Free access to exclusive content!

Subscribe NOW to Project Value Delivery mailing list!

How to Properly Control Client-Induced Changes in Your EPCI Project [new Expert Corner Paper]

Contractors lose on average 5 to 7% of the Contract value due to undetected additional requirements requested by their Client.

\"stoppingChanges cannot be fully avoided during project execution, but they should be minimized to avoid disturbing the execution. One major practical concern is the amount of changes that can be created by the Client, and which are too often not acknowledged. This leaves the Contractor in a sometimes difficult conundrum. Yet it is essential for the Contractor to remain protected because a significant value can be at stake. Our new Expert Paper by Herve Baron examines some good practices that should be implemented by Contractors to protect themselves.

One of the main issues is Non-acknowledged changes that come in the form of comments on deliverables, requirements transmitted \”candidly\” via letters, records in minutes of meetings, informal communication (oral, emails etc.). The Paper gives some useful strategies that need to be implemented with discipline to avoid uncompensated scope creep.

Maintain your position in the case of non-acknowledged changes – read our new Expert Corner\’s Paper \”How to Properly Control Client-Induced Changes in Your EPCI Project\” by Herve Baron!

If you would like to raise your contractual awareness further and practice on real cases, join the author’s hands-on Contract Management Training. The next session will be held on October 20-21, 2014, in Jakarta. For more details and to register, please visit: www.rhenindo.com.

3 thoughts on “How to Properly Control Client-Induced Changes in Your EPCI Project [new Expert Corner Paper]”

  1. I do agree with you that the issue of recognizing a change is an important one, yet beening the procurment and contracts manager for some mega projects I can assure you that any subcontracor who refuses to perform a job claiming that it is a change as you suggest in your paper is totally unacceptable, and in some cases would cause to the immidiate termination of its contract. from my vast experince the commun practice is continne doing the job and prepare all relevant paper work. Furthermore, most contracts I know usualy have a clause stating that in cases of disagreement of this natre the contractor is forbided to stop its work or not enter the disputed additional work.
    reading this paper I cant help wondering if the person who wrote has ever actually worked on a project. I regret to say that you are spreading out some very bad advice.

  2. Hi Gilad, thanks for your comments which effectively demonstrates the dilemma. Apart from the difference in appreciation, which we can discuss further I can assure you that the author of this paper has effectively worked on large projects (from the Contractor side obviously) (his bio is available). I fully understand your point, yet it is not always possible to terminate the contractor when the contract is well advanced and some technologies are used that are not common-place; I guess it boils down to a power tension between the two parties. Thanks for your reaction anyway.

  3. I’m not challenging your “5-7%”, in fact it sounds reasonable, but when this article states that “industry sources estimate…”, it would add credibility to these numbers if you were to identify who these industry sources are. For example, when & where was the study/survey conducted, what questions were asked, and what does the sample pool look like (e.g. how many respondents, what geographies, what types of companies, etc.)?

    Much thanks in advance for any details you can share.

    Sincerely,

    Philip Greer
    Trimble Navigation, Ltd.

Leave a Comment