WHY MOST BODY CORPORATES PROJECTS GO OVER BUDGET (AND HOW COMMITTEES CAN TAKE BACK CONTROL)

Body corporates are responsible for some of the most complex and high-risk decisions in a building’s lifecycle, particularly major maintenance and capital works.

From façade remediation and roofing to waterproofing and infrastructure upgrades, these projects carry significant financial, legal, and operational implications. Yet many still run over budget, fall behind schedule, or end in dispute.

These outcomes are rarely caused by a single failure. More often, they stem from gaps in planning, structure, and oversight that compound over time. Addressing these gaps early is critical to achieving better outcomes.

Why Early Decisions Shape Project Outcomes

A common misconception is that problems arise during construction. In reality, most issues are embedded much earlier, during planning, scoping, and contractor engagement.

Incomplete scopes, limited independent review, decisions made without full visibility of risk, and over reliance on contractor-led advice all contribute to future cost escalation. By the time issues surface, committees are often forced into reactive decision-making.

The Value of Clear Structure for Body Corporates

An effective approach to major works often involves bringing together project management discipline, facilities knowledge, and structured decision-making. Rather than treating projects as isolated delivery tasks, committees are often better served by considering day-to-day operational needs alongside long-term asset performance and planning.

Where that structure is less defined, projects can become more difficult to coordinate and key issues may not always be identified as early as they could be. A more considered approach can support better visibility, clearer accountability, and more confident committee decision-making.

Why Better Information Leads to Better Decisions in Body Corporates

One of the recurring challenges for committees is looking beyond isolated maintenance requests or individual contractor recommendations and instead understanding how project delivery, compliance obligations, building operations, asset condition, and future capital requirements fit together.

In practice, better decision-making often starts with clearer scoping, more rigorous review of consultant and contractor advice, stronger documentation, closer budget alignment, and more consistent reporting. This makes it easier for committees to understand what is being proposed, why it is needed, what it may mean financially, and what issues should be addressed before a commitment is made.

Equally important is strong documentation. In a body corporate environment, clear records support accountability, reduce dispute risk, and provide continuity as committee members change over time.

Separating Immediate Requests from Long-Term Needs

Building projects and maintenance decisions should not be considered in isolation. An important part of effective decision-making is distinguishing between what is being requested and what is actually required to achieve the best outcome for the building, taking into account building condition, safety, compliance obligations, operational impacts, and longer-term asset performance.

This involves assessing the underlying issue, identifying gaps in available information, testing whether the proposed response is proportionate, and considering both immediate priorities and longer-term asset planning objectives.

In some buildings, recurring maintenance issues can become normalised over time. However, where reactive fixes continue to be repeated, this may be an indication that the issue extends beyond the immediate defect and warrants a broader review.

By taking a measured and strategic approach, committees can make more informed decisions, reduce the likelihood of reactive spending, and ensure that maintenance and capital works align with the broader needs and lifecycle of the property.

Better Decisions, Better Outcomes

Major maintenance and capital works are an unavoidable part of building ownership, but poor outcomes are not. For body corporates, a more informed and structured approach can improve cost control, transparency, compliance, and long-term asset performance.

When committees have access to clearer scope definition, stronger oversight, better reporting, and more effective alignment between immediate works and long-term planning, they are better placed to make decisions that protect the property and the interests of owners.

As expectations around compliance, transparency, and asset management continue to grow, body corporates are increasingly being encouraged to look not only at what works need to be done, but also at how those decisions are assessed, coordinated, and documented.

Article Contributed by Tamika Davey, Director at Elite FM Pty Ltd.

Elite FM will also be exhibiting at the upcoming Gold Coast seminar next week, where attendees can learn more about how Committees can take back control on major projects – Register Here.