Miss one clause in a scope of work and one of two things happens: you've left scope out of your price, or you've signed up to an obligation you never costed. Both are discovered late, and both are expensive. Here is a method that holds up under that pressure.
Step 1: Assemble the real document set
The SoW is never alone. It invokes site specifications, standards, drawings and annexures; and obligations hide in all of them. List every referenced document, then triage: which ones actually apply to this tender? Record the excluded ones too, with the reason. When a claim dispute arrives two years later, "we excluded spec X because clause Y limits it to brownfield works" is gold.
Step 2: Capture clause by clause, but trim the depth
Walk the SoW in order. Every clause that creates an obligation becomes a row. Two disciplines keep this usable:
- Stop at section level. Capture
3.2and3.2.1; fold3.2.1.1into its parent. Beyond that depth you're photocopying, not analysing. - Write the requirement, not the prose. The row says what must be done; the citation says where it came from.
Step 3: Use a column structure that survives review
| # | Description | Captured | Origin | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12 | Switchgear rated 11 kV, 1250 A, 25 kA/3 s, arc-fault contained | ☐ | SoW | SoW §3.2 |
| 13 | OLTC with ±8 × 1.25% taps and AVR control | ☐ | SoW | SoW §3.3 |
| 14 | Earthing design responsibility, see conflict register | ☐ | SoW / Spec | SoW §3.6 vs EL-spec §6 |
The Captured column stays blank. It's for the person (or supplier) confirming compliance. Origin matters because spec-derived rows behave differently in negotiation than SoW-derived ones.
Step 4: Split the master into package checklists
Your transformer supplier shouldn't read 96 rows to find their eleven. Filter the master by equipment package (transformer, switchgear, protection, civil) and issue each supplier a returnable checklist covering only their scope. Their completed checklist comes back as evidence in your own compliance story.
Step 5: Keep a standalone conflict and variation register
While capturing rows, you will find contradictions: the SoW says 11 kV, the single-line drawing shows 22 kV; the SoW assigns the earthing design to you, the spec says the principal issues it. Do not bury these as comments. Each one goes into its own register with both citations side by side. Before submission they're clarification questions; after award they're variation opportunities. Teams that skip this step absorb the cost silently. A typical substation tender yields three to eight of them.
Step 6: Cite everything, then let citations do the review work
The test of the finished checklist: any reviewer can take any row and find its source in under a minute. That's what makes it an audit document rather than an opinion.
Can this be automated?
The reading, capturing, trimming, splitting and conflict-spotting: yes, and it's exactly what Elora Grid's "check this SoW for compliance and conflicts" task does: master checklist, per-package supplier checklists, the conflict register, and draft supplier RFQ emails, each row cited. The judgment calls (what to clarify, what to price as variation) stay with your commercial team, which is where they belong.
There's an interactive demonstration of the clause scan on that page, or you can send a real SoW through and review the output on your own tender.