Living and working in a capital city like London is a unique experience. It’s a place where history and innovation collide, where the echoes of the past resonate alongside the hum of futuristic design and technology. For those in the construction industry, this dynamic environment offers a front-row seat to the evolution of our built world. As someone who has spent over a decade in London with Morgan Sindall Construction, I’ve witnessed firsthand the industry’s transformation, which has been nothing short of remarkable.
The construction industry has long been stereotyped as resistant to change, but my experience contradicts this notion. Over the past decade, sustainability has become a driving force in design, with net-zero goals reshaping materials and waste strategies. Collaborative working practices and performance-based outcomes have largely replaced adversarial approaches. Technology, in the form of building information modeling and digital twins, is now commonplace. Gender diversity and working practices have also made significant strides. The industry’s culture has shifted, with a strong emphasis on the right behaviors and attitudes demanded by and of the people who work in it.
Yet, despite these advancements, there are areas where the industry still needs to evolve. One such area is risk transfer. Currently, the approach to risk transfer can be somewhat erratic, swinging like a pendulum depending on the scheme, the project team, and perceived market conditions. As a business, we successfully deliver social infrastructure, including leisure, education, healthcare facilities, and affordable homes at scale. We also bring significant value to burgeoning parts of the London market, especially high-specification buildings for life science and technology. Given the sheer size and complexity of these schemes, risk management and transfer are always under close scrutiny.
At Morgan Sindall, we are more than willing to accept our share of risk. We have the capability and covenant to make those decisions. Our model of empowerment and decentralization is a key differentiator for us and our clients. However, we still encounter projects that are detached from realistic timeframes and risk management practices. It is not uncommon to see suggestions that the main contractor should deliver aspects of the pre-work in implausible timeframes, leading to unreliable outcomes.
This issue reflects a broader trend in the industry: the shift in focus to the pre-construction service agreement (PCSA) period. Everyone knows roughly how long construction takes, but the variable has become the PCSA period. This has become a pinch-point where important aspects of managing complex developments can all too easily get compromised. We need more acknowledgment and transparency around where the risk sits, how it is transferred, and how long this takes. This conversation is crucial for the industry’s future, and it is one that I hope we will have progressed by 2035.
The construction industry is at a pivotal moment. We have made significant strides in sustainability, technology, and collaborative working practices. However, we must continue to evolve, particularly in areas like risk transfer and realistic project timeframes. As Richard Dobson, area director London at Morgan Sindall Construction, aptly puts it, “We need to maintain the realism around how long it takes to complete designs of good quality, manage risk to an acceptable level and mobilise a dedicated supply chain.” This is a call to action for the industry—to embrace transparency, realism, and a shared understanding of risk and timeframes. The future of construction depends on it.
