Contractors want architects to acknowledge risk as the key to better working relationships, says Paul Nash, president of the CIOB, which worked closely with the RIBA on the clients survey.
Paul Nash
Since it seems to go to the heart of the issue, where and how do you think that architects add value?
The dynamic between the architect’s ability to get under the skin of the client, develop the brief, unlock the potential of a site and work the planning system is exceptional. It requires real skill and creates value.
In my view their role becomes more problematic later on when the design has to turn into a set of information that can be procured and delivered by contractors.
Contractors’ satisfaction ratings in this survey are consistently much lower than other kinds of clients’. Why?
There’s an expectation gap between what architects do best and what contractors want them to do. The contracting side is all about risk management. Contractors give their clients a guarantee and sign a contract based on a fixed date of completion and a fixed price. Where it is reasonable to do so, they want to reduce, remove or transfer that risk. It’s a huge generalisation, but I’m not convinced that architects understand this. But it is key to explaining some of the behaviours we see in project teams.
Theodore Levitt famously said that clients buy quarter-inch holes, not quarter-inch drill bits. It captures an important concept. Buildings are a means to an end, not an end in themselves. Too often I think we lose sight of that when designing buildings.
Do you implicate contracts?
Contracts bear closer scrutiny. They demand a robust set of information that defines the product. But by its nature, design development is an iterative process. Maybe the architect is trying to achieve the best outcome for the client, but the contractor just wants drawings and specifications that they can price up. We have to draw a line somewhere or we’ll never build anything.
It’s not just contracts, though. Our industry is still too siloed. Collaboration is the key to breaking down these silos but in practice we still have a long way to go. BIM is a step in the right direction but does not necessarily promote collaboration. What is needed is education, particularly in the softer skills that underpin collaborative behaviours.
The CIOB has supported the RIBA’s past and current client engagement initiative. What do you think of its approach?
The RIBA has turned a mirror on the architectural profession and that is to be applauded. It is important always to ask whether you could improve. But the research cannot stop here. The CIOB is keen to keep collaborating with the RIBA, perhaps even asking architects what they think of contractors. It could only improve mutual understanding.
How do you think architects would respond?
I suspect some architects would say that all that contractors are interested in is driving down the cost at the expense of quality. Genuinely, I think contractors do understand this point. However, they operate in a boom-bust industry, and are keenly interested in profit and loss.
In my experience architects don’t sit comfortably in this hard-edged commercial world. Part of me is thankful for that. We need people willing to champion the built environment legacy for future generations.
