Co-locating consultants

Are there benefits for consultants to work directly at the client site all the time? Clare Belsey weighs it up.

In recent years, there has been an increased trend towards the co-location of consultant and client teams or design and contractor teams. This seems expected for large, complex projects with multiple consultants, but is this the best way to go?

There are advantages: it gives the client comfort that work is progressing and allows for instant access to their consultants. It also helps with building relationships and building trust. Having the multi-discipline design team in one location is also expedient for the consultant, as interaction naturally occurs more than it would if the disciplines were in separate offices.

However, the disadvantages are also there. The client cannot keep control of what is being done, despite their initial thoughts to the contrary. Particularly for work based on an emerging-cost basis, the client may instruct additional work on an ad-hoc basis, but this is very difficult for the commercial team to keep up with.

The consultant’s employees may not be working solely on the project involved either, which can cause friction if they are sitting in a client’s office but not working on their project. There is also a lack of privacy for the consultant to have internal meetings and open discussions and, of course, there is nowhere to hide if things aren’t going to plan. ‘

'Can you just' syndrome 
The ‘can you just’ syndrome is a very specialist skill that requires years of training. Rather than going through the project management team (and potentially side-stepping any contractual obligations), a client will ask, ‘Can you just change (a) to (b) and add (c)?’

It is not really for the engineering team to decide whether this might be within the accepted scope, but a standard rule should apply to say that they need to check, and that the client should speak to the project manager. Formal project manager approval should be secured before any work takes place.

Failing to follow this can result in unapproved work, leaving the client in a very strong position not to pay you, even if you have the emails that asked for the work. If it isn’t agreed contractually, tough luck. Of course, if the project management team acquiesces to the ‘can you just’ question, then they only have themselves to blame when the client refuses to pay for something.

Needless to say, all of this can also affect your programme as much as your costs. Knowing how a new piece of work fits into the existing programme and what impacts it has can be a major factor in your quotation, and may end in the client deciding not to do the work.

In short, always get formal instruction for potential additional work. It may be difficult to do when time is precious, but the contractual paper trail is vital.

Not all bad 
Co-location can, of course, work well – but often there needs to be some meeting in the middle.

Rather than the entire design team working from the client’s office, perhaps only the discipline leads need to go, but for only one day a week rather than five. Meetings can still happen outside of this, but the day could include a half-day workshop to give everyone the chance to discuss progress and any issues. It gives the client a feeling of instant access and confidence that work is progressing well or, if not, that mitigation is in place. Should a decision be made that the various project teams be co-located, being as near to the site as possible is – obviously – an advantage, although this will not be possible for multiple-site projects.

A local site office may be preferential if the teams need to be on-hand and work solely on the particular project. To give some control, however, consider having clearly-defined areas (or floors) for each party. Try to have some neutral areas for general ad-hoc discussions, but have contractor or client-specific meeting rooms in their respective areas.

Location
Location continues to be key. The wholesale co-location of a team can lead to poor morale, and as time moves on, attendance may drop and people will look for reasons not to go.

Some resources may have a difficult journey to the co-located office, which can make the best of us grumpy. Some people move homes specifically to have an easier commute to work and a better work-life balance, so a different journey could lead to severe disruption. There is also the risk of greatly-increased business expenses. This is not a problem if it is built into the bid, but most likely it will not be. This can be a tricky decision to make on whether or not to rule out bids that insist on full-time co-location, or to come to an agreement on the additional costs (the chances for the latter are that you will lose that argument).

Back to the office
When a project completes, it can lead to difficulties for consultants to return to the main office. Trying to fit in again, trying to feel like part of the ‘family’ and catching up on the comings and goings of the office can feel like being a new starter again.

For the majority of consultants, if you are told to co-locate there is not much choice about it. Yet there is the option of negotiating a split of weekdays between the project site and the main office.

Co-location can be expected to lead to changes in the project team, perhaps even leading to a higher staff turnover rate than would normally be expected – you will often hear people talk about how they ‘managed to escape the X project’.  

---

Clare Belsey is a project professional with more than 10 years’ experience of project delivery gained across rail, commercial and residential projects in the UK