I would be interested in joining a body that could promote my profession as a construction cost consultant – however, I do not believe that an institute purely for quantity surveyors will do this (12 September, page 12).

I applaud the fact that someone is prepared to help change the profession’s image but I feel that an institute for QSs would be ridiculed by the industry, and leave the general public in the dark as to what on earth we do.

The main reason that we are suffering as a profession – along with the fact that we are poor at PR – is because we consistently refer to ourselves as “quantity surveyors”. This description is more than 20 years out of date. Most of the large practices offer risk management, value engineering, advice on taxation and capital allowances, facilities management, a PFI consultancy and project management, alongside the traditional roles.

I do not believe any consultant working in any of the aforementioned fields would join an institute for quantity surveyors, and I fear that the body would become less relevant than the RICS, with the only members joining being conservative, old-fashioned bean counters.

It is time to move on from outdated names and rebrand ourselves as consultants, cost managers, construction accountants or other modern names that befit the services that we provide.

Creating a new institute or body is the right thing to do, but if the image is presented wrongly it will do more harm than good to one of the most important professions in the industry.

Postscript

Name and address supplied.