Keeping change open to question

The Egan report advocates a wholesale change in the way the construction industry organises and carries out its business. No one would dispute that the cultural change prompted by Egan (and before him Sir Michael Latham) was, and is, badly needed. But there is a danger that the 'Egan agenda' outlined in Rethinking Construction may become all pervasive.

Some might argue that's no bad thing. But, as Dr Stuart Green warned at a lecture last week (see page 1), the dominance of one way of thinking brings in its wake a concern that it might become the only way of thinking.

It seems that if anyone questions Egan they are automatically branded a dinosaur wishing to keep the industry in its old adversarial ways, rather than as someone who might be offering an alternative. Clients appear to be saying do it the Egan way or you don't get the job.

There is a danger here that the industry may be locking itself into a narrowly defined path. And however much better that new path may be, if Egan becomes the new orthodoxy it may stifle any questioning of the Egan agenda itself and smother any creative and innovative alternatives.

Surely no one wants the changes advocated by Egan to turn into the industry dogma? People must be allowed to question the changes recommended by the Egan report without necessarily being seen as reactionaries.