Daisy-Chaining Contractors: The Problems And Pitfalls

We've been warned (I hope!) that daisy-chaining plugs into extension leads as shown in in this picture is a very bad and dangerous idea. It's just as bad when our contractors do it by subcontracting to others.

You know the saying, "If it's too good to be true, it's probably not true"? Not enough of us are heeding it and it's causing a lot of problems for us. There are four ways in which daisy chaining contractors is detrimental to customer service delivery:

1. Contractors aren't always upfront about it
2. We don't know who is actually doing the work
3. Confusion 
4. Costs 

All of the above results in a ticked-off client and impacts on the contract in the long run, so we've got to take this seriously. Let's take a closer look at each point.

Contractors aren't always upfront about it

At one of my previous jobs I was working remotely in an office in Manchester arranging attendance for air conditioning maintenance in Bristol. Our preferred supplier was a maintenance firm that mostly did fabrics, plumbing, and electrical work (Tom), so they subcontracted the work to another company (Dick). However, that company's AC operative wasn't experienced in dealing with the condenser unit we had on that site so they subcontracted to someone else (Harry). The third contractor's engineer attended without booking in first, spoke abruptly to the site staff, and left a mess behind. We struggled to get the paperwork in and when we did the engineer had mentioned that we needed parts but had not provided details for a quote. I had a lot of smoothing over to do with the irate site staff who were complaining about their condenser not working, bits on the floor, and no indication of when it was going to be put back into operation. After some digging I discovered the daisy chain and that the third firm had called the engineer away to an emergency job, hence the lack of after care, etc. He had walked off site in the middle of the job and nobody knew what had happened until he returned from holiday. Nobody told me what was going on, I had to find this out for myself and the process took about two weeks.

We don't know who's actually doing the work

On another occasion I was tasked with arranging the replacement or repair of the car park tarmac at a site near Newcastle. The area was about two acres and was riddled with potholes. Again, we had preferred vendors so I selected our usual maintenance company and asked them to quote for the job. They daisy-chained the job without informing me so, weeks later, I finally got a quote for about £5,500 for the lot. I ran up the quote, passed it to the contract manager, who asked no questions and sent it to the client. Six weeks later I was still chasing attendance. Eventually the contractor advised that they'd subcontracted the job to someone else who had subcontracted to a cowboy outfit that had just gone bust. They had done nothing to keep me informed about what was going on.

Given the way we were set up I couldn't just give the job to someone else (though I pleaded with the manager) and he actually tried to convince our contractor to carry out the work for the cost provided, despite the fact that it was grossly under-valued. After about a year of everyone blaming everyone else I had the opportunity to do the quote again and used another preferred supplier. This time the job was in excess of £28,000 and although they subcontracted it the job was done as advised and everyone was satisfied — apart from the client's finance department. The project succeeded this time because I knew who was doing the work — part of the cost was down to the attendance of the project manager of the firm I'd hired actually being on site to ensure the work was done properly and to the client's satisfaction.

Confusion

In each of the above cases confusion reigned because:

• there was a lack of communication
• there was no clear way to hold anyone accountable
• there was no timetable to check and enforce
• we had no clue as to who was actually going to be on site, whether or not they were properly qualified to carry out the work, and whether or not they were going to do it per our standards

During the second attempt to get the car park resurfaced the contractor I used was communicative, provided a timetable and details of who would be on site, and provided RAMS* and other documents to demonstrate a commitment to carrying out the work to acceptable standards. They also provided a project manager to be on site to be the point of contact for both the client and myself. If you're managing remotely you need a point of contact, the lines of communication need to be kept open, and people need to be letting each other know what's going on at all times. When inclement weather stalled the project the manager called and emailed to let me know that it would have to be rescheduled and why. I was able to pass that on to the client. They then arranged a new date between them and copied me in so I knew what was happening.

Costs

The costs of daisy chaining contractors might seem worth the risk in the short term but in the long term the costs can be prohibitive. We could have lost the contract with that site near Newcastle over the botched car park job. If the third contractor had gone ahead and carried out the work, it would have been a patch up of each pothole. It would have looked awful and the client would have been furious. It might not even have lasted long since the underlying problem was the fracturing of the surface; more potholes would have appeared. Goodwill is an asset we can ill afford to lose, people. The risks associated with using unscrupulous contractors are also costly in the long run. Fly-tipping waste from repairing the potholes in the Newcastle area might not be problematic to someone in Manchester if the fly-tippers don't get caught. If they do and their handiwork is traced back to us, we could get negative press over it. Reputation is another asset we can ill afford to lose. Don't get me started on health and safety.

It looked really bad on my end when I went back to the client with a cost for repairing the car park that was about five times more than the quote I had provided at first. They stalled for another six months before the state of the car park compelled them to go ahead with the job.

What can we do?

When selecting a contractor to carry out a particular job, first ensure this is part of their core business**. If it's not, they will almost certainly subcontract. If they do subcontract, find out who this is; one firm we used for PAT testing was using one of our preferred suppliers. We could have saved ourselves the markup cost. Any company that doesn't provide a clear line of communication to the people actually doing the work should be avoided — and reported to Procurement. Comparing notes with other members of staff and keeping records of those companies that provide the best service is essential as it helps to avoid getting caught in the daisy chain trap. Finally, don't worry when something goes wrong; this is an opportunity to learn and to help others. Clients will forgive you even the most egregious errors of judgement if they can see that you care about providing the best service you can by keeping them informed.

*RAMS: Risk Assessment and Method Statement
**I found out later on that landscaping companies do paving and surfacing as part of their core business, a fact that has enabled me to provide a better customer service experience for my clients.