A capital project worth 150 million euros gets its own controls team. A project worth eight million usually gets a project leadership that keeps track of schedule and costs on the side – in a spreadsheet that is updated with every invoice. That works as long as nothing unexpected happens. When a deviation occurs, it is often only noticed once there is hardly any room left to correct it.
The reason is rarely negligence; it is arithmetic. Bought in the conventional way, project control means one full-time position per discipline – for a small project, that is disproportionately expensive. So the question is not whether control makes sense, but in what scope.
Why we are being asked this more and more often right now
Operators want more transparency and planning certainty. Many therefore now make project controls a standard requirement for smaller projects too. And where budgets are scrutinised more closely, even a smaller project needs a reliable forecast.
What typically happens without project control
- The commitments are missing. As soon as an order is placed, the budget is economically committed – even if the invoice only arrives months later. Anyone who records only invoices sees the overrun too late.
- The schedule is too coarse – and stays at the status of approval. Often it was never built to the necessary level of detail in the first place: the workshops in which the plan is agreed with all trades and parties involved are missing. After that it is not updated, and a delay at a supplier only surfaces when installation is waiting.
- The documentation is produced at the end. At handover, documents are missing, and where evidence is required – for example towards the client – the search begins.
Avoiding these three issues does not take a full-time position. But it does take someone who looks after them regularly and brings their full experience to bear.
How demand fluctuates across the phases
Capacity demand in project control is not constant. In preparation, a fraction of a position is enough; in execution, it takes many times that; towards the end, considerably less again. Anyone who staffs it permanently either pays for idle time or lacks capacity at the peak. An example from our capacity planning for a project worth around 150 million euros:
| Discipline (FTE) | Preparation | Ramp-up | Execution | Completion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scheduling | 0,4 | 1,0 | 2,0 | 0,5 |
| Cost Control | 0,8 | 1,0 | 0,8 | 0,5 |
| Document Control | 0,3 | 0,7 | 0,5 | 0,6 |
| Total | 1,5 | 2,7 | 3,3 | 1,6 |
Example values. The profile is set for each project and phase and adjusted continuously.
What stands out is not just the total but the shift: cost control is the largest discipline in preparation, when budget and structure are being set up. Scheduling peaks in execution. Document control rises again towards completion, when the final documentation is handed over. In a smaller project, all values are correspondingly lower – and that is exactly where the entry point of 0.1 FTE comes in.
What 0.1 FTE means in practice
Arithmetically, 0.1 FTE is around four hours a week. In a small project, that is enough for the tasks that have to be done regularly:
- record commitments and actual costs and update the forecast of final cost in each reporting cycle
- update the schedule against actual progress and name deviations
- assess changes and variations for their impact on budget and schedule
- prepare a short report that makes the decision easier for the project leadership
What 0.1 FTE does not cover: daily presence on site, moderating every coordination meeting or managing the contractors. That stays with the project leadership – or it needs more capacity, which we provide as well. So that such a small share still runs reliably, the deployed team is backed by a back office that handles quality assurance and cover during holidays or absence.
When the model fits
- Demand and mix change across the phases. Scheduling, cost control and document control can be engaged individually or combined – in the proportion each phase requires.
- The project leadership sits with the operator and takes the decisions. We give it the basis: current figures, a reliable forecast and deviations while they can still be steered.
- Several smaller projects run in parallel. A team that looks after several measures in a portfolio knows how they connect and reports consistently.
When another model is worth considering
- When someone is to be firmly embedded in your organisation. This can also be covered by Project Controls on demand – up to a full-time position and beyond, on site if you wish. If the person is to work permanently at 1 FTE in your organisation, staffing is a good alternative.
- When you want to build the expertise in-house for the long term. Then direct placement or training your team makes more sense than an external service.
- When it is about a plant shutdown. Project Controls on demand is the model for capital projects. For turnarounds, there are dedicated services in scheduling and execution coordination.
- When the project is very small and easy to oversee. A simple budget with few orders can be managed by an experienced project leadership itself. Frankly: then you do not need us for the controlling – at most for a review of the cost estimate before approval.
Four questions to help you decide
- Does your company or your steering committee require project controls for this project too – and who provides them today?
- How many orders and contractors does the project have – and are commitments recorded from the moment of ordering?
- Was the schedule built with all trades and parties involved – and is it updated after approval?
- How much does the effort differ between preparation, execution and completion?
Anyone without a clear answer to two or more of these questions should consider project control in the right scope – before the first major order is placed.
Conclusion
Project control is not a question of project size but of scope. Small projects also need a forecast, an updated schedule and documentation that is in place at the end. They just do not always need a full-time position for it. What matters is that the capacity follows the project – and that someone says honestly when another model fits better.
How we put this into practice
With Project Controls on demand, you engage scheduling, cost control and document control as a service – from 0.1 FTE per discipline, scalable up and down again phase by phase. One team, one contract, one point of contact.
Are you planning a project or a portfolio of smaller measures? We will propose a capacity plan per phase – the initial call is free of charge.
Frequently asked questions
What does 0.1 FTE mean in practice?
Roughly four hours a week per discipline. In smaller projects, that is enough to keep the cost forecast, schedule and reports regularly updated. During execution, capacity can be raised to several full-time positions and reduced again towards the end.
How does the model differ from staffing?
With staffing, we provide the experts, whom you select and deploy in your organisation. With Project Controls on demand, we deliver the work as a service: a team that we manage and back up with a back office scales with your project. Many clients combine both.
How is it billed?
We bill by the hour, by day rates or at a fixed price – we work out together which model fits. The initial call and the proposal for a capacity plan are free of charge.
Sources: Project Controls on demand and Cost Control service pages (ep-cm.com)