appointment of consultants or contractors

• inappropriate appointment eg not enough experience or relevant experience
• inadequate brief
• insufficient fees to do the job properly
• insufficient resources to do the job properly
• complexity of project not sufficiently appreciated

design process

• investigations not thorough enough
• analysis or design not sufficiently rigorous
• inappropriate use of software
• ambiguous or unusual computer results
• use of unproven materials or techniques
• conflict with regulations or codes of practice
• inadequate checking, reviewing or quality assurance (QA)
• taking disproportionate risks
• designs not sufficiently robust
• insufficient detail in drawings
• design responsibilities passed too far down the line

manufacturing or construction process

• design intent not clear from documentation
• inadequate or insufficient drawings
• inadequate method statements
• inadequate staff training and experience levels
• resident engineers with a lack of involvement and authority
• divided responsibilities leading to confusion
• unsafe temporary works and falsework
• workmanship that could lead to premature failure
• use of unsuitable materials
• not using products in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions
• inadequate supervision levels
• dangerous conditions
• inadequate budget
• near misses

operation and maintenance

• lack of guidance from original designers
• no information available on design or construction
• incomplete as built drawings
• refurbishments and alterations made without proper consideration
• inadequate frequency and scope of inspections
• insufficient budget to address structural concerns
• dangerous techniques employed
• unusual dynamic behaviour
• severe climate change effects
• premature deterioration or undue corrosion
• indications of instability
• unexpected deflections or deformations
• component failures
• components that cannot be inspected
• near misses