An unpublished Australian has his say

The article by John Crace in the Guardian titled "Who'd be a quantity surveyor" has certainly stirred Ethyl the Aardvark and even a few possums in the far colonies Down Under.

The thrust of the article is that the quantity surveyor is responsible for all the time and cost ills of the construction industry.

Some years ago an industry inquiry here reached a similarly ill informed conclusion regarding disputes between the parties involved in building contracts.

In that case, just as in your article, there appeared to be a few inaccuracies and a lack of understanding of the development process and the role of the various stakeholders.

The underlying theme of your article is a lack of accuracy and accountability. On both counts the QS profession prides itself on those very attributes. It's interesting to note that, as a profession, we are probably on our own, or perhaps only in the company of accountants, in the fact that the accuracy of our work can be measured in such precise terms. Indeed, when we are able to control all of the inputs to our work then the output has proven to be extremely accurate - better than +/-2%.

Secondly, there is frequent confusion about the difference between estimate accuracy and overall cost management performance.

In the case of the former, the quantity surveyor will, in most cases, perform well by any reasonable measure. When it comes to the latter many other factors outside the control of the quantity surveyor come to play. These factors include the volatility of client's brief, designer's vision, specifier's discretion, supplier's product cycles, labour force attitudes and contractors' appetites.

The QS’s estimate is often the first realistic assessment of likely cost, but, of course, no one wants to hear bad news

In practice, the same forces apply, irrespective of whether the project involves a multi-million pound development or renovations to the backyard loo.

To illustrate to your readers, I would equate the QS's challenge being akin to responding to a request to estimate the quantities of each and every ingredient, the cost of every ingredient and the likely selling price of a cake for which the recipe is yet to be written and the final appearance is just a concept.

Whilst I have no knowledge of the identity nor competence of the QS employed by Multiplex for the Wembley Stadium redevelopment, I have no doubt that their skills would have required a combination of knowledge, experience and judgement and all of these would have been severely tested.

Throw in a high profile iconic project involving interface with an existing facility and you have the makings of a very spicy recipe indeed.

Finally there is the misunderstood concept of budget versus estimate. Frequently budgets are set (artificially) by corporations or politicians with little or no knowledge of the realities of development cost. Such projects are then handed over to a team of designers, engineers, QSs and contractors to deliver on a promise. The QS's estimate is often the first realistic assessment of likely cost, but, of course, no one wants to hear bad news.

As a profession, we take our performance very seriously and tire of being treated like the proverbial messenger who is an easy target because of the inherent nature of the work we do every day.