The 12th Edge Debate: 11th April 2001

The Hawley Review: what does it offer construction - cart or horse?

Michael Dickson, Chairman, CIC, Senior Partner, Buro Happold

The Hawley Report is entitled 'Making the most of available talent'

Without doubt this is needed if the UK is to retain and create the manufacturing wealth that underpins our quality of life.

The newly-proposed, maladroitly titled Engineering and Technology Board (ETB) is seeking its wealth-creating role through excellence in communication efficiency and relevance to modern problems. It will provide a bridge:

• between individuals and industry;
• between the 'old' and 'new' economies;
• between the need for information and its supply;
• between industry's needs and the education system; and ' in terms of foresight -
• between today's 'knowledge' and tomorrows requirements for skills;

All of this will help recruitment by ensuring that qualifications are more relevant

To create an ETB with the potential to achieve this, six working groups have been set up - on a 'top down' model

Constitution and Governance

• Defining Stakeholders
• Reviewing Governance
• Transition process
• Funding

Business and Industry Needs

• Identify main business audiences
• Develop understanding of needs
• Identifying ETB support
• Future Trends
  

Communication

• New audiences
• Relevant messages
• Appropriate tasks
• Coordinated delivery of Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths

Attracting Greater Membership

• Understand reasons for not joining 'institutions”
• Identify what will make more people join
• Lessons from other types of networking
• Improvements from Institutional Clustering
  

Education and Training

• Management of 'Skills Seminar'
• Define changing business requirements for technology and engineering skills
• Reviewing University provision
• Identifying best practice in business – University links
  

Continuing Professional Development

• Spread best practice
• Integrating CPD with industry needs
• Resolving who does what
• Links to registration, licensing and international recognition
  

The report does recognise the significance of Sir Robert Malpas's "Wider Universe of Engineering". Just as in the Construction Industry, the Engineering Institutions have to recognise that there are far more people creatively engaged in industrial wealth creation than the corporate institutional members - E-commerce experts, CAD technicians and craftsmen, technicians et al.

There can be little doubt that a greater emphasis on engineering professionalism in the UK will contribute to improved national economic performance.

Not surprisingly this report has been prepared for the DTI, which has traditionally sponsored the Engineering Council as part of its brief to sponsor manufacturing industry generally, but not construction. I believe that the DTI is being asked to continue substantial funding of the Engineering and Technology Board in order for it to pursue the remit described above and to continue to be the Registration Authority for Engineering Qualifications. Perhaps these two tasks should be separately identified.

The question - is the ETB a cart or horse for the construction industry - is an enormous topic.

It is true that construction is benefiting from 'Rethinking Construction” by moving towards "manufacturing" through use of virtual prototyping, greater involvement of specialist contractors, use of prefabrication and strategic and tactical construction management. Yet, with some exceptions where identical repeat product is possible (hangars, some student and residential buildings, price right hotels, retail outlets etc) most constructions, particularly those with longer design lives, remain location and use-specific. Elements (stairs, lifts, plantrooms, even precast and steel frames) may be of prefabricated standardised components but the composition and formulation is site and project specific.

In line with the thinking of the Malpas report, many more skills are needed beyond those provided by members of leading institutions for construction to be a successful contributor to the wealth of the UK.

Integration and interaction of this wide range of working skills, not fragmentation, is required for success. This is the central purpose of the CIC reinforced by its democratic framework where a wide range of individuals representing the 55 member bodies share in a bottom up process delivery of shared and aligned goals to government and other users of the construction industry.

The constitution of CIC ensures representation of the views of Chartered and Professional Institutions, other Professional Bodies, Business Associations, Research Organisations, Standards-setting and Regulatory Bodies as well as academic groups - this is the key horizontal integration of CIC.

Individuals from their institutions then sit on the various panels (Consultants, Education, CPD, Innovation & Research, Industry Practices, Training, Sustainable Development) or on various Working Groups (Economic Task Force, Health & Safety, Adjudication, Equal Opportunities etc) contributing their ideas upwards to Council.

CIC began its life as the Building Industry Council during 1988. The initial Council brought together

• The Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB)
• The Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE)
• The Institution of Structural Engineers (IStructE)
• The Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) and
• The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors
  

It started cautiously, with a small budget and activity largely centred on two key objectives: one, to encourage commonality in the education of construction professionals and, the other, to promote research and development in the construction industry.

Underpinning these two initial aims was a broader desire for multi-disciplinary cooperation. The initial Manifesto for the Council spoke of the "need for collective decision-making and, therefore, unity" whilst recognising that 'the construction industry is not one industry but several’. It was to provide a chance for the members of the building industry to speak with one voice, before 'attempting the far more difficult task of achieving a consensus within the construction industry’.

In April 1990 BIC changed its name to the Construction Industry Council.

The scope of the Council's work and influence has grown to embrace all aspects of planning, designing, creating, maintaining and managing the built environment. But despite this increased scope, the essential nature of CIC has remained the same. It is:

• Multi-disciplinary
• An umbrella body (ie a representative forum and not a Confederation or Trade Association)
• A Company Limited by Guarantee (ie non-profit making)
  

The Council now has 55 members, including its associates, which cumulatively represents more than 400,000 individual construction professionals and over 25,000 businesses. These member bodies are:

• Professional institutions representing planners, managers, constructors, designers, technologists, technicians and other built environment professionals
• Business associations for consultants and specialist firms
• Research organisations
• Bodies concerned with standards and regulation in construction
• Academic groups
  

In its short life to date, the Council has absorbed three other national bodies:

• In 1990 the four professions energy group became part of CIC and its role has developed into the present Sustainable Development Committee;
• In 1994, the CPD and Construction Group
• In 1999, the Construction Industry Standing Conference, which had pioneered the development of higher level vocational qualifications in construction, became the CIC Standards Committee.
  

The absorption of bodies responsible for Continuing Professional Development and NVQ's demonstrates how the initial concept of promoting commonality in education has grown to include all aspects of lifelong learning.

TOPIC (the Training Organisation for Professionals in Construction) was formed in 1997, and has quickly become an integral part of the industry's national training arrangements. A Memorandum of Agreement was signed with the Construction Industry Training Board in 1999, enshrining TOPIC's role as the key organisation for overseeing policy in training construction professionals.

The single most important feature of all CIC activities is its impartiality. CIC is not a trade association established to promote its members' interest above all else and it is not our role to speak for any sector or individual group within the built environment. CIC is often seen as a voice for professional services or consultants and it certainly can provide a unified voice on behalf of all consultants’ groups but the membership of the Council itself embraces a much wider constituency of interests.

There are now four inherent elements underpinning all that CIC does.

• An interface with Government
• An agent for improving industry practices and performances
  • CIC was a key component of the Latham Review and its implementation through the Construction Industry Board (CIB) and is now a major player in the Movement for Innovation (M4I).
• A Standards-setting body for
  • National (and Scottish) Vocational Qualifications at the higher levels
  • the qualification and registration of Approved Inspectors
  • nationally recognised Building Construction Performance Standards
  • the qualification and registration of Adjudicators and their Nominating Bodies, under the construction Act; and
  • Training Providers
• An information exchange
  • for example, the CIC Cascade, a weekly electronic newsletter
• CIC also collects data for wider consumption, establishing the market data for professional services in construction including a major new study to be co-funded by the DETR, which is about to commence in April 2001
  

The output of CIC's work generally appears in published form. Some of the most successful:

• A Guide to Project Team Partnering
• The role of cost saving and innovation in PFI projects
• A framework for business improvement – A guide to Investors in People
• Construction Careers Handbook
• The Guide to Quality Based Selection
• CIC Client Guides to Energy Efficiency and Water Conservation
• CIC Education Manifesto
• Project Management Skills
• Building Control Performance Standards
  

The initial objectives to improve integrated professional education and R&D have remained as consistent high priorities. The narrower concept of R&D has been expanded with a new emphasis to demonstrate how businesses can profit from innovation and a consequent move towards promoting innovation and research.

A key element of promoting innovation has been the establishment of CRISP (the Construction Research and Innovation Strategy Panel) as an interface between Government, industry and researchers, which began life as a CIC concept.

The broader role of CIC as an organisation concerned with the built environment has been enshrined within the new 3 year Corporate Plan agreed last year. This includes the following activities:

• A major study into integrated transport and land use, to be published later this year;
• The development of Design Quality Indicators as part of a collaborative research contract with Government;
• Developing a theme of establishing the business case for sustainable construction with clients and the financial institutions
• Establishing independent appeals tribunals to enable member bodies to meet their obligations to members and applicants under the Human Rights Act; and
• Establishing standards for the post-occupancy evaluation of facilities
  

Our broader role has also led to some new alliances, perhaps the most important of which has been with the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE). We have worked closely with CABE on the development of Design Quality Indicators and in the establishment of a new Design and Construction Alliance of the major bodies in this area, including the Urban Design Alliance (UDAL).

The biggest structural change in the way in which CIC now operates has been the establishment of National Regions. Two key drivers for this policy have been membership demand (that is to say, individual local members' demands within our member bodies) and to meet the new Government policies of devolution and regional empowerment.

The Council has agreed to establish 12 National Regions, which is one in the area of each National Assembly and English Regional Development Agency. The pilot National Region was CIC Wales established in December 1999, which now has a flourishing relationship with the NAW.

CIC South West (which is the product of an amalgamation with the South West Construction Network), CIC North West and CIC West Midlands (a merger with the West Midlands Centre for the Built Environment) have followed.

Preliminary meetings for CIC East, CIC South East and CIC North East (hopefully to build on a partnership with the Centre for the Urban Environment) have already been planned. It is hoped that CIC London, CIC Yorkshire and Humberside and CIC East Midlands will follow before the end of this year.

The CIC National Regions will be essentially self-determining bodies, operating within a consistent financial and constitutional framework. What they do will be up to each of their Executive Committees and members but it seems likely that they will focus on Representation (especially to the relevant National Assembly or RDA), Project Activity, and developing CPD, Information and Social Networks.

CIC is firmly committed to eradicate fragmentation wherever possible and, in the Regions, we are determined to work with existing organisations, such as the Centres for the Built Environment, the M4I, Construction Best Practice Programme, CABE (etc) in order to avoid duplication and provide a 'one-stop shop’ for built environment liaison at regional level.

The Council's early aims for multi-disciplinary co-operation, collective decision-making and unity to provide a chance for the members of the construction industry to speak with one voice are still at the heart of all that we do.

Executive control is provided by Executive Board, with considerable dedication from a full time Chief Executive and staff and an elected Chairman and other non-executive, volunteer officers. In this way CIC is able to contribute and align its members to the greater arrangement of the industry and its clients.

Allied to the horse and cart question is the looming big issue as to whether the Construction Industry will be sponsored by the DETR or DTI after the forthcoming Election.

If the Construction Industry is to become a partner of manufacturing industries under the umbrella of the CBI, then it would make sense for the industry to move towards the DTI.

On the other hand, most of the products of the construction industry are remote from market, and yet - providing that they are efficiently organised and well designed - these products ( roads, water, buildings and infrastructure) contribute enormously to productivity and wealth generation.

We believe that the framework for delivering this contribution effectively requires to integrate the creation of the Environment, including planning and housing, (E) with Transport (T) and that this is specific to the economy and structure of each particular region (R). It seems to us in CIC that the combination of these capital letters suggests that the DETR should continue to be the sponsor of Construction. We further believe that there should be greater synergy between the DETR and DCMS.

Certainly this is the reason for CIC's evolution from construction into the broader remit of the Built Environment and for its regionalisation strategy.

As many of you will know, CIC is an important integral part of the Construction Industry Board which brings together Government, Clients (both public and private sector) and Industry. CIC has members on both supply and demand sides and we sit alongside other umbrella bodies representing:

• Clients (the Confederation of Construction Clients)
• Contractors (the Construction Industry Employers Council)
• Manufacturers (the Construction Products Suppliers)
• Sub-Contractors (the Constructors Liaison Group)
  

Together CIC and these other groups represent the full spectrum of client and industry representative bodies – over 160 in total.

Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons, it is unlikely that the CIB will continue for much longer. We, in CIC, hope that it can be replaced by a new Strategic Forum for the Construction Industry but it is not yet clear whether this has sufficient support to fly.

We feel that such a forum needs an engine room in the form of a suitable secretariat, costing no more than £250,000 a year to run. Unfortunately, other bodies seem unprepared to help meet this sum. In contrast to the industry's £60 billion annual turnover, and the far higher organisational budget of ETB, this seems a good investment in the potential financial gain for everyone by better satisfying clients with a better product.

Summary

Co-operation between the CIC, representing the professional interests in the creation of our built environment, and the Engineering & Technology Board's representation of the professional Engineering Institutions in the Process, Manufacturing and Computer Industries is clearly vital and needs to continue.

Both have to be actively engaged with the movement to change the images of these industries to one of challenge and technological leadership. Without this synergy, young people will not be attracted to engage in the wealth creation that is so essential to the Quality of Life of UK plc. The CIC Mission Statement is after all:

"A more effective Construction Industry for Quality and Prosperity in the Built Environment".

To serve society by promoting improved value and quality for clients and users;

To serve the Construction Industry by encouraging unity and emphasising the significance of the Built Environment to the nation; and

To serve Members by adding value and emphasis to their work.

Process Engineering, Manufacturing, and the Computer Industry (although not software development) are engaged in continuous processes or repetitive activities and so require a different range and proportion of skills than does construction. Further, manufacturing workforce is generally employed in one place for a long time because of the level of fixed capital of any venture, where engineering input per hour has a very high added value. The construction industry has little of these attributes and so is much more suited to the integrated systems of training, business and communication being brought together by CIC and other industry bodies.

Returning to the Question before us, the Hawley Report and its outcomes are certainly not offering a cart for construction. The new Engineering and Technology Board needs to be properly aligned with the activity of CIC and, through CIC, with the establishment of a new strategic forum for construction. If we can achieve this degree of lateral thinking in the promotion of all our initiatives then it can be a multi-horse-powered engine for driving improvement in our industry.