Alliancing is a collaborative approach to project delivery that has gained increasing popularity in the UK infrastructure sector. It involves forming an alliance between the client and key members of the supply chain, such as contractors, designers, and suppliers. This approach aligns with the UK government’s Construction 2025 Strategy, which aims to lower costs and reduce time in infrastructure delivery. This report explores the pros and cons of alliancing, provides examples of its implementation in the UK, and offers recommendations for its effective use in future infrastructure programmes.
What is Alliancing?
Alliancing is a long-term partnering arrangement where the financial rewards of each alliance member are linked to achieving specific, agreed-upon outcomes. All aspects of the arrangement are incorporated into legally binding contracts. Unlike traditional adversarial contracts, alliancing fosters a collaborative environment where parties share risks and rewards, promoting a “one-team” mentality. A key feature of alliancing is the “painshare/gainshare” mechanism, where all participants share in the financial consequences of project outcomes, whether positive or negative. This encourages collective responsibility and incentivizes collaborative behavior. Another important aspect is “open book accounting,” which promotes transparency and trust by making accurate figures for forecasts, profits, costs, and expenses freely available to all parties.
Pros and Cons of Alliancing
| Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|
| Shared Risk and Reward: Parties share accountability and mutual interests, leading to collective success and increased motivation to achieve project goals. | Complexity in Governance: Alliance contracts require intricate governance structures and decision-making processes. |
| Enhanced Collaboration: Open communication and teamwork are encouraged, fostering a cooperative environment and reducing the likelihood of disputes. | Potential for Disputes: Despite a collaborative environment, disputes may still arise, requiring effective conflict resolution mechanisms. |
| Innovative Problem-Solving: A collaborative approach promotes creative solutions to challenges and value-engineering initiatives. | Resource Intensive: Setting up and maintaining alliance contracts demands significant resources. |
| Improved Risk Management: Risks are shared collectively, reducing individual financial exposure. | High Upfront Costs: Initial setup costs, including legal and administrative expenses, can be high. |
| Efficient Decision-Making: Streamlined decision-making processes enable collaborative evaluation and selection of the best course of action. | Dependency on Trust: Success heavily relies on trust among parties; distrust can undermine collaboration. |
| Cost Savings: Reduced disputes, minimized delays, and efficient resource allocation contribute to optimizing project costs. | Balancing Individual and Shared Goals: Balancing individual interests with the collective good can be complex. |
| Early Issue Identification: Encourages proactive problem-solving and risk mitigation by enabling early detection of potential issues. | Longer Setup Period: Establishing an alliance contract and aligning all parties can be time-consuming. |
| Flexibility: Allows for adaptability in project design and execution to accommodate changing circumstances. | Potential for Uneven Risk Sharing: Despite shared risks, disparities in contributions or responsibilities among parties can lead to uneven risk-sharing. |
It is important to note that while alliancing promotes a “no blame” culture, there are exceptions where parties may be held liable, such as in cases of wilful default or insolvency.
When is Alliancing Most Effective?
Alliancing is likely to be most effective in the following situations:
- Complex Environments: Projects with multiple stakeholders, competing interests, and challenging goals.
- Performance Improvement Required: When performance improvement and change are key business requirements.
- Access to Supply Chain is Critical: When supply chain innovation or direct customer contact through supply chain partners is essential.
- Larger Programmes or Projects: Where the scale of the project or programme justifies the setup and overhead costs associated with alliancing.
Alliancing in the UK: Case Studies
The UK has seen both successful implementations and challenges in adopting alliancing for infrastructure projects.
Successful Implementations
Several UK infrastructure projects have demonstrated the benefits of alliancing:
- Andrew Oil Field Project (BP): This pioneering project successfully used alliancing to address complex contracting principles in the North Sea oil and gas sector, resulting in significant cost savings and reduced project duration.
- Modular Building Solutions Project (Crown Commercial Service): This project utilized the FAC-1 Framework Alliance Contract to deliver modular buildings to the public sector.
- Smart Motorways Programme Alliance (Highways England): Highways England adopted the NEC-4 Alliance Contract for its Smart Motorways Programme.
- eight2O Alliance (Thames Water): This alliance, the largest in the UK water sector, successfully delivered the King’s Scholars’ Pond sewer rehabilitation scheme.
- Anglian Water’s @one Alliance: This alliance has consistently delivered significant efficiency savings on complex water and wastewater infrastructure programmes.
- Reading Capacity Programme (Network Rail): An alliance approach delivered this project more than a year early and exceeded its saving target.
- Midland Metro Alliance: This alliance of nine international partners successfully delivered five light rail schemes in the West Midlands.
These successful implementations highlight the potential of alliancing to achieve project goals efficiently and cost-effectively. Common factors for success include early stakeholder involvement, strong leadership, and a clear governance structure.
Challenges and Considerations
While the UK has seen successful alliance implementations, some challenges remain:
- Limited Market Appetite: The UK construction industry has traditionally been risk-averse, which can hinder the adoption of alliancing.
- “Pure Alliances” are Rare: Bespoke arrangements within UK alliance contracts often deviate from the “pure alliance” model, potentially diluting the collaborative principles.
- Risk for Owner Participant: The owner participant typically retains most of the risk for project delivery, as payment to non-owner participants is often on a cost-plus basis.
Alliance Contracts in the UK
Two commonly used alliance contracts in the UK are the NEC4 Alliance Contract and the FAC-1 Framework Alliance Contract.
NEC4 Alliance Contract
The NEC4 Alliance Contract is a multi-party contract designed for major projects or programmes of work where long-term collaborative working is desired. It promotes a collaborative approach where all parties work together to achieve the client’s objectives and share in the risks and benefits. The contract includes core clauses and option clauses to tailor it to specific project needs.
FAC-1 Framework Alliance Contract
The FAC-1 Framework Alliance Contract integrates the activities of consultants, contractors, suppliers, and other industry organizations engaged on a project or programme. It creates a multi-party umbrella agreement that sets out agreed processes for planning, value improvement, contract award, performance review, problem-solving, and shared learning. FAC-1 is designed to be used in conjunction with any project contract form and can be applied to projects of any size or type.
Implementing Alliancing Effectively
Based on the research, the following recommendations can enhance the implementation of alliancing in UK infrastructure programmes:
- Strong Leadership and Commitment: Visible and committed leadership from both the client and partner organizations is crucial. This includes fostering a culture that embraces the behavioral aspects of alliancing, such as open communication, trust, and a willingness to collaborate.
- Early Involvement: Engage alliance members early in the project lifecycle to foster collaboration and ensure alignment on project goals.
- Clearly Defined Objectives and Incentives: Establish clear objectives, success measures, and incentives that are aligned with the client’s requirements and promote collaborative behavior.
- Open Communication and Trust: Foster a culture of open communication, transparency, and trust among all alliance members.
- Effective Governance Structure: Implement a robust governance structure with clear roles, responsibilities, and decision-making processes.
- Integrated Teams: Create integrated teams with the best individuals for each task, regardless of their organizational affiliation.
- Appropriate Contractual Framework: Utilize a suitable alliance contract, such as the NEC4 Alliance Contract or the FAC-1 Framework Alliance Contract, and tailor it to the specific project needs.
- No Blame Culture: Promote a no-blame culture where the focus is on problem-solving and continuous improvement rather than assigning blame.
Conclusion
Alliancing offers a valuable alternative to traditional contracting in UK infrastructure projects. By fostering collaboration, innovation, and shared responsibility, alliancing can lead to improved project outcomes, including cost savings, reduced project duration, and enhanced stakeholder satisfaction. However, successful implementation requires careful planning, strong leadership, and a commitment to the collaborative principles that underpin alliancing. The UK construction industry needs to embrace a shift in mindset from adversarial to collaborative approaches to fully unlock the potential of alliancing. By addressing the challenges and embracing the recommendations outlined in this report, the UK infrastructure sector can further utilize alliancing to deliver complex projects effectively and efficiently.
Leave a Reply