The Project Manager as an ambassador of the contract. The case of NEC4 ECC contracts

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 11 Issue: 02 | Feb 2024 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2024, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 8.226 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 105
The Project Manager as an ambassador of the contract. The case of
NEC4 ECC contracts.
Georgios Xanthakis
Professor, Aegean University, Chios, Greece
GeorgeX consultants (Director), PMP, MICE MAPM, EUR-ING
Email: xanthakisg@gmail.com, info@gxconsultants. Phone: (0044)07514-233832
---------------------------------------------------------------------***---------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - NEC has always been known for its innovative
approach to contract management. No other contract suite
has had such a transformative effect on the built environment
industry as NEC. It has put the collaborative sharing of risk
and reward at the heart of modern procurement. It is also
unique in providing a complete, back-to- back procurement
solution for all works, services and supplies in any sector and
any country.
The research is based on a literature review with the main
objective of understanding of the specific contracts. A new
contribution is made regarding the benefit of improving the
traditional contracting models and, thusseekingtocontribute
to the closing of the knowledge gap of the NEC4 ECC. The
purpose of this article is, therefore, to provideareviewofsome
of the main characteristics of the NEC4 ECC contracts during
their appliance in the construction Industry and the way they
lead the overall management of the project.
Key Words: Project management, NEC4 ECC, Contract
management.
1.INTRODUCTION
Many have argued about the existence of a necessity to
migrate to collaborative environments, which can provide
more innovative solutions and better overall
constructability, particularly through the better
development of a construction contract [1]. Rahmani [2]
addresses such existence of a tendency for a change in
adversarial traditional culture in the construction industry.
Mutual trust is also a determining factor in the contractual
management of successful infrastructure projects;thisisthe
basic quality of thecollaborativephilosophyunderwhichthe
standardised contracting models were designed,whichseek
to propose collaborative environments between all levels of
the project [3]. Although mutual trust and collaboration may
appear easily achievable in theory, they both rely on a major
overall change in the philosophy of the conservative and
bureaucratic mindsets [4].
Such a philosophy opens up the possibility of balanced risk
management between the parties involved in a construction
contract, a quality identified as the most effective technique
for avoiding conflict [5]. Furthermore, Eriksson et al. [6] and
Taylor [7] assert that this philosophy would allow access to
modern management mechanisms such as Early Contractor
Involvement (ECI), since contract risks are commonly
assumed by the contractor, who often does not have the
capacity for the aforementioned responsibility.
Table 1 and 2 summarizes the recent bibliographyconsulted
in prominent journals and book,fromwhichtheglobal use of
the NEC is highlighted in order to develop the subsequent
subsections, allowing for the identification of the most
important tools and practices from the NEC, as well as
determining the recurrent use of the methodologies for
research on this topic.
Table -1: Recent references (Source: Ardiles et al., 2023)
Author Year Method
Nkunda et al.[8] 2023 Literature Review
Yeung et al [9] 2022 Case Study
Alhyari and Ani [10] 2022 Literature Review
Rahmani [2] 2020 Interviews
Cheung et al. [1] 2020 Online surveys
Eriksson et al. [21] 2019 case study
Farrel and Sunindijo [11] 2020 Interviews
McDermot et al. [12] 2020 Literature Review
Laryea [13] 2019 case study
Lau et al. [14] 2019 Interviews
Table -2: ICE & NEC books (Source: ICE Library)
Author: ICE Year: 2017
NEC4 Engineering and Construction Contract [19]
NEC4 establishing a procurement and contract strategy [20]
NEC4 preparing an engineering and construction contract [21]
NEC4 managing an engineering and construction contract [22]
Mitchell & Trebes Year: 2017
Managing the reality. Book One: Introduction toengineeringand
construction contracts. Third edition [23]
Managing the reality. Book Two. Procuring an engineering and
construction contracts. Third edition [24]
Managing the reality. Book three. Managing the contract. Third
edition [25]

1.1 New Engineering Contracts
It was in 1993 that the ICE published the first version of
the New Engineering Contracts, a new and innovative way of
managing construction contracts.Itwasdesignedtofacilitate
and encourage good management of risks and uncertainties,
using clear and simple language.
The NECapproachtomanagingcontractswasendorsedin
“Constructing the team – The Latham Report”, which was a
government/industryreviewofprocurementandcontractual
arrangements in the UK construction industry. This led to a
second edition in 1995 incorporating the further
recommendations of that review. This contract was used
increasingly in the UK andoverseas,andamajorrevisionwas
made with the third edition. By 2005, this version had
already demonstrated its effectiveness on several
infrastructure projects in the UK, which led to the creation of
NEC3 in that year. In search of improved collaboration,NEC4
was born in 2017, which is the most recent and complete
version of these standardised contracts [15]. Such a suite of
contracts, popularly misnamed collaborative contracts, are
rather stimuli and procurement toolsforconstruction,which
propose clauses that allow for collaborative environments
between the parties involved.
NEC has played a part in helping the industry do things
differently and better. It has done so by introducing effective
project management procedures into the contract itself.
These requirepro-activemanagementofriskandchange,and
the day-to-day use of an up-to-date programme.Therangeof
pricing options has given Client’s flexibility in the allocation
of risk and the ability to share risk and manage it,
collaboratively.
There were three key objectives [16]. in drafting NEC4:
provide greater stimulus to good management, support new
approaches to procurement which improve contract
management and inspire increased use of NEC in new
markets and sectors. The features of NEC4 include a new
design build and operate contracttoallowflexibilitybetween
construction and operational requirements in timing and
extent and a new multi-partyalliance contractbaseduponan
integrated risk and reward model. They offer new forms of
subcontract to improve integration of the supply chain.
Further enhancements include finalizing cost elements
during the contract incorporating a party-led dispute
avoidance process into the adjudication process, increasing
standardization between contracts and also providing
enhanced guidance to give greater practical advice to users.
The NEC is fundamentally the same as othercontracts[17],
in that it provides a legal framework. But it is also radically
different in that it establishes a detailed set of project
management procedures. All NEC forms of contract are
designed and drafted with three the following three key
principles in mind.
Clarity. NEC contracts are easier to read and understand
than many other standard forms because they are written in
plain and readable English, use minimal legal terminology,
are highly organised, orderly, modular in structure and are
free from references to specific laws. The principle of clarity
in the NEC provides clear roles for all involved, and clear
processes defining exactly what people must do and within
what time periods.
Flexibility. The NEC family provides a contract for any
project, service, applied anywhere in the world (globally
applicable), in any legal jurisdiction, in any sector, with any
level of complexity, with any level of design responsibilityby
the supplier, under almost any procurement strategy, with
different payment options, with different levels of risk
allocation between contract parties.
Oncetheappropriatecontractischosen,NEC’sapplication
flexibility is further illustrated by the modular structure of
the NEC Engineering and Construction Contract (ECC). An
NEC ECC contract is built up from:
 the nine core clauses (common to all main payment
options)
 one of six main payment options - including lump sum, re-
measurement, target cost and cost reimbursable.
 one dispute resolution option
 a choice of secondary options to suit the specific
requirements of the contract.
 a choiceofjurisdiction-specificsecondaryoptionsdesigned
for particular local legal issues.
 any additional conditions of contract (‘Z’ clauses). The
flexible nature of the options means that, ideally, there
should be little need for additional conditions of contract.
1.2 Innovative Elements
Uniquely, one of the foundation clauses of every NEC4
contract states [16] 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.
A very important,innovative,anduniquecharacteristicof
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 earlywarning
meeting to decide how best to mitigatetherisk andaimingto
decrease the time taken to resolve the issue.
If there are changes to the amount of work the supplier
has to do, there are clearly defined processes to handle
changes in costs and time called ‘compensation events. The
contracts also provide a clear and precise process for
evaluating the cost and time implications of compensation
events, which include events arising from client scope
changes, and the contract sets out the process to determine
the time and cost effects, within a set timescale.
The result is that the programme and budget are
continually updated and agreed as changes and events
happen. There should be no surprises at the end of an NEC4
Contract. All works and supply contracts also allow for early
contractor/supplier involvement [16]

1.3 Allocation and Management Risk
Allocation and management of risk [16] is the core of the
legal and commercial relationship established by a project’s
contract. This allocation must be fair and sustainable
through the life of the project. The party holding a risk
should also be able to count on the co-operation of the other
party to identify and resolve issues as they arise. NEC
therefore built around procedures for sensible risk
allocation and ensuring that when risks do emerge the
parties collaborate to deal with them quickly and decisively.
Unfortunately, many contracts do not support thisapproach
to risk management. They start from the assumption of
failure and attempt to offload risk and costs on to suppliers.
Any security or protection this appears to give the client
is illusory. This type of contract creates a defensive,
adversarial environment, in which information is withheld
and the best minds of the project devote their energies to
defending their commercial position. The result is often
multiple legal claims and counter claims which can continue
for many years after the project has been completed.
It’s needed a fair and sustainable Risk Allocation for each
project. Risks should be allocated to the party best placed to
manage them. This judgement normally flows from an
assessment of a project’s complexity and size.
Complexity creates more risks, while size increases the
financial impact of a risk being realised. In both cases
suppliers normally demand a higher price for taking on
higher levels of risk. However, in highly complex scenarios,
pricing risks might not be feasible. Furthermore, at larger
projects, contractors and sub-contractors may lack the
financial strength to accept their share of project risk. In
these circumstances it might be more beneficial for both
sides to either share the risk or for the client to take on risk.
In a tight market or where a client has a dominant
position in the sector, there may be a temptation forclientto
use their power to unfairly (and unsustainably) offload risk
on to their suppliers. While this could lead to a short-term
cost advantage for the client, it often results in long-term
difficulties. Suppliers may adopt an aggressive stance to
improve their position, leading to conflicts, strained
relationships, and project setbacks.
Establishing a fair and sustainable risk allocation aligns
the interests of clientsandsuppliers,fosteringa co-operative
environment across multiple contracts that cover the
relationships with different suppliers servicing various
project aspects from design to operations.
1.5 Diversity Payment and Delivery Models
NEC [15] provides diverse payment and delivery models
tailored to match the complexity and scale of projects:
 For straightforward work where a supplier can handle
project risk: Clients can opt for a fixed price contract,
ensuring cost certainty.
 In complex or larger projects where both client and
supplier agree to pool risk: Clients can use a Target Cost
contract, sharing savings or overspends through a
pain/gain mechanism.
 Within the contracts the client is best suited to manage
risks: Clients use a Cost-Reimbursable Contract, in which
suppliers receive their costs plus an agreed fee or a
Management Contract, in whichsuppliersare paida feefor
managing the sub-contractors delivering the works.
These choices [16] are further complemented by optional
contract clauses allowing parties to address issues upfront,
while also allowing contracts to reflect public policy
priorities such as fair payment or local content
provisions. NEC contract alsosupportsframework contracts
and design, build, and operate options.
Risk allocation is not the same as risk management. It is
essential that the parties to the project co-operate to ensure
that problems are identified and dealt with as soon as they
arise. A project should have a single view of live risks and
how they will be dealt with. This shared view mustextend to
the implications of any action taken for the project budget,
its delivery programme, and the quality of what will be
delivered.
1.6 Methodology
By its nature, this paper is an integrative literature
review. This is a form of research that reviews,critiques,and
synthesizes representative literature on a topic in an
integrated way such that new frameworks and perspectives
on the topic are generated (Torraco, 2005). Integrative
literature reviews can be structured usinga setofcompeting
models and information.Nodata weregeneratedoranalysed
during the study. At the first part of this paper the conceptof
NEC contracts and theirprinciplesispresented whilefollows
the implementation of them and the new innovative way of
thinking is demonstrated. The paper is complete with
discussion, conclusions and recommendations [18].
The methodology of this studycomprisesconsistingof(i)
a literature review on the main topic of the study and (ii)the
analysis and deeper understanding of the NEC contracts.
Simultaneous systematic scientific research focused on the
NEC was undertaken. Google Scholar wasthestartingsearch
engine, where the research was directly limited to review
articles. Keyword combinations such as NEC, Collaborative
Procurement, Early Contractor Involvement, Compensation
Events, Early Warnings and Dispute Avoidance Boardswere
used.
Then, papers in Scopus and Web of Science were
analysed, consideringthatsuchdatabasescontainthelargest
number of peer-reviewed journals and have a broader
coverage of information. The Institution of Civil Engineers'
own literature on the NEC4 was also studied as a
fundamental topic source in the literature review. This
included the NEC4: Engineering and Construction Contract
Bundle and the Managing Reality, third edition: Complete
Set, both acquired via NECContracts'official website.Finally,

the analysis of the collected data was developed, with the
main focus on the roles, documentation, and strategies
proposed by NEC4 ECC.
2. GAINING AN UNDERSTANDING
To gain an understanding of how NEC ECC iscarriedout[16],it
is necessary to make a complete review of some relevant
aspects, such as roles, documentation, and tools of the
standard model, which generate incentives for good project
management. Firstly, it is appropriate to point out that the
roles of the ECC have no point of comparison with any
traditional model contract. Therefore, it isnecessarytoknow
the roles and responsibilities of those involved in an NEC4
ECC contract. Table 3 gives details on these aspects with
focusing on the roles that will be part of the of the study.
Table 4 describes the documentationrelatedandrequiredby
the NEC4 ECC contracts.
Table -3: Roles in NEC ECC (Source: Ardiles et al., 2023)
Role Liabilities
Client
One of the parties of the project. Submit the
tender proposal in part 1 of the contract. Appoint
PM and supervisor. Monitor and record project's
KPI.
Project
manger
It' the client representative on the site. Establish
structure, procedures and systems for project
development. Approve charges scope, defects and
delegate responsibilities.
Supervisor
Ensure compliance with the scope and
performance standard. Supervise carried outtests
and inspections. Notify and file defects on site.
Contractor
It’s the other party of the contract. submit its
proposal in Part 2 of the contract specifying how
the work and subtracting will be carried out.
Similarly, it is necessary to recognise the documentation
involved in the procurement and tendering process of a
project, as these are approved by various levels of
management or representatives prior to the signing of the
contract, indicating that a professional standard requiredfor
quality control must be met.
It is of utmost importance to mention that a properly
prepared Contract Data minimises any ambiguity and
uncertainty regarding important data such as the response
periods between the parties, the names of the parties
involved, start and end dates of the works, methods of
payment and all types of Secondary Option Clauses chosen
for a given project. Similarly, an appropriate scope provides
the contractor with information that specifies and describes
the works required by the client.
Client Description
Form of Contract Contract itself
Contract Data Part 1
Specific complementary information
required to operate the contract.
Conditions to be fulfilled by the
Contactor
Site Information
Construction site, its surroundings,
existing buildings, and services.
Scope
Technical information. Obstacles to
contactor. Safety requirements.
Drawings and technical specifications
Contractor Description
Contract Data Part 2
Conditions presented by the Contactor
to validate the contract data according
to the clauses requiring it
Programme
Execution programme, including
resources labour and equipment
Pricing Documents
Activity schedule (options A& B) and
bill of quantities (options C & D)
Contractor's Scope
response to client's scope indicating
how the work will be carried out.
Design and Risk
Management
Risk and Action plan
On the other hand, the parties involved in the tendering,
procurement, and execution of a work under NEC4 apply the
sameresponsibilitiesasindicatedinTable3,regardlessofthe
degree of customisation of the contract.
This is because the standardisedNEC4ECCmodelisbasedon
nine Core Clauses, which are not modifiable and, on their
own, providegreater sophisticationanddetailthananyother
the pro-forma.
Within the contract, there are six Main Option Clauses[22] to
define the type of payment to the contractor for the work
performed, of which one must be chosen depending on the
balance in the desired risk allocation.
The Main Option Clauses eligible in anNEC4ECCcontractare
the following:
• Option A, priced contract with activity schedule.
• Option B, priced contract with bill of quantities.
• Option C, target contract with activity schedule.
• Option D, target contract with bill of quantities.
• Option E, cost reimbursable contract.
• Option F, management contract.
Figure 1 shows the distribution of risks according to the type of
Main Option chosen, which it shared between the client and the
contractor.
Table -4: Documentation in NEC ECC (Source: Ardiles et al.,
2023)

Fig -1: Distribution of risks in NEC ECC
Source: Ardiles et al., 2023
Fig -2: Overall role of Project Manager
Source: NEC ECC material
The basis of the standardized model is sufficient to be ableto
contract with NEC4; however, the complexity of the
infrastructure works, the involvement of the multiple actors
in the contract and the variable circumstances that occurina
medium to large project make it necessary to apply
incentives for good project management.NEC4 proposes
stimuli and took forgood project managementinitsCoreand
Secondary OptionClauses,startingwiththeprocurementand
tendering processes, where these stimuli and tools are
specified in documents such it’s the Contract Data the scope,
the programme, etc. Within tine wide range of clauses, they
stand out as the main drivers of the philosophy of
collaborative work.[17]
2.1 Communications (Clause 13) [22]
Communications within the framework of an NEC4 ECC
contract are the most important basis and tool for
establishing collaborative environments. All parties to the
contract are obliged to notify each other by means of a
written communicationsystemthatisproperlyestablishedin
the contract. Theraare, therefore,establishedresponsetimes
for all types of notifications, be they early warning,
compensation events, ambiguities, inconsistencies, etc. To
maintain a proper identification [17] and level of response to
communications, it is established that each party has its own
record and schedule of communications, which will allow
immediate access to the record of events that may facilitate
the prevention or resolution of potential problems.
2.2 Early Warning (Clause 15) [22]
An early warning, on the other hand, is a notification that
can be made by either the project manager or the contractor,
to alert the other party of any event that may increase the
price total, delay completion dates and key deliverables or
impair the performance of the works. The generation of an
early warning should be performed as soon as the event
becomes known, so that meetings are held to establish and
manage the appropriateresolution changes more efficiently.
If the contractor does not generate an early warning that
could have foreseen a damaging event for the project, the
contractor will be penalized;however, if theprojectmanager
does not generatean early warning, the project managerwill
not be penalized. In this way,the contractorandtheclientare
encouraged to fulfil their responsibilities diligently.
2.3 Compensation Events (Clause 6) [22]
Compensation events refer to a situation that may occur
during the execution of the project and that, if not
attributable to the contractor, the latter is entitled to be
compensated for the effects that may have been generated.
Failureto be notified bythecontractorwithineightweeks
from the first instance when such an event could have been
alerted shall result in the contractor being penalised by
recognising the value of the work performed as if such a
compensation event had been alertedandforeseenintimeby
a competent contractor. A project manager [17] has no time
limit for notifying compensation events. Considering that,
under a philosophy of mutual and cooperative work, such as
the one proposed by the NEC, it is expected that a contractor
is neither benefited nor harmed by a compensation event,he
must present the solution and quotationofthecompensation
event to the project manager, who will evaluate it and, if
necessary, instruct him to reformulate better alternatives
that are more practical at the moment of facing the situation.
2.4 Incentives (Clause 6) [22]
While collaborative actions and tools have been
mentioned positively, they could not be carried out in a
context where incentives for good working practices are not
encouraged. Thus, NEC4 provides some specific clauses to
reward the parties for their good performance in achieving
objectives. One example is clause X12, [17] which apart from
encouraging a particularized multiparty collaboration,
provides incentives to those parties that meetorimprovethe
established KPIs. Similarly,andbeingmutuallyexcludedwith
clause X12, clause X20 encourages incentives to the
contractor through the obligation to report on KPIs set and
programmed by the counterpart, which will be evaluated,
approved, and remunerated by the project manager.

There are also incentives for the early completion of the
works (clause X6) or incentives from the Main Options C and
D that work with the target contract, where the finalpricefor
the works performed is compared with a target price set in
the contract, so that, if there is a positive balance of this
comparison, thisisdividedbetweenthepartiesascontracted.
2.5 Dispute Avoidance Board (Clause W3) [22]
NEC4, within its new tools, provides three (03) dispute
mitigation and resolution options. Of particular interest is
option W3, where a Dispute Avoidance Board is used as the
first method of resolution. Board members visit the project
site, inspect the works, provide recommendations [17], and
resolve potential disputes before they are formally referred
to a court.
DISCUSSION
Implementing an early warning system may enhance and
innovate problem-solving techniques in projects, since it
implies both parties to work together in preventing or
mitigating cost, time, andqualityrisks,asconcludedbyMeng
[27]. Such a system becomes essential when accompanied by
compensation events, which can improve the risk allocation
and help avoid possible future disputes between theparties.
Remembering also that the contract is made up of
supporting documentation, it is important to ensure that it
contains all the information necessary for the contractor to
be able to carry out the proposed works. To achieve this, a
procurement structure such as NEC4 could be adapted,
which contains particular documents such as the site
information, which is provided by the entity and avoids the
contractor being confronted with unforeseen existing
buildings or services; in the same way, the scope specifies
the extent of the works required by the entity, thus having
two documents strictly referring to project information,
which would facilitate the delivery of the works to the
contractor.
Finally, to complement the proposal in view of the inherent
need to improve the documentation pertaining to
procurement processes, implementing a document such as
Contract Data would ensure knowledge of the contract in its
entirety, as well as the responsibilities of each party and
would demand a higher level ofcollaborativework during its
elaboration; in addition, it would allow for raising the
performance levels of both parties during the execution of
the contract.
In any case, in agreement with Wilkinson and Farhi [26], as
long as the search for a change in philosophy and mentality
is not prioritised, in order to achieve higher standards of
mutual work among public servants, none of these
innovation tools will have a major positive impact on public
procurement processes and the clauses and documentation
implemented will remain as merely legal formalities.
Moreover, it is important toaddresstheresearchlimitations,
which resulted in the analysis of a single infrastructure
project in the case study. One of the primary constraints is
the outdated and limited availability of information in the
public. Additionally, inherent difficulties arose when
attempting to obtain information directly from the parties
involved in the contract, largely due to issues related to
confidentiality and internal bureaucratic processes.
EPILOGUE
Its common at Construction Industry [27] projects have
significant delays and budget overruns. A lack of trust [28]
and collaborative work within the construction sector has
created systems of checks, double-checks and over
specification to cover legal ramifications both real and
perceived issues. Due to the existing conditions, it is
concluded that there is a need for change in the processes, as
well as in the way the contract and its parts are used, which,
as the NEC postulates, should be everyday working
documents.
REFERENCES
[1] Cheung, S.O., Cao, N.; Ma, W.S.A. Using KPI for
Incentivization. In Proceedings of International
Structural Engineering and Construction; ISEC Press:
Fargo, ND, USA, 2020; Volume 7.
[2] Rahmani, F. Challenges and opportunities in adopting
early contractor involvement (ECI): Client's perception.
Archit. Eng. Des. Manag. 2020,17, 67-76.
[3] Mitchell, B.; Trebes, B. Managing Reality. Book One:
Introduction to the Engineering and Construction
Contract, 3rd ed.; Institution of Civil Engineers: London,
UK, 2017.
[4] Lau, C.H.; Mesthrige, J.W.; Lam, P.T.I.; Javed, A.A. The
challenges of adopting new engineering contract:AHong
Kong study. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2019, 26, 2389-
2409.
[5] ARCADIS. Global Construction Disputes Report:
Collaborating to Achieve Project Excellence. ARCADIS:
Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020.
[6] Eriksson, P.E.; Volker, L.; Kadefors, A.; Lingegard, S.;
Larsson, J.; Rosander, L. Collaborative procurement
strategies for infrastructure projects: A multiple-case
study. Manag. Procure. Law 2019,172,197-205.
[7] Taylor, F. NEC 4 Contract: Early Contractor Involvement
(ECI). 2022. Available online:
https://www.hka.com/nec4-contract- early-contractor-
involvement-eci/ (accessed on 10 Jan 2024).
[8] 8.Nkunda, R.M.; Kazungu, I.; Changalima, I.A.
Collaborative Procurement Practices in Public
Organizations: A Review of Forms, Benefits and
Challenges. Ghana J. Dev. Stud. 2023,20, 40-57.

[9] 9.Yeung, J.F.Y.; Chan, D.W.M.; Chan, J.H.L.; Lok, K.L.
Development of a Composite Project Performance Index
for the New Engineering Contract (NECPPI) of
construction projects in Hong Kong: A Delphi study. Int.J.
Constr. Manag. 2022, 23, 2804-2817.
[10] 10.Alhyari and Ani [4 Alhyari, O.H.; Ani, A.R.A. Is the
Engineering and Construction Contract Legally Less
Competitive than the Red Book in Civil Law Countries? J.
Leg. Aff. Disput. Resolut.Eng.Constr. 2022,14,06522001.
[11] Farrel, A.; Sunindijo, R.Y. Overcoming challenges of early
contractor involvement in local governmentprojects.Int.
J. Constr. Manag. 2020, 22,1902-1909
[12] 12. McDermot, E.; Agdas, D.; Diaz,C.R.R.;Rose,T.;Forcael,
E. Improving performance of infrastructure projects in
developing countries: An Ecuadorian case study. Int. J.
Constr. Manag. 2020, 22, 2469-2483.
[13] 13. Laryea, S. Compensation events in NEC3 contracts:
Case studies from South Africa. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. 2016,
169, 49-64.
[14] Lau, C.H.; Mesthrige, J.W.; Lam, P.T.I.; Javed, A.A. The
challenges of adopting new engineering contract:AHong
Kong study. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2019, 26, 2389-
2409.
[15] Ardiles Y. O, Sanchez-Carigga C., EspinozaVigilA.,Malaga
M., and Milon Zevallos A., 2023. SeekingtheOptimisation
of Public Infrastructure Procurement with NEC4 ECC: A
Peruvian Case Study. Buildings 2023,13,2828.
[16] The NEC 3 Engineering and construction contract.
Complementary. Second Edition. Blackwell. Science
[17] Mott Macdonald,2020. The MM Little book of NEC
Contracts. Available at:
https://www.apm.org.uk/v2/media/wwnbcdkl/mott-
macdonalds-little-book-of-nec-20221121.pdf
[18] Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing integrative literature
reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Res. Dev. Rev.
4 (3): 356– 367. Available at: https://doi.org/10
.1177/1534484305278283
[19] ICE. NEC4 Engineering and Construction Contract;
Institution of Civil Engineers: London, UK, 2017.
[20] ICE. NEC4 Establishing a Procurement and Contract
Strategy; InstitutionofCivilEngineers:London,UK,2017.
[21] ICE. NEC4 Preparing an Engineering and Construction
Contract; Institution of Civil Engineers: London, UK,
2017; Volume 2.
[22] ICE. NEC4 Managing an Engineering and Construction
Contract; Institution of Civil Engineers: London, UK,
2017; Volume 4.
[23] Mitchell, B., Trebes, B. Managing Reality. Book Three:
Managing the Contract. Institution of Civil Engineers:
London, UK, 2017. 3rd ed
[24] Mitchell, B., Trebes, B. Managing Reality. Book Two:
Procuring an Engineering and Construction Contract, 3rd
ed.; Institution of Civil Engineers: London, UK, 2017.
[25] Mitchell, B.; Trebes, B. Managing Reality. Book One:
Introduction to the Engineering and Construction
Contract, 3rd ed.; Institution of Civil Engineers: London,
UK, 2017
[26] Wilkinson, S.; Farhi, C. Could the NEC be widely used in
New Zealand? Manag. Procure. Law 2008,161,107-113.
[27] Meng, X. Is Early Warning Effective for the Improvement
of Problem Solving and Project Performance? J. Manag.
Eng. 2014,30,146-152.
[28] Hammadhu R, 2023. Guide to Lean Construction-Easy
way to become Lean with case studies. Printed by
Amazon.
[29] Moujib, A.,2007. Lean Project Management. Paper
presented at PMI® Global Congress 2007. EMEA,
Budapest, Hungary. Newtown Square, Project
Management Institute
BIOGRAPHIES
Dr. Georgios Xanthakis have worked for 25 years as a Senior
structural design engineer, and lately as a senior project
Manager. He holds a PhD Degree in HR management and
MScs in Structural Design, Carbon management and
Construction management. He worked as a Lecturer for 5
years in Engineering and HR management.
His research interests includes Leadership, Employee
Motivation, HR Management, Organisation development
/behavior/change & project management and Sustainability.
He is author of many scientific papers published in
international journals or presented in conferences. He have
published two kooks : Motivation in Uncertainty (2019) and
Exploring insecurity in Workplace (2019).

The Project Manager as an ambassador of the contract. The case of NEC4 ECC contracts

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to The Project Manager as an ambassador of the contract. The case of NEC4 ECC contracts (20)

More from IRJET Journal (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

The Project Manager as an ambassador of the contract. The case of NEC4 ECC contracts