You might think that this was unremarkable. Why should I write about it? But hang on a moment – just think back ten to fifteen years. Would large clients have come to such an evening? Would they have thought twice about the mechanical and electrical side of their projects, or known what the specialist contractor did?
The architects and consulting engineers might have felt themselves too professional to attend and they would not have wanted specialists talking directly to clients. The construction managers, building firms in this case, would have treated the m&e specialist as a firm to be hired by lowest price competitive tender at the last possible moment before the builder's own bid went in.
The idea of involving the specialist at an early stage, let alone in direct discussions with the client and consultants, might not have occurred to the builders at all. As for ductwork or controls specialists, they would be sub-subcontractors and unknown to the builders, let alone to the clients.
The equipment manufacturers would not have been considered for an invitation. As downstream suppliers, their main hope was that their kit should be nominated by the consulting engineer or architect, and that the builder would not then substitute some cheaper equipment during the job.
Some of those features still exist. What has changed is that best practice clients recognise that the old construction hierarchies are meaningless. Efficient performance requires the whole team to be seen as such – one team, with the same objectives, in which the client itself is fully involved.
Planning the project in an initial workshop needs to involve all to whom design is crucial
Planning the project in an initial workshop needs to involve all to whom design is crucial. This must mean a prominent place for the specialist engineering contractors. The workshop facilitator should emphasise that all must value the whole project, not just their part of it. It is extraordinary that specialists can come onto a site not knowing who the client is, let alone the overall project aim.
The wise supply side team, working closely with the client and fully integrated at both design office and site level, knows that the reworking of specialist design is a wasteful and non-value adding operation. How much more sensible it is to involve the specialist as early as possible! M&E contractors have been saying this for years and it was a recommendation in 1994's Constructing the team. Only now though is it beginning to be seen as an integral part of the construction process.
The supply side needs to be a solid chain without any broken links. If the client does not value design, and chooses the architect or engineer at a miserable fee level, the relationship will be distant from day one. Equally, if the builder is chosen by a lowest price competitive tender, with no attention to quality, experience or suitability for the project, the likelihood is that the tender will be sub-economic. The scene is set for an adversarial struggle of claims and dutch auctioning.
The m&e contractor will be chosen on a similar basis, as will its sub-subcontractors. No-one will be valuing the project or the process, but looking instead to claw back the margin which was not in the tender. That is the bad, old game. It still happens too often. The difference now is that the Construction Act is there to level the playing field a little.
Suppose that the team has been chosen on a more sensible basis. Quality has been the first priority, and best value rather than lowest price was the key to selecting consultants, builders and specialist engineering contractors. In those happy circumstances, a heavy responsibility lies on the m&e contractor to choose its own ductwork or controls specialists with equal attention to quality and a fair margin.
Source
Electrical and Mechanical Contractor
