Dr Stuart Kings, NEC4 drafter, co-author of NEC3/4 Practical Solutions, and technical director at Sypro, explores why the digital obligations created by modern procurement frameworks don’t stop once a contract is signed
Until the Procurement Act 2023, public sector construction always treated procurement compliance as something that happens before a contract is signed. The Act has since strengthened the transparency requirements surrounding public contracts, with further requirements around payment information and contract performance now in force.
Since 1 January 2026, contracting authorities have published payment compliance notices under section 69 of The Procurement Act 2023 and assess supplier performance under section 71. From 1 April 2026, section 70 added quarterly publication of every individual payment over £30,000 made under a new-regime contract.
For contracts worth more than £5m, section 71 requires recording performance against contractual KPIs on the Central Digital Platform (CDP). Assessments happen annually and again at termination.
Standing as a single source of truth, evidence of poor performance under the Act can be used to exclude a supplier from future public procurements. When an authority assesses performance, will proactive digital contract management be visible?
Modern contracts for modern communications
The first step in achieving compliance is getting the contract right from the outset. NEC’s clarity and collaboration-focused design has always been the favourable choice in this respect.
Updated terms from NEC3 to NEC4 Engineering and Construction Contract (ECC) shifted the focus to proactive digital contract management by introducing Clause 13.2, which makes the communication system central to the contractual process. If a particular system is named, communications need to take place through that system to have contractual effect. Reverting to old habits such as email or Microsoft Teams will not count as valid communications if they are not the specified system.
Construction projects generate an enormous volume of information. Instructions, early warnings, compensation events, programmes, payment information and other communications all need to be traceable.
The Procurement Act’s wider transparency agenda reinforces the importance of having reliable information and records throughout the life of a public contract, rather than attempting to reconstruct them retrospectively.
Therefore, a system that records who communicated what, when and in relation to which contractual process provides a much stronger foundation for transparency and accountability.
Formal and auditable instructions
One of the most common sources of contractual difficulty is a failure to follow the required process when something changes.
Under NEC4, a project manager’s instruction can change the scope, while a change affecting time or cost may also need to be dealt with through the compensation event process. If an instruction is unclear, issued through the wrong channel or separated from the subsequent contractual process, ambiguity can quickly develop.
A dedicated system can provide structured, time-stamped communication threads, link an instruction to the relevant documentation and maintain an auditable record of the actions that follow, giving users access to the same contractual history.
That becomes particularly valuable when projects are under pressure. An instruction might begin as a seemingly straightforward change, but if its implications for programme, cost or risk are not properly recorded, the consequences can emerge months later.
The objective should therefore be to make the compliant route the easiest route. If project teams have to leave their contract management system every time they want to communicate, informal channels will inevitably become part of the process. If the contractual workflow is built into the digital environment, compliance can become part of normal project behaviour.
Turning compliance into a daily discipline
A checklist can be one of the most effective tools available to a project team. NEC4 includes a substantial number of obligations, responsibilities, deadlines, and procedural requirements covering everything from early warnings and programmes to payment, compensation events, subcontractor approvals, and secondary options.
Research cited from King’s College London (2024), in collaboration with The Adjudication Society, found inadequate contract administration to be the most cited cause of construction disputes, named by half of those surveyed. Lack of competence among project participants followed at 42%. The same report recorded 2,264 adjudication referrals in a single year, the highest figure on record.
The solution is not to eliminate every familiar tool, but to establish a clear hierarchy. Teams can discuss an issue informally, but the contractual communication should still be read, copied and recorded through the system specified by the contract.
Digital from day one
The most effective time to establish these behaviours is before problems arise.
A project launch should therefore cover more than programme dates, roles and commercial arrangements. Teams should understand how the contract will be administered and, crucially, how communications will be handled.
Joint training is particularly valuable. Project managers, contractors, consultants, finance teams and relevant supply chain partners should understand the project’s communication system and what Clause 13.2 means in practice.
This is also an opportunity to establish the wider culture NEC4 requires. View early warnings as a mechanism for identifying and managing risk, not as a precursor to blame or dispute. Deal with compensation events promptly. Programmes should be reviewed collaboratively. Key deadlines should be visible to those responsible.
Digital systems can support all of this by providing a single, auditable source of information and by highlighting actions before they become missed obligations.
Compliance lives where the work happens
Digital contract management connects the contract’s legal requirements with the operational reality of delivering a project, building confidence that it is managed properly every day.
The Procurement Act has now caught up to the contract suite and has shifted the burden of proof, with implications for everyone involved in delivering a public contract. Awarding the right contract is no longer enough. Authorities must show, publicly and annually, how that contract is performing.
By managing instructions, risk and performance data natively through the contract environment from day one, compliance isn’t something you scramble to prove – it is already built into how you work.
The post Why the Procurement Act has made contract administration a robust public record appeared first on Planning, Building & Construction Today.
