{
  "query": "NEC4 early warning resolution average days industry benchmark UK infrastructure report site:ice.org.uk OR site:neccontract.com OR site:rics.org",
  "raw_results": [
    {
      "url": "https://www.neccontract.com/news/seven-practical-tips-for-making-nec-early-warnings-more-effective?srsltid=AfmBOorKpn5nmhJVVLkhS0DwPM-U9NTV-N8JNCPAjNLzbR5yDxoy55rJ",
      "title": "Seven practical tips for making NEC early warnings more effective",
      "content": "When a matter emerges, it needs to be resolved efficiently and quickly with minimal disruption to progress. That means small, prompt, ad-hoc meetings with the relevant people who are empowered to make decisions.  \n  \nIf resolution is held over to a regular early warning meeting, not only will the work be disrupted but it will also probably take longer as all the people at the meeting will want to have their say. A five-minute discussion may turn into a half hour one; multiply this by ten early warnings and a whole day can disappear. [...] Indeed, the more actions that are made outside of regular meetings, the more the regular meeting can monitor whether actions have been done and been effective, and to close out early warning matters which are no longer relevant. It therefore becomes shorter. [...] Under clause 15.1 of the NEC4 Engineering and Constrution Contract (ECC), Term Service Contract (TSC) and Professional Service Contract (PSC), only the contractor and project or service manager can notify an early warning.  \n  \nHowever, project and service managers are often remote from the day-to-day goings on in a design office or on site but can delegate their powers. This means there are likely to be delays in notification and hence resolution – by which I mean agreed actions – to the detriment of progress.",
      "score": 0.9981614,
      "raw_content": null
    },
    {
      "url": "https://www.neccontract.com/news/using-key-performance-indicators-to-improve-how-nec-contracts-are-used?srsltid=AfmBOorO3hO1nDe8ZdmVOoH9-DwaE4QuV_GEdh9JxuJG0o0OIR1OPilW",
      "title": "Using key performance indicators to improve how NEC contracts are used | News | NEC Contracts",
      "content": "| KPI-1.4 | Time (progress) | Price for work done to date as a fraction of expected price at current date based on first accepted programme (this is designed as a simple measure and does not try to allow for compensation events). | More than one day | £ nil |\n| KPI-2.1 | Early warnings | Number of days since last early warning meeting (target to be set based on the period stated in the contract data). | Maximum 28 days | £ nil |\n| KPI-2.2 | Early warnings | Number of early warnings notified in the period.  £ nil |\n| KPI-2.3 | Early warnings | Cumulative number of early warnings notified.  £ nil |\n| KPI-3.1 | Compensation events | Number of compensation events notified in the period.  £ nil |\n| KPI-3.2 | Compensation events | Cumulative number of compensation events notified.  £ nil | [...] | Key Performance Indicator Number | Aspect of performance | Key performance indicator description | Target performance | Amount the contractor is payed if the target stated is improved upon or achieved |\n ---  --- \n| KPI-1.1 | Programme acceptance | Number of days since last acceptance by the project manager of a revised programme. | Maximum 31 days | £ nil |\n| KPI-1.2 | Programme acceptance | For the last accepted programme, the number of days between submission of the revised programme and acceptance of the programme by the project manager. | Maximum 7 days | £ nil |\n| KPI-1.3 | Time (terminal float) | Number of weeks that planned completion is in advance of the completion date. | Remains constant or increases | £ nil | [...] | KPI-3.3 | Compensation events | Cumulative value of delay to completion date in quotations for compensation events that have not been implemented.  £ nil |\n| KPI-3.4 | Compensation events | Cumulative value of change to the prices in quotations for compensation events that have not been implemented.  £ nil |\n| KPI-3.5 | Compensation events | Average time between original notification of quotation and implementation of the compensation event. | Maximum 14 days. | £ nil |",
      "score": 0.993807,
      "raw_content": null
    },
    {
      "url": "https://www.neccontract.com/news/using-key-performance-indicators-to-improve-how-nec-contracts-are-used?srsltid=AfmBOoomHMOlv1wJzU0OnS_AtMwB_KAQMY47v6sYihCJsuB6Ir3K5oJ8",
      "title": "Using key performance indicators to improve how NEC contracts are used | News | NEC Contracts",
      "content": "| KPI-1.4 | Time (progress) | Price for work done to date as a fraction of expected price at current date based on first accepted programme (this is designed as a simple measure and does not try to allow for compensation events). | More than one day | £ nil |\n| KPI-2.1 | Early warnings | Number of days since last early warning meeting (target to be set based on the period stated in the contract data). | Maximum 28 days | £ nil |\n| KPI-2.2 | Early warnings | Number of early warnings notified in the period.  £ nil |\n| KPI-2.3 | Early warnings | Cumulative number of early warnings notified.  £ nil |\n| KPI-3.1 | Compensation events | Number of compensation events notified in the period.  £ nil |\n| KPI-3.2 | Compensation events | Cumulative number of compensation events notified.  £ nil | [...] | Key Performance Indicator Number | Aspect of performance | Key performance indicator description | Target performance | Amount the contractor is payed if the target stated is improved upon or achieved |\n ---  --- \n| KPI-1.1 | Programme acceptance | Number of days since last acceptance by the project manager of a revised programme. | Maximum 31 days | £ nil |\n| KPI-1.2 | Programme acceptance | For the last accepted programme, the number of days between submission of the revised programme and acceptance of the programme by the project manager. | Maximum 7 days | £ nil |\n| KPI-1.3 | Time (terminal float) | Number of weeks that planned completion is in advance of the completion date. | Remains constant or increases | £ nil |",
      "score": 0.993807,
      "raw_content": null
    },
    {
      "url": "https://www.neccontract.com/getmedia/eb31350a-24b9-49ff-8205-2e5580578145/Delivering-better-project-outcomes-in-Australia.pdf?ext=.pdf&srsltid=AfmBOopkplcIO9U1GAR-t3NZUNEaB7RQZ8E1cLn3HoqWoBmuONSafhjH",
      "title": "[PDF] Delivering-better-project-outcomes-in-Australia.pdf - NEC Contracts",
      "content": "Uniquely, one of the foundation clauses of every NEC4 contract states the parties are to act, ‘in a spirit of mutual trust and co-operation.’ This differentiates them from traditional contracts, which tend to follow a more adversarial, ‘us and them’ approach.\nTo many users, the ‘jewel in the crown’ of NEC4 contracts is the ‘early warning’ process. if either party becomes aware of any matter which could affect time, cost or quality, they are required to notify the other party immediately. This is promptly discussed at an early warning meeting to decide how best to mitigate the risk and aiming to decrease the time taken to resolve the issue. [...] • \u0007 NEC4 option C and D target cost contracts have pain/gain mechanisms to incentivise suppliers and ensure fair and appropriate risk allocation.\n• \u0007 NEC4-compliant key performance indicators has been used to encourage use of the NEC4 early warning mechanism, which mitigates risk by encouraging issues to be addressed proactively and collaboratively.\nE: info@neccontract.com T: +44 (0) 20 7665 2305 W:neccontract.com nec-contract @nec_contracts NEC Contracts NEC One Great George Street London SW1P 3AA UK NEC is a division of Thomas Telford Ltd, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Institution of Civil Engineers, the owner and developer of NEC. [...] Government Priority 2 Adopt partnership-based approaches to risk allocation The NEC suite of contracts are even handed when it comes to risk allocation between the parties. During a project, NEC contracts allow stakeholders to flag matters that may impact cost, time or quality managed through an early warning system for discussion and resolution.\nGovernment Priority 3 Standardise contracts and procurement methods NEC contracts are suitable for every contractual arrangement in the supply chain from the head contract through to supply only contracts. The contracts are harmonised as they have consistent ethos and drafting across the suite. Sector specific amendments can also be incorporated into a contract.",
      "score": 0.94776917,
      "raw_content": null
    },
    {
      "url": "https://www.neccontract.com/getmedia/eb31350a-24b9-49ff-8205-2e5580578145/Delivering-better-project-outcomes-in-Australia.pdf?ext=.pdf&srsltid=AfmBOopaRDJLJ7xhzUFzTQPMWLMRVwfcwrZD3MsAG9vQbW6KO5rWdIEP",
      "title": "[PDF] Delivering-better-project-outcomes-in-Australia.pdf - NEC Contracts",
      "content": "Uniquely, one of the foundation clauses of every NEC4 contract states the parties are to act, ‘in a spirit of mutual trust and co-operation.’ This differentiates them from traditional contracts, which tend to follow a more adversarial, ‘us and them’ approach.\nTo many users, the ‘jewel in the crown’ of NEC4 contracts is the ‘early warning’ process. if either party becomes aware of any matter which could affect time, cost or quality, they are required to notify the other party immediately. This is promptly discussed at an early warning meeting to decide how best to mitigate the risk and aiming to decrease the time taken to resolve the issue. [...] • \u0007 NEC4 option C and D target cost contracts have pain/gain mechanisms to incentivise suppliers and ensure fair and appropriate risk allocation.\n• \u0007 NEC4-compliant key performance indicators has been used to encourage use of the NEC4 early warning mechanism, which mitigates risk by encouraging issues to be addressed proactively and collaboratively.\nE: info@neccontract.com T: +44 (0) 20 7665 2305 W:neccontract.com nec-contract @nec_contracts NEC Contracts NEC One Great George Street London SW1P 3AA UK NEC is a division of Thomas Telford Ltd, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Institution of Civil Engineers, the owner and developer of NEC. [...] Government Priority 2 Adopt partnership-based approaches to risk allocation The NEC suite of contracts are even handed when it comes to risk allocation between the parties. During a project, NEC contracts allow stakeholders to flag matters that may impact cost, time or quality managed through an early warning system for discussion and resolution.\nGovernment Priority 3 Standardise contracts and procurement methods NEC contracts are suitable for every contractual arrangement in the supply chain from the head contract through to supply only contracts. The contracts are harmonised as they have consistent ethos and drafting across the suite. Sector specific amendments can also be incorporated into a contract.",
      "score": 0.94776917,
      "raw_content": null
    }
  ],
  "formatted": "Source: Seven practical tips for making NEC early warnings more effective\nURL: https://www.neccontract.com/news/seven-practical-tips-for-making-nec-early-warnings-more-effective?srsltid=AfmBOorKpn5nmhJVVLkhS0DwPM-U9NTV-N8JNCPAjNLzbR5yDxoy55rJ\nWhen a matter emerges, it needs to be resolved efficiently and quickly with minimal disruption to progress. That means small, prompt, ad-hoc meetings with the relevant people who are empowered to make decisions. If resolution is held over to a regular early warning meeting, not only will the work be disrupted but it will also probably take longer as all the people at the meeting will want to have their say. A five-minute discussion may turn into a half hour one; multiply this by ten early warnings and a whole day can disappear. [...] Indeed, the more actions that are made outside of regular meetings, the more the regular meeting can monitor whether actions have been done and been effective, and to close out early warning matters which are no longer relevant. It therefore becomes shorter. [...] Under clause 15.1 of the NEC4 Engineering and Constrution Contract (ECC), Term Service Contract (TSC) and Professional Service Contract (PSC), only the contractor and project or service manager can notify an early warning. However, project and service managers are often remote from the day-to-day goings on in a design office or on site but can delegate their powers. This means there are likely to be delays in notification and hence resolution – by which I mean agreed actions – to the detriment of progress.\n\n---\n\nSource: Using key performance indicators to improve how NEC contracts are used | News | NEC Contracts\nURL: https://www.neccontract.com/news/using-key-performance-indicators-to-improve-how-nec-contracts-are-used?srsltid=AfmBOorO3hO1nDe8ZdmVOoH9-DwaE4QuV_GEdh9JxuJG0o0OIR1OPilW\n| KPI-1.4 | Time (progress) | Price for work done to date as a fraction of expected price at current date based on first accepted programme (this is designed as a simple measure and does not try to allow for compensation events). | More than one day | £ nil | | KPI-2.1 | Early warnings | Number of days since last early warning meeting (target to be set based on the period stated in the contract data). | Maximum 28 days | £ nil | | KPI-2.2 | Early warnings | Number of early warnings notified in the period. £ nil | | KPI-2.3 | Early warnings | Cumulative number of early warnings notified. £ nil | | KPI-3.1 | Compensation events | Number of compensation events notified in the period. £ nil | | KPI-3.2 | Compensation events | Cumulative number of compensation events notified. £ nil | [...] | Key Performance Indicator Number | Aspect of performance | Key performance indicator description | Target performance | Amount the contractor is payed if the target stated is improved upon or achieved | --- --- | KPI-1.1 | Programme acceptance | Number of days since last acceptance by the project manager of a revised programme. | Maximum 31 days | £ nil | | KPI-1.2 | Programme acceptance | For the last accepted programme, the number of days between submission of the revised programme and acceptance of the programme by the project manager. | Maximum 7 days | £ nil | | KPI-1.3 | Time (terminal float) | Number of weeks that planned completion is in advance of the completion date. | Remains constant or increases | £ nil | [...] | KPI-3.3 | Compensation events | Cumulative value of delay to completion date in quotations for compensation events that have not been implemented. £ nil | | KPI-3.4 | Compensation events | Cumulative value of change to the prices in quotations for compensation even\n\n---\n\nSource: Using key performance indicators to improve how NEC contracts are used | News | NEC Contracts\nURL: https://www.neccontract.com/news/using-key-performance-indicators-to-improve-how-nec-contracts-are-used?srsltid=AfmBOoomHMOlv1wJzU0OnS_AtMwB_KAQMY47v6sYihCJsuB6Ir3K5oJ8\n| KPI-1.4 | Time (progress) | Price for work done to date as a fraction of expected price at current date based on first accepted programme (this is designed as a simple measure and does not try to allow for compensation events). | More than one day | £ nil | | KPI-2.1 | Early warnings | Number of days since last early warning meeting (target to be set based on the period stated in the contract data). | Maximum 28 days | £ nil | | KPI-2.2 | Early warnings | Number of early warnings notified in the period. £ nil | | KPI-2.3 | Early warnings | Cumulative number of early warnings notified. £ nil | | KPI-3.1 | Compensation events | Number of compensation events notified in the period. £ nil | | KPI-3.2 | Compensation events | Cumulative number of compensation events notified. £ nil | [...] | Key Performance Indicator Number | Aspect of performance | Key performance indicator description | Target performance | Amount the contractor is payed if the target stated is improved upon or achieved | --- --- | KPI-1.1 | Programme acceptance | Number of days since last acceptance by the project manager of a revised programme. | Maximum 31 days | £ nil | | KPI-1.2 | Programme acceptance | For the last accepted programme, the number of days between submission of the revised programme and acceptance of the programme by the project manager. | Maximum 7 days | £ nil | | KPI-1.3 | Time (terminal float) | Number of weeks that planned completion is in advance of the completion date. | Remains constant or increases | £ nil |\n\n---\n\nSource: [PDF] Delivering-better-project-outcomes-in-Australia.pdf - NEC Contracts\nURL: https://www.neccontract.com/getmedia/eb31350a-24b9-49ff-8205-2e5580578145/Delivering-better-project-outcomes-in-Australia.pdf?ext=.pdf&srsltid=AfmBOopkplcIO9U1GAR-t3NZUNEaB7RQZ8E1cLn3HoqWoBmuONSafhjH\nUniquely, one of the foundation clauses of every NEC4 contract states the parties are to act, ‘in a spirit of mutual trust and co-operation.’ This differentiates them from traditional contracts, which tend to follow a more adversarial, ‘us and them’ approach. To many users, the ‘jewel in the crown’ of NEC4 contracts is the ‘early warning’ process. if either party becomes aware of any matter which could affect time, cost or quality, they are required to notify the other party immediately. This is promptly discussed at an early warning meeting to decide how best to mitigate the risk and aiming to decrease the time taken to resolve the issue. [...] • \u0007 NEC4 option C and D target cost contracts have pain/gain mechanisms to incentivise suppliers and ensure fair and appropriate risk allocation. • \u0007 NEC4-compliant key performance indicators has been used to encourage use of the NEC4 early warning mechanism, which mitigates risk by encouraging issues to be addressed proactively and collaboratively. E: info@neccontract.com T: +44 (0) 20 7665 2305 W:neccontract.com nec-contract @nec_contracts NEC Contracts NEC One Great George Street London SW1P 3AA UK NEC is a division of Thomas Telford Ltd, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Institution of Civil Engineers, the owner and developer of NEC. [...] Government Priority 2 Adopt partnership-based approaches to risk allocation The NEC suite of contracts are even handed when it comes to risk allocation between the parties. During a project, NEC contracts allow stakeholders to flag matters that may impact cost, time or quality managed through an early warning system for discussion and resolution. Government Priority 3 Standardise contracts and procurement methods NEC contracts are suitable for every contractual arrangement in the s\n\n---\n\nSource: [PDF] Delivering-better-project-outcomes-in-Australia.pdf - NEC Contracts\nURL: https://www.neccontract.com/getmedia/eb31350a-24b9-49ff-8205-2e5580578145/Delivering-better-project-outcomes-in-Australia.pdf?ext=.pdf&srsltid=AfmBOopaRDJLJ7xhzUFzTQPMWLMRVwfcwrZD3MsAG9vQbW6KO5rWdIEP\nUniquely, one of the foundation clauses of every NEC4 contract states the parties are to act, ‘in a spirit of mutual trust and co-operation.’ This differentiates them from traditional contracts, which tend to follow a more adversarial, ‘us and them’ approach. To many users, the ‘jewel in the crown’ of NEC4 contracts is the ‘early warning’ process. if either party becomes aware of any matter which could affect time, cost or quality, they are required to notify the other party immediately. This is promptly discussed at an early warning meeting to decide how best to mitigate the risk and aiming to decrease the time taken to resolve the issue. [...] • \u0007 NEC4 option C and D target cost contracts have pain/gain mechanisms to incentivise suppliers and ensure fair and appropriate risk allocation. • \u0007 NEC4-compliant key performance indicators has been used to encourage use of the NEC4 early warning mechanism, which mitigates risk by encouraging issues to be addressed proactively and collaboratively. E: info@neccontract.com T: +44 (0) 20 7665 2305 W:neccontract.com nec-contract @nec_contracts NEC Contracts NEC One Great George Street London SW1P 3AA UK NEC is a division of Thomas Telford Ltd, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Institution of Civil Engineers, the owner and developer of NEC. [...] Government Priority 2 Adopt partnership-based approaches to risk allocation The NEC suite of contracts are even handed when it comes to risk allocation between the parties. During a project, NEC contracts allow stakeholders to flag matters that may impact cost, time or quality managed through an early warning system for discussion and resolution. Government Priority 3 Standardise contracts and procurement methods NEC contracts are suitable for every contractual arrangement in the s"
}