Insight
5 min read
JMW helped pioneer the alliance model in the 1990s with BP on the successful development of the Andrew Field and has spent the last three decades partnering with alliances worldwide to deliver commercially successful major capital projects.
An alliance is the most integrated form of collaborative contracting: one contract, one balance sheet, one team, and a legally enforced no-blame ethos. It is typically chosen when success hinges on integrated problem-solving rather than rigid risk transfer—particularly in large, technically challenging, or politically exposed capital projects where time, stakeholder trust, and innovation matter as much as price. From mega and “first-of-a-kind” projects, to urban builds, to projects with risks too costly to transfer, alliance contracting pays off when three conditions collide: high degree of complexity, high level of uncertainty, and a high premium on team-wide collaboration.
Taking this approach to shared purpose, equal contribution, and open communication takes courage, because it’s not how most capital projects usually function. Traditionally, each party protects its own scope, budget, and risk. By contrast, an alliance requires leaders to move beyond those boundaries and authentically commit to the good of the whole, putting the project’s success above individual commercial interests. This type of commitment is essential to the success of the alliance, and requires each party to:
Yet this mindset isn’t instinctive. Owners and contractors carry deep-seated habits of self-protection, shaped by decades of master-servant contracting, that can quietly weaken an alliance’s potential. To guard against this, leaders must first understand the hidden conditions that reinforce these legacy mindsets and habits—conditions that quietly undermine the collaboration essential for an alliance to succeed.
1. Carrying Over Assumptions from Past Projects
Long experience with traditional contracts, often fraught with blame and financial risk, has taught each party to protect itself. As a result, every new project begins with unspoken assumptions shaped by past experiences. Owners may assume contractors will pad costs; contractors may assume the owner will squeeze margins and shift blame. Because no one voices these beliefs and assumptions, they remain hidden beneath the surface, quietly steering the thoughts, behaviors, and actions of all parties involved, often to the detriment of the project.
2. “Playing” Collaboration Instead of Truly Living It
Forming an alliance doesn’t automatically reset the assumptions, biases, and suspicions ingrained by years of traditional contracting. Individuals working in the alliance know that overt cooperation is the minimum price of admission, but many mistakenly conflate cooperation with collaboration. These two terms could not be more distinct. Cooperation is surface level, simply working alongside each other without friction, while true collaboration goes deeper, requiring trust, aligned goals, mutual accountability, and shared ownership of outcomes.
As a result, many end up “playing” collaboration because the alliance contract—and senior leadership—signal that anything less is unacceptable. Visible cooperation protects reputations, keeps them eligible for pain-share/gain-share rewards, and avoids the stigma of being “the blocker” in a model built on unity. Add the social pressure of daily joint-team meetings, and it becomes easier to act the part than to challenge long-held assumptions about risk, control, and profit protection. The result is a surface-level harmony masking the same adversarial instincts that alliances are meant to eliminate.
3. Mitigating Issues Through Contracts
To mitigate these biases and assumptions, the natural instinct is to “write it into the contract.” Clause by clause, owners and contractors try to legislate good behavior and shift risk, ballooning agreements into hundreds of pages. An alliance contract can suffer the same fate, as every party pushes to codify collaboration rather than build it into operational principles that translate into daily practice. The result is a paper shield: detailed enough to feel safe, yet powerless to create the trust and flexibility the project actually needs.
These three conditions weaken the foundation needed for success. The question now is how to build a different foundation—one that sets the alliance up to deliver.
Put hidden assumptions openly on the table
When members are aware that each party enters the alliance with entrenched beliefs shaped by past experiences, the first step is to clearly identify and openly address these assumptions to create a clean slate. It’s important to understand that while many of these beliefs may feel like “the truth,” they are simply opinions, not reality. By openly voicing these hidden assumptions, members create an environment of authenticity and trust, realizing they share a mindset that blocks genuine collaboration. Recognizing this shared mindset allows them to choose differently by renewing their commitment to the project, taking responsibility, shifting their interactions, and facing challenges together rather than separately.
Confront the likely reality
With that environment of authenticity and trust established, there’s now room to openly discuss the project’s probable outcome. The predictable reality—supported consistently by industry data—is that major projects almost always end up behind schedule and over budget. Unless something changes, this project will likely follow the same path. Confronting this reality directly creates another clear choice: continue toward that inevitable outcome or commit to doing something different.
Choose a different future
Alliances who openly put hidden assumptions on the table and honestly confront the project’s likely reality have the power to reset their course. Instead of repeating past mistakes, they actively choose transparency, build trust, and commit to principles and practices of genuine collaboration. This choice isn’t passive—it’s an intentional decision to create a new, shared future. By breaking free from old patterns, these alliances defy the predictable cycle of delays, overruns, and failure, and deliver powerful project outcomes instead.
Extraordinary project outcomes don’t come from mandates, coercion, pressure, or process. They come from leaders who choose to do something different—who are driven by a vision, inspired by a shared sense of purpose, and courageous enough to do something beyond the ordinary. That purpose might be creating a legacy the team proudly stands behind, delivering a project that transforms an industry, or building something meaningful for a community.
Whatever the motivation, it must come from within the alliance itself—from the hearts and minds of the people responsible for driving it forward each day. It won’t be found in the contract or written in the project strategy. It comes from a genuine, shared commitment to something greater than the status quo, and a decision to move forward without the weight of the past.
