OCERP

Industry sectors · where the platform lands today

Five sectors. Five
different jobs to do.

A residential developer pricing 280 flats does not have the same job as a tunnelling JV at €240m of TBM works. Same platform, different practices, different pains. Below: where each sector actually hurts and what OCERP does about it today — with the gaps named. no fake templates. no fake fees.

5 sectors 5 validation rule packs · 46 rules v2.9.x codebase referenced Updated 2026‑05‑07

Project size · indicative cycle time

The five sectors at a glance — scale & cycle.

Residentialmulti‑family · social housing
14 – 30 mo
Commercial & mixed‑useoffice · retail · hospitality
18 – 36 mo
Industrial & logisticssheds · cold chain · plants
10 – 24 mo
Infrastructureroads · rail · utilities
3 – 8 yr
Heavy & energytunnels · grid · renewables
5 – 12 yr
€10m·€100m·€500m·€1bn+

Jump to a sector

S‑01 Residential Multi‑family · housing S‑02 Commercial & Mixed‑Use Office · retail · hospitality S‑03 Industrial & Logistics Sheds · plants · cold chain S‑04 Infrastructure Roads · rail · utilities S‑05 Heavy & Energy Tunnels · grid · renewables
Sector
01

Residential

Multi‑family · social housing · build‑to‑rent · purpose‑built student

High repetition, thin margin, ferocious sensitivity to per‑m² cost. The estimator's job is to know what an apartment block actually costs in this district, this quarter — not two years ago in a different city. Repetition is the friend; assumption is the enemy.

Where this sector hurts

Per‑m² target the developer won't move
Land‑and‑finance committee gives a €/m² ceiling at concept that becomes immovable. The estimator has to land below it without knowing the actual finishes mix.
Spec drift between concept and tender
Marketing wants timber kitchens; QS budgeted laminate. Two months of email and the BOQ never quite catches up. Price drifts faster than the spec is recorded.
Phasing across blocks
Block A starts March, Block C starts October. Cost data and labour rates need to roll forward block‑by‑block, not project‑wide.
Subcontractor dropout late in process
Plumbing sub walks at week 14 — re‑tendering one trade should not take three weeks of re‑formatting BOQs.

How OCERP fits this sector today

▸ What's wired in v2.9.x

▸ Cost
CWICR seed (~55K total, UK + DACH) · per‑project catalogue · assemblies for repeated apartment types · vectorised search
▸ Validation
DIN 276 (DE) or NRM 1/2 (UK) rule packs · BOQ quality universal pack
▸ Tender
GAEB X83 round‑trip (DE) · XLSX with NRM 2 column profile (UK)
▸ Contracts
VOB/B templates (DACH pack) · UK contract wrappers — partner‑provided
▸ Honest gap
No live BCIS or BKI API feed; benchmarks brought in via XLSX. JCT contract profile not native.

Practice fit · most likely to land first

▸ Primary Cost Intelligence Per‑project catalogue + assembly composition rewards firms with repeated apartment types.
▸ Primary AI Takeoff Apartments repeat 30–80×; takeoff matching gets accurate fast on this geometry.
▸ Secondary BIM Transformation Lands when Revit is already in the workflow — usually housebuilders > 200 units/year.

Before you commit · 4 questions

Pin the per‑m² cost story down before tender.

  1. What's the latest €/m² target for this district from a real local source — not a national average two years old?
  2. Are apartment‑type assemblies actually re‑used between blocks, or rebuilt from line items every time?
  3. If Block C starts six months after Block A, do labour rates and material prices roll forward per block or stay frozen at concept?
  4. How long does it take in your current setup to re‑tender one trade when a sub walks in week 14?
Sector
02

Commercial & Mixed‑Use

Office · retail · hospitality · life sciences · workplace fit‑out

Where the brief moves three times before tender and the architect changes facade cladding two weeks before the GMP deadline. Cost certainty under design churn is the entire job. Optionality has a price — and the estimator is the one who has to put a number on it.

Where this sector hurts

Facade options that won't sit still
Six cladding alternatives, each with a different envelope cost. Every alternative needs a defendable number before the design call drops one off the table.
GMP locked before MEP coordinated
Guaranteed Maximum Price signed at RIBA Stage 3 / LPH 3. MEP coordination only finishes at Stage 4. Contingency carries the gap — and gets eaten if BIM coordination slips.
Tenant‑driven late spec changes
Anchor tenant wants 14m clear span. Anchor tenant changes mind. Whole BOQ needs to recompute, re‑tender, re‑validate.
Sustainability spec premium
LEED / BREEAM / DGNB targets bolt on cost categories that didn't exist in the original budget. The QS finds them, prices them, defends them.

How OCERP fits this sector today

▸ What's wired in v2.9.x

▸ BIM
DDC cad2data reads RVT, IFC 4 / 4.3; BIM hub element/property browser; BIM requirements rules for parameter checks
▸ Validation
DIN 276 / NRM 1‑2 / MasterFormat rule packs · Requirements engine for client‑specific rules
▸ Cost
Assembly composition for facade / partition / ceiling alternatives — every option as a recipe
▸ Coordination
BCF read & write for clash & issue exchange with Solibri, Navisworks, Revizto
▸ Honest gap
No BREEAM/LEED/DGNB validation rule packs today — sustainability evidence stays in the consultant's spreadsheet for now (roadmap)

Practice fit · most likely to land first

▸ Primary BIM Transformation When MEP coordination is the GMP risk, the model‑to‑BOQ link stops being a nice‑to‑have.
▸ Primary Compliance & Validation Requirements engine for client‑specific rules; standards rule packs for cross‑border bids.
▸ Secondary Cost Intelligence Assembly library for option pricing turns "give me a number by Thursday" into a 20‑min job.

Before you commit · 4 questions

Get the fit‑out boundary on the table first.

  1. Which fit‑out cost category is your weakest data — MEP, finishes, or vertical transport — and where does the rate actually come from?
  2. Are tenant‑fit allowances handled as separate cost units in the BOQ, or absorbed silently into the shell estimate?
  3. Who owns the late‑stage spec swaps driven by the brand standard or leasing agent — design, QS, or the developer?
  4. How fast can you re‑cost a "drop two floors" or "change the cladding" change — minutes, hours, or days of re‑keying?
Sector
03

Industrial & Logistics

Distribution sheds · cold chain · e‑commerce fulfilment · light manufacturing

The shell is repetitive. The MEP and process fit‑out is anything but. Cold storage drops a refrigerant strategy into the BOQ; fulfilment drops conveyor and robotics. Process is the price.

Where this sector hurts

Tenant signs after groundworks start
Speculative shell goes up before the tenant is named. Every fit‑out option has to be priced against an unbuilt scenario.
Floor flatness & loading specs
F‑number flatness in US, DM1/DM2 in DACH; superflat zones for narrow‑aisle racking. An extra 1.5 mm tolerance changes the price meaningfully.
Cold chain refrigerant + insulation
Insulation, refrigerant choice (R‑744 vs R‑290), and door spec move together. Estimating them in three separate BOQs is how money disappears.
Process fit‑out scope creep
Conveyor, AS/RS, robotics, sortation — boundaries between MEP and process are political, not technical.

How OCERP fits this sector today

▸ What's wired in v2.9.x

▸ Cost
Shell library calibrates fast (every project looks like the last); assemblies handle fit‑out optionality recipes
▸ Tender
RFQ / bid module for portfolio tenders across multiple sheds · 3‑way invoice match for procurement
▸ BIM
DDC reads tenant‑provided RVT/IFC for fit‑out coordination — parameters extract into BOQ
▸ Validation
DIN 276 / NRM / MasterFormat rule packs · BOQ quality universal pack
▸ Honest gap
No process‑equipment specific rule pack (FEM 9.831 racking, ATEX) — those checks remain partner‑side

Practice fit · most likely to land first

▸ Primary Cost Intelligence Shell rates calibrate fast; fit‑out optionality is where the assembly library earns its keep.
▸ Primary Tendering Long subcontractor lists, repeat trades — bid handling pays back inside two tenders.
▸ Secondary BIM Transformation For tenants with their own BIM standard (Amazon, IKEA, DHL) it's a tenant requirement.

Before you commit · 4 questions

Separate the shell from the process.

  1. Is your floor‑area cost cleanly separated from racking, conveyors, and process equipment — or do they bleed into each other in the BOQ?
  2. What's the breakdown of slab + dock‑levellers + insulation as a % of total shell cost on your last three sheds?
  3. Are MEP loads driven by tenant unknowns at tender stage — and if so, how do you ring‑fence the contingency?
  4. Do you treat turnkey vs split‑package estimates as the same BOQ with different filters, or two unrelated documents?
Sector
04

Infrastructure

Roads · rail · water · utilities · airports · public realm

Public buyer, public scrutiny, public pricebook. Nothing leaves the building unaudited. The estimating job is half cost, half compliance — every position has to map back to a published framework.

Where this sector hurts

Statutory tender format or rejection
German Bundesländer want GAEB X83/X84. Spanish public works want BC3. French marchés publics want DPGF. Wrong format = bid rejected before opening.
Pricebook anchored to public schedule
CCS / CESMM4 in UK; LB/Sirados in DACH. Every position has to trace to the published pricebook — even when actual rate diverges, the link must be visible.
Geological & ground risk
Earthworks rates swing with ground category — and the ground category lives in a separate GI report nobody has linked to the BOQ.
Multi‑year price indexation
A 6‑year project with rates fixed in year 1 dies. Indexation clauses need to flow into the BOQ — not be a footnote.

How OCERP fits this sector today

▸ What's wired in v2.9.x

▸ Tender (DACH)
GAEB X83 round‑trip + GAEB X84 import + legacy DA XML import. Public‑works friendly first.
▸ Validation
GAEB rule pack (5 rules) + DIN 276 (4) + DPGF (2) + universal BOQ quality (~20)
▸ BIM (infra)
IFC 4.3 with native infra alignment, road, rail extensions read through DDC
▸ Coordination
BCF 2.1 / 3.0 read & write for issue / viewpoint / report exchange
▸ Honest gap
BC3 (Spain) and native DPGF (France) are roadmap, not shipped. CESMM4/CCS rule packs not built yet. Indexation as live formulas — manual today.

Practice fit · most likely to land first

▸ Primary Compliance & Validation Public‑sector audit is non‑optional. Validation pipeline catches structural issues before bid submission.
▸ Primary Tendering GAEB round‑trip is sector‑native for DACH public works. France/Spain — workable via XLSX profiles today.
▸ Secondary Cost Intelligence Reconciling published pricebooks with actual outturn — without losing the trace.

Before you commit · 4 questions

Force the regional rate story into the open.

  1. How are unit‑rate bands per region kept current — public registry, internal database, or "ask the senior estimator"?
  2. What is the documented link between earthworks volume in the BOQ and the actual soil report?
  3. Are utility relocations costed inside the main BOQ, in a separate envelope, or pushed to the contractor — and is everyone agreed?
  4. Who owns the contingency narrative when geology comes back worse than the survey said?
Sector
05

Heavy & Energy

Tunnels · power generation · grid · renewables · hydrogen · district heat

One‑off engineering at €100m – €5bn scale. The question is not "what does it cost per m²" — it's "what's the realistic spread, given the assumption stack". The BOQ has to carry the assumptions with it.

Where this sector hurts

No real comparable
There are three hydrogen electrolyser plants in Europe at 100 MW — and none cost the same. Calibration data is thin.
Long‑lead equipment with FX risk
Turbines, transformers, TBMs ordered 2–4 years ahead in foreign currency. FX, indexation, supply‑chain assumptions need to be live, not buried in notes.
Ground risk is the project
For tunnels, the ground category isn't a cost factor — it's the cost. A jump from cat 4 to cat 5 can change project NPV by 30%.
JV cost structures
Three‑way JV with shared procurement, separate scopes, different tax structures. Estimate has to roll up by JV partner, scope, jurisdiction simultaneously.

How OCERP fits this sector today

▸ What's wired in v2.9.x

▸ Cost
First‑principles cost modelling via assemblies; supplier rate import via XLSX/CSV/GAEB X81; per‑project catalogue with provenance
▸ Validation
BOQ quality + standards rule packs at every milestone gate · Requirements engine for project‑specific rules
▸ BIM
IFC 4.3 infra extensions read through DDC · BCF 3.0 for clash & issue exchange
▸ Risk & change
Risk register module · Change orders module with budget‑delta linkage · Project Intelligence (always‑on)
▸ Honest gap
Live FX conversion is not shipped — single currency per project today. AACE Class 1–5 ladder template, Monte Carlo P50/P80 ranges, JV‑rollup matrix — none of these are platform features.

Practice fit · most likely to land first

▸ Primary Cost Intelligence First‑principles cost modelling with provenance per rate — every assumption stays traceable.
▸ Primary Compliance & Validation Validation gates at concept → FEED → FID with audit trail — milestone governance.
▸ Secondary Tendering EPC packages — partner brings FIDIC/NEC4 contract wrapper, platform handles BoQ & bid normalisation.

Before you commit · 4 questions

Settle scope vs cost ownership before FEED.

  1. Are major equipment costs estimated package‑by‑package with vendor quotes, or rolled into a single lump sum from a benchmark?
  2. How often does your unit‑rate library actually get refreshed for steel, copper, and concrete — and who signs that off?
  3. Who handles the multi‑discipline interface costs (Electrical + Instrumentation + Civil + Mechanical) — one team, or a gap nobody owns?
  4. Where exactly is the line drawn between EPC contractor scope and owner's costs, and is it the same on every package?

Find your sector's starting point

Eleven questions, one band, three actions.

The maturity assessment doesn't ask which sector you're in — it asks where your firm actually stands across estimating, BIM, cost data, validation and openness. The result tells you which practice will move the needle for your sector first.

Start the maturity assessment Explore practice areas