KEY OUTPUT 13: Current developments with legal contracts and technology

Contract management is set to undergo decades of change as a result of recent advancements in generative AI. The creation, evaluation, and tracking of contracts could all be fundamentally altered by these new technologies. One viewpoint is that they could obscure procedures and increase reliance on lawyers. Alternately, they may enable the common person to better comprehend legal language and democratise our interaction with legal contracts. The majority of construction contracts follow standard form, so we may be able to handover much of the creation and review to AI where this can be trusted. Such investment will be expected to result in legal transformation and cost efficiencies.

There there will no doubt be intricacies, exceptions and complexities that will necessitate human intervention by lawyers, to verify basic work completed by any robots, where this is trusted. The time spent on contracts is set to be drastically cut but this will require care with judgement and interpretation to avoid a myriad of lawsuits from any contracts created with AI. We noted some recent developments and continuing challenges:

• The use of AI and its subfields, such as machine learning, being on the rise, aiding in aspects like health and safety, cost estimating, supply chain, and risk detection.
• Despite these advancements, the construction industry remains one of the least digitised and faces substantial challenges in fully adopting AI and other technologies.
• Key barriers include the cost of any technology investment and the organisational changes needed to leverage and realise benefits from these investments on contracts.

In our Key Output 13, our steering group sought to obtain answers to four key questions below as usual from a multi-disciplinary perspective. This KO13 report is a must read.

• What are the recommended practical engineering and construction contract (NEC, JCT and FIDIC) standard form best practices?
• If the need for cost assurance is removed from collaborative contracts? What then happens to accountability and innovation when cost assurance is wrongly adversarial?
• We wanted a discussion on the current technology challenges that we are seeing on construction contracts e.g. lack of ownership and control and lack of trust with data.
• What the impact of AI will be on digital integration, digital QS and digitised cost assurance? Will we see faster delivery, improved estimates and more cost certainty?

Cecelia is a qualified accountant of 25+yrs, and director of CFBL Consulting, a cost and strategy consultancy specialising in independent cost audits on infrastructure projects and strategy advisory. She has worked across commercial, finance and project control functions. A CIMA fellow and member of AICPAs, sustainability and R&D panel. She is a cost consultant and auditor experienced in the rail, technology, defence, renewable energy, and electrification sectors and has led audits on major programmes. She is chair of the multi-disciplinary steering group. Her career in construction spans 20 years and she has worked on high-profile projects such as HS2, Hinkley Point C, and Crossrail, and as a result, brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to this space.

Should the need for cost assurance be removed from collaborative contracts?

In recent times, collaborative contracts, known for fostering trust and innovation, have proven to be financially beneficial. They can lead to significant savings, improved working practices or generate efficiencies crucial for public sector services and projects. From my experience, cost assurance provides real-time financial insight, allowing for immediate corrective action and informed decisions based on actual data. It reveals non-conformances and control weaknesses, playing a critical role in independent governance and budgetary control.

However, an excessive focus on cost assurance can stifle the innovation and creative problem-solving these contracts are designed to encourage. The success of such contracts hinges on administering them correctly and conducting cost assurance in a non-adversarial manner. It is essential to balance cost assurance with the flexibility required for innovation, tailoring its level to each project’s unique needs without undermining the collaborative essence of the contract.

Collaborative contracts aim to create a symbiotic environment marked by cooperation, transparency, shared risks, and reduced adversarial interactions. These contracts, whether initiated by funders, clients, alliances, or to exercise an open book accounting clause, have varying benefits that should inform the extent of the cost assurance exercise. It is important not to remove cost assurance entirely but to calibrate its application thoughtfully, aligning it with each project’s specific nuances.

In conclusion, cost assurance should be an enabler of strategy and objectives, supporting the parties involved in a collaborative contract with independent insights. It enables fiscal accountability, drives improvements and helps with maintaining budgetary control, while still allowing room for the creative problem-solving and innovation these contracts aim to achieve.

What are the recommended practical contract forms’ best practices?

Limiting amendments to the NEC, JCT or FIDIC standard forms of engineering and construction contracts is a key recommended best practice. These contracts have been created to mitigate the risk of one party leveraging their position to gain an unfair advantage over another. Such exploitative behaviour can manifest as unilateral changes to delivery schedules, price fluctuations, or the imposition of more stringent terms and conditions that will in turn give rise to adversarial behaviour.

Economists refer to this concern – where one party may be disadvantaged by the other – as the ‘hold-up problem.’ This problem is exacerbated by the reality that legal contracts, despite the most thorough preparations, often contain gaps, omissions, and ambiguities that I flag as grey areas during a cost assurance engagement. Before proceeding, parties must very carefully consider which relational approach and formal contract type is really best suited for the project at that point in time

Examples are fixed price lumpsum, target price or cost plus. In practice, I have seen a fixed price lumpsum contract that sufficed at the start of what initially appeared to be a straight forward project varied to a cost plus contract. Due to increasing risks, we are seeing changing delivery models needed to deliver complex long-term projects efficiently and the increasing use of cost-based contracts designed for collaborative, strategic partnerships, that focus on shared risk and rewards.

What are the current technology challenges that we are seeing on construction contracts?

The construction industry, known for its low productivity levels compared to sectors like manufacturing, faces significant technological challenges. This industry is one of the least digitised globally, often exhibiting a historical resistance to change. Such reluctance, combined with predominantly manual operations, leads to complex and inefficient project delivery. Furthermore, cost inefficiencies are frequently linked to poor digital capabilities and technology integration.

Key Technological Challenges:

• Implementation of Building Information Modelling: Despite its potential to revolutionise project planning and management, the industry struggles with the widespread adoption of BIM. Challenges include a lack of standardisation and the necessary investment in training for effective use.
• Advanced Data Analytics and Machine Learning: Integrating these technologies to predict project risks and optimise resource allocation remains a hurdle. The industry must overcome obstacles related to data sensitivity, volume, and the expertise required to utilise these technologies effectively.
• Contract Management Systems and Data Disputes: Issues arise regarding the cost, control, and ownership of data. While these technologies can enhance efficiency of contract management, cost and safety, the sector often struggles with the commercial sensitivity of data sharing.

Recent Developments and Continuing Challenges:

• The use of AI and its subfields, such as machine learning, is on the rise, aiding in health and safety monitoring, cost estimation, supply chain logistics, and risk detection.
• Despite these advancements, the construction industry remains one of the least digitised sectors and faces substantial challenges in effectively adopting AI and other technologies.
• Key barriers include the cost of technology investment and the organisational changes needed to leverage and realise benefits from these investments.

Imran is an experienced chartered accountant (ACA) providing Cost and Commercial Assurance services to a variety of major infrastructure clients with prior experience in external and statutory audits from working at the U.K National Audit Office. He is currently the UK lead and global SME for Cost Assurance service development and delivery within Turner & Townsend global provider of consultancy services within the construction industry.

What are the recommended practical contract forms’ best practices?

Contracts should try and offer as much structure and detail as possible without mandating requirements that are not possible to obtain or excessively difficult to achieve – that compromise value and efficiency. With regards to open book environments and with particular reference to cost assurance the NEC, as a commonly used example on major construction projects in the UK, provides a good degree of detail on process, interfaces and also what constitutes what costs are able to be applied for by a supplier. The contract however still offers a level of flex for interpretation between parties, via the requirement for collaboration ultimately, to refine ways of working and information requirements.

Should the need for cost assurance be removed from collaborative contracts?

Assurance is a critical aspect of project delivery covering all facets from cost/commercial to quality and health & safety. A well-defined and embedded lines of defence model is deemed best practice in any organisation to help identify non-compliances, areas of improvement and opportunities for efficiency. Ultimately it also provides a way for other stakeholders (e.g., funders, government, the National Audit Office) who are not involved in the day-to-day activities of project delivery to gain confidence and comfort on progress. Whilst collaboration is intended, the actual implementation of this requirement is still important to check. An intelligently developed risk-based approach that properly considers contract requirements, client and supply chain ways of working and capabilities will help to ensure the process is as efficient as possible. Of course it is stressed that the earlier that assurance processes are embedded the better, in achieving efficiency and being able to take an incrementally lighter touch approach to assurance over time.

What are the current technology challenges that we are seeing on construction contracts?

The ongoing reliance on Excel as a key tool to present cost information remains a challenge within the industry combined with a lack of specific data and application for payment structures and requirements. This is compounded further by the ever-escalating complexity and scale of major programmes in the industry. This often means that these documents become difficult to navigate, control and ultimately audit. With respect to project delivery, manual interfaces on site such as manually completed timesheets and other documents still create the challenge of how to create efficient audit/assurance processes to navigate this often ‘unstructured’ data.

What will be the impact of AI on digital integration, digital QS and digitised cost assurance?

AI, if used appropriately, could provide a positive and powerful tool for commercial managers when reviewing costs, progress and change. For example, the opportunity to embed machine learning and predictive analytics techniques into datasets could help streamline the assessment and certification process as well as help shorten the time taken to review compensation events. A successful implementation however requires:

(1) an appropriately written contract that provides clarity on the type, format, frequency and quantity of information and data to be collected

(2) early assurance intervention to provide comfort that supply chain systems are well configured to source the data / information

(3) a mutual agreement between parties to incentivise efficiency and productivity gains

(4) a technology solution that is adaptable and scalable as the programme/ project develops and is able to be informed by intelligence gained through the assurance process

(5) suitable capability / training at all levels to be able to use these tools effectively.

Claire is a lawyer specialising in construction and engineering disputes with experience in litigation, adjudication, mediation, and domestic and international arbitration. Claire acts for employers, contractors, and subcontractors across a wide range of projects including large-scale infrastructure projects, energy, utility, oil, and gas supply projects. Our global teams operate seamlessly to deliver the commercial know-how and strategic alignment that clients need from their advisers to help further their business interests. We shape our advice to the unique circumstances and challenges of each project and ensure the right people are in the right places to offer insight and certainty every time – from the day-to-day to complex, multi-jurisdictional transactions.

Current Developments With Legal Contracts & Technology

What are the recommended practical contract forms’ best practices?

We are seeing technology being used more and more to assist with the administration of construction contracts and, whilst commonly used standard forms (e.g. NEC, JCT and FIDIC) do not expressly state that contract management systems must be used, their use can be invaluable where such contracts often have time critical notice provisions (particularly relating to payment and risk) and require the sharing of large volumes of data amongst multiple users.

Such software solutions are certainly embraced and endorsed by industry bodies as a means to increase productivity, promote transparency and encourage pro-active behaviours across a project. Indeed, NEC4 recognises that the parties may have a “communication system” in place (which includes electronic communications), allowing this to be specified in the Scope.

JCT has also embraced technology, with the 2024 suite expected to provide for the use of electronic signatures and recognise the serving of notices electronically. Digital working (including downloading and amending) using their already established JCT On Demand and JCT Construct will also continue to be championed.

Should the need for cost assurance be removed from collaborative contracts?

The current economic climate and the impact of Brexit and Covid has seen an increase in using more collaborative forms of contracting, with the focus on aligning the interests of employers and contractors and encouraging the early identification and management of risks. This form of contracting relies on cost certainty, transparency and predictability, which is why cost assurance can be a such a vital part of collaborative contracting.

However, because the nature of cost assurance involves checking, verifying and interrogating a contractor’s costs, in addition to the financial controls and procedures it has in place, independent verifiers may send out the wrong message. If a review is approached in an adversarial manner (for example, demanding unnecessary documentation) or with the assumption that the contractor is seeking to overcharge the client, this can undermine the intended collaborative nature of the contract and project.

So, whilst cost assurance should not be removed from collaborative contracting, it is important that the parties approach it in the right manner. Finding an independent and competent reviewer is key, but it is also vital that the parties trust each other and feel able to openly discuss and pro-actively deal with any issues identified.

Tom is the Head of Commercial Management at Southern Water. He is a chartered surveyor and manager of commercial, contract, and audit teams for large infrastructure clients and contractors. Specialising in the commercial management of construction contracts, claims, and disputes, He demonstrates a solid track record in infrastructure markets with experience in major energy, water, aviation, transport, and communications networks.

Should the need for cost assurance be removed from collaborative contracts?

In the foreseeable future I don’t think so. All Clients, whether they be public bodies or otherwise, need to demonstrate diligent assurance to their various stakeholders. Verification from a qualified professional in this assurance process will at the very least show that funds have been properly spent.

Moreover, Clients procuring any form of construction works will have commercial and business objectives. Assurance of project costs is a key part of the process in demonstrating performance (value for money) or, on the other hand, underperformance vs these objectives. The absence of the assurance process would hinder a Clients ability to measure its objectives. As part of this process Clients will also want a general understanding that they have paid in accordance with the rule of the contract and that no overpayment has occurred.

Standard forms of construction contract get the balance right between components that are not auditable (the fee and its build up parts) and those components that are auditable. So in this sense the standard forms appear to have considered a practicable balance.

Charlotte is a Senior Associate in the Construction and Engineering Disputes team at DLA Piper, specialising in contentious construction and engineering matters for national and international Employer and Contractor clients. Acts on behalf of claimants and defendants across numerous dispute resolutions. Her Experience includes delay, prolongation, breach of contracts claims, defects liability claims, concurrent delay, payment disputes, and termination and insolvency advice in relation to construction contracts, often involving complex technical and contractual issues and multiple parties across numerous jurisdictions.

What are the current technology challenges that we are seeing on construction contracts?

From a disputes perspective, the issue remains that the input is not sufficient to make full and adequate use of the more advanced technology available. Whilst we are seeing increased options for streamlining the more process-driven aspects of contract management, the output is only ever as good as the input. If the time and energy is not put in at the front-end of the contractual process, the parties fail to properly administer the contract, and/or if all information is inputted on a piecemeal basis (or not at all) then there will only ever be an incomplete picture.

If parties are unfortunate enough to end up in dispute, the strength of a claim can often be undermined by lack of records and/or a full picture in circumstances where the parties have opposing views as to contract management and entitlement.

What will be the impact of AI on digital integration, digital QS and digitised cost assurance?

We are seeing an increased focus on regulation and policy frameworks to police the rapidly expanding use of AI technology in businesses. With increased use of AI systems and more advanced algorithmic models comes increased need for compliance with regulatory frameworks and navigation of new laws. Whilst the impact can surely be a positive one in respect of gaining a competitive edge as well as increased time and cost efficiency, there are currently over 700 active policy initiatives globally trying to regulate AI, meaning there is no consistent step-by-step guide to implementing AI for construction companies to follow whilst ensuring they comply with everything they need to. There is currently a balance to be found between the cost and time savings of introducing more advanced AI and the cost and time of complying with the relevant regulations and procedures governing its use!

Shy specialises in construction and engineering law and his practice covers project advice and acting in a dispute related to UK and international projects. His experience covers litigation, arbitration, adjudication, and ADR and he has advised on all main forms of contract, including NEC, JCT, and FIDIC. He is a fellow of the Chartered Institution of Civil Engineering Surveyors. He is a visiting lecturer at King’s College London and the University of Stuttgart, a member of the NEC Contract Board, and a council member of the UK Society of Construction Law.

What are the current technology challenges that we are seeing on construction contracts?

There is great scope for the use of technology on construction and infrastructure projects, particular in terms of cost, risk and project management. There are platforms and technologies available now which use AI and machine learning to assist with contract and risk management. However, there isn’t always perfect information as to the technology that is available, how it can be implemented on a project and the cost savings it can entail (particularly when faced with the investment costs of adopting the technology in the first instance).

To effectively use technology in construction contracts, the type of technology and the particulars of its use need to be agreed up front in the parties’ contract. Parties may have very different ideas about the use of technology (and who should pay for it), which can make reaching an agreement on the use of technology, particularly when there are many other contractual points to agree on and resolve, very difficult. Often, it requires one party to advocate for the use of a particular piece of technology and to fund a significant proportion of it, to secure its use on a project.

Jennifer specialises in construction and engineering law and covering project advice and acting in disputes related to UK and international projects. Her experience covers Legal advice, Legal research, dispute resolution, and Commercial litigation.

She is a graduate from the university of Oxford. She is a senior associate of BCLP Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP.

What will be the impact of AI on digital integration, digital QS and digitised cost assurance?

That said, as actors in the industry gain more experience of the technologies available for use on construction projects and the efficiencies that can result, we will start to see more consensus on the use of technologies on construction projects and in construction contracts. There are huge economies of scale to be gained through the use of technology on long term infrastructure projects. It is worth the time and investment up front at the tender, and pre-contract phase to understand the technologies that are available, how they can be deployed on a project and projecting the potential cost savings from adopting the use of technology to streamline cost and project management functions.

Gary is a Director at Blake Newport, an experienced construction commercial, contract and disputes consultant and Expert Witness. His specialisms include quantum analysis, contract administration, construction law, cost control, payment assessments and change management.

Should the need for cost assurance be removed from collaborative contracts?

It depends. Some contractual arrangements are collaborative in title only and some contracts are truly collaborative, usually linked to the outcome the client is looking to achieve and its working relationship/history with the contractor. Some parties are used to working together on a regular basis on separate contracts and therefore it would not make sense to check the same costs on each contract because it takes time and effort to do so – which ultimately costs more and slows the process down.

In this case it would be better to audit central costs as part of a pre-qual requirement and then to check project-specific costs. However, if there is a history of compliance on the project-specific costs, then it could be judged to be waste of time and overall, it would increase the cost of the project. Instead, internal audit and self-regulation could be the smarter answer. In the alternative, parties who have not worked together before would need greater scrutiny to build trust.

Also, contracting/procurement strategy can help. A pure cost-plus-fee arrangement would create a greater assurance burden because the client is assessing what should be in the fee, what is disallowed cost and what is allowable cost. But in a target cost contract, the target itself can be the deterrent for “loading” the project with what the contractor states to be allowable cost. If the cost is higher than the target then the contractor would have to bear some or all of the overspend through the pain mechanism. So, if reduction of pain/maximisation of gain is a more profitable position for the contractor than just earning fee on its allowable cost, then it is incentivised to regulate its allowable cost.

What will be the impact of AI on digital integration, digital QS and digitised cost assurance?

In theory, in any industry, the point of AI is to improve efficiency and reduce costs. So in the context of cost and contract administration its function will be to speed up the bits that humans are comfortable with the AI speeding up. As things stand today, AI is useful but not perfect so if there is an element of uncertainty then humans will need to step in. However, the parties in a construction contract can agree, via the contract terms and conditions, what degree of uncertainty they are comfortable with. We can choose to accept that AI will play a role in the administration of the contract with the ultimate aim to take advantage of AI in creating efficiency and reducing costs.

So, for example, the parties could agree via the terms of the contract, if it was conducting quarterly audits on Defined Cost under and NEC contract, that it would conduct a full audit on Q1 costs and then train an agreed AI application to search for disallowed costs in the cost data of Q2 where the entries are similar in structure. The parties could accept that whatever the AI has identified is disallowed or alternatively accept whatever it has not identified as disallowed is Defined Cost.

The parties would have to evaluate the efficiency and cost saving of auditing vs the risk and cost of misidentification by the AI.

Katy is an experienced Quantity Surveyor with a demonstrated history of working in construction/contractor/client-held roles within the construction industry. Skilled in negotiation, tender optioneering, value engineering, contract drafting and administration (NEC & JCT), change control, dispute resolution, auditing cost and commercial Compliance, and other aspects of commercial management. She is a chartered surveyor working towards an LLM in Construction Law from the University of Strathclyde to reinforce existing experience and knowledge.

What are the recommended practical contract forms’ best practices?

An unamended standard form of contract which is tailored to clients’ needs but takes a balanced approach to risk is commonly thought to be best practice. This approach supports clarity of responsibilities, standardised methods (use of pro-forma communication for example), time periods and makes it more likely that where disputes may occur – legal precedent will be available to all parties to consider likely outcomes. Clarity, transparency and communication are really at the heart of best practices in relation to contract and when amendments are made to contracts it can introduce grey areas, a lack of clarity and misunderstandings which can be avoided.

Should the need for cost assurance be removed from collaborative contracts?

Contracts which agree obligations, responsibilities and risks on parties (which includes a payment for goods and services) will require a degree of cost assurance in some form. In relation to public funds assurance work is required to ensure robust checks as to value for money are in place. In collaborative contracts it is likely that cost assurance will benefit all parties to the contract ensuring that clarity and transparency upon which trust is built and maintained, continues to be provided.

What will be the impact of AI on digital integration, digital QS and digitised cost assurance?

The benefits of AI when harnessed by the industry could make it more efficient, more sustainable and provide value for money throughout the supply chain. However consideration needs to be given to getting the basics correct, aligning machine learning with the objective, and understanding its limitations and the risks associated with over-reliance on AI. This field is still developing so it is difficult to forecast the impact but experts will be required to provide the structure of the AI including limitations and it is anticipated subject experts will be required to assist in this regards and to provide a check that the AI is achieving the desired quality and that outputs are logical and acceptable.

What are the current technology challenges that we are seeing on construction contracts?

The current challenges being seen include:

• Aligning expectations – Directors, developers (of technology), and end users need to understand the objective of the introduction of technology, the benefits they can provide, how they provide these, and what is expected of them.
• Continuous Change/Unintended Consequences – Unintended consequences can be an opportunity or a risk. Either way, these can lead to an iterative process of refinement and improvement which translates to continuous change. This ultimately can be good for business but can present challenges.
• User awareness/training – Technology changes are usually introduced to achieve strategic objectives (value for money, increased sustainability, better audit trails, fraud resistance) which are important and valuable to the company. However, the implementation of these can have a profound impact on day-to-day working practices and methods. Training is required to ensure staff are able to utilise these technologies, and in some cases, processes and procedures may need to be updated to accommodate these changes.
• Integration of systems – Technology has and continues to develop at a rapid pace. These technologies may satisfy immediate needs but getting them to integrate with other systems within the company or external to the company is a larger challenge.
• Ensuring parity throughout the supply chain – Smaller companies may not have the resources to fund the development and implementation of technologies within their business. This will make industry-wide adoption more difficult to achieve and requires support.

 

Elliot has over 30 years of experience providing specialist pre- and post-contract commercial and project management services in the built environment across multiple sectors that include: infrastructure, residential, office, leisure, and mixed-use development projects. His pre-contract areas of specialism include development due diligence and feasibility assessment, value engineering, cost planning, procurement strategy development, contract form selection, and contract drafting. Post Contract: proven in-depth experience in leading large project and commercial management teams to deliver high-value, key complex programmes.

What are the current technology challenges that we are seeing on construction contracts?

The increased use of advanced technologies on construction sites has resulted in radical changes to workforce skill requirements. The use of Building Information Modelling, drones, 3-D printing and increased application of modern methods of construction has led to a host of new skill sets required on site. Nonskilled workforce are being replaced by a digitally savvy workforce. More than ever, the industry now needs to attract and retain a diverse workforce in particular the younger generation ‘Z’ who are digital natives.

Another challenge is the haphazard and uncoordinated manner the construction industry is introducing technological advancements. On large construction sites its the norm to work with suppliers who are all at different technological development stages. It is not uncommon to have a Tier 1 supplier working in BIM models whilst their tier 2 and subsequent suppliers hardly apply or work with digital tools. This in turn generates a discord and creates working and delivery challenges.

As most construction technologies are still at an early phase, they have not had the opportunity to pass the test of time. In particular, modern methods of construction (MMC) are still shunned by many clients as they lack proof of concept. This has led to the slow uptake of MMC with the industry remaining and sticking to traditional construction.

Another key challenge facing the construction industry has been a failure to capture, store and manage data to provide meaningful insights that can turbo charge our productivity levels which lag behind most other industries.

As data is the bedrock of artificial intelligence and digital advancement, the construction industry has not adequately invested in data management systems and human capital. There are hardly any data analyst working as part of construction consultant teams.

The construction industry can begin with introducing a standardised technological development roadmap. This will increase productivity and drive consistency across the sector. This should be followed with human capital investment to up-skill the construction workforce to be digital natives. Further investment should be added to boost data management infrastructure and capabilities across the sector.

Dr Anywhere is currently the Rail Division Commercial Manager at BAM Nuttall Ltd in West Sussex, UK a position he has held since November 2006. Before this, he was the Managing Quantity Surveyor at Faithful and Gould in London for a year, and before that, he worked as a Senior Project Surveyor at Davis Langdon & Everest in London for almost three years. He has over 30 years of experience In the construction Industry, having served as the Chief Quantity Surveyor at Costain Zimbabwe for over 12 years.

What does good contract management principles mean to you?

They mean embedding good practice in managing construction projects which involve following the notification & communication requirements in the contract to ensure that key players (client, contractor & supply chain) are all managing the projects as a minimum in line with the contract requirements. This is premised on the principle that the project is at the centre of the process & that time , cost & quality considerations are all managed & communicated as required under the contract with no surprises leading to the completion of the project in time & in line with the costs recognised under the contract. In simple terms it’s as a minimum complying with the contract requirements in all respects so that all stakeholders involved are always in the know & are in control of the project cost, time, quality, health & safety status of the project at any given time.

How to best embed good practice in contract management to reduce the assurance burden and requirement?

To include all the required assurance regime in the contract explicitly so that it’s all clear to all parties what their contractual obligations are & if any party doesn’t adhere to the obligations, then it is a breach of contract providing the aggrieved party with remedies under the contract. Regular training & briefings to key parties involved can also help the project team to embed good practice in contract management. Long term it may be a good idea to engage with the academia of all Built Environment curricula so that this is included as a course module in their training

What are the requirements for the new NEC4 Supervisor role?

Although I haven’t got a working knowledge of the NEC4 form of contract I would have thought that Supervisor is responsible for checking the works carried out by the contractor & to ensure that the works are in accordance with the Works Information

How do their responsibility of checking that works or defects are in accordance with the contract link into audit/assurance?

I would say that it links well because the client is only obliged to pay for works that has been undertaken in accordance with the contract requirements so if the Supervisor believe that the works isn’t in accordance with the contract & is defective the client isn’t obliged to pay for it & the cost incurred by the contractor in undertaking such defective work is treated as Disallowed cost