Which Route Offers the Best Foundation for Construction Disputes?

One of the most common questions I hear from construction professionals considering a move into claims and disputes is :

Which background gives you the best foundation?

Is it working for a main contractor?

A subcontractor?

Or a consultancy?

There is no single route that guarantees success. I regularly speak with and have recruited excellent disputes professionals who have come from all three backgrounds.

All three routes can provide an excellent foundation for a career in construction disputes, but they tend to develop different skills. Depending on whether you want to move into quantum, delay, claims consulting or eventually expert witness work, some experience may prove more useful than others.

The important thing is understanding what each environment teaches you and, just as importantly, what it may not.

Main contractor | Strong commercial and contractual foundations

For someone looking to move into construction disputes, main contractor experience can provide an extremely strong foundation.

Working on live construction projects gives you first-hand exposure to the commercial and contractual issues that can ultimately become the subject of a dispute.

For Quantity Surveyors, this could include:

• variations and change management;
• extensions of time;
• loss and expense;
• subcontractor management;
• payment disputes;
• contractual notices;
• final account negotiations; and
• preparing or responding to claims.

You are not simply reviewing what previously happened several years later through project records. You have experienced the pressures and decisions that created those records in the first place.

That practical understanding can become incredibly useful when you later move into forensic work.

A particularly strong route into quantum

For aspiring Quantum Consultants, contractor-side commercial experience often transfers well.

A Quantity Surveyor who has spent several years assessing variations, analysing costs, preparing claims and negotiating commercial positions already possesses many of the underlying skills used within quantum disputes.

There is, however, an important distinction.

Working commercially for a contractor means representing your employer's position. Working in expert services requires a much more forensic and independent approach.

The challenge when moving into disputes is therefore often less about understanding construction costs and more about learning how to analyse evidence, substantiate conclusions and communicate those findings within formal reports.

Subcontractor | Closer to the Detail

Subcontractor experience is sometimes underestimated when people think about routes into construction disputes.

In reality, working for a specialist subcontractor can provide extremely valuable experience.

Subcontractors often operate on tight margins and are heavily affected by delay, disruption, variations, access issues and changes to sequencing. As a result, commercial professionals can become highly experienced in identifying and pursuing entitlement.

You may also develop a very detailed understanding of how work is actually carried out.

For example, a Quantity Surveyor working for a mechanical and electrical subcontractor may have significantly deeper knowledge of MEP costs, productivity and sequencing than someone working at a more general level.

That technical understanding can become extremely valuable in complex disputes.

The potential downside 

 The challenge can be demonstrating breadth. Someone who has spent most of their career within one specialist package may need to show a disputes consultancy that their commercial and analytical skills can transfer across different sectors, trades and types of claim.

That does not make the experience less valuable but it is something employers are likely to consider.

Consultancy | Breadth, Analysis & Client Skills

That does not make the experience less valuable — but it is something employers are likely to consider.

A traditional consultancy background can provide a very different foundation.

Quantity Surveyors working for a cost consultancy or PQS practice may have experience across multiple projects and clients, often developing strong skills in cost planning, procurement, contract administration and financial reporting.

Planners working within a project management or programme consultancy may similarly gain exposure to a wide variety of projects, programmes and stakeholders.

This breadth can be useful when moving into disputes.Consultants are also accustomed to advising clients rather than representing only one commercial position.

That can help develop the professional communication and analytical skills required in disputes work.

But how much contentious experience have you actually had?

The main challenge for someone moving from a traditional consultancy into disputes is often a lack of direct claims exposure.

You may be technically excellent, chartered and highly experienced, but if your career has focused predominantly on cost management or project delivery, a disputes consultancy may still view you as relatively inexperienced from a claims perspective.

This is particularly relevant at more senior levels.

A Senior Quantity Surveyor with ten years of general PQS experience will not necessarily move directly into a Senior Consultant position within a quantum disputes team.

There can be a degree of recalibration when entering the sector. This does not mean the consultancy route is weaker.

It simply means candidates need to demonstrate relevant experience in areas such as contractual analysis, contentious change, claims preparation, expert assistance or dispute resolution.

What about delay?

For delay professionals, the answer is slightly different.

Some of the strongest Delay Analysts I speak to originally developed their careers in planning roles with main contractors.That makes sense.

A contractor Planner is often closely involved with:

• preparing baseline programmes;
• updating progress;
• analysing critical paths;
• sequencing works;
• assessing the effect of change;
• preparing extension-of-time submissions; and
• explaining programme performance to project teams.

That practical experience provides an excellent understanding of how programmes are actually created and used.

It can be difficult to replicate this entirely in a consulting environment.

A Planner who has worked on live construction projects and understands why activities move, why logic changes and why records are imperfect can bring valuable perspective to forensic delay analysis.

However, as with quantum, forensic work requires another layer of skill.Being able to create and manage a programme does not automatically mean someone can carry out a robust retrospective delay analysis.

That transition requires learning formal methodologies, evidence-based analysis and report writing.

The best disputes professionals often have experience on both sides

When I look at some of the strongest people working in claims and disputes, many have not followed one single route.

• They may have started with a main contractor before moving into consultancy.
• They may have worked for a subcontractor before joining a claims practice.
• Others may have started in traditional cost management before moving into commercial management and then disputes.

That combination can be extremely powerful. Live project experience provides context. Consultancy experience develops analysis and communication.Disputes experience teaches forensic thinking.

Over time, those skills can complement one another.

Does your background matter less as you become more experienced?

To an extent, yes. Your original background is particularly important when you are trying to secure your first role in construction disputes.

Employers need to understand what transferable skills you already have.

Once someone has spent several years working on claims, adjudications, arbitrations or litigation, their disputes experience becomes far more important than whether they originally started with a contractor, subcontractor or consultancy.

At that stage, employers will be more interested in questions such as:

•         What disputes have you worked on?
• What was your role?
• How much analysis did you complete yourself?
• Have you drafted sections of reports?
• Have you worked directly with experts?
• What exposure have you had to lawyers and clients?
• Have you been involved in arbitration, adjudication or litigation?

Your early career provides the foundation, but it does not need to define your entire career.

So, which route is best?

If I had to generalise:

Main contractor experience can provide an excellent foundation for commercial claims, quantum and delay because of the exposure to live projects, contractual issues and change.

Subcontractor experience can produce very strong claims professionals, particularly where they have developed detailed commercial and technical knowledge alongside hands-on experience pursuing entitlement.

Consultancy experience can provide excellent analytical, advisory and client-facing skills, although candidates may need to build more direct contentious experience before moving into specialist disputes work.

But none of these routes guarantees success.

A contractor Quantity Surveyor who has never prepared a claim may be less relevant than a consultant who has spent several years advising clients on disputed variations.

A subcontractor QS with strong claims experience may be better prepared for quantum work than someone from a much larger organisation with limited personal responsibility.

It comes down to the experience gained, not simply the name of the type of company on your CV.

What should you focus on if you want to move into disputes?

If construction claims and disputes is where you want your career to go, try to build experience that will be useful regardless of your current employer.

• Look for opportunities to become involved in contentious variations, claims preparation, extensions of time, loss and expense, programme analysis and contractual correspondence.
• Understand the contract rather than only the commercial numbers.
• Improve your report writing.
• Keep strong records.
• Try to understand not just what happened, but why it happened, what the contractual consequences were and how you would prove it.
• Those are the skills that begin to move someone from traditional project delivery towards forensic disputes work.

Conclusion

There is no single correct route into construction claims and disputes. Main contractor, subcontractor and consultancy backgrounds can all produce excellent disputes professionals. Each develops different strengths.

What matters most is whether you can translate your experience into the analytical, contractual and evidence skills required within a disputes environment.

At Maxim Recruitment, I regularly speak with Quantity Surveyors, Commercial Managers and Planners who are considering their first move into construction claims and disputes, as well as specialist consultancies looking to recruit professionals from these backgrounds.

If you are considering making the move and want to understand how your current experience is likely to be viewed by claims and disputes employers, please feel free to get in touch.

Nilam Modhwadia
Senior Recruitment Consultant
Maxim Recruitment
LinkedIn

Nilam is a Senior Recruitment Consultant based at our head office in Leicester, where she leads the UK and international Construction Disputes division. She specialises in recruiting top-tier professionals across the construction disputes sector; including claims consultants, quantum experts, delay analysts, and dispute resolution specialists. Nilam partners with premium, and often exclusive, employer clients, connecting them with exceptional talent to drive project success.