Civil Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
competing with other clients whose model presents a better, or dif-
ferent, set of propositions?
• Potential risks - what do the target suppliers see as the main risks to
delivery, and are they comfortable with the way in which these risks
are allocated within the procurement strategy?
• Current issues - are there any specifi c issues within this market that
may restrict or delay responses to the procurement opportunity or
delivery of the contract?
• Trends - is there a trend in the supply market for a certain form of
contracting or delivery model that has not been considered, or that is
preferable in order to strengthen the appetite of potential contractors
and suppliers?
London 2012 Aquatics Centre case study
When London won the contest in July 2005 to host the Olympics, the
initial appetite to bid for sports stadia construction projects was relatively
low. This was partly due to the buoyant private-sector market for construc-
tion in general, especially speculative offi ce development in London, and
partly because the construction sector's track record for stadium delivery
was strewn with spectacular delays, cost overruns and losses at that time.
The packaging strategy initially proposed for the Aquatics Centre pro-
curement separated the Aquatics Centre from the main park's entrance
bridge, known as F10. The F10 bridge had a direct construction interface
with the complicated and challenging structure of the Aquatics Centre.
Initial market intelligence had indicated to the ODA and its Delivery
Partner that the risk of this complex interface might not be conducive to
attracting any contractors, as it had been intended that the proposed
packaging was to be managed across two contracts by two different
procurements and therefore potentially two different contractors. As a
result of feedback on the proposal, the packaging strategy was adjusted
to bring the construction of the bridge and the Aquatics Centre into a
single and much larger package.
This route had not originally been chosen, as it was felt the package
size was too big and the construction disciplines involved in the building
of a bridge and an Aquatics Centre required different market sectors to
respond. The change of approach was not unique. The type of market
engagement utilised by the PSE model and described here has often
infl uenced procurement strategies to the benefi t of both sides of a
transaction.
