Paul Morrell, former chief construction adviser to the government, has called on the industry’s contractors to open up a new channel of communication with the architects working for them on design and build or contractor-led bids.
The call follows an architect-contractor forum initiated by RIBA president Stephen Hodder, held in January at the RIBA headquarters at 66 Portland Place, London.
Morrell and Turner & Townsend managing director Steve McGuckin attended the event alongside senior figures from several major contractors, including Skanska, Carillion, Mace, Laing O’Rourke, Willmott Dixon, Bouygues and BAM.
The group focused on design management and the communication of design information, and also architects’ “over-reliance” on QSs to cost their designs.
l-r: Steve McGuckin, Stephen Hodder and Paul Morrell
Morrell told CM: “It is an overdue conversation, and it is to the credit of both Stephen Hodder and the RIBA that they reached out. The competition that characterises so much of what we do too often turns into tension or confrontation between those whose attention should be focused on our clients. This is now so embedded that there is no point in trying to decide whose ‘fault’ it is. So, let’s keep talking, and listen to others telling us ‘how it is’ from their end of the telescope.”
He added: “I look forward to the organisations that represent contractors coming out of their trench and extending a return invitation.”
Design management and the increasing number of contractors’ design managers – often individuals with an architectural background – was the main topic.
Stephen Hodder, a former Stirling Prize winner, told CM that contractors at the meeting were “urging the architectural profession to regain that [coordination] position … as it would lead to a more efficient process”.
But Morrell cast the comments in a slightly different light, mentioning contractors’ “disappointment about the perceived lack of skill in managing the design process itself”.
He added: “As more design gets passed down to trade contractors, this increasingly falls to contractors to make good. So where the boundary of responsibilities lies emerged (to me) as a useful topic for further exploration.”
"As more design gets passed down to trade contractors, this increasingly falls to contractors to make good. So where the boundary of responsibilities lies emerged (to me) as a useful topic for further exploration."
Paul Morrell
Turner & Townsend’s Steve McGuckin agreed that roles and responsibilities in different types of contractual arrangements could be clarified, as there was “no consensus on how best to manage design” and it was “a hard nut to crack”.
McGuckin, who qualified as an architect and worked for Grimshaw before joining Mace and then Land Securities, echoed Morrell’s call for more direct debate between contractors and architects, perhaps mediated via the RIBA, CIOB and ICE.
He also said the event highlighted shifts in the industry in the past 20 years, for individuals as well as firms, mentioning that the chief executives of contractor BAM and consultant Atkins were both architects. “The idea that the only career route for architects is through an architectural practice is quite outdated,” he said.
McGuckin said that the contractors also discussed whether “architects need to be as reliant on QSs”, or could be better at providing cost estimates for clients and contractors.
The event was timed as the market picks up, but Morrell said he didn’t anticipate that clients would return to the mindset of pre-2008, which sometimes prioritised architecture at the expense of buildability, and that contractors’ integrating role could deliver more efficient buildings and processes in the future.
He said: “Too much of what went on before 2008/9 is still perceived as ‘irrational exuberance’, and whilst there will always be patrons of architecture as an art, they will always be out-numbered by clients whose primary purpose in building is functional or commercial. Of course they want good design, but they also want some security.
“As the industry moves slowly towards integration (as it must), it is generally contractors who have the enterprise and the balance sheet strength to act as integrators, and it would be close to tragic if the consequence of this is that the real potential of good design to create whole life value is sacrificed to the short term needs of profitable construction.”
For more on this story, see the March issue of Construction Manager
Comments
Comments are closed.
Isn’t the end game here simply more collaboration and integration?
Frequently client teams produce designs that are over budget. The contractor winning the tender is then the bearer of bad news! Value Engineering follows on which is never satisfactory, results in compromise and leaves a bad taste.
Designing to cost, rather than costing after the event is key, and is one of the strands of good Design Management. Sad to say it is mainly contractors that see the need for Design Managers. Few architects really get the procurement and construction processes.
It is time for a shake up of roles and disciplines, and a breaking of the traditional silos and tribes. Education and training need to change too.
We must move towards a more integrated and collaborative style of procurement,
I just think in evolutionary terms we need to change, and the industry will – its inevitable, it has to. Its just a question whether we will evolve to still be part of it!