A selection of readers’ comments about news and issues in the industry from across the CIOB community and social media
In response to Nicky Roger’s article: Construction professionals urged to train next generation
Having worked in both industry and education, I’ve always found the greatest obstacle to attracting experienced construction professionals into teaching is the gap between industry salaries and education pay. Until that gap narrows, recruitment will remain a challenge. Gerry O’Rourke
Most construction professionals recognise the gap in skills in today’s market and those of recent generations. What is the route in? I was told I needed teaching experience – this is a very big obstacle if you have been a construction professional all of your working life. Peter Stoneman
How do experienced professionals and trades move from being “encouraged” to having a managed pathway into the right programme, with appropriate development activity and support to make this idea a success? Is there a designated organisation or initiative that could set up a “match-making” programme to link skilled candidates with teaching organisations and make this idea work? If it’s just a case of “urging” experienced people to try teaching, will it really happen? I was very fortunate to have had such an opportunity in Scandinavia, 10 years ago. It feels like we need to develop something substantial here in the UK. Mike Townsend
In response to Rod Sweet’s article: CIOB calls for commitment to new construction vocational GCSE
We need to do a much better job of showing young people just how broad the built environment actually is. Construction isn’t one career path, it’s a huge range of opportunities across trades, commercial, design, project management, sustainability, tech and so much more. A vocational GCSE would be a really positive step, especially if it’s shaped properly with input that is actually listened to and actioned from industry and professional bodies like CIOB. Krystina Hartry
In response to Justin Stanton’s article: It’s time to digitalise your PMO function: The article is right to argue that digital PMO should move beyond dashboards, software licences and reporting automation. Where I would disagree is with the suggestion that information management should simply “sit in the PMO”.
The PMO has an essential role in programme governance, assurance, reporting, controls and decision coordination, but project management and information management are not the same discipline. A PMO asks whether the project is progressing, costs are controlled, risks are managed and decisions are recorded. Information management asks different questions: what information is required, who is responsible for it, whether it has been checked, what its status is, who may rely on it, what superseded it and what evidence supports its authority.
The better model is not “PMO owns information”, but an enterprise information- governance framework within which the PMO is a key participant. Information must be required, classified… and reused across the asset lifecycle. That governance cannot be reduced to project controls, nor to a document repository.
So yes: digitalise the PMO. But do not confuse digital PMO maturity with enterprise information authority. The PMO should help orchestrate decisions; the information-management function must govern the information on which those decisions depend. Dr Terence Price
