The motivation behind this monthly newsletter is to provide better and more frequent communication to CAASA members, and to solicit suggestions and responses to the contents. We need input from you to ensure that the content of this newsletter, our webinars and annual conference remain both topical and relevant.
Please indulge me if I have discussed this subject before, but with the stated intention of turning the country into a building site through increased spending on infrastructure, now more than ever we need to have successful project outcomes.
I believe that there are 6 fundamental factors contributing to the success of a project.
Well defined scope of work
Credible project estimate
Sensible planning and programming
Appropriate delivery model and allocation of risk
Competent teams – Employer, Engineer, Contractor
Local involvement and a positive community perception towards the project
Having all these factors in place does not necessarily guarantee success but they greatly improve the chances.
Government cannot fund this massive infrastructure drive out of its own pocket. It requires significant external funding. Lenders and investors require two things – certainty of outcome and a guaranteed return on their investment.
Delivering failed projects not only comes at a price but also impacts the credibility of the country to attract further investment – once bitten twice shy.
And we do not have a good track record when it comes to mega projects. Medupi and Kusile are hardly the poster children of successful projects. Throw in Gautrain, the 2010 World Cup Stadia, Transnet’s Multi-Purpose Pipeline and the Ingula Pumped Storage Scheme and we have more than enough case studies as to what can go wrong and why.
To paraphrase Einstein “insanity is doing the same things over and over again expecting a different result.”
At the heart of it all is a well-defined scope of work. Without this there is little chance of the project estimate being credible or producing a realistic construction programme. I fully understand that “design as you go” in parallel with construction is used extensively on projects, but without a well-defined scope this leads to numerous variations and changes. This is why the NEC places such importance on the Works Information (NEC3), now renamed the Scope (NEC4). At some point in the construction of Medupi and Kusile serious consideration was given to suspending the project until the scope was better defined and the detailed design at a sufficient advanced level to minimize changes.
Project estimates are compiled at a very early stage with very limited information. A budget associated with a feasibility study can be out by anywhere between 50 – 80%. Unfortunately, this first figure on the table becomes the anchor against which all future estimates need to be explained and the difference justified. So, the bulk of the time is spent trying to shoe-horn the real price into the original budget price instead of admitting that the budget was wrong from the outset.
There is a distinct difference between planning and programming. Planning is all about the execution of the project and must start on Day 1. First plan and then programme. The plan constantly evolves as the project progresses, as should the programme. Under the common law contractors could commence work when they decided to do so, provided they completed by the finishing date. Nowadays employers need to see their contractor on site immediately after award, digging holes and pouring concrete. I was fortunate to be at Basil Read when we were awarded the contract to build an airport on St. Helena Island. Since all materials, plant and equipment had to be shipped to the island, and because there was no dock or jetty alongside which a ship could moor, the first item of construction was a temporary jetty where the ship could dock and offload.
This took 3 months to construct. The project team took full advantage of this period to continually review and refine both the plan and programme, which contributed greatly to the project’s success.
One of the most critical decisions made at the outset is what form of contract to use. 70% of the success or failure of a project lies with the form of contract chosen to deliver the project. Employers are often “sold” a form of contract by specialists with vested interests. I was advised by a quasi-government organization that the reason they elected to use the FIDIC Silver Book was because they did not have to pay for an engineer. Conditions of Contract are chosen for all the wrong reasons. Employers need to look inside their organizations and base their choice of contract on the available skills and expertise.
We need to throw the current tendering system into the bin. It is an outdated, adversarial, open to corruption, risk dumping, lose-lose system that rewards mediocrity. No amount of tightening up on legislation will save it. Awards are delayed for many months and then the award is challenged. It is time for new models – partnering, alliancing, early contractor involvement – if we want to succeed.
We have a dearth of experience, expertise and skills in the industry, particularly amongst employers. There is no clear project pipeline published by government or the industry. There is no clear collaboration between government, the industry, academia and the broader civil society to deliver better projects. What happened to the 18 SIPS? We only train when the project is awarded and, once completed we abandon those we trained, move to a new site and start the process over again. Growing and maintaining a skilled workforce is critical to project success.
A transparent project pipeline, both public and private, with firm start and end dates, would encourage all parties to train up front to suit the needs of the project. There is no point in training someone to lay bricks or to weld when he may only be able to use that skill in 12 – 24 months’ time.
Unlike a motor manufacturer who assembles his car out of sight, and we only see the final product on the showroom floor, the construction industry builds projects in the local community. The community sees progress on a daily basis and wants to be a part of the process.
Depending on who you listen to unemployment in South Africa either sits at 32,9% or 42,4% (if you include those who have given up on looking for employment.) Youth unemployment represents around 57%. Each year there are more matriculants than positions at higher education institutions and/or jobs.
When I started out in the industry we spent 6 months receiving formal training and 6 months on site learning what construction actually meant. We were more useful and appreciated than the graduates straight out of university. Training was done for the industry by the CEITB – the Civil Engineering Industry Training Board. We no longer have apprenticeships or trade schools. I don’t know if the TVET colleges have any interaction with the industry as to the type of training required.
All agree that the education system needs to be overhauled. This will take time.
Productivity in the SA construction industry is dismal. We should be adopting new technologies to improve efficiency and reduce costs, yet we need to absorb as many unskilled and semi-skilled people in our workforce as possible. Instead of doing more with less, we end up doing less with more.
I don’t have all the answers to this but clearly growing the economy by more than the current +/- 1% per annum will go some way to creating employment.
Above all we need to ensure that the community participates in the project in a meaningful way. Jobs don’t just provide money; they provide dignity and a sense of purpose.
CAASA MATTERS
Our monthly webinars commenced on 13 February 2026. The first 3 sessions will delve into compensation events under the NEC starting with how the contract deals with inclement weather. The next session is on Friday 10th April. David Jamieson will discuss The Programme under the NEC and other Standard Forms of Contracts. David is a member of CAASA, an adjudication panelist and has a wealth of experience in programming and the analysis of delay and disruption.
CAASA ran a mentoring programme last year over a 6-month period. Based on the very positive feedback received we intend to run this again in 2026. More details will be provided in the next newsletter. We are looking for mentors to be involved in the programme. If any CAASA member is willing to become a mentor or requires additional information please email Michelle Kerr at mkerr@mdalaw.co.za
