Behavioural Assessment, one of the top 10 buzzwords we identified in the January issue, is already making its presence felt in the industry (see vox pop). Highways England is the best known proponent of the technique, while HS2 is already committed to using it throughout the procurement phase and into project delivery.
As 2016 progresses, the likelihood is that other major clients and framework operators will seek to include at least an element of “behavioural assessment” in bidding processes too.
The technique involves putting bid teams through their paces in simulated exercises, such as a project delay or last-minute redesign, then judging how well they display the kind of problem-solving and collaborative behaviours that clients need. It’s similar to the assessment exercises that some employers run when recruiting individuals, but with far higher, multi-million pound stakes.
The emergence of behavioural assessment certainly seems to be in step with other trends in the industry. In the case of BIM, for instance, it’s increasingly becoming clear that digital techniques per se will only have a limited effect on project efficiencies: the real step change comes when client and supply chain teams truly put partisan needs to one side, develop a collaborative approach that cuts out risk and the costs that go with it, and start innovating together.
In payment practice too, the industry is shifting, with Tier 1 contractors increasingly adopting Project Bank Accounts, and the new wider-angle view of the world that goes with it. And if the delayed Supply Chain Payment Charter takes hold in 2016, it will further drive the industry away from the “us and them” fragmentation that lies at the root of so many inefficiencies.
So yes, behavioural assessment is to be welcomed as another tool that will encourage the industry towards a more cost effective, and hopefully more profitable, way of working.
But while we’re on the subject, could we add a few more scenarios to the tests? A year ago, Construction Manager revealed that contractors’ carbon footprint, in terms of emissions from onsite operations and transport, in fact rose through the recession years.
This year, it’s clear that the same pattern prevailed in total built environment emissions, covering “embedded carbon” in products and materials, and heating and lighting emissions from the UK’s building stock. In other words, the drive to de-carbonise, and de-couple emissions from output, had less impact than we thought.
“Business as usual” therefore means we are extremely unlikely to achieve the 50% reduction in emissions (from 1990 levels) targeted in Construction 2025.
Clearly, government policy, such as the failure of the Green Deal and soft-pedalling on Part L and zero carbon, had a major role. But if we’re looking at critical issues that benefit from collaborative behaviour, that will surely include the industry’s contribution to climate change.
Elaine Knutt, editor
