I don’t think anyone would argue that the industry hasn’t changed in the last decade. Partnering isn’t a novelty anymore, it’s a form of contract. Framework agreements aren’t limited to supermarket chains. People have even heard of customer service.

But for every firm that has felt these changes, there are hundreds that haven’t. And as some of our industry players comment in our cover story on page 14, there are losers as well as winners: specialist contractors and suppliers who contribute to value engineering but don’t share in any gain; small builders who have been elbowed out of their long, if informal, relationships with the local council, as a bigger player sweeps in to take it all.

It looks now like the elite club that has benefited from the reform movement, started by Latham and continued by Egan, is about to become more elite. Members will pay to be part of whatever body comes out of the merger talks between Constructing Excellence, Be and CIRIA. Their money will go towards bettering themselves, not to fund reform in the rest of the industry, which will have to make do with what little comes from the DTI.

This was Egan’s plan. Get the top 10% up to speed, the argument goes, and leave market forces to do the rest. But construction is such a vast and varying market. Is that ever going to happen?

The improvers at the top should be left to their own devices now. The reform movement itself needs to change dramatically to address the needs of the small and medium-sized firms which make up the bulk of the industry.

There’s talk of a Strategic Forum for SMEs being formed. That’s a good idea, but any forum will have to remember that one size doesn’t fit all. It’s time for more changes. But we’ll have to look outside the Egan agenda to work out what they’ll be.

Source

Construction Manager