The Design Build Foundation is looking to expand beyond D&B byÉ - Breaking down barriers

going on as the implications of Sir John Egan's report, Rethinking construction, start to sink in.

As CJ reported when the Egan report was released in July, sectors of the industry were concerned about the undue influence that a handful of major clients had wielded in the drafting of the report. These concerns arose because the representatives on the Egan task force were largely drawn from client organisations. Another influential body involved in the drive to improve productivity was the Construction Round Table. Again the CRT is dominated by large repeat-order clients (see box).

overlooked

This led to a belief that small or irregular private sector clients, together with those clients operating in the public sector, were being overlooked.

The DBF is now setting out its stall to be one of the leaders in the post-Egan revolution. Its supporters claim that its pan-industry membership is ideal for getting to grips with the issues raised by Egan and that it is not dominated by sectoral interests. They also believe that much of the industry's inefficiencies can be overcome by the fundamental integration of design and construction and that no other organisation except the DBF can achieve this. As one DBF member remarks: "The Construction Industry Board is not equipped to do this nor is it something the CIB should be doing."

John Carpenter, chairman of DBF and director of building and services at the John Lewis Partnership, believes the impetus for change is going to come from clients: "Major clients are going to drive the process further." However, unlike some other organisations, the number of clients in the foundation is limited to around 20 per cent of the membership. This figure "ensures we maintain our client focus."

The foundation is also striving to maintain a balanced membership that involves all sectors of industry. The aim is for a membership mix of 20 per cent clients, 30 per cent professional organisations, with the remaining 50 per cent split between contractors and specialists. "We are looking for people who want to change the world", remarks Carpenter.

Dr Bernard Rimmer, construction director of Slough Estates, explains: "We are intent of getting a balance but the hardest thing is trying to get people involved."

John Anderson, managing director of Bovis Europe, concurs: "We have got to get more people involved." Anderson does not want the DBF to be just a forum for people to 'network', but an organisation that breaks down the barriers between the professionals and the constructors. He says that there is still an air of elitism among some professionals who look down on contractors. "Class is still the problem. But the exciting place to be will be with the trade contractors."

Richard Saxon, chairman of Building Design Partnership, thinks likewise: "Britain, more than any other European nation, and far more than the US or Japan, developed strong cultural and educational separation between professions and trades. The status of practical men remains lower here than elsewhere.

"So now we suffer the absurdities of professionals excluding the expertise of the constructors from the design and value-seeking process and taking responsibility for the design of elements which they cannot understand fully. All this is done in the name of tendering in a publicly accountable way for trade work. As we all know, this method performs poorly by international standards."

Saxon feels that integration of the design and building process will bring down the barriers. "Old style design-build rarely rose above the commonplace because consultants and constructors didn't often team up as equals, and clients did not often seek their participation from the start. D&B deteriorated into client's concept consultants handing off, or being novated to a delivery-oriented team who did not participate in the early stages.

"The idea of a standing sector specialist team seeking the total service role is strong, but is a big leap for those clients who see designers as either concept or delivery people. Adding maximum value to clients does not, however, require a single team right through from when the need for a project is identified."

problems

All this may sound good for the private sector clients, but what about the public sector? Dr Rimmer agrees that there could be problems. Slough Estates' construction director opines: "You can't get any real improvement without an integrated team approach and that can be difficult with public sector clients."

Part of that difficulty can be witnessed in the membership of the DBF. There is only one public sector client - the Ministry of Defence. The foundation says it will be seeking to enrol more public sector clients to redress the present imbalance.

Construction Minister Nick Raynsford was at the conference and was asked whether he thought public sector clients should get involved. He replied: "My feeling is that there really is a growing interest for integrating design and construct schemes. There is a lot of scope for public sector clients to get involved."

But it is not only the public sector clients that the DBF will have to work on to get them involved - it is also the specialist contractors. At present, the number of specialists involved with the DBF is nowhere near as high as the foundation would like. Anderson observes: "Specialists have got to get away from the shop floor and into the design meeting. Once they find their voice, we will really start to see major improvements in efficiency."