• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

MDC Systems

Providing Expert Solutions
for Projects Worldwide


PH: (610) 640.9600 | FX: (484) 301.0969

MENUMENU
  • About
  • Services
    • Construction Claims
    • Construction Management
    • CPM Scheduling/TIA®
    • Construction Dispute Resolution
    • Forensic Services
    • Expert Witness
    • Project Management
    • Risk Assessment
    • Modeling, BIM, Schedule, WUFI®
    • Energy/Sustainability Consulting
    • Government Services
    • Benchmarking
  • Professionals
  • Projects
    • Projects By Category
      • Building Diagnostics
      • Construction Claims
      • CPM Scheduling
      • Owner Issues
      • Project Management
      • Time Impact Analysis®
    • Projects by Industry
      • Commercial
      • Educational
      • Government
      • Industrial
      • Institutional
      • Pharmaceutical
  • Articles & Seminars
    • Seminars
    • Articles
  • Brochures
    • General Overview (PDF)
    • Forensic Engineering (PDF)
    • Schedule Analysis TIA (PDF)
    • Building Diagnostics (PDF)
    • Green Building & Sustainability (PDF)
  • MDCAdvisor®
  • Contact

Real Risk Management – Read the Contract

Stephen M. Rymal, P.E., Esq.
MDC Systems®
Consulting Engineer

Construction is as timeless as the pyramids. As a result, the most common construction risks have already been identified and allocated in the terms and conditions of standard form contracts. These are published by a multitude of professional associations such as the Construction Management Association of America (CMAA) and the American Institute of Architects (AIA). This article discusses the practical aspects of risk management and how to convert a potential problem to work to your advantage.

By its dynamic and economic nature, construction inherently carries risks for both the contractor and the owner, which are sometimes mutually exclusive. From the contractor’s viewpoint, the risk can be summarized as completing the project in the shortest possible time for less than the contract price, to maximize profits. From the owner’s viewpoint the risk is having the project delivered late or not at all, for more than the contract price, thereby requiring additional financing.

Unfortunately, too many parties enter into a construction contract without reading or understanding the obligations each owes to the other and how the risks have been allocated. The net result is that they wind up engaged in a dispute by using their mutually exclusive misunderstanding of a contract that neither party read nor understood. When they finally do read the contract they merely try to “cherry pick” clauses that only support their position and ignore those to the contrary.

Case in point, I managed a construction project several years ago and the contractor had hired an extremely diligent quality control representative. At the very start of construction, he prepared a matrix listing every specification and standard, such as the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards, referenced in the contract. He then set about the task of acquiring copies of them in order to verify compliance when submitting catalog cuts and shop drawings of the materials to be incorporated into the work. A month into this process, he reported that he could only locate about 75 % of the referenced specifications and standards. The remaining 25% were either improperly referenced, outdated, or in direct conflict with the technical specifications themselves with regard to several key elements of the work.

The bottom line is the architectural/engineering (A/E) firm that prepared the technical specifications referenced a series of specifications and standards without checking to see what, if any, relevance they actually possessed to the work being performed. In the above case, the quality control representative effectively minimized the risk to the contractor, and ultimately the government, with regard to complying with the plans and specifications by pointing out the deficiencies in the technical specification. This is an important step that was taken before purchasing and installing material that may later have been claimed to be out of compliance. This particular project was completed on time and within budget, with a minimum number of change orders and no outstanding claims in large measure due to the effectiveness of that matrix because everyone, including the engineers, inspectors, superintendents, and foremen read the contract before raising any new issues with regard to either changed conditions or disputes.

At a recent CMAA meeting, one of the board members mentioned to me that they require all of their construction managers to prepare a matrix summarizing the obligations of each party to the contract as well as a short synopsis of the risk allocation clauses in the contract they administer. Just for starters, the clauses that every party to a construction contract must understand are:

  • Price
  • Time for completion
  • Liquidated damages
  • Changes or Changed Conditions
  • Differing Site Conditions
  • Defects in the specifications and drawings (who is responsible)
  • Payment provisions
  • Disputes

The procedure of summarizing these risk allocation clauses forces the construction managers to not only read the contract, but also interpret, in their own words, what each clause means and how it operates. Someone recently asked me what my model was when I analyze a claim and I told him, “…when in doubt read the contract.”

Another case that bears on the issue of risk involves the rehabilitation of a lift bridge. The contractor pointed out that the wiring diagrams in the construction drawings didn’t match the wiring in the field. Neither the A/E firm nor the operating engineers were able to design a fix. Compounding the problem was that the more the contractor worked on the bridge the worse the operation became. Eventually, the operating engineers started to wedge the outdated mechanical switches shut with 2 by 4’s, in order to get the bridge to raise and lower. This is a true story. The operating engineers and the A/E blamed the contractor, so the contractor submitted a change order for his engineering time to design a “fix” for the bridge, which I eventually negotiated as no one else had a solution.

Later, I discovered that his “fix” involved digging deep enough into the historical records on the bridge until he found the original sepia wiring diagrams for the electrical panels when the bridge was constructed. He and his assistant, just two workers, simply started re-wiring the bridge back to its original configuration. It turns out that over the course of about one hundred years of repairs the operating engineers had improperly rewired it because they lost the original diagrams. Within a matter of weeks, the bridge was operating properly. The risk involved here was that no one, neither the A/E firm nor the operating engineers took the time to research the archives related to this particular bridge, except for the contractor. The contractor understood the changes clause and notice provisions and promptly submitted his change order to his economic benefit.

MDC Systems® believes that risks are identifiable and manageable. We also believe that they can be turned to your advantage, but only if you recognize how they are allocated in the contract and take the appropriate steps to resolve them before they are turned into claims.

Post Views: 102

You may like:

  • What Standard? Under Whose Care?
  • Information Management in an Electronic Age
  • Primavera Scheduling
  • Comparative Solar System Performance Analysis

Primary Sidebar

Latest News

  • MDCSystems® Taking Off with Commercial Drones
  • Change Orders: Maximizing Benefits for Owners
  • Privatization of American Water Utilities
  • Building Information Modeling – Boon or Bane?
  • Shipyard Contracts: New Construction vs. Ship Repair
  • Why is there a Labor Overrun?
  • Avoiding Death by a Thousand Cuts
  • Sustainability – Un-Definable Success in a Defined World
  • Modeling of a Residential Photovoltaic System and Model Validation Using Measured Data
  • Time Impact Analysis (TIA®)
  • Risk Management: Insuring Continuity of Supply
  • More Than Just Counting Rainy Days: Documenting Weather Delays
  • Primavera Scheduling
  • Complexity is Often the Culprit in Cost Overruns, Delays

Footer

Headquarters United States

MDC Systems®

1800 E. Lancaster Ave.
Suite -P Paoli, PA 19301
Map/Directions

Phone and Fax

Phone: 610.640.9600
Fax: 484.301.0969

Email

Robert C. McCue, PE
mccue@mdcsystems.com

Popular News

  • Overcoming Complexity-Intellectual Foundation of the Concepts
  • CAD and Models – If 4-D is good, then 5-D must be better
  • Forensic Project Management
  • Design-Build – What Every Underwriter Should Know
  • Project Management & Project Advocacy®

Associations

Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
American Bar Association
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
International Code Council
Forum on Construction Law
Building Construction Association
National Society of Professional Engineers

©1998 by MDCSystems, Inc. MDCSystemsSM, Time Impact AnalysisSM, TIASM, Capital Project Management SystemTM, CPMSTM, Forensic Project ManagementSM, FPMSM, are services marks and/or trademarks of MDCSystems, Inc.

Copyright © 2023 · Slipstream on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in