NUPHOENIX

INTRODUTION
As evidenced by research literature (Cheng et al., 2010), one of the greatest influences on industry worldwide is construction. It contributes to the foundation and growth of many companies, from owners, contractors and many others along the supply chain and is therefore 
a crucial factor to the GDP of many countries.
My research, for this paper will focus on supply chain fragmentation and how this damaging procurement phenomenon has an impact on Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) megaprojects such as HS2 (UK), Olkilouto 3 (OL3) (Finland) and Hanhikivi 1, (Finland) all of which I have had personal professional experience. The only project where I have witnessed any form of supply chain integration is HS2, where the UK Government stepped in and appointed a new CEO who consequently ordered what is called a project reset.
The main differences between the design and build contract model for example and the EPC contract model, is that under an EPC the owner selects one main contractor who must be responsible for and manage the three main packages of Engineering, Procurement and Construction. The concept of the strategic integration of the supply chain was completely misunderstood by the Plant Supplier on the OL3 Project, and at Hanhikivi 1 many attempts were made to implement integration of the suppliers by the Fennovoima project and procurement teams however, due to the complex supply chain of the Plant Supplier ROAS, these attempts ultimately failed.

EPC Supply Chain
It is a fact that on many EPC projects, the supply chain is unmanageable because the production and logistical procedures are either weakly connected or scattered over many non-cohesive parts. In cases where the main contractor chooses to contract with numerous suppliers, situated in many different countries or regions, this usually results in inefficient working, with poor communications causing delays, cost overruns and poor quality.

Fragmented -v- Integrated
When the coordination between the different suppliers has broken down, this is known as
a fragmented supply chain as opposed to an integrated supply chain. Where a supply chain becomes fragmented, there is little or no interface between the various suppliers. This is often the result of poor project and procurement management, logistics, border restrictions and language barriers. The various parts of the supply chain such as procurement, manufacturing and logistics begin to operate separately instead of being a centralised, integrated unit. The consequence of the formation of these operational silos is that transparency disappears, and it becomes near impossible to manage quality, keep track of equipment and have a manageable control of the overall supply chain.
An integrated supply chain works as one unit; the functions are cohesive and collaborate with each other to operate seamlessly. When fragmentation in the supply chain is prevalent in 
a company, different departments isolate themselves with only departmental and not overall objectives, and become what is known as silos. There have been several research papers into the topic of how to avoid supply chain fragmentation and how to implement strategic integration of the supply chain. Papers such as A Strategic Theory of Regime Integration and Separation (Tana Johnson and Johannes Urpelainen, 2012) and The Power of Strategic Integration (Burgelman and Doz, 2001) offer companies solutions on how to avoid or correct fragmentation of the supply chain.

Case Studies
In the following three case studies, I will demonstrate how each project suffered, albeit in different ways and different reasons, from the consequences of having a fragmented supply chain.