It has been a few years since we started encountering a boom in technological innovations mostly related to new manufacturing processes and materials, as well as data connectivity and information modelling. Whereas the construction industry has been continually advancing, the rate in which innovations are currently changing the landscape of all phases of construction is probably at its fastest in history. But what happens with risk? While recently developed innovative tools, techniques, and materials very often aim to reduce structural, project and construction risks, an inherent risk aspect of introducing novel practices is itself the lack of experience with these tools and the uncertainty as regards the anticipated performance.
Such new technologies include for example, digital surveying and monitoring and precise geolocation; building information integration and BIM, automated / interconnected construction procedures, often implementing augmented reality tools or unmanned construction machines and robotics; very high performance materials and additive manufacturing. All the above are well designed technologies, sometimes though only on paper, while there is a lack of experience and trial on a real project basis. At the same time, the benefits they offer are incomparable to existing methods, which makes their immediate application extremely attractive. I believe that experience is essential, but when it comes to modern construction, we need to allow space for fresh, innovative ideas, provided that the respective risks remain well managed.
Some application-specific risk definitions include interoperability between old and new software, legal and standards compliance, safety and reliability of big data networks, or scarcity of qualified staff. More generally, the challenges arising include the management of very large volumes of information, the employment and education of labour staff with new tools, reliance on always decreasing human-driven processes, multi-interface communications, and all that at growing speeds and within a clash of business cultures. In short, we can easily recognise that the risk management focus is on skills, interfaces, and adaptation to change. In that sense, state-of-the-art construction risk management concepts may prove the most valuable option. With this, I can immediately refer to the spirit of the tunnelling Joint Code of Practice, since tunnels and heavy underground civils, incubate significant uncertainties, similarly to the application of novel and sometimes untested concepts.
Looking at the early planning and contractual stages, we need to ensure that innovation is allowed from a contractual perspective, as for example in a collaborative client-contractor participation to risks; this has certainly been successfully implemented in the industry. Since large scale projects come with long life cycles, it is quite likely that new technologies emerge, which have not yet been in place at the project start. Considerations for such a situation should also escort the project planning. In relation to that, the various project decisions should be recorded in detail, particularly the justifications for discarded options along the way. The role of a project’s innovations manager gains in importance. This role’s qualifications and competencies, as well as its collaboration channel with the risk management team should be established well in accordance with the project’s specific requirements.
As regards the design and construction phase, we need to embed an innovation-oriented risk control based on the well-known live risk-register tools. The risk and change management plans can now be interconnected with a project information platform (typically BIM models). Again, as with any novel or challenging work, competent technical reviewers should perform a thorough check of the promoted solution.
