Category: Uncategorized

The method of measurement is not an administrative preference. It governs how a bill of quantities is structured, what each rate is deemed to include, and how varied work will later be valued. Selecting one that does not suit the contract or the geography introduces ambiguity that persists for the life of the project.

NRM2

The RICS New Rules of Measurement 2 provide detailed rules for building works and are widely used across the UK and the Middle East. NRM2 sits within a coherent suite covering order of cost estimating and cost planning, which makes reconciliation between cost plan and bill straightforward.

It suits building projects — residential, commercial and mixed-use — where a detailed, elementally structured bill is required.

POMI

The Principles of Measurement International is deliberately concise and internationally applicable. It is widely adopted across the GCC, particularly where the employer or a bespoke contract specifies it, and it copes well with international project teams working to differing national conventions.

Because POMI is less prescriptive than NRM2, preambles carry more weight. Where POMI is used, the preambles must be drafted with care.

CESMM4

The Civil Engineering Standard Method of Measurement, fourth edition, applies to civil and infrastructure works — roads, drainage, structures, earthworks and marine. Its item coding and treatment of temporary works reflect the realities of civil engineering, and it aligns naturally with re-measurement contracts.

How to choose

Three questions usually settle it:

• What does the contract require? If a method is specified, that ends the discussion.
• What type of work predominates? Building works point to NRM2 or POMI; civil works to CESMM4.
• Who is pricing it? A method unfamiliar to the likely tenderers attracts qualification and risk pricing.

Mixing methods within a single bill without clearly delineating which applies to which section is a common and avoidable error. Where a project genuinely requires both — a building with substantial external infrastructure, for instance — separate the packages and state the governing method in each.

Whichever method is adopted, state it explicitly in the preambles and apply it consistently. Most measurement disputes arise not from the choice itself but from inconsistent application of the choice made.

Procurement route determines how cost, risk and programme are distributed between employer and contractor. It is among the highest-value decisions taken on any project, and among the most frequently rushed — often settled by habit or by whichever route the last scheme used.

Start with the objective that cannot move

Every project has one constraint that genuinely dominates: a fixed opening date, a hard funding ceiling, or a quality standard tied to brand or operator commitments. Route selection should follow from that constraint rather than from general preference.

• Cost certainty dominates — favour routes that fix price against a complete design before commitment.
• Programme dominates — favour routes permitting overlap between design and construction, accepting reduced early price certainty.
• Quality dominates — favour routes retaining employer control over design development and specification.

Test the market before committing

A theoretically ideal route fails if the market will not price it. In a busy market, capable contractors decline routes carrying risk they consider unquantifiable. Assess appetite and capacity before the strategy is fixed, not after tenders return short or heavily qualified.

Allocate risk to the party best able to manage it

Risk transferred to a party that cannot control it is not removed; it is priced, and priced expensively. Ground conditions, statutory approvals and employer-driven change are the usual candidates for retention rather than transfer.

Consider packaging deliberately

How work is divided into packages affects interface risk, programme flexibility and the number of commercial relationships to administer. More packages can improve pricing but increase coordination burden and the potential for interface disputes.

Document the reasoning

A short options appraisal recording what was considered and why the selected route was chosen is valuable well beyond the decision itself. When circumstances change — and they will — that record allows the strategy to be revisited on its original logic rather than re-argued from memory.

Cost overruns are rarely a surprise. By the time a project reports a significant variance, the decisions that caused it were usually taken months earlier. The value of disciplined cost management lies in catching those decisions while they can still be influenced.

Seven causes account for the majority of overruns we encounter.

1. Optimistic early estimating

A budget set before the design is understood, using rates that suit the business case rather than the market, constrains a project for its entire life. Early estimates should carry explicit assumptions, exclusions and a stated confidence range. An estimate presented as a single number implies a precision that does not exist at concept stage.

2. Scope creep without change control

Individually minor additions rarely feel like a problem. Collectively, and without a register that prices each one at the point of instruction, they become the single largest source of final account dispute. Every change should be measured, priced and agreed before it is built.

3. Incomplete tender documentation

Ambiguity in a pricing document does not remove risk; it transfers it into the tender as a premium, or defers it into a claim. Contractors price what they can see. What they cannot see, they either qualify or recover later.

4. Contingency set by convention

A flat percentage applied because it is customary bears no relationship to the actual risk profile of the scheme. Contingency should be derived from a quantified risk register, so it can be defended, drawn down deliberately and released when the risk expires.

5. Late or absent cost reporting

A cost report that arrives six weeks after month end reports history. Its value is nil. Reporting must be timely enough that the client can still act, and must state the anticipated final cost rather than only what has been spent.

6. Poor contract administration

Notices missed, instructions issued verbally and records kept inconsistently do not cause cost directly — they remove the ability to resist it. When entitlement is contested, the party with the better contemporaneous record generally prevails.

7. Ignoring inflation and supply chain reality

Budgets prepared on today’s rates for a programme delivering in three years must carry an explicit escalation allowance, informed by lead times and material availability. In a market as active as the GCC, this is not a technicality.

The common thread

Every item above is a control failure rather than a pricing failure. Cost certainty is not achieved by estimating more accurately at the outset; it is achieved by managing continuously thereafter.