I recently supported a Tasmanian modular construction contractor in preparing a tender response for a construction workforce accommodation project associated with a major resources development.
At face value, the opportunity appeared to be a standard Design and Construct submission.
It was not.
The requirement was for Early Contractor Involvement (ECI), being detailed design, capital cost estimation and construction planning for a future construction village, with the execution phase to be tendered separately at a later date.
This shifts the entire nature of the response.
The requirement is no longer to prove that a contractor can build.
It is to prove that the contractor can define the project clearly enough that it can be built.
My role was to reframe the submission from a build-focused tender into a structured ECI methodology that aligned with what the Principal was actually trying to achieve.
The first step was correcting the positioning.
The contractor was not being asked to construct a village.
They were being asked to act as a delivery-informed design and planning partner.
The response was reframed to:
This repositioning is critical. Most responses fail at this point by answering the wrong question.
The submission was restructured around the actual ECI outputs, being:
Rather than presenting “how we would build it”, the response presented:
This ensured the response aligned to the evaluation criteria, not assumptions.
A key requirement of the ECI phase is control of design and approvals.
Design was not presented as a set of drawings.
It was presented as a structured system that leads to approvals and cost confidence.
Execution planning is not a downstream activity in an ECI. It is a core deliverable.
The submission structured this planning around:
This demonstrated that the contractor could define not just what to build, but how it would realistically be delivered.
The ECI phase required a capital cost estimate to support investment decision making.
Cost was presented as a model informed by design and delivery reality, not a standalone number.
A defining feature of the project was the requirement to consider what happens to the accommodation village after the construction phase ends.
The response elevated legacy planning to a core design consideration.
It addressed:
By addressing legacy early, the submission demonstrated commercial thinking beyond construction.
The Principal was not only seeking deliverables. They were seeking guidance.
The submission therefore introduced:
This positioned the contractor as a partner in navigating approvals, planning and decision-making.
The ECI phase involves a high volume of coordinated documentation.
The response:
This demonstrated traceability, control and audit readiness.
The final submission was no longer a construction tender.
It became a structured Early Contractor Involvement proposal that:
Well-structured ECI submissions are fundamentally different to build submissions.
They don’t prove that a contractor can construct an asset.
They prove that a contractor can define the asset clearly enough that construction becomes predictable.
And in projects of this scale, that is where the real value sits.
Jason Bresnehan is the founder of Evahan Group and a commercial strategist. For over three decades, he has helped businesses cut through complexity, negotiate with confidence, and embed clarity into their operations.
His career includes six years with Delta Hydraulics in Tasmania and Thailand, where he oversaw the manufacture of hydraulic cylinders, hose assemblies, and manifolds for multinational clients such as Caterpillar. Working within Just‑In‑Time (JIT) supply frameworks, Jason gained firsthand experience in global manufacturing discipline, supply chain precision, and the commercial realities of delivering to world‑class standards.
Today, his work spans high‑risk, high‑stakes industries — from defence OEM, infrastructure, modular construction to marine engineering and transport.
Whether reviewing contracts, restructuring governance, or guiding acquisitions, Jason’s hallmark is turning ambiguity into clear, enforceable rules of engagement.
Alongside his consulting practice, Jason also manages Bresnehan Family Office assets, ensuring investments are aligned with long‑term legacy and commercial clarity.
Jason’s core principles are:
Cut to clarity, articulate with precision, KISS and act.
19 June 2026
Seventh Ribbon Music is an independent music label producing original songs shaped by memory, identity, movement and…
18 June 2026
Evahan recently supported an Australian lighting infrastructure company in undertaking on‑site due diligence of its…
01 May 2026
I recently supported an Australian modular construction contractor in preparing a detailed response for a public-sector…
