David Stockdale: Hold the horses – we’re not all ‘construction managers’

Story for CM? Get in touch via email: [email protected]


  1. I wholeheartedly agree with what David says. I am someone who has benefited from the ‘broad church’ of the CIOB as I don’t come from a traditional construction management background. I trained as a CAD technician working for consulting structural engineers. I then worked for a firm of steel fabricators, taking a role in managing some of the projects. I now work as a Project Manager/Designer for an architectural glazing company. In this era of CDM regs, I have a major responsibilty towards the design and management of the facade, before during and after the construction phase. I am using my knowledge of construction technology to design and build a solution, therefore ‘Chartered Building Technologist’ perfectly sums up my role. I would definately welcome the title change.

  2. I agree that ‘Construction Management’ presents a narrow view of the ‘broad church’ that is CIOB. Not sure I like ‘technologist’ either, much prefer to remain as a Chartered Builder.

  3. Why not have several? The RICS has a variety of titles. “Chartered Building Technologist” would suit me personally as I don’t ‘build’ anything, but others may wish to stick with “Chartered Builder” as this could describe their function better; or “Chartered Construction Manager” although I suspect the latter may be opposed by the ICE (as happened before).

  4. I am in two minds over the term Chartered Builder. We should recognise our heritage and where we have come from. However I’m not sure the title “builder” encompasses the vast array of positions that we, as CIOB members, do. I, for example, am involved in infrastructure and building design, project management, construction health and safety, building surveying, facilities management and contract management. I wouldn’t really describe myself as a builder. When somebody mentions the term builder to me, I picture an individual who runs a small business constructing extensions, renovations etc. Also the term builder is associated with cowboy traders etc. Whilst I don’t know what title we should adopt but we need to change with the time. I am in a similar position at work. My military job title is Clerk of Works (Construction) but we can do far more than a traditional Clerk of Works. It is very frustrating when you are trying to explain to a civilian what you can do but they can’t look past the military job title.
    I agree with Tim Richardson. If RICS are ok with different titles for it’s members perhaps this is somthing we should consider.

Comments are closed.

Latest articles in Opinion