Barry
If you are interested in relocating to either Europe, the Middle East or Asia Pacific, the firm I work is the largest claims consultancy in the world and has a number of claims / delay related vacancies which may be of interest to you.
If you want to follow this up, I can be contacted at tobyhunt@hillintl.com
Regards
Toby

Hi Barry

I do not know what the work situation is like in South Africa but a number of the big UK consultancies have offices in your location.

Go to the PP links site and see who to send your CV.

You may consider relocating to somewhere like Dubai to get your basic EOT experience before aiming for expert witness level.

You should also apply to join the Planning Engineers Organisation where you will be listed under your speciality.

Then join the Society of Construction Law and the Adjudication Society where you will be listed.

Good luck and Best Regards

Mike Testro

Hi Dave

I have been Planning for 13 odd years, I have a Qs background and have worked as a Jnr Project Controls , and JNR Planner when I started Planning , I had already been in the Construction field on site for 10 odd years before planning.

I have been the lead on some Projects or assigned areas for responsibility for some multi , discipline Projects , I have been trying for the last four years to get into Delays , Claims etc, and have managed to get to do some and involved in Contract disputes etc. It has been Hard , but eventually there, and by no means do I consider my self a Senior Delay or Claims analyst ,

But when I read or see how these jnr and I mean Jnr computer jockeys get these high paying positions , it makes me wonder where we are going , and That’s why I am all for a systems by where one is evaluated on a regular basis to show competency etc

Example , I have 5 planners below me at present , One Senior Planner , Two Planners and Two Jnrs, The one jnr getting the lowest pay

But he is the most experienced, and of them all they don’t like or believe that Site Visits are important ?, sorry two fo the senior planners do prescribe to site visits It is so frustrating , they believe that sitting behind the computer with software makes them Planners, God Help us

I think that the perception out there is Planning is easy and GOOD Money

Just my rant

David

I could not agree more. Just before Christmas I received a CV from one of the major recruitment companies of a guy who was highly educated but whose construction experience was three year’s of HV transmission lines and substations in South America, one year as a part-time site engineer in the UK on urban infrastructure projects and then one year with the UK office of a major multi-national consultant as a Construction Delay Analyst. He was looking for a new position as a Senior Delay Analyst!

When subsequently contacted by the agency to ask if I was interested in seeing the candidate I was barely able to remain civil. No wonder agencies get a bad reputation if they are pushing candidates like this for senior positions. More so, I am sure, because of the dearth of suitable candidates, someone might well have evidentially employed him. This is what is damaging our discipline in my humble opinion, is people passing themselves off, or being passed off, as planners/analysts/consultants/experts when they have almost no experience.

Hey… I managed to get six days into the New Year before my first major rant!

Happy New Year to you all…

David

Hi

This thread has been most interesting to read, also the different but similar perspectives in relation to "baseline” Programs as well as "contractors" Programs

My view would be simple, before the populating of the "software” programs one should draw up the method statement of the constructability of the Scope of Work “the project”

This in consultation with the Project Date (Project Specific Data) included in NEC Contracts, will ensure that both the Planner and the Construction Manager, define before hand, how the project is to be erected. This is then usually communicated and laid before the Client, hopefully he puts time and effort into reviewing this, Then Approves it

Here is where the problems lie, the accurate capture of the as built and the formal recording of this is where in my opinion all falls loose.
Initially both sides want to be friends, and when the cost reports start showing things are not progressing as they should then comes the claims etc.

Example, I have recently done a EOT Analysis, the contractor had a defined scope of work, but after the accepting of his Tender and Tender Program , additional scope of was added, now proportionally his risk went up , he should have at this stage added the additional three months to his Program , but didn’t , this compounded with the non submission of updates added to the mess.

Now he is claiming this and basing it on events that occurred during the progress, but the events he puts forward are those resulting in him being behind program at that time , simply due to the fact that he hadn’t correctly done his baseline up front

Any way in reference to the thread try reading a documenst on the web in relation to Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol, four retrospective delay analysis techniques

charles,

because of the variables and cost consideration, deviation from the baseline programme most of the time is inevitable. it’s all project management decision. good for mike.

cheers.

Nestor and Mike,

What we are trying to say here is that knowledge in developing reasonable logic is a must for planners/planning engineers.

This reasonable logic can be derive through actual field experience in whatever trade: oil and gas, infrastructure, building works, etc.

On the other hand, it is the contractor scheme of works as presented in this plan or the contractor intent on how he will programme his works that is the basis in approving plan or schedule. And the basic question is why did the contractor was not able to follow his baseline plan/schedule????

Cheers,
Happy Planning and Scheduling

Basically, it is dangerouse to tweak the plans.

It could be subjected and manipulative.

to show that the client mistake.

I work on the client side.

Maybe if I work on the contractor side, then, it could be different.

Cheers,
Happy Planning and Scheduling

Hi Nestor

I am employed mostly by Contractors although I did have a long spell with the Employer on the Hong Kong Airport.

Lets get one thing absolutely clear - If I could use the Contract programme without any adjustment then that would be ideal but so far I have not been able to - except once when I did the contract programme at the start the job.

If there is an event that delays 2nd fix joinery on the 3rd floor you have to be able to pinpoint that activity precisely - and determine its criticality.

When I get a contract programme that has an activity - 2nd Fix All Trades - and it spread over 5 levels - with arbitrary lead lag links that drop down to the next global bar - then I have no option but to break the programme up into sufficient detail for the delay analysis to work.

I ALWAYS do this baseline development BEFORE I have looked at any of the delay events - this is so that I can escape the charge that I have fiddled things to suit my clients purposes.

Sometimes this results in a baseline programme that is more detailed than necessary.

The main problem is that my developed programme will be different to the contract programme and this will be opened to challenge by the opposition and sometimes the adjudicator.

In the real world the Contractor’s Planner should set up his/her programme so that it will respond properly to changes and be able to predict the likely effect of events.

In the NEC contract this is a specific requirement.

In my experience the client’s planner is no better and no worse than the contractor - they are just using the same methods to thwart contractors claims.

The difference is that it is very easy to say NO to a delay claim without giving any reasons - they just seem to be cleverer.

With a properly developed and detailed programme it is much more difficult to reject a claim without sound reasons being given.

So when putting together a programme start from the bottom - with one task that has one trade in one location and build up from that until you have all trades in that location under a summary bar.

Only use f/s links - make sure every activity has at least 1 outgoing link.

DO NOT USE:
Lead lag links.
Constraints of any kind.

My new year project is to set down my methods in an interacive CD with on screen worked examples and different templates.

Best regards

Mike Testro.

Wish you all a smashing Christmas and a bombastic New Year 2009 !

Yours Hornyrable,
...

Hi Mike, maybe that is the reason or at least part of the reason the projects that we get involved with have gone wrong - poor planning.

I’d be interested to hear the views of the planners on this site as to whether they understand the construction process or not.

D

David

I think Mike meant ’some of the planners I have come across do not understand the construction process’.

Some time ago Keith Picavance was cited in the CIOB magazine Construction Manager saying something similar:

“ …
‘The guys who used to do it in the old days used to work things out by hand and draw by hand. To do that, you need to understand it,’ says Pickavance. ‘Now we have got a sophisticated calculator in the form of software. We have people who can operate calculators, but have very little or no idea of what the answer should be.’

To compound the problem, architects and engineers often don’t understand the software, and the contractors just provide print-outs. ‘Nobody is checking things to make sure they are meaningful until things go wrong and they are sent to someone like me and we see a complete load of junk,’ says Pickavance.
… “

Part of the problem with working in delay analysis is that we tend to only see projects, and programmes, that have gone wrong. I don’t think it is safe, or constructive, to generalise about the state of planners in the construction industry based upon what comes across delay analyst’s desks. After all, most planning and programming ‘consultants’ come from a contractor background - I often ask myself how they suddenly turned from being a contractor’s monkey to an all-knowing consultant. I am quite happy with the experience, training and education I have had but sometimes I do question those who set themselves up as consultants and experts who have not had any real-time experience or have taught themselves all they know.

I think we should not beat ourselves up to much. In my experience it is human nature to criticise others, especially if one holds oneself in high esteem. Let’s ask quantum experts what they think of the standard of quantity surveying in contractors - you’ll likely get a similar answer that they are all rubbish. So, I don’t think planners are any better or any worse than any other group, it’s just that we seem to be going through a period of self-examination and inviting criticism whereas other disciplines are keeping quite and continuing to flounder in their morass of ineptitude!

Love and peace…

David

* http://www.construction-manager.co.uk/story.asp?storyType=143&sectioncod...

Hi Ali

I may have responded to your earlier thread but here is my current answer.

I trained myself to be a delay analyst starting in the late 80’s when I was a freelance quantum claims consultant.

I realised that until I had got a grip of the time problems I would not solve any of the money problems.

So I bought PowerProject software and learnt how to use it.

I then started to understand how delays were caused and impacted on the programme.

I decided that I prefered delay analysis to money claims so I called myself a delay analyst and put my rates up.

I am not a planner - I am a builder who can do the software.

To be a delay analyst you have to understand the construction process and then put the process into a baseline programme.

Planners do not understand the construction process - every time I am presented with a "Contract" programme I have to develop it into a "Baseline" programme that will respond properly to whatever caused the delays.

That is the start.

When you have learnt and understood the ways and means of the 4 systems of forensic delay analysis and how they apply to:

1. Forms of Contract.
2. Levels of As Built data.
3. Detail of Impact Events.

Then you can make a start as a delay analyst.

By the way - £500-£600 a day is the low end of the market.

Best regards

Mike Testro

Hi Gwen,
A key requisite in forensic analysis is very good oral skills; is this something you have also helped smiling shagger to develop?

D

Hi Gwen,

If you are developing Smiling Shagger then I am sure that he/she must have considerable potential. I note that Smiling has been a member of PP since March 2006, so they are not that new. They are bound to have gone through a considerable development process and picked up a great deal of experience under your expert tutelage.

I do recall among the members of PP one Speedy Shagger, a relative perhaps?

Chris Oggham

Dear Mr Shagger.

You are new to planning but you set yourself up as a forensic delay analyst.

Please explain.

Best regards

Mike Testro