Agree with your comments, I guess the real bottom line though is that it usually comes down to the time available to get the tender in and how much work the tender department has got on - often the result then reflects what work the company is keen to win and thatwork it is not!
1. Long time, little work - detailed programme and estimate
2. Short time, lots of work - not so detailed programme or estimate.
Member for
22 years 4 months
Member for22 years4 months
Submitted by Shahzad Munawar on Fri, 2006-09-22 13:27
No doubt, Estimater and Planner should be considered one as both are integral part in execution of works especially in tendering, procurement and then in certification of monthly invoices
“The art is to find the most economic solution to the problem.” I love that word it is actually an art not a rocket science as there is no a single mathematical solution to this problem,
In the case of federal agencies, most of the bids are evaluated depending on time and costs; of course u must first pass the technical liability to be accepted. So how can u resolve this problem? The shortest possible duration of the programme with the respect of space and time constraints and activities chronology, with lowest possible costs, and a comfortable mark-up for profit.
Imho it is easier to optimise a bid if u have the duration of the programme as an input not an output, especially if it is a long period
Thanks for the clarifications, but I have to say I was really astonished that you face the same problem, specially when u do a bid and as the specifications are not well defined like materiel availability ( water, gravel etc..) and worst u have not even enough time to visit the site of project. As a result sometimes we made such a sadly bid!
But I imagine even if u are not involved in the bid process (as a planer), eventually if u gain the contract, u have to access the assumptions made in the bid estimation, like costs duration etc.. so u can prepare the project budget accordingly.
Please can you explain more? And can you show us how the work is shared between the different divisions? In my case we have the technical department manager who supervise three divisions
Estimation division: they prepares bid, contracts with the client, invoices
Planning division : planning the projects ( duration and budget )
Control division : ( where I work) preparing contract for specialized subcontractors, monitoring the project ( planned vs. actual percent completion) and a lot of claims, letters
As u can see the planning division is the easiest one, only he prepares budget for all projects and mainly 1 revision every year
Thanks
Ps: James I am sill home (600 km from work), we work 6x2 i.e.; six weeks work for two weeks holiday.
Member for
20 years 10 months
Member for20 years10 months
Submitted by Andrew Flowerdew on Tue, 2006-09-19 13:35
"The level of detail included in the tender programme is normally based on the requirements of the client"
ie, its to win the job, not build it. I totally agree that it would be nice, and the aim should be, to get it right at the earliest possible stage - however some clients know alot about the construction process, some know very little. Depending on your client or their consultants, they MAY have detailed requirements and a good knowledge, but this is not always the case.
The tender team has to convince the client they know what theyre doing and this does not always correspond with giving alot of detail, but sometimes it may. I have worked on tenders where the client has specifically stated a maximum number of activities for a tender programme (50no activites for a £25million project believe it or not)and therefore there was no way it could at that stage become a detailed construction programme - although by rolling up activities into summaries it had more detail in it than shown.
Still hold to my contention that its the estimators job to come up with the correct competitive market value for the job, ie win the job, rather than get every dollar allocated against the right piece of plant, material etc. Time doesnt usually permit a breakdown to the nth degree.
Member for
19 years 5 months
Member for19 years5 months
Submitted by James Griffiths on Tue, 2006-09-19 07:41
The level of detail included in the tender programme is normally based on the requirements of the client - and it seems that, sometimes, our clients want to read a "detailed handbook". This is in order to instill confidence that we have understood the scope etc.
Ok, it doesnt have to go into extreme-levels of detail - but when negotiations start - ie. remove this, add that, try this in a different order, report it this way instead of that etc. etc., the tender programme has to be sufficiently detailed in order to accommodate the changes without adversely affecting the logic or requiring a total reformatting. Moreover, if you can get in as much detail as possible, from the outset, then you will acquire a far-better understanding of how the programme works and the uncover minimal horror-stories once the baseline has been agreed.
My contention is to get-it-right at the earliest possible stage. If you can do this at the initial tender stage, then your stance for negotiations will be significantly stronger. Place yourself in the clients position and ask yourself whom are you going to favour: the one with the beautifully developed programme or the one whose programme looks like a pretty-picture? Yes, a more detailed programme may induce more questions - but the contractor, if he knows what he is doing, should have no problem with that. I always say: Let The Programme Be Your Servant and Your Authority.
James.
Member for
20 years 10 months
Member for20 years10 months
Submitted by Andrew Flowerdew on Tue, 2006-09-19 07:16
We never have enough time at tender but the role of an estimator is not to get every bit of money in exactly the right place, although very helpful if he/she does.
An estimators role is to come up with the market value of the project. In doing so he (or she) needs input from many sources, planners being one. They dont need a detailed construction programme but an overview of the times involed, methods, etc, to build the project.
I know the frustration it causes when you start to build a job. You look at the tender breakdowns and the programme and keep finding things that dont appear to be included in the tender, programmes that are of little help as to how you are going to actually build the project, etc, etc.
It took me a while to accept that the tender is a document to win the job, not a detailed handbook on how youre going to build it.
In the industry I work in (Oil/Gas), the Tender planning falls into two groups:
a) One group have dedicated planners that work alongside the estimators/quantity surveyors/contracts engineers etc.. These guys usually have good access to the key players and all the current information, tender documents, contract, drawings, specifications etc. The most important thing they have is the full duration of the bid period to collect their ideas and put their stuff together and as result produce resonable plans.
When you do tenders this way you can build up routines, procedures etc that can be applied from one bid to another, saving a lot o time and energy. Mind things can be very hectic with several large bids/rebids/clarifications etc going through at the same time!!
b) The other group, the one James and I belong to, planners doing their normal job, then suddenly CD’s / pile of A3/A4 folders arive on your desk and you are expected to turn a professional programme out for some rediculouse date.
These plans are best described as "full filling the Tender requirements".
Most people do not relise the amount of time that is required to do a tender correctly, i.e. time spent just reading the mountain of literature that comes with the tender, the input of data, sorting the programme out, printing and binding etc etc.
In addition you have people that cann’t make their mind up and wait till the last minute and you have to make changes to the plan to suit their ideas!!!!.
Also the planner is expected to keep his normal work load up and running.
AS a planner that has often reviwed plans for the client these type are easy to spot and are treated accordingly.
Best way is the first way - dedicated planners working within the tender group.
Regards
John
Member for
19 years 5 months
Member for19 years5 months
Submitted by James Griffiths on Mon, 2006-09-18 06:45
I hope you had a good week-end with your family, and are feeling happy to be back at work.
In answer to first your question: NO!!!
Last week, on Tuesday, I was asked to help construct the programe on a £5M tender. Strictly speaking, the programme was supposed to be delivered on the Friday. Three days to construct, optimise and amend the programme???? Yeah right.
I told them that it would take at least a week to even have the basic programme ready - and that assumed I had all the estimating data already available.
Initially, it was the bid leader who began constructing the programme - yet none of the estimating had been done. When she realised how much time it would take to construct the programme, she then asked me if I could do it for her (she is an Engineer with a little bit of very basic programming experience). This enables her to continue with the Estimating Sheets.
This is where our company has failed to learn, and still thinks that "programming" is a five-minute job, to be done as a "pretty-picture" just to satisfy the clients RFP. Therefore, it gets given to whomever happens to be leading the bid - usually an Engineer. Then they suddenly find out that they cant cope with the amount of data; concluding in a badly constructed programme.
Yep, its the same old story. They dont involve the planner until its too late - or even at all.
You are correct in that a bid is a team effort between all concerned. I keep telling them to complete the estimate sheets and Ill construct the programme. Well all get-together and then optimise the programme.
Member for
19 years 5 monthsRE: Estimator vs. Planner
Clive,
Don’t forget to include the company philosophy on use the use of programmes.
1. Long time, little work - detailed [] programme and estimate.
2. Short time, lots of work - not so detailed programme [] or estimate
James.
Member for
20 years 10 monthsRE: Estimator vs. Planner
Clive,
Agree with your comments, I guess the real bottom line though is that it usually comes down to the time available to get the tender in and how much work the tender department has got on - often the result then reflects what work the company is keen to win and thatwork it is not!
1. Long time, little work - detailed programme and estimate
2. Short time, lots of work - not so detailed programme or estimate.
Member for
22 years 4 monthsRE: Estimator vs. Planner
No doubt, Estimater and Planner should be considered one as both are integral part in execution of works especially in tendering, procurement and then in certification of monthly invoices
Member for
19 years 1 monthRE: Estimator vs. Planner
i believe that there should have been no differences between an estimator & a planner. They are suppose to be one!
Member for
19 years 3 monthsRE: Estimator vs. Planner
Hi all
Clive thanks for your “teacher’s approach”
“The art is to find the most economic solution to the problem.” I love that word it is actually an art not a rocket science as there is no a single mathematical solution to this problem,
In the case of federal agencies, most of the bids are evaluated depending on time and costs; of course u must first pass the technical liability to be accepted. So how can u resolve this problem? The shortest possible duration of the programme with the respect of space and time constraints and activities chronology, with lowest possible costs, and a comfortable mark-up for profit.
Imho it is easier to optimise a bid if u have the duration of the programme as an input not an output, especially if it is a long period
Regards
Morph
Member for
19 years 3 monthsRE: Estimator vs. Planner
Hi all
Thanks for the clarifications, but I have to say I was really astonished that you face the same problem, specially when u do a bid and as the specifications are not well defined like materiel availability ( water, gravel etc..) and worst u have not even enough time to visit the site of project. As a result sometimes we made such a sadly bid!
But I imagine even if u are not involved in the bid process (as a planer), eventually if u gain the contract, u have to access the assumptions made in the bid estimation, like costs duration etc.. so u can prepare the project budget accordingly.
Please can you explain more? And can you show us how the work is shared between the different divisions? In my case we have the technical department manager who supervise three divisions
Estimation division: they prepares bid, contracts with the client, invoices
Planning division : planning the projects ( duration and budget )
Control division : ( where I work) preparing contract for specialized subcontractors, monitoring the project ( planned vs. actual percent completion) and a lot of claims, letters
As u can see the planning division is the easiest one, only he prepares budget for all projects and mainly 1 revision every year
Thanks
Ps: James I am sill home (600 km from work), we work 6x2 i.e.; six weeks work for two weeks holiday.
Member for
20 years 10 monthsRE: Estimator vs. Planner
James,
You said it in your first sentence:-
"The level of detail included in the tender programme is normally based on the requirements of the client"
ie, its to win the job, not build it. I totally agree that it would be nice, and the aim should be, to get it right at the earliest possible stage - however some clients know alot about the construction process, some know very little. Depending on your client or their consultants, they MAY have detailed requirements and a good knowledge, but this is not always the case.
The tender team has to convince the client they know what theyre doing and this does not always correspond with giving alot of detail, but sometimes it may. I have worked on tenders where the client has specifically stated a maximum number of activities for a tender programme (50no activites for a £25million project believe it or not)and therefore there was no way it could at that stage become a detailed construction programme - although by rolling up activities into summaries it had more detail in it than shown.
Still hold to my contention that its the estimators job to come up with the correct competitive market value for the job, ie win the job, rather than get every dollar allocated against the right piece of plant, material etc. Time doesnt usually permit a breakdown to the nth degree.
Member for
19 years 5 monthsRE: Estimator vs. Planner
Andrew,
The level of detail included in the tender programme is normally based on the requirements of the client - and it seems that, sometimes, our clients want to read a "detailed handbook". This is in order to instill confidence that we have understood the scope etc.
Ok, it doesnt have to go into extreme-levels of detail - but when negotiations start - ie. remove this, add that, try this in a different order, report it this way instead of that etc. etc., the tender programme has to be sufficiently detailed in order to accommodate the changes without adversely affecting the logic or requiring a total reformatting. Moreover, if you can get in as much detail as possible, from the outset, then you will acquire a far-better understanding of how the programme works and the uncover minimal horror-stories once the baseline has been agreed.
My contention is to get-it-right at the earliest possible stage. If you can do this at the initial tender stage, then your stance for negotiations will be significantly stronger. Place yourself in the clients position and ask yourself whom are you going to favour: the one with the beautifully developed programme or the one whose programme looks like a pretty-picture? Yes, a more detailed programme may induce more questions - but the contractor, if he knows what he is doing, should have no problem with that. I always say: Let The Programme Be Your Servant and Your Authority.
James.
Member for
20 years 10 monthsRE: Estimator vs. Planner
We never have enough time at tender but the role of an estimator is not to get every bit of money in exactly the right place, although very helpful if he/she does.
An estimators role is to come up with the market value of the project. In doing so he (or she) needs input from many sources, planners being one. They dont need a detailed construction programme but an overview of the times involed, methods, etc, to build the project.
I know the frustration it causes when you start to build a job. You look at the tender breakdowns and the programme and keep finding things that dont appear to be included in the tender, programmes that are of little help as to how you are going to actually build the project, etc, etc.
It took me a while to accept that the tender is a document to win the job, not a detailed handbook on how youre going to build it.
Member for
21 years 1 monthRE: Estimator vs. Planner
Hi
In the industry I work in (Oil/Gas), the Tender planning falls into two groups:
a) One group have dedicated planners that work alongside the estimators/quantity surveyors/contracts engineers etc.. These guys usually have good access to the key players and all the current information, tender documents, contract, drawings, specifications etc. The most important thing they have is the full duration of the bid period to collect their ideas and put their stuff together and as result produce resonable plans.
When you do tenders this way you can build up routines, procedures etc that can be applied from one bid to another, saving a lot o time and energy. Mind things can be very hectic with several large bids/rebids/clarifications etc going through at the same time!!
b) The other group, the one James and I belong to, planners doing their normal job, then suddenly CD’s / pile of A3/A4 folders arive on your desk and you are expected to turn a professional programme out for some rediculouse date.
These plans are best described as "full filling the Tender requirements".
Most people do not relise the amount of time that is required to do a tender correctly, i.e. time spent just reading the mountain of literature that comes with the tender, the input of data, sorting the programme out, printing and binding etc etc.
In addition you have people that cann’t make their mind up and wait till the last minute and you have to make changes to the plan to suit their ideas!!!!.
Also the planner is expected to keep his normal work load up and running.
AS a planner that has often reviwed plans for the client these type are easy to spot and are treated accordingly.
Best way is the first way - dedicated planners working within the tender group.
Regards
John
Member for
19 years 5 monthsRE: Estimator vs. Planner
Hello Morph,
I hope you had a good week-end with your family, and are feeling happy to be back at work.
In answer to first your question: NO!!!
Last week, on Tuesday, I was asked to help construct the programe on a £5M tender. Strictly speaking, the programme was supposed to be delivered on the Friday. Three days to construct, optimise and amend the programme???? Yeah right.
I told them that it would take at least a week to even have the basic programme ready - and that assumed I had all the estimating data already available.
Initially, it was the bid leader who began constructing the programme - yet none of the estimating had been done. When she realised how much time it would take to construct the programme, she then asked me if I could do it for her (she is an Engineer with a little bit of very basic programming experience). This enables her to continue with the Estimating Sheets.
This is where our company has failed to learn, and still thinks that "programming" is a five-minute job, to be done as a "pretty-picture" just to satisfy the clients RFP. Therefore, it gets given to whomever happens to be leading the bid - usually an Engineer. Then they suddenly find out that they cant cope with the amount of data; concluding in a badly constructed programme.
Yep, its the same old story. They dont involve the planner until its too late - or even at all.
You are correct in that a bid is a team effort between all concerned. I keep telling them to complete the estimate sheets and Ill construct the programme. Well all get-together and then optimise the programme.
James