Count the cost

No one expects companies to undertake research and development just because they have a few spare quid lying around to spend. It is never about altruism. The results have to be viable business propositions, leading to increased revenues for businesses involved. But in the end, the benefits usually seem to spread to the rest of the industry – second to market is no bad thing, and often further improvements can be made.

The subject of research in the wider construction industry is becoming a thorny one. The government seems less inclined to hand out grants for projects. Here on BSj we have heard many calls for another set of post-occupancy, PROBE-style investigations into buildings. But this requires funding to pay the experts to undertake the research. Government has not yet seen fit to sponsor such a programme. Other research organisations have found that bodies such as the DTI and ODPM aren't so free with the money these days.

And this is the nub of the issue. If construction needs research, why shouldn't it pay its own way? Other industries don't wait for handouts.

Manufacturers in our sector seem willing enough to invest in research. But in the case of consultants and contractors, there seems to be less enthusiasm for it. But this is where improvements are needed most. It's not as though the money would be wasted. R&D into better process systems, management of procurement routes and the supply chain would have a massive impact on the paying organisation's bottom line.

Perhaps once again, we are entangled in the old construction industry blindfold which prevents those at the top seeing any problems. As long as there are Jags and Mercs in the car park, why go looking for business improvements? Maybe someone in government has decided to create a need for research by withdrawing support – and expects the money from industry to follow. Let's hope that's right.

Karen Fletcher, Editor