From Informal Coordination to Scope Commitments

Abstract

This thesis examines how scope-related decisions formed during the Dutch bouwteam phase are interpreted once projects transition to execution under UAV or UAV-GC contracts. Bouwteam collaboration is characterised by informal coordination, joint problem-solving, and flexible decision-making under uncertainty. While this environment supports progress and adaptive design development, many decisions gradually become direction-setting for scope, cost, and risk allocation in the subsequent realisation phase, where formal contractual regimes apply. The transition between these phases proves structurally vulnerable: decisions that emerged informally may later be reinterpreted when responsibility, liability, and evidentiary standards shift. A combined analytical approach is adopted, integrating a conceptual analysis of informal decision formation and cross-phase commitment, a contract analysis of DG2020, UAV 2012 and UAV-GC 2005, and a Q-method study with validation interviews across professional roles. The findings reveal a structural tension between the value of informal coordination and the expectation of formal governance. Project managers predominantly assess informal practices as functionally effective, whereas contract and technical managers emphasise vulnerabilities related to mandate clarity, decision embedding, execution timing, and decision articulation. These differences reflect role-based responsibilities rather than conflicting values. The study concludes that governance challenges do not stem from insufficient formal control, but from limited visibility of when informal alignment becomes a commitment with downstream significance. A proportionate governance framework is developed to support explicit recognition and embedding of such commitment moments without undermining collaborative flexibility.