Record keeping for contemporaneous delay analysis: a model for effective event management

Abstract

Increasingly sophisticated computer software is being utilized to support detailed critical path method (CPM) analysis for resolving delay and disruption claims. The accurate determination of entitlement is however still dependent on the quality of programme and progress information provided by all parties. A comparative analysis of record‐keeping methods in the UK and the US reveals that there is less rigour to this practice in the UK, where parties are not required by the contract to provide such records. In most forms of US government construction contract the contractor is required to produce a schedule using CPM software and to regularly update this to reflect project progress and changes. Recent recommended best practice in the UK also stipulates that the contractor should keep reliable and accurate progress and programme records to assist contemporaneous assessment of the cause and effect of project changes. While not contractually imperative, a clear method of managing information is important in UK construction and engineering projects to facilitate more effective and accurate assessments of delay and disruption. The US experience and good practice approaches in the UK demonstrate the importance of implementing and establishing an ‘event management strategy and archive’ at the outset of projects.