Chris Blythe
The old year ended with some interesting stories: Morrison Utility Services and Dyer & Butler being bought by US investor First Reserve and the claims arm of Hill International being scooped up by Bridgepoint.
Those stories, along with the one about the China National Building Materials Company’s plan to build six offsite housing plants, suggest that changes are afoot and that our industry is seen as a place of opportunity.
Other things, such as the increase in fines for health and safety breaches rightly to eye-watering levels, suggest that business cannot continue as usual, despite the desire to do so.
This is evidenced by the dire warnings going out to government about the impact of Brexit on the supply of skilled and semi-skilled, but essentially cheap, labour. Up to 215,000 people could be lost to the industry, it is claimed, but really it’s a plea for the status quo.
The pressure to change is as strong as ever and the question is whether events will happen that let the industry off the hook. In the past, just as we reach the cusp of change along comes a recession, the pressure is off, and the drive for innovation dies.
The classic indicators include more people staying in apprenticeships as an alternative to unemployment, new house buyer satisfaction increasing as house builders produce better quality in a buyers’ market. We see people improving their qualifications just to remain viable in a more challenging labour market. The snake of recession is an escape from the effort of climbing the ladder of opportunity.
But the current combination of events means that even a recession will not provide an escape. With the housing crisis, there is no chance that private sector housing providers can or will be inclined to provide the level of low-cost housing required.
A common plea is the industry needs to do more to be able to attract and retain women. The truth is it needs to do better for everyone — there is a growing mismatch between the aspirations of the people who work in the industry and many employers.
Some jobs ought to disappear with the greater application of technology. In fact, it might be the case that rather than lament the shortages in an area, we eradicate the role altogether through innovation.
It was Oliver Cromwell who said: “He who stops being better, stops being good.” To be better we need the ladder not the snake.
Comments
Comments are closed.
Chris, a fair summation of the industry approach to change and innovation. If we spent as much time looking for and climbing the ladders as we do seeking out and anticipating the snakes we might have a better industry. Why do we persist with the status quo? Of course, it’s comfortable, non threatening and perceived to be without cost! Where is the leadership in all this? Twenty one years ago I stepped out of the comfort of traditional contracting and wholeheartedly adopted the partnering approach espoused within the Latham Report. As a client I demanded the change from my contractors, suppliers and importantly my design teams. Some did change, some didn’t.
Needless to say I no longer work with those who didn’t, those who did have reaped rewards through highly successful contracts delivered to time, budget and superior quality. It hasn’t been a comfortable ride, but getting on and climbing the ladders rather than looking for snakes has, for me, brought the Cromwell quotation into stark reality.
So, my challenge is to leaders across the industry, and especially the moribund consultants out there, stand up and be counted, advise your clients with passion and facts to seek change and innovation, you are at the forefront of this so adopt the “better” rather than the alternative!
Thank you for this succinct and in-time article Chris.
The CIOB ethics course started to day with a bang; right in there with Oliver Cromwell “He who stops being better, stops being good”.
Chris,
On housing, it may already be too late for the domestic industry to meet the huge demand. Big money is already piling into this gap, bringing a different business model – prefabrication of affordable build-to-rent units.
For instance, last year Legal & General, a £12bn-turnover company, teamed up with a Dutch pension fund manager PGGM to pre-manufacture 3,000 apartments across the UK under a £600m build-to-rent campaign.
That’s nothing, however, in comparison with plans by state-owned China National Building Material Company (CNBM) to bring its industrial might to bear in a £2.75bn joint venture with housing association, Your Housing Group (YHG), to premanufacture affordable rented housing. Six factories are planned, using British light gauge steel framing to produce panelised components.
Figures released by the British Property Federation (BPF) in February this year showed that there were more than 30,000 build-to-rent units with planning permission in the UK, a 47% increase since October 2015.
The dominant mode of UK home construction may be unrecognisable in a few years.
Research and Development is slow in construction because of the minuscule margins available throughout the industry.
It would be useful if the Government changed its approach to training. Courses that lead to an award not being tax deductable?
How if in the industry serious skills development is needed across all sectors, but particularly professionals, does that help matters?
We can’t do it all via lunchtime CPD, particularly for complex subjects where in depth learning is required, and study is a tremendous cost in not just money, but time as well. Many professionals cannot afford it, and employers in my experience refuse to pay for it, or pay more for the employee once they have the extra skills.
It shows how much the government values rhetoric over reality that it isn’t tax deductable.