Construction Procurement Routes
Why Procurement Route Selection Matters
The procurement route determines how a construction project is organised — who designs, who builds, who carries the risk, and how the parties are contracted to each other. It is one of the earliest and most consequential decisions the client and their advisers make. Choose the wrong procurement route and you build in problems that no amount of project management can fix: adversarial relationships, misaligned incentives, cost overruns driven by design changes that should have been anticipated, or programmes that are longer than they need to be because design and construction cannot overlap.
For quantity surveyors, procurement route selection is not an academic exercise — it shapes the QS’s entire scope of work. The method of cost control, the form of contract, the pricing mechanism, the risk allocation, the timing and content of the bill of quantities, the approach to variations, and the strategy for managing cost certainty all flow from the procurement route chosen at the outset. A QS who understands procurement routes can advise the client on the trade-offs between cost certainty, programme speed, quality control, and risk transfer — and can ensure that the commercial arrangements support the project’s objectives rather than working against them.
This article provides a practical guide to the principal construction procurement routes used in the UK, covering how each works, where it is best suited, the contract forms that support it, and the QS’s role within each. It includes a worked comparison using a 2,000 m² primary school project, illustrating how the same building would be procured, priced, and managed under each route. The article also covers the Construction Playbook requirements that now govern public sector procurement, and the implications of the Procurement Act 2023 for construction contracts.
Traditional Procurement (Design–Bid–Build)
How It Works
Traditional procurement separates design from construction. The client appoints a design team — architect, structural engineer, building services engineer, and quantity surveyor — who develop the design to full technical detail before the project is tendered to contractors. The contractor prices the completed design, usually from a bill of quantities prepared under NRM 2, and is responsible only for constructing what the design team has specified. Design responsibility remains with the client’s professional team throughout.
The sequence is linear: design first, then tender, then build. There is no overlap between design and construction. The contractor has no design input unless the contract includes specific contractor-designed portions (CDPs), which are increasingly common for specialist elements such as structural steelwork connections, curtain walling, or mechanical and electrical installations.
When to Use It
Traditional procurement suits projects where the client requires maximum cost certainty before committing to construction, where the design needs to be fully developed and approved before work starts, or where quality and specification are more important than programme speed. It is the default route for many public sector projects where accountability for expenditure requires a firm price before works commence. It is well suited to straightforward building projects where the scope is clear, the design is unlikely to change significantly during construction, and the client has sufficient time for the full design-then-build sequence.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Advantages. The client receives competitive tenders based on a complete design, providing high cost certainty at the point of contract. The bill of quantities provides a transparent pricing document and a sound basis for valuing variations. The client retains control over design quality and specification. Roles and responsibilities are clearly defined — the design team designs, the contractor builds. The QS has a full NRM 2 bill to work with, making interim valuations, cost reporting, and final account negotiation straightforward.
Disadvantages. The overall programme is the longest of any route because design and construction are sequential — the contractor cannot start until the design is complete. Late design changes are expensive because the contractor prices variations against the contract rates, often with limited competitive pressure. The contractor has no opportunity to contribute buildability advice during the design stage, which can result in designs that are more expensive or slower to construct than they need to be. If the design is incomplete or ambiguous at tender stage, the cost certainty advantage is undermined by variations and claims during construction.
Contract Forms
The standard contract for traditional procurement is the JCT Standard Building Contract (SBC/Q 2024) where quantities are provided, or SBC/XQ 2024 where they are not. For intermediate-value projects, the JCT Intermediate Building Contract (IBC 2024) is commonly used. For smaller projects (typically below £500,000), the JCT Minor Works Building Contract (MW 2024) provides a simpler form. Under the NEC4 suite, traditional procurement is delivered using Option A (priced contract with activity schedule) or Option B (priced contract with bill of quantities), with Option B being the closer equivalent to the JCT with-quantities approach.
QS Role Under Traditional Procurement
The QS has the fullest role under traditional procurement. During the pre-contract stage, the QS prepares cost estimates and cost plans under NRM 1, produces the bill of quantities under NRM 2, advises on tender lists, analyses returned tenders, and prepares the tender report. During construction, the QS prepares interim valuations, assesses and values variations, monitors cost against the contract sum, prepares cost reports, and negotiates the final account. The QS also advises on contractual and commercial matters including extensions of time, loss and expense, and the financial implications of design changes.
Design and Build (D&B)
How It Works
Under design and build, the client appoints a single contractor who is responsible for both designing and constructing the project. The client sets out the requirements — typically through an employer’s requirements document — and the contractor responds with contractor’s proposals showing how those requirements will be met. Once the contract is signed, the contractor takes on the design risk: if the design does not meet the employer’s requirements, the contractor is responsible for putting it right at their own cost.
In practice, most D&B projects are not designed from scratch by the contractor. The client’s design team typically develops the design to RIBA Stage 2 or 3 before it is novated (transferred) to the contractor, who completes the detailed design and builds the project. This novated design and build approach means the same architects and engineers who started the design continue to develop it, but they are now employed by the contractor rather than the client. The point at which the design is handed over — sometimes called the “employer’s design freeze” — determines how much design risk transfers to the contractor and how much control the client retains over design quality.
When to Use It
D&B suits projects where single-point responsibility is important to the client, where programme speed matters (because design and construction can overlap), where the client is willing to accept a degree of reduced control over detailed design in exchange for cost certainty and risk transfer, or where the project is relatively standard and the client’s requirements can be clearly specified. It is widely used for commercial, industrial, and residential development projects, and is increasingly used on public sector projects where the client’s in-house team is small and the transfer of design risk is attractive.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Advantages. Single-point responsibility means the client has one party to deal with if things go wrong — the contractor cannot blame the designer because they are the designer. The programme can be shorter than traditional procurement because the contractor can start construction on the early packages (foundations, frame) while the later design packages (finishes, fit-out) are still being developed. The lump sum price provides cost certainty, and the risk of design errors sits with the contractor rather than the client. The contractor has the opportunity to apply buildability expertise during the design stage, potentially reducing cost and programme.
Disadvantages. The client has less control over detailed design quality. Specification drift is a real risk — the contractor, carrying the cost risk, has an incentive to use the cheapest materials and methods that comply with the employer’s requirements, even if these are not what the client’s design team originally envisaged. The employer’s requirements document must be precise and comprehensive; vague or incomplete requirements lead to disputes about what is and is not included in the lump sum. Variations are expensive because the contractor prices them without competitive pressure, and there is limited transparency over the pricing build-up. The QS’s role in cost control during construction is more limited because there is no bill of quantities to use as a valuation baseline.
Contract Forms
The standard contract is the JCT Design and Build Contract (DB 2024). Under NEC4, Option A (priced contract with activity schedule) is the most common choice for D&B because it provides a lump sum mechanism without requiring a bill of quantities. Option C (target contract with activity schedule) is also used where the client wants to share risk and reward with the contractor — the target cost mechanism incentivises the contractor to deliver below the target, with savings shared between the parties.
QS Role Under Design and Build
The QS role shifts under D&B. Pre-contract, the QS prepares cost plans under NRM 1, drafts or reviews the employer’s requirements to ensure they are sufficiently detailed and measurable, analyses the contractor’s proposals and pricing, and advises on value for money. During construction, the QS assesses applications for payment against the activity schedule or contract sum analysis, values variations (typically on a fair rates and prices basis rather than against bill rates), monitors cost, and advises on commercial issues. The QS must pay particular attention to the employer’s requirements document — if it is insufficiently detailed, the contractor will argue that items are not included; if it is overly prescriptive, it may conflict with the contractor’s proposals and create ambiguity about which document takes precedence.
Two-Stage Tendering
How It Works
Two-stage tendering is not a procurement route in itself but a tendering mechanism that can be applied to either traditional or D&B procurement. In the first stage, contractors are selected competitively on the basis of their preliminaries pricing, overhead and profit percentages, and sometimes a schedule of rates — but not a full priced bill. A preferred contractor is appointed at the end of Stage 1, usually under a pre-construction services agreement (PCSA). During the second stage, the preferred contractor works alongside the design team, contributing buildability advice, supply chain pricing, and programme input as the design develops. The full contract sum is negotiated (not tendered) during Stage 2, based on work packages that the contractor procures competitively from their supply chain.
When to Use It
Two-stage tendering suits complex projects where early contractor involvement is valuable — for example, projects with difficult site conditions, complex structures, tight programmes, or specialist construction methods. It is commonly used on large-scale projects where the design is not sufficiently developed for single-stage competitive tendering, but the client wants to start the pre-construction process early. It enables the contractor to influence the design for buildability, programme, and cost efficiency while the design team retains responsibility for the design. It is often used on education, healthcare, and mixed-use projects where the programme benefit of overlapping design development with contractor input outweighs the reduced competitive pressure on the second-stage pricing.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Advantages. Early contractor involvement brings construction expertise to the design stage, improving buildability and reducing the risk of expensive design changes during construction. The programme can be compressed because the contractor can start enabling works and procure long-lead items while the design is still developing. The client retains design team control over design quality. Supply chain packages are competitively tendered, providing a degree of market testing even though the main contractor is not competitively priced. The relationship between the design team and contractor is collaborative rather than adversarial.
Disadvantages. The main contractor’s overhead, profit, and preliminaries are agreed on a limited competitive basis at Stage 1 — there is no lump-sum competition for the full contract sum. The client relies on the QS to ensure that the Stage 2 negotiation delivers value for money against benchmark data. There is a risk that the preferred contractor, knowing they have been selected, will not price as keenly as they would in open competition. If the Stage 2 negotiation fails to reach agreement, the client faces the cost and delay of starting a new procurement process. Cost certainty is only achieved at the end of Stage 2, which may be well into the construction phase if design and construction overlap.
Contract Forms
The Stage 1 appointment is typically under a PCSA — either a bespoke document or the JCT Pre-Construction Services Agreement (PCSA 2024). The Stage 2 construction contract is usually JCT SBC/Q 2024 (if traditional with quantities) or JCT DB 2024 (if D&B). Under NEC4, the same approach works with the contractor engaged under an NEC4 Professional Service Contract for pre-construction services, followed by an NEC4 Engineering and Construction Contract (ECC) Option A, B, or C for the construction phase.
QS Role Under Two-Stage Tendering
The QS role is particularly demanding under two-stage tendering. At Stage 1, the QS prepares the tender documentation, analyses Stage 1 returns, and recommends a preferred contractor. During Stage 2, the QS benchmarks every work package price against independent cost data, challenges the contractor’s pricing where it does not represent value for money, negotiates the contract sum, and monitors the overall cost against the approved budget. The QS must maintain an independent cost check throughout Stage 2 to ensure that the absence of full competition does not result in the client paying above market rates. During construction, the QS role is similar to traditional procurement — interim valuations, variation assessment, cost reporting, and final account.
Management Contracting
How It Works
Under management contracting, the client appoints a management contractor who manages the construction process but does not carry out any of the physical work themselves. The management contractor is appointed early, typically at RIBA Stage 2, and works alongside the design team to plan the construction programme, break the project into work packages, and procure each package competitively from specialist works contractors. Each works contractor has a direct contract with the management contractor (not the client). The management contractor is paid a fee (typically a percentage of the total construction cost) plus the prime cost of the works packages and their own preliminary costs.
When to Use It
Management contracting suits large, complex projects where programme speed is critical and the design is likely to evolve during the early stages of construction. It is most appropriate where the project involves a large number of specialist packages, where early start on site is essential, and where the client has a strong in-house or consultant team capable of managing the design and maintaining quality oversight. It has historically been used on major commercial, retail, and mixed-use projects where the value of programme savings outweighs the loss of cost certainty.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Advantages. Maximum programme speed — construction can start while the design is still developing, because each work package is tendered and let individually as the design for that package is completed. The management contractor provides professional construction management expertise from RIBA Stage 2 onwards, contributing to buildability, programme planning, and supply chain strategy. Each work package is competitively tendered, providing market-tested pricing. The client retains full control over design quality and specification through their own design team.
Disadvantages. The client carries the construction cost risk — there is no lump sum or guaranteed maximum price. The total cost is the sum of all works packages plus the management contractor’s fee and preliminaries, and this total is not known until the last package is let. If works packages come in over budget, or if design changes increase the scope, the client pays. The management contractor has limited financial incentive to control cost because their fee is a percentage of the total — a higher total means a higher fee. The client needs a strong QS team to manage cost across potentially dozens of individual work packages, each with its own contract, payment schedule, and final account.
Contract Forms
The standard contract is the JCT Management Building Contract (MC 2024), with works packages let under the JCT Management Works Contract (MCWK/C 2024). Under NEC4, management contracting can be delivered using Option F (management contract), where the management contractor is paid the defined cost plus a fee and the works are procured through subcontracts.
QS Role Under Management Contracting
The QS role is extensive and demanding. The QS prepares cost plans, advises on work package breakdown, prepares tender documents for each package, analyses returns, recommends awards, prepares interim valuations for each works contractor, assesses variations, monitors overall project cost against the approved budget, and prepares individual final accounts for each works package as well as the management contractor’s own account. The QS must maintain a rolling cost report that aggregates all package costs, anticipated final accounts, and uncommitted design risk to give the client a single authoritative view of the project’s financial position. On a large project with 40–60 work packages, this is a substantial workload requiring a structured and disciplined approach to cost management.
Construction Management
How It Works
Construction management is similar in principle to management contracting, but with one critical structural difference: each trade contractor has a direct contract with the client, not with the construction manager. The construction manager is a consultant — engaged under a professional services appointment — who manages, coordinates, and supervises the trade contractors on the client’s behalf. The construction manager does not enter into contracts with the trade contractors and does not carry construction risk. The client holds every trade contract directly and is responsible for paying each trade contractor, managing interfaces between packages, and bearing the risk of delay or default by any individual trade contractor.
When to Use It
Construction management is used on large, fast-track projects where the client is sophisticated, experienced in construction procurement, and willing to carry cost and interface risk in exchange for maximum programme speed and direct control over every package. It is most commonly seen on major commercial developments — particularly in the City of London and Canary Wharf — where programme value (the rental income generated by earlier completion) justifies the higher risk exposure. It is not suitable for inexperienced clients, small projects, or projects where cost certainty is more important than programme speed.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Advantages. Maximum programme flexibility — the construction manager can re-sequence packages, accelerate critical path activities, and respond to design changes without the commercial constraints of a lump sum or management contract. The client has direct contractual relationships with every trade contractor, giving them maximum transparency and control. The construction manager, as a fee-earning consultant, has no financial interest in increasing the construction cost. Each trade package is competitively tendered.
Disadvantages. The client carries all construction risk. If a trade contractor defaults, the client must appoint a replacement directly. The client is responsible for managing interfaces between packages — if the steelwork contractor is late and this delays the cladding contractor, the client bears the delay cost. There is no single party responsible for delivering the completed building — the construction manager manages the process but does not guarantee the outcome. Total cost is not known until the last trade package is let. This route requires an experienced client team and a highly capable QS practice to manage the commercial complexity.
Contract Forms
The standard contract for the construction manager’s appointment is the JCT Construction Management Appointment (CM/A 2024), with trade contracts let under the JCT Construction Management Trade Contract (CM/TC 2024). Under NEC4, the construction manager is engaged under an NEC4 Professional Service Contract, and trade contracts are let under separate NEC4 ECC contracts — typically Option A or Option B depending on whether the package is priced as an activity schedule or a bill of quantities.
QS Role Under Construction Management
The QS role is essentially the same as under management contracting, but with the additional complexity that each trade contract is directly between the client and the trade contractor. The QS must ensure that each trade contract is properly coordinated with adjacent packages, that interface risks are identified and allocated, and that the client’s overall cost position is reported clearly. The QS manages interim payments to each trade contractor, negotiates final accounts, assesses variations, and maintains a comprehensive cost report covering all packages. The QS also advises on the commercial implications of programme changes — for example, if accelerating the mechanical and electrical package to recover programme time would require premium-time working and additional cost, the QS quantifies the cost impact for the client’s decision.
Framework Agreements
How It Works
A framework agreement is not a procurement route in itself but an overarching arrangement under which multiple projects can be called off over a fixed term (typically 3–4 years) without the need to run a separate procurement process for each project. The client or public body runs a single competitive procurement to appoint one or more contractors to the framework. Individual projects are then allocated to a framework contractor — either by direct award (single-supplier frameworks) or by mini-competition among framework members (multi-supplier frameworks). The construction contract for each project is typically a standard form (JCT or NEC) with framework-specific amendments.
When to Use It
Framework agreements suit clients with a rolling programme of construction projects — typically local authorities, housing associations, NHS trusts, central government departments, and large corporate occupiers. They are particularly effective where the client has a series of similar projects (schools, housing, healthcare facilities) that can benefit from standardised processes, supply chain continuity, and continuous improvement. Major UK frameworks include those procured by the Crown Commercial Service, the Department for Education, NHS Shared Business Services, and regional procurement hubs such as SCAPE and Pagabo.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Advantages. Faster procurement — individual projects can be called off in weeks rather than the months required for a standalone procurement. Established relationships between client, contractor, and supply chain promote collaboration and continuous improvement. Framework contractors invest in understanding the client’s requirements, standards, and processes. Aggregated buying power reduces cost. Performance can be measured across multiple projects, enabling the client to benchmark and drive improvement. Frameworks align with the Construction Playbook’s emphasis on long-term relationships and outcome-based procurement.
Disadvantages. The initial framework procurement is time-consuming and expensive. Contractors who are not on the framework are excluded, which may limit competition for individual projects. Framework pricing may not reflect the latest market conditions if the framework was procured several years earlier. There is a risk of complacency — framework contractors, knowing they have a guaranteed pipeline of work, may not price as keenly as they would in open competition. The client must actively manage the framework to ensure value for money is maintained throughout the term.
Contract Forms
Framework agreements themselves are typically bespoke documents. The call-off contracts for individual projects are standard forms — most commonly NEC4 ECC (Option A or Option C) for public sector frameworks, reflecting the Construction Playbook’s preference for NEC. JCT Framework Agreement (FA 2024) provides a standard framework wrapper, with individual projects let under the appropriate JCT building contract.
QS Role Under Framework Agreements
The QS’s role spans both framework-level and project-level activity. At framework level, the QS advises on pricing mechanisms, evaluates framework tenders, establishes benchmark rates and cost data, and monitors performance across the framework portfolio. At project level, the QS prepares cost plans, manages the mini-competition or direct award process, prepares contract documents, administers interim payments, and manages final accounts — essentially the same project-level role as under whichever procurement route the framework employs (usually traditional or two-stage D&B). The QS also plays a key role in benchmarking — comparing framework project costs against open-market equivalents to demonstrate that the framework is delivering value for money.
NEC Contract Options: The Risk Spectrum
Understanding Options A to F
The NEC4 Engineering and Construction Contract offers six main pricing options that span the full spectrum of risk allocation between employer and contractor. Choosing the right option is integral to procurement route selection — the option determines how the contractor is paid, who carries the cost risk, and how the QS manages cost control during construction. The options are:
| NEC4 Option | Pricing Mechanism | Cost Risk Allocation | Best Suited To |
|---|---|---|---|
| Option A | Priced contract with activity schedule | Contractor carries cost risk (lump sum) | Traditional or D&B where design is complete and scope is clear |
| Option B | Priced contract with bill of quantities | Contractor carries rate risk; employer carries quantity risk | Traditional procurement with remeasurement; scope broadly defined but quantities may vary |
| Option C | Target contract with activity schedule | Shared — pain/gain mechanism against target | Complex projects where collaboration and shared incentives are valued |
| Option D | Target contract with bill of quantities | Shared — pain/gain mechanism with remeasurement | Complex projects with uncertain quantities; collaborative approach |
| Option E | Cost-reimbursable contract | Employer carries all cost risk | Emergency works, highly uncertain scope, research or prototype projects |
| Option F | Management contract | Employer carries cost risk; contractor manages | Management contracting procurement route |
The Construction Playbook expresses a preference for NEC contracts and specifically encourages the use of Option C (target cost) for public sector projects. The target cost mechanism aligns the commercial interests of the employer and contractor — if the project is delivered below target, the savings are shared; if it exceeds the target, the overrun is also shared, typically on a pre-agreed percentage split. This incentivises the contractor to manage cost proactively rather than simply pricing risk into a lump sum and then seeking variations to recover margin.
Pain/Gain Share Mechanism
Under NEC4 Options C and D, the pain/gain share operates against the target price. A typical share ratio is 50:50, meaning any saving below the target is split equally between employer and contractor, and any overrun above the target is also shared. The share percentages can be varied, and many contracts include a cap on the contractor’s pain share (typically at 10–15% of the target) to prevent the contractor from facing unlimited financial exposure. The QS’s role under target cost contracts is to assess the defined cost (the actual cost of the works), compare it with the target, calculate the pain/gain share at each assessment, and advise the client on the projected final share position. The QS must also ensure that compensation events (the NEC equivalent of variations) are properly assessed and the target is adjusted accordingly.
Procurement Route Comparison: Worked Example
Project: 2,000 m² Primary School
To illustrate how the procurement route affects cost, programme, and risk, consider a 2,000 m² single-storey primary school in the West Midlands. The project includes 14 classrooms, a hall, kitchen, staff and administration areas, external play areas, and car parking. The client is a local authority with an approved budget of £6.5 million (including fees, furniture, and equipment). The building is steel-framed with masonry cavity walls, a flat roof with standing-seam metal covering, and a mechanical ventilation system with heat recovery. The site is level, greenfield, and without significant ground constraints.
This is a relatively straightforward building — the kind of project that could be procured under any of the principal routes. The following comparison shows how each route would affect the key parameters.
| Parameter | Traditional | Design & Build | Two-Stage | Management Contracting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Design responsibility | Client’s design team | Contractor (novated) | Client’s team with contractor input | Client’s design team |
| Estimated construction cost | £5.20M | £5.05M | £5.15M | £5.30M |
| Design period | 10 months | 6 months (to Stage 2) | 8 months (overlapping) | 8 months (overlapping) |
| Tender period | 8 weeks | 10 weeks | 4 weeks (Stage 1) | 6 weeks (per package) |
| Construction period | 14 months | 14 months | 13 months | 12 months |
| Overall programme | 26 months | 22 months | 23 months | 22 months |
| Cost certainty at contract | High (±5%) | High (±5%) | Medium (±10% at Stage 1) | Low (±15–20%) |
| Client cost risk | Low (variations only) | Low (employer’s requirements risk) | Medium (Stage 2 negotiation risk) | High (all package cost risk) |
| Client design control | Full | Limited (post-novation) | Full | Full |
| Typical contract form | JCT SBC/Q 2024 | JCT DB 2024 | PCSA then JCT SBC/Q 2024 | JCT MC 2024 |
| NEC4 equivalent | Option B | Option A | Option C (target) | Option F |
Cost Breakdown Comparison
The estimated construction costs differ across routes because each route allocates risk differently, and contractors price risk. Under traditional procurement, the contractor prices the completed design at competitive rates but includes a risk allowance for the unknowns that remain — ground conditions, weather, supply chain availability. Under D&B, the contractor absorbs design risk but can offset this through buildability savings and specification optimisation. Under two-stage, the contractor’s pricing is negotiated rather than fully competitive, but supply chain packages are market-tested. Under management contracting, every package is competitively tendered but the management contractor’s fee and the coordination overhead add cost.
| Cost Element | Traditional | Design & Build | Two-Stage | Management Contracting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Building works (NRM 1 Groups 0–8) | £4,160,000 | £4,090,000 | £4,120,000 | £4,100,000 |
| Preliminaries | £520,000 (12.5%) | £455,000 (11.1%) | £515,000 (12.5%) | £530,000 (12.9%) |
| Overheads and profit | £312,000 (6.0%) | £303,000 (6.0%) | £309,000 (6.0%) | — |
| Management fee | — | — | — | £206,000 (4.0%) |
| Design risk premium | — | £101,000 (2.0%) | — | — |
| Contractor’s risk pricing | £208,000 (4.0%) | £101,000 (2.0%) | £206,000 (4.0%) | £164,000 (4.0%) |
| Estimated construction total | £5,200,000 | £5,050,000 | £5,150,000 | £5,300,000 |
| Cost per m² GIFA | £2,600 | £2,525 | £2,575 | £2,650 |
The D&B route shows the lowest estimated construction cost because the contractor can optimise the design for buildability and absorb design risk within a competitive lump sum, rather than pricing it separately. However, the client must accept reduced control over detailed specification. The management contracting route shows the highest cost because the management contractor’s fee is paid on top of competitively tendered packages, and the client carries all cost risk — any package that comes in over budget is the client’s problem. Traditional procurement sits in between, with cost certainty and design control balanced against the longer programme.
Which Route for This School?
For a 2,000 m² primary school procured by a local authority, the most likely route in current UK practice would be a call-off from an existing education framework — for example, the Department for Education framework or a regional framework such as SCAPE. The call-off would typically use NEC4 Option C (target cost), reflecting the Construction Playbook’s preference for collaborative contracting with shared financial incentives. If no suitable framework is available, two-stage D&B would be the next most likely route, giving the authority early contractor involvement, a single point of design responsibility, and a competitive lump sum by the time the main construction contract is signed.
Traditional procurement remains a viable option — particularly if the authority has a strong in-house QS and design management capability and wants to retain full control over design quality and specification. Management contracting and construction management would be unusual for a project of this scale and complexity — they are better suited to large, complex projects where programme speed justifies the higher risk exposure.
The Construction Playbook
Policy Framework for Public Sector Procurement
The Construction Playbook (first published December 2020, updated 2022 and 2024) is the UK Government’s policy document for how public works projects and programmes are assessed, procured, and delivered. It applies to all government departments and their arm’s-length bodies, and its principles are increasingly adopted by local authorities, NHS trusts, and other public sector clients. For QS professionals working on public sector projects, the Playbook is now the defining commercial framework.
The Playbook is structured around 14 key policies that cover the full project lifecycle from preparation through procurement to delivery and performance measurement. The policies most relevant to procurement route selection are:
Policy 4: Benchmarking. Departments must use cost and performance benchmarks to inform investment decisions, set cost targets, and measure project outcomes. For the QS, this means cost plans must be benchmarked against comparable completed projects — aligning directly with the NRM 1 cost planning approach of using BCIS data to validate elemental cost allowances.
Policy 7: Commercial pipelines. Departments must publish rolling pipelines of planned projects and programmes to give the market visibility of future demand. This supports framework procurement and long-term supply chain planning.
Policy 8: Contract forms. The Playbook recommends NEC contracts as the default for public sector construction, with a specific preference for target cost mechanisms (NEC4 Option C) that incentivise collaboration and shared financial outcomes. JCT contracts remain permissible where appropriate, but the direction of travel is clearly towards NEC.
Policy 9: Risk allocation. Risks should be allocated to the party best placed to manage them. The Playbook explicitly discourages the transfer of risks that the contractor cannot control or price — a principle that favours target cost and collaborative procurement routes over fixed-price lump sums for complex projects.
Policy 12: Payment. The Playbook requires 30-day payment terms throughout the supply chain, with project bank accounts encouraged to ensure subcontractors are paid promptly. The QS must ensure that interim payment processes are structured to comply with these requirements.
The Procurement Act 2023
What Changed
The Procurement Act 2023 came into force on 24 February 2025, replacing the previous EU-derived Public Contracts Regulations 2015 for procurement in England and Wales. The Act represents the most significant reform of UK public procurement law in a generation. While it is a general procurement statute (not construction-specific), its provisions have direct implications for how construction projects are procured, tendered, and awarded.
Most Advantageous Tender (MAT). The Act replaces the previous “Most Economically Advantageous Tender” (MEAT) criterion with the “Most Advantageous Tender” (MAT) criterion. This is more than a name change — MAT explicitly enables contracting authorities to evaluate tenders on a wider range of criteria including social value, environmental impact, innovation, and whole-life cost, alongside price and quality. For construction procurement, this means that the cheapest tender is less likely to win — evaluation models must balance price against quality, sustainability, and the contractor’s approach to delivery.
Competitive flexible procedure. The Act introduces a single flexible procurement procedure that replaces the previous open, restricted, competitive dialogue, and competitive procedure with negotiation. Contracting authorities can design a procedure that suits the complexity of the project — from a simple single-stage tender for straightforward projects to a multi-stage dialogue with shortlisting for complex ones. For construction, this provides statutory support for two-stage tendering, early contractor involvement, and framework call-offs.
KPI and performance reporting. The Act requires contracting authorities to set, monitor, and publish key performance indicators for major contracts (above £5 million). KPIs must cover delivery, cost, quality, and any other criteria the authority considers relevant. For QS professionals, this means project cost performance data will be published and benchmarked — reinforcing the importance of accurate cost planning, effective cost control, and transparent cost reporting.
30-day payment. The Act enshrines 30-day payment terms for the supply chain, supporting the Construction Playbook’s existing requirement. Payment notices must flow down the supply chain, and contracting authorities can exclude suppliers who have a poor payment record from future procurements.
Choosing the Right Procurement Route
Decision Framework for QS Professionals
There is no universally “best” procurement route — the right choice depends on the client’s priorities, the project’s characteristics, and the market conditions. The QS’s role is to advise the client on the trade-offs and recommend the route that best serves the project’s objectives. The key factors to consider are:
Cost certainty. If the client’s primary requirement is to know the total cost before committing to construction, traditional procurement or single-stage D&B provides the highest certainty. If the client is willing to accept cost uncertainty in exchange for programme speed or design flexibility, management contracting or construction management may be appropriate.
Programme. If the client needs the building as quickly as possible, routes that overlap design and construction — D&B, management contracting, construction management, or two-stage with early works — will deliver the shortest programme. Traditional procurement, with its sequential design-then-build approach, will be the slowest.
Design quality. If the client places a high value on design quality and wants to retain control over specification, traditional procurement or construction management gives the most control. D&B transfers design responsibility to the contractor, and the client must accept that the contractor may optimise the specification to manage cost.
Risk appetite. If the client wants to transfer construction risk to the contractor, D&B or traditional lump-sum procurement achieves this. If the client is willing to share risk in exchange for collaborative working, NEC4 Option C target cost is appropriate. If the client is willing to carry cost risk directly, management contracting or construction management provides the most programme flexibility.
Client capability. Procurement routes that require the client to manage multiple direct contracts (construction management) or to benchmark negotiated pricing (two-stage tendering) demand a sophisticated and experienced client team. Less experienced clients are better served by routes with clear single-point responsibility — D&B or traditional procurement with a strong QS practice providing commercial management.
Cross-References and Further Reading
This article sits within a series of practical guides on ProQS.site covering the core skills of the quantity surveyor. Related articles include:
NRM 1 Cost Planning Guide — a practical walkthrough of cost planning from order-of-cost estimate to pre-tender cost plan, using a fully priced worked example. The cost planning approach described in that article applies regardless of procurement route, but the timing of cost plan stages, the level of design information available, and the pricing mechanism all vary depending on the procurement route chosen.
NRM 2 Practical Measurement Guide — a guide to measurement under NRM 2, the standard used for preparing bills of quantities on traditional procurement and for pricing work packages under two-stage and management contracting routes.
BIM for Quantity Surveyors — covers how BIM integrates with cost management across all procurement routes, including model-based quantity extraction, 5D cost planning, and information management under ISO 19650.
Methods of Measurement in Construction — a guide to the principal measurement standards used in UK construction, explaining where each standard applies and which contract forms they typically support.
What Comes Next
This article has set out the principal procurement routes used in UK construction, the contract forms that support each route, and the QS’s role within each. The worked comparison illustrates how the same project would be priced, programmed, and risk-allocated under each route — and how the right choice depends on the client’s priorities rather than a universal rule. The Construction Playbook and the Procurement Act 2023 are reshaping how public sector projects are procured, with an increasing emphasis on collaborative contracting, outcome-based evaluation, and supply chain performance. Future articles on ProQS.site will explore contract administration under JCT and NEC, cost reporting during construction, and the QS’s role in managing variations, claims, and final accounts across different procurement routes.