In defence of construction technology

Citation

Douglas, J. (1998), "In defence of construction technology", Structural Survey, Vol. 16 No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1108/ss.1998.11016baa.001

In defence of construction technology

In defence of construction technology

Technology is the vital link between science, engineering, economics and management. Still, compared to these disciplines my impression is that technology is often viewed as the poor relation in some academic and professional spheres.

One of the greatest challenges facing building surveying and other technologically based construction disciplines is in reconciling the tension between the demands for both technical and management skills. Formal and informal feedback I have received from practising building surveyors, for example, tends to show that technical competency, self reliance and communication skills are the three main attributes that employers in the profession look for in graduates.

Technical competency for building surveyors of course demands an in-depth knowledge of building construction, an ability to read and interpret drawings, and a capacity to investigate and resolve building problems. Increasingly, it also means a familiarity with or an ability to pick up quickly computer-aided draughting/design, and the use of spreadsheets, databases, word-processing, e-mailing and other tools of information technology. Coincidentally, some are now arguing that it should be called "information management"!

Employers are increasingly demanding that graduates also have business and social skills and other transferable skills. Few would argue that management skills are unimportant in any profession. After all, everyone has to "manage" their time, their finances and their work. It is not surprising therefore that project management, design management, facilities management, property management, value management, and maintenance management are now common components of many construction and property related undergraduate courses. The emergence of such subjects reflects the increasing complexity of managing both the process and product of building.

Unfortunately, however, the inclusion of these useful management subjects in undergraduate programmes is sometimes done at the expense of the building technology content. In my experience, there has been a tendency to dilute the technical content of some undergraduate courses such as architecture, construction management, estate management, and quantity surveying. The inclusion of the word "management" in many such courses provides the pretext for paying less attention to the technical aspects of construction. Granted, it remains to be seen whether this trend is typical across the country.

Moreover, some professionals in the industry tend to underrate the significance or complexity of construction technology. They seem to view it as a predominantly craft-based subject which is best learned by experience. This implies that it only requires a fairly low level of technical knowledge. In other words, there is a perception that construction technology need not be studied thoroughly and rigorously. The same thing, of course, was probably once said about management.

Still, those architects, engineers and surveyors who are regularly involved in resolving building disputes and failures are not blinded by such prejudice. They readily acknowledge the need for and benefits of having technical competency of building construction.

Construction technology, though, is not just about how buildings are built or about how they work. It is also about how they fail. From this has developed the relatively new branches of applied construction technology such as Building performance, Building pathology, Building maintenance and Building deteriology.

Data from Building Maintenance Information show that the maintenance and repair sector (which includes adaptation) now accounts for nearly 50 per cent of the UK construction industry's output. Trends suggest that work to existing buildings rather than new-built is increasingly likely to form the bulk of its workload in the years ahead.

The implications for building surveying education are clear. The need for retaining if not increasing the proportion of construction technology in the curriculum dealing with traditional and obsolete building techniques (such as wattle and daub and solid wall construction) is imperative. Similarly it is critical that it addresses modern and innovative building techniques and materials.

Industrialised and system building and other non-traditional methods are apparently making a slow comeback in the UK. Fast-track techniques, modularised construction, as well as automation and robotics are being used more in the industry.

Furthermore, construction technology is becoming increasingly complex by the sophistication of environmental services along with the use of "intelligent buildings". The interaction of these services with the structure and fabric of buildings is often overlooked. Building surveyors and other appraisers and maintainers of property need to be aware of these developments as well if they intend to serve the built-asset needs of their clients effectively. Thus, achieving a balance between these diverse areas is one of the several tasks facing teachers of construction technology in higher education.

What, then, are the core competencies of building surveyors? The Building Surveyors Division of the RICS recently attempted to prescribe the key areas of knowledge and skill that building surveyors should acquire to satisfy the requirements for becoming chartered. A draft consultation document on education and training for chartered building surveyors published in 1996 identified seven generic areas of knowledge and six generic skill areas. Both of these areas correlate remarkably well with those prescribed by the Association of Building Engineers (ABE) in its document (December 1994) on policy regarding degree validation. Table I illustrates these similarities.

The dangers in marginalising the technological content of construction courses are not hard to find. It will make it more difficult for graduates to deal with awkward or complex building problems; the incidence of defects in buildings is unlikely to be reduced; there will be a continuing failure to learn from past mistakes; and, there is the likelihood of an increase in negligence claims against building professionals.

That is why publications such as Structural Survey are so important. They provide an informative medium for practitioners and academics involved in the technical appraisal of buildings. Ever since it was launched in 1982, the journal has continued to lead the way in its field. It has a key role to play in helping to enhance our technical literacy by providing a forum where the technological aspects of construction can be discussed and appraised.

James Douglas