This article was also published in issue 153 of Marina World magazine. Click here to read the online version.

Successful projects are those that have been well planned and thought through long before the physical works begin or the detailed design is completed. 

Viaduct Harbour, Auckland CBD, New Zealand. Richard Lumborg / Unsplash

My company and I have been associated with a broad variety of projects over the years, including privately funded and local government funded projects. We've learned that no two projects are the same, not because of the different physical infrastructure being renewed or built, but because of the various project delivery options available to the organisations tasked with delivering the new infrastructure.

Good planning and successful concept delivery are often achieved by the owners looking outside their own workforce to seek guidance from advisors and subject matter experts, and most importantly seeking out the people and companies with the most recent experience in delivering similar infrastructure. Some of our most recent health checks on projects have found that if external expert guidance had been sought early on in the concept’s development, then considerable anguish, challenges and stress during project delivery could have been avoided and millions of dollars saved.

In many instances, organisations may have conscientious, well-trained and industry-leading staff provide their best guidance for a particular project. However, unless they have recent experience in delivering a similar project or specific element thereof, it is likely that the outcome will be fraught with difficulties. One core issue I have often found is that the project was lacking a level of governance and oversight from the beginning. A well-structured project steering or governance group with independent experts will often prove to be a valuable investment in the project’s delivery and ultimately will increase the chance of success.

In one recent example, during a mid-project delivery health check, my team and I at Wardale explained to a client that if a member of our team had been involved with the project as a sitting member of a functional project steering group, then our expertise from having delivered very similar projects elsewhere could have saved an estimated $3-5 million NZD on the key elements of their project. Had they invested less than $100,000 NZD in one member of our team joining their project steering group, we would have been able to contribute significant first-hand knowledge that would have delivered additional project benefits or savings.

Project governance and steering groups need to have appropriate delegation, terms of reference and a well-considered membership, including staff from the sponsor company. This is so that any decisions and recommendations can be made and implemented without delays to the project. That said, such project delivery groups also need to be able to welcome additional subject matter experts from time to time during the project lifecycle. In our experience, a group is best chaired by an experienced project director responsible for the overarching delivery.

Design engineers and consultants

Whilst project governance is critical, selecting and appointing the most appropriate and well-skilled design engineers and consultants is also critical to the project’s success. Some of the required experts may sit on the steering or governance group, or they may deliberately sit outside and be part of a technical advisory group.

However, where possible, we recommend that the first outreach at the start of the project should be to a design or engineering consultancy that has delivered similar pieces of infrastructure before. The value of engaging early with an experienced advisor is often missed or downplayed in the marine infrastructure world. In most instances, it is best to start not with an engineer but instead with a consultant who is most familiar with the concept design and project’s delivery so that learnings can be reviewed and shared, and possible collaboration on the new project considered.

Too often we have seen clients start projects by engaging the company’s go-to engineering firm without first developing a clear concept or undertaking some due diligence as to the company’s experience and success in delivering similar designs or projects. While familiarity with the same engineering firm may feel comfortable and appear the most logical way forward - and in some instances corporate guidelines may steer staff to a particular engineering firm - all benefits of this will quickly be lost if one design goes wrong or their marine inexperience results in mistakes being made that cost the client large sums of money over the life of the asset.

One recommendation that we often make is that if there is a trusted and long-term relationship with a particular engineer or advisor, then this party can remain associated with the project but the expert with the most recent experience should be allowed to lead. Meanwhile, the other party can be retained in an advisory capacity or as a peer reviewer. For example, the party could be part of a technical advisory group to contribute local knowledge or company experiences. Often their participation alongside industry experts can provide the added benefit of upskilling the regular or local advisor in particular industry knowledge.

View of Chaffers Marina in Wellington, New Zealand. Hrushi Chavhan / Unsplash

A well-considered masterplan

Whilst recent engineering experience and learnings from another similar project are valuable, the marina and boatyard industry should not assume that an engineer or engineering practice is the best place to start when developing the concept for a new project. 

There are now sufficient expert advisors to allow the industry to first complete a site’s masterplan and concept before moving to engage an engineer. Any well-considered masterplans should already include, engage and involve a host of internal and external stakeholders. Such engagement allows for projects and concepts to be well scoped with early guidance from stakeholders, so that one is more likely to succeed when incorporated into the final approved masterplan. Furthermore, a project with a clearly identified scope limits scope creep. 

One valuable part of a well-considered masterplan is clearly outlining its various sub-projects, which may include staging and phasing towards any particular larger piece of the masterplan. We often recommend phasing or staging to allow for a health check as clients often inadvertently try to deliver a project in its entirety too quickly, which might create project delivery risks and add complexity.

Financial planning and procurement

Two further suggestions for successful project delivery are to include appropriate financial planning and oversight, and well-considered and implemented procurement and procurement planning.

Our project health checks often identify poor procurement planning and processes, poor selection of advisors and poor selection of construction delivery partners. Compressed time frames or pressure from within the client organisation are often identified as the core reasons for the company to not undertake professional procurement and instead directly appoint a particular contractor. 

Planning and preparing for the procurement of a suitable construction partner can provide valuable and more detailed insight into the project, including specifying which components and items can be sourced from an expert industry provider instead of overpaying for bespoke components. Procurement planning often identifies construction partners that also have recent experience in developing such infrastructure, with early contractor involvement being one procurement method favoured by some clients.

Early contractor involvement has its benefits but only when it provides a value that cannot be sourced through consultants. We have often seen that early contractor involvement can result in higher construction costs when the partner has no competitive tension placed on them during the tender.

Formal procurement for a project through one or more tender stages often identifies project risks from a contractor’s perspective that the project delivery team may not have considered. These risks can also be assessed with mitigations developed in parallel to the completion of the procurement process.

The marina industry is also well served by a number of product and component suppliers. Therefore, procurement plans may need to consider splitting the procurement into smaller parts to allow these parties to participate. Alternatively, especially for smaller components, these suppliers can be named as preferred suppliers in the tender documents, guaranteeing their quality products are priced and considered.

Picton Marina at the entrance to New Zealand’s South Island. Nico Smit / Unsplash

Quantity surveyors

Our health checks have often found that clients who have failed to engage an industry consultant may also fail to familiarise themselves with international suppliers that can be found via industry publications like Marina World’s Suppliers and Services Guide, or via regional industry association memberships. A visit to an industry association’s marina and boatyard trade show provides the opportunity to speak to suppliers and manufacturers who can guide them. 

Lastly, our health checks regularly find that projects often start out with poor project estimates, resulting in poor budgeting and eventual financial difficulties during delivery. Our observation is that engineering estimates have often been used, which for smaller and simpler projects may be sufficient. However, for larger projects, in our opinion, engineers are not best placed to be sufficiently up to date on construction costs, project management costs, engagement costs, procurement costs or consenting fees.

We recommend that clients should engage a quantity surveyor with experience in similar types of marine projects. We believe that a quantity surveyor with experience in marine will be able to provide a clear budget for the project, assess any optioneering and feed into engineering options to reduce project costs or provide confidence to possible alternatives. If we are establishing a project delivery team we will ask the quantity surveyor to be a key member of the technical advisory group, which in turn will report to the project steering or governance group.

For larger projects we ask the quantity surveyor to maintain a “cost to complete” check on a project and review all contractor claims. Maintaining a watch on the project budget is one element where most businesses are inexperienced, and when done well will reduce unnecessary project delivery stresses.