Construction issues do not show up as problems on day one. They show up when the job is underway and decisions have been made based on assumptions.
A contractor starts work based on one set of drawings, then receives a revised set. Ground conditions are assumed to be consistent, then turn out not to be. Access is promised but not available. By the time these issues are clear, the programme is already under pressure.
This module looks at how these situations actually play out on projects and what needs to be done at the time to avoid them turning into claims and disputes.
Across major projects, the same issues come up again and again. They are not unusual. What matters is how they are handled when they happen.
Typical examples include:
On most projects, these are not dealt with appropriately. Records are incomplete, notices are late, and positions become harder to defend as time goes on.
This training focuses on getting these fundamentals right while the project is still live.
This training focuses on the distinction between delay and disruption and how each impacts project performance.
Key areas include:
This is where many projects start to come unstuck. Your price is based on an understanding of the ground conditions. Once work starts, that assumption proves wrong. It might be rock where soil was expected, contamination that was never identified, or services that were not shown on any drawing. The condition itself is only part of the problem. The real issue is whether the contract allows recovery of time and cost, and whether the right steps were taken when the condition was first identified. This part of the module works through what needs to happen at that moment. Not weeks later when the claim is written, but when the issue first appears on site.
A common assumption is that if information is provided, it can be relied on. That is often not how the contract is written. For example, a contractor may rely on a geotechnical report during tender. If that report turns out to be wrong, recovery depends on whether the contract allows reliance on that information. In many cases, it does not. What happens if the reliance information is correct but only for the area identified and not where the latent condition was encountered? This section looks at how reliance is actually treated in contracts and what that means in practice when information proves inaccurate.
Ground risk is rarely removed. It is pushed to one party or the other, sometimes without fully understanding the consequences. Investigations are often limited due to time or cost. The result is that construction starts with gaps in information. When those gaps are exposed, the question becomes who carries the impact. This section focuses on how geotechnical information should be read, what can and cannot be relied on, and how that risk should be managed during delivery.
Performance guarantees look straightforward until testing starts. A contractor may be required to meet output or efficiency targets. If the design assumptions behind those targets are not correct, the obligation can still sit with the contractor. On several projects, performance tests have failed not because of workmanship, but because the design inputs were never realistic. The issue then becomes whether that risk sits with the contractor or the company. This part of the module focuses on how these obligations work in practice and how they should be managed before testing begins.
Delays are often driven by issues outside the contractor’s control. Drawings are issued late. Approvals are not in place. Access to work areas is restricted. Work stops, but the programme does not automatically move with it. The challenge is not identifying the delay. It is proving it and linking it back to the contract in a way that supports entitlement. This section looks at how to deal with these situations as they happen, including what needs to be recorded and communicated at the time.
Design obligations are often broader than people expect. There is a difference between carrying out design with reasonable skill and care and being responsible for delivering an outcome that is fit for purpose. That difference becomes critical when something does not perform as intended. On many projects, this risk is accepted without being fully understood. When issues arise, the contract position can be difficult to unwind. This part of the module focuses on how these obligations arise and how they should be assessed before and during delivery.
Not all risk sits within the contract. If information is presented in a way that leads to the wrong conclusion, there can be exposure outside the contract terms. This often comes up where reports, data or assumptions are relied on during tender. For example, if site information suggests conditions that are not accurate, and that information influences pricing, the consequences can extend beyond contractual risk allocation. This section focuses on where these risks arise and how they affect both parties.
Intellectual property issues are usually ignored until they become a problem. Designs, systems and methodologies may be reused across projects, but ownership and usage rights are not always clear. Disputes can arise when one party assumes they can use material that the other party considers restricted. This section looks at how intellectual property is typically structured in contracts and what needs to be clarified early to avoid issues later.
This training is for people involved in delivering projects day to day.
It is relevant to:
Project managers responsible for programme and delivery
Commercial and contract managers managing risk and claims
Engineers working across design and construction
Contractors delivering work on site
Asset owners overseeing project outcomes
The module is highly applicable to organisations delivering projects under EPC, EPCM and other major contracting models across infrastructure, energy and resource sectors.
By the end of this module, participants will be able to:
The training is based on real project scenarios and practical application.
It can be tailored to suit specific projects, contract models and delivery environments. The focus is on how these issues are managed in practice, not theory.
Equilibrium works across contract development, project delivery and dispute resolution.
The training reflects how construction issues actually unfold on projects and how they are managed from a commercial and contractual perspective.
