Aggregate Industries

James Craddock

Having worked in the construction industry for my whole career to date, i’ve delivered many projects at various stages in their lifecycle, including feasibility, option selection and single option development. Through those projects, across the rail, defence, manufacturing and nuclear sectors, i’ve experienced first-hand the excitement of bringing together a team to nurture a project from an initial idea through to a fullyfledged buildable design, incorporating things like the best in sustainability practices and new innovative technologies. I have also in turn, as I’m sure most have, experienced the bitter disappointment of developing the first estimate - or an iteration of that estimate - that demonstrates that the project simply isn’t affordable within the regulatory/business control period. I’ve observed in dismay as all of the best parts of my project are stripped back until it finally stacks up against the business case, the end product barely recognisable against that inspiring initial concept.

I have also had the good fortune to learn and capitalise on an idea which can mitigate against this inevitable project challenge - the concept of the Masterplan. On certain projects which I have managed, instead of simply descoping elements of the project to bring the overall cost down, we took the decision to define the scaled back project as Phase 1 in the Masterplan, with the removed elements instead being transferred to Phases 2, 3 and beyond. Whether these subsequent phases were to be delivered in the next regulatory control period, over a period of say ten years or perhaps never, was immaterial. This was because the concept of the Masterplan didn’t require any financial commitment on the part of the client, other than the comparatively minor expense of the time spent defining the subsequent phases. 

The important thing was that nothing was descoped, only rephased to deliver as part of a later stage in the ultimate Masterplan for the project.

I’ve seen the clear benefits of this approach, not just when delivering projects which may sit across two or more regulatory control periods - this is particularly true of those organisations whose capital spend is controlled annually. One major additional benefit i’ve seen is slightly less tangible but equally important - the positive impact on the morale of the project team. Instead of stripping their project back to its bare bones, they’re encouraged to think creatively and actively seek solutions for how the newly-formed Phase 1 of the project could be designed and constructed in such a way that it facilitates the subsequent phases - this could be for example through designing foundations to allow for the likely mass of the final asset or simply protecting space for future development. Project teams - Project Managers, Engineers, Planners - are natural problem-solvers by their nature and presenting them with this type of challenge electrifies the team, instead of taking the wind out of their sails.

Capital spend limitations will forever be a challenge in the project space - I can’t recall ever kicking off a project where it was flush with cash. However, I hope the simple concept of the Masterplan can be used as a tool to work around these restrictions and keep the project team motivated and challenged.