Holdfast Training Services Trial Blog

Read time: 5 minutes.

This morning was the ICE Strategy Session: Covid-19, Artificial Intelligence, and the future of the Civil Engineer. During the session, chaired by Rachel Skinner, Prof. Richard Susskind spoke about how AI and ‘the future’ might affect industries. His thoughts then provoked discussion amongst a board of construction industry experts.

Richard’s presentation focused on several key themes which I’ll summarise below:

The Mind Set

Richard explained that if, as an industry, we don’t want to be left behind, we need to change the way we approach problem solving. We shouldn’t be thinking about how we can do what we currently do faster, better or cheaper but change what we do all together to achieve the end goal.

An example Richard gave was the decline of the rail industry in the US. He suggested that their decline can be attributed to the rail industry’s inability to comprehend that they weren’t in the ‘rail business’, they were in the ‘transportation business’, and the customer didn’t care how they got there. Another example was given where the MD of Black & Decker explained to new employees that they weren’t in the ‘selling drills’ business, but in the hole making business, and if they find a better way to help customers make holes in walls that doesn’t involve a drill, then they need to adapt, quickly. The focus should be outcome above all else.

The Disrupter

The discussion then moved on to, “well ok, so who is it going to be that shakes things up”. After the CEO’s of several international construction firms (Balfour, WSP and others) discussed how we might adapt as civil engineers, Richard suggested that “the enemy that kills you, doesn’t look like you”. He went on to explain that whilst we might be able to disrupt and innovate internally, this is typically a very hard thing to do and usually it’s external people/companies who really disrupt industries.

So who might these disrupters be? Richard suggested that with the development of AI, data is king, and so it might be data analysts and scientists, not civil engineers, who create this disruption and lead innovation in construction. Mark Naysmith, CEO of WSP, supported this theory when he explained that as a consultancy, they’re employing more and more graduates with computer science degrees and even creative degrees such as art and music. Mark didn’t say if this meant he was consequently employing less engineers, I expect not, but perhaps this is us conceding as an industry that we, with all of our structural theory, might not be all of the solution to the problem. Those that don’t embrace this might be left behind.

Something that wasn’t mentioned in the strategy session, but I think reflects the sentiment, is what Dominic Cummings was trying to do in No. 10. We are familiar with the news that rather than employing civil servants and staff with politics degrees, he was employing data analysts and computer scientists to help run the government. Now, the success of his strategy would be a contentious debate, but to me the parallels are stark as we see an industry (politics) realising that the disrupter (the innovator) might not look like a politician.

My Opinion

It’s my opinion that the civil engineer, and what we design and build, will remain the solution to the outcomes required by society for at least the next 100 years. Whether that being transport infrastructure to enable trade and movement, energy infrastructure to power our homes or the high rise buildings to home us where space is a commodity. However, the longer we wait as an industry to ‘self-disrupt’ and innovate, the less control we’ll have over an industry that we regards as ‘ours’. This has already been witnessed with the modernisation of project management. The Bragg and many other reports of the 80s/90s that reviewed the technical and commercial practices of the civil engineer, saw the engineer’s remit transfer to project managers, quantity surveyors and schedulers. It’s my opinion that the longer we wait to self-disrupt, the higher the chances of what remit remains (such as risk management, construction sequencing, design and quality assurance) could become the remit of yet another specialist, perhaps data analysts and computer scientists.

Further Reading:

The session was recorded and should be available on the ICE’s website in a couple of days.

The board members were:

Prof. Richard Susskind OBE: A British author, speaker, and independent adviser to international professional firms and national governments, specifically on the use of AI.

Mark Neysmith: CEO of WSP UK and a member of the Global Leadership Team.

Simon Adam: Head of commercial for Crossrail 2.

Stephen Tarr: Managing Director of Balfour Beatty.

Suzannah Nichol: CEO of Build UK.

Chris Young: CEO of Tony Gee.