Architectural Engineering and Design Management

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/taem20

Challenges and opportunities in adopting early

contractor involvement (ECI): client’s perception

Farshid Rahmani

To cite this article: Farshid Rahmani (2021) Challenges and opportunities in adopting early
contractor involvement (ECI): client’s perception, Architectural Engineering and Design
Management, 17:1-2, 67-76, DOI: 10.1080/17452007.2020.1811079

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2020.1811079

Published online: 01 Sep 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1368

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 4 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=taem20
ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT
2021, VOL. 17, NOS. 1–2, 67–76
https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2020.1811079

Challenges and opportunities in adopting early contractor

involvement (ECI): client’s perception
Farshid Rahmani
School of Property, Construction and Project Management, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The emerging project delivery methods increasingly encourage Received 20 April 2020
collaboration between the client, designer and contractor to develop Accepted 13 August 2020
longer-term relationship between project parties. In Australia
KEYWORDS
development of Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) was an endeavour to Early contractor Involvement;
involve the contractor at the early stage of design and planning of a ECI; relationship based
project. While ECI promises benefits to the project outcomes, clients procurement; construction
should have a good understanding about this delivery system to make clients; Australia
sensible decision as to whether adopt it for a project. Despite the
growing use of ECI by public sectors in Australia, there has been limited
research that investigated the characteristics of ECI from the client’s
views. This paper explores the opportunities and challenges in adoption
of ECI in Australian through the public client’s perspective. Semi-
structured interviews were conducted with 25 construction professionals
who held senior leadership roles for their departments with several
decades of experience in the establishment and delivery of collaborative
contracts for complex projects and programmes. The study results show
cultural barrier, demonstrating value for money, change in relationship
protocol, and inadequacy of contractor remuneration for early stage
engagement are the challenges that are most experienced in ECI
projects. It further shows that there is inconsistency in the use of ECI
within the public sector clients as a result of the ambiguity in the
definition of ECI. This study also finds a number of opportunities for
clients when ECI is adopted, the chief amongst which are enhancement
in constructability, improving working relationship, greater certainty in
price and scope, and innovation.

Introduction
Over the past decades, development of relationship-based approaches to project contracting have
arisen in response to increasing problems in the construction industry (Manley, 2002) in an effort
to achieve specific business objectives by maximising the effectiveness of each participant’s
resources and establishing ongoing business relationships (Rahmani, Khalfan, & Maqsood, 2016a).
Evidence shows the use of relationship-based procurement (RBP) could improve project performance
and offer direct benefits to the whole supply chain (Walker & Hampson, 2003). Among different RBP
methods, Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) has emerged as a new construction procurement
approach that typically is utilised for complex projects to alleviate uncertainty and manage risks
more effectively (Eadie & Graham, 2014). Originated in the UK in 1998, development of Early Contrac-
tor Involvement (ECI) is an endeavour to involve the contractor at the early design and planning stage

CONTACT Farshid Rahmani [email protected]

© 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
68 F. RAHMANI

of a project to improve the project outcomes including cost, time, quality, and working relationships
(Rahmani et al., 2016a).
In Australia, ECI is adopted and contextualised from the British version in 2005 for delivery of a
number of projects mainly in the road and rail sectors (Campbell & Minns, 1996; Walker & Lloyd-
Walker, 2014). While the number of projects procured under ECI has been increasing in last few
decades (Edwards, 2009; Love, O’Donoghue, Davis, & Smith, 2014; Scheepbouwer & Humphries,
2011; Whitehead, 2009), shifting from conventional to relational procurement methods such as ECI
still requires deliberate efforts and fundamental changes by clients involved in the projects (Eriksson,
Atkin, & Nilsson, 2009; Kumaraswamy, Ling, Rahman, & Phng, 2005). Like other procurement systems,
clients should understand why ECI is suitably deployed over other types of procurement systems
(Walker & Lloyd-Walker, 2012) to evaluate their individual and organisational capability to ascertain
that they are adequately equipped to overcome difficulties associated with adoption of collaborative-
based approaches. However, despite the growing use of ECI by public sectors in Australia in past
decades, there has been limited research that investigated the characteristics of this delivery
system from the public sectors views. The aim of this study is to investigate the challenges and oppor-
tunities for clients to implement ECI for their projects. Influenced by the aim of this study, the prin-
cipal research question is ‘how clients in construction perceive the challenges and opportunity
associated with adoption of Early Contractor Involvement (ECI)?’. This research question encompasses
the dimensions of the fundamental benefits and barriers in utilising ECI and identification of other
aspects that are essential to understand the core characteristics of ECI.
This paper is structured as follows: A literature review is presented that describe the concept of ECI.
This review is followed by the methodology section, which describes the research process and pro-
vides details of data collection technique. This paper highlights the important findings from the study
and future research directions.

Early contractor involvement (ECI)

Traditionally, construction projects are delivered under Design-Bid-Build (DBB), Design and Build
(D&B) and Management Contracting or a variation of these building procurement methods. These
single stage procurement strategies offer some benefits to the clients, including cost certainty,
control over the project outcomes, and ability to demonstrate value for money and accountability
for public projects (Love, Davis, Baccarini, Wilson, & Lopez, 2008). However, such strategies cannot
obtain the best contributions of the project participants to a successful project due to exclusion of
the contractor from the early design and project planning (Edwards, 2009; Mosey, 2009). In order
to incorporate innovative solutions, and building constructability into design, collaboration
between the client, designer and contractor is required. In response to this need, a number of initiat-
ives to the project delivery and management have been developed that essentially rely on collabor-
ation between project bodies. Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) as one of the collaborative
procurement methods, is an initiative that has been developed to engage the contractor early in
the project to develop longer term relationships between project participants and to deliver the
best value for the client (Song, Mohamed, & AbouRizk, 2009). Under an ECI arrangement, designer
and contractor work together in a contractual relationship with the client, to scope and price the
project and then to design and construct the project (Rahmani, Maqsood, & Khalfan, 2017). Song
et al. (2009) argue that since contractors generally have a higher level of construction expertise,
their input in design will have a direct positive impact on the project outcomes including quality
of their own planning and construction performance. Professional advice of the contractor in the
design process during the early phase of the project improve risk management, time schedule,
cost and safety due to the contractor’s in-depth knowledge of construction materials, methods
and local practices (Rahmani, Khalfan, & Maqsood, 2016b).
In Australia, although ECI is borrowed from the original British version, the approach is genuinely a
different procedure, which is not similar to any form of contract used before. The Australian form of
 ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT 69

ECI as a hybrid version of the original British version includes two phases with two separate contracts
throughout the different stages of project. The first phase, similar to design alliancing, involves the
contractor in a collaborative environment where all project participants become responsible for resol-
ving problems during the planning and design phase. In the second phase, a conventional form of
contract such as Construct only, Design and Construction and Managing Contractor at risk (Love
et al., 2014) is adopted to complete the design and construct the project. Prior to commencement
of the first phase, client normally develops a business case as well as some works on preliminary plan-
ning and detailed design report. The selection process of the contractor involves several interviews
with potential contractors on the basis of non-price, qualification-based dialogues. Upon the appoint-
ment of the contractor, an open book reimbursement contract is signed at the rates contained in the
contractor’s tender including margins and overhead (Rahmani et al., 2017). The contractor alongside
with client and designer collaborate to develop the plans, design and risk adjusted price. If the client
agrees with the price, the appointed contractor sign the contract for the second phase including
detailed design and construction, otherwise the project moves to the market as a construction
contract.

Related research on ECI: Australasia as a focus

ECI contract is first originated from the engineering and construction contract published by the
British Institution of Civil Engineering in 1998 and adopted by the British Highways Agency for
their infrastructure projects. Adopting from the British version, in Australia ECI was first used by
Queensland Mains Roads in 2005 and around the same time ECI was adopted by New Zealand gov-
ernment. Upon the successful outcomes of the ECI, the public projects are increasingly being deliv-
ered by ECI contracts such as Cairns Bruce Highway Upgrade; Maroochy River Bridge Duplication;
North Ward Road in Townsville; Forgan Bridge replacement in Mackay and part of the Bruce
Highwa Upgrade as examples (Rahmani, Khalfan, & Maqsood, 2014). As a result, a number of
studies have been undertaken in this field of research by scholars and professionals in the industry;
and a few guidelines and policies have been published by the government agencies.
The earliest studies followed the first adoption of ECI in Australia by the Queensland and South
Australia governments (Edwards, 2007, 2009; Swainston, 2006) however, as ECI was used into a
wider range of projects, there has been a surge in research interest into ECI projects in recent
years. The Table 1 below shows the articles focusing on ECI within Australasian sorted by study
purpose.

Research methodology
Research methodology refers to the various means by which data can be collected and analysed
(Collis & Hussey, 2009). The choice of research methodology is guided by the philosophical underpin-
ning of the research problem, the sources from which data is collected, feasibility of the study and
other factors such as time, location and ethical issues (Lewis, Saunders, & Thornhill, 2009). Guided

Table 1. ECI literature within the Australasian context.

Authors Purpose of study
(Swainston, 2006); (Edwards, 2007); (Edwards, 2009)) Definition and
Conceptualisation
(Love et al., 2014); (Turner & Riding, 2015); (Rahmani et al. 2016a); (Nibbelink, Sutrisna, & Zaman, Pros and Cons
2017);
(Scheepbouwer & Humphries, 2011) Transitional issues
(Hastie, Sutrisna, & Egbu, 2017); (Nibbelink et al., 2017) Knowledge integration
(Rahmani et al., 2017) Comparison
(Whitehead, 2009); (Rahmani, Khalfan, & Maqsood, 2012); (Turner & Riding, 2015); (Ferme, Zuo, & Implementation and
Rameezdeen, 2018); (Farrell & Sunindijo, 2020); Experiences
70 F. RAHMANI

by the research aim, this study considers the reality through a position of the social construction of
information. This subjectivist point of view of reality as projection of individual imagination
encourages a concern for understanding the process through which human beings concretise
their relationships to the world (Morgan & Smircich, 1980).
Influenced by the research philosophical position, in order to gain an insight about client’s views
about challenges and opportunities in adopting ECI, this study adopts a qualitative research
approach as the method of inquiries as advocated for the study of the complex nature of the
phenomenon when the objective of the research is understanding and describing the phenomena
from the participants’ perspective (Flick, 2009).

Data collection
The choice of techniques for collecting data is highly influenced by the strategy adopted for conduct-
ing the research. The choice of qualitative approach guided this study to employ semi-structured
interviews as the primary data collection technique. This study intended to capture professionals’
point of view about ECI. Interviews, therefore, could document research participants’ attitudes, feel-
ings, beliefs, experiences and reactions.
The strategy for recruitment of participants for this study was driven by the principles of purposive
sampling in an effort to involve participants who could contribute to understanding the concepts
being explored. Targeted participants were involved in the construction of infrastructures in Australia
within the public sector organisations including state government departments. Ideal participants
had been involved in the implementation process of ECI and could provide input into their experi-
ence in that area. There are six states in Australia with their own state constitutions dividing the
state governments into the same divisions of legislature, executive and judiciary as the federal gov-
ernment. Approval to conduct the study within the organisation was sought from the head of each
department via email. Three departments in Victoria, Queensland, and South Australia responded to
the request and agreed to participate in the research project. Upon receipt of the approval, a list of
candidates who had interest in participating in the research study including their contact details was
requested. Initially participants were sought through invitational emails sent directly to them or their
secretary and additional participants were identified through snow ball sampling approach from the
other participants referral.
In total, 25 in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with experts and key manage-
ment representatives on three state government organisations. The 25 people who were interviewed
all performed senior leadership roles for their department with several decades of experience within
their field of practice specialised in the establishment and delivery of collaborative contracts for
complex projects and programmes including ECI as well as other conventional procurement strat-
egies. Table 2 provides a summary of the participants’ profile.

Table 2. Overview of research participants.

Role Number of participants
Program Delivery and Operations Manager 2
Infrastructure Management and Delivery Director 1
Project Review and Procurement Manager 3
Construction Team Leader at Delivery and Operations 4
Principal Engineer/General Manager 3
Contracting Services Manager 3
Project Manager/Director 2
Network Safeguard and Development Manager 1
Senior Procurement Consultant 3
Executive Officer 3
Experience in construction (in years)
Minimum Maximum Mean Median
8 40 22.20 23
 ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT 71

Interviews involved the researcher and participants in detailed discussion of the issues tackled in
the research. Each interview took 30–45 min and all interviews were audio recorded and sub-
sequently transcribed to text format files. The analysis process adopted a ‘content analysis’ approach
for the identification of common threads that extends throughout an entire interview or set of
interviews.

Empirical findings and discussion

Analysis of this study predominantly follows the content analysis principles and associated with the
microanalysis. Microanalysis is an analysis process that lets the data speak for itself and demonstrates
that analysis is not a structured, static or rigid process, rather it is a free flowing and creative (Corbin &
Strauss, 2008). Since all research participants (n = 25) had experience with both traditional and colla-
borative delivery systems, they were asked to identify the benefits of ECI and barriers in implement-
ing ECI compared to other procurement methods. This question could narrow down the responses
into specifically ECI context and excluded the common attributes that ECI may share with other deliv-
ery systems.
Eighty eight percent of respondents (n = 22) repeatedly stated that there was ambiguity in the
definition of ECI and their responses indicated that the term is used to address a procurement
method by some people whereas it is used to refer to a contract form by some others and precisely
acknowledged the confusion in the adoption of the term in the industry. For example, one of the par-
ticipants stated that ‘ECI means differently to different people. Unlike many other forms of contracts or
many other forms of procurement process, there is no single method that is completely regarded, or uni-
versally regarded, as the ECI approach’ Although the ambiguity in its definition cannot be classified as
a challenge in implementation of ECI, it indicates inconsistency in the use of ECI within the industry
creating challenges for researchers and practitioners to grasp the true characteristics of this method.
Participants’ discussion of challenges in implementing ECI addressed a wide range of factors that
clients encounter in implementing an effective ECI process. Demonstrating value for money to the
government was identified as one of the barrier. One participant commented that
Our challenge was to insure that [it] was a value for money outcome, that it was going to give us what we
expected in terms of scope, and then once we agreed on price, we had to go to the Cabinet to get approval
to award the contract.

Although the hard-dollar stage of the model gives the client the ability to justify obtaining value for
money to the government to some extent, a general perception that ECI is a softer form of contract
raises treasury’s concerns with respect to the value for money. This finding is supported by Rahmani
et al. (2016b) and Walker and Harley (2014) that the use of relationship based procurement models
are unable to demonstrate the full value of what they have done and hence remain unproved for a
number of advisors in government departments.
Unfamiliarity of the client with the process was described as another barrier. One of the respon-
dents mentioned that ‘From having gone through the process I think one of the challenges from the
client’s side is that ECI is rarely used for projects so we gain limited experience and lesson learned for
the next [ECI] projects’. Respondents indicated that they had fairly good understanding of both the
traditional contracts as well as highly collaborative approaches such as PPP and Alliancing but
were unfamiliar with the ECI process where the combination of both is in place. In addition, misun-
derstanding of key strategic decisions, lack of confidence and knowledge of the delivery team seem
to be the impediments for adoption of ECI. These issues were perceived as one of the challenges in
the project teams for running and facilitating the ECI process due to lack of adequately trained
resources. The result of a study conducted by Love et al. (2014) within the public sector in the
Western Australia also show unanimous agreement with this finding in that the lack of experience
of clients in using ECI and competent resources influence the public sector’s choice of ECI procure-
ment method.
72 F. RAHMANI

Remuneration mechanism of ECI was deemed to be problematic which did not cover the actual
costs of design and tendering to the contractor for the first stage. Although the level of senior per-
sonnel and amount of time invested in the process from the contractor’s side is significant, there is no
remuneration to the contractor for the ECI service (Laryea & Watermeyer, 2016) and this was seen as
one of the challenges in motivating contractors to get engaged in an ECI process.
Change in relationship protocol was described as an issue in transitioning from early stage of col-
laborating and open book into a traditional environment. What might have been appropriate beha-
viours and communication protocol in the early stage may no longer appropriate for the second
stage. This issue can be attributed to the lack of guidance available to navigate and manage the
change in relationship at the transitioning stage (Farrell & Sunindijo, 2020) coupled with the predo-
minant cynical attitude exists in the construction industry (Scheepbouwer & Humphries, 2011).
Cultural barrier was identified as the biggest challenge where the traditional hard dollar mentality
was being brought to the ECI front-end by contractors or the clients. As commented by one of the
respondents: ‘People who grew up in an environment that is adversarial or always has been adversarial,
find it difficult to transition into more of a relationship type of environment’. Generally, absence of trust,
prevailed in the culture of construction industry, impedes the development and nurture of collabora-
tive and open book relationship between the client and contractor which requires diligent efforts
from both sides to overcome this challenge (Farrell & Sunindijo, 2020).
Misusing the relationship by the contractor to avoid contractual commitments and obligations
repeatedly came to the light as it was perceived that this opportunistic advantage seeking behaviour
negatively affect the working relationship between the client and contractor. Zhang and Qian (2017)
argue that the contractor’s opportunism can cause project disputes that lead to time and cost over-
runs and reduce production efficiency.
Interestingly, it was asserted that the barrier to ECI was a strong leadership on the client side or
strong leadership on the contractor’s side in which an imbalanced leadership between the two
sides means that one side dominates the leadership. According to Cox and Thompson (1997), asym-
metrical leadership in a working relationship creates a position of supremacy upon which the other is
dependent and use this to gain advantage. Table 3 demonstrates the challenges in adoption of ECI
found in this study.
The first column represents the list of challenges identified in this study and the second columns
shows the number of respondents described that item (in both percentage and number format).
Amongst identified challenges, it is evident that cultural barrier, demonstrating value for money,
change in relationship protocol, and inadequacy of contractor remuneration for early stage engage-
ment, were experienced by the participants in the most of their ECI contracts.
In discussing opportunities of ECI, participants identified a large number of benefits that the use of
ECI could offer. Higher certainty in the price and scope was identified as one of the benefits of using
ECI as a result of joint risk management with the help of expertise and experience of the contractor.
The greater certainty and better understanding of the risks by engaging project participants have
positive influence on the working relationship during the delivery phase, enhance trust and reliability
and reduce mindreading and inaccurate assumptions between parties (Marinelli & Salopek, 2019;
Rahmani et al., 2016a).

Table 3. Challenges in adoption of ECI.

Challenges Frequency
Demonstrating value for money 80% (n = 20)
Unfamiliarity with ECI process 40% (n = 10)
Inadequacy of remuneration 68% (n = 17)
Lack of adequately trained resources 48% (n = 12)
Change in relationship protocol 72% (n = 18)
Cultural barrier 92% (n = 23)
Misusing the relationship by the contractor 56% (n = 14)
Imbalanced leadership 20% (n = 5)
 ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT 73

It was indicated that the ECI process created a better opportunity to undertake value engineering
resulting least reworks during the delivery stage. The refined solution caused by the constructor over-
seeing the design led to a better value outcome (Song et al., 2009).
Defining standards jointly was identified as another benefit of using ECI when standards of the
project were not well defined and developed. It was emphasised that the involvement of the
same management team in the both design development and delivery phases was a great benefit
to develop and refine the standards. One respondent commented that ‘the benefit is definitely
having similar people involved in the ECI development, the design development phases, what you’re
doing in D&C delivery. I’m talking about at the senior management top level’.
Establishing better communication between the client and contractor in the early stage of project
was suggested as a significant benefit of ECI to the working relationship. This finding is generally con-
sistent with the view of Rahmani et al. (2016a) that the frequent interaction between client and con-
tractor in an ECI contract results in enhanced communication, better working relationships and
reducing risk of opportunism.
Majority of participants (n = 22) pointed out that the positive working relationship built during the
collaboration phase was the most noticeable benefit that the ECI process offered. The essence of col-
laboration generated during the first phase remained in the second phase even though the contrac-
tual environment changed to the hard-dollar type of contract. This relationship was characterised as
being open, honest and collaborative by which mutual trust and understanding prevail in the
working relationship between the parties. No secrecy and transparency incorporated in the relation-
ship, generated a no blame environment in which there was little time spent on commercial claims,
or disputes, that can be seen often in normal contracting methodology. As explained by a
respondent:
The principal is able to go to tender on a hard-money basis with so much less uncertainty in the job than they
normally would and so even you engage in what you may refer to as an adversarial-type delivery method, most of
the scope for disagreement has been taken away.

Constructability (n = 22) and innovation (n = 20) are two benefits of ECI that respondents confidently
discussed more than other benefits identified earlier. Except for three participants who had a
different view on the constructability considerations for the clients, the rest of participants stated
that constructability was significantly improved in their ECI projects as a result of all parties
working together to develop the design and planning. For those three participants, it was not
their concern how the contractor was to build the project. Rather, they focused on the project out-
comes ensuring the project objectives were met. One of the statements as an example was ‘the way
the contractor builds and fabricates the project in terms of constructability, that’s where their innovation
is. So, it is not what we focus on, instead we focus on saving money’. However, the rest of participants
emphasised the importance of constructability consideration during the project design. Since the
client, designers, and the constructors work together in the same office and review all the designs
and construction processes in ECI arrangements, the constructability is evaluated and considered.
Contractors generally have different insight into the project constrains and hence they can
propose a wide range of other solutions if the initial design was not in compliance with the
project objectives even though the integrated solutions in the design process may cause a slight
deviation from the original design (Song et al., 2009). It was perceived that the constructability
enhancement resulting from the contractor’s contribution to the design, reduces the risk of under-
taking designs in a way that some components of that design would not be able to be built as
they are designed. This can, therefore, significantly reduce the waste of design efforts and risk of
delay which helps the project to complete more economically. This is described as a result of
careful considerations of the safety issues during the design development and a smaller number
of claims by the contractor where some small changes in design in the construction stage can
make a big change in construction costs or time.
74 F. RAHMANI

Table 4. Opportunities of ECI.

Opportunities Frequency
Price and scope certainty 76% (n = 19)
Value engineering 20% (n = 5)
Development of standard jointly 12% (n = 3)
Client-contractor communication 60% (n = 15)
Working relationship 88% (n = 22)
Constructability 88% (n = 22)
Innovation 80% (n = 20)

In defining innovation, it was suggested that innovation was created by a collaborative link
between the designers and the constructors and the collaboration institutionalised in an ECI contract
allowed the contractor to propose innovative solutions to problems that were different to what nor-
mally were done, therefore the ECI, in the contractual sense, was set up to encourage innovation. One
of the respondents provided more details about their recently completed project that
In our [name of project], which was a [multi]million-dollar project, we put it out as an ECI. We had two design and
construct ECI proponents and both of them came up with very different scenarios to our reference design. Both of
their designs were better as opposed to our reference design and cheaper, so then the process was really good in
constructability, and the innovation was just fantastic.

ECI provides an opportunity for the contractor and designers, as well as the client to develop inno-
vative solutions that can add value to the project. Ironically, it was suggested that the competition in
the second phase of an ECI was the best vehicle for securing innovation because the proponents had
to demonstrate innovative solutions to win the job. ECI process requires the client to be ‘open to
negotiate’ about the innovative ideas but at the same time needs to be very clear about their expec-
tations. The importance of a formal innovation process for driving innovation was emphasised by a
few respondents:
You do need to have a sort of formal innovation process, rather than just expecting people to sit around and
come up with good ideas … you just have to use a structured approach … using a variety of different
methods of getting people together … the process of managing those innovations and scoring them and
working out which ones are worth pursuing and which ones aren’t, linking them all with sustainability and
that sort of thing.

Table 4 illustrates the opportunities in adoption of ECI.

The first column represents the list of benefits identified in this study and the second columns
shows the number of respondents described that item (in both percentage and number format).
Amongst identified opportunities, enhancement in constructability, improving working relation-
ship, greater certainty in price and scope, and innovation were perceived by respondents as the
primary potential opportunities when ECI is being used.

Conclusion
It is generally accepted that the early acquisition of construction knowledge and experience improve
the project time, cost and performance. The development of ECI was based on this premise that the
involvement of the main contractor at the early stage of the project can bring significant benefits to
all parties engaged in the project.
The growing use of ECI in public project in Australia, triggered this study to explore the challenges
and opportunities of adoption of ECI. Since clients have great influence on the project outcomes
given that their financial status, characteristics, management competency and construction experi-
ence make significant contributions to project success, this paper focused on construction client
organisations as the context of this study. This could also be perceived as a limitation of this study
as the ECI involves the contractor at the early stage to create an integrated team that includes
client, consultant and contractor. Consequently, the results of this study are based on the client
 ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT 75

representatives’ point of views. Since the contractors and designers are also main components of a
construction project’s delivery team, there is a need for future research concentrating on contractor
and designer organisations.
The findings of this study enrich and extend the field beyond its current intellectual foundations
and connect it more closely to the challenges of contemporary project procurement management
practice. This article presents the application of ECI in the Australasian context and shows the oppor-
tunities and difficulties that state governments would face in adopting ECI as a delivery system.
The empirical findings of this study suggest a number of challenges and opportunities in imple-
menting a successful ECI that public client representatives could envisage through the experience
from their past projects delivered under ECI.
The enhancement in constructability, improving working relationship, greater certainty in price
and scope, and innovation are shown the major opportunities ECI can provide. In turn, cultural
barrier, demonstrating value for money, change in relationship protocol, and inadequacy of contrac-
tor remuneration for early stage engagement are reported as the challenges clients experience in uti-
lising ECI.
The use of ECI in the current structure for projects in the future is significantly dependent on the
outcomes of more projects once a greater number of ECI schemes have been completed. While the
growing maturity of the industry towards ECI would lead the decision-makers select this delivery
system with more knowledge, further studies are required to be carried in order to refine, improve
and extend the results of this study.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

ORCID
Farshid Rahmani http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2312-807X

References
Campbell, P., & Minns, D. (1996). Alliancing-The East Spar and Wandoo projects. AMPLA Bulletin, 15, 2.
Collis, J., & Hussey, R. (2009). Business research: A practical guide for undergraduate and postgraduate students. London, UK:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.
Cox, A., & Thompson, I. (1997). ‘Fit for purpose’contractual relations: Determining a theoretical framework for construction
projects. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 3(3), 127–135.
Eadie, R., & Graham, M. (2014). Analysing the advantages of early contractor involvement. International Journal of
Procurement Management, 7(6), 661–676.
Edwards, R. (2007). The experience of the South Australian DTEI with ECI contracts. Adelaide: South Australian Department
of Transport, Energy and Infrastructure.
Edwards, R. (2009). Early contractor involvement (ECI) contracts in the South Australian Transport infrastructure construction
industry. Adelaide: South Australian Department of Transport, Energy and Infrastructure.
Eriksson, P. E., Atkin, B., & Nilsson, T. (2009). Overcoming barriers to partnering through cooperative procurement pro-
cedures. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 16(6), 598–611.
Farrell, A., & Sunindijo, R. Y. (2020). Overcoming challenges of early contractor involvement in local government projects.
International Journal of Construction Management, 1–8.
Ferme, L., Zuo, J., & Rameezdeen, R. (2018). Improving collaboration among stakeholders in green building projects: Role
of early contractor involvement. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction, 10(4),
04518020-1–04518020-13.
Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hastie, J., Sutrisna, M., & Egbu, C. (2017). Modelling knowledge integration process in early contractor involvement pro-
curement at tender stage–a Western Australian case study. Construction Innovation Information, Process and
Management, 17(4), 429–456.
76 F. RAHMANI

Kumaraswamy, M. M., Ling, F. Y., Rahman, M. M., & Phng, S. T. (2005). Constructing relationally integrated teams. Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, 131(10), 1076–1086.
Laryea, S., & Watermeyer, R. (2016). Early contractor involvement in framework contracts. Proceedings of the Institution of
Civil Engineers-Management, Procurement and Law, 169(1), 4–16.
Lewis, P., Saunders, M. N., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students. Essex: Pearson.
Love, P. E., Davis, P., Baccarini, D., Wilson, G., & Lopez, R. (2008). Procurement selection in the public sector: a tale of two
states.
Love, P. E., O’Donoghue, D., Davis, P. R., & Smith, J. (2014). Procurement of public sector facilities, facilities.
Manley, K. (2002). Partnering and alliancing on road projects in Australia and internationally. Road and Transport Research:
a Journal of Australian and New Zealand Research and Practice, 11(3), 46–60.
Marinelli, M., & Salopek, M. (2019). Joint risk management and collaborative ethos. Journal of Engineering, Design and
Technology, 18(2), 343–361.
Morgan, G., & Smircich, L. (1980). The case for qualitative research. Academy of Management Review, 5(4), 491–500.
Mosey, D. (2009). Early contractor involvement in building procurement: Contracts, partnering and project management.
Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Nibbelink, J. G., Sutrisna, M., & Zaman, A. U. (2017). Unlocking the potential of early contractor involvement in reducing
design risks in commercial building refurbishment projects–a Western Australian perspective. Architectural
Engineering and Design Management, 13(6), 439–456.
Rahmani, F., Khalfan, M. M. A., & Maqsood, T. (2012). How is the early contractor involvement (ECI) being implemented within
the Australian construction industry? Melbourne, Australia: Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology Univ.
Rahmani, F., Khalfan, M. M. A., & Maqsood, T. (2014). The application of early contractor involvement (ECI) in different
delivery systems in Australia. In Proceedings of CIB 2014 International Conference on Construction in a Changing
World (pp. 1–12). Heritance Kandalama, Sri Lanka: University of Salford.
Rahmani, F., Khalfan, M. M. A., & Maqsood, T. (2016a). Analysing the drivers for early contractor involvement (ECI) adop-
tion by construction clients. International Journal of Procurement Management, 9(4), 373–397.
Rahmani, F., Khalfan, M. M. A., & Maqsood, T. (2016b). Lessons learnt from the use of relationship-based procurement
methods in Australia: Clients’ perspectives. Construction Economics and Building, 16(2), 1–13.
Rahmani, F., Maqsood, T., & Khalfan, M. M. A. (2017). An overview of construction procurement methods in Australia.
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 24(4), 593–609.
Scheepbouwer, E., & Humphries, A. B. (2011). Transition in adopting project delivery method with early contractor invol-
vement. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2228(1), 44–50.
Song, L., Mohamed, Y., & AbouRizk, S. M. (2009). Early contractor involvement in design and its impact on construction
schedule performance. Journal of Management in Engineering, 25(1), 12–20.
Swainston, M. (2006). Early Contractor Involvement, Queensland Roads Technical Journal, Edition 2.
Turner, N., & Riding, M. (2015). Early contractor involvement in Australia: Learnings from Transfield Services projects. Small
Enterprise Research, 22(2-3), 173–184.
Walker, D. H. T., & Hampson, K. D. (2003). Procurement strategies: A relationship-based approach. Malden, MA: Blackwell
Science Ltd.
Walker, D. H. T., & Harley, J. (2014). Program alliancing in large australian public sector infrastructure projects. Centre for
Integrated Project Solutions, School of Property, Construction and Project Management, RMIT Univ., Melbourne,
Australia.
Walker, D. H. T., & Lloyd-Walker, B. (2012). Understanding Early contractor involvement (ECI) Procurement Forms, paper
presented to Twenty-Eighth ARCOM Annual Conference, Edinburgh.
Walker, D. H. T., & Lloyd-Walker, B. (2014). The ambience of a project alliance in Australia. Engineering Project Organization
Journal, 4(1), 2–16.
Whitehead, J. (2009). Early contractor Involvement-The Australian experience. International Journal of Constitutional Law,
4, 20.
Zhang, L., & Qian, Q. (2017). How mediated power affects opportunism in owner–contractor relationships: The role of risk
perceptions. International Journal of Project Management, 35(3), 516–529.