Editor's comment: The agenda for improvement

The construction industry can sometimes be likened to a supertanker. As an entire industry, it can take a long time to respond to a call for a change in direction.

Only a few brave souls initially embraced the call for new ways of working and partnering in the wake of the Egan and Latham reports, while plenty of others stood as onlookers, sure that this new-fangled way of working would result only in disaster - and in particular, in contractors being taken for a ride by their clients.

But for those who have taken the challenge on, it has worked well. Most are thriving, and rather than fighting with clients, many are using the joint approach to develop long-term successful partnerships, which can only add financial certainty to a traditionally volatile market.

As part of this 'new approach', the 2012 Construction Commitments, originally seen as an Olympic initiative, looks set to have a much wider use in the industry. Yes, it's a document that might initially seem to be lacking in in-depth information. But it tells you all you need to know about where the industry should be going.

Its longest section is on procurement and integration. And in terms of driving the industry forward, one of its key points is that payment periods should be 30 days not the 90 days (or even more) that some subcontractors have to suffer. It also says that unfair retentions are unacceptable. Both are key statements that any good business should be aiming to meet, but it is surprising how many don't.

A modern construction industry needs to be professional and businesslike in everything it does. Getting it right doesn't have to mean being soft or ineffectual - neither BAA, or any of the contractors on its frameworks would quibble about that. But if more contractors were prepared to embrace the Commitments, the UK's construction industry would be a far better place to do business for both clients and contractors.

[Contract Journal, 13 September 2006, p 52]