NEC4 Programme Compliance: A Practical SME Checklist

NEC is often sold as “good management in a contract.” In practice, it is also a commercial control system.

If you are a specialist subcontractor or SME contractor, your programme is not just a planning output. It is the document that connects your intent to entitlement: time, change, and payment discussions.

This matters more in 2026 than it did a few years ago. Margins are tighter, cash is more sensitive, and formal disputes remain common. UK adjudication research reported record referral volumes (2,264 referrals between May 2023 and April 2024) and identified inadequate contract administration as the leading cause of disputes (50%).  

If you are not governing the programme properly, you are exposed to the very behaviours that drive these outcomes: late decisions, unclear records, and arguments about “what was really planned.”

The good news is that NEC planning does not need to be heavyweight to be effective. For many SME packages, a simple, logic-linked, contract-compliant programme is enough to protect margin and reduce payment friction.

What NEC planning is really doing for you

NEC’s “Accepted Programme” regime (clauses 31 and 32 in the ECC) is intended to provide an up-to-date, realistic plan that both parties can manage against. NEC’s own guidance and commentary on additional time highlights how difficult it becomes to demonstrate time entitlement when there is no up-to-date accepted programme, and why the programme should reflect a realistic and practicable plan at any point in time.

Separate from entitlement, there is a broader point. Peer-reviewed research on construction cost overruns continues to identify planning and scheduling issues as a central, high-influence driver of cost overruns across the literature.  That aligns with what most SMEs experience day to day: when sequencing, constraints, and access dates are not controlled, the job becomes reactive. Reactive delivery is where margin evaporates.

Four predictable ways SMEs lose money when the programme is weak:

1. Tender scoring and mobilisation risk

   
   

   Many clients score delivery confidence, not just price. A bid that includes a credible sequence, key dates, and a realistic methodology reduces perceived risk. SMEs often lose points not because they cannot deliver, but because they cannot demonstrate delivery in a structured way. A concise tender programme and narrative can be the difference between “commercially attractive” and “non-compliant.”

   
   

2. Compensation events and time discussions become opinion-led

   
   

   NEC commentary is explicit that absence of an up-to-date accepted programme makes time assessment harder and can turn analysis into a hypothetical exercise because the accepted programme does not model the status of works at the time the event occurs.  When that happens, discussions shift from evidence to interpretation. SMEs rarely win that type of debate, especially when the Project Manager is under pressure to control employer exposure.

   
   

3. Delay narratives drift onto the subcontractor

   
   

   Without regular updates that capture progress, constraints, and the evolving critical path, it becomes difficult to separate employer-driven delay, interface delay, and subcontractor delay. Even where the facts are on your side, the absence of a disciplined baseline and progress record weakens your ability to explain cause and effect at pace.

   
   

4. Payment friction increases

   
   

   Even where payment is not explicitly “programme-driven,” payment assessments and progress agreement rely on a shared view of status. A current programme, tied to short-term lookahead and progress evidence, reduces ambiguity and improves the quality of commercial conversations. That is often the fastest way to improve cashflow on live NEC jobs.

   
   

The minimum viable NEC programme for SMEs

You do not need Primavera P6 or a 40-page planning method statement to get value. You do need a programme that is compliant, readable, and defensible.

A practical minimum standard, aligned to common NEC expectations, is:

1. Key contract dates and access dates (start, access, key dates, completion).

2. A logic-linked sequence that reflects how you will actually build, not how you wish it would happen.

3. Interfaces, constraints, and information releases that you rely on.

4. Procurement and lead times for long-lead items, with clear “need by” dates.

5. Testing, commissioning, approvals, and hold points where relevant.

6. Float shown, and time risk allowances shown where you are carrying risk.

7. Clear milestones that match how the job will be assessed and managed.

8. Regular updates at the progress interval, showing actual progress and realistic remaining durations.

9. A short narrative explaining change, constraints, and the critical path shift.

10. A simple evidence pack (progress notes, photos, delivery records) referenced in the update narrative.

    
    

Industry commentary on NEC programme compliance is consistent that the contract expects float and time risk allowances to be shown on the programme, and that the acceptance regime exists to ensure the programme is practicable and realistic.  Even if you keep it simple, those elements matter because they affect how the plan is interpreted when change arrives.

What to do in the first two weeks on an NEC job

Day 1 to 3: Set the rules of the programmeAgree the programme format, update frequency, and what “progress” means for your package. Confirm access assumptions, working hours, constraints, and interfaces.

Day 4 to 7: Build and submit a baseline that can be acceptedAim for a logic-linked programme that tells the truth. If it is not practicable, it is harder to accept and harder to defend later. NEC commentary flags that the accepted programme should represent realistic and practicable plans and should be kept current.

Day 8 to 14: Start the update rhythm earlyDo not wait for problems. Make the first update quickly, even if progress is small. The discipline of capturing actuals and updating remaining work is what prevents the job becoming a dispute story later.

A short example (typical SME outcome)

A specialist contractor bids a mid-value package with a strong price but provides only a basic milestone list. The client asks for a resubmission with a programme aligned to NEC expectations. With a simple logic-linked programme, procurement dates, access dates, and a short narrative, the contractor improves delivery confidence and wins.

On the live job, the same programme becomes the weekly tool that separates client-driven constraints from subcontractor performance, and it gives the QS team a cleaner structure for change conversations. The commercial benefit is not theoretical. It is fewer payment arguments, faster agreement on what changed, and less time spent firefighting “who delayed what.”

References

1. Stephensons Solicitors (2024). Construction adjudication in the UK: insights and trends. Accessed 19 January 2026.

2. NEC Contracts (n.d.). Additional time in ECC: a practical approach. Accessed 19 January 2026.

3. Abdelalim, A. et al. (2025). An Analysis of Factors Contributing to Cost Overruns in the Global Construction Industry. Buildings. Accessed 19 January 2026.

4. Ramskill Martin (2017). NEC4 Programme Compliance. Accessed 19 January 2026.