Cutting out the QS is good for everyone

I spent 33 years working for a large contractor in California and never saw a QS or a bill of quantities the whole time. I never missed them either. Returning to work in the UK, I am told that B of Q jobs are now the exception rather than the rule. I can certainly see why.

Without a B of Q, the estimator has to be skilled enough to thoroughly analyse the tender documents rather than just plugging in his rates and letting the computer do the arithmetic.

Without the added bureaucratic layer of a QS, the construction process is actually more efficient and thus faster and less expensive. Granted, it is at their own risk, but estimators are then also freed from slavishly following the standard method of measurement.

The contractor and all his subcontractors become responsible for their own take-offs so variations are easily settled. Skilled estimators and project managers are then able to quickly negotiate fair rates and settlement.

Furthermore, as Jonathan points out, without a bill, each contractor will look at a job slightly differently. This allows for greater creativity to ultimately benefit both contractor and client.

In short, if contractors accept more responsibility and their management staff are highly skilled, they can exert more control over the construction process and bring better value to the client while reducing their risk and cost at the same time.