally approved it.

Claims and delays ensued. during the first big claims meeting with the Engineer (several years after the programme submission!), we tabled the master programme as our baseline for the EOT claim. The RE promptly piped up that he had never approved the programme, at which point his boss asked him where the letter of rejection was.

Silence and a red faced RE!

"Programme is approved" said the Engineer.

We had a job keeping our faces straight.



John
Top
Sun, 2004-07-25 10:09
#20
Dayanidhi Dhandapany
User offline. Last seen 3 years 26 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 18 Mar 2003
Posts: 470
Groups: None
Dear Forum Guest,

I’ve tried to answer your questions as much as possible, However the application is entirely depend on the nature of contract / size of the project.

Your Question: Is there really a need to get an "approval" of a master programme?

Answer: Yes, we must get an Approval of a Master Programme, or else on what basis you will set up a progress monitoring system?. Also this approval is necessary in order to prepare disruption analysis/EOT Claim etc if applicable.

Your Question: What I mean of approval is, does a client need to formally approve a schedule?

Answer: The Client Must Approve the schedule like signing a Contract Document on every page of the schedule(both parties signature is required, if applicable - This kind of procedure was followed for Ministry of Finance Project, in Putrajaya). or atleast the schedule must be properly documented and attached with client’s approval letter.

Your Question: What if the client doesn’t want to approve it, he just want to acknowledge that the contractor has complied with the contractor’s contractual obligation to submit one, what do you think a contractor should do in this kind of situation?

Answer: In this kind of a situation, It must be captured in a progress meeting minutes which is held between client and contractor, stating that the Client is acknowledged the construction schedule and having no objection to use the schedule for monitoring purpose as well the schedule will be used as the basis for interim progress claims.

I hope the above will be helpful to some extent.

Regards

Daya

Top
Wed, 2004-06-30 11:48
#21
Stuart Ness
User offline. Last seen 12 years 38 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Posts: 352
Groups: None
I suppose it depends on what the Contract says. If the Contract requires Client approval of the Master Programme then there is no doubt, but if it only requires his review (or if it is otherwise silent on the subject) formal approval isn’t required. However, where formal approval is not contractually required, I would try to at least have the Client’s acknowledgement of the fact that he is familiar with the Master Programme and that he has no objections to it (this could be done in MoM, for example). You may need this security if at some time in the future you wish to use the Master Programme as a baseline schedule on which to base a future claim for additional time. If you use a Master Programme to which the Client has no objection, then he can hardly object to its use at a later date.
Top
Fri, 2004-06-25 11:56
#22
Ronald Winter
User offline. Last seen 3 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 4 Jan 2003
Posts: 928
Groups: None
It has been pretty well established that this type of a semantics game is not valid in US Courts. When the Owner requires that a schedule be submitted, that same Owner has a responsibility to review and understand what was presented. The Owner does not assume responsibility for the project schedule just because he approves it as meeting specified requirements.

On the other hand, if you would feel better saying that you “accept the submittal as meeting scheduling specifications,” then you can legally feel free to do so. This is certainly a less possessive response. Good luck!
Top