The Journal of the Canadian Institute of Quantity Surveyors
Le Journal de l’Institut canadien des économistes en construction
CONSTRUCTION ECONOMIST CIQS Celebrates
To promote the professional status of Institute members by establishing and maintaining high standards and ethics, and fostering excellence through education and the interchange of knowledge and partnership with industry stakeholders.
Canadian Institute of Quantity
Surveyors (CIQS)
90 Nolan Court, Unit 19
Markham, ON L3R 4L9
905.477.0008 | 1.866.345.1168 info@ciqs.org
CIQS EDITORIAL TEAM
Chief Executive Officer
Sheila Lennon, CAE ceo@ciqs.org
Managing Editor
Arif Ghaffur, PQS(F) editor@ciqs.org
Assistant Editors
Kelsey Wright, memberservices@ciqs.org
Ajibola Soboyejo, PQS
Karen Cheung, PQS
Shane McKernan, PQS
CIQS BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Chair Arif Ghaffur, PQS(F)
Vice-Chair Tammy Stockley, PQS(F)
Past Chair Erin Brownlow, PQS(F)
Directors
Ajibola Soboyejo, PQS
Antoine Aurelis, PQS
Dominic Leadsom, PQS
Ibrahim Oladapo, PQS
Kerry Mohur, PQS
Marc Brown, PQS
Observer Roy Lewis, PQS(F)
Observer, International Relations
David Dooks, PQS(F)
Observer, YQS Mykola Pulnyev, PQS
Statements of fact and opinion contained within this journal are those of the authors, including subject matter experts. CIQS assumes no responsibility or liability for the content of such fact and opinion, nor do they represent the official policy of CIQS.
Published by / Publié par
1200 Portage Avenue, Suite 200 Winnipeg, MB R3G 0T5
T. 204-975-0415
F. 204-947-2047
www.naylor.com
CONSTRUCTION ECONOMIST
Publisher Darryl Lazarenko
Content Andrea Németh
Layout Gufran Khan
©2024 Naylor (Canada) Inc. All rights reserved. The contents of this publication may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the publisher.
PUBLISHED JUNE 2024/CIQ-Q0224
Canadian Publication Mail Agreement #40064978
COVER IMAGE: ISTOCK.COM/NATALI_MIS
12 PROJECT PROFILE Calgary’s Arts Commons Transformation.
14 THE GAME: COMMERCIAL STRATEGY AND ADJUDICATION
Strategic administrative and commercial considerations ahead of adjudication.
18 CONSTRUCTION PRICING CONSIDERATIONS & ESSENTIALS
22
MACROECONOMIC DASHBOARD: CANADIAN CONSTRUCTION
Indicators of Growth, Composition and Changes.
24
QUANTIFYING CARBON IN BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION
Part 3 – Case Study for Structural and Architectural Works (Embodied Carbon).
28
REFLECTIONS ON CANADA’S 2024 BUDGET AND ITS IMPACT ON THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
TTHANK YOU!
…as my term as Chair of CIQS ends.
Arif Ghaffur, PQS(F)
his message will reach you as I conclude my term as Chair of the Canadian Institute of Quantity Surveyors (CIQS) and around the time of Congress 2024 in Toronto, at a time when we will be celebrating the 65th anniversary of CIQS.
During the last two years, I have thoroughly enjoyed my role as my support and perpetual enthusiasm for the profession of quantity surveying has continued. I am very grateful for the support of our CEO Sheila Lennon, Board, staff and CIQS members who have made my term so enjoyable and left me with many positive memories.
be involved in all stages of construction projects lifecycle. These projects include houses, hospitals, rails, roads, bridges and plethora of other project types and configurations.
…I am very grateful for the support of our CEO Sheila Lennon, Board, staff and CIQS members who have made my term so enjoyable…
I dearly miss the fact that my friend and mentor Ian Duncan, PQS(F) is not here today to share my journey and experiences. I dedicate my volunteering and effort to Ian, a gone-but-not-forgotten stalwart of our profession. I very much hope that Ian will be proud of our progress in moving the profession forward and providing me with his unfiltered opinion, which was often to “keep moving forward and doing the right thing.” Thank you, Ian.
Becoming a member in 2007 and attending member events, my first involvement with CIQS goes back to 2010, when I wrote my first article for the Construction Economist. Since then, I have written many other articles, supported and became the editor of this journal in 2015. This was followed by being invited as an observer on the CIQS Board and then joining the Board enroute to becoming Vice Chair and Chair.
During my term as Chair, I am pleased to have continued with my role as the Managing Editor of the Construction Economist. No day has been boring, as in parallel with my “day job” of running an emergent professional practice, I have sought out every opportunity to progress and champion our profession and the important work of our members.
CIQS is a professional association with a deep history. Having been established and operating as a self-regulated professional body since 1959, CIQS has cemented itself as the voice of Canada’s construction economists. I am proud to see members (PQS and CEC) continue to
There has been an increasing focus as CIQS continues to expand its chapter activities across Canada with well over 2,000 members, including overseas members. At home in Canada, we have remained involved with federal initiatives such as the Construction Round Table and Federal/Industry Real Property Advisory Council (FIRPAC) and many outreach initiatives that have required outreach and dialogue with the various levels of government.
Internationally, we are involved with organizations such as the Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors (PAQS), the European Council of Construction Economists/Conseil Européen des Economistes de la Construction (CEEC), International Cost Engineering Council (ICEC), International Construction Management Standards (ICMS). However, the focus remains on Canada’s future – we want to continue to be recognized as professionals that are actively engaged in making positive change.
It has been a wonderful and enjoyable journey for me as the Chair – this has been characterized by my desire to elevate the profession, augmented with volunteering many hours for the benefit of our collective profession. Much has been achieved, though there remain challenges and opportunities ahead, our profession is well positioned to support as the Canadian construction industry grows and continually strengthens.
Ian Duncan, PQS(F).
The future will be defined by the CIQS engaging in knowledge share and thought leadership in the arenas of artificial intelligence and global warming.
…artificial
intelligence, climate change and cost escalation will create defining moments for our profession and CIQS will need to demonstrate thought leadership in these arenas…
These arenas of thought leadership also include retention of human resources which will increasingly become an issue for employers as a combination of factors impact employees. This requires that the CIQS is nimble, quick and adapt to respond to industry needs, and remain current and relevant, within the confines of the governance model – it is all about being current and relevant. An example being artificial intelligence, climate change and cost escalation will create defining moments for our profession, CIQS will need to demonstrate thought leadership in these arenas. These developments will allow the CIQS Board to continue to be informed, relevant and make decisions that are timely and focussed.
Professional development of the CIQS Board is remains important, and I was very pleased at the last Board meeting (April in Toronto) to have Hammad Chaudhry, Vice President, Innovation & Construction Technology at EllisDon, to present as we enter a new era where deep technology proliferates, and construction is awakening to the new digital age. As Hammad said at his presentation, “The best vision is insight – Malcolm Forbes.”
The following are highlights of some of the focus areas and particular achievements of the CIQS that I am particularly proud of:
• Member Engagement: Working towards and the launch of a member survey, for improved understanding of the make up of the CIQS and to better enable and shape CIQS future strategy.
• Education: Existing courses and policies undergo review and development, with a view on introducing new electives in civils and such programs. Commencement of the hiring process for a new learning director.
• Local Chapters: Continuing to provide members with opportunities including, undertaking key roles, be part of chapter activities and CIQS advancement across Canada.
• Stakeholder Relations: Entrenching our ongoing work with the federal government, expanding advocacy and meeting with key decision makers in Ottawa.
• Risk Management: Launching and establishing a structured framework to identify, recognize and manage risks in a manner that safeguards the future of CIQS.
ensure preservation of sustainable supply chain, through awareness and dialogue with all levels of government.
• Young Quantity Surveyors: Continuing outreach in providing a platform for involvement as we enable the YQS to flourish and develop as an important and integral part of CIQS.
• YQS Portal: Establishing the Hub as the go to information and networking portal for current and future quantity surveyors.
• Awards & Recognition: Introduction of new awards for 2024 (via a nominating platform), specifically:
• Quantity surveying/estimating project team excellence award for a team.
• Quantity surveying/estimating excellence award for emerging employer.
• Young quantity surveyor award for an individual.
• Marketing & Communication: Launching promotional campaigns (including for Congress), posts, eblasts, LinkedIn, website enhancements, and consolidating the ambassador program.
…Within
the confines of the governance model it is important that CIQS is nimble, quick and adapt to respond to industry needs – it is all about being current and relevant…
• Governance: Major overhaul of the complaints handling procedure, amendments to the licensing agreements and updates to the by-laws and national standards.
• International Relations: Entrenching a coherent tracking process and continuous engagement, updates, and renewal of reciprocity agreements with South Africa, Australia, Sri Lanka, and Nigeria.
• Prompt Payment: Continuing to advocate for practices that
In furtherance of our initiatives and as part of routine governance, at the April CIQS Board meeting in Toronto, we went through a detailed agenda encompassing every aspect of the CIQS – its was great to see directors, observers, and staff have open, engaging conversations and dialogue. The highlight of the meeting was having Graham Randall, PQS(F) with us. Graham has provided over 17 years of service to CIQS, having reviewed 2,800 diaries and helping almost 600 students.
With Ibrahim Oladapo, PQS (middle) and Graham Randall, PQS(F) (right).
Also, I was pleased that the Canadian Association of Consulting Quantity Surveyors (CACQS) and CIQS signed a Statement of Ongoing Co Operation earlier this year and it was a pleasure for me to meet with Glenn Hultzer, PQS, President of CACQS. The CACQS and CIQS has reaffirmed their commitment such that the designations of PQS and CEC are upheld and referred to in a manner that is consistent with their intended objectives. In this context, it would be remiss of me not to thank Susan Neil, PQS(F) for working with David Dooks, PQS(F) and myself to provide encouragement and ensure that we continue to work together for the benefit of the profession.
The engagement with CACQS is hot on the heels of the dialogue that I wrote in my Chair’s message (“Staying Relevant and Remaining Connected – Engaging for the benefit of our profession”) in the Spring 2024 issue of Construction Economist. In particular, the initiatives with the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb) and the knowledge share with the Chartered Institution of Civil Engineering Surveyors (CICES). I am very pleased to have been part of this dialogue and it remains important that CIQS continue these relationships and yield the benefits of our respective affiliations.
It has been a pleasure to work closely with our CEO Sheila Lennon, CIQS staff, and the Board as we have addressed our priorities in a manner that Harland Lindsay, PQS(F), the stalwart
of our profession has characterized as always being for “the good of the Institute.” We have at every opportunity sought that members continue supporting the profession as they:
• Respond to calls for volunteering.
• Participate in mentorship initiatives.
• Write articles in Construction Economist
• Volunteer at the Chapter level.
• Attend seminars and CPD sessions.
• Attend the annual congress and AGM.
• Sponsor CIQS events and initiatives.
• Share CIQS social media releases. I encourage those exploring membership to join CIQS and access specialized continuing development programs, connect with industry professionals from across Canada and work towards the internationally recognized designations of Professional Quantity Surveyor (PQS) or Construction Estimator Certified (CEC).
Learn more about the various pathways to membership, the regulations governing membership, as well as the technical skills and expectations of the PQS and CEC designations. I encourage you to reach out to info@ciqs.org for any aspect of enquiry relating to CIQS. I am sure that Sheila Lennon and her team will assist as we seek to build and elevate the CIQS.
To the incoming Chair Tammy Stockley, PQS(F), I wish all the best and I am sure that Tammy will do a wonderful job as the CIQS takes the next step and pivots the strategic plan to provide members with support as
we navigate new norms that include artificial intelligence, climate change and human capital challenges. A big thank you to the outgoing Directors Erin Brownlow, PQS(F), Dominic Leadsom, PQS, Antoine Aurelis, PQS, and Kerry Mohur, PQS for their contributions to our profession.
Also, a shout out to our wonderful and hardworking staff: Alexandra Parliament, Director, Marketing & Communications; Sophia Chin You, Membership Manager; Kelsey Wright, Member Services Coordinator; and Elvina Kam, Meetings & Events Coordinator. Daily you continue to support our profession and I encourage you to continue with vigour your dedication and commitment to CIQS.
Also, I particularly wish Sheila Lennon and her team all the best as the CIQS pushes ahead with several key operational initiatives, transitions a move to its new offices later this year and in parallel the CIQS engages the expertise of a new learning director and other staff as part of the overall process of growth. . . exciting times ahead!
In closing, I again extend heartfelt thanks to our members, friends, and my family for your encouragement during my term as Chair. I wish you all the best and thank you for your excellent work in being part of the advancement of construction economics right across Canada!
Respectfully submitted, Arif Ghaffur, PQS(F) Chair, CIQS
Susan Neil, PQS(F).
With Glenn Hultzer, PQS (left).
CMERCI !
…alors que mon mandat de président de l’ICÉC touche à sa fin.
Arif Ghaffur, ÉCA(F)
e message vous parviendra alors que je termine mon mandat de président de l’Institut canadien des économistes en construction (ICÉC) et à l’approche du Congrès de 2024 à Toronto, au moment où nous célébrerons le 65e anniversaire de l’ICÉC.
Au cours des deux dernières années, j’ai beaucoup apprécié mon rôle et mon soutien et mon enthousiasme perpétuel pour la profession de l’économie en construction ont continué à croître. Je suis très reconnaissant du soutien de notre directrice générale, Sheila Lennon, du conseil d’administration, du personnel et des membres de l’ICÉC, qui ont rendu mon mandat si agréable et m’ont laissé de nombreux souvenirs positifs.
Je regrette beaucoup que mon ami et mentor Ian Duncan, ÉCA(F), ne soit plus avec nous aujourd’hui pour partager mon parcours et mes expériences. Je dédie mon bénévolat et mes efforts à Ian, un sympathisant fidèle disparu, mais non oublié de notre profession. J’espère vraiment que Ian sera fier des progrès que nous avons accomplis pour faire avancer la profession et qu’il me donnera son avis sans filtre, qui était souvent « … continue à avancer et à faire ce qu’il faut… ». Merci, Ian.
Étant devenu membre en 2007 et ayant participé à des événements organisés par les membres, ma première participation active au sein de l’ICÉC remonte à 2010, lorsque j’ai écrit mon premier article pour le Construction Economist. Depuis lors, j’ai écrit de nombreux autres articles, j’ai apporté mon soutien et je suis
Ian Duncan, ÉCA(F).
devenue rédacteur en chef de ce journal en 2015. J’ai ensuite été invité en tant qu’observateur au conseil d’administration de l’ICÉC, avant de rejoindre le conseil d’administration et devenir vice-président, puis président.
Au cours de mon mandat de président, j’ai eu le plaisir de poursuivre mon rôle de rédacteur en chef du Construction Economist. Aucune journée n’a été ennuyeuse, car parallèlement à mon « gagne-pain » qui consiste à diriger une pratique professionnelle émergente, j’ai cherché toutes les occasions de faire progresser et de défendre notre profession et le travail important de nos membres.
L’ICÉC est une association professionnelle qui a une longue histoire. Établi et fonctionnant en tant qu’organisme professionnel autoréglementé depuis 1959, l’ICÉC s’est imposé comme la voix des économistes en construction du Canada. Je suis fier de voir que les membres (ÉCA et ECC) continuent à participer à toutes les étapes du cycle de vie des projets de construction. Ces projets comprennent des maisons,
des hôpitaux, des chemins de fer, des routes, des ponts et une multitude d’autres types de projets et de configurations.
Nous avons continué à nous décentraliser en développant les activités des chapitres de l’ICÉC à travers le Canada, avec plus de 2 000 membres, y compris des membres résidant à l’étranger. Au Canada, nous avons continué à participer à des initiatives fédérales telles que la Table ronde de la construction et le Conseil consultatif sur les biens immobiliers du gouvernement fédéral et de l’industrie (FIRPAC), ainsi qu’à de nombreuses initiatives de sensibilisation qui ont nécessité des contacts et un dialogue avec les différents ordres de gouvernement.
Au niveau international, nous sommes impliqués dans des organisations telles que la Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors (PAQS), le Conseil européen des économistes de la construction/ European Council of Construction Economists (CEEC), l’International Cost Engineering Council (ICEC), et l’International Construction Management Standards (ICMS). Cependant, l’accent reste mis sur l’avenir du Canada ; nous voulons continuer à être reconnus comme des professionnels qui s’engagent activement à apporter des changements positifs.
Mon parcours de président fut merveilleux et agréable, tout en étant caractérisé par mon désir d’élever la profession et par les nombreuses heures de bénévolat que j’ai consacrées au bénéfice de notre profession collective. Nous avons
accompli bien des choses, même s’il reste des défis et des opportunités à venir. Notre profession est bien placée pour soutenir la croissance et le renforcement continu de l’industrie de la construction au Canada. L’avenir sera défini par l’engagement de l’ICÉC dans le partage des connaissances et la direction dans les domaines de l’intelligence artificielle et du réchauffement climatique.
Ces domaines de direction d’opinion comprennent également le maintien des ressources humaines, qui deviendra de plus en plus un problème pour les employeurs à cause de l’association de facteurs ayant des répercussions sur les employés. Pour ce faire, l’ICÉC doit faire preuve d’agilité, de rapidité et d’adaptation pour répondre aux besoins de l’industrie et rester actuel et pertinent, dans les limites du modèle de gouvernance. Il s’agit avant tout d’être actuel et pertinent. Parmi ces exemples, citons l’intelligence artificielle, le changement climatique et l’escalade des coûts qui créeront des moments décisifs pour notre profession. L’ICÉC devra faire preuve d’une direction éclairée dans ces domaines.
Ces développements permettront au conseil d’administration de l’ICÉC de continuer à être informé et pertinent et de prendre des décisions opportunes et ciblées. Le développement professionnel du conseil d’administration de l’ICÉC reste important, et j’ai été très heureux, lors de la dernière réunion du conseil d’administration (en avril à Toronto), d’accueillir Hammad Chaudhry, vice-président de l’innovation et de la technologie de la construction chez EllisDon, alors que nous entrons dans une nouvelle ère de prolifération de la technologie approfondie à laquelle la construction s’éveille. Comme l’a dit Hammad lors de sa présentation, « La meilleure vision est la perspicacité –Malcolm Forbes ».
Voici quelques exemples de domaines d’intervention et de réalisations de l’ICÉC dont je suis particulièrement fier :
• Engagement des membres : Travail sur l’élaboration et le lancement d’une enquête auprès des membres, afin
de mieux comprendre la composition de l’ICÉC et de mieux permettre et façonner la stratégie future de l’ICÉC.
• Éducation : Examen et développement des formations et politiques existantes en vue d’introduire de nouvelles options dans les programmes civils et autres. Lancement du processus de recrutement d’un nouveau directeur de l’apprentissage.
• Chapitres locaux : Poursuite de la provision d’opportunités aux membres de participer aux activités des chapitres et à l’avancement de l’ICÉC à travers le Canada, notamment en assumant des rôles clés.
• Relations avec les parties prenantes : Renforcement de notre travail en cours avec le gouvernement fédéral, en développant les activités de plaidoyer et en rencontrant les principaux décideurs à Ottawa.
• Gestion des risques : Lancement et mise en place d’un cadre structuré pour identifier, reconnaître et gérer les risques de manière à préserver l’avenir de l’ICÉC.
• Gouvernance : Révision en profondeur de la procédure de traitement des plaintes, modification des accords de licence et mise à jour des règlements et des normes nationales.
• Relations internationales : Mise en place d’un processus de suivi cohérent et d’une mobilisation continue, de mises à jour et du renouvellement des accords de réciprocité avec l’Afrique du Sud, l’Australie, le Sri Lanka et le Nigéria.
• Paiement rapide : Poursuite du plaidoyer en faveur de pratiques qui garantissent la préservation d’une chaîne d’approvisionnement durable, par la sensibilisation et le dialogue avec tous les ordres de gouvernement.
• Les jeunes économistes en construction (YQS) : Poursuite de l’action de sensibilisation en fournissant une plate-forme de participation pour permettre aux jeunes économistes en construction de s’épanouir et de se développer en tant que partie intégrante et importante de l’ICÉC.
• Le portail YQS : Établir la Zone ICÉC comme le portail d’information et de mise en réseau de référence pour les économistes en construction actuels et futurs.
• Prix et visibilité : Introduction de nouveaux prix pour 2024 (par le biais d’une plate-forme de nomination), dont :
• Le prix d’excellence pour une équipe pour les équipes de projet en estimation/économie en construction.
• Le prix d’excellence en estimation/ économie en construction pour un employeur émergeant.
• Le prix du jeune économiste en construction pour une personne.
• Marketing et communication : Lancement de campagnes de promotion (y compris pour le Congrès), de publications, des envois par courriel, LinkedIn, des améliorations du site Web et consolidation du programme des ambassadeurs.
Dans le cadre de nos initiatives et de la gouvernance de routine, lors de la réunion du conseil d’administration de l’ICÉC en avril à Toronto, nous avons examiné un ordre du jour détaillé englobant tous les aspects de l’ICÉC. C’était formidable de voir les administrateurs, les observateurs et le personnel avoir des conversations et un dialogue ouverts et engageants. Le point fort de la réunion fut la présence de Graham Randall, ÉCA(F). Graham a fourni plus de 17 ans de « service » à l’ICÉC, ayant examiné 2 800 relevés d’expérience et aidé près de 600 étudiants.
J’ai également été heureux de la signature par l’Association canadienne des consultants en économie de la construction (ACCÉC) et l’ICÉC d’une
Avec Ibrahim Oladapo, ÉCA (au centre) et Graham Randall, ÉCA(F) (à droite).
déclaration de coopération continue au début de l’année, et j’ai eu le plaisir de rencontrer Glenn Hultzer, ÉCA, président de l’ACCÉC. L’ACCÉC et l’ICÉC ont réaffirmé leur engagement à faire en sorte que les titres d’ÉCA et d’ECC soient maintenus et mentionnés d’une manière conforme à leurs objectifs premiers. Dans ce contexte, il serait négligent de ma part de ne pas remercier Susan Neil, ÉCA(F), qui a collaboré avec David Dooks, ÉCA(F), et moi-même pour nous encourager et veiller à ce que nous continuions à travailler ensemble dans l’intérêt de la profession.
La mobilisation avec l’ACCÉC suit de près le dialogue que j’ai écrit dans mon message du président (Rester pertinent et connecté : S’engager pour le bien de notre profession) dans le numéro du printemps 2024 du Construction Economist En particulier, les initiatives avec la Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), le Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb) et le partage des connaissances avec la Chartered Institution of Civil Engineering Surveyors (CICES). Je suis très heureux d’avoir participé à ce dialogue et il est important que l’ICÉC poursuive ces relations et tire profit de nos affiliations respectives.
Ce fut un plaisir de travailler en étroite collaboration avec notre directrice générale, Sheila Lennon, le personnel et le conseil d’administration en abordant nos priorités d’une manière que Harland Lindsay, ÉCA(F), le pilier de notre profession, a caractérisée comme étant toujours pour le « bien de l’Institut ». À chaque
occasion, nous avons cherché à encourager les membres à continuer à soutenir la profession en :
• Répondant aux appels au bénévolat ;
• Participant à des initiatives de mentorat ;
• Écrivent des articles pour le Construction Economist ;
• Se portant bénévoles au niveau des chapitres ;
• Assistant à des séminaires et à des séances de DPC ;
• Assistant au congrès annuel et à l’assemblée générale annuelle ;
• Parrainant les événements et les initiatives de l’ICÉC ;
• Partageant les communiqués de presse de l’ICÉC sur les médias sociaux.
J’encourage ceux qui envisagent d’adhérer à l’ICÉC de franchir ce pas afin d’accéder à des programmes de formation continue spécialisés, d’entrer en contact avec des professionnels de l’industrie de l’ensemble du Canada et de travailler en vue d’obtenir les titres internationalement reconnus d’économiste en construction agréé (ÉCA) ou d’estimateur en construction certifié (ECC).
Je vous encourage à en apprendre plus sur les différentes voies d’accès à l’adhésion, sur les règlements régissant l’adhésion, ainsi que sur les compétences techniques et les attentes liées aux titres d’ÉCA et d’ECC. Je vous encourage à contacter info@ciqs.org pour toute question relative à l’ICÉC. Je suis sûr que Sheila Lennon et son équipe vous soutiendront alors que nous nous efforçons de construire et d’élever l’ICÉC.
Je souhaite bonne chance à la nouvelle présidente, Tammy Stockley, ÉCA(F), et je suis sûr qu’elle fera un excellent travail alors que l’ICÉC passe à l’étape suivante et fait pivoter le plan stratégique pour fournir aux membres un soutien lors de la navigation de nouvelles normes, dont l’intelligence artificielle, le changement climatique et les défis liés au capital humain. Un grand merci aux administrateurs sortants, Erin Brownlow, ÉCA(F), Dominic Leadsom, ÉCA, Antoine Aurelis, ÉCA, et Kerry Mohur, ÉCA, pour leur contribution à notre profession.
Je tiens également à féliciter notre merveilleux personnel, qui ne ménage pas ses efforts : Alexandra Parliament, directrice du marketing et des communications, Sophia Chin You, responsable des adhésions, Kelsey Wright, coordinatrice des services aux membres, et Elvina Kam, coordinatrice des réunions et des événements. Chaque jour, vous continuez à soutenir notre profession et je vous encourage à poursuivre avec vigueur votre dévouement et votre engagement envers l’ICÉC.
Je souhaite également à Sheila Lennon et à son équipe tout le succès possible alors que l’ICÉC s’apprête à mettre en œuvre plusieurs initiatives opérationnelles clés, des transitions, un déménagement dans ses nouveaux bureaux plus tard cette année. En même temps que tout cela, l’ICÉC fait appel à l’expertise d’un nouveau directeur de l’apprentissage et d’autres membres du personnel dans le cadre de son processus global de croissance.… des moments passionnants en perspective !
En conclusion, je remercie sincèrement une fois de plus nos membres, nos amis et ma famille pour leurs encouragements au cours de mon mandat de présidente. Je vous souhaite le meilleur et vous remercie pour votre excellent travail qui contribue à l’avancement de l’économie de la construction dans tout le Canada !
Salutations respectueuses, Arif Ghaffur, ÉCA(F) Président, ICÉC
Susan Neil, ÉCA(F). Avec Glenn Hultzer, ÉCA (à gauche).
CCIQS Builds Roster of Member Volunteers for Complaints and Investigations Committee to Maintain Accountability and Transparency
Sheila Lennon, CAE Chief Executive Officer, CIQS
IQS is responsible for ensuring that all Associates, PQS and CEC Members meet appropriate ethical and professional standards through the implementation of a Complaints and Investigations Committee (CIC) whose members consider and screen complaints. The CIC consists of CIQS member volunteers to create a fair process where allegations of misconduct about a CIQS member are reviewed by a panel of their peers.
The CIQS National Standards and By-Laws establish minimum standards of acceptable professional conduct for CIQS Members, and these documents are the basis for the CIQS disciplinary process which is outlined in the CIQS Rules of Practice and Procedure (the “Rules”). The Rules guide the CIQS’ investigations and hearings into action by CIQS members (and former members, where the conduct occurred while the individual was a member) that may represent a breach of the CIQS National Standards or By-Laws. The purpose of the Rules is to:
• Establish fair processes that consider the interests of the public, the profession, and the individual member,
• Promote timely determination of proceedings in accordance with the public interest,
• Ensure processes and procedures are clear, understandable, timely and transparent, and
• Allow members to participate in the process, with or without legal representation. For this process to function properly, we need to build a roster of CIQS member volunteers from across the county and from every sector of the industry. When a complaint is received, a CIC is established by contacting members from the CIC Roster. Care is taken to ensure that members on any specific CIC do not have a conflict of interest (such as being in direct competition or being an acquaintance of the member under investigation), which is why it is so important to build a strong roster of volunteers. CIC volunteers must review the Flow Chart for the CIC Process to ensure they understand the timelines and commitment required, should they be called upon to investigate a complaint.
CIC Investigation Timeline
• The CEO or their delegate shall acknowledge receipt of complaints within ten (10) business days of receipt. Within ten business days of receipt of the complaint, the CEO or their delegate shall appoint a committee of three Members of the CIQS to investigate the complaint. This committee shall be the Complaints and Investigations Committee (CIC).
• The members of the CIC shall appoint a chair for the matter they are investigating. The CIC shall report to the CEO within six months, advising whether the complaint should be referred
For this process to function properly, we need to build a roster of CIQS member volunteers from across the county and from every sector of the industry.
to the Discipline Tribunal. The CIC may engage professionals or other persons to assist in the investigation process. The CEO may choose to extend the timeline if required for a thorough investigation. No reasons shall be given for the decision and the decision must be unanimous.
• If CIQS receives a complaint against a current board member, the CEO will ensure that the three Members appointed to the CIC are not current board members and have not sat on the CIQS board of directors alongside the board member that the complaint is for.
Further details about the CIQS Rules of Practice and Procedure are available on www.ciqs.org under Members/Tribunals and Hearings.
CIQS Members interested in volunteering for the CIC can submit their Expression of Interest and a copy of their CV to submissions@ciqs.org. Direct any questions to me directly at ceo@ciqs.org. ■
LL’ICÉC constitue une liste de membres bénévoles pour le comité chargé des plaintes et des enquêtes afin de maintenir la responsabilité et la transparence
Sheila Lennon, ÉCA Directrice générale, ICÉC
’ICÉC est chargé de veiller à ce que tous les membres associés, ÉCA et ECC respectent les normes éthiques et professionnelles pertinentes grâce à la mise en place d’un comité chargé des plaintes et des enquêtes dont les membres examinent et filtrent les plaintes. Le comité chargé des plaintes et des enquêtes est composé de membres bénévoles de l’ICÉC afin d’obtenir un processus équitable au cours duquel les allégations d’inconduite de la part d’un membre de l’ICÉC sont examinées par un comité de leurs pairs.
Les Normes nationales et les règlements de l’ICÉC définissent les normes minimales de conduite professionnelle acceptable pour les membres de l’ICÉC, et ces documents servent de base au processus disciplinaire de l’ICÉC qui est détaillé dans les Règles régissant la pratique et les procédures de l’ICÉC (les « Règles »). Ces Règles orientent les enquêtes et les audiences de l’ICÉC sur les actions des membres de l’ICÉC (et d’anciens membres, lorsque la conduite a eu lieu lorsque la personne était membre) qui peuvent représenter une violation des Normes nationales ou des règlements de l’ICÉC.
Les Règles ont pour objet de :
• Mettre en place des processus équitables qui tiennent compte des intérêts du public, de la profession et de chaque membre ;
• Favoriser le règlement des procédures en temps utile, conformément à l’intérêt public ;
• Veille à ce que les processus et les procédures soient clairs, compréhensibles, opportuns et transparents ;
• Et permettre aux membres de participer au processus, avec ou sans représentation légale. Pour que ce processus fonctionne correctement, nous devons constituer une liste de membres bénévoles de l’ICÉC provenant de l’ensemble du pays et de tous les secteurs de l’industrie. Lorsqu’une plainte est reçue, un comité chargé des plaintes et des enquêtes est mis en place en contactant les membres de la liste du comité chargé des plaintes et des enquêtes. Nous veillons à ce que les membres d’un comité chargé des plaintes et des enquêtes donné n’aient pas de conflit d’intérêts (par exemple, s’ils sont en concurrence directe ou s’ils connaissent le membre faisant l’objet de l’enquête), d’où l’importance de constituer une liste solide de bénévoles. Les bénévoles du comité chargé des plaintes et des enquêtes doivent examiner l’organigramme de la procédure du comité chargé des plaintes et des enquêtes pour s’assurer qu’ils comprennent les délais et l’engagement requis, s’ils sont appelés à enquêter sur une plainte.
Calendrier de L’enquête du Comité Chargé des Plaintes et des Enquêtes
• Le directeur général/la directrice générale ou son délégué accuse réception des plaintes dans les dix (10) jours ouvrables suivant leur réception. Dans les dix jours ouvrables suivant la réception de la plainte, le directeur général/la directrice générale ou son délégué nomme une commission composée de trois Membres de l’ICÉC pour enquêter sur la plainte. Ce comité est le comité chargé des plaintes et des enquêtes.
• Les membres du comité chargé des plaintes et des enquêtes désignent un président/une présidente pour l’affaire sur laquelle ils enquêtent. Le comité chargé des plaintes et des enquêtes fait rapport au directeur général/à la directrice générale dans un délai de six mois en indiquant si la plainte doit être renvoyée ou non devant le tribunal disciplinaire. Le comité chargé des plaintes et des enquêtes peut faire appel à des professionnels ou à d’autres personnes pour l’aider dans la procédure d’enquête. Le directeur général/la directrice générale peut décider de prolonger le délai si cela s’avère nécessaire pour mener une enquête approfondie. La décision n’a pas besoin d’être motivée et doit être prise à l’unanimité.
• Si l’ICÉC reçoit une plainte contre un membre actuel du conseil d’administration, le directeur général/ la directrice générale s’assurera que les trois membres nommés au comité chargé des plaintes et des enquêtes ne sont pas des membres actuels du conseil d’administration et qu’ils n’ont pas siégé au conseil d’administration de l’ICÉC avec le membre du conseil d’administration visé par la plainte. De plus amples informations sur les règles de pratique et de procédure de l’ICÉC sont disponibles à l’adresse suivante www.ciqs.org sous la rubrique Adhésion/Tribunal et audiences.
Les membres de l’ICÉC qui souhaitent être bénévoles au sein du comité chargé des plaintes et des enquêtes peuvent envoyer leur déclaration d’intérêt et une copie de leur CV à l’adresse suivante submissions@ciqs.org. Pour toute question, veuillez vous adresser directement à moi à l’adresse ceo@ciqs.org. ■
PROJECT PROFILE –CALGARY’S ARTS COMMONS TRANSFORMATION
PROJECT: Arts Commons Transformation Project
LOCATION: 205 8 Ave SE, Calgary, AB
OWNER/DEVELOPER: Calgary Municipal Land Corporation (CMLC) in partnership with the City of Calgary and Arts Commons
CONSTRUCTION MANAGER: EllisDon
By Shane McKernan, PQS, GSC, B.Tech
Stats
Size: 170,000 SF, three-storey building.
Cost: Initial construction investment: $660 million.
Schedule: Four-year anticipated construction period commencing later this year (2024) and expected to complete in 2028.
Notes: The project will comprise of a 1,000 seat multi-purpose theatre and 200 seat theatre as well as an extensive modernization of the existing Arts Commons facility – built in 1985.
This project is connected to the Olympic Plaza Transformation (which CMLC will also be overseeing) where the designers are planning to capitalize on the Common’s intimate connection with the Plaza.
The Arts Commons building in Calgary, Alberta is gearing up for a multi-phase expansion and renovation that promises to completely transform the downtown Calgary arts hub. The expanding Arts Commons vision will also support revitalization of the neighbouring Olympic Plaza.
The recent unveiling of the architectural design for the Arts Commons Transformation expansion, brought to fruition through a
partnership between the Calgary Municipal Land Corporation (CMLC), Arts Commons, and The City of Calgary, signifies a significant milestone for the arts and cultural landscape of Calgary. This initiative stands as a pivotal advancement in Canada’s largest ongoing arts-focused infrastructure endeavour.
Kate Thompson, serving as the President and CEO of CMLC, underscores the profound impact of this project as a forward-looking investment in the city’s cultural evolution, with a total estimated value of half a billion dollars. The collaborative effort behind this endeavour sees the involvement of
Rendering of the completed interior lobby, with proposed winding staircase in the double height entry.
esteemed architects and designers, drawing inspiration from the distinctive landscapes of Alberta and the architectural motifs of lodge typologies. The expansion is underpinned by a steadfast commitment to inclusivity, accessibility, and technical excellence, addressing the burgeoning need for arts venues within Calgary, Alberta. Supported by substantial funding, notably a recent $103-million contribution from the Government of Alberta, this endeavour is poised to
redefine Calgary’s downtown landscape while elevating its global standing.
Meticulous attention has been devoted to theater planning and acoustic design to ensure adherence to the highest technical standards. The 1,000-seat theatre will boast versatile floor layouts, while the 200-seat studio theatre will feature adaptable seating arrangements to accommodate a diverse range of productions.
Accessibility has been a paramount consideration, guided by specialist
insights to ensure that the facilities are universally welcoming. The design facilitates seamless access to performance spaces, inclusive seating options, and multiple elevators to enhance mobility.
With a total investment of $660 million, this initiative encompasses not only the expansion and modernization of Arts Commons but also the renovation of Olympic Plaza and the establishment of a $50-million endowment for Arts Commons. The expansion phase, with a budget of $270 million, is funded through a combination of resources from The City of Calgary and the CMLC’s Community Revitalization Levy. Additional funding is being pursued for the modernization phase and the transformation of Olympic Plaza, with a $40 million allocation from the City’s downtown renewal budget. The recent injection of funding from the Government of Alberta brings the project significantly closer to its financial objectives.
The Olympic Plaza Transformation project aims to reimagine the 35-year-old urban gathering place into a dynamic, adaptable, arts-centric hub at the heart of downtown Calgary. Leveraging the momentum generated by ongoing investments and initiatives in the downtown area, this endeavour aspires to revitalize the space into a versatile and engaging destination.
Construction on the expansion, through project manager Colliers and construction manager EllisDon, is expected to begin in late 2024 and open in the Arts Commons’ 2028/2029 season. ■
Shane is the Director of Preconstruction for Axiom Builders, based out of Vancouver, BC. With over sixteen years of experience, Shane’s a seasoned construction professional specializing in cost consulting & project management. Shane was the Past President of the CIQS – BC Chapter, where he served for ten years and is a current Assistant to the Construction Economist editor.
Rendering of the new 1,000 seat theatre.
Rendering of the completed Arts Commons exterior.
THE GAME: COMMERCIAL STRATEGY AND ADJUDICATION
By Paul Winfield FCIArb. LL. B (Hons), BVC.
From my own personal experience, I strongly believe that the decision to use interim construction adjudication under traditional construction contracts can be a critical factor in the successful execution and delivery of a project. The amount of time and money spent on commercial issues on a project can be disproportionate to the value of the resultant claim, the eventual award of time and cost, and the relationships on site and in the boardroom, not to mention the effect on the project itself. I suggest that both the owner and the contractor have a vested interest in resolving their issues and acknowledging their liabilities as quickly and cheaply as possible.
However, before the decision to use adjudication is made, there are some major strategic administrative and commercial considerations to be made.
As part of this strategy, it should again be emphasized that, the default assumption should always be that the parties should try to settle their issues on site, by themselves. Please refer to my profile and previous articles on LinkedIn (www.linkedin.com/in/ paul-winfield-fciarb), including “Is the Dispute Serious Enough to Justify Construction Adjudication?” for more information.
During my career, I have always thought that the administration of the contract generally, and claims management specifically, as a game. When I represented the contractor, one of my tasks was to identify and secure additional entitlement to time and/ or money as the project progressed. Whereas, when I represented the owner, it was to limit any additional awards for time/money and hold the contractor closely to the original schedule and budget.
Most standard form contracts in the construction industry (e.g., CCDC) have components and processes for the administration of claims baked into them, which I would call the rules of the game.
During my career as a contractor’s quantity surveyor, each month, I would prepare a cost/value reconciliation and progress report to show whether the project was running profitably or at a loss, and whether it was going to be delivered on time, for internal consumption. This included the secured and potential claims, which were incorporated into that reconciliation/ report with varying certainty.
Similarly, as the owner’s representative I would report each month to the owner on how many claims the contractor had made, how many had been approved, or denied, and the impact on the overall budget and schedule. For one particular
owner, I would report to the Claims Committee, who would either monitor those claims or deploy their own personnel/counsel onto that claim if necessary.
The potential claims that were denied were either: (a) closed; or (b) escalated to some form of dispute resolution.
The game was performed reasonably cordially between the commercial representatives on or off site, but each side applied the rules in a way to support their own arguments. In fact, for the contractor, it became one of my primary objectives on the project, and both me and my colleagues would try to identify as many claims as possible while following and applying the rules. Whereas, when I represented the owner, a major objective was to establish that there was no entitlement to the claims made by the contractor or that the claims were excessive in some way. Whoever played the game in the best way, and according to the rules, won the game.
Obviously sometimes, we site representatives agreed to disagree on how to apply the rules, and the dispute escalated. But the process weeded out the meritorious and unmeritorious claims and gave both the contractor and the owner a good idea of where the project was heading.
This plays right into the hands of the commercial strategy; it is only those claims that are escalated that need either: (a) management intervention and negotiation; or (b) dispute resolution. In my opinion, it should be a motivating factor for the respective project management teams (especially the commercial teams) to keep as many claims as possible out of any escalation process. When a claim did escalate, I thought of it as a failure of the respective teams – because who wants to admit that you cannot win the game on your own?
However, some claims do escalate, and they were either handed to senior management to resolve or were moved into the dispute resolution forum. For the aforementioned reasons – the number of these claims were distilled before they were negotiated and/or adjudicated, but for every claim which
did escalate – the respective site personnel first had to convince people up their chain of command that their position was the correct one and was worth fighting for. Once management was convinced, and all negotiations had ended, was where the next part of the dispute resolution strategy began.
The adjudication process is still part of the game, but by now everyone on the project is secure in the knowledge that someone else will make the commercial and strategic decision(s) necessary, and everyone else on site can get on with delivering the project and their other tasks.
But crucially, the adjudication process takes over, and the dispute is taken away from most desks on site. Another important factor is that, if management cannot resolve the dispute, the decisions and strategy in approaching the adjudication remains with them.
When deciding this part of the strategy, the value and complexity of the dispute plays a major part in a decision to issue the Notice of Adjudication and appoint an adjudicator. This is obviously context-specific, and the ends must justify the means. For example, for small value claims, the existing in-house/site personnel may be considered able to participate in the adjudication process themselves. Otherwise, or for large value or legally/technically complex disputes, outside assistance may well be needed.
Nevertheless, in both scenarios, a professional approach should be taken to compile a detailed and compelling submission in the most clear and concise manner possible. Each party has to convince the adjudicator that their position is the correct one, and serious consideration for legal/ technical claims professionals’ input, may well be the best way to go. As this approach will also help when proposing an appropriate suggested process or will assist the adjudicator, when developing a crisp customized process.
Other considerations for management include the effect on the parties themselves. As previously
stated, construction disputes are best avoided, but there must be an element of business and commercial reality taken here. Each party’s chances of success, the cost of the adjudication, and the long-term effect on relationships between key owners and contractors must also be considered.
Finally, choosing the correct adjudicator is also crucial. Each Nominating Authority has carefully selected and appointed its adjudicators to provide as broad a legal and technical knowledgebase as possible. By choosing your adjudicator wisely, that choice will pay huge dividends during the process because each adjudicator brings their own skillset and experience to the particular nuances of the parties’ dispute.
With time, I believe that this type of commercial/dispute resolution strategy, while resorting to interim adjudication to resolve crystalized and unresolved disputes during the execution of the project, will be appreciated, adopted, and will become the accepted norm for construction commercial management in Canada. In addition, it will also greatly help in any subsequent arbitration or litigation process.
Remember, where the respective site teams or senior management cannot find a compromise on a construction dispute, the next most cost-effective and expedient way to resolve it, is with the use of interim construction adjudication.
But make sure that you are adjudication ready, let us resolve something, and prevent construction disputes from becoming (too) contentious, costly, and time-consuming. ■
Paul is an arbitrator, mediator, and adjudicator. With over 35 years’ experience in the construction industry, Paul has represented contractors and owners at every level of the construction pyramid in contract negotiations, drafting, administration, commercial and ADR activities, he now acts as a 3rd-party neutral in construction related disputes.
CONSTRUCTION PRICING CONSIDERATIONS & ESSENTIALS
By Karen Cheung, Bsc (Surv), PQS, MRICS, MCInstCES, Senior Contracts & Commercial Specialist, Lakeland Consulting Inc.
The Canadian construction industry remains optimistic for the coming years, supported by government plans and industry findings. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently unveiled the federal government’s housing plan to build 3.87 million new homes by 2031.1 Evidence of such optimism is also reflected in an annual survey done by the Independent Contractors and Businesses Association (ICBA), indicating that 87% of British Columbia construction contractors expect 2024 to be as busy or busier than 2023.2 Further, a recent report by BuildForce Canada highlighted the need for an 83% workforce growth over the 2023 baseline in the residential construction sector to achieve the housing supply gap target set out by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation3 (CMHC).
Despite the optimism, ensuring healthy profit margins can still be challenging for contractors in an era of uncertain project economics, characterized by fluctuating material prices, increasing wages and a general inflationary environment. To ensure the profitability in construction projects, cohesive and thoughtful pricing is paramount. While a typical profit margin may fall within the range of 8% to 15%
and possibly beyond, this deviation prompts me to contemplate the pricing strategies in bids and the underlying factors that must be taken into account.
Pricing a construction project is of crucial significance to parties to a construction contract (“Parties”). For the owners of the construction project (“Owners”), prices received should fall within an approved budget, thereby guaranteeing the financial feasibility of the project. For the general contractors, subcontractors, vendors, suppliers, (collectively “Contractors”), the pricing not only influences their likelihood of being awarded the project but also has direct impacts on the revenue generated, the profit margin realized and the viability of the business. This article explores the principles and consideration of pricing, with the aim of achieving “smart pricing” while mitigating risks associated with pricing decisions.
Pricing Arrangements
Construction contracts typically encompass three basic types of pricing arrangements to accommodate specific contractual requirements and often unique project complexities, each carrying different responsibilities and opportunities to Parties. These arrangements can be summarised as follows:
1 2 3
Lump Sum (also known as fixed price or stipulated sum): Contractors are paid at a pre-defined price, which includes profit and overhead, regardless the actual cost of the work. The lump sum can be adjusted when there are change orders resulting in additional costs.
Cost Plus: Contractors are paid based on the actual costs incurred for the work, along with a lump sum or percentage fee for overheads and profit.
Unit Price: Contractors are paid based on re-measured quantities of actual constructed works at the tendered rate for each unit of work, with Contractor’s overhead and profit incorporated into the rate for each unit.
As time progresses, new pricing structures emerge alongside hybrid variations of basic arrangements to meet the evolving demands of the market. Such demands could be attributed to the advocacy for transparency in project costs, easy comparison between bids, guaranteed profitability for Contractors, collaborative contracting, risk and award sharing, incentive-based contracts, simplicity, and flexibility to manage the uncertainty and changes of the scope of work.
Pricing Process
Before embarking on pricing, Contractors have to gain a thorough understanding of the project requirements. This often involves reviewing technical documentations including drawings and specifications to accurately assess the resources necessary for the project. Following that, estimating comes into play, which involves understanding the scope, meticulously calculating quantities and costs for each individual component of the project. Subsequently, the objective remains to determine the price of each scope item, recognizing by applying the profit margin or markup on top of the calculated costs.
Construction pricing encompasses both direct and indirect costs. Direct costs refer to expenses directly attributable to the physical construction of an asset or a project. These costs are often made up of labor, materials, equipment, subcontractor cost, testing and commissioning. In contrast, indirect costs refer to expenses that cannot be attributed directly to a specific work item but are necessary to support the project and the overall business operations, commonly shared by more than one type of work. These costs primarily include items such as temporary site facilities, insurance and bonding, site security, obtaining permits and head office overhead.
Determinants of Pricing
Several factors contribute to the construction cost of a project, each exerting varying levels of influence on pricing. The following section explores two specific factors.
A. Procurement Models
Procurement models in construction determines roles and responsibilities of Parties, and different types of risks, namely a) known-knowns, b) known-unknowns, and c) unknown-unknowns, within the scope of work and projects. These influence the allocation of risks between Parties, the magnitude of risks (measured in terms of the probability of occurrence and severity of consequences),
the coverage of items within the contingency, and ultimately the pricing. Procurement models used in construction encompass a variety of approaches, including Design-Bid-Build (DBB), Design-Build (DB), Design-Build-Finance (DBF), Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Maintain (DBFOM), Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and construction management. The underlying risks, arising from design, construction, financing, usage demand, operation, and maintenance, vary among these models.
To better illustrate, let us compare the DBB arrangement with the DBF arrangement. DBF arrangement can potentially capture the benefits of enhanced design and construction quality, achieved by leveraging the expertise of the private sector. In DBF arrangement, financing risks traditionally retained by Owners are now fully or partially distributed to Contractors. Financing risk, being linked to the private partner’s performance obligations, can significantly influence the extents of risk premium allowed in the bid pricing. Contractors are responsible for financing the capital cost of the project during the design and/or construction phases under DBF arrangement. Risks arise when the necessary project funding cannot be obtained or when the funding is obtained at high interest rates, and thereby potentially eradicating Contractors’ profit or jeopardizing their business. Contractors shall therefore be prudent to account for financing risks in pricing.
B. Contractual Provisions on Risk Allocation
Risk allocation to cover unforeseeable expenses of the project can be achieved through various provisions in the contract. Standard contract terms and conditions used as risk allocation tools include insurance requirement, liquidated damages clauses, payment terms, warranty, and limitation on liability. Contractors have to quantify and price the responsibilities and extents of indemnification associated with risks they bear. Below, let us delve into two contractual clauses and their implications on pricing:
i. Compensation Clauses
Construction projects inevitably encounter a myriad of complex issues, commonly resulting in changes to the project conditions and original scope of work. Terms and conditions of contracts should clearly and comprehensively, in respect of risk allocation: a) define the risk events entitling Contractors for time and/or cost compensation; b) describe the timeline, procedures and requirements for Contractors to submit and substantiate claims; and c) demarcate Contractors’ obligations such as due diligence and best endeavours to prevent/mitigate delay. Typical clauses associated with the compensation mechanism include extension of time, loss and/or expenses and delay recovery measures. Such clauses enable bidders to contemplate and anticipate the extent to which they can be contractually secure in their rights throughout the project.
There are well-established practices for Owners and Contractors to account for time and cost implications associated with delays that they are responsible for, ensuring that Contractors can rest assured of receiving compensation in the event of owner-caused delay (excusable/ compensable). Still, there are circumstances subject to contract negotiation where Parties are flexible in agreeing on the entitlement and extent of compensation. Such circumstances include concurrent delays where two (or more) delays to the completion of the works are overlapping and “neutral” events such as force majeure, extreme weather and change in law that neither party has directly caused.
It is crucial to keep in mind that imposing onerous contract conditions can significantly increase contingencies in bid pricing. In essence, a realistic and prudent allocation of risks serves as the cornerstone for averting inflated bids during the pre-contract stage and minimizing claims and disputes during the post-contract stage.
ii. Fluctuation Clauses
Recently, I have seen a rise in escalation claims and disputes when contracts remain silent on the
provisions of fluctuation clauses. These claims and disputes are primarily driven by the far-reaching impacts of COVID-19-related shutdowns and restrictions, which have caused widespread disruptions in global supply chains and shortages of materials and labor. Eventually, these unprecedented events have resulted in a rate of inflation hitting four-decade highs throughout 20224, tremendously hindering cost predictability and stability. The unanticipated escalating costs of any given projects could severely erode Contractors’ profit when compensation from Owners is unavailable.
Contractors are anticipated to incorporate fluctuation costs into tender pricing when mechanisms to accommodate cost volatility are absent. A conservative approach has been to allow 2.5% to 3% escalation rates per annum. This approach, however, has come under extreme scrutiny since cost escalation have exceeded bid allowances.
Fluctuation mechanism can be established when Owners prefer Contractors to tender based on current prices, leveraging Contractors’ risks of price volatility over the contract term. Such mechanism typically defines the formulae and indices used for the calculation of escalation, enabling Contractors to recover a price increase above a
negotiated threshold either to material costs in overall or specific types of materials facing high risks of price volatility. As a result of transferring all or a part of the risks of cost changes to Owners, bidders are likely to reduce their contingency reserved for price surges in the bid price. Indeed, the introduction of fluctuation clauses to contracts could enhance the accuracy of pricing. However, fluctuation clauses are rarely found in construction contracts in Canada due to various concerns such as cost certainty and Owners’ financing capabilities (including construction loan from the perspectives of lenders).
In conclusion, construction pricing reflects Contractor’s best judgment on the compilation of estimate. It is widely recognized that construction projects are influenced by a multitude of factors, rendering it impossible for bidders a) to predict precisely on the costs of the projects, b) to capture the maximized profit on the investment and c) to win every bid. From a business perspective, instead of solely concentrating on maximizing profit in a single bid, it is more crucial for the bid to be set at an “optimal markup” for the business such that the revenue and profitability for a company can be maximized over the long run.
One more area worth exploring is how a company’s competitive
advantage can be established and sustained in competitive bidding situations, representing the capacity to either offer lower costs or command premium pricing, which other competitors may not be able to achieve. Such advantages can stem from superior management practices, accumulated experience, better relationships with other stakeholders, and advanced technology utilization. All in all, “smart pricing” entails a lot of consideration. Contemplate more before pricing; experience less worry thereafter. ■
References
1. Prime Minister of Canada (2024). Canada’s Housing Plan.
2. Independent Contractors and Businesses Association (2024). Construction Monitor –Construction Sector Robust – But Could Do More with Less Red Tape.
3. BuildForce Canada (2024). Residential Scenario Outlook 2024-2033.
4. Statistics Canada (2023). Consumer Price Index Fact Check: Measuring inflation during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.
Karen is a Professional Quantity Surveyor and Chartered Surveyor with experience of working on projects in Canada and Hong Kong. Karen continues to be involved in project planning/design, cost estimating including during the pre-contract, delivery, and post-construction phases of projects.
UNLOCKING YOUR POTENTIAL: PRACTICAL STEPS FOR ADVANCING YOUR CAREER AS A YOUNG QUANTITY SURVEYOR
By Mykola Pulnyev, PQS, MRICS, PMP, P.GSC
Are you a young quantity surveyor (YQS) eager to take your career to new heights? Look no further! Here is your roadmap to advancing success, packed with practical advice and actionable steps to propel you forward in the dynamic world of quantity surveying.
1 Define Your Path
Set clear, achievable career goals. Where do you see yourself in a short term 1 to 3 years, mid-term, 3 to 5 years and long term, 10 years and beyond? Define your aspirations and outline the steps needed to get there. Seek guidance from seasoned professionals. Do not be afraid to ask questions. Mentorship can provide invaluable insights and help you navigate career challenges more effectively, seek to get a mentor.
2 Seize Opportunities
Keep an eye on emerging trends and sectors within the construction industry. Identify areas of growth and explore opportunities for specialization. The Canadian construction industry is poised for growth in 2024 and beyond, primarily driven by the non-residential sector, including infrastructure, electrification, industrial, commercial, defence and institutional projects. Attend networking events, industry conferences, and webinars. Forge
connections with fellow professionals and stay updated on job openings and industry news.
3 Invest in Yourself
Continuously upgrade your skills. Take advantage of training programs, workshops, and online courses to stay relevant in a rapidly evolving field. Set an achievable target to allocate time for these activities.
Pursue certifications and accreditations, earn your CEC or PQS. Demonstrating expertise in niche areas can set you apart and open doors to new career opportunities.
4 Leverage Innovative Tools
Staying competitive requires adopting innovative tools like AI systems, cost estimation software, and project management apps. These technologies streamline cost analysis, planning, and collaboration across teams. Continuously upskilling in innovative solutions will increase your productivity and adaptability, making you a valuable asset in the rapidly evolving construction industry.
5 Cultivate Relationships
Build a strong professional network. Engage with peers, mentors, and industry leaders both online and offline. Seek feedback and mentorship from experienced professionals. Their insights can help you navigate challenges and accelerate your career growth.
Conclusion
By taking small, practical steps and staying proactive in your career development, you can unlock your full potential as a YQS. Define your path, seize opportunities, invest in yourself, leverage innovative tools, and cultivate meaningful relationships within the industry. With determination and persistence, you will pave the way for a fulfilling and successful career in quantity surveying. ■
Mykola’s deep understanding of the construction world comes from working for both public and private clients in property, transportation, food manufacturing, defense, and clean energy sectors. These diverse experiences have resulted in a balance of knowledge and creativity that drives the desire to advocate and promote Quantity Surveying Profession and practice best industry standards.
Mykola’s true desire is to guide clients towards a predictable and successful outcome.
Mykola holds an Advanced diploma in Construction Engineering Technology Management from George Brown College and a bachelor’s degree in applied science in Technology Management from Bemidji State University.
CANADIAN CONSTRUCTION –INDICATORS OF GROWTH, COMPOSITION AND CHANGES
By Ajibola Soboyejo, MSc, MRICS, PQS and Udayan Chatterjee, B.Tech, PMP, MRICS, PMI-SP
Recent data on the performance indicators of the Canadian Construction Industry offers valuable insights into its GDP, prevailing construction price trends, and its response to housing supply concerns across the country.
Construction Industry GDP and Investments
The Canadian construction industry plays a significant role in driving the country’s economic growth, contributing approximately 7% to its gross domestic product (GDP). However, recent data indicates a downward trend in the industry’s GDP, with a 3.5% year-over-year decline observed in January 2024. The decline in GDP is mirrored in the investment trends within the industry, particularly in residential building construction, which experienced a 1.7% decrease from the previous month and a 2.6% decline year-over-year. The primary contributor to this decline was Ontario, which experienced a notable $228 million decrease.
In contrast, non-residential construction investment showed promising growth, with a year-over-year increase of 3.8% and a slight uptick of 0.6% from the previous month. However, it’s important to note that the increase in construction price indices across provinces suggests that this growth may be attributed to rising construction costs rather than increased investments in projects. Stats Canada’s data highlights that the growth in non-residential construction is primarily driven by gains in institutional (+$32.3 million) and industrial (+$7.3 million) investments, offset by declines in commercial investment (-$26.2 million).
Overall, while Canada’s construction industry is experiencing a decrease in residential construction investment compared to the previous year, it continues to show resilience and adaptability, in the non-residential sector, at least prima facie
Housing Starts
In the first quarter of 2024, the construction industry witnessed a notable 16% year-over-year increase in housing starts. Despite Ontario leading in housing starts composition data, the province experienced declines of 18% and 7% compared to the previous month and year, respectively, showing the industry’s growth isn’t solely reliant on the performance of this densely populated province.
According to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), Toronto witnessed a significant decline in housing starts, primarily attributed to a decline in multi-unit projects. Conversely, Atlantic Canada, which
contributes the least to housing starts composition data, saw a remarkable 65% year-over-year increase.
The surge in overall housing starts was predominantly driven by increases in British Columbia (BC) and the Prairie provinces, due to their major contribution to the overall composition. However, except for BC, all provinces experienced decreases in housing starts compared to the previous month. Notably, Atlantic Canada saw a downturn in housing starts, dropping to 9,972 in March after reaching peaks of 12,059 and 17,998 in January and February 2024, respectively. Quebec remained relatively stable with no significant changes.
These mixed signals in housing starts indicating the industry’s varied response to the growing demand for housing amidst Canada’s expanding population. Despite the overall increase, regional disparities and fluctuations suggest a complex landscape within the industry that requires careful consideration and strategic planning.
Building Construction Price Index
The latest data from Statistics Canada reveals significant year-over-year increases in construction prices for both residential and non-residential projects across an 11-city index in the last quarter of 2023.
In Q4 2023, in residential construction, Toronto emerged as the frontrunner with an index of 201, followed by Calgary (182.3), Ottawa (176), and Edmonton (164.6). Across most cities, there’s a noticeable increase in the residential construction index compared to Q4 2022, with Toronto and Halifax leading, with increases of 10% and 9% respectively. The sole exception is Edmonton, which experienced a slight 1% year-over-year decline.
Similarly, in non-residential construction, all cities show an uptick in construction price index compared to the previous year, signaling an overall increase in construction costs across sectors within the industry. Ottawa leads the non-residential construction index chart with 159.6, boasting a year-over-year increase of 7.8%, closely followed by Vancouver with a 7.7% increase. Notably, Moncton leads the year-over-year surge for non-residential construction with an increase of 9.4%.
Overall, Toronto, Vancouver, Halifax, and Moncton exhibit significant increases in both residential and non-residential construction price indices, indicating substantial inflation in these cities. While others show modest increases in price indices, Edmonton stands out as the only city displaying a decline in the residential
*Based on available data from Statistics Canada as on April 15, 2024, as follows:
Change in Construction Industry Gross Domestic Product (GDP), as at Jan 2024: Statistics Canada. Table 36-10-0434-01 Gross domestic product (GDP) at basic prices, by industry, monthly (x 1,000,000).
Composition & Changes in Investments in Construction, as at Jan 2024: Statistics Canada. Table 34-10-0286-01 Investment in Building Construction.
Construction Price Index Across Metropolises, as at Q4 2023: Statistics Canada. Table 18-10-0276-01 Building construction price indexes, by type of building.
Change in Construction Price Index Across Metropolises, as at Q4 2023: Statistics Canada. Table 18-10-0276-01 Building construction price indexes, by type of building,
Housing Starts Composition, as at Mar 2024 (Residential Construction): CMHC-SCHL: CMHC Starts and Completion Survey, Market Absorption Survey.
Composition of Employment in All Industries Vs Construction, as at March 2024: Statistics Canada. Table 14-10-0022-01 Labour force characteristics by industry, monthly, unadjusted for seasonality (x 1,000).
construction price index. These trends signify a general escalation in construction prices across both residential and non-residential sectors, with specific cities experiencing pronounced increases.
Employment in the Canadian Construction Industry
In March 2024, the composition of employment within the construction industry underscores a notable gender disparity. Men continue to dominate the workforce, constituting 86% of industry employment, while women
Changes in Housing Starts, as at Mar 2024 (Residential Construction):
CMHC-SCHL: CMHC Starts and Completion Survey, Market Absorption Survey.
comprise a mere 14%. This contrasts with the more balanced gender distribution seen across the total working population of Canada, where genders are split approximately 52% to 48%. This persistent gap in gender representation within the construction sector emphasizes the ongoing challenge of achieving gender equality in this industry. ■
Ajibola is a quantity surveyor with expertise in cost management, design economics, BIM estimating, cost control, and project management. Holding both a Master’s and a Bachelor’s degree in Quantity Surveying, Ajibola has a rich professional background, having worked on commercial real estate projects in Nigeria and Canada, as well as data center projects in the United States.
Udayan is a commercial and project management professional with expertise in quantum assessment, schedule forensics, contract and claims management. He holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Electrical Engineering, Diploma in Construction Engineering and has worked on various large scale transportation, mining and commercial construction projects across North America, Europe and India.
1. Change in Construction Industry Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
3b. Change in Construction Price Index Across Metropolises
6. Composition of Employment in All Industries Vs Construction
4. Housing Starts Composition (Residential Construction)
5. Changes in Housing Starts (Residential Construction)
2. Composition & Changes in Investments in Construction
3a. Construction Price Index Across Metropolises
QUANTIFYING CARBON IN BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION
CASE STUDY FOR STRUCTURAL AND ARCHITECTURAL WORKS (EMBODIED CARBON) PART 3
By Ayo Daniel Abiola, P.Eng, PQS and Susan Neil, PQS(F), MRICS
In the third part of this series, the typical technique for assessing carbon quantities of buildings under construction is presented. Carbon quantities are mapped to the ICMS3 classifications and are assessable for each item in the CIQS elemental cost categories. As described in Part 1, embodied carbon may be considered as the “upfront” carbon which is emitted prior to a building’s use phase.1 The goal of carbon quantification is to deliver buildings with a reduced carbon footprint compared to the typical baseline. The Canadian Green Building Council (CaGBC) estimates2 that typical mid-rise office buildings currently have an embodied carbon footprint of 400 kgCO2e/m2 Partly to address the housing crisis, Canada is keen to increase its building stock which will increase the carbon footprint from the sector. Budget 2024, for example, includes an expanded $55 billion loan program for multi-apartment buildings. Given Canada’s increased investments in building construction along with its commitment to decarbonizing the building sector, the need to accurately measure and account for the sector’s embodied carbon emissions has never been greater.
To paraphrase the famous British scientist Lord Kelvin, what we do not measure and express in numbers, we cannot manage. Quantity Surveyors are uniquely suited to perform these measurements.
When to Assess Carbon
Ideally, embodied carbon should be assessed at various stages, just as the cost is estimated from the functional program stage to 100% design
completion. Earlier assessments, often an approximation, will rely on benchmark comparisons and “per square foot” quantities. Carbon assessed at later stages as the design matures with measurable material (and waste) quantities will be more accurate. Carbon assessment and monitoring during procurement and construction will ensure deviations that increase the final carbon footprint can be managed and minimized.
Figure 1: The image on the left is a concrete foundation (structural element), and on the right is a broadloom carpet finish (architectural elements). Both were generated by Google Imagen.
Figure 2: Example of an EPD for a EliteFlex™ Broadloom (Solution Dyed) carpet, valid until 2024-09-26.
2.02.020
a. ICMS Classification. See Appendix B in the ICMS3 publication.3
b. Material and product emission factors must align with the unit of the measured quantities.
architectural works.
Gathering Data
Material quantities and reliable data on a material’s emission factor are the key requirements to accurately assess the carbon embodied in building elements. The former is easily estimated or measured by quantity surveyors. Material emission factors are more challenging. They identify the carbon per quantity locked into a given material. These data may be obtained from public sources such as the environmental product declarations (EPDs) provided by specific manufacturers and industry bodies or from Life cycle inventory (LCI) databases. Additional sources of emission factors for building materials can be acquired through a life cycle assessment (LCA) of the carbon load in each material. EPDs are the recommended resource to obtain emission factors of the most common building materials. A suitable material EPD should be current and ideally match the procurement list items for construction, including manufacturing sources. Unlike an LCA, one limitation of EPDs is that they may not capture carbon emissions due to the transportation, storage, construction, and installation processes. As such, an as-built carbon assessment may be conducted to bridge these gaps.
Case study for Structural and Architectural Works
The Canadian Standard on Embodied Carbon in Construction focuses on structural materials, especially concrete. However, carbon can be assessed on any product. Here, we present an example of carbon assessed for structural works (concrete) and another for
interior architectural works (carpet) for a light commercial building with a gross floor area of 2,380 m2 . The perimeter foundation for this building substructure includes 45.4 cubic meters of 30 MPa concrete along with associated rebar, formwork, and labour. The Emission Intensity factor for the ready-mix concrete material at the specified strength was obtained by assessing its average industry EPD from a public database using the Industry EPD (Average), as identified in Table 1. For the interior finish, the EPD for the yarn material was available from the manufacturer (see Figure 2).
Table 1 shows the resulting carbon footprint assessed for each of these items, along with the corresponding ICMS3 reporting classifications.
Aggregates and Reporting
The example described above relied on accurate measurement of quantities (including waste) and careful application of the most suitable emissions factor to determine each element’s embodied carbon footprint. Once the carbon embodied in all applicable items has been determined, they are rolled into an aggregate for the construction works or elements of interest. The result can then be compared to the relevant baseline to determine any carbon savings (reduction) or carbon increase from the baseline.
ICMS3 provides a functional standard for reporting the outcome of carbon quantification. As an international standard, ICMS3 also allows practitioners and owners to compare the outcome of their carbon assessment with that of similar projects within the local or other geographical jurisdictions. ■
References
1. Abiola, A. (2023). Quantifying Carbon in Buildings and Construction, Part 1. Construction Economist. The Canadian Institute of Quantity Surveyors.
2. Canadian Green Building Council (2021). Embodied Carbon: A Primer for Buildings in Canada. Available online at cagbc.org.
3. ICMS Coalition. (2021, November). ICMS: Global Consistency in Presenting Construction Life Cycle Costs and Carbon Emissions.
Ayo is the Manager for the recently established Hanscomb’s Saskatchewan office, senior mechanical quantity surveyor and sustainability expert. Ayo’s experiences include energy and carbon consulting for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional (ICI) facilities. Ayo is also licensed to practice engineering in Ontario and Saskatchewan. He is a Certified Energy Manager and a WELL Accredited Professional, having the skills and experience to foster health and wellness in the built environment. Ayo lives in Regina, Saskatchewan.
Susan is President of Hanscomb and leads an independent Quantity Surveying firm specializing in major infrastructure projects. A Fellow of the CIQS, RICS member, and former CACQS President, Susan is a vocal advocate for the profession. She passionately champions the independent oversight of capital investments and standardized carbon measurement in construction projects, emphasizing the pivotal role of Quantity Surveyors. Susan lives in Hamilton, Ontario.
Next, Part 4 – Case Study for Mechanical and Electrical Services (Operational Carbon)
Table 1: Example of carbon assessment for structural and
ONTARIO DIVISIONAL COURT WEIGHS IN ON PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS IN INTERIM ADJUDICATIONS: LEDORE INVESTMENTS V. DIXIN CONSTRUCTION
By Sahil Shoor
In Ledore Investments v. Dixin Construction,1 the Ontario Divisional Court held that procedural fairness constitutes a valid reason for judicial review of a determination of an adjudicator under Ontario’s Construction Act
Judicial review of an interim adjudicator’s determination is only available in the limited circumstances set out in section 13.18(5) of the Construction Act.2 Fairness to the parties is addressed in paragraph 5, which provides that an interim adjudication decision may be set aside where “the procedures followed in the adjudication did not accord with the procedures to which the adjudication was subject under this Part, and the failure to accord prejudiced the applicant’s right to a fair adjudication.” 3
In the adjudication decision under review in Ledore Investments, the adjudicator’s determination turned on a point neither party had raised nor made submissions on. The dispute before the adjudicator had concerned, materially, three invoices for which the subcontractor sought payment from the contractor.4 The contractor had been paid by the project owner, who was not a party to the proceedings. The contractor argued it was entitled to withhold payment to the subcontractor as set-off for deficiencies and delays. The subcontractor alleged that the contractor had not delivered a notice of non-payment within the time required under section 6.5(4) of the Construction Act, and thus was obligated to pay the invoices under the prompt payment scheme.
The adjudicator concluded that the contractor’s failure to deliver notice of non-payment would have precluded them from relying on set-off, except that the contractor had not delivered a “proper invoice” 5 to the owner This lack of “proper invoice” – even though it was the contractor’s omission and not the subcontractor’s –meant that the prompt payment provisions were not engaged, and the failure to give notice of non-payment was not fatal to the contractor’s set-off argument.
The “proper invoice” issue was not raised by either party in the adjudication. This was acknowledged by the adjudicator, who commented that if the issue had been known or realized by the subcontractor prior to issuing the Notice of Adjudication, “perhaps the adjudication could have been structured in a way to deal with [the contractor]’s failure in this regard.” 6
The subcontractor sought judicial review, arguing, among other things, that there was a breach of procedural fairness. The Divisional Court allowed the application, concluding that there had been a breach of procedural fairness; and remitted the matter back to the adjudicator.
The key points from the Court’s reasons include:
• Procedural fairness is available as a ground for judicial review : even though “procedural fairness” is not expressly incorporated into paragraph 13.18(5) (5), section 13.6 provides that an adjudication shall be conducted in accordance with the procedures set out in, among other things, the regulations; provides that the code of conduct for adjudicators shall include principles of procedural fairness. Additionally, the Court has jurisdiction to intervene with respect to serious breaches of procedural fairness.7
• Some procedural fairness protections apply even in interim adjudication: while the subcontractor was not entitled to the full range of procedural protections that might apply in a final arbitration or hearing, “the right to be heard on the determinative issue is a central component of even more limited procedural protections.” 8
• Adjudicators’ power to issue directions includes the power to request further written submissions on a determinative issue: Although the interim adjudication scheme focuses on efficiency, an adjudicator, who is authorized under subsection 13.12(1) to issue directions respecting the conduct of the adjudication, is not precluded from requesting further submissions from the parties.
The Court rejected the contractor’s argument that an adjudicator’s “inquisitorial role” empowers them to proactively determine facts and issues: “the adjudicator’s entitlement to take initiative in ascertaining facts and law does not override an experienced party’s fundamental right to be heard on the determinative issue.” 9
• The appropriate remedy is to remit the matter to the adjudicator: The Court declined the subcontractor’s invitation to substitute its own determination the adjudicator’s. Rather, this matter was not one of the “limited scenarios” warranting departure from the general rule that the matter be remitted back to the original decision maker.10
For the parties involved in adjudications, this decision underscores the need to balance the “fast and informal” 11 interim adjudication process with the reality that procedural protections inevitably involve some degree of formality and expenditure of time. Familiarity with the process and being able to determine where efficiencies can be realized without unduly compromising fairness will be key to ensuring interim adjudication remains a useful tool for parties to deal with disputes. ■
References
1. 2024 ONSC 598 (Div Ct) [Ledore].
2. RSO 1990, c C.30 [Construction Act ].
3. Although the applicant had also argued paragraph 13.18(5) (3) (“[t]he determination was of a…matter entirely unrelated to the subject of the adjudication”), the Court concluded they did not need to consider this provision in light of their finding on paragraph 13.18(5)(5).
4. As noted in the decision at paragraph 7, additional relief had been sought before the adjudicator; however the focus of the judicial review application was three unpaid invoices and attendant holdbacks.
5. Defined in section 6.1 of the Construction Act
6. Ledore at para. 20.
7. Ledore at para. 25.
8. Ledore at para. 28.
9. Ledore at para. 36
10. Ledore at para. 42, citing Thales DIS Canada Inc. v. Ontario (Transportation), 2023 ONCA 866, at para. 102.
11. Anatolia Tile at para. 3.
Gowling WLG partner Sahil Shoor is a leading litigation and dispute resolution partner with a wide-ranging practice focused on major construction and infrastructure projects across Canada and internationally. Called to the Bar in Ontario and British Columbia, Sahil focuses his national practice on the sectors that help drive Canada’s economic development, including commercial construction, real estate development, infrastructure/civil works, power/energy (nuclear, hydro-electric, power generating stations) and major public-private partnership/transit projects. He has appeared before courts/arbitration panels (domestic and international) in Ontario, Newfoundland and Labrador, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia.
ALL ABOUT DESIGNATIONS
In 1988, CIQS obtained the marks PQS (Professional Quantity Surveyor) and the French equivalent ÉCA (Économistes en Construction Agréé). These designations replaced MCIQS. Later, CIQS also obtained the official marks CEC (Construction Estimator Certified) and ECC (Estimateur en Construction Certifié).
CIQS grants members a license to use these designations, provided they are qualified and in good standing. Here is a list of acceptable (provided you are a qualified member of CIQS and in good standing) and unacceptable designations:
Professional Quantity Surveyor
Construction Estimator Certified
Économistes en Construction Agréé
ÉCA
Estimateur en Construction Certifié
ECC
Professional Quantity Surveyor (Fellow)
PQS(F)
Économistes en Construction Agréé (F)
ÉCA(F)
Construction Estimator Certified (Fellow)
CEC(F)
Estimateur en Construction Certifié (F)
ECC(F)
PQS (in training)
PQS(R)
PQS (Intern)
AND ITS IMPACT ON THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY REFLECTIONS ON CANADA’S 2024 BUDGET
On April 16th, 2024, Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister, Chrystia Freeland, stood before the House of Commons to table her fourth budget. The stakes for the Liberals could not be higher right now as the political mood in Canada reflects a growing dissatisfaction with the Liberal government, evidenced by sagging poll numbers and a sense of disillusionment towards Prime Minister Trudeau. Canadians are increasingly tuning out from Trudeau’s leadership, signaling a shift in public sentiment and a desire for change.
Traditionally, government budget announcements are shrouded in secrecy, with details closely guarded until the official release. However, this year marked a departure from tradition, as the government embarked on a tour of pre-budget announcements, almost resembling an electoral campaign. Instead of the customary veil of secrecy, there was a concerted effort to engage with the public and garner support for key budget initiatives through a series of pre-budget announcements across Canada. This shift in approach reflects a strategic decision to build momentum and generate buy-in for the budget priorities, potentially signaling a more politically charged budgetary process.
As a Public Affairs Associate deeply entrenched in the realm of policy analysis and governmental affairs, the unveiling of Canada’s 2024 budget has once again brought the government’s spending strategy to the forefront, provoking conversations about fiscal responsibility, economic growth, and the welfare of Canadians. Centred around the government’s messaging theme of generational fairness, one aspect stood out prominently – the substantial investment in housing. While the infusion of funds into this critical sector promises to address pressing societal needs, it also brings forth a unique set of challenges, particularly for the construction industry, which I have been closely observing and analyzing.
From the onset, the government’s commitment to bolstering housing affordability and accessibility elicited a sense of optimism. The allocation of significant resources towards the construction of affordable housing units, coupled with measures to incentivize home ownership, holds immense potential to alleviate the housing crisis plaguing many Canadian communities. As someone who has witnessed firsthand the detrimental effects of inadequate housing on individuals and families, I cannot overstate the importance of such initiatives in fostering social equity and economic stability.
However, beneath the veneer of optimism lies a complex web of challenges that the construction industry must navigate in the wake of this substantial investment. Foremost among these challenges is the looming specter of supply chain disruptions and material shortages, exacerbated by global economic uncertainties and geopolitical tensions. The unprecedented demand for construction materials, coupled with logistical bottlenecks, labour shortages, and unprecedently levels of immigration, threatens to impede the timely execution of housing projects envisioned under the new budget.
The Prime Minister’s announcement of 3.87 million new homes by 2031 may be deemed unrealistic based on the historical average number of new construction builds in Canada. Given that the average annual rate of new housing construction in recent years has been significantly lower than the projected target, achieving such a substantial increase within the specified timeframe would require an unprecedented acceleration in building activity. Factors such as regulatory hurdles, labor shortages, and supply chain disruptions further compound the challenge, casting doubt on the feasibility of realizing the stated goal within the designated timeline.
By Brandon Vieira
Furthermore, the scale and scope of the government’s housing initiatives necessitate robust regulatory frameworks and oversight mechanisms to safeguard against potential misuse of funds and ensure accountability. As a Public Affairs Associate, I am committed to advocating for transparent and accountable governance practices that uphold the public trust and foster confidence in the efficacy of government interventions. Only through diligent oversight and collaborative engagement can we mitigate the risks associated with large-scale investments and ensure that taxpayer dollars are being deployed judiciously and effectively.
Amidst these challenges, however, lies a silver lining – an unprecedented opportunity for collaboration and innovation within the construction industry. As the demand for sustainable and energy-efficient housing continues to rise, there is a pressing need for industry stakeholders to embrace emerging technologies and adopt best practices that promote environmental stewardship and resilience. From modular construction techniques to the integration of renewable energy systems, the possibilities for transformative change are boundless.
In conclusion, Canada’s 2024 budget marks a pivotal moment in addressing the housing crisis and fostering inclusive communities. While the infusion of funds holds promise, it presents formidable challenges for the construction industry, underscoring the need for strategic solutions and collaborative efforts to realize the budget’s objectives. ■
Brandon is a Public Affairs Associate with Impact Public Affairs in Ottawa, Ontario. Brandon works with a variety of clients to engage government on Canadian construction issues, including the Canadian Institute of Quantity Surveyors.
ENHANCING PROJECT VALUE THROUGH VALUE MANAGEMENT
By Ibrahim Oladapo, PQS, PMP
As construction projects grow in complexity and scale, value management emerges as a crucial methodology for balancing costs with functionality and quality. This article briefly explores the implementation of value management techniques within construction projects as well as the role that Professional Quantity Surveyors (PQS) can play in its successful implementation.
Value management is a systematic approach used to improve the value of a project by optimizing its functions, reducing costs where feasible, and ensuring project objectives are achieved without compromising quality. This approach goes beyond mere cost-cutting; it entails identifying and satisfying the needs of stakeholders while minimizing waste.
At the core of value management lies the principle of delivering maximum value for every dollar spent. In the realm of construction projects, value management plays a pivotal role in optimizing resources, enhancing efficiency, and ensuring project goals are achieved. Successful implementation of value management
on projects requires a structured approach typically involving the following elements:
Establishing clear objectives by defining project goals, performance criteria, and budget constraints to guide the effective implementation of value management.
Forming cross-functional and multi-disciplinary teams comprising owners, architects, engineers, contractors, and other stakeholders to bring diverse perspectives to the process of value management. Conducting collaborative workshops and brainstorming sessions to generate innovative ideas and identify opportunities for achieving improvements in value. Assessing and evaluating different design and construction alternatives based on their potential to deliver value in terms of cost, performance, and quality. Implementing plans and recommendations, translating identified value improvement opportunities into actionable plans, and integrating them into project execution strategy.
Project teams implementing value management foster a culture of innovation and continuous improvement. They also prioritize open communication and collaboration among stakeholders, embrace flexibility to adapt to changing project requirements and constraints, and utilize technology and data analytics to support decision-making and optimize resource allocation. These teams are also typically equipped through regular training on value management processes, tools, and techniques to maintain the quality and effectiveness of their efforts.
Tools and techniques used in value management include but are not limited to life-cycle costing, cost-benefit analysis, function analysis, value management workshops, and benchmarking. These techniques assist in collecting information, analyzing data, brainstorming, and decision-making. Selected based on the goals of the project, its complexity, and the value management team’s preferences, these techniques help streamline the value management process. For example, on a residential project, functional analysis could be applied by reviewing the design and
optimizing the floor plan to decrease the overall built-up area by 10% without affecting living space, thereby saving on materials and labor. On a bridge construction project, the outcome of life-cycle costing could be using high-performance steel costing 20% more but extending the bridge’s lifespan by 30 years, thereby reducing maintenance cost and needs.
Professional Quantity Surveyors (PQS) are equipped with a unique set of skills and expertise that make them indispensable in the value management process. Their thorough understanding of construction costs, project management, and procurement processes positions them as key facilitators and participants in maximizing value throughout the project lifecycle.
Expertise that PQS can provide on projects include reviewing project programs, designs, and conducting cost studies to identify opportunities for cost optimization, value enhancement, and risk mitigation. Another expertise is facilitating Value
Management Workshops, which bring together stakeholders from various disciplines to collaboratively explore value improvement opportunities. These workshops foster innovation, promote collaboration, and drive consensus towards achieving project objectives.
Evaluating project processes and components can also be carried out to identify inefficiencies, redundancies, and areas for improvement. Optimizing processes and selecting cost-effective components contribute to overall project value while maintaining quality standards. Finally, the preparation of actionable recommendations for optimizing project value can be provided based on comprehensive analysis and expertise. These recommendations are typically tailored to the specific needs and objectives of the projects, ensuring alignment with stakeholder expectations.
In the realm of construction projects, value management emerges as a powerful and available tool for optimizing costs
Your Cost Consulting Professionals
A.W. Hooker Associates Ltd., offers leading edge Cost Consulting with a comprehensive portfolio of services from a team of Professional Quantity Surveyors; including, Architectural, Structural, Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, Independent Certification, Loan Monitoring, Expert Witness, Adjudication and Client Representation roles.
JOIN OUR TEAM
If you have the skillset in any of the above disciplines, i in particular Intermediate Electrical Quantity Surveyors, we would be interested in receiving your resume as a first step in joining our team.
without compromising quality and functionality. The expertise and value-added services offered by PQS play a crucial role in maximizing the potential of value management. By leveraging their skills in project cost management, procurement, and value optimization, PQS can contribute significantly to the success of construction projects across diverse sectors and landscapes. ■
Ibrahim’s career spans three continents (Africa, Europe, and North America) and over 18 years in consulting, contracting, academia, and public service. He possesses a master’s degree in project and enterprise management and a bachelor’s degree in quantity surveying. He is a Cost Manager with the Government of Alberta and provides expertise for the planning and delivery of the province’s vertical infrastructure projects. Ibrahim is the Education Director of CIQS and is based in Edmonton, Alberta.
CONGRATULATIONS TO THE FOLLOWING DESIGNATION HOLDERS WHO HAVE QUALIFIED AS A PQS OR CEC
CIQS – British Columbia
Bahman Basirat, CEC
Balraj Singh Garcha, CEC
Chad Jones, CEC
Chen Xu, CEC
Chiaka Opara, CEC
Dustin Van Den Eerenbeemt, CEC
Ilze Lombard, PQS
Jason Short, CEC
Jeremy J. Rondeau, PQS
Jordan Star, PQS
Ksenia Khisamova, CEC
Malalage Buddhini Peiris, PQS
Mark James Canthal, CEC
Mike Jackson, CEC
Ron Petkau, CEC
Rufu Jin, CEC
Tim IkHyun Kim, PQS
Xiuying Qian, CEC
Yun Yun (Grace) Cao, PQS
CIQS – Maritimes
Marlu Cordero Arquitola, CEC
Nelson Javier Diaz, CEC
Parteek Kaur Smagh, CEC
Remi Richard, CEC
CIQS – Members at Large
Aaron Nii Lantei Heward Mills, CEC
Adebola Matthew Adeyera, CEC
Chun Tung Ko, PQS
Henry Mukiibi, CEC
Holali Kofi Tonyigah, CEC
Pirashanth Mahathevan, PQS
Reuben Cheng, PQS
CIQS –
Ontario
Ahmed Oluwatobi Saibu, CEC
Andrew Erlandson, PQS
Anshuman Singh, CEC
Asseel Elfarra, PQS
Ayoola Tobun, CEC
Batool Mahdi, CEC
Eshan Patil, CEC
Fadi Hammudeh, PQS
Faisal Halim, CEC
Fritz Hagen, CEC
Hannah Whyte-Fagundes, CEC
Hans Herbert Ocampo Valientes, CEC
Ira Kadare, CEC
Jad Jawad, CEC
Jason Amaral, CEC
John Frederick Mendoza, CEC
Joshua K. Logan, CEC
Jung Hyung An, PQS
Kellie Chang Liu, CEC
Kelvin Mitchell, CEC
Kenneth Kwong, PQS
Lu Xu, PQS
Mahid Hossain, CEC
Marianella Arevalo, CEC
Maziar Zareechian, CEC
Michael St.Cyr, CEC
Navid Saghebi, PQS
Olaniyi Folusho Olayemi, CEC
Ozgur Mehmet Duman, CEC
Parmjit Kandola, CEC
Patrick Franaszczyk, CEC
Rahul Prabhudayal Agrawal, PQS
Raj Upendra Mithani, PQS
Roshiel Tagaban Macalipis, CEC
Ryan Paterson, PQS
Sakku Jacob, CEC
Samuel Oluwagbenga Owolabi, PQS
Scott Plume, CEC
Sean Po, CEC
Shigirayi Christopher Zimunhu, PQS
Sourav Behera, CEC
Sunday Egbe Afianmagbon, CEC
Thisaru Kithmal Wickramathantri, CEC
Wai Hei Chan, PQS
Yong Tan, PQS
Yuanfang Huang, PQS
Yue Cao, CEC
Yuet Ching Chan, CEC
CIQS – Prairies and NT
Ademola Oluwatosin Ojo, PQS
Adeola Onifade, PQS
Alfredo Motta, PQS
Andrew Drysdale, PQS
Brenda D. Tubig, CEC
Eduard Langemann, PQS
Hamza Mohammed, CEC
Hernan Castro, CEC
Jayaweera Arachchige Tilani Malsha Perera, CEC
Kathryn Bailey, CEC
Kristian James Wenaus, CEC
Lawrence Rey Arafol Medina, CEC
Marwan Alatrouni, CEC
Rotimi Adedeji Adeniyi, CEC
Thomas Sypkes, CEC
Vincent Asuquo Ekpo, PQS
Wilmer Pontevedra Bajao, CEC
CIQS – Québec
Castalia Nunes Tavares, ÉCA/PQS
Elnaz Ghanbari, CEC/ECC
Koon Fung Ho, CEC/ECC
Nathalie Raad, CEC/ECC
CORRECTION NOTICE
The advertorial in the Spring 2023 issue titled “Building Permits: An Overview of Processes and Practices in Ontario” did not include the names of the authors. Authors of the article are Gemma Healy-Murphy, Partner, Litigation and Dispute Resolution, McMillan LLP, Patrick Pinho, Associate, Construction & Infrastructure, McMillan LLP, and Kailey Sutton, Partner, McMillan LLP. Construction Economist regrets this oversight.
Commercial Management Expertise
Project delivery encounters challenges that increasingly require Commercial Management Expertise, for example:
Cost:
Is your estimate accurate and do you require assurance on the final cost of construction?
Opportunity
Establish the accuracy of estimates
Review sufficiency of final cost projections
Provide value engineering solutions
Schedule:
Is the schedule for construction and schedule updates reliable and do delays require analysis?
Opportunity
Review completeness and integrity of schedules
Analyze delays to the schedule
Track performance relative to baseline
Changes:
Do actual or anticipated changes require evaluation or assessment upon receipt?
Opportunity
Quantify and evaluate changes
Review contractor submissions
Support the process of resolution
Scope:
Is the scope aligned with the schedule/cost and is there potential for improvement?
Opportunity
www.lakelandconsulting.com
Carry out triangular reviews (scope, schedule, cost)
Identify areas for improvement
Advise on contract documentation
As part of a solution-based approach, Lakeland is adept at supporting Project delivery.
Renew Canada’s Top100 Projects Report.