Middle ground melodrama

So said a certain David Bucknall back in 1993 while discussing how fees were free falling. Bucknall might as well have been speaking in February 2006, but for different reasons

Back in the dark days of the early 90s companies were undercutting simply to survive the recession. Now it seems that despite healthy workloads the unfettered market is driving fees down. Couple that with soaring staff wages and a lack of middle management caused by the last recession, and talk of the profession sitting on a timebomb (low fees, poor investment in training) from some in the sector is not as melodramatic as it first sounds.

One can therefore understand Steve Barker's call for a return to fee scales . It's probably an unrealistic aim, especially when the Office of Fair Trading is taking particular interest in any sniff of a cartel in our sector at the moment, but surely an attempt at finding Bucknall's middle ground would be valuable. As one leading QS pointed out to me this week: "It's gone from the cosy Victorianism of scales to 37 companies haggling over an OJEU process." It has created a polarised market, with the big firms able to push fee levels to somewhere near the 1-2% level and medium and small firms beating a path to specialise in particular sectors that have enlightened clients, or offering different services.

Part of the problem is measuring just what the profession does at present. Many firms have not completed a bill of quantities for years, hence the avoidance of the actual QS tag by major firms (check all their websites, not a mention of quantity surveying). If the profession can be clear what service it is actually offering we would have made a significant step.