Pre‐construction project partnering: developing the process

TLDR

Subcontracting is widespread in construction, but the relationship between main contractors and subcontractors is strained by unfair contract terms and competitive pressures. The study proposes a limited‑competition procurement approach to strengthen main‑contractor/subcontractor relationships. Semi‑project partnering was applied to a commercial development, guided by research on stakeholder needs and performance benchmarking. The approach yielded benefits such as improved teamwork, better understanding, more compliant bids, stronger relationships, reliable scheduling, reduced confrontation, lower tendering costs, and a 10 % reduction in subcontractor quotes.

Abstract

The use of subcontracting within the modern construction industry has become commonplace with many main contractors only undertaking the management and co‐ordination activities. The reliance on subcontractors has put much stress on the subcontractor — main contractor relationship. As main contractors have realized that the greatest potential for cost saving lies with subcontractors, the prevalence of unfair contract conditions, dutch auctioning and other onerous practices has increased. This paper describes a procurement approach, utilizing limited competition, developed by a top UK main contractors (MC) in order to improve its relationships with subcontractors. The approach, termed semi‐project partnering, was implemented on a commercial development. The approach was supported by research which identified: what MC's employees want from subcontractors; what subcontractors want from main contractors; and a study to benchmark MC's performance with that of other main contractors. It was concluded that this approach offers a number of benefits for the client, main contractor, partnering subcontractors and professional consultants. These included an improved team approach; an improved understanding of the project; more compliant subcontractor bids; better/closer relationships; more reliable programming; less confrontation; and lower tendering costs. It was also identified through debriefing subcontractors that sub‐contractors were quoting a10% lower than normal due to this approach.