King Canute's stance

The entire focus of his argument with e-tendering appears to be the fact that he no longer receives hard copy drawings from which he can scale his measurements.

I am glad to see that Mr MacBain recognises that quantification from CAD is possible. Indeed on the same page as his letter in the issue, there was an article entitled "Nobody wants my quantities" that demonstrates that "drawings", as envisaged by Mr MacBain, are not required at all to enable quantification. It seems to me there is no sense in taking electronic information provided by the designers, then turning it into paper, to enable measurement, to then type the measurements into another electronic system, to once again turn that into paper to pass it onto someone else who no doubt will go through the whole process again.

I fully appreciate that those of us of a certain age prefer paper and the production of A3 "picture" drawings is a good way to overcome this requirement. These can be printed quickly and easily on almost any office printer.

Taking Mr MacBain's questions in order:

• Are the designers fees likely to be reduced, because they no longer have to print, package and send hard copy documents to tenderers?

Designers' fees are already taking account of this fact. In many circumstances, printing is a disbursement or the subject of a provisional sum and is not included in their fees at all.

• Are tenderers to be given more time to prepare their tenders because of the time required for the initial printing of tender documents?

I cannot see why any extra time will be required based on my previous statements. Indeed, if you are working for a contractor, the job of sub-dividing the information to obtain tenders from sub-contractors becomes easier in a non paper-based project.

• Will clients be prepared to accept that tender prices are likely to increase because of the time required by estimators, etc to constantly review the e-tender website for revisions and the like?

Again, with tender revisions, the fact that information is being transferred electronically will not affect the quantity or quality of the information. With CD/DVD information exchange, the processes and procedures are the same as with hard copy. If a tender web system is used, then any notifications of additional documents etc, would be automatically notified by email.

• Will e-tendering and/or electronic issue of tender documents prevent the issue of inadequate information and/or sloppy processes?

As in my previous response to Mr MacBain, the issues he raises are not e-tendering specific problems. However, the reason for the production by the RICS of an e-tendering guidance note was to give clear guidance on the issues associated with electronic transfer and to help put in place correct processes.

• Will the designers (architects/ engineers, etc) still be responsible for ensuring all drawings are not only drawn to the correct scale, but are also printed to the correct scale?

A very good reason why QSs should not be printing/plotting drawings themselves but rather quantifying directly from the native CAD file. CAD files themselves do not have a scale. They are drawn at full size, so the issue of checking scales on these files does not exist.

At Davis Langdon we are already carrying out a significant proportion of our measurements using CAD tools. In our London office, the majority of the measurement is via CAD. We have projects where the plan and elevation shapes demand that CAD tools are used, as a 2D drawing (paper or electronic) would not yield the correct information. The use of CAD tools means that we are able to quantify design options faster and more accurately than we could by using hard copy drawings.

Mr MacBain can, like King Canute, stand and attempt to turn the tide back to paper, but I am afraid he will have as much success as the fabled King. We are in an electronic age and the sooner we (QSs) stop complaining about it and apply the skills and experience that we undoubtedly have as a profession, to embracing and, indeed, leading the move to efficient, controlled information exchange the better, for us individually, as a profession and for the entire industry.

Peter Sell, partner, Davis Langdon