Before comparing the approaches of the two AAPs, it is useful to briefly consider the context of the two AEPs. The publication of the National Alliance Contracting Guidelines  followed a 2009 study commissioned by the coffers of Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia.  The results of the study may not have been well received by the state coffers. One of the main results of the study was that alliance projects recorded on average an increase in the estimate of business costs to actual costs of results, in the order of 45-55%. Perhaps, in response to this finding, the principles of the National Alliance`s contractual policy, the Guide to Alliance Contracting and the NACG AAP appear to be strongly influenced by the desire for cheap value for money, and these documents adopt certain approaches that could not be considered to be consistent with the principles of a pure alliance of your kind. The promoter/owner can create added value if he participates in the design or delivery of the project on the basis of his knowledge, skills, experience and/or skills. The project team, made up of the contractor`s owner and staff, will select subcontractors and suppliers to achieve the best results without compromising safety, quality and environmental impact. The terms “project owner” and “owner participant” are used throughout the AAP to refer to the role in which this entity operates. It is important that the owner of the project, when acting as a “client for the performance of the works,” is not subject to the obligations of the Alliance Charter, the objectives of the alliance or the obligation of faithful faith (hereafter collectively referred to as “alliance commitments”). This means that the project owner can act in his or her own interests – which may not be in the Alliance`s interests – if the AAP allows it. In this type of contract, the promoter and the contractor sign an Alianza agreement by which they undertake to work the project in the equipment under the philosophy of open books. Historically, most project alliance agreements (AAP) were bespoke instruments or, at least (in later years), based on documents that were initially custom instruments.
In his 2007 article  Ian Briggs talked about the possibility of an Australian PAA standard and that a number of government agencies would standardize their own AAP.