Early contractor involvement has historically been cited as best practice across the industry. When it’s approached with trust, transparency and collaboration, it demonstrates proven cost and programme certainty.
There is, however, an instinct is that it weakens commercial tension and, as a result, value for money. In the public sector particularly, where every spending decision is open to scrutiny, selecting a preferred contractor ahead of a final agreed price can feel like ceding control.
CCBP’s latest research, Constructing Certainty, challenges that assumption directly. An analysis of 412 completed projects across 55 contractors found significant cost and programme savings from earlier contractor appointment, with the benefit increasing the earlier the contractor is engaged.
For Wates, Early Contractor Involvement has created stronger conditions for collaboration and true partnership, reduced risk and demonstrated real savings to the clients they work with.
In this Q&A, Pat Fitzgerald, Chief Commercial Officer at Wates, shares his perspective on how ECI can support better decision-making, improve cost and programme certainty, and help clients move beyond lowest-price procurement towards a more collaborative, transparent and value-led approach.
Commercial tension: moved, not lost
The concern that ECI weakens a client’s negotiating hand is the most common objection raised by procurement teams, particularly in the public sector. It is also, in CCBP’s view, a misreading of how commercial tension functions across the lifecycle of a project.
“The reluctance to embrace ECI often stems from the belief that bringing in a contractor early weakens the negotiating position of the client,” says Fitzgerald. “The concern, particularly in the public sector, is that selecting a preferred contractor before the final price is agreed means you lose competitive tension, and along with it any value for money.”
“But ECI doesn’t do away with commercial tension, it simply moves it to where it matters most, into design decisions, risk management and delivery certainty. It means decisions and suppositions can be tested early, risks can be better understood, and costs can be tied down collaboratively rather than emerging as a surprise later.”
The hidden cost of lowest-price procurement
Constructing Certainty found that projects procured at RIBA stage four were consistently more likely to experience cost overruns, programme delays and in consequence, disputes.
Pat Fitzgerald, Chief Commercial Director at Wates, suggests that what looks like value on bid day frequently becomes the source of cost pressure once construction begins and unexpected issues are discovered. “Lowest-price procurement is often a false economy,” says Pat.
“You have a situation where contractors are likely to be bidding against incomplete designs or uncertain project requirements. In those circumstances there’s a natural tendency to price on what is clearly defined and manage the unknowns later. This is where, once construction starts, there can be claims, variations, programme delays and strained relationships.”
“A contractor who has had an opportunity to identify where buildability can be improved, risks mitigated or programme time shortened might set a higher price initially, but those elements potentially will deliver substantial savings over the life of the project.”
