Its 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.Ms, etc, do not see the Value for Money in P.E.s, whereas other industrys 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 its effectiveness previoulsy. Things are changing though.
Member for
20 years 10 months
Member for20 years10 months
Submitted by Andrew Flowerdew on Wed, 2006-03-22 05:28
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 thats not the answer.
Santas got alot of work to do I think although Im not sure hes the right person to ask for miracles from!
Member for
22 years
Member for22 years1 month
Submitted by Robert Burns on Wed, 2006-03-22 05:23
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 its culture.
Although, as Christmas lists go the amount of culture changes required in Construction wouldnt fit in Santss sleigh.
Im 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. Its also possible that during the preparation of the programme, the one evaluating the programme doesnt 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
Member for
20 years 10 months
Member for20 years10 months
Submitted by Andrew Flowerdew on Thu, 2006-03-16 13:26
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.
Member for
22 years
Member for22 years1 month
Submitted by Robert Burns on Wed, 2006-03-15 09:49
Thanks for the response as its as I saw the situation also. As certain procurement methods are created to speed up the processs, 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.
Member for
20 years 10 months
Member for20 years10 months
Submitted by Andrew Flowerdew on Wed, 2006-03-15 06:44
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 doesnt, 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 youre 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 dont and the claims for delay keep on coming.
Shouldnt complain, keeps me in a job!!!!!!!!!!!
Member for
20 years 10 months
Member for20 years10 months
Submitted by Andrew Flowerdew on Wed, 2006-03-15 06:31
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.
Member for
22 years
Member for22 years1 month
Submitted by Robert Burns on Wed, 2006-03-15 06:30
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.
Member for
22 years
Member for22 years1 month
Submitted by Robert Burns on Wed, 2006-03-15 05:59
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
Member for
20 years 10 months
Member for20 years10 months
Submitted by Andrew Flowerdew on Wed, 2006-03-15 05:21
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.
Member for
22 years
Member for22 years1 month
Submitted by Robert Burns on Wed, 2006-03-15 04:46
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.
Member for
20 years 10 months
Member for20 years10 months
Submitted by Andrew Flowerdew on Tue, 2006-03-14 12:48
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.
Member for
22 years
Member for22 years1 month
Submitted by Robert Burns on Tue, 2006-03-14 05:03
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 its 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, its clarity, its 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.
Member for
22 yearsRE: Varying Procurement Methods on the Programme
Andrew,
Its 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.Ms, etc, do not see the Value for Money in P.E.s, whereas other industrys 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 its effectiveness previoulsy. Things are changing though.
Member for
20 years 10 monthsRE: Varying Procurement Methods on the Programme
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 thats not the answer.
Santas got alot of work to do I think although Im not sure hes the right person to ask for miracles from!
Member for
22 yearsRE: Varying Procurement Methods on the Programme
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 its culture.
Although, as Christmas lists go the amount of culture changes required in Construction wouldnt fit in Santss sleigh.
Member for
24 years 5 monthsRE: Varying Procurement Methods on the Programme
Speaking of a mess programme:
Im 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. Its also possible that during the preparation of the programme, the one evaluating the programme doesnt 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
Member for
20 years 10 monthsRE: Varying Procurement Methods on the Programme
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.
Member for
22 yearsRE: Varying Procurement Methods on the Programme
Andrew,
Thanks for the response as its as I saw the situation also. As certain procurement methods are created to speed up the processs, 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.
Member for
20 years 10 monthsRE: Varying Procurement Methods on the Programme
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 doesnt, 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 youre 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 dont and the claims for delay keep on coming.
Shouldnt complain, keeps me in a job!!!!!!!!!!!
Member for
20 years 10 monthsRE: Varying Procurement Methods on the Programme
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.
Member for
22 yearsRE: Varying Procurement Methods on the Programme
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.
Member for
22 yearsRE: Varying Procurement Methods on the Programme
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
Member for
20 years 10 monthsRE: Varying Procurement Methods on the Programme
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.
Member for
22 yearsRE: Varying Procurement Methods on the Programme
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.
Member for
20 years 10 monthsRE: Varying Procurement Methods on the Programme
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.
Member for
22 yearsRE: Varying Procurement Methods on the Programme
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 its 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, its clarity, its 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