how to write rics case study

Your chance to win an Amazon voucher! (T&Cs apply)

Skip to main menu
Skip to user menu

Your APC Case Study Tips

Careers Advice

Your case study is one of the most pivotal sections in your APC submission. It is a major component in terms of quantity, as the basis of your ten-minute presentation and the subsequent questioning.

An ideal project will have drawn on your professionalism to consider key issues and options, then make recommendations for resolution. You should have a choice of projects that you are working on so you can evaluate which are best for your APC.

Evaluate Your Projects

You will spend time and effort preparing the submission and presentation, so focus on your project with the greatest potential. A good starting point is to evaluate your projects against the Understanding the APC guide to eliminate those that fail to meet the criteria, then reassess the remainder as they progress for your best choice.

Sometimes the project that you had the highest hopes for falls by the wayside or fails to meet the criteria in some way; it helps to have an alternative project as a contingency. Be proactive in gaining advice and guidance from your APC supervisor and counsellor when selecting your case study.

What could you look for in selecting your project?

First, you should ensure the project is within two years of your APC submission date. Many candidates select a project where they are actively involved within one year of the submission date – if they are on the two-year structured training route they are likely to be given more responsibility in this second year, so it will be fresher in their mind and in certain circumstances it might be re-used if they are referred.

Second, if you provided reasoned advice on Building Surveying Level 3 core competency matters, then it has potential. Ideally, you will have identified the project early on as one where you are likely to be personally involved at Level 3.

Third, if your project has two or three key issues that relate to your Building Surveying competencies then it starts to look very promising. These will vary by project; examples include building defect investigation and repair, redesigning a refurbishment due to a client change, or the selection and specification of a product.

There should be meaningful options to consider when determining how the key issue should be resolved. If you had to research or reflect on an event in order to reach a reasoned decision on the project then this could be a key issue. Where you had already identified the project early on as a possible case study then it is a great help if you note key issues as they arise so you can select from these and have a ready-made aide memoire.

If you feel there are no meaningful key issues or options then do discuss the project or projects, key issues and options with your supervisor, counsellor or others involved in the projects; they may provide useful suggestions or advise you towards another project.

Ensure you provide clarity and detail

When preparing the 3,000-word case study, it can be tempting to select more than one project and also three key issues. While the 3,000-word limit is usually easily reached, the challenge is often to provide the clarity, accuracy and detail. This can limit your demonstration of the issues, decision-making ability, reasoned judgement and so on. Do take your supervisor’s or counsellor’s advice on the number of projects and key issues to cover. You may have a valid need for more than one project and three key issues.

Many case studies are on a single project and two key issues. Using two instead of three allows more detail, which should enhance clarity while helping you to keep to the word limit. An additional benefit of a single project and two key issues is in your ten-minute presentation, as it will also allow you more time per issue.

Take pride in it

Once selected, then make the case study your own. It is a key part of the APC in representing you and your work, so take pride in its preparation and the chance to show assessors your professionalism.

Ewan Craig is an APC assessor, APC coach and local director with Right Surveyors

The above article originally appeared in RICS Built Environment Journal April/May 2019 titled The case in hand

Any Questions?

During an online Q&A with the RICS Training team candidates got to ask their questions on the APC case study, below are the questions raised and answers.

I have just started my APC and was wondering when I should be thinking about my case study?

If you’re on the Structured 24 route, you shouldn’t worry about it until the second year. Firstly, you may not have the range of live experience to choose from. Secondly, if you rotate seats and undertake different types of work, you may have not found something you are best suited to yet. Your first year is really about your learning and development as a surveyor. In your pathway guide , there will be a timeline that help’s you to manage this.

Would it be better to write about a project from start to finish or should I look to target one specific aspect?

Target one aspect, so for example, foundations. The project does not need to be completed 100%, just the part you are writing about.

Are you able to use a project undertaken whilst working for a previous employer?

Your project(s) needs to be undertaken up to two years before your assessment. As long as this is the case, altering your employment will not be a problem.

How do I find hooks in all mandatory and technical competencies?

In your pathway guide, there is a Case Study checklist that brilliantly bullet-points potential hooks you could use. Keep in mind though that the checklist is not a syllabus - you don’t need to know or do all of it. Think of it more as a menu where you can pick and choose the tasks and activities you have carried out.

When it comes to the presentation, do you have an opinion on whether assessors prefer visual aids, or do you just want to hear about the case study?

The most important thing is that you are comfortable. Some people get in a muddle, others like to use visual aids as a crutch. If you have one, make sure it is relevant and not a distraction - use it to enhance, not dominate your presentation.

Becoming an RICS Member

Network Spotlight - Sikh Surveyors

Why government property offers rewarding careers

Latest articles, what is inclusive recruitment.

APC Support and mentoring

Case study – part 2: writing to the requisite format..

Posted on July 7, 2015 Updated on June 23, 2018

FOREWORD : Please be aware that this post is not an official RICS guidance.

All the advice given in this blog is based on my personal interpretation of the APC Candidate’s Guide 2016 which I have enhanced through many discussions with fellow APC Mentors and APC Assessors.

Sonia Desloges MRICS

Director, APC Support Limited

Case Study: Writing to the requisite format.

As I explained in the first part of this series of three articles, writing your Case Study should advance in three stages:

Select your key issue(s)
Write your Case Study to the requisite format
Perfect your drafts applying concise and logical reasoning, using accurate vocabulary and demonstrating level 3 competencies.

This second post focuses – quite logically – on the second stage and will examine each section of the Case Study step by step.

Front Cover and Contents

The current RICS template for the Case Study is set out on ARC and also contained within the ‘APC Submission Template’ available for download on the RICS website:

http://www.rics.org/uk/apc/pathway-guides (select your relevant pathway and make sure that you select ‘chartered’ if you are applying for full MRICS status rather than Associate)

The Assessors will expect your Case Study to be presented to the highest professional standards, exactly like a formal report to a client.

Whilst this is not currently included in the RICS template, I would therefore strongly recommend that you add a front cover and a page of content.

You can download the amended template that I have produced here: case-study-template-august-2016

If you feel that this is a little adventurous, you will find that most assessors and APC mentors give the same advice on the APC Forum on LinkedIn. It will make you stand out from the crowd and in a good way.

This template is an exact copy of the RICS template but includes additional sub-sections to help you with your structure and your word count. You may choose to remove the sub-headings at the time of your submission or retain them, which will help the assessors follow your case study more easily.

You may adapt the front cover to suit your personal preferences but I would suggest including a photograph of your project as it will help grabbing your reader’s interest.

I have also added a couple of optional additional pages that you may want to consider. Those do not have to be included in the word count.

Confidentiality statement

The RICS have included a confidentiality statement assuming that you will obtain consent from your client and your employer. If this is not the case and you can not reveal all the names and details, I have included an alternative wording which you may amend to suit.

Glossary of Abbreviations

Using abbreviations and acronyms is generally not recommended but if you must, remember to incorporate a glossary or list of abbreviations. Remember to always use the full word with the abbreviation between brackets the first time you use an acronym in your case study, eg the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) and thereafter RICS.

Page of Contents

Like all professional reports, your case study should have a page of contents. This page is automatically linked to the contents of your case study but you must remember to right-click on your mouse to update the fields.

Your case study is to be uploaded as a pdf rather than directly typed on ARC so you can really make an effort on presentation.

Section 1: Introduction (circa 500 words)

In this section you are expected to give a brief description of the project, your roles and responsibilities. You do not need to give detailed background to your key issue(s) in this section but simply put your reader into context.

As with every written work, start with an introduction sentence such as:

‘This report will critically analyse my involvement as the [your role] in project XYZ.’

You can add a brief outline of your report if you can afford the extra words (please omit if your wordcount if too tight!). For example;

‘I will present two keys issues which I encountered in this project and review the options I considered to overcome them. This report will go on to evaluate the outcome of my approach and recommended solution, and conclude by the analysis of the lessons I have learnt through this experience.’

1.1 Project Overview

Include some or all of the following as appropriate – this may be as bullet points if you are struggling with the word count;

Brief description of project
Brief description of client (and stakeholders but only if relevant to your key issues)
Stage at which the project currently is
Project key objectives (if relevant)
Project key risks and constraints (if relevant)
Key dates / timescales
Project value, form of contract, procurement (as relevant to your pathway)

1.2 My involvement and responsibilities

What was your role? (Keep it short and make a list with bullet points if you carried out many different tasks)
What was your level of responsibility?
At what stage did you get involved?

Section 2: My approach (circa 1,600 words)

Remember that the assessors are only interested in what YOU did. Write the whole of your Case Study using the first person and active verbs.

2.1 Key Issue One: [Give it a title] (circa 800 words)

Provide the background to your first key issue in this sub-section.

You do not need to explain all the details of the project or circumstances. Focus on the key points that impacted on your decisions to consider and reject or adopt your options.

The type of questions you need to answer here may be;

What events or constraints led to the key issue?
What made it a challenge for you?
What was the stance of your client and stakeholders?
What were the risks to the project?

Do not omit to clearly formulate what your key issue was . The Assessors have not worked with you on your project and you should not over-estimate their ability to guess what you are trying to say. Ask a friend who does not know anything about your project to read your case study to check whether you have suitably expressed yourself.

2.2 Options

Start by explaining what your objectives were when you started tackling this key issue. What were you aiming to achieve?

This will enable you to set out a number of criteria against which you will measure the success of your solution in section 3 (My Achievements) of your Case Study. This could be just half a sentence or a couple of sentences depending on the complexity of your project.

Then briefly list the 2 to 4 options that you considered. (3 is always best)

‘As it was critical to my client that the budget was not exceeded whilst not compromising the end user’s requirements, I identified that three courses of actions were available to me for resolving this key issue:

Option 1: XYZ
Option 2: ABC
Option 3: Bla bla bla’

As the headings and sub-headings must be included in your word count, you may have to choose between listing your options here or stating them under the next series of sub-headings to keep to the word limit.

Then review them one at the time remembering that you want to demonstrate your level 3 competencies (providing reasoned advice).

Option 1: [title]

What led you to consider option 1? Why was is a realistic option?
What methodology did you use to analyse its suitability? Why?
What were the results of your analysis?
Why did these results lead you to reject this option?
How did you advise your client?

Option 2: [title]

Repeat the same structure for option 2.

Option 3: [title]

The last option is usually your solution. Same as options 1 and 2 but you may emphasise on how you established that it was the best solution and why.

You need to follow a logical reasoning and also demonstrate that you have taken into account your client’s requirements and that you have addressed the issue you were trying to resolve. Inserting a table listing the advantages and disadvantages of each option is not satisfactory. You must write full sentences and analyse the benefits or not of each option against your objectives.

Once again remember that you need to demonstrate that you provided reasoned advice .

This structure is adopted by most candidates but may not work with all key issues and some candidates prefer to briefly describe each option, why they considered them and the methodology applied under each relevant sub-heading. And they add an additional section ‘Analysis of options’ in which they compare and contrast the relative benefits and disadvantages of each option against the objectives they aim to achieve.

2.3 Key Issue Two: [Give it a title] (circa 800 words)

2.4 options.

Proceed as per Key Issue One.

You do not need to have a second key issue if your first one was particularly complex and entailed the application of several Level 3 competencies.

I would not recommend more than two keys issues as the strict word count will not permit you to explain them in sufficient depth.

Section 3: My achievements (circa 400 words)

The official RICS Candidate’s Guide states:

‘In this section you should describe what you achieved, how you achieved this and what your involvement was. Demonstrate your ability to think logically, laterally and professionally giving examples of where you gave reasoned advice to a client for your level 3 competencies.’

To be clear, you should aim to demonstrate level 3 competencies in the whole of your Case Study, not just this section.

You do not need to explain how you achieved each competency nor how you were thinking logically, laterally and professionally. Assessors will work this out by themselves. In this section, you just need to explain what happened next.

I recommend that you tackle this section in two steps. First describe the outcome, then explain how you achieved it. Make sure that you focus on what YOU did.

Deal with your key issues one after the other to avoid confusing the assessors.

3.1 Key Issue One

The outcome

What was the result?
What were the project’s and client’s objectives and key drivers? Did you achieve them? Did they evolve over time? (Link it back to Section 2.2)
What happened next? How did you implement your solution?

Do not hesitate to give one or two precise figures or details if you can. This will provide the assessors with additional evidence that you have successfully resolved your key issue.

How did you achieve this?

This will be completely specific to your personal circumstances but below are some examples for consideration;

What arguments did you put forward to convince your client / stakeholders? (relate it back to your objectives)
How did your client react when you advised them of your solution?
Did you have any difficulties convincing your client and / or stakeholders? Why?
Was there a risk that your solution would fail? How did you mitigate this risk?
What did you personally do that contributed to the successful outcome?
In hindsight, do you think that there was a better alternative? (Maybe one option that your client rejected?)

3.2 Key Issue Two

Section 4: conclusion (circa 500 words).

In accordance with the RICS Candidate’s Guide, ‘ in this section you need to critically reflect on and analyse your performance and make reference to the lessons you learnt and what you would do differently next time.’

This is the most challenging section for many candidates and yet, probably the most important one. You should aim to identify three or four lessons learnt per key issue. You should also try to relate them to your pathway competencies.

Which competencies did you develop and how? (this may include soft and professional skills as well as rules of conduct and ethics)
Did you learn any better ways of doing your job? Did you gain a better appreciation of the reasons why the industry’s best practice is what it is?
What were the causes of your key issue(s)? In future projects, could you do anything to prevent or mitigate it?
Could you have tackled your key issues in a more efficient manner? (Obviously, you want to convince the panel that you dealt with it very well but you also need to be critical of your performance)
How have you used / could you use one or several of these lessons learnt in other projects?

Finally close your Case Study with a concluding sentence such as;

‘I believe the lessons learnt during my involvement in this project have contributed to my understanding of the role required of a Chartered Surveyor and I will ensure I take all of these forward on to future projects.’

Best of luck!

FREE DOWNLOADS

case-study-template-august-2016

Further help

If you would like to prepare the detailed plan of your Case Study with our APC trainers and discuss with them your key issues and options, we offer one-to-one mentoring sessions either face-to-face (Manchester or London only) or via Skype.

We also offer a documentation review service once you have completed your draft. Please check our pre-submission services here .

Alternatively, we offer face-to-face training for corporate clients across the UK. Please e-mail us at [email protected] to discuss your requirements.

And as always, we are on Twitter @APCsupport_Ltd and you can send me an invite on LinkedIn if you would like to be notified of our latest events.

2 thoughts on “ Case Study – Part 2: Writing to the requisite format. ”

[…] Case study part 2: Writing to the requisite format […]

[…] Part 2: Writing your case study to the requisite format […]

RICS APC Case Study: A Successful QS Example

When figuring out how to approach the APC Case Study, I found that reviewing past example submissions was incredibly helpful, as this gave a clear understanding of how to structure and write up the 3,000 word report. So in this post, I’m sharing a copy of my own Case Study, which helped me pass the APC in 2015. I hope this example will provide some useful insights into key issues you can address, and that it serves as a helpful reference as you work on your own APC case study.

RICS APC Case Study Example: Quantity Surveying

Confidentiality Statement

The following case study contains confidential information included for the purpose of the Assessment of Professional Competence. The Client’s details have been removed due to confidentiality agreements and they are referred to throughout this report as “The client”. My Firm have given their consent to disclose details for the case study on the basis that the information is not to be used for any other purpose or by any person other than those authorised by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors.

Introduction

My Approach

My Achievements
Appendix A – Competencies Achieved
Appendix B – Project Photographs/Plans

Total word count: 2,932 words (Not including Contents List or Appendices)

The project comprises the redevelopment of a single storey retail unit which involved the fit-out of an existing, empty shell for ‘THE CLIENT’ to provide a standard specification store achieving 75% net sales space from a GIFA of 32,000ft2 (see Appendix 1 for store layout and photographs of the building). The site is located in Dundrum, Republic of Ireland within a busy retail outlet with occupying tenants adjacent to the works. The client is an international retailer experienced in this type of project. This store formed part of their wider expansion plan being one of five new stores in the Republic of Ireland during 2014.

Project Details:

Contract Sum Approximately £1.7M
Contract Duration 8 Weeks
Form of Contract JCT Intermediate 2016 with CDP
Collateral Warranties & Bonds with Landlord Benefit
Construction Category A & B Fit-Out with Steel Frame Structure & Composite Cladding

My Involvement and Responsibilities

I was involved in the project during the design development stage and attended design team meetings to suggest value engineering options and review the contractor’s proposals. I liaised with the design team to obtain information on the condition of the existing building shell in order to generate a scope of works and updated the cost plans accordingly. Once the design was complete and cost plans finalised, the client approved the project for tender. I was involved in negotiating tenders on behalf of my client using approved suppliers listed under a JCT 2011 framework agreement. I was also involved in post contract duties including administering the change control procedure, conducting valuations and producing cost reports.

Key Issue 1 Background

Following agreement of the feasibility with ‘THE CLIENT’, cost targets were set for each element of works with the aim of being within circa 5% cost accuracy of the contract sum agreed with each supplier. However on receipt of tenders for Fire Sprinkler and Detection equipment, both prices appeared inflated and were circa 42% and 72% above the cost limits respectively. It was initially thought that the inflated tender prices received were caused by a lack of pricing competition within the framework.

As both tenders were significantly above the agreed cost targets, it caused issues for my client and did not appear to represent good value for money. I conducted a tender analysis to determine why they appeared inflated by firstly reviewing quantities against the drawings and checking to see if any rate loading or computation errors were apparent. It was obvious that detection and sprinkler equipment for installation within the ceiling void were abnormally high. I subsequently forwarded the contractor’s design onto the client’s Fire Safety Consultant who confirmed that the high levels of sprinkler and fire detection equipment within the void were necessary as the ceiling void depth was in excess of 800mm due to an irregular layout of structural beams above the sales floor.

Original Elevation Drawing

Original Fire Protection Drawing

Key Issue 1 – What options are available in order to reduce the cost of the Fire Alarm and Sprinkler protection works?

I was involved in advising the client on the various options available to them, as a result of the aforementioned key issue.

Evaluation of Options Availble

The works would be re-tendered through a single stage selective tendering in accordance with the RICS tendering strategies guidance note, with six contractors shortlisted by myself and sent to the client for approval.

Option Summary

This option was considered as it would have been beneficial to gain competitive tenders based on current market rates with local suppliers based in Republic of Ireland. The suppliers listed within ‘THE CLIENT’’s framework were based in England and their tenders were subject to a percentage uplift to cover the additional costs of working in Ireland.

Reason Rejected

Whilst this option would have provided competitive tender prices and a potential discount on the tenders initially received, an impending commencement date did not afford sufficient time to conduct the necessary pre-qualification and tender interviews in order to add additional suppliers onto the ‘THE CLIENT’ Framework and negotiate a contract sum. This option was therefore not practical and was quickly dismissed.

Omit the suspended grid ceiling above the sales floor to negate the need for fire sprinkler void protection and reduce the quantity of fire detection equipment.

Omitting the suspended grid ceiling above the sales floor would have eradicated the ceiling void, meaning that all void sprinkler equipment could be omitted and less fire detection equipment would be required. The exposed services above the sales floor would need to be sprayed out for decorative purposes but the cost savings achieved by omitting the suspended grid ceiling and void protection equipment would have achieved a nett saving of circa £24,500.

Omission of the suspended grid ceiling would have left mechanical and electrical services exposed above the sales floor in the line of sight of customers. Whilst we proposed that these services were sprayed out to match the structural soffit for decorative purposes, this design was not in keeping with ‘THE CLIENT’’s standard specification and despite the prospect of achieving significant savings was rejected by ‘THE CLIENT’’s design team.

Increase the ceiling height to reduce the void depth to less than 800mm in order to omit the sprinkler void protection and reduce fire detection equipment.

By raising the ceiling height over the sales floor to 3822mm from 3200mm, a ceiling void space of less than 790mm would be formed. With the advice of ‘THE CLIENT’’s fire safety consultant this would mean that the sprinkler protection within the ceiling void could be omitted and fire detection equipment reduced

Revised Elevation Drawing

Revised Fire Protection Drawing

Proposed Solution for Key Issue 1

With the consent of ‘THE CLIENT’’s design team and fire safety consultants we proposed that the ceiling height over the sales floor was raised to 3822mm. This meant that sprinkler void protection could be omitted and detection equipment was significantly reduced whilst still providing ‘THE CLIENT’ with the desired store layout with provision of a suspended ceiling for aesthetics purposes. A bulkhead and lowered section of ceiling was formed around the irregular beams which still required fire sprinkler and detection equipment, however this still resulted in a significant saving as fire sprinklers above the remaining sales floor were no longer required.

Conclusion for Key issue 1

It was thought that this option provided the best outcome in terms of delivering improved value for money, the correct ‘CLIENT’ store layout and also mitigated any delays and risks if the work had been re-tendered with local but unfamiliar suppliers. ‘THE CLIENT’ was satisfied with this solution and the savings achieved of £20,710.00 and £23,474.19 on sprinkler and fire detection tender prices respectively.

Key Issue 2 Background

The second key issue I encountered was managing the post contract cost control of the project. Due to the high frequency of variations and lack of understanding of the change control procedure, it was extremely difficult to monitor and raise change requests in a timely manner. This impacted on the accuracy of cost reports and did not provide RETAILER with the levels of cost certainty required.

When variations were submitted by the contractor, they were not priced in accordance with the agreed framework rates or supported with substantiation. Variations were often submitted by e-mail without a breakdown which meant that rates from the framework had to be identified in addition to requesting further information and drawings. This prolonged negotiations in respect of agreeing variations and caused the cost reporting of the project to be less accurate. In some cases instructions had been made directly to the contractor from an appointed building control consultant. Despite these instructions having no contractual validity, the contractor had acted on them and requested that a change request was raised.

Key Issue 2 – How Can The Change Control And Cost Reporting Of The Project Be Improved?

Evaluation Of Options Availble

Option 1 – Communicate the current change control procedure to the contractor requesting that variations were submitted in a timely manner and supported with the correct substantiation.

By holding a meeting with the contractor’s surveyor, I could explain the correct change control procedure and stress the importance of submitting variations within a timely manner. I would explain that when submitting variations by e-mail they needed to be clearly priced in accordance with the framework rates and supported with a breakdown. I could make them aware that they were only permitted to act upon the instructions of the contract administrator and instructions received by other consultants would hold no contractual validity.

This option was rejected as it would leave the presentation of variations open to the interpretation of the individual compiling the documentation. Due to the contractor’s surveyor being on annual leave at various stages of the project, changes in project staff would potentially create a future lack of understanding around the change control process and would not form an effective solution for the duration of the project and future schemes. This option would also do little to improve the speed at which variations could be assessed, as the framework rates would still need to be searched for and cross-checked. Due to the revised Irish Building Control Amendment Regulations (2014), the contractor was under pressure to act on instructions from the appointed certifier despite them not being permitted to do so. This option would not have supported the contractor through this issue as the appointed certifier may have continued to issue instructions.

Option 2 – Introduce a standardised change control document to assist in the validation of variations. This would include a presentation to the project team briefing them on the change control procedure.

Introducing a standardised change control document to be completed by the contractor would act as a prompt to provide the correct substantiation and confirm that the change had been signed off by the contract administrator. Holding a meeting with the project team would ensure the correct change control procedure was adhered to and would reduce the likelihood of the building control authority issuing instructions directly to the contractor.

Proposed Solution for Key Issue 2

Introducing a standardised change request form (appendix 2) meant that as each variation was raised, the necessary substantiation, framework rates and authorisation were included rather than having to be identified and queried. This would allow variations to be assessed and agreed more quickly and increase accuracy of the cost reports for RETAILER. The autonomy of this process would mean that if new project team members became involved in future, they could be briefed on the change request form to reduce the prolongation of submitting and agreeing variations.

Presenting the change control process document (Appendix 2) to the project team would make everyone aware that variations were to be raised and agreed in a timely manner. I reminded the team that any instructions other than those issued by the contract administrator would hold no contractual validity and that in future they needed to be authorised by the contract administrator within 48 hours of becoming apparent.

Conclusion for Key Issue 2

Introduction of the standardised change request form assisted with negotiating and agreeing variations in a timely manner as relevant information was enclosed with the change request instead of having to be searched for. The meeting reaffirmed the importance of reporting and agreeing variations in a timely manner on behalf of my client. Future change requests were authorised by the contract administrator to ensure the correct administration processes were followed.

Reflective Analysis of Key Issue 1

Why did the problem arise?

The initial site visit was undertaken by a colleague who had previously left the company; when reporting findings from the visit, the irregular nature of the structural beam layout was not mentioned within their report. The structural beam layout caused the need to allow provision for additional fire protection and caused higher than anticipated tender prices. The tendering contractors were based in mainland UK and were entitled to a percentage uplift to cover the additional costs of working within the Republic of Ireland. These costs would not have been incurred had the contractors been based in the Republic of Ireland. The lack of time apportioned to undertaking the tendering process meant I was unable to competitively tender the works which could have delivered further savings.

How could this have been prevented?

As the initial site visit was undertaken by a colleague, I was unaware of the layout and depth of structural beams. If attending site I would have been sure to pay particular attention in measuring the depth of structural beams from soffit height. This would have allowed the cost of void protection to be estimated more accurately at feasibility stage. ‘THE CLIENT’ would then have been able to make a fully informed decision in whether to proceed with the acquisition of the unit by knowing in advance the cost of void protection was likely to be inflated in comparison to other stores.

If additional time had been allocated for the tendering process, the works could have been competitively tendered with suppliers based in the Republic of Ireland, negating the need to pay an uplift to suppliers based in mainland UK.

not being permitted to do so. Changes in members of the project management team created further confusion during this period as the contractor’s surveyor was on annual leave.

Reflective Analysis of Key Issue 2

A lack of understanding of the change control procedure meant that during the first two weeks of the project, variations were not being executed in accordance with the administration procedures defined within the contract. This was caused as new team members were unaware of the procedures they were required to adhere to. I had assumed in this period that the team were well briefed on the change control procedure and the importance of controlling project expenditure to my client.

Due to the Building Control Amendment Regulations (2014), various elements of the project needed to be signed off by the assigned certifier. This had put the contractor’s project management team under pressure to act on instructions from the authorising person despite not being permitted to do so. Changes in members of the project management team created further confusion during this period as the contractor’s surveyor was on annual leave.

By holding a meeting prior to project commencement, the change control procedure could have been reaffirmed to the project team to ensure they understood the process. This would have improved awareness of the standards required and reduced the likelihood of invalid instructions and prolongation in agreeing variations.

The standardised change control document could have been issued to any new members of the project team to improve their awareness and offer an opportunity to address any queries rather than assuming they were aware of the process

Lessons learned

A key lesson learned is the importance of undertaking an in depth site survey to determine the risks associated with proceeding with a project. This would have highlighted the irregular structural beam layout prior to preparing the feasibility study and allowed ‘THE CLIENT’ to make a fully informed decision on whether to proceed with the acquisition of the unit.

My experience has highlighted the importance of communication to ensure that each member of the project team is aware of their obligations, rather than assuming they know what is required of them. Communicating the required standards at project commencement can improve each team member’s awareness of the procedures in place. Time should also be taken to brief new team members. Utilising standardised process documents can assist in ensuring members of the project team are fully aware of the information they need to present in support of raising change requests to improve the levels of post contract cost control.

RICS APC Case Study: Quantity Surveying Example

To receive a full copy of this Case Study in word format, please click here .

What Is The RICS APC Case Study Word Count?

The Case Study Word Count is strictly limited to a maximum of 3,000 words which excludes the contents list and appendices however all other items such as headings and sub headings are included.

For further guidance on the essential components your Case Study must include and how to select your key issues, please click here.

Jon Henry Baker

Jon Henry Baker (MRICS) is a Senior Chartered Quantity Surveyor with over 15 years industry experience working on Commercial, Retail, Education, Infrastructure and Industrial Projects in the UK and Ireland. Over the last 9 years he has coached many colleagues and helped them to pass their APC. He is passionate about making the APC a smooth and enjoyable process for candidates and is also the Author of 'RICS APC STUDY GUIDE, 1000+ Questions & Answers'.