Association Presidents

Facilitator: Panos Panagopolous

The roundtable of Association Presidents provides a unique opportunity to the leaders of MA's from countries with different conditions to discuss issues of common interest.

2. Subjects of interest

• methods of public procurement & award ethics in the consulting engineering industry
• promoting the image of the consulting engineer
• the role of the consulting engineer in Design-Build contracts

• the co-operation between engineers and architects
• recognition of engineering qualifications
• competition from management consultants
• unfair competition to consultants
• enhancing the role of local engineering firms
• approaches to the formation of umbrella organizations
• the improvement of the contract conditions of awarding agencies
• risk management (also related to contract conditions)
• the enhancement of business practices
• quality control in the engineering sector
• professional liability
• broadening the education of engineers
• cooperation with accountants and lawyers
• intellectual property of the consultant ' engineer
• performance-based fee adjustments
• trends in the consulting industry from globalization
• reaching out to young engineers
• mobility in the consulting sector
• increasing the value of membership in MA's
• organization of networking between MA's

These subjects could be of value to future Roundtables for Association Presidents.

Of the subjects that concentrated most of the interest, the following two were discussed:

• methods of public procurement & award
• promoting the image of the consulting engineer

After brief discussion, the issue of Ethics was referred to the presentation of the proposals of the FIDIC Integrity Management Task Force.

3. Methods of public procurement

3.1. Issues of interest

The issues of interest that were identified for this subject are:

• the application of QBS in practice
• the advisability of consideration of cost for selection of the consultant
• factors affecting the selection of the appropriate tendering process, e.g. open
  or closed processes
• improvement of the procurement conditions relating to local consulting firms
• the harmonization of procurement rules between awarding agencies

The first 2 issues were discussed.

3.2. QBS in practice

The problem: Public authorities with limited experience have difficulty in the successful assessment of consulting engineers in the context of a QBS system.

Proposals: The following proposals were put forward:

1. Establishment by FIDIC of more detailed directions on the application of QBS. In its present form, the QBS brochure lays down the general concepts but there seems to be a difficulty in applying them. A standardization process that lays down the award system in more detail would be useful, with provision where necessary for alternative procedures (Note: in this context, the adverse influence of corruption in many countries should be taken into account, e.g. if a price negotiation stage is provided for.)
2. In the above context, the following two specific recommendations were noted:
   a) in order to increase the objectivity and workability of the evaluation process, FIDIC and the MA's should encourage the awarding agencies to predefine the evaluation criteria and the weighting factors in the tendering stage.
   b) require awarding agencies to publish the detailed evaluation results to all participating parties; this will force the awarding agencies to strengthen the evaluation process.
3. Increase the expertise of the awarding agencies through education in the application of Q13SI. this can best be achieved by:
   a) the MA's themselves, with the support of FIDIC where necessary, and
   b) by FIDIC itself, e.g. by inviting major awarding agencies to attend FIDIC conferences and/or seminars.
4. FIDIC and the MA's should encourage clients that have limited experience in the assessment of consulting engineers to use independent consultants (i.e. consultants which have no direct or indirect involvement in the project) to assist in the evaluation process.
5. FIDIC should strive to make the donor agencies (which in most cases have more experience than the receiving agencies) more responsible for the award process - at least for projects where financing is through grants; most of the European Union projects fall in this category. On the other hand, in situations where projects are funded by loans and the receiving agency has a tangible financial interest in the result of the process, it seems reasonable to keep the award process with the receiving agencies.
6. Corruption can severely distort any quality-based component of consultant selection. this effect should be taken into account in the formulation of FIDIC policies.

3.3. Consideration of cost in the award procedure

The problem:  The consideration of cost in the award procedure could deteriorate to cost-based selection of consultants (CBS).

Proposals: The conclusions drawn from the discussion on the advisability of including cost in the award procedure are:

1. The main criterion for award of projects should be the quality of the consultant, since the economic impacts of the project design can be quite significant down the road.
2. In this context, the right of the awarding agencies to select a level of expertise not necessarily corresponding to the (internationally available) highest level for reasons of economy was put forward.
3. The application of QC13S to projects of a more standard nature vs. QBS for more complicated projects could be acceptable to consulting engineers.
4. In the above context, note is taken of the fact that the inclusion of cost as a (secondary) evaluation criterion can reduce the extent of corruption- thus the level of corruption of the awarding agency can influence the use (or not) of cost in the evaluation process.

4. Image

The problem: The consulting engineers image is perceived to be less than their actual contribution to society.

Proposals: Several proposals were put forward for the MA's. the principal ones were:

1. Promotion of the status of consulting engineers by requiring their official registration in each country - with support from FIDIC.
2. Strengthening of the MA's by increasing the number of consultants registered in each country; such registration may be obligatory or can be promoted to awarding agencies as a measure of higher standing of the firms.
3. Enhancement of relationships with the press, especially the relevant journalists, i.e. those covering infrastructure and the environment.
4. The selection and publicity of award-winning projects each year. in such publicity, it is essential to focus on the non-engineering aspects, i.e. the benefits from the project to society and the environment.
5. The selection and publicity of non-technical awards may increase the profile of MA's in the community.
6. Interaction with the younger generation, in order to increase the demand and level of engineering schools, this interaction should be pursued with the appropriate age group for each country.
7. Contribute to the discussion of public issues., the contribution of opinion on public issues constitutes a visible service to society and will be valued as such.
8. Influence the curriculum of universities towards a more professional orientation.
9. Promote engineers to become active in other professions; despite the loss of engineering talent from consulting firms, it was put forward that this may have positive long-term benefits to the profession.

Other proposals included client awards (a delicate issue), the benchmarking of clients and the establishment of web-sites.

5. Conclusions

The above proposals should be evaluated and considered for future action of FIDIC and, indeed, the MA's themselves.

In view of the large variety of subjects and the diversity of the audience, the Presidents unanimously stated that they would like to have more time in future roundtables.

In order to save time from future Roundtables for Association Presidents, it is proposed that the issues for discussion are selected after consultation with the attendees in advance of the meeting.

P. Panagopoulos, Ph.D. President of Hellasco (Greece) Senior Partner, ECOS Consulting s. a.