A Guaranteed Maximum Price is a project delivery method utilized within the construction industry. It establishes an upper limit on the total cost of a construction project. The contractor agrees to complete the project within this pre-determined price, encompassing labor, materials, subcontractor fees, and a contingency for unforeseen circumstances. If the actual cost of the project exceeds the established ceiling, the contractor bears the financial responsibility for the overage.
This contractual approach offers significant advantages to the project owner. It provides budget certainty, allowing for more accurate financial planning. It also incentivizes the contractor to manage costs effectively and to identify potential savings, as any cost reductions below the agreed-upon maximum are often shared between the owner and the contractor, as stipulated in the contract. Historically, its adoption has been driven by the need for greater cost control and risk mitigation in construction ventures.
The following discussion will delve into the specific components of this pricing structure, exploring aspects such as risk management strategies, contract negotiation points, and the implications for project stakeholders.
1. Cost ceiling established
The establishment of a cost ceiling represents the defining characteristic of a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) contract. Without a pre-determined maximum price, the arrangement fundamentally ceases to function as a GMP. This ceiling serves as the owner’s financial safeguard, stipulating the absolute highest expenditure anticipated for project completion, barring approved changes in scope. For example, consider a hospital expansion project: the owner agrees to a GMP of $50 million. The contractor is then obligated to deliver the expanded facility for no more than this amount (excluding owner-directed scope modifications), regardless of unforeseen market fluctuations in material costs or subcontractor bids exceeding initial estimates. The contractor absorbs any costs exceeding that initial agreement.
The process of establishing the ceiling involves a thorough evaluation of project plans, specifications, and market conditions. Detailed cost estimation is crucial, considering labor rates, material prices, equipment rental, and potential risks. A realistic contingency allowance is included to address unexpected circumstances, such as adverse weather conditions or unforeseen site conditions (e.g., discovering contaminated soil). A failure to accurately assess these factors can lead to the contractor either significantly inflating the ceiling price (making the GMP less beneficial to the owner) or underestimating the costs, resulting in potential financial losses for the contractor. The negotiation of the cost ceiling is therefore a critical phase that necessitates transparency and due diligence from both parties.
In summary, a precisely calculated and agreed-upon cost ceiling is not merely a component of a GMP agreement; it is the cornerstone. It dictates the financial accountability of the contractor, providing the owner with budget predictability and instilling a framework for cost-conscious project management. Challenges arise when project scope is poorly defined at inception, necessitating frequent change orders that erode the integrity of the GMP and can lead to disputes. Therefore, establishing a well-defined scope alongside a realistic cost ceiling is paramount for successful GMP implementation.
2. Risk allocation defined
Within a Guaranteed Maximum Price framework, clearly defined risk allocation is paramount. The arrangement inherently shifts a significant portion of project risk from the owner to the contractor. The contractor assumes financial responsibility for cost overruns exceeding the agreed-upon maximum. This incentivizes proactive risk management and cost control during all phases of the project. Consider, for instance, unforeseen site conditions discovered during excavation. In a traditional cost-plus contract, the owner typically bears the cost of remediation. However, within a GMP contract, the contractor’s contingency fund is the initial buffer. If the cost of remediation exceeds the contingency, the contractor is generally responsible for covering the excess, unless the unforeseen condition is explicitly excluded in the contract’s risk allocation provisions.
The precise delineation of risk responsibilities is documented in the contract. This encompasses risks associated with material price fluctuations, labor shortages, subcontractor defaults, permitting delays, and unforeseen site conditions. A well-defined allocation clearly identifies which party bears the burden of each potential risk. This is essential to prevent disputes and misunderstandings throughout the project lifecycle. For example, contracts will specify whether the owner or contractor is responsible for delays caused by a natural disaster. Or, if a key supplier goes bankrupt, who has the responsibility to find a new supplier within the agreed-upon budget? This allocation significantly influences pricing and negotiation strategies.
In conclusion, clear articulation of risk allocation within a GMP contract is not merely a procedural detail; it forms the bedrock of the agreement. It impacts pricing, incentivizes contractor efficiency, and minimizes potential disputes by clearly outlining the responsibilities of each party regarding potential project risks. The success of a GMP project hinges upon a thorough and mutually understood risk allocation strategy. Ambiguity in this area can undermine the very cost certainty the GMP seeks to achieve.
3. Contingency fund included
The inclusion of a contingency fund is an indispensable aspect of a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) contract. It serves as a financial buffer within the pre-determined price ceiling, designed to mitigate unforeseen risks and cost escalations that may arise during construction. The absence of such a fund would render the GMP inherently unstable, as even minor unexpected issues could easily push project costs beyond the agreed-upon maximum, undermining the very purpose of this contract type. For instance, the discovery of asbestos during a building renovation project necessitates immediate and costly remediation. A properly structured contingency fund is explicitly intended to cover such eventualities, preventing the contractor from absorbing the cost and potentially compromising project quality or schedule.
The establishment of the contingency fund typically involves a percentage of the overall project cost, determined through a comprehensive risk assessment process. This assessment evaluates potential hazards, market volatility, and other factors that could impact expenses. The fund is not a general allowance for cost overruns but rather a dedicated resource for addressing specific, unforeseen events outlined within the contract. Proper management of the contingency fund is crucial. Typically, access to these funds requires justification and approval from both the contractor and the owner, ensuring transparency and accountability. Consider a situation where unexpected soil conditions require additional foundation work. The contractor must provide a detailed cost breakdown and demonstrate that the expenditure falls within the scope of the contingency fund’s intended use.
In summary, the contingency fund is not merely an optional add-on to a GMP contract; it is an integral component that provides stability and resilience against unforeseen risks. It protects both the owner, by ensuring the project remains within budget, and the contractor, by providing a financial cushion to address unexpected challenges. A well-defined and actively managed contingency fund contributes significantly to the success and predictability of GMP projects, minimizing disputes and fostering a collaborative environment.
4. Owner/Contractor shared savings
Owner/Contractor shared savings represent a pivotal element of a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) contract, incentivizing collaborative efficiency and cost management. The concept dictates that any savings realized below the established maximum price are distributed between the owner and the contractor, typically according to a pre-agreed percentage outlined in the contract. The presence of this shared savings provision directly impacts the contractor’s approach to project execution. Instead of merely aiming to complete the project within the GMP, the contractor is motivated to actively seek cost-effective solutions, value engineering opportunities, and innovative construction techniques to reduce overall project expenses. A school construction project operating under a GMP, for example, might uncover a more efficient HVAC system design that lowers both initial installation costs and long-term energy consumption. The resulting savings are then divided between the school district (owner) and the construction firm (contractor), fostering a mutually beneficial outcome. This element of the GMP promotes a partnership approach rather than an adversarial relationship often seen in traditional fixed-price contracts.
The practical significance of shared savings extends beyond immediate cost reductions. It encourages transparency in project finances, as the contractor must diligently track and report all cost-saving measures to justify the shared savings calculation. It also fosters a more open and collaborative communication channel between the owner and contractor, promoting a sense of shared ownership and responsibility for the project’s success. The agreement on the sharing ratio is important, impacting motivation of the contructor. If the contractor receives a substantial portion of the savings, the incentive to implement cost-effective strategies is heightened. If the ratio is less favorable, the motivation may diminish, potentially affecting the overall success of this mechanism within the GMP framework. Furthermore, clear guidelines regarding what constitutes a “saving” are crucial. These should be stipulated in the contract, to mitigate potential disputes related to, for example, unexpected market shifts in material prices not directly attributable to contractor effort. The savings are usually tracked and managed using the earned value management(EVM) technique.
In conclusion, owner/contractor shared savings serve as a vital catalyst for efficient project delivery within a GMP contract. By aligning the financial interests of both parties, it fosters a culture of collaboration, incentivizes cost-conscious decision-making, and promotes transparency throughout the project lifecycle. The effective implementation of shared savings, however, hinges on clearly defined contractual terms, transparent cost tracking, and a commitment to open communication between all stakeholders. Addressing these considerations ensures that the intended benefits of shared savings are realized, contributing to the overall success of the project.
5. Scope Change Management
Scope change management is a critical aspect of any construction project, but it assumes particular importance within the framework of a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) contract. Because a GMP establishes a fixed upper limit on project costs, modifications to the original scope of work can have significant implications for the budget, schedule, and overall success of the project. An effective scope change management process is therefore essential for maintaining cost control, minimizing disputes, and ensuring that the project meets the owner’s evolving needs without exceeding the agreed-upon price ceiling.
-
Change Order Process
The change order process is the formal mechanism for documenting, evaluating, and approving modifications to the original scope of work. This process typically involves a written request from the owner or the contractor, detailing the proposed change, its rationale, and its potential impact on cost and schedule. The contractor then prepares a cost estimate for the change, which is reviewed and negotiated by the owner. Once approved, the change order becomes an amendment to the GMP contract, adjusting the maximum price and project timeline accordingly. A clearly defined and transparent change order process is crucial for maintaining trust and accountability throughout the project. For example, if the owner decides to add a new wing to a hospital under construction, a change order would be required, detailing the additional costs and time needed to complete the expansion. Failure to have a robust process can lead to disputes and overruns.
-
Impact on Contingency
Changes to the project scope often draw upon the contingency fund established within the GMP. If the costs associated with a change order can be absorbed within the contingency, the GMP remains unchanged. However, if the change significantly exceeds the contingency, it may necessitate an increase in the overall maximum price. Effective scope change management, therefore, involves carefully assessing the impact of proposed changes on the contingency fund. This assessment helps to prioritize essential changes and identify opportunities to mitigate costs. For instance, substituting more expensive materials with alternatives in another part of the project could offset the cost increase of a requested scope addition. This proactive approach preserves the financial integrity of the GMP and minimizes the need for costly budget adjustments.
-
Documentation and Communication
Meticulous documentation and clear communication are fundamental to successful scope change management in a GMP project. Every proposed change, cost estimate, and approval must be thoroughly documented to provide a clear audit trail. Regular communication between the owner and the contractor is essential for ensuring that all parties are informed of potential changes and their implications. This open dialogue enables informed decision-making and minimizes the risk of misunderstandings or disputes. Imagine a scenario where an electrical engineer identifies an error in the existing blueprints, necessitating alterations to the wiring schematic. Proper documentation of the original error and the steps taken to correct it, along with continuous updates to all stakeholders, are essential to maintain transparency and avoid future complications.
-
Risk Assessment and Mitigation
Changes in scope introduce new risks to the project, which must be carefully assessed and mitigated. A thorough risk assessment should identify potential impacts on cost, schedule, and quality. Mitigation strategies may involve revising the project schedule, adjusting resource allocations, or implementing alternative construction techniques. Proactive risk management is critical for preventing scope changes from derailing the project and exceeding the GMP. For example, if a change in building materials necessitates a new permit, the potential delays associated with the permit process must be considered. Mitigation strategies might include expediting the permit application or exploring alternative materials that do not require additional approvals. A proactive strategy is critical to protect both the budget and timeline.
In conclusion, effective scope change management is not simply an administrative task within a GMP project; it is a strategic imperative that directly influences cost control, project success, and the relationship between the owner and the contractor. By establishing a clear change order process, carefully managing the contingency fund, maintaining meticulous documentation, and proactively assessing risks, projects can adapt to evolving needs without compromising the financial stability provided by the Guaranteed Maximum Price.
6. Detailed cost breakdown
A detailed cost breakdown is an indispensable component within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) construction contract. Its existence directly informs the establishment of the guaranteed maximum price itself. Without a comprehensive itemization of anticipated project expenses, the GMP lacks a verifiable foundation and becomes susceptible to inaccuracies and potential disputes. For instance, in the construction of a commercial office building under a GMP arrangement, the detailed cost breakdown would meticulously enumerate expenses such as site preparation, foundation work, structural steel, HVAC systems, electrical wiring, plumbing, interior finishes, and landscaping. Each category is further subdivided into specific material costs, labor hours, equipment rental fees, and subcontractor quotations. This level of granularity provides the owner with a transparent view of the project budget and allows for informed decision-making during the construction process. The lack of such a breakdown would leave the owner vulnerable to inflated cost estimates and opaque accounting practices, ultimately undermining the value of the GMP.
The practical significance of a detailed cost breakdown extends beyond the initial pricing phase. It serves as a critical tool for monitoring project expenses throughout the construction lifecycle. As the project progresses, actual costs are tracked against the original estimates, allowing for early detection of potential overruns or savings. This proactive monitoring enables the project team to implement corrective measures, such as value engineering or scope adjustments, to maintain budget adherence. A granular breakdown facilitates the efficient management of change orders. When modifications to the project scope are proposed, the detailed cost breakdown allows for a precise assessment of the incremental costs associated with the change, enabling the owner to make informed decisions about whether to approve the modification. It also fosters trust and collaboration between the owner and the contractor, as both parties have access to the same comprehensive cost information. For example, consider a situation where unexpected soil conditions necessitate additional foundation work. The detailed cost breakdown allows the contractor to demonstrate the specific costs associated with the remediation, ensuring that any adjustments to the GMP are justified and transparent.
In summary, a detailed cost breakdown is not merely an administrative requirement within a GMP contract; it is a foundational element that underpins the credibility and effectiveness of the entire pricing structure. It empowers the owner with transparency, facilitates proactive cost management, and fosters a collaborative relationship with the contractor. Without a comprehensive and verifiable cost breakdown, the GMP loses its intended purpose, increasing the risk of budget overruns, disputes, and ultimately, project failure.
7. Payment terms specified
Specification of payment terms is intrinsically linked to the functionality of a Guaranteed Maximum Price contract within construction projects. These terms delineate the schedule and method by which the contractor receives compensation for completed work, directly affecting cash flow and project viability. Ambiguous or unfavorable terms can undermine the financial stability of the contractor, potentially leading to delays, quality compromises, or even project abandonment. Conversely, well-defined and equitable payment terms incentivize timely completion and adherence to quality standards. For instance, a GMP contract might specify monthly payments based on a percentage of completed work, verified through site inspections and approved invoices. This ensures a consistent revenue stream for the contractor, enabling the procurement of materials and the timely payment of subcontractors. In contrast, a contract stipulating a single lump-sum payment upon project completion places a significant financial burden on the contractor, requiring substantial upfront investment and increasing the risk of financial strain.
The specification of payment terms directly impacts risk allocation within the GMP framework. Contracts often include provisions for retainage, where a percentage of each payment is withheld until substantial completion of the project. This protects the owner against incomplete or defective work. However, excessive retainage can negatively impact the contractor’s cash flow. The negotiation of retainage percentages and release schedules is therefore a crucial aspect of establishing equitable payment terms. Furthermore, GMP contracts typically address payment for stored materials. The payment schedule for items stored on-site or off-site must be clearly defined to reduce the contractor’s financial exposure and incentivizes upfront procurement which can reduce overall costs due to economies of scale and avoiding future price escalations. Payment terms have significant effects of scope creep, in which the terms are specified it reduces the change and allows for better management of resources.
In conclusion, payment terms within a GMP contract are not merely procedural details; they are fundamental to the financial health of the project and the contractor’s ability to deliver quality work on schedule. Clear, equitable, and well-defined payment terms are crucial for fostering a collaborative environment, incentivizing efficient project management, and mitigating potential financial risks for all parties involved. Neglecting the specification of these terms can lead to disputes, delays, and ultimately, project failure, thereby defeating the cost certainty that the GMP seeks to provide.
8. Change order process
The change order process is an integral component of a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) contract, serving as the mechanism for managing modifications to the original project scope without undermining the fundamental principle of a pre-determined cost ceiling. Given that construction projects are dynamic endeavors susceptible to unforeseen circumstances or evolving client requirements, a robust change order process is crucial for addressing these inevitable alterations while maintaining financial control. Without a clearly defined procedure, scope changes can lead to cost overruns, disputes, and ultimately, the erosion of the GMP’s value to the project owner. For example, consider a renovation project where the initial GMP was based on existing architectural drawings. If, during demolition, previously unknown structural issues are discovered, a change order process is triggered to assess the scope, cost, and schedule implications of addressing these issues.
The efficacy of the change order process directly influences the success of a GMP project. A well-defined process typically includes provisions for documenting the proposed change, evaluating its impact on cost and schedule, obtaining necessary approvals from both the owner and the contractor, and formally amending the contract to reflect the agreed-upon modifications. This structured approach promotes transparency, accountability, and informed decision-making. Contrast this with a scenario where changes are implemented informally, without proper documentation or cost analysis. Such a scenario can quickly lead to budget overruns, disagreements over responsibility, and a breakdown in communication between the project stakeholders. Moreover, an efficient process enables the project team to proactively manage risks associated with scope changes, minimizing their potential impact on the GMP. The process should specify the contingency utilization and its effect to the overall cost management of the construction project.
In conclusion, the change order process is not merely a procedural formality within a GMP contract; it is a vital safeguard that ensures the project can adapt to evolving circumstances without sacrificing financial predictability. Its implementation demands a well-defined framework, transparent communication, and a collaborative approach from all project stakeholders. A deficient change order process weakens the foundations of the GMP agreement, increasing the risk of cost overruns and jeopardizing the project’s overall success. Therefore, a meticulous change order protocol is as crucial to a GMP as the maximum price itself.
9. Project timeline impact
The project timeline, or schedule, is inextricably linked to the dynamics of a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) construction contract. The agreed-upon completion date, and the milestones leading up to it, exert a considerable influence on cost management and overall project success under this contractual framework.
-
Contingency Buffer Erosion
An extended timeline, whether due to unforeseen delays or scope changes, can directly erode the contingency buffer built into the GMP. As time progresses, indirect costs such as site overhead, equipment rental, and project management fees accumulate. If the schedule slips significantly, these accrued costs can consume a substantial portion of the contingency fund, leaving less financial protection against unexpected issues arising later in the project. Consider a commercial building project where unexpected permitting delays push the completion date back by several months. The additional site management, security, and equipment rental fees incurred during this period will deplete the contingency, potentially leaving the contractor vulnerable to cost overruns if other challenges arise.
-
Material Price Volatility
The longer the project timeline, the greater the exposure to material price volatility. Market fluctuations in the cost of key construction materials, such as lumber, steel, or concrete, can significantly impact the overall project budget. While a GMP contract typically includes provisions for material price escalation, prolonged timelines increase the likelihood of exceeding these allowances, requiring the contractor to absorb the additional costs or negotiate a change order with the owner. For example, if a multi-year infrastructure project experiences delays, a sudden surge in steel prices could significantly impact the project’s profitability, potentially exceeding the contingency allocated for material price fluctuations. Careful monitoring of market trends and proactive procurement strategies become crucial for mitigating this risk.
-
Subcontractor Availability and Pricing
Extended project timelines can also affect subcontractor availability and pricing. If the project schedule stretches out longer than originally anticipated, subcontractors may become unavailable due to commitments to other projects. This can force the contractor to seek alternative subcontractors, potentially at higher prices. Furthermore, the longer the duration of a subcontract agreement, the greater the likelihood of price increases due to inflation or changes in market conditions. A delay in a residential development project, for instance, may result in key subcontractors, such as electricians or plumbers, becoming unavailable, forcing the general contractor to find replacements at a premium. These additional costs would need to be managed within the existing GMP constraints.
-
Impact on Shared Savings Potential
While a shorter project timeline can increase the potential for shared savings within a GMP contract, an excessively compressed schedule can also introduce risks. In an attempt to accelerate completion, contractors may forego value engineering opportunities or compromise on quality, ultimately negating the potential for cost savings. Moreover, an overambitious schedule can increase the likelihood of errors and rework, leading to cost overruns that erode any potential shared savings. For example, an effort to expedite the construction of a new school building might result in rushed concrete pouring, leading to structural defects and costly repairs. This can consume the budget contingency, leaving the Owner with higher financial cost and potential legal action.
In conclusion, the project timeline exerts a significant influence on cost management and risk within a GMP framework. Extended schedules can erode contingency buffers, expose the project to material price volatility and subcontractor availability issues, and impact shared savings potential. Effective project management, proactive risk mitigation, and realistic schedule planning are therefore essential for maximizing the benefits of a GMP contract and ensuring project success.
Frequently Asked Questions
This section addresses common inquiries regarding the Guaranteed Maximum Price contract model used in construction projects. These answers aim to provide clarity on the functionality, benefits, and limitations of this pricing structure.
Question 1: What constitutes a “guarantee” within a Guaranteed Maximum Price?
The “guarantee” refers to the upper limit on the total cost of the construction project. The contractor assumes the financial risk for expenses exceeding this established maximum, excluding owner-directed changes in scope.
Question 2: How is the Guaranteed Maximum Price determined?
The GMP is established through a detailed estimation process, encompassing labor, materials, subcontractor fees, overhead, and a contingency for unforeseen circumstances. The contractor presents this comprehensive cost breakdown to the owner for review and negotiation.
Question 3: What happens if the actual project cost is less than the Guaranteed Maximum Price?
In many GMP contracts, a shared savings provision exists. The savings, representing the difference between the GMP and the actual cost, are distributed between the owner and the contractor according to a pre-agreed percentage.
Question 4: What types of changes are not covered by the Guaranteed Maximum Price?
Changes in the project scope directed by the owner are typically not included in the GMP. These changes necessitate a formal change order process, potentially adjusting the maximum price and project timeline.
Question 5: What are the primary advantages for an owner utilizing a Guaranteed Maximum Price contract?
The primary advantage is budget certainty. The GMP provides a clear upper limit on project costs, enabling more accurate financial planning and mitigating the risk of cost overruns. The contract also incentivizes cost-conscious project management by the contractor.
Question 6: What recourse does an owner have if the contractor fails to complete the project within the Guaranteed Maximum Price?
The contract specifies the remedies available to the owner in the event of a breach. These may include requiring the contractor to absorb the excess costs, pursuing legal action for damages, or terminating the contract and engaging another contractor to complete the project.
In summary, the Guaranteed Maximum Price offers a balance between budget predictability and flexibility, provided that a clear contract and strong communication are present between parties.
The following section will examine best practices for successful implementation of this pricing strategy, identifying key success elements.
Tips for Effective Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) Implementation
Successfully navigating a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) project requires careful planning and execution. These guidelines are intended to assist in optimizing project outcomes when utilizing this contractual approach.
Tip 1: Define the Project Scope Precisely: Ambiguity in the project scope introduces significant risk to a GMP contract. Comprehensive and detailed project plans, specifications, and drawings are essential. A clearly defined scope minimizes the potential for costly change orders and disputes.
Tip 2: Conduct Thorough Due Diligence on Contractors: Select contractors with a proven track record of successfully managing projects under a GMP framework. Evaluate their experience, financial stability, and risk management capabilities. References should be checked carefully.
Tip 3: Establish a Realistic Contingency Fund: Base the contingency fund on a comprehensive risk assessment, considering factors such as site conditions, market volatility, and potential permitting delays. Ensure that the contingency is adequate to address unforeseen issues without significantly inflating the GMP.
Tip 4: Implement a Robust Change Order Process: Establish a clear and transparent change order process that outlines the procedures for documenting, evaluating, and approving modifications to the project scope. Ensure that all change orders are thoroughly documented and tracked.
Tip 5: Maintain Open Communication: Foster open and frequent communication between the owner, contractor, and other project stakeholders. This promotes collaboration, facilitates proactive problem-solving, and minimizes the potential for misunderstandings.
Tip 6: Monitor Project Costs Closely: Implement a system for tracking project costs in real-time, comparing actual expenses against the detailed cost breakdown. Early detection of potential overruns allows for timely corrective action.
Tip 7: Actively Manage Risks: Proactively identify and assess potential project risks, developing mitigation strategies to minimize their impact. Regularly review the risk management plan and update it as needed.
These tips emphasize the importance of thorough preparation, open communication, and proactive risk management in achieving successful outcomes with a Guaranteed Maximum Price contract. Adherence to these guidelines enhances cost control and fosters a collaborative environment for the project.
The following section concludes the examination of the Guaranteed Maximum Price, summarizing the key benefits and limitations of this pricing model.
Conclusion
The preceding exploration detailed “what is a gmp in construction,” examining its core components, risk allocation mechanisms, and implementation best practices. The Guaranteed Maximum Price framework offers a structured approach to construction project costing, providing budget certainty for owners and incentivizing efficient management by contractors. However, its efficacy hinges upon meticulous planning, transparent communication, and a clearly defined contract that addresses potential challenges and scope changes.
Understanding the nuances of “what is a gmp in construction” enables project stakeholders to leverage its benefits while mitigating its inherent risks. Continued diligence in contract negotiation, risk assessment, and project monitoring remains crucial for maximizing the value and minimizing potential conflicts associated with this increasingly prevalent construction pricing strategy. As the industry evolves, so too must the approaches to its application to continue to achieve efficient cost predictability and project success.
