Building for tomorrow
Concerned with competence — Graham Manly
CIBSE’s new president Graham Manly is concerned that the building-services industry lacks the resources and competences it needs for a sustainable future.‘The average age of those working in the building-services sector is increasing by four months every year,’ says CIBSE’s new president Graham Manly in his presidential address. ‘This is not sustainable,’ he adds, ‘and we have a problem if we believe the industry is not dying, but, indeed, likely to grow as a result of the demands for energy-efficient design and operation of products, systems and buildings. ‘Let us not forget that lack of competent resources results in employment of resources who lack the competence — a sure way to kill off any business.’ Referring to research by the Sector Skills Development Agency that 39% of employers had regularly taken on staff that were less skilled that they would have liked in the year to June 2003, Graham Manly asks, ‘Dare I suggest that this percentage might be even higher in our sector?’
Difficulty Why does the building-services sector have difficulty recruiting the competences it needs? CIBSE’s new president has a long list of reasons. • Low image and understanding of building services by the public and the Government. • Shortage of dedicated HNC and HND courses, with poor regional coverage — caused by insufficient demand. • Content of many existing first-degree courses not meeting educational needs of employers. • General low level of investment in training by employers. Major companies train, but only for their own requirements. • Lack of practical training/knowledge, especially by designers. • Need for more emphasis on ‘soft skills’ to enable engineers to undertake leadership roles. The situation is getting worse, with the closure in the last two years of two BEng building-services courses and three HND courses through lack of numbers. Despite the responsibility and role of building-services engineering in creating an acceptable environment for our daily activities, Graham Manly is concerned about its low profile. ‘In this high-tech age, how can we excite and encourage recruits to join the industry if we continue to hide our engineering? ‘Understandably, plant is invariably consigned to areas of a building like basements and roofs, and services are generally concealed in ducts, ceilings and floors for aesthetic reasons.’
Excited Then he gets excited about his visit last year to Hong Kong’s largest building — the newly completed International Finance Centre No. 2. The control room was displayed with dozens of screens displaying the status of all the services equipment. ‘What a shame that only very few people ever saw it,’ he says, ‘Imagine the awareness and interest that could be created from a display wall in the ground-floor reception area at the Canary Wharf Towers.’ There is the problem. What of its solution? Mr Manly has a very succinct answer. ‘If each building-services engineer identified and encouraged a suitable new recruit every 15 years, the resource problem would be solved. ‘The real problem is more fundamental,’ he says. ‘Despite the range of abilities, knowledge, skills and competencies which the industry requires, we are not managing to attract appropriate recruits or train them satisfactorily.’
Encourage As part of the solution, he refers to professional firms such as accountants recruiting graduates with unconnected degrees, but providing a structured and formalised training programme thereafter. ‘We should encourage this to be the norm and require it to include a period of industrial/practical experience (if not already obtained) for all those who have not studied building services and wish to practise it.’ Those at the ‘technical level’ of the industry should, he argues have a degree that includes building services but that their knowledge should include interdisciplinary working and that their experience must include practical and commercial training. Another of his concerns is the increasingly low level of movement between contractors and consultants. ‘Design is now outsourced, usually to consulting engineers, and therefore contractors do not perceive the need to educate and train engineering staff to such a high level of technical knowledge. Thus generally, there is a reduced level of movement of staff from contracting to consulting and almost zero the other way, resulting in hardly any skill or knowledge transfer.’ ‘On the one hand, contractors are attempting to provide a basic technical qualification (e.g. HNC/D), plus a range of operational training in project management, programming, leadership, PR and presentational skills, as well as commercial and contractual matters. ‘Consulting engineers, on the other hand, are recruiting school leavers or graduates with little or no practical background or experience, which furthermore they are unable to provide.’ Graham Manly has identified the key elements of a training framework for the future, and puts the responsibility for taking the lead on major employers, especially contractors — as they have in the past. He suggests that input from contractors should include providing college lecturers with industry experience, assisting with project works and site visits. CIBSE itself comes under criticism for its past record. ‘As custodians of the industry, we have in the past failed to take that lead [bringing about beneficial change] and as an institution we have increased unnecessarily the qualification requirements, reduced the intake and failed to make membership relevant to the workforce or the employers. This now has to change, but without reducing the knowledge, experience or competence of the individual.’
Levy and grant system Finally, with 70% of the workforce employed in SME firms with fewer than 24 people, the vast majority of which do not have the resources to provide adequate training, Graham Manly wonders if it is time that the industry faced up to a levy and grant system again — as with the construction trades. ‘Admittedly, clients would eventually pay any additional charge, but I am sure that they would see it as money well spent if as a result of an appropriately trained workforce we could deliver better-quality buildings, which provide client satisfaction — in itself an essential part of Constructing Excellence.’
Related articles:
