Hello, welcome to Built Environment Matters, a monthly podcast brought to you by Bryden Wood, an international company of technologists, designers, architects, engineers and analysts working for a better built environment, Bryden Wood, believe in Design to Value to cut carbon, drive efficiency, save time, make beautiful places and build a better future.
So thanks for joining us for another episode of our podcast Built Environment Matters. I am Jaimie Johnston, Head of Global Systems at Bryden Wood. And this month, I've got the pleasure of being joined by Keith Waller, who's the Program Director for the Construction Innovation Hub. Hi, Keith.
Hi, Jaimie.
Perhaps we can start off just by saying a few words about what the Construction Innovation Hub is for those who aren't familiar with it.
Okay, so the Construction Innovation Hub is a vehicle that's funded through the Construction Sector Deal as part of the Transforming Construction Challenge. And we're funded through UKRI to deliver a number of outcomes that support the transformation of the sector. So how do we embed greater digital manufacturing solutions into the built environment? How do we do it in a way that supports the industry to grow and prosper? How do we do it in a way that delivers better social, economic
and environmental outcomes. So we get more from our construction sector in the UK. And it's the Construction Innovation Hub is made up of three partners, the Manufacturing Technology Centre (MTC), the Building Research Establishment (BRE), and the Cambridge Center for Digital Built Britain (CDBB). And I say three partners, but I really should say is four because actually, our program is not a self delivery model. It's a
co-delivery model. So we're delivering our outputs by working very closely with industry partners, people like Bryden Wood. So we will not deliver our ambitions if we work in splendid isolation over our four year program, we have to work collaboratively with clients and government and with our industry partners to make sure the outputs that we produce, deliver those outcomes we need as part of a transformed construction sector.
So thinking back, think I first met you in one of those airless, windowless basement rooms in BIS as it was, now BEIS, talking about BIM level three. So can you give us a quick canter through your CV because you've been right at the front and center of this drive to transform construction in different guises. It might be interesting just to go through some of the steps in that process.
I spent about 25 years after I graduated working on various projects on site in the design office in the UK, in the states in Europe. And it was really when I was involved in the energy sector and particularly the nuclear sector, I was first approached by government to come and be an advisor in what was then the Department of Energy and Climate Change at the very start of 2010. And very quickly from there, I started in the Treasury in Infrastructure UK, the forerunner to the Infrastructure
and Projects Authority. So I had about eight or nine years working in central government. And the last couple of years, I've left and taken on the role of delivering, if you like, on the Construction Sector Deal by running the Construction Innovation Hub. So for me, my journey started in 2010 in government, I had no idea how government worked, it sounded phenomenally dull and boring. And I wasn't sure I really wanted to do it. But of course, when I got in there, I found it
absolutely fascinating. And I met some really bright and really interesting people who thought differently and acted differently to what I've been used to in the construction sector. So you know, by the time we met Jaimie, I was probably just finding my feet in government. But actually you learn a lot of things very quickly. And of course, we often think of ourselves in the engineering community as being innovators. And actually, we think we're quite good at working out what needs doing.
But actually, the real skill, I think one of the biggest lessons I learned from my time in government is working out what to do can be quite easy. It's working out how to get it done that becomes hard. And of course, we've seen Coalition government, following on from the Labour government when I first started, and then a Conservative government to
follow that. But in all of those three different types of government, we've seen, there's been an increasing focus on the importance of construction and infrastructure, and how that can be transformed. So it's really exciting place to be working on how we shape policy, how policy gets delivered, and how we can transform the sector from its medieval practices into something that's a little bit more future facing a little bit more inclusive, and better represents the society we serve.
Yes, that's, this isn't a question you can ask it. But that's really fascinating. I was reading a thing recently about people think that the private sector is that kind of groovy place of innovation. But actually things like the iPod world or the iPhone. were built on a whole load of R&D that was carried out by governments because noone in a private sector can't afford to
do that stuff. So yeah, I had the same experience actually that certainly working with a kind of civil servants you think flipping hell really bright people all trying to do fantastic work. I think people don't see that because they see
the political end of it. But yeah, I completely agree that sort of that, yeah, the people working at government level are really, really trying hard to do the best for the country, I think, yeah, people don't necessarily see that just sort of watching, you know, the press releases and some of the stuff they see on TV.
Yeah, I think actually, the the way that government and industry have been working together, particularly in 2020, since the pandemic started. And more recently, in terms of developing the policy responses to the pandemic, we've seen much more collaborative work. And in the past, government has produced policies and landed it on industry and said, there you go. This time, we've seen certainly with the Construction Playbook.
And with the Industrial Strategy, a much more collaborative approach where government is working with industry to make sure the policy is going to land and is implementable, rather than just something that will make a headline in tomorrow's Daily Mail. They're now thinking about long term delivery and implementation of the policy. And they recognize they need to be working with industry to deliver it. So writing the policy document is not the end of the journey. It's the start.
And I think how industry and government can work together is going to be absolutely crucial to how we deliver on the transformation objectives we need for the sector.
I want to come on to the Construction Playbook, but it says the sort of latest in a series of linked things. So there was the adoption of BIM, then there was the Autumn Statement around Modern Methods of Construction, transforming infrastructure performance, the Sector Deal, the Hub, the Platforms, there's been a sequence of these events. It feels to me like government has been putting all that all the things in place. But my personal view, industry hasn't been
responding quickly enough. We're still talking about when you started looking at climate sector, we're still talking about productivity and carbon things. Do you think we do you agree, or do you think we're not moving quickly enough? And certainly, we're not moving quickly enough for the next 30 years after see some fundamental change in construction, doesn't it?
Yeah. And I think if we just reflect over the last decade, I mean, the very first time I was in the Treasury, was in the summer of 2010. And at that stage, it was the emergency budget and the emergency spending review, when government was setting out his plans to deal with the deficit. So a lot of projects were cancelled. A lot of schemes, highway schemes that had been started, a lot of school building programs that were underway were more or less
cut overnight. And there was a lot of fiscal consolidation going on at that time. And when they started to put out spending plans, and of course, the end of 2010 saw the very first iteration of the National Infrastructure Plan, when they the government construction strategy and the BIM mandate that followed in 2011. But at that stage, much of the narrative was focused around efficiency, how do we save money? And I would characterise it is, you know, almost how do we do the wrong thing better?
And actually, as we've started to move forward, and started to perhaps think more about how do we drive better performance? How do we increase value? How do we deliver those broader outcomes? And how do we work with industry and academia and business community to deliver that? We're seeing perhaps a flip from can we do the wrong thing better to can we do a better thing. And I think the pace of change over the last two years, has been
quite remarkable. And I think, actually COVID has, in a way been a bit of a catalyst for some more rapid change and a more of an appetite to change. Certainly the government in all its messaging about Build Back Better, Greener, Faster, that's not cheaper. That's Better, Greener, Faster. So we are seeing a change, to recognise that we need to be delivering better outcomes from the huge investment we make in the Built Environment. How does that support leveling up our economy?
How does it deliver greater social value? How does it help drive a path to net zero, and you don't do these things by buying cheap, taking the lowest price and hoping everything works out? transferring risks down the supply chain, arcane procurement practices? So it's really quite heartening to see a policy environment developing, which is focused more on value and more on outcomes, and less
of a focus on cheap. So I think, you know, I'm quite optimistic that the pace of change we've seen over the last 12 months will continue and perhaps accelerate, as government sets out its its plans to drive an economic recovery through how it invests in construction infrastructure, and our industry sort of girds its loins to be able to respond in a way that delivers better value and supports those better outcomes that we desperately need.
You mentioned that the Playbook I mean, that, for me has been a phenomenal example of just how quickly people can move. I mean, given the fact that one was working in new cicumstances and everyone had their own business imperatives to focus on the fact that government is able to collate or get together that group of people from both public and private sector side, create that document, get that level of buy in, in the time it's taken, you go, that's a phenomenal, let's never lose that that
agility, that ability. I mean, perhaps we can talk a bit about, you know, the contents of the Construction Playbook, but what what we think it means and maybe a little bit about the process of just how, how that galvanised industry to create that sort of set of interlinked locking policies and quite the way it did?
Well, I think it would have been quite difficult to galvanize industry without there being a crisis at that time. One of the characteristics of policy development over the last 10 years is there's been an absolute plethora of announcements. And even if you're in them in the centre of government is quite difficult to keep up with everything that's
going on. You've got all the policy environment around Brexit, around, you know how government's setting out its schools, building program, its road building program, High Speed 2 major infrastructure projects, and you can be easily forgiven for just you know, giving up on trying to keep up with all the announcements and policy initiatives that are coming out. But actually, that the crisis with COVID bought the
industry together. And I think huge credit goes to the Construction Leadership Council, and the officials in BEIS in particular, who worked very closely to forge a much better link between industry and government through that. And that renewed convening power. And the spectacular things that CLC have done in terms of keeping sites open, launching the talent retention scheme, and others have really given industry a voice in government. So it's a sector that hasn't necessarily been widely listened
to, in the past. It hasn't spoken to government with one voice, the messages have been quite confusing. But I think CLC speaking in one voice, over the period of the early days of the pandemic, helped government to recognize the benefit of engaging with industry, and how the sector could support its
recovery. And I think the industry players themselves have seen the benefit of coming together to address that significant problem that COVID brought to the sector, and seeing it as a way, not just in terms of how it might recover from the immediate downturn, but how it may support and accelerate the transformation to a more productive, more sustainable sector in the
future. So I think government's Done, done an extremely powerful job of setting out a policy environment in a way that engages industry, and makes it want to be part of that journey. And that's been replicated. But I think the the great work the CLC has done and how it's used its convening power to bring industry to the table. So it's listened to, its views are actively sought. So to help shape the policy environment to something we need.
Yeah, we we've talked about this before that, you know, construction is vast compared to automotive or aerospace, say but, because there Yeah, as you say, they're much more joined up, they speak with one with one voice, they're
much more consistent. they're asked to government and say, right, and the next billion pounds of investment, we're going to sell our engines wings, whatever it is, for the good of the industry, they seem to have a lot more penetrating power in terms of getting what it wants, it feels like this is sort of constructions chance to get a
seat at the big table. And actually, if we can nail this, if we can talk with one voice, if we can do that, there's no there's plenty more it feels engagement from governments, it feels like there's a recognition that you know, this could be the engine that kickstart the economy helps the road to recovery, if we get this right, so it feels like a vast opportunity for construction, if we can just get our hands on it.
Yeah. And I think that that's continuing today. So you know that even with the the Playbook publication, industry has been asked to be part of the implementation of it, you know, so it's being done with industry rather than to industry in that space. And I certainly think industry does have a much more prominent seat at that table now, because the language of what we need for recovery isn't about, we just need more people on site to build things cheaper.
It's recognizing that how we construct our assets, how we operate, the built environment in the future, really will support a leveling up agenda will support a better path to net zero will support greater social impact. So it's not just what in terms of a long list of projects, we're going to be funding in the UK, in our construction infrastructure. It's very much about how we
deliver those projects. And we're seeing, you know, great policy drivers, not just around digital, but around how do we drive greater levels of manufacturing and more productive growth into the sector? How do we use data in a way that supports not just better construction projects, but better operational assets? So actually, industry has got a really important role in how things are delivered, and how in
that delivery. They support those broader social, economic and environmental outcomes that are so crucial in our strategic policy. Drivers as a nation know if how are we going to level up? How are we going to decarbonize the construction sector is crucial in delivering that. And both on the new assets that we build, and how we operate the existing assets, which make up the vast majority of the built environment anyway. So we have a seat at the table. And that voice is now being listened to
and actively sought. And it's really up to us to make sure we use it in a way that delivers those better outcomes and supports the transformation we need.
Yeah, that's, well, there's something. I mean, you said it early. I think there's something incredibly prescient about the timing. I mean, obviously, the COVID thing has been horrific, the number of families affected, you got entire industries at a standstill, who knows when that
will recover. But if it was one silver lining it does feel like it came at a time when construction was gearing itself up through things like the hub to kind of get get fit for purpose, the future, things that we were doing for actually a productivity gain, won't be quite useful for social distancing moving forward. And then there's obviously all the stuff around climate crisis and
things. So it does feel like if there was a time to kind of slightly put a pause on the industry, give people time to, yeah, understand how uncertain The world is moving forward, how interlinked we are, I felt like this was quite a good time to do it. And then you get the Construction Playbook. So yeah, whilst it's been horrific, for all sorts of reasons, it does feel like this could be a really fantastic opportunity, maybe for the industry to reset itself,
pause and go, right? What are we actually going to do coming out of this because we have a moral obligation, I think to do better than we have done maybe for society for all the reasons you've just talked about.
Couldn't agree more, Jaimie. And I think, again, we've got to be mindful that while there's a huge opportunity, if we do this, right, we've got to be guarded against some of the risks. So, you know, we've got to try and resist. And, and, and I suppose report, bad practices are people trying to buy cheap rather than driving value, you know, how we we don't want to be driving a
race to the bottom. And of course, it's really important to how we shape future policy direction, that we're able to evidence how this this approach we're taking now does support those better outcomes. We need to provide more evidence, more data, more measurement that says this way, will deliver these outcomes. And of course, if we're just measuring cost and measuring time, we're missing out on demonstrating a really strong case for productive growth and greater social value,
all of those things we seek. So it's really important, we don't waste the opportunity that's in front of us, and we make sure we provide that compelling case about this is the right way for us to respond. This is the right way for us to transform the sector. And I think we have to be realistic, you know that... Even though we might have a clear idea of what the end state of utopian end state looks like, we do need to have a bit of flexibility on the path that we
take to get there. Again, working out where we want to go is quite easy. Making sure we get the right path to get there is equally important. So we have to have some flexibility on how we make that journey. I don't think we want to compromise on the destination. But I do think we need to have some flexibility in the approach we take to get there, it's really important that we don't rush down the wrong path for political expediency or, or short term
measures. And we keep our eye on that prize at the end, and make sure we're able to respond to the emerging needs. It may be that a future government places greater emphasis on carbon, or greater emphasis on social value, or any other sort of variants on that how we respond to that to make sure we we move in the right direction at the right pace. So we don't lose the opportunity that is really important. And that requires us to be working much more joined
up as a sector. And again, the CLC and its convening power will be a crucial ingredient in that.
So I do want to come on to that utopian state, but just on that sort of changing the or responding to the changing context. One of the things that you said that most stuck in my head years ago was that BIM level one was doing the thing you were always supposed to be doing BIM level two was doing the same thing better BIM, level three was a different
thing. And we don't really talk about BIM level three, it was a sort of mystical land of opportunity that we never really got to I it feels to me, like maybe BIM level three is, you know, that's what we're currently talking about digital twins, and some of those things that are maybe the we couldn't define BIM level three at the time, because we didn't know where we were going. Whereas now we've sort of dropped that that nomenclature but maybe this is what BIM level three looks like.
So I think that's an example of setting a direction of travel, maybe course correcting as we went, but maybe this what we're doing now is actually what we really meant we couldn't articulate it back in the day, and if you agree,
yeah, I think that's right. So I mean, BIM, the BIM level two program is really about digitizing the design and construction of projects. I think when we start thinking about how do we then move into understanding and measuring and digitizing the performance in service of These assets, and then how we use that data, not just within the project or not even just within the asset, but to help us understand sort of network and system level impacts of that.
How does a, an energy project and a transport project and a schools project and a housing scheme interact? And how do we understand the digital twins in the Federated digital twins, that enable us to understand how things are performing, and make decisions on how we want to intervene or how it may shape policy environment. So BIM,
level two was very much. And the program both you and I are on, in that, in that dingy basement in BEIS, all those years ago, was very much focused on the capital phase of a single construction project. Whereas I think when we're moving into digital twin world, we're talking about the whole life of an asset, and how that asset interacts and integrates with its environment and those assets
around it. And that data, and that insight, and that knowledge will really help us drive better decisions that support those broader outcomes. And then I think we'll see the power of data and the value of data, and how that's going to drive and shape decisions increasing exponentially over the over the coming years.
And if you could be mindful all the things about being aware of the risks. I wrote a thing recently for the Hub about what I think the end state, the utopian state looks like for Platforms, can you speculate a bit on where you think this is all heading, what that what that might look like, or what it might mean for construction for society, for economy?
Yeah, I think we've got to be clearer and articulate and get people to buy into that end state. Again, having that end vision is really important, but then, you know, understanding the path we want to get there. So I see in the future, if you like a digital marketplace, where products and sub assemblies and systems sit a bit like something like an Amazon Marketplace, that might have an Amazon digital
marketplace at the moment. But actually, rather than just any old stuff being on there, which Amazon has, at the moment, I'm thinking about, we make sure the only products that are in that digital marketplace are those that support and provide the data that allows us to understand what jobs they've supported, how they help deliver social impacts, how they support a path to net zero, how they can demonstrate their safe, they comply with regulations, and standards, you know, and all the
various data that sits around there. And I would like to think that the suppliers who operate in that world would need to have a certain quality and ethical thresholds to be allowed to work in that marketplace. So I think buildings will be configured from kits of parts increasingly in the future, they'll put a much large proportion of the built environment. But I would like those kits or parts to be
interoperable. I would like there to be common interface standards and rules, and have a clear route to market for people who are developing innovative new solutions and products. It may be, for example, that you have a particular cladding system that you have developed as a supplier, you know, you want to understand the route to market if this product is really energy efficient, and supports local jobs, that should be part of the value based decision for
how that is deployed. But we can't, at the moment, create that marketplace because we haven't got a clear set of rules. We've got far too many different systems and ecosystems that are not yet interoperable. We don't make decisions based on value and outcomes, we still make decisions based on cost and cost alone, costs will always be important initial capital costs and whole life costs. But it's part of a balanced scorecard of value metrics and value drivers
that we need to consider. So I see a digital marketplace being a key part of the future environment. But let's be clear, we're not going to transform the entire sector at the flick of a switch overnight. So that's why the journey from where we are now to that utopian end state becomes really important. There's no point in having a fantastic technical solution in 10 years time, if there's no one able to buy it. And there's no capability and capacity in industry to be able to deliver
it. So we need to bring clients with us. We need to bring policymakers with us. We need to bring the market with us. So people are increasingly able to develop and bring to market those solutions that support that utopian vision you described, Jaimie?
So I've been I've been reading a whole load of books about the founding of Google Facebook. I'm reading Amazon at the moment actually.
It's fascinating stuff. So when you talk about the Amazon Marketplace, obviously all of those types of industries were massively disrupted by someone who came in you know, Jeff Bezos didn't feel constrained by the normal rules of retail and tip the thing on its head but the same time we look at automotive and there was massive consolidation from there used to be hundreds of little car manufacturers now there's there's a handful because he no one knows where there's going.
Do you think the construction call them tier one Now but their construction come to the future. Do you think it's the existing ones? But a variation of them? Do you think it's disruptors will come into that mix of those? Or? Obviously it's guesswork. But if you had to speculate, where do you think this is heading? Do you think it's going to be the evolution of our current current players?
Or do you think it's going to open it up for a whole load of new players who suddenly wouldn't have come in construction go, oh, now your data lead manufacturers? Yeah, I can, I can help there, I can step into that space.
If you look at the top 20 contractors, league tables that are published every year, you will see more or less the same people moving up and down every now and again, one goes pop be it a Jarvis or Carillion. And there is a new entrant coming in. But it's largely the same people who move up and down that league table, I think a number of those players will still be there and really powerful parts of the market in the future. But I do genuinely believe there'll be disruptors
coming in. And it's not just that, I also think some of the some of the current tier ones in this space will start to diversify the services they offer. So it will be about providing whole life solutions, rather than just capital assets. Some may choose to be developing products, that they can license and be used by other contractors in that space, particularly if we're in a manufacturing space. And of course, we think about the disruption not just to contractors, but to consultants
models as well. You know, at the moment, many, many consultants, business models are based on making their money by selling man hours, you know, selling the hours that they do on procured design services, I think increasingly, we'll see people perhaps developing products and solutions, and selling those products and solutions, not in an hour's basis, but on outcome and a value based way forward.
So if you invest a bit like an app developer, developing your product, you don't necessarily get paid to develop your product. But you do get paid for how many times it's bought. And at the moment, the traditional model that we work at the moment is you get paid for it once and it gets used once, you know, but you don't you don't you don't start developing until someone's
paying for you. Now, if we think about actually, I think there's a really good market for one of these solutions, I will develop a product or a solution that fulfills that need. And I'll make my money by how many times I can sell it, or how many times I can license it. In the UK and overseas. I think we'll see a diversification of range of services that the current players operating. And I will
see. And I also see that there'll be some disruptors who come in for data, your it will be a key driver of that people understanding how they can use data and offer different products and services, you know, operate, you know, offering, you know, availability or operational performance, and then the capital cost is just a sort of a blip on that overall service off offering that they bring into market. So I think we'll see some big disruptors.
And I think we'll see many of the current players, disrupting their own business models to broaden the range of services and income streams that they're able to generate from that. So I think pure contracting in its in its current widely understood form, is going to be a smaller part of the market. So the people who are currently in it, are going to have to think about how do they diversify or broaden their product range, to be able to respond to what happens in
the future. But let's be frank, Jaimie, this is not a five minute transformation. Again, this is a long term journey. So there'll be plenty of signals of what the path should be. But I think going back to your earlier point, if we're able to articulate that end state and that vision, in a compelling way that people can get behind, then people will be able to plot their own path and journey that they need to take as businesses and their services to help align
with that end state. But it's a very clear direction of travel, we are not going to be doing what we currently do in the way we currently do it in the future.
Brilliant. So going back to the start of a conversation, one of the key things I thought worked really well about the BIM standards was that they were we put them out into the international community. And very quickly, they became adopted almost as the de facto standards obviously turned into things like the EA and ISO 650. It feels like there's a huge opportunity to do the same again, with Platform thinking and all the work we're
currently doing. Like the challenges we're trying to solve a global challenges feels like if we make some headway. There's a massive international market. And you can see the rest of the world starting to look into industrialized construction, calling it slightly different terms, but it seems to be the same fundamental drive globally. Do you think that's something we should be considering more longer term about how we start to propagate this stuff outside the UK?
Absolutely. And I think there's a real opportunity if we can join up across a few different things. What we've seen, historically, and the International BIM Pro is a really good example of going out there, engaging with foreign governments and all throughout the world and forming a community, which is promoting it as sort of approach and a process that really supports
better delivery. Actually, there's a real chance now to start thinking What is it apart from BIM that the UK businesses can offer to those international markets? Now, we have a number of areas where we are, you know, world leaders and highly regarded, not just in BIM. So we are in a world leading in, in finance, in insurance products, finance products, that that are required by communities and governments who want to deliver their infrastructure and
construction programs. We've got the BIM opportunity that plays in that we've got all the various digital tools that are being developed and coming to market now. Even things like the value toolkit coming out of the Hub, how do we help governments make choices that support their ambitions, the value drivers in Colombia or Peru, are not going to be exactly the same as they
are in the United Kingdom. But actually, how do we help them make choices that support the outcomes that meet their own local needs, their own projects, their own communities. So I think the technical services and the products that we are developing here in the UK will become increasingly exportable and marketable. But again, I think we need to try and have a much more joined up and collaborative approach to how we bring the UK construction value
proposition to market. If we go in on every single initiative, with blinkers on talking just about that, I think we'll miss some of the opportunities that will come from selling UK expertise and British expertise.
And it may be BIM unlocks value or value unlocks finance, or finance unlocks BIM, whatever it's going to be, but there is a real chance to develop a UK brand construction approach that we can sell internationally, I don't think we want to be competing internationally on how cheap we can provide labor and concrete. What we want to be competing on is how much value we can add, and how we can help support the delivery of, you know, the infrastructure and development plans of economies
throughout the world. And I think we have a crucial role to play and quite encouraged. Now, even the CLC, working very closely with the Department for International Trade, has started to think about what is that UK value proposition? And what does it mean for businesses like Bryden Wood, Motts and Arups and other consultants, as well as the big contractors and
construction managers? How do we get behind a UK value proposition and create something that allows us to export those wonderful technologies and services internationally, and develop our capability to service the needs in the UK at the same time.
So I think by 2050, we could be looking back at COVID and Brexit as necessary pain we have to go through to lead get the UK to lead the global transformation into a sustainable and equal global community.
I'll go halfway and say COVID. Im not necessarily going to think that Brexit is going to be something that's going to help internationalize the UK based on current evidence fairpoint.
So that's all we got time for for now. Thanks, Keith ever so much for joining us. That was fascinating. So I really appreciate you spending the time with us. For everyone else. Thanks for listening next month. Please join us when we'll be talking to Helen Hough, Bryden Woods Head of Sustainability to discuss embodied carbon operational carbon and all things sustainability.
Thank you for listening to Built Environment Matters. A podcast brought to you by Bryden Wood. Listen and subscribe wherever you get your favorite podcast. And you can follow Bryden Wood on LinkedIn and Twitter.