State of the Industry Survey

Just under five hundred building services engineers mailed their replies to a reader questionnaire run in the November issue of Building Services Journal. This is an admirable response, and one that enables us to make meaningful statements about the membership's role in a dynamic and challenging industry.

Table 1 shows respondents' areas of business. A significant majority were consultants specialising in building services, followed by engineers working in the public sector or multidisciplinary practices. Contractors were well represented from both general and specialist m&e fields. Greater London and the south-east accounted for 42% of the respondents by region.

The average age of respondents is 46 years, with experience averaging at 22 years. Around 87% of respondents have been in the profession for more than ten years.

So what makes people opt for a career in building services? Curiously, 49% of respondents did not plan to enter the profession. As 65% of those declined to say what had influenced them, it is not possible to identify the reasons with any certainty.

That said, careers information seems to play a significant role in promoting building services. Around 28% of those who "fell into" building services cited careers information as a motivating force, with 26% influenced by family and friends. Of those who consciously chose building services as a profession, careers information played an even greater role, motivating 48% of that sample. (University prospectuses and course information would seem to demand priority treatment now that chartered status rests on an MSc qualification).

While a reassuring 79% of respondents intend to stay in the profession and only 5% intend to get out, worryingly, 30% would not recommend building services as a career and 24% were unsure.

Revealingly, only 34% of respondents said they were well managed (table 2). Two-thirds said they were either badly managed or simply unsure about the quality of management. The survey also paints a worrying picture of engineers' working hours. Table 3 reveals how many hours each profession says it is working. While the majority of engineers (from all backgrounds) work within the statutory maximum of 48 h/week, a high percentage work over the limit.

Worst off seem to be the m&e contractors, of whom 37% say they work more than 51 h/week. A fifth of those work in excess of 56 h/week. Consulting engineers fair only slightly better, with 12% of respondents working between 51-55 h/week, and 8% over 56 h/week.

Note that these figures are, if anything, conservative, as the 46-50 h/week band in the survey straddles the statutory limit. That said, it seems likely that few respondents would either be able (or indeed inclined) to give an exact figure for hours worked. Hence arguments for under-estimation or exaggeration would be equally plausible.

  Three out of five respondents felt that they were not taking an active role in the CIBSE. Those who worked in a building services consultancy were most likely to take an active role (27%), with contractors the next most involved in Institution affairs (22%).

Salary and stress

Most respondents answered the questions on salary, although the data suggests many found it a painful exercise. The median salary is approximately £25 175, and the most common salary range group is £20-24 000. The mean average salary is slightly higher at £27 175, which the BSRIA believes is a figure that could reasonably include typical bonuses and overtime payments.

  Table 4 lists salaries by type of work. Note the ranges in which, among other things, take in geographical differences.

The data, if accurately reported by survey respondents, paints a bleak picture of the industry's financial rewards. Only 27% of building services engineers are earning in excess of £30 000, 11% of whom are in the £45 000+ bracket. And this is in an industry where 87% of survey respondents have been in their profession for more than ten years.

Not surprisingly, employees in the public sector are the least well paid by type of firm. Conversely, manufacturers and clients tend to be better paid than consultants or contractors.

In the data for salary by age and experience, there appears to be a learning curve with salaries increasing up to the 36-40 year age group. There is a statistically significant drop in the 50-54 year age category, which has the highest percentage of respondents earning £15-19 000/y of any group over the age of 30. The survey was not able to reveal precisely why this should be – perhaps readers can shed some light.

On average, those who worked longer hours tend to earn more. However, there are a surprising number of respondents who reported earning less than £15 000, while working more than 56 h. According to the BSRIA statisticians, this equates to less than £5.58/h.

Naturally there are regional differences. Interestingly, while the mean salary for Greater London is £28 981, a shade lower than salaries in the south-east, respondents in the West Midlands enjoy a higher average salary of £29 704. The lowest salaries are in Northern Ireland, where 72% of respondents earn less than £24 000.

The big question is how salary levels and hours worked relate to the industry's reported stress levels. While the survey did not seek to identify specific levels of stress, just over 70% of respondents – from all the professional backgrounds – said that stress levels were higher now than five years ago. The only exception was respondents working in multidisciplinary practices and the utilities, but even then over 60% said stress levels were rising (figure 1).

Figure 2 shows how stress relates to salary. With the exception of the £35-39 000 band (which is based on a very small sample) the highest stress levels are in the category that is just above the average salary. This implies (or at least reinforces the belief) that middle managers are the most stressed.

The data shows that those who enjoy less than two weeks holiday are the most likely to be stressed. This would include those who work in (or own) a small business. Thankfully, stress seems to ease off after about 50, which again suggests that the most stressful role is middle management.

Surprise, surprise, stress seems to be related to greater workload and the increased turnaround times for designs. Profit margins are also a problem as productivity has to be raised to meet targets, often at the expense of training.

Less personnel is also a big concern. However, it is not clear whether this is due to a shortage of qualified staff, or simply a lack of budget to pay for it. Anecdotal evidence does suggest an increase in contract staff (which can only increase the pressure on middle managers).

An increasing amount of bureaucracy due to health and safety legislation, along with the increased potential for litigation, were also reported as significant causes of stress.

And what of those who are leading a less stressful life? Do they possess a magic formula for enjoying a calmer existence? Well, most of those respondents had either moved firms, were preparing for retirement, or were leaving the construction industry altogether. Not the most reassuring news.

The survey did not ascertain whether stress levels were becoming intolerable. In hindsight this would have been a good question, but in the absence of a direct measure we have attempted to correlate hours worked against reported levels of stress.

If one accepts that the 48 h/week statutory maximum is a fair threshold, and that stress is related to hours worked (table 3), then a significant number of employees from each of the professions reporting excess hours of work might be considered to be overstressed.

Now this relationship may be spurious or even an exaggeration, but as 30% of survey respondents would not recommend building services as a career and a further 24% were unsure, it would seem to be a fair reflection of respondents' stress levels.

So what do respondents think should be done? And what, if anything, can the CIBSE do?

From the hundreds of anecdotal responses it is clear that respondents' are generally resigned to their fate. Many thought there was little bodies like the CIBSE could do, but recurring pleas included help in attracting higher quality staff into the industry, education of the client base to select on quality not price, and greater efforts to improve the image and status of engineers "I feel that greater client education is required," wrote one respondent, "as well as less use of design and build where the pipe fitter designs as he installs."

Many wanted their Institution to lobby and campaign more on their behalf. "[Bodies should] force clients to take professional advice and not quantity surveyors' ideas of what projects can be obtained for," said one. Some wanted their Institutions to help architects retake their leadership of the professions, while others wanted help to eliminate contracting 'Dutch auctions'.

Most poignant was the respondent who wrote, "At least 50% of the stress is coming from the home – two people working and no proper childcare facilities".

Information technology

Around 85% of respondents across all professional categories have sole use of a personal computer, of whom 81% have e-mail and 76% access to the Internet. Forty percent use their computer for 2D drafting, but only 1% work in 3D. Around 51% use their computers for other purposes, probably for spreadsheets and word-processing.

Among the design professions, 51% of consultants polled use 2D drafting compared to 37% of m&e specialist contractors (table 5). Commercial and industrial firms are also wide users of 2D applications, with 53% of respondents working in 2D, but still only 3% in 3D. E-mail is the preferred means of communication, although 69% communicate in 2D, and (amazingly) 18% in 3D.

The survey reveals an industry working with a wide age range of processors and memory. While the majority of all respondents have had their pcs updated within the last two years, a high percentage – on average 17% – have not had their pc updated in over three years. Over 30% of general building contractors fall into this category. This highlights the current difficulties of communicating high-level data to all members of the construction team1.

Figure 4, shows that an overwhelming majority of respondents want access to intelligent product information. This was defined as product data that possesses physical attributes recognisable by computer applications.

Over 79% of building services consultants want intelligent product information, along with 62% of m&e contractors and 83% of commercial and industrial firms. How much this is wishful thinking is a moot point, particularly given the reported shortcomings in processor power and the current disinclination to work in 3D expressed earlier. But the demand is clear.

Survey respondents reported that CD-Rom, the Internet and construction helplines will all become more important as forms of communication (table 6). The survey also suggests that the Internet will become more important than written information in two years time.

Interestingly, a fifth of all respondents reported that resources had been cut to pay for information technology. These cuts are reportedly highest in the public sector (38%) and lowest among m&e contractors (7%). It is a common misconception that computers displace work, when they often generate it.

Is this a cause of the industry's increased stress and longer working hours? The answer partly lies in the industry's reported lack of training. Around 72% of respondents said there is a need for computer tuition, with a whopping 85% saying that it should be done by the CIBSE.

The Knowledge Exchange

Table 7 shows how survey respondents rank the importance of the industry's information sources. By far the most important were the CIBSE's technical publications, which 37% of respondents thought were vital and 38% important. Building Services Journal followed a little way behind, with 17% saying it was vital and 39% saying it was important.

Although the scoring system used by the BSRIA puts 'other sources' as the next most important, less than 10% of respondents completed this part.

Regional cpd themes are viewed as the most important activity carried out by the CIBSE, which is borne out by the anecdotal evidence. Accessibility to regional and national events was perceived to be more of a problem, and the majority of respondents viewed national conferences as only useful, rather than important or vital. Contractors viewed representation to government and society as the most important CIBSE activity.

Respondents were equivocal over whether they would pay extra for CD-Rom based information, 35% saying they would pay £30 extra while 46% said they would not. On the more specific question of technical guides on CD, 83% were in favour and 14% against. So yes, we'll have it, but no, we won't necessarily pay £30 for it. Some respondents felt that CIBSE members should get the CD free while companies should pay for it.

Other additional services were listed as an Internet-based library (38%), more effort into improving management and education (18%), and legal information and services (11%).

Thirty-eight percent of respondents wanted specific information on building services products or technologies, especially emerging technologies and energy efficient products such as condensing boilers and small-scale chp. Around 24% wanted information on management and training, with information about contractual law also being important.

In conclusion, it is tempting to presume that only those unhappy with their lot bothered to return their survey forms. Is that true, or do the findings of this survey truly reflect the feelings of the wider community of building services engineers? Either way, we would like to hear from you.