How can Civil Engineering thrive in a Smart City World?

2

Growing urbanisation is placing pressures on cities the likes of which we have never seen before. There is no other profession that is in a better position to tackle the issue of how to manage the demands of a growing population than civil engineering. From water and sanitation to energy and transport, the way that infrastructure is designed, delivered, operated and maintained has a critical impact on everyone’s lives.If we get it right civil engineers can proudly claim to have made life better for people across the globe. If we do not, society will look to others for solutions as the digital era makes it easier for new players to step up to the plate with innovative answers to the world’s problems. Civil engineers have throughout time, always innovated to solve the issues of the day. Bazalgette, Telford and Brunel are rightly feted for being ahead of their time in seeking to overcome seemingly impossible obstacles to transform people’s lives. The Institution of Civil Engineers is celebrating its 200th anniversary in 2018 and can count these engineering giants as past members. There is no doubt in my mind that these great innovators would have grasped the opportunities we now have at our disposal with both hands. As an industry we must follow their lead and swap ‘faster and cheaper’ for ‘smarter and more effective’. We must think about achieving better outcomes for the societies we serve, and we must embrace the new tools that the digital era offers us.

Foreword

There is no other profession that is in a better position to tackle the issue of how to manage the demands of a growing population than civil engineering.

Nathan BakerDirector, Institution of Civil Engineers

This report gives us a great insight into the change in mind set that all of us, as individuals, businesses and professional bodies need to achieve in order to thrive and not just survive in the face of radical digital change.The recommendations will require civil engineers to step outside of their comfort zone, but we must address the lack of ‘soft infrastructure’ that exists within our industry if we are to flourish as an industry and become digital leaders rather than followers.ICE is already at the forefront of encouraging industry transformation. Project 13, the industry-led initiative to improve the way high performance infrastructure is delivered, has already begun to challenge the status quo. The recommendations in this report provide us with an opportunity to work with industry to develop a strategy that will not only allow us to compete in the digital era, but to lead the way in using technology to improve people’s lives.

3

Contents

Executive summary

Introduction Purpose of this report

Our approach Method Report structure

Section 1: Fighting challenges in the digital city Context: Cities cannot exist without the civil engineer.

What do civil engineers do? Where do civil engineers work?

Change: An approaching smart city age What do we mean by the smart city? Increased data availabilityBetter connectivity Increased processing power

The theoretical case for digital technology in civil engineeringWhat opportunities could digital technology bring to civil engineers?How can civil engineers leverage these opportunities to address the challenges they face?

Section 2: Where we are today The reality on the ground

Three challenges to radical change Perception of high risk Perception of limited value Poor understanding of role

How digital innovation creates value – today

Section 3: Where we need to goSolving challenges with soft infrastructures

The missing piece

Soft infrastructure 1: Potential for commercialisationThe need for new business modelsNew digitally-enabled business modelsChallenges to business model changeBringing about changeRecommendations to the civil engineering profession

Soft infrastructure 2: Governance and processThe need for new approaches to governing innovation? What do we mean by frameworks?How can these frameworks reduce uncertainty while still providing freedom to innovate? How should these frameworks be developed?Recommendations to the civil engineering profession

Soft infrastructure 3: Human capitalWhy do civil engineers need to change their knowledge, skills and behaviours?What will this change look like for different career stages?Is there a need for new roles in civil engineering?Recommendations to the civil engineering profession

How digital innovation creates value – tomorrow

Summary of recommendations

Authors

About us

Bibliography

4

Fighting challenges in the digital cityCivil engineers make cities work. Their many constructions support systems from energy to transport to sanitation; without them, urban living as we know it would not exist.

New opportunities are on the horizon. ‘Smart cities’ is on the tip of every mayor’s tongue: a vision that digital capabilities may bring value to our urban areas. Passion for this paradigm may lead to radical digital change in the civil engineer’s habitat – and possibly, within the profession itself.

Three digital capabilities stand out – better connectivity, a greater availability of data and a rise in processing power. These could empower civil engineers to be more efficient and more effective, better combating challenges in individual infrastructures, across infrastructure systems, and throughout society as a whole.

But are civil engineers ready for radical digital change?

Where we are todayThe Civil engineer is no stranger to digital innovation. Our research however shows modest progress: a profession with isolated instances of innovation, focusing on efficiently producing outputs, blinkered to individual infrastructure and the short term. Civil engineers paint digital innovation as an unappealing pursuit; stakeholders describe a view of high risk, limited value, and a poor understanding of their role in its delivery. Injecting the profession with hard infrastructure – specific digital technologies – has not delivered. A “faster and cheaper” philosophy can only go so far. Soon it will become a distraction. If the civil engineering profession continues its current approach to digital innovation, no matter the vigour, we predict new competitors, rising commodification and shrinking influence. At present, civil engineers may best aspire to survive in a smart city age.

Executive Summary

Where we need to goWe believe in an alternate path forward. The challenges we have seen are symptomatic of a wider issue: a lack of soft infrastructures – cultural systems that govern human behaviours. Our analysis focuses on three connected instances:Civil engineers need to perceive the wider potential of digital innovation. However, this value is irrelevant if engineers cannot translate wider outcomes to profitable Commercial Practice. A need for new business models is created. Even with a lucrative arrangement, delivering digital innovation remains an elusive, amorphous and risky process, warranting new Governance and Process. These new structures will place individuals in distinctly different roles and we do not believe civil engineering’s Human Capital will suffice. New approaches to knowledge, skills and behaviours are necessary. Investigating each, we make recommendations to individual engineers, engineering organisations, and the Institution of Civil Engineers. The change needed is substantial, the recommendations difficult and improvement areas lie outside the profession’s comfort zone. In history, however, the civil engineering profession has shown the ability to deliver significant soft infrastructure change in times of significant technological change. The profession needs to rewrite its strategy to digital innovation. It must broaden its world view, invest in soft infrastructures, and draw on its roots as an innovative profession that brings great societal good. While digital innovation may be at odds with the profession’s current culture, it is highly complementary to its purpose.We believe, if we can rise to this challenge, civil engineering will thrive – not only in tomorrow’s smart city age, but also in the UK’s industry as it stands today.

This report tells the story of civil engineers moving from surviving to thriving in the face of radical digital change.

5

Introduction

Purpose of this report

The city is the playground of the civil engineer. A myriad of connected constructions provide the essential infrastructure citizens need to live, work and play. Without them, the cities of today would not exist.In a future, ‘smart city’ age, civil engineers will need to solve challenges in a more digital habitat. But are they ready for radical digital change?

A rising urban population, the changing climate and increased resource scarcity present the profession with an increasingly challenging realm in which to engineer. In parallel, new digital technologies are disrupting professions with new ways of doing and being. This new urban context presents challenges and opportunities for civil engineers. The emergence of “smart city” thinking – where digital capabilities create value – may accelerate the use of digital innovation around the civil engineer. This could present a context for change and improvement: this could present a context for stagnation and obsolescence. This focussed study considers how the role of civil engineering could change as “smart solutions”, or digital technologies, become more commonplace in our cities, and potentially, in how infrastructure is designed, delivered and maintained within (and between) them. Extensive research has already been undertaken on the technical nature of digital technologies. This study focuses instead on their use by civil engineers, how the profession’s culture shapes their interpretation and what change is necessary achieve to achieve more of the benefits that digital innovation has to offer.Digital technologies are not new to civil engineering. Through this research, we will acknowledge and assess the state of digital innovation within the profession, explore what success in a more digital future might look like, and assess the challenges to this end. Comparative to other implementation research, this report concerns radical digital change over smaller, evolutionary improvements. Analysis of the profession will be unflinching against this stretching lens: a number of uncomfortable truths should be expected herein.We aim to provide advice to civil engineers as to how their profession should evolve in the face of digital technology. This study is supported by the ICE, but offers a strictly independent perspective. Whilst the focus of our study has been the UK, we expect that many of our findings will be more widely applicable.

6

MethodBetween July and October 2017, Arup, with support from the University of Bristol, carried out the following tasks: - A desk study and literature review, exploring both

commercial and academic literature relating to smart cities, civil engineering and the built environment.

- Interviews with key stakeholders working in digital technology, smart cities and civil engineering. Interviewees were sought from the public and private sector, from infrastructure operators, contractors and consultants, and from across all career stages.

- A workshop with experts from a range of key infrastructure sectors, including water, energy and transport, with expertise ranging from civil engineering to digital technology to legal and commercial.

- Analysis and reporting of the data collected above.

This report is kindly supported by an Institution of Civil Engineers Research and Development Enabling Fund grant.

Our Approach

Report structureThe remainder of the report is structured into three sections as follows: Section 1: Orchestrators of the digital city. - Context: Cities cannot exist without the civil engineer

explores the purpose of civil engineers and their vital role in cities.

- Change: An approaching smart city age explores the context of the smart city, setting a clear definition of this term and contributing digital capabilities.

- The theoretical case for digital technology in civil engineering provides a theoretical overview of the opportunities digital innovation could bring to civil engineers.

Section 2: Where we are today. - The reality on the ground provides a practical

overview of the status quo of digital innovation in civil engineering, drawn from our observations of the profession.

- How digital innovation creates value – today summarises the value digital innovation creates for civil engineers today.

- Conclusion: Surviving in a smart city age concludes Section 2 with a consideration of civil engineering’s likely fate in a “smart city age” based on its current path.

Section 3: Where we need to go - Solving challenges with soft infrastructures introduces

the importance of a type of intervention – ‘soft infrastructure’ – alongside hard digital technology, in achieving change.

- Soft infrastructure 1–3 each explore a specific soft infrastructure, detailing our analysis and recommended interventions.

- How digital innovation creates value – tomorrow summarises the value we believe civil engineering could draw from digital innovation through the pursuit of our recommendations.

- Conclusion: Surviving in a smart city age concludes Section 3 with the likely future of civil engineering in a smart city age, if it embraces a different path

This report ends with a summary of our recommendations and a list of the authors.

How we approach

digital innovation

What do we mean by “digital”?

How this creates value

How we approach

digital innovation

What do civil engineers do

in cities?


2. Where we are today

3. Where we need to go

1. Fighting challenges in the digital city

7

FrameworkThis report focuses on digital innovation in the civil engineering profession. In the course of our study, we have created a framework that communicates and connects our findings.

To support the narrative of our story, we will punctuate our report with snapshots of the framework‘s development. To begin with, sections will hold placeholders with the questions we wish to answer. Visual answers will be added as they are introduced, chapter by chapter. The initial placeholders can be seen here.

8

Section 1

Fighting challenges in the digital city

1

2

3

9

What do civil engineers do?Civil engineering deals with the design, construction, and maintenance of the physical and natural built environment, in and between urban areas. Civil engineers improve and maintain this environment to enhance the quality of life for present and future generations1. In essence, civil constructions are required for everything from the provision of food and water, to effective sanitation, to reliable transport. Through their work, civil engineers have a key role in solving a wide variety of challenges in the built environment, from the smallest infrastructure faults to global resource shortages. These challenges are not confined to the scale of individual pieces of infrastructure, but also span the systems these infrastructures collectively form, and in the wider society that depends on them. We will not exhaustively investigate civil engineering challenges within this report, but have identified an example for each level. We will return to these levels later in our analysis as a means to assess the potential of digital technology.This answers “What do civil engineers do in cities?” in the framework.

Context: Cities cannot exist without the civil engineer

What do civil engineers do in cities– Civil engineers solve challenges at the levels of: 1) individual infrastructures, 2) infrastructure systems, 3) wider society

“Civil engineering is everything you see that has been built around us.” Institution of Civil Engineers

10

Individual infrastructuresCivil engineering projects often focus on a single piece of infrastructure – a building, a bridge, a tunnel. Civil engineers work to create, maintain, upgrade and operate these individual infrastructures, to meet the needs of citizens. One particular challenge at this level is the need to restore ageing infrastructures – almost half of London’s water mains are over 100 years old, and 70% of the UK’s buildings that will be in use in 2050 already exist2,3. Replacing this infrastructure is often prohibitively expensive, and an increase in the proportion of repair and maintenance construction (as is expected with ageing infrastructure) has been linked to the issue of low productivity in the construction sector4.

Infrastructure systemsCities form a convergent point of many different infrastructures, connecting to form large and complex systems. The positive synergies emerging from these connected systems are what make cities liveable.In addition to solving problems at the individual infrastructure level, civil engineers can use their understanding to ensure that individual infrastructures work well within a system. Civil engineers work to understand and control these systems effectively, with the aspiration to improve outcomes for citizens.

At this level, civil engineers face challenges including the increasing complexity and interdependency of infrastructure systems, as observed over the past 50 years2. There is increasing overlap between different infrastructures – for example, the electrification of vehicles is creating new interdependencies between transportation and energy systems. This presents an increase in risk: a minor fault in one part of the electrical distribution network could result in significant consequences across the connected transport network. Wider societyWhile their work is usually focused on specific infrastructures or systems, civil engineers’ fundamental role is to improve the built environment for society. Whether directly or indirectly, civil engineering contributes to solving challenges at the wider societal level, including large-scale issues such as climate change, inequality and resource scarcity.The wider societal issue of climate change, for example, poses a twin challenge for civil engineers: to provide solutions that are resilient to the coming environmental changes, while also minimising their contribution to worsening these changes. The construction sector (and therefore civil engineers) have a significant opportunity to minimise this contribution: energy from fossil fuels consumed in the construction and operation of buildings alone accounts for 50% of the UK’s CO2 emissions. This is in addition to the impact in other infrastructures such as energy and transportation. Civil engineers have both an immediate impact in this respect, and influence long term user behaviour6.

Where do civil engineers work?Civil engineers may have a unified purpose, but they practice their profession in a diverse range of organisations. This can span many sectors, including four we have focused on in this report: - Transport (rail, road, aviation, urban mobility) - Energy (generation, storage, transmission, distribution,

use) - Water (supply, processing, distribution, waste water

treatment, flood protection) - Property (housing, commercial, public)

Civil engineers can be employed by a number of commercial or non-commercial entities in each sector, such as: - Professional bodies (e.g. ICE) - Government (local and national) - Civil engineering consultants - Civil engineering contractors - Academic institutions - Infrastructure asset owners - Infrastructure asset maintenance and operation firms

Context: Cities cannot exist without the civil engineer

Examples of digital technologies (Existing, Emerging and Future)

Digital trends Digital capabilities

Better connectivity

Faster, higher capacity networks with better coverage

4G

Li-Fi

5G

New digital interfaces

VR/AR

Social media

Wearable technology

Smaller, cheaper, more versatile connectivity devices

Increased data

availabilityGreater accessibility of existing data

Open data

New data markets

Increasingly digital lifestylesSocial media

Contactless payment systems

New ways to collect data

Smaller, cheaper, more versatile sensors

3D LiDAR

Greater processing

Power

Machine learning More intelligent processing

Availability of faster processing

Cloud computing

Nano computing

Quantum computing

11

What do we mean by the smart city?Having undergone a boom of interest since the 90s, the term ‘smart city’ now has many interpretations and definitions8. For simplicity, in this report we define smart cities as urban areas where digital capabilities create value. This is a recurrent theme across many definitions. Recent smart city literature emphases the importance of citizen-centric thinking – ensuring that the value this creates has a tangible and wholly positive impact on the quality of citizen life. We have identified three key digital capabilities used to create value in the smart city:1. Increased data availability2. Better connectivity3. Greater processing powerThese capabilities are being enabled by a series of digital trends, which themselves are brought about by the development of both new digital technologies and innovative ways of using existing technologies. One trend can also enable new technologies to drive other trends: the development of higher capacity networks, for example, is enabling the use of cloud computing, thereby providing a new way of accessing greater processing power.Digital innovation is the process of using digital technology in a way to create value – regardless of whether the novelty is in the technology itself, or in the means in which it is used. The diagram across shows some example interactions of technologies, trends and capabilities. These are explained in more detail overleaf. This constitutes the “What do we mean by “digital?” in the framework.

Change: An approaching smart city age

What do we mean by “digital?” – the interaction of technologies, trends and capabilities.

12

Better connectivityGreater connectivity, between and among both people and things, driven by:Faster and higher capacity wireless networksNew wireless technologies have the capability to transmit information at increasingly high speeds and capacities. In addition to existing 4G technology, future technologies include 5G and Li-Fi, which will use visible light to transmit information at speeds up to 100 times that of conventional Wi-Fi9.

Greater coverage of these networks4G LTE coverage is 53% in the UK, increased from 3% in 2013 (although still poor when compared with other developed countries such as South Korea and the USA, with 96% and 81% respectively)10,11, providing potential for people and things to be connected across wider geographical areas.

New and innovative interfaces among and between humans and objectsSocial media is providing the potential for rich interactions between huge numbers of users. Increasingly vivid augmented and virtual reality (AR/VR) experiences allow humans to collaborate more effectively with each other, and gain an improved understanding of their designs. Smaller, cheaper and more versatile ways of connecting devices are enabling objects to communicate with each other forming an ‘Internet of Things’.

Change: An approaching smart city age

Increased data availabilityAn increased availability of data – in terms of volume, velocity, veracity and variety (‘4V’)12 – is being driven by:New, more effective methods of creating and collecting dataNew methods include sensor networks enabled by sensors that are increasingly smaller, more functional, and cost-effective, and new scanning technologies (such as LiDAR) which provide 3D data at an unprecedented level of resolution.

Greater accessibility of existing datasetsThe “open data” movement is driving the development of platforms that make large third-party datasets accessible, such as those provided by the Met Office, Ordnance Survey, and the UK Government’s data.gov platform13,14,15.

Increasingly digital lifestylesThe general public are leading increasingly digitally-enabled lifestyles, which are creating more data – 94% of adults in the UK now own a mobile phone, with 52.4 million 4G mobile subscriptions16.

Increased processing powerThe power to meaningfully process this data is also increasing, enabled by:An increase in availability of greater processing power“Moore’s Law” states that the speed of processors doubles every year continues to hold true despite scepticism, providing more power (for the same price) to process the data17. Even as Moore’s Law might falter in the future, new forms of computing such as cloud and quantum computing promise access to completely new ways of processing data faster and with more flexibility18.

Increasingly intelligent processes.Self-learning programs may reduce the time and power required to process information by carrying out repetitive processes quickly. Alternatively, such systems may highlight trends and patterns in data more readily, reducing the need for detailed human review.

Better Connectivity

Increased Data

Availability

Increased Processing

Power


1

2

3

Civil engineers tackle societal challenges

Digital technologies provide radical new capabilities



Dig

ital t

echn

olo

gie

s How we approach

digital innovation


How we approach

digital innovation


13

Leak detected: urgent maintenance required

Efficiency?

Effectiveness?Drain

Building

Sensor

How could digital innovation improve the design’s…

The engineer writes a program to optimise the network to minimise the amount of materials required.

The engineer also decides to install sensors in the network so that maintenance can be predicted and carried out before significant damage is done to the system.

A civil engineer designs the drainage system for a new development.

Context

Opportunity comparison

14

What opportunities could digital technology bring to civil engineers?Digital technologies are meaningless in isolation. They add value by facilitating opportunities to better address challenges across the aforementioned three levels.In this section, we will consider exactly what these opportunities are and how they can be applied to the three levels of challenge. Evidence from the literature and interviews highlighted that digital technology presents civil engineers with two distinct opportunity groups. Firstly, to work more efficiently, doing what they already do but faster and cheaper; and secondly, to work more effectively, adding greater value to their solutions.

The theoretical case for digital technology in civil engineering

EfficiencyImproved efficiency –the opportunity for civil engineers to do what they already do using less time, cost or material resources – is a key opportunity provided by digital technology. Both in theoretical research and practical experimentation, it is the most thoroughly explored opportunity to date. Efficiency has two main incarnations: improving the efficiency of internal processes, and streamlining collaborative work.

AutomationAutomated, intelligent processes can allow laborious week-long calculations and processes to be completed in a matter of seconds, and with minimal risk of human error. Although these may require an initial investment to develop, they can often be scaled up for use on different projects and easily tweaked for different applications.

For example, when Crossrail digitised its Redline drawing process using cloud computing and automated reports, the new method ran at 2.5 times the speed and 40% of the cost of the original7.

More streamlined collaborationIn an industry where collaboration has traditionally been a significant influence on (and often hindrance to) efficiency, digital technology could present a way of facilitating and integrating collaborative processes and saving time. Digital tools such as Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality could facilitate remote collaboration, reducing the need for travel, and allowing easier involvement of multiple stakeholders at all stages of a project.

15

In addition, when guided by collaborative frameworks such as those provided for Building Information Modelling (BIM), digital tools could facilitate the involvement of more stakeholders at each stage of the process. This could potentially aid in ensuring that work is streamlined and reduce time-consuming re-work in fixing design clashes19.

EffectivenessGreater effectiveness is the opportunity for civil engineers to use digital technologies to add greater value to their projects. Effectiveness is about achieving an outcome. This may involve creating more effective civil engineering outputs. However it may also involve finding ways to solve challenges with fewer outputs, for example reducing congestion on a road (an outcome) without building higher-capacity roads (an output).

Focusing too much on efficient outputs can have unintended negative outcomes. For example, using efficiencies to save cost and so as to create a larger, higher capacity road (an output) may reduce congestion initially, but may increase car usage over time and generate further congestion elsewhere (an outcome).

A greater understanding of the problem space.The three core digital capabilities could provide new ways for civil engineers to improve their understanding of the problems they need to solve. This could be from a number of perspectives, such as: - Understanding the social context of the problem,

by gaining greater insight into user behaviour and stakeholder views and opinions. - For example, from 2012 to 2015, mobile data was

used to understand visitor footfall and demographics in Margate. This provided an improved level of insight compared to manual surveys, and was used to inform urban water management and infrastructure planning20.

- Understanding the environmental context of the problem, by gaining greater insight into the physical constraints of the problem

- For example, on Crossrail, 250,000 sensors were used to monitor ground movement patterns around its tunnels. This information was quickly relayed to field engineers, improving risk management and forecasting of soil displacement4.

This greater understanding can then be either used by civil engineers themselves to improve the effectiveness of their solutions, or provided to the client as standalone insight, providing a new valuable service. For example, in 2014, Arup measured and modelled pedestrian flows through St. Pancras station in order to optimise the locations of emergency exits. In addition to allowing Arup to tailor their design more closely to the behaviour of its users, the data then provided benefit to the client in supporting the pricing of retail space within the station.


Greater integration of infrastructure solutions.Digital capabilities could allow elements of infrastructure could have greater integration across: - Geographic areas, through the potential to connect

infrastructure in different areas using new connectivity devices and networks.

- Infrastructure life cycles, by having greater knowledge of how the infrastructure will be used over its life cycle and the ability to automatically adapt the infrastructure to meet demand.

- Different sectors and disciplines, by using newly available data to understand how infrastructure in different sectors interacts and designing infrastructures to generate positive synergies.

For example, the Ecological Sequestration Trust is developing a regional-scale digital interface platform to allow multiple separate stakeholders to design in an integrated and collaborative way21.

More digital functionality for solutionsIn addition to utilising these new trends and technologies to improve their work, civil engineers can also integrate technologies into the solutions they create. This leads to added functionality, improving the infrastructure’s value to clients. This functionality could help improve the main purpose of the infrastructure (such as by moving more cars per second down a motorway) or provide a secondary function (such as also monitoring air quality). For example, Arup provided Highways England’s Smart Motorways programme with digital solutions to manage motorway traffic – helping to reduce congestion, without the need to build significant additional infrastructure.

16

Level Example challenge Greater automation More streamlined collaboration

Individual infrastructures

Ageing infrastructure

Automating the operation of infrastructure can reduce the risks from human error, allowing for smaller safety factors and greater utilisation of existing

infrastructure.

Arup’s Australian highways team automated the production of over 5,000

models to replace a 34km stretch of road, allowing them to deliver a huge amount of detail and transform 2D

models to 3D models based on accurate geometry.

Less latency in collaboration means ageing infrastructure can be dealt with more quickly, reducing downtime and

the risk of failure.

Crossrail’s red line drawing process facilitates digital drawing procedures,

reducing the confusion involved in the drawing process and making significant time and cost savings7.

Infrastructure systems

Complexity and interdependency

Automation allows complexity to be managed without the constant input of the engineer, reducing risk and allowing

multiple connected systems to be managed effectively.

Comma Energy Efficiency is developing smart autonomous control systems for water supply infrastructure: all control modules are connected to a central

system and can either be manipulated in real time or work autonomously23.

Being able to accommodate more stakeholders, more easily, means that interdependencies can be managed

effectively from multiple points of view.

During the London 2012 Olympics, the London Traffic Control Centre (TCC)

co-located coordinators from different transport modes, with individual communication and information

systems, to provide a central point for monitoring and coordinating all

transport operations24.

Wider society

Climate change

Automation can help to optimise the efficiency of infrastructure operations,

helping to reduce its impact on the environment.

Stakeholders collaborating across previously significant boundaries

can help to understand the effects of infrastructure on the environment across long timescales, distances or

geopolitical boundaries.


Cha

lleng

e le

vels

Efficiency

How can civil engineers leverage these opportunities to address the challenges they face?The opportunities presented by digital technology are not beneficial in isolation – their value lies in helping civil engineers to address the challenges they work to solve, at the three levels identified in Context: Cities cannot exist without the civil engineer. The table across shows how each of the opportunities might contribute to addressing a challenge at each level, and case studies examples of where this has been undertaken. The two principal opportunities, applied to address challenges across the three levels, constitutes the basis of how we will assess “How does this create value?” for digital innovation in the framework.

17


Level Example challenge Better understanding of problem Better integration of solutions More digital functionality

Individual infrastructures

Ageing infrastructure

Having a greater understanding of asset conditions can allow engineers to make better decisions about prioritising the

repair and replacement of infrastructure.

The London Heat Map, developed by the Greater London Authority, allows people

to identify opportunities for district heating projects in London, based on a variety of factors including the location of supply

plants, and heat density25.

Integrating infrastructures in an effective way can result in positive outcomes for

individual infrastructures – effectively distributing demand can mean reduced

load placed on an existing, ageing piece of infrastructure.

Introducing digital functionality to an ageing infrastructure asset could allow its owner a greater understanding of its condition, and to respond quickly to changes in its

condition, reducing downtime.


Complexity and interdependency

A greater understanding of the complexity and interdependencies of infrastructure systems can allow these systems to be

managed more effectively.

Amey’s and Staffordshire Council created ‘Project Heinken’ in 2016, a smart roadworks collaboration that aligns

maintenance windows for subterranean assets from a range of infrastructure firms,

allowing expensive excavations to be consolidated41.

Integrating infrastructure systems means that their complexity can be managed more effectively, as information can be transferred between systems in order

to allow infrastructures to adapt to meet demand and changes in external

conditions.

SAS Green + Schneider Electric created an integrated system to manage its

car share scheme, at the same time as managing the electricity supply to SAS’s

head offices, using an algorithm to ensure that power distribution matched

demand24.

Digital functionality could allow asset owners and operators to better understand the

interactions of their infrastructure systems, enabling the prioritisation of investments.

In collaboration with Laing O’Rourke, Severfield-Watson Structures placed

RFID tags on the steel beams created for Manchester City Football Club’s

Etihad Stadium. Awareness of upstream delays allowed for adjustments to project

management40.

Wider society

Climate change

Having a greater understanding of the impact of climate change on infrastructure,

and vice versa, could guide investment into sustainable infrastructure.

In Margate, mobile data was used to improve the understanding of how

water and environmental events (such as pollution) impact footfall, helping to “enhance an evidence base for

sustainable infrastructure”20.

Better synergies between infrastructures in order to minimise impact, and more

holistic design can create more resilient/effective infrastructure in the wake of

natural disasters

In Rotterdam, software is used to move storm surge barriers to protect against flooding, without restricting ship traffic. Smart dikes then use sensors to feed

information back to a control/crisis centre26.

Engineers can design digital systems to allow cities to respond quickly and effectively

to the effects of climate change.

The Rio Operations Control Centre uses an algorithm to predict how much rain will fall in different areas – and sends out warnings to each department in the city so they can

prepare for potential floods27.

Cha

lleng

e le

vels

Effectiveness

1

2

3



Better Connectivity

Increased Data

Availability


Power

Dig

ital t

echn

olo

gie

s How we approach

digital innovation

How we approach

digital innovation

Effe

ctiv

enes

sE

ffici

ency

Effe

ctiv

enes

sE

ffici

ency






18

19

Section 2

Where we are today

20

Three challenges to radical changeHow has civil engineering approached these opportunities?Literature presents a strong case that civil engineers are not currently making the most of the opportunities digital innovation presents. A report by McKinsey identified the ‘construction sector’ as being the least digitised in Europe4 – an issue which is tied closely to its historically low productivity and fragmented ways of working7.We explored the reality on the ground through the interviews undertaken. Our study led us to 11 key observations of the current state of digital in civil engineering.These observations connect to three key challenges gaining more value from digital capabilities in civil engineering: - A perception that digital innovation carries a high level

of risk - A perception that digital innovation is limited in the

value it can provide to civil engineers - A poor understanding of the role of the civil engineer in

digital innovation; both in terms of the profession itself and of specific individuals.

Overall, these observations constitute the framework’s ‘How we approach digital innovation’ for civil engineering today.The rest of this section details these three challenges.

The reality on the ground

Challenge: Perception of high riskUncertainty around the wider implications of digital innovation was seen to result in a perception that digital innovation carries a high level of risk. Companies do not want to expose themselves to potential negative issues. For example, collecting infrastructure on how citizens interact with a road network without being sure of the legal requirements. Combined with the risk-averse nature of the civil engineering profession, this perception forms a significant challenge to implementing digital technology.

Risk averse culture

There is an overall culture of risk aversion in the profession, and in the built environment sector in general28. Public sector projects and organisations were described as being particularly risk-averse and less open to innovation29; however, interviews with civil engineers indicated there are exceptions.

Interviews also highlighted that this risk aversion is not limited to only civil engineers themselves, but also other engineers, clients, and other professionals working with the built environment. This has a compounding effect on a project basis and the overall direction of travel.

Legal, security and ethics concerns

There are uncertainties about the wider implications of digital innovation, specifically from legal, security, and ethical perspectives, and a perception that these could be significant. Participants were concerned about their right to collect data, the possible public reaction to its use and the threat of cyber attack leaking sensitive information.

This was often described as due in part to the lack of standardisation of and around digital technology in the construction industry33.

Perception of high risk

Risk averse culture

Legal, security and ethics concerns

21

Challenge: Perception of limited valueCivil engineers currently perceive the value in digital innovation to be limited.

There is a strong focus on efficiency improvements in civil engineering, typified by a strong focus on BIM. The profession was seen to fixate with particular value types, such as capital costs, and to emphasise evolutionary improvements to such ends. There was a lack of clarity around any other potential benefits in particular the effectiveness benefits discussed in section 3.1.1).

During the course of this study, many professional events focused on exploring the possibility of digital innovation in the built environment took place in the civil engineering community in the UK. However, when interviewed individually, civil engineers presented a consistent perception of limited digital innovation value was seen to exist across organisations, sectors and career levels. Participants argued this scepticism was not unique to them, but shared also among architects, town planners, and other built environment stakeholders.


Focus on CAPEX

When considering digital technologies and their benefits, there is a focus on capital expenditure (CAPEX) rather than operational expenditure (OPEX) or even total expenditure (TOTEX). This was seen most clearly through the prevalence of CAPEX-based business models in the industry, which disincentives, for example, reflecting on in-use data to reduce OPEX costs7.

Focus on efficiency

Efficiency opportunities are the clear focus of digital innovation in civil engineering – both in discourse and practice. These were moderately well understood by the average interviewee. In comparison, effectiveness opportunities were scarcely understood. It was often volunteered that under the existing business models, the value of more effective design is only as a market differentiator than anything quantifiable (which are more clearly provided by efficiency improvements). A relative lack of tangibility around effectiveness opportunities also drives disinterest.

Benefit uncertainty

Participants spoke of lack of clarity around the potential benefits of digital innovation, particularly that beyond efficiency opportunities.

This was apparent in interviews, where there was a significant difference in opinion between different civil engineers. Participants vehemently disagreed on efficiency versus effectiveness, and incremental improvements versus radical change.

Civil engineers confessed that implementing digital technologies was often seen as an “add-on”. The greatest value was in the novelty appeal to clients, rather than in any quantifiable benefits – even for efficiency opportunities.

Implementations of digital innovations were described as isolated and ad-hoc, rather than part of a structured approach. This prevents consistent uptake and as a result, the benefits are rarely visible to a wider audience, and so the underlying concepts never scaled32.

Focus on BIM

There is an overwhelming focus on BIM in digital innovation within civil engineering. By this report’s segmentation, BIM is an efficiency opportunity.

BIM has enjoyed the greatest level of analysis and guidance development for civil engineers. Significant efforts have been made to standardise and encourage take-up of BIM, most recently the mandate of Level 2 BIM on all public sector projects, and the release of the national BIM Level 3 strategy19.

In interviews, civil engineers often regarded BIM as ‘business as usual’, in stark comparison to the “novelty value” of other digital technologies such as sensors.

However, in some areas, BIM was described as having slow – or more specifically, “patchy” – take-up31, with some civil engineering leadership pointing out that private sector clients are still often unable to realise tangible benefits from its use.

“BIM has been well publicised, and clients therefore take a lot of interest in it. However, many contractors are not yet well versed.”

Perception of limited value

CAPEX focus

Focus on BIM

Benefit uncertainty

Focus on efficiency

Associate Director, Civil Engineering Consultancy

22


There is currently significant uncertainty around how civil engineers should drive digital innovation. A lack of guidance, frameworks and training for digital innovation all contribute. Poor interoperability of early digital innovations further exacerbates. This uncertainty applies to engineering companies not only at an industry level, but also individual civil engineers on a day-to-day basis.

Civil engineers admitted fault. They have a ‘responsibility’ to define their role and push the interpretation in the industry – but have not done so.

This task is complicated by confusion regarding the role of digital innovation across the wider industry. Civil engineers argued other professionals (e.g. planners, architects and software developers) also had a poor understanding of digital innovation. Civil engineers want to define their role in relation to others but struggle. Ambiguous data management is a common consequence; mid-project clarifications lead to poor interoperability and therefore delays.

Poor understanding of the civil engineer’s role in a more digital world drives confusion during individual digital implementations, and a lack of solidarity for profession-wide digital change.

Poor understanding

of role

Lack of targeted guidance

Lack of framework for innovation

Lack of training

Poor inter-system compatibility

Lack of targeted guidance

Literature highlights a lack of guidance targeted at civil engineers specifically. The vast majority of guidance on digital innovation in built environment is either general, or aimed at other professionals.

Interviewees stated a need for the civil engineer’s role to change, but identified a significant lack of understanding in what this change could or should look like. Specific detail on variation for specific career stages, sectors or types of organisation was absent.

With the exception of technical skills such as coding, literature scarcely identifies knowledge, skills or behaviours needed for civil engineers to succeed in whatever the new roles may bring. Civil engineers were left uncertain about their personal development.

“There has been no thought as to the required skill set of future engineers”

Poor inter-system compatibility

There is poor interoperability between different disciplines, sectors, and organisations in the built environment. The literature highlighted the current fragmented and solid nature of the industry7,30.

This extends to digital activities. In interviews, civil engineers highlighted numerous problems with collaborative work when the interfaces between disciplines were poor – for example mismatching software packages or data types.

“We need to join up the use of digital over different industries and disciplines”

Lack of training

Interviews highlighted a lack of training on how to implement digital technologies in different ways or how to identify those that produce the most value in a given situation.

Many civil engineers, particularly those in midcareer project management roles, felt that there was insufficient investment of time and resources in developing the knowledge, skills and behaviours necessary. Senior staff were often uncertain what skills were needed at the top. Junior staff did not feel empowered to influence training practices ‘bottom-up’.

A further nuance was expressed in getting skills to the correct depth rather than ‘blanket approaches’. Midcareer staff want to be able to audit digital innovation, but not necessarily code models from scratch.

“There is very little time to develop digital skills – particularly on smaller projects with tight budget constraints”

Lack of frameworks for innovation

There are very few frameworks for digital innovation in civil engineering. On a given project, civil engineers felt presented with little information on how they approach digital innovation, either in isolation or with others.

The construction sector is not investing significantly in research and development – crucial for developing digital innovation good practice – spending only 1% of its turnover on R&D. This is less than a third of that in the automotive and aerospace industries, which have undergone revolutionary change in their use of new digital technology29. There is a powerful exception to this – and that is BIM. However as examined later, while BIM receives praise for its prevalence, it receives criticism for its curtailment of creativity.

Director, Infrastructure Service Provider

Senior Engineer, Civil Engineering Consultancy

Director, Civil Engineering Contractor

1

2

3



Dig

ital t

echn

olo

gie

s How we approach

digital innovation

Poor understanding

of role



The profession is unable to embrace all opportunities

Better Connectivity

Increased Data

Availability


Power



Effe

ctiv

enes

sE

ffici

ency

Effe

ctiv

enes

sE

ffici

ency




23

Business as usual – digital capability enabling an efficiency opportunity for a individual infrastructure

Engineer’s activity

Individual infrastructure


Wider society

Automate flood volume calculations Lower cost to develop

24


Modest progressThe three challenges can be seen to have a profound effect on how the civil engineering profession considers digital innovation.Collectively, the challenges steer the profession to an implementation of digital innovation that is limited to: - Individual instances of infrastructure and less - commonly, infrastructure systems - Almost exclusively efficiency-type opportunities - A consideration of benefits over the short term

Where this is successful, it creates meaningful value for civil engineers. Evidence has been observed of notable cost savings on projects. For certain mechanisms, these have even had a tangible impact at an industry level, as seen with BIM. However, it is a stretch to call this value transformative. When benefits at a level of Wider Society are considered, it is difficult to argue economic growth, climate change or citizen happiness have been notably moved by civil engineering’s use of digital innovation to date.

“The civil engineering profession has yet to consider digital innovation beyond simply ‘faster and cheaper.’”

“There’s frequently an assumption that digital means improving efficiency – doing things faster or for less. People tend to ignore the notion of digital enabling things to be done differently.”

Reader, Department of Civil Engineering, UK University

Director, Civil Engineering Consultancy

Civil engineers interviewed presented a clear consensus that the perceived benefits of using digital technology were currently limited to improving efficiencies and so as to improve profits by current business models. The possibility of infrastructure becoming more effective, or considering impacts beyond the project in question are rarely considered. In fairness, other engineers highlighted that the connection between these levels is not always clear, and is typically absent from the written scope of the civil engineer’s work.Overall, these observations constitute the framework’s ‘How this creates value’, with respect to digital innovation today.

The importance of world views to digital innovation is also clear.The status quo has a powerful influence over the profession’s collective mind. Over time, perception of digital innovation possibilities has become deeply anchored in what is currently practiced. In essence, stakeholders perceive that this is the full extent of what is possible. A reinforcing loop maintains the status quo. Although new approaches to digital innovation were not readily imaginable, many interviewees had strong, often emotive concerns for the profession in the face of digital innovation taking place around them. Four main threats were identified.

The surviving zone – at present the opportunities presented by digital innovation are both practiced and appreciated narrowly.

Effe

ctiv

enes

s

Greater understanding of the problem

Greater integration of solutions

More digital functionality

Effi

cien

cy

Greater Automation

More streamlined

collaboration

25


Competitive threatsA fear of new competition was common, particularly from major technology companies attempting to enter the market. Some suspected this would be slow and stealthy. Others suggested a sudden ‘uber style’ disruption could hit the industry through smaller start-ups.

“Big engineering companies are not very agile; we are likely to see new small-scale competitors who keep up with the pace of digital technology.” Director, Civil Engineering Consultancy Director, Civil Engineering Consultancy

Shrinking staff forceA smaller staff force might be necessary if the fixation with efficiency opportunities continues and alternative valuable uses of time are not identified. Some Civil engineers feared for their future livelihoods.

“We need to avoid a future where fewer and fewer people are needed.” BIM Manager, Civil Engineering Consultancy

Comoditisation Both new competitors and the efficiency focus were associated with a fear of increasing commoditisation in the industry. Participants suggested this would lower price points for services, lower client appreciation of the importance of creativity in design and decrease job satisfaction for civil engineers.

“Engineers need to have their research radars switched on – so they are a part of new digital trends, before those trends become their competition, and they are left turning the wheel on what remains.” Director, Architecture Practice

Shrinking influenceAcross interviews, there was a sentiment – sometimes explicit, but more often implied – that all of these factors would combine to lower the influence of the civil engineering profession in society. This included influence over politics; over other professions such as architecture; and with respect to their standing in the eyes of society as a whole. Putting their own careers aside, civil engineers feared for a society where those with the knowledge to solve societal challenges were regulated from the decision-making table.

In summary, most of the potential of digital innovation is not only rarely practiced, it is scarcely perceived to exist. This misses great positive value in and of itself, but has serious negative consequences when appreciated in the wider civil engineering market and those innovating around it.

“We are told radical change is coming, but we still do things as we always have. For us, so far, ‘smart cities’ is‘everything is different, but nothing has changed.’”CEO, Infrastructure Service Provider

1

2

3



How we approach

digital innovation

Poor understanding

of role



The profession exists in the surviving zone

More streamlined collaboration


Effe

ctiv

enes

sE

ffici

ency

Effe

ctiv

enes

sE

ffici

ency




Better Connectivity

Increased Data

Availability


Power

Dig

ital t

echn

olo

gie

s


26

27

Today, digital innovation in the civil engineering profession is a story of modest progress.Civil engineering has achieved commendable incremental improvements focused on improving the efficiencies of outputs. However, regardless of the enthusiasm with which these are advanced going forward, it seems probable that continuing the ‘faster and cheaper’ philosophy we have observed will at best result in diminishing returns, at worst distract from the possibility of more radical and more productive change.

Many elements are absent in civil engineering. There exists no shared vision of what ‘better’ innovation may look like, nor why this is strategically important. Engineers are without specific learning guidance; companies lack effective frameworks; and the profession is left naïve as to how to commercialise digital innovation’s full potential.

Threats to the profession are growing on the horizon. Business models are ageing. New types of competition presents itself as more innovative and more agile. In parallel, citizen expectations of infrastructure continue to grow as a result of their own digital experiences.

Fear of a sudden, über-scale disruption is brewing, but feels too distant to catalyse change. There is no evidence to suggest civil engineers will vanish in the future, but there are indications here that the number of professionals, remit of role, and share of market may all diminish.

On its current course, the civil engineering may at best aspire to survive in a smart city age.

Section 2 – Conclusion: Surviving in a smart city age

28

Section 3

Where we need to go

Soft infrastructures – three areas of cultural improvement for the civil engineering profession.

Human capital

Governance and process

Commercial practices

29

The missing piecesCivil engineering’s mixed progress with digital innovation cannot be explained solely by technical shortcomings of the hard infrastructures. Neither the new digital technologies nor the pre-existing civil infrastructures are at fault.

Instead, we perceive that the challenges to further uptake are symptomatic of a lack of definition of three key “soft infrastructures”. Soft infrastructures are cultural systems that influence how individuals behave.

We believe that these soft infrastructures are key to successfully realising benefits from digital capabilities, crossing the gap of implementation between technologies and outcomes.

We still believe hard infrastructures, such as new IT systems and technologies, will also be required for change.

However, we believe these are not currently doing the profession back. Their exact form will also depend on these soft infrastructures. The notion of soft infrastructure for digital innovation is underrepresented in civil engineering literature. Therefore these are not included in the scope of our suggested interventions.The focus of our recommendations is therefore on these three soft infrastructures, which are as follows:

Solving challenges with soft infrastructures

Commercial practices - Harnessing new digital opportunities at new challenge

levels does not automatically benefit the civil engineer. The profession needs to be able to commercialise these and to do so before competing industries. New digitally-compatible business models should be developed.

Governance and process - New digital opportunities, delivered in new commercial

models, presents uncertainty. To provide structure and manage the risks, effective governance and standard processes will be required. These are well defined in some areas, such as BIM, but achieving a balance between structure and creativity remains difficult. Coherent approaches for most other technologies are lacking.

Human capital - In order for these digital innovation processes to

succeed, civil engineers will need to develop the right sets of knowledge, skills and behaviours. Exactly what will be required of different civil engineers is currently unclear and insufficiently tailored. These should be considered from a variety of perspectives, including but not limited to career levels, disciplines, and sectors.

These constitute the “How we approach digital innovation” in the future. Each soft infrastructure can be linked to the aforementioned challenges in how civil engineering approaches digital innovation today.

For each, we will now detail the need for the soft infrastructure, how the soft infrastructure can be developed, and who needs to act to bring this to fruition.

1

2

3



Dig

ital t

echn

olo

gie

s

Better Connectivity

Increased Data

Availability


Power

Developing soft infrastructure will empower the profession to respond

The profession exists in the surviving zone




Poor understanding

of role



Effe

ctiv

enes

sE

ffici

ency

Effe

ctiv

enes

sE

ffici

ency




Commercial Practice

Does it make commercial sense?

Governance and Process

Are the appropriate processes and frameworks in

place?

Human Capital

Do we have the right knowledge,

skills and behaviours to

deliver?

?

30

The needHow it can be

deliveredWho needs

to act

31

The need for new business modelsThroughout our research, evidence has suggested existing business models in the civil engineering profession are not effective at commercialising the full gamut of benefits digital innovations bring. This in turn limits the motivation for civil engineers to embrace them. Five key factors are driving the obsolescence of these business models, creating a clear need for new models that are more complimentary to digital innovations.

Conflict of pricing and automationInterviewees emphasised the popularity of time-based fees in the profession. Lump sum fees were also described as common, but were similarly constructed based on the estimated time cost of providing a service rather than focusing on the value of an output to a client. Innovations that deliver automation in the form of staff time savings are in conflict with this approach. If the civil engineer sells their time, then minimising a task’s duration shrinks their income. Civil engineers of all seniorities expressed concern with not only this prospect, but also with some proposed remedies. Suggestions that automation gains could be ‘hidden’ from the client do not stand up to market dynamics – one firm is likely to reduce their price because of the saving, forcing others to follow. Suggestions that engineers will have more time available for more creative or innovative exercises was seen as valid in principal, but convincing clients to maintain fee levels on this speculation alone was seen as challenging.

Many sampled held a deep concern that automation – if continued under current business models – will result in a significant reduction in staff.

Competitive threats from AIOur research identified organisations in the technology sector using digital innovation to rapidly develop design capabilities that could serve as competitive threats to civil engineers. New entrants to the market are gathering large datasets of civil engineering projects and standards and attempting to replicate civil engineering procedures. The degree of accuracy is initially poor until datasets expand and machine learning algorithms improve. However, such services do not need to be perfect to have value – and pose a threat. Order of magnitude estimates can be valuable to clients early on in the project life cycle.

Although interviewees typically viewed these concepts as immature and not yet viable players in the market, their speed of growth and unpredictability – seen in initiatives such as Google’s Flux – meant they remained a significant medium to long term threat. Civil engineers are faced with several possible responses

– replicate this expertise themselves, or find new, less procedural and more creative ways of adding value that are difficult for algorithms to replicate. Such new processes may be difficult to sell in traditional business models that often rely on the production of standardised deliverables. A need for new models therefore arises.

Digital assetsMid and entry-level civil engineers proudly cite new client-facing software tools – such as dashboards – as a product of digital innovation within the profession. There is a recognition that these tools often have great potential for re-applicability between projects. Commonality of needs between clients is high, and the digital nature of deliverables makes them transferable to different parties at negligible transactional cost – starkly different to physical assets such as a bridge. However, the process of commercialising these tools has challenges. Firstly, clients would likely use these tools over an extended period. Neither, time-based fees nor lump sums account for how long clients use the tool nor what value they take from it. Secondly, if clients are charged the cost it took to create the tool, the first client would pay a disproportionally high price; all later users would pay minor adjustment fees. Thirdly, if the tool is sufficiently effective, clients may have less need of civil engineers. New business models are needed to accommodate digital assets’ unique features.

Soft infrastructure 1: Commercial practice

“The profession has been largely shielded to the threat of job losses through automation – many who would have been automated have retired, others have been put to work creating and monitoring models. This is unlikely to be the reality going forward.”Director, Civil Engineering Consultancy


deliveredWho needs

to act

32

Confidence vs. RiskCivil engineers expect an increase in the availability of data associated with the infrastructure they are designing. This spanned data regarding the need for an infrastructure, data regarding the use of the infrastructure and data regarding how the infrastructure may respond to use. Combined with an expectation for greater processing power, this is anticipated to provide civil engineers with more confidence on the best solutions to client problems. However, it was recognised that this confidence is not readily commercialisable by current models. Firstly, clients often present civil engineers with requests for support that already contain a highly-specified solution, restricting the ability to propose better performing alternatives. Secondly, civil engineers rarely receive remuneration for solutions that perform better than others, and where such incentives do exist, these are often restricted in scope to the delivery of an output (e.g. how long a bridge takes to construct) than the outcome (e.g. how much the bridge reduces congestion).

The civil engineer is unable to take on more risk as a result of this confidence to achieve greater reward – and so a need arises for new models with more flexible risk arrangements.

Supply chain cooperation The delivery of major civil engineering infrastructure relies on extensive and diverse supply chains to deliver component parts. Discussion with interviewees highlighted that before new digital technologies can be affixed to civil infrastructure, a supply chain must be in place that can reliably deliver these. Logistically, this was considered a significant challenge – a clear and consistent need for a given technology needs to be presented to suppliers if a market is to emerge. Suppliers are unlikely to gamble developing capability or stocks for technologies that appear to have a transient interest or niche compatibility. More significant challenges were flagged regarding collaboration along the supply chain as a result of digital innovation. Interactions between buyer and supplier in civil engineering are often highly transactional – contractually isolating specific requirements for each stakeholder, rather than collectively working to achieve outcomes. As a result, stakeholders can be reluctant to share data regarding their actions on a project for fear of litigation – even if this knowledge could help mitigate impacts. There is a need for new business models that allow the supply chain to collaborate more closely, implement digital innovations and share the benefits.

New digitally-enabled business modelsInterviewees described a fear of ‘looming disruption’. No one of these factors was deemed likely to bankrupt the profession in the short term. Individuals are aware of the increasing inadequacy of business models for a future age, but that the consequences are not yet considered significant enough to warrant action.


“There is a tendency for clients – particularly the public sector – to bound the solution as much as possible to reduce risk and increase comparability of tender.”

“New digital business models are not nearly defined enough. Sadly, there is insufficient movement towards changing this.”

Head of Innovation, Infrastructure Service Provider

Head of Technology, Infrastructure Service Provider

Throughout this project, we have sought inspiration on what new business models more compatible with digital innovations may look like. This draws upon: - Theoretical views proposed by interviewees - Demonstrators currently undergoing testing by civil

engineering firms - Mature models in implementation in other industries,

which could viably be transferred to civil engineering We have identified five models that we believe could have a significant positive impact on the profession in the future, three of which we have examined in detail with stakeholders. This section will overview each model, exploring its core mechanism, its strengths and weaknesses, and where it may have the greatest suitability in the civil engineering profession.

Value-Based Fees Also known as “performance based contracting”

Time or lump sum “Performance”

• Supply of data reducing cost / risk of assessment• Better data management giving confidence of connection of outcomes to specific infrastructure

Share of benefits based on infrastructure’s…

Incr

easi

ng r

isk

/ re

war

d

…societal contribution?

…service?

…qualities?

e.g. congestion/air quality/jobs

e.g. capacity cars/hour

e.g. maintenance costs

Digital


deliveredWho needs

to act

33

Value-Based FeesOverviewValue-Based Fees is a long-standing concept in other professions where remuneration for a service is based on the value it adds. Digital innovation can facilitate this model by an improved ability to predict performance in advance, cheaper performance assessment, and more contextualisation of performance – linking it to wider client outcomes. A key detail of value-based fees is the definition of ‘value’. This can vary from the narrow, such as timescales of delivery for infrastructure, to the wide, such as the contribution of a piece of infrastructure to air quality improvement. Similarly, remuneration can be a set financial bonus, or a direct share of the supposed financial benefits of the achieved value.



deliveredWho needs

to act

34

Opportunities Value-based fees presents the opportunity for civil engineers to create more innovative, better performing solutions and be more fairly remunerated for them. Philosophically, those undertaking the ‘best’ civil engineering succeed. Digital innovations, particularly those that support new types of solution or new functionalities, are more likely to make commercial sense. In theory, this would also improve procurement processes that often focus on minimising risk through high specification. By linking requirements more closely to the desired outcome, clients can avoid paying out when solutions do not perform. In situations of public infrastructure, value-based fees encourage maximising the infrastructure’s contribution to public good, channelling civil engineering skills to the betterment of society.

ChallengesValue based fees represent a significant commercial change, and present challenges in the form of risks, complexities and contradictions to relationship norms. Civil engineers need to absorb a greater level of risk. To mitigate this, they would need to lever more datasets to understand external variables and increase integration of design internally, ensuring all parts of a design perform. All parties are subject to the risk of creating incentives that work to deliver the wrong outcomes. If assessments metrics are too specific, engineers could ‘game’ the system, delivering numerically impressive performance that misses, or even intensifies the wider problem. Similarly, if clients are ‘firefighting’, there could be a tendency to request quick fixes that exacerbate problems in the long term. The clients of civil engineers are also unlikely to be familiar with these models; standard procedures of ‘the lowest bidder’ and renegotiating contracts midway are at odds with the principles of value-based fees. Value based fees are also inherently complex. Whether part of a solution or not, digital sensing infrastructure is likely required to assess performance, as well as an independent assessor to undertake the task.

Application Value based fees lend themselves to projects with tangible means of measuring performance and a tangible value associated with it. Participants suggested clients described as ‘long term perspectives’, ‘fair’, and ‘intelligent’ might be the first to warm to such models. Describing public sector procurement rules as slow to change, the private sector appears an easier test bed. The sectors of energy – where energy savings are easily monetizable and transport – where performance is already frequently measured, were seen as key targets.


• Design to specification• Definitive handover

Engineer involvement Engineer involvement

• Design for lifecycle performance• Responsible for maintaining up time and necessary refurbishment

• Responsibility for operational effectiveness

• Ability to monitor remotely• Ability to install digital technologies that improve operational performance

Digital

2017 20172037 20372027 20272047 2047

Civil Infrastructure-as-a-Service


deliveredWho needs

to act

35

Civil-infrastructure-as-a-serviceOverview While design processes can span multiple years, after the completion of civil engineering infrastructure, engineers described their involvement coming to an abrupt end. The civil engineer may have significant knowledge on how to maximise performance and minimise operational costs – either in design or on-going, but the client instead takes on responsibility for the infrastructure themselves. Infrastructure as a Service reverses this, with civil engineers taking a degree of responsibility of the asset for its lifetime. Digital sensing technology means that civil engineers are able to monitor the state of the infrastructure without costly site visits.



deliveredWho needs

to act

36

Opportunities Civil infrastructure as a service presents the ability for civil engineers to monetise sector knowledge by designing for the lowest lifetime cost and predictively maintaining the infrastructure throughout its life. This in turn translates to long-term revenue streams, with a 3-year project having the potential to be 30 years. Clients should as a result enjoy better performing infrastructure with a lower and potentially more predictable lifetime cost.

ChallengesSimilar to value-based fees, civil infrastructure as a service involves the civil engineer taking on more risk. From the outside, engineers must carefully model the expected lifespan of the asset, and ensure all design and operation perspectives are effectively integrated in the solution. Considerations such as how projects will interface with other infrastructure and how that may change will be critical. Although not essential for the model, civil engineers may be required to invest capital in the project. Challenges also present themselves in the marketplace. Civil engineers will need to persuade clients to think in terms of life cycle costs, rather than exclusively CAPEX metrics. Contracts will also need to have a degree of flexibility, to avoid civil engineers being penalised for unforeseeable societal or technological changes in the long term. Digital monitoring systems will need to be robust and valid and clients will need to commit to a degree of data sharing to support the civil engineers job.

Impact areas Civil engineers described infrastructure as a service as sitting best with long-term clients, particularly those whose assets suffered from high and unpredictable operational costs and where forms of monitoring may already be in place. Water utilities, buildings services and toll roads (where the model is already in use in some geographies) stood out as key targets. Partnerships between designers and contractors were seen as a beneficial step to piloting more instances of infrastructure as a service. Together, this union of civil engineering could both understand and demonstrate how these models may deliver better outcomes for clients.


Data as an Asset

• Significant increase in data from sensors and automated design processes

Exchange with adjacent projects for synergies?

Sell it?

Inform future designs?

Provide strategic insights to clients?

Digital

How to create value?


deliveredWho needs

to act

37

Data-as-an-Asset Overview Civil engineers consistently described data as a highly valuable resource. However, individuals were sceptical that this value was being effectively captured by civil engineering organisations. Views were fragmented on the best mechanism for capturing this value, but participants were resolute that it should be elevated to a higher position within civil engineering business models. Data as-an-Asset raises the collection, management and exploitation of data from a secondary issue, to the core determinant of business success. Techniques for commercialising data include selling, reiterative design improvement, providing strategic insights, or for identifying better connections between projects – internally or externally. Many others likely exist.



deliveredWho needs

to act

38

Opportunities The mechanisms harness fundamental characteristics of data, particularly that it is very cheap to gather, and can be used for multiple purposes without being degraded. However, the four mechanisms capture value in distinctly different ways: - Selling data presents the opportunities for new revenue

streams. - Reiterative design improvement allows firms to learn

from the strengths and weaknesses of designs based on real time observations.

- Over time, data on the context of client problems may allow engineers to provide advice to clients at a more strategic level.

- As data from individual projects grow, civil engineers may be able to consolidate construction activities with others or other such synergies.


ChallengesIn general, all of these mechanisms rely on civil engineers having effective data gathering and management expertise, a competency that was questioned by many participants. Similarly, doubts were raised about the sufficiency of internal infrastructure, although many cited new investments in this space. Ethical, security and legality risks were all raised as concerns with the mechanisms, particularly where data leaves the control of a firm, particularly in data selling. Confusion regarding the ownership of data was described as a common feature of many projects. While participants demonstrated confidence that in time clear standards would be developed, the situation is uncertain in the interim. Engineers also cited the likelihood of other parties having superior data in terms of quality and quantity, which significantly restricts the viability of data sales to scenarios where only civil engineers have exclusive data access.

Impact areas Situations where sectors were moving towards an increased recognition of data as an asset – such as energy – were seen as useful starting points for civil engineers to develop general data processing and management expertise. Projects where civil engineers had longer term engagements with assets were perceived to be those most likely to provide the most fruitful data, such as railways or highways. Projects with clear interdependences were also highlighted, such as electric vehicle infrastructure, where transport and energy factors are increasingly interlinked. Developing ‘data service contracts’ at the start of the project could help set the ground work for data exploitation later on in the project, creating bespoke agreements up front, rather than standardised agreements as an afterthought. Two further new business models were identified, but not extensively explored within this report:

• Software more commonly made bespoke as an investment on a project

• Single piece of software developed to have applicability to many projects

• Licences (e.g. monthly subscription) allow 3rd parties access to the tool

• Creating flexible tools that can be customised to different projects

• Tools becoming more powerful

Digital

Software-as-a-Service

Speed of change

Bring in? Spin out?

• Need for some deep technical digital skills• Need for agile teams• Re-applicability of services

Digital Valuable contributions to projects

Revenue from external sales of services

Increase in value of equity taken

Digital Incubator / Venturer

SME SME

How to create value?

Large Engineering Organisation


deliveredWho needs

to act

39


Software-as-a-ServiceSoftware-as-a-Service represents a transition from bespoke software development as a product to the centralised development of software, provided as a service to many clients simultaneously.

Digital Incubator/Venturer Civil engineering companies discussed the potential for exporting or absorbing SMEs that may be able to innovate with digital technologies faster than the host firm.


deliveredWho needs

to act

40

Challenges to business model change The process of creating new business models in any industry has been shown to be a complex and difficult process [34]. Our study has identified several further factors that exacerbate this for civil engineers:

Difficulty with commercially innovative thinking Civil engineers described commercial innovation as a skill that did not come naturally to them culturally.

Failure of experiments entrenches normsBringing in new business models require significant testing, refinement and proof of success before they stand a chance of being mainstream in the profession. Civil engineers shared anecdotes of commercial innovations that were seen to have ‘failed’ and so served only to entrench existing models further. Little consideration appears to be given for evaluating what could have been improved.

Collective action is uncommon While individual pilots may lead to pockets of capability and awareness, business models are unlikely to become mainstream if civil engineering organisations maintain isolated efforts. In other industries such as mobile telecommunications and automotive manufacturer,

‘coopetition’ has been employed, where competing companies come together to set new standards and change en mass.


Some participants suggested that experimenting with new business models would create valuable intellectual property that they would wish to keep to themselves. This may be a logical concern, however coopertition approaches in other industries have demonstrated that the short term loss of competitive differentiation can be outweighed by the shared mutual benefits of collective action.

Bringing about changeThere is a clear need for new business models in civil engineering, yet emerging “digitally-compatible” solutions are highly speculative, each with their own challenges. Furthermore, there exists further obstacles that hinder an already difficult change process. The path to transformation appears arduous.

“We need to start asking the question – do we need to teach entrepreneurialism better in a digital age?”

“Civil engineers would do well to heed a cautionary tale from the music industry – if you do not pre-empt digital and adjust your business model you will vanish.”

“We need to work to grow the pie for everyone, rather than fighting over individual pie slices, otherwise Google will eat it all.”

“Digital business model change is very much like changing the fan belt while the engine is running.”

Reader, Department of Civil Engineering, UK University

Chief Executive, Technology Innovation Centre

Research Engineer, Civil Engineering Consultancy

Chief Executive, Technology Innovation Centre

The traditional business models of civil engineering are long standing, so few interviewed had prior experience of experimenting. Engineering education was described as having only passing reference to commercial skills and the idea of civil engineers as entrepreneurs was relatively nascent.

Client inaction The market for civil engineering services is heavily influenced by demand. However, participants were of the strong opinion that clients are unlikely to be requesting new business models in the short term, and civil engineers have a duty to show them the benefits.Practitioners feel that waiting for change to be shaped by clients alone is unlikely to result in fast change, nor the most favourable arrangements for civil engineers.

Fortuitously, many of these new models have complimentary characteristics – for example, an element of Value Based Fees is likely to suit an Infrastructure as a Service arrangement – so the profession need not bet on the development of any one in particular. Ultimately, these models can be seen to have the potential to not only allow civil engineers to commercialise the benefits of digital innovation, avoid new competitive threats, but also lead to working practices that deliver better societal outcomes. There is little sentiment to suggest that current business models can be adequately reworked, so commercial decline appears the only other likely alternative.


deliveredWho needs

to act

41


Civil engineering organisationsPilot new business model innovations with targeted clients

Our study has highlighted possible new digitally-compatible business models, and where their suitability may

be greatest. We call on civil engineering organisations to undertake their own feasibility studies, followed by targeted experimentation. This will help develop capability for engineers and awareness for clients.

We recommend engineers start by viewing clients as partners, rather than customers. This will facilitate collaborative initiatives such as pilots, living labs and public private people partnerships.

We encourage projects to have sufficient scale to show value – to both the profession and clients. Companies will need to accept that the perfect model may take several iterations – but these should not be seen as failures, rather experiments that yielded valuable learning.

Strive for coopetition to establish new business model precedents

We propose embracing the concept of coopetition – rival engineering firms should enter partnerships to develop new business models collaboratively and publicly. This could consist of developing shared thought leadership, approaching clients collectively or participating in joint ventures. The combined effort of research and marketing is likely to have a greater impact than the sum of its parts. The civil engineering firms need to grow the size of “the pie” for all of the profession, rather than fighting for a bigger slice individually.

Institution of civil engineersRaise business model innovation as a key theme in the Digital Transformation agenda

As the neutral party representing the best interest of the industry, the

ICE is ideally placed to shepherd collaboration on the sensitive topic of commercial practices. We so recommend the ICE place more emphasis on the need for business model innovation as part of the digital innovation journey.

Possible mechanisms include the creation of a central depository of business model innovation examples, encouraging and applauding those who come forward with examples of their successful and unsuccessful endeavours.

From this, the ICE could develop standardised guidance of key questions that need to be asked as different stages in civil engineering projects, making the topic of business model innovation more accessible to a wider group. This could include, but should not be limited to, the ICE’s existing work on data standards.

Finally, with access to key policy markets, the ICE should work to lobby the public sector for business model change in public sector procurements – a circumstance civil engineers viewed as facing the most barriers to implementation.

One lever may be collaborating with academics to produce independent thought leadership investigating the quantified connections between infrastructure and wider societal outcomes.

Individual civil engineersView commercial innovation on a parity with technical innovation

Civil engineers should value commercial innovation and technical innovation equally.

A recognition that technology alone cannot bring change could take many forms, including: increasing the value associated with entrepreneurship; develop an interest in business model disruption in other industries; practicing a mental exercise of ‘how could this project be delivered with a different commercial model?’ for every project undertaken.

Recommendations to the Civil engineering professionWe believe that the profession has not only a self-interest but also a societal duty to lead on business model change. To this end recommended the following actions:


deliveredWho needs

to act

42

Soft infrastructure 2: Governance and process

The need for new approaches to governing innovation?In order to motivate the use of, and realise value from digital technology, civil engineers need an environment which encourages innovation. However, it was observed that the following characteristics of the profession are currently not provided in this environment: - Long project timescales - A low risk appetite - Uncertainties about the risks, benefits and roles in digital

innovation

Long project timescales are inherent to the often large-scale, multi-stakeholder nature of civil engineering projects. This is unlikely to change significantly, even with improvements in the efficiency of work and collaboration. Similarly, the risk-averse nature of civil engineering is an important characteristic of the profession, and exists for a good reason. Through their work, civil engineers are responsible for the safety and wellbeing of society, and the risks of failure can be very significant. It would therefore be unwise to suggest changing this risk appetite (although as previously highlighted, new business models can help to distribute this risk more effectively).In order to incentivise innovation, the civil engineering profession therefore needs to focus on reducing uncertainty. Through both the literature review and the interviews, four main areas of uncertainty were observed:

- The civil engineer’s role in digital innovation - The legal and commercial implications of digital

innovation - The security aspects of digital innovation - The ethical implications of digital innovation

In order to reduce this uncertainty, and effectively manage digital innovation, the profession needs to provide more effective governance of, and processes for dealing with, each of these issues. This study investigated the potential of frameworks as a method of accomplishing this, one that not has been extensively utilised for digital innovation in civil engineering. There exists the very notable exception of BIM, but this, we argue, has flaws.

What do we mean by frameworks?We define frameworks as the principles and guidelines that govern innovation and implementation of digital technologies in civil engineering. These can exist in many forms (and some frameworks take more than one), including: - Guidance documentation - Official standards - Formalised processes - Best practices - Legislation

These frameworks can be developed at a number of levels, from nationwide to an individual basis. However, for the purposes of this report it is considered that there are three main levels at which most frameworks are developed in civil engineering: individual projects and programmes, civil engineering companies, and industry-wide.

Case study – BIMBuilding Information Modelling (BIM) is the process of creating and managing digital information about a built asset. In 2011, the UK Government Construction Strategy (GCS) required BIM Level 2 to be implemented on all centrally procured government projects by 2016. This specifies that all project and asset information, documentation and data must be electronic at the design and construction stages of a project, and is underpinned by a series of standards and best practice documents produced by the British Standards Institute (BSI) and Construction Industry Council (CIC). BIM is arguably the most widespread implementation of digital technology in civil engineering – and the UK has been considered a “world leader” in the area35. We hypothesise that BIM itself is a set of frameworks for the use of information on construction projects, as the standards which define BIM were seen to fulfil the purpose of a framework as it is defined above, as shown overleaf. We also hypothesise that the nature of BIM, as a set of frameworks, is in part what has led to its relatively widespread use in the UK. Of the four main areas of uncertainty identified earlier in this section, the only area not addressed by BIM is ethics. However, this is likely due to ethical concerns being considered in the provision of legal, commercial and security guidance, rather than its own separate standard.


deliveredWho needs

to act

43

How can these frameworks reduce uncertainty while still providing freedom to innovate?However, there is an important balance to be struck: to allow freedom for civil engineers to be innovative on projects, while also providing enough governance to reduce uncertainty to within the appetite of the organisation or project.Currently, digital innovations in civil engineering are rarely subject to a standardised method, which often does not bring the best results. For example, it was highlighted by senior civil engineers that often automation is done by individuals, and the tools are not standardised or shared.This often leads to work being duplicated and multiple, separate tools being developed for the same issue. The efficiency value of these tools not being realised, as time was wasted in redeveloping them, and therefore their use is discouraged.However, care must be taken when providing guidance so as to not be overly prescriptive, as this can limit freedom to innovate. Anecdotal evidence from workshop participants indicated that BIM itself is currently perceived as stifling innovation; one participant described BIM as a “straitjacket”.It will be important for those creating these frameworks – including civil engineers – to ensure that they strike an appropriate balance to allow for both certainty and innovation.


Provide legal and commercial

guidance

Provide guidance on security aspects

Define roles, responsibilities and

procedure

CIC best practice for Professional Indemnity Insurance using BIM

PAS 1192-5Specification for security-

minded building information modelling, digital built

environments and smart asset management

PAS 1192-2/3Specification for information

managementBS 1192-4

Method for collaborative production of information

The purpose of BIM – The development of frameworks for roles and responsibilities in digital innovation is likely to be a circular process


deliveredWho needs

to act

Industry provides guidance

Organisations change skill

profiles

Roles on projects change

44

Commercial and legalThe development of frameworks to guide roles and responsibilities is likely to be somewhat iterative. Guidance is needed from a high level, but the wide variety of projects worked on by civil engineers means that the initial change to role of the engineer is likely to be bottom-up, driven by changes on individual projects and programmes. The initial change to the civil engineer’s role is likely to be somewhat organic, represented by gradual changes in the roles and responsibilities of the engineer as defined in contracts for individual projects or programmes. In particular, as higher-level guidance around commercial and legal aspects is put in place, individual contracts should place greater emphasis on digital roles, such as responsibilities for data transfer and data formats. The latter was often highlighted by civil engineers as a responsibility that is often left unclear in contracts, leading to issues with unsuitable or incompatible data.This change in defined project roles is likely to lead individual companies to change their skills profiles in response. Companies should issue clear training and development requirements for frameworks – this is a discussed more in the Human Capital soft infrastructure.However, acting in a purely reactive way is likely to put civil engineering companies at a disadvantage in guiding digital change.Industrial bodies and professional associations such as the ICE need to provide more targeted guidance for civil engineers as to what their future roles and responsibilities might be as a result of new business models and available technologies. There is also a need to respond to the project- and company-based changes by guiding the development of new education requirements for civil engineers in schools and universities.

Literature and interview evidence highlighted a number of emerging commercial and legal issues which contribute to overall uncertainty. Although there was a level of awareness of the potential impact of these issues, there was also a perception of there being very little practical guidance for how to deal with them.These include, but are not limited to: Who has intellectual property of automated tools? - There is uncertainty over who owns tools and the

analysis they produce. Should this be the developer, or the owner? What if tools are passed between companies or organisations, and edited before being used again?


How should these frameworks be developed?Roles and responsibilities

Normalising frameworks – BIM can act as a framework for the use of digital technologies on civil engineering projects

“The data we need usually exists in some usable format – problems are often due to the fact that there is no funding or governance around the provision or management of data.”

“There is a need for a legislative framework to manage digital technologies. Such frameworks exist for housing, water, and other sectors, so one will need to exist for digital.”

“We need to significantly improve our understanding of ownership and intellectual property, and how this applies to digital innovation.”

Senior Engineer, Civil Engineering Consultancy




deliveredWho needs

to act

45

Who is accountable for the results of these tools? - This is more straightforward with standard automated

tools, but needs to be addressed in more detail as increasingly intelligent, machine learning automation becomes more prevalent. As tools are able to develop themselves over time in ways that may not be visible to the engineers who initially created them, it may be less clear who is accountable for its outputs.

Who should own data gathered on a project? - This is particularly relevant concerning data gathered

from the public, with recent suggestions that members of the public should own their own data36,37. In addition, with new business models revolving around the monetary value of data, it will be important for engineers to understand the commercial implications of data ownership.

Commercial and legal guidance is likely to develop in a top-down basis, as there is a need for these guidelines to be consistent across the industry. Historically, the pace of technological development has been faster than the speed at which legislation comes into place, resulting in issues with technology being used inappropriately. The case of drone technology in the UK is illustrative, where potentially dangerous use cases appeared before the technology had been fully regulated38. Industrial bodies and professional associations should therefore work to develop and release legal guidance and regulation quickly, in order to reduce this risk, and ensure that technologies are used appropriately.


Individual companies and engineers then have a role to feed back into the development of this regulation; this should not exclude early career engineers using digital technologies on a day-to-day basis, who may be most aware of emerging digital innovation. In addition, as individual companies develop new digital innovations themselves, they should consider the legal implications of these, and do so in conversation with those creating the legislation.

Security and ethicsMany civil engineers highlighted the implications of digital technologies with regard to security and ethics – particularly those pertaining to the availability of more data, and more sophisticated automation – as an area for concern. However, different individual projects and organisations are likely to take different approaches to security and ethics. For example, a nuclear energy project is likely to have a much more developed security requirement than the replacement of a small piece of water infrastructure. As digital capabilities present new ethical and security challenges, civil engineering organisations should dedicate resources specifically to addressing these – both from an organisation-wide perspective and on individual projects, where necessary.

At a high, industry-wide level, security and ethics considerations are likely to be contained within legal and commercial frameworks defining accountability, rather than in their own separate framework. However, the industry has a role to provide some guidance on these issues, not only to reduce uncertainty in general within the profession, but also in order to allow individual organisations to develop their own guidance. Ethics in particular is a highly subjective issue. The civil engineering industry should foster collective debate, engaging also the end users of infrastructure, ensuring a spectrum of public views are considered.


deliveredWho needs

to act

46


Individual civil engineersTake an active role in providing feedback to, and maintaining, governance systems

Individual civil engineers have an important role to play in ensuring that these systems are fit for purpose; in particular, as those developing them may

not always be working with them on a daily basis. Individual civil engineers should be proactive in evaluating these systems and communicating with those at a higher level in their

organisations and in the industry, in order to ensure that the frameworks governing their work do not become redundant.

In particular, civil engineers should also communicate effectively where they feel that these frameworks fail to maintain the balance of facilitating creativity while reducing uncertainty.

Civil engineering organisationsWork with professional institutions and other stakeholders to implement governance systems for digital innovation and implementation.

In order to develop and implement governance systems that are fit for purpose, civil engineering organisations need to work collaboratively, with a number of other stakeholders. These are likely to vary depending on the organisation, its activities, and individual projects, but could include:

- Other built environment professional institutions, to adapt industry-wide guidance to meet the organisation’s needs, and provide feedback on this guidance.

- the legal profession, to understand in more detail the legal implications of digital technology and how best to manage these.

Institution of Civil EngineersProvide practical guidance for civil engineering organisations on how to deal with uncertainties related to digital technology.

At a high level, the industry needs to move further than “thought pieces” around ethical issues related to digital technology. Professional institutions and industry regulators need to work with civil engineers, in addition to other stakeholders such as the legal profession, to move beyond simply discussing these issues and actually implementing practical frameworks for managing new uncertainties.

Assess how digital technology has affected other industries in the past, and take lessons learnt into consideration when developing new frameworks.

The industry should work with professionals from other industries and sectors that have been impacted by digital technology, to look at how success was achieved and what lessons were learnt. In particular, the industry should look to others such as the automotive industry where creativity has thrived at the same time as digital technology being implemented, and learn from their examples to ensure that the balance of certainty and freedom is achieved.

Recommendations to the civil engineering professionIn order to fully harness the potential of the digital capabilities, it will be imperative for civil engineering as a profession to maximise the value of its human capital. We believe this change will take shape through redefining the knowledge, skills and behaviours that civil engineers need to develop in order to succeed. To this end we recommended the following actions:


deliveredWho needs

to act

47

Why do civil engineers need to change their knowledge, skills and behaviours?Human capital is the value that individual civil engineers collectively bring to the organisations they work in. In this report, we define human capital as consisting of three components: Knowledge, skills and behaviours. These comprise the personal attributes civil engineers (or indeed any other profession) need in order to effectively fulfil their role in the work they do. - Knowledge is what civil engineers need to know. - Skills are what civil engineers need to be able to do. - Behaviour is how civil engineers need to act.

The evidence showed that digital technology is likely to – and to some extent, already has – caused the civil engineer’s role to change. In particular, digital technology is likely to remove the need for much of the laborious, repetitive work that has traditionally been a significant element of the civil engineer’s role. In tandem, as new opportunities appear around the three digital capabilities, civil engineers are likely to take on new roles with their additional capacity. In order to thrive in these new roles, there will therefore need to be a significant change to the knowledge, skills and behaviours of the civil engineer.

However, the exact nature of this change does not seem to be well-defined: existing literature on the skills required for digital innovation rarely refers specifically to “the civil engineer”, let alone specific career stages or sectors. In addition, the exact nature of the skills is often unclear: “soft skills” were identified as being increasingly important, but there was little detail on which soft skills were important for which kinds of engineers7.

On the ground, interviewees appeared lost as to how to improve their human capital. A lack of clarity and a lack of specificity were common views surrounding personal digital development.

What will this change look like for different career stages?In this report, we have identified three key “tiers of engagement” – representing common groupings of different career stages of civil engineers. These do not represent every discrete stage of a civil engineer’s career, as civil engineers in different companies, industries and projects are unlikely to have the same responsibilities. Instead, these are designed to identify with as many civil engineers as possible, in different types of roles, with different responsibilities, and with different levels of familiarity with digital technology. These tiers of engagement are illustrated by three characters: Anna, Tarek and Claire.

Soft infrastructure 3: Human capital

“I know that digital innovation is going to happen to me, but I do not know what my role will involve. Except more BIM.”Graduate Civil Engineer, Civil Engineering Consultancy


deliveredWho needs

to act

48


AnnaAnna is a civil engineer working in a technical role at a built environment consultancy. She has been working for two years since leaving university. Anna is a digital native: she has grown up using digital technology from a young age, and is able to quickly familiarise herself with new digital technologies.

Anna’s responsibilities include:

- Automating calculation and design processes: many of which used to be manual, laborious tasks carried out by her predecessors

- Processing and interpreting data: taking raw data from a variety of sources and translating this data into valuable information, either for internal insights or to external clients and contractors

- Performing task-level innovation: finding and developing new and innovative ways to allow herself (and others) to perform tasks more efficiently and effectively using digital technology

Future civil engineer


deliveredWho needs

to act

49


TarekTarek is a civil engineer working in a mix of technical and project management roles at a civil engineering contractor. He is at a mid-career level, having worked in the industry for just under 10 years. Tarek is not a digital native: although he is familiar with digital technology, he has not grown up using it and as a result does not have the same level of familiarity as Anna.

Tarek’s responsibilities include:

- Auditing the automation that junior colleagues like Anna carry out: checking that this automation is correct, robust, and future-proof

- Communicating with clients and contractors: working both internally and externally with clients and contractors, to manage collaboration using digital tools

- Taking accountability for the project outcomes: Tarek is responsible for the outcomes at a project level – in interviews, civil engineers in project management roles felt that digital innovation sometimes felt unviable on projects as it presented a risk to the project achieving its targets of time or cost

- Performing innovation at a process scale: finding innovative ways to manage projects and processes such as commercial, design, and collaboration procedures



deliveredWho needs

to act

50


ClaireClaire is a director at a civil engineering consultancy. She trained as an engineer, worked in a wide variety of roles throughout her career, including project management, and now acts as a business leader in her company. Claire is aware of the increasing importance of digital technologies, but does not use them in her work on a day-to-day basis.

Claire’s responsibilities include:

- Identifying future commercial and technological trends: assessing which of these should be prioritised, how these might affect the business and the industry on a wider scale

- Providing the strategic direction of the business: deciding on which commercial areas, industries, and types of projects to focus on, and where the best areas of focus for the business are

- Developing and implementing new digital business models: finding, adapting and implementing new ways of generating value from the increasingly digitally-enabled work her company does



deliveredWho needs

to act

51


Anna, Tarek and Claire’s different responsibilities reflect their need for different sets of knowledge, skills and behaviours. Some of the key behaviours they will need to maintain, develop and gain are highlighted as follows:

KNOWLEDGE SKILLS BEHAVIOURS

Awareness of digital trends Automation Creativity

In order for Anna to ensure that the innovation she carries out is making the most out of the available digital capabilities, she needs to maintain her awareness of new digital technologies and trends.

While business leaders such as Claire may be more aware of high-level digital trends and business models, it will be important for Anna to understand the specific new technologies which are emerging, as she is most likely to use these technologies on a day-to-day basis. Her abilities as a digital native also mean that she is most likely to quickly pick up on and use these technologies, and can provide significant value by harnessing new technologies early on.

One of Anna’s main responsibilities is to automate processes. This will require her to have new technical skills, including coding. Anna is likely to need to know how to code in a variety of languages, appropriate for different situations and types of automation.

Part of Anna’s role is using her “digital native” understanding to come up with innovative ways of using the digital capabilities to improve her work, such as automating design processes, adding functionality or using data in new ways to gain new insights.

Anna needs to be creative in order to perform this task-level innovation. In addition to knowing about what digital technologies are available, Anna needs to be creative and imaginative in coming up with new ways of using the technologies.

Data analysis

Anna is increasingly responsible for turning raw data into valuable information and insights. In order to do this, she needs to understand how to manipulate data, recognise patterns and trends, and manage and organise data effectively.

Technical & theoretical civil engineering knowledge Digital/Non-digital “translation” An attitude of collaboration

Although Anna may be carrying out fewer manual calculations and design processes, she needs to understand the underlying theory in order to automate them. She therefore needs to maintain her technical and theoretical knowledge of civil engineering concepts.

This is critical to ensure that the automation is correct, and does not become a “black box” which she uses without considering the theory behind.

This is also important to allow Anna to contribute to higher-level, initial design processes, which require an understanding of basic technical principles.

In order to allow others to check and validate her automated tools, and in order for others to understand insights from her data analysis, Anna will need to be able to communicate effectively with those who are not digital natives.

She will need to know how to communicate complex concepts to people – who may be her immediate supervisors and colleagues – who do not have the same ingrained understanding of digital technology that she does. This will be critical to ensure her tools can be validated and her insights are trusted.

Anna needs to ensure that her work is collaborative for three key reasons.

Firstly, to ensure that the innovation she carries out is not siloed, and the benefits and knowledge that come from it are shared with a broad range of colleagues.

Secondly, through interaction Anna’s tools can be suitable for others to use and understand, so they are future-proof.

Thirdly, Anna needs to work with others to ensure that the benefits of her automation and data interpretation are clear; to ensure that there is no ‘reinventing of the wheel’, and to ensure insights from data analysis are reflected upon on future projects.

Improve Improve

Improve

Improve

Maintain New

New


deliveredWho needs

to act

52



Client drivers Selling digital Coordinating

In order to ensure that his clients (and contractors) see the value of using digital technologies on their projects, Tarek needs to ensure that he understands their motivations. This is likely to change, particularly in the advent of newer digitally-enabled business models.

Changes in policy, government and economic climate may affect the motivations of his clients, so Tarek should maintain an up-to-date knowledge of wider trends.

In his role as a manager, Tarek often collaborates with external clients and contractors. While he may have a good understanding of the benefits of using digital technologies on a project (whether for project management purposes or to add value to a solution), this may not be as clear to his clients and contractors.

Tarek needs to be able to effectively communicate the opportunities that digital technologies present, and match them with the drivers of his clients and contractors.

One of the issues highlighted by staff in manager roles was that automation is often uncoordinated with the wider project, and so as such does not produce a significant benefit.

Tarek has a role to integrate automation activities into project management, ensuring the engineers he manages perform their roles in a coordinated way. This includes putting automation tasks on the critical path, not duplicating data or re-automating tools from previous projects and ensuring that tools are understandable by others.

Technical & theoretical civil engineering knowledge Digital quality assurance Focusing on outcomes

Tarek is likely to be auditing, and utilising, the tools created by digital natives like Anna. Tarek will need to maintain his knowledge of theoretical civil engineering concepts, so that he can ensure that automated tools are being done right.

In addition, Tarek needs to maintain this knowledge so that he can sense-check designs and continue to perform “back-of-the-envelope” calculations in situations where a quick estimate is required.

Although Tarek may not be carrying out automation himself, he will be responsible for ensuring that these new automated tools are correct, suitable, and future-proof.

This may not be as simple as checking through a calculation, and therefore Tarek will need to develop a new set of skills in order to do this, as he will be responsible for the outputs of these tools. This may involve elements of coding, code structuring, and data analysis techniques, to allow him to understand the work of digital natives like Anna.

Although Tarek is likely to be focused on meeting targets, what these targets are needs to change. This will be facilitated to some extent by new, value-based business models described in Commercial Practice, but also requires a behavioural change from managers like Tarek.

Particularly when selling the value of digital technology to clients, Tarek will need to focus on potential effectiveness outcomes, rather than traditional efficiency savings in cost or time, as this is likely where significant untapped value lies.

Core design skills

Digital project management tools are likely to free up more time for Tarek to spend on the creative design aspects of projects, which currently cannot be automated. Therefore, Tarek needs to maintain his core abilities in design, as this is likely to be an area where a great deal of “human value” can be added to his solutions.

Improve Improve

Improve

Improve

Maintain

Maintain

New


deliveredWho needs

to act

53



Future business models Balancing “Annas” and “Tareks” Taking responsibility for risk

In order to provide strategic direction for her company, Claire needs to remain up-to-date with new and emerging digital business models within the industries she works. In addition, Claire should know about business models in other industries such as software development (and others less associated with civil engineering), as these may become more relevant to civil engineering in future.

While not all of these might be directly relevant to her work, she will need to maintain an understanding of these in order to identify future competitive threats and to effectively commercialise the opportunities the opportunities the digital capabilities present.

The need to encourage innovation among digital natives (such as Anna) is likely to come into conflict with the need for managers (such as Tarek) to maintain structure on projects and reduce commercial risk.

Claire therefore needs to be able to manage a balance between these two streams, by providing young engineers like Anna with sufficient room and budget for creativity, while at the same time ensuring that this does not have a negative impact on the outcomes of projects, for which Tarek takes responsibility.

Civil engineers will need to quickly take advantage of new digital technologies in order to remain competitive. Although governance and process can help to reduce the risks of implementing digital technology, civil engineers may not have the time to wait for these to be developed perfectly.

As the business leader, Claire needs to be willing to take ownership of these new risks, particularly at a business level. This will be necessary to avoid mid-level managers such as Tarek feeling that they are overly responsible for the risks of digital implementations, as this could stifle innovation by younger engineers such as Anna.

Competitive threats Humility

As new business models emerge based around software and infrastructure, it is likely that civil engineers will face new types of competitors from new industries.

In order to ensure that her business remains competitive, Claire needs to maintain and constantly update her understanding of these potential competitive threats. This includes not only other civil engineering companies, but also newer competitors in other industries such as software development.

As Claire may have worked for most of her career in non-digital environments, it may be that not all of the expertise she has gained is relevant to emerging digital technologies, business models, and ways of working. In particular, she needs to respect that they will grow and develop in paths that look unlike hers.

Claire therefore needs to be humble and receptive to ideas from younger, more digitally-native engineers. This is crucial in order to allow the business to respect digital natives contribution to digital innovation.

Improve Improve

Improve

Improve

Maintain


deliveredWho needs

to act

54

Is there a need for new roles in civil engineering?


Interviewees highlighted the civil engineer cannot be everything, and we do not suggest technical knowledge will become less important in the future profession – a balance is crucial.The industry needs to consider how, as the role profile of the civil engineer changes, some existing KSB will become irrelevant. Similar shifts have happened before: for example, manual engineering drawing techniques have become comparatively (although not completely) redundant since the advent of Computer Aided Design (CAD) software in the 1980s. Very few KSB are likely to become completely irrelevant. For example many interviewees cautioned against removing the need for young engineers to understand fundamental civil engineering theory, in order to prevent automated tools becoming “black boxes” that are used but not understood. However, it will be important for industry leaders to understand that civil engineers cannot develop infinite competence in every knowledge, skill and behaviour, and some will need to be prioritised over others.Civil engineers are well positioned to become integrators of skills in the delivery of digitally-enabled solutions. As such, there is a need for the industry to consider new types of job in civil engineering – perhaps an automation-focused engineer, or data analysis-focused engineer – ‘T-shaped’ individuals with a mix of digital, engineering or commercial skills. Rather than trying to up-skill all engineers in the same digital competencies, this would lead to more diversity of roles within the profession, allowing each civil engineer to focus on one aspect of digital innovation in civil engineering.Rather than existing in a separate silo of “digital engineering”, these roles could slot in to existing engineering teams, ensuring that digital capabilities are integrated with technical engineering knowledge.

“The failure to address the potential loss of civil engineering jobs, and what new kinds of jobs will exist in future, is a fundamental blindside in the educational system.”Director, Infrastructure Service Provider

Both literature and interview evidence highlighted new knowledge skills and behaviours (KSB) that civil engineers need to develop, including those in the above matrices. However, in interviews there was incongruity to which civil engineers believed they would take on more digital-related work (such as programming and software development) or whether this should be left to specialised members of staff. Many civil engineers interviewed highlighted that they felt a pile-on of skills requirements; they had been told what new KSB they needed to develop (rather than solicited for their own views), but there was no mention of which KSB would become less relevant. There was a perception observed that many engineers felt it was inappropriate to try and up-skill all engineers in the same digital competencies. There was also a perceived need to consider which KSB would become redundant in the future, to “make room” for new, digital-related KSB.


deliveredWho needs

to act

55

Recommendations to the civil engineering professionTo develop and implement governance frameworks that are fit for purpose, input is necessary from all levels and all sources of civil engineering. Although the industry as a whole, as represented by professional institutions such as the ICE, is likely to have a very significant role, as we have seen, others cannot be neglected if sustainable change is to be achieved. To this end we recommended the following actions:


Individual civil engineersBuild awareness of emerging digital trends and their link to wider societal benefits

Civil engineers need to maintain their own understanding of digital trends to ensure that the uptake of digital technology is not purely top-down.

However, an understanding is not enough – individuals need to continuously consider how these may affect their role. By understanding how technologies link to societal outcomes, engineers can have confidence in promoting new uses, and new human capital that is required.

Proactively develop personal human capital

Civil engineers need to then be proactive in changing their own knowledge, skills and behaviours. This may be enabled by guidance from their organisation, but as no two civil engineers will have exactly the same responsibilities, individuals should take an active role in assessing how they can maximise the value of their own human capital.

Civil engineering organisationsConsider whether there is a need for new, digital-based roles to be integrated with existing civil engineering teams

Civil engineering organisations need to consider how to integrate digital-based roles into their existing functions, and how they should develop their human capital to enable this. Not all organisations will take the same approach, as some might have more of a need to integrate than others, and new business models are likely to affect how human capital is distributed in an organisation.

This understanding should then be fed back to the individual engineers, to guide them in driving their own development.

Consider the best mechanisms to enable the changes in human capital

Organisations should also consider in more detail the best mechanisms of enabling this change in human capital. This is likely to depend on a number of factors, including: the specific type of knowledge, skill or behaviour; the organisational structure; the profile of the individual engineers; and the training capability of the organisation itself. Some of the potential mechanisms for this change might include:• Integrating learning with practical, project-

based activities• Completing formal training courses• Partnerships with educational institutions

Institution of Civil EngineersConsider the appropriate changes in human capital in different sectors and types of organisations, and provide targeted guidance for these.

We have begun to assess how human capital might need to change at different career levels for civil engineers. However, the required change is unlikely to be uniform across different types of organisations, and across the many sectors civil engineers work in. The ICE should work with engineers to provide targeted guidance for each.

Support educational institutions in balancing traditional theory and digital skills development.

“Black boxes” need to be avoided. The civil engineering profession should consider how curricula will allow future engineers to develop the digital-related skills they need to succeed, without losing a core understanding of engineering theory.

Consider ‘continuous chartership’

In other professions, such as medicine and accounting, chartership and accreditation involves a degree of lifelong learning. Civil engineers need competencies that fit fast-moving digital technologies and the ability to manage staff, projects and businesses in more a digital age. The ICE should consider chartership reviews at key career stages. This is not an additional examination of ability, but a means of ensuring individuals are guided to be most effective in changing times and are able to communicate this on their CV to others.

Efficiency opportunities having impact at the levels of Infrastructure Systems and Wider Society

Effectiveness opportunities having impact at the levels of Infrastructure Systems and Wider Society







Wider society

Wider society

Lower risk of human error/inaccuracy

Greater understanding of localised potential impacts of climate

change

Lower risk of flood damage to water

infrastructure


infrastructure

Automate flood volume calculations

Utilise digital sensors to measure water levels in local rivers over longer

time frame

Increased resilience of local area to flooding

Overall increased resilience of local area

to flooding

More time spent deciding placement of

flood storage

Provide Augmented Reality experience to view potential flood storage locations

Reduced impact on local housing

development

Lower risk of flood damage to energy

infrastructure

Lower risk of flood damage to energy

infrastructure


infrastructure

Lower risk of flood damage to highways

infrastructure

More suitably placed flood storage

Lower impact on local community

Greater community awareness of flooding

56

For civil engineers – and so society – to fully harness the value digital innovation presents, civil engineering needs to expand its consideration to: • Challenge levels of Infrastructure Systems and Wider

Society• Effectiveness opportunities as well as Efficiency• A consideration of benefits in the long term as well as

the short.Overall, these predictions constitute the framework’s ‘How this creates value’, with respect to digital innovation in a preferable future.It is important to clarify that this is not a recommendation to abandon efficiency opportunities. The impact of efficiency can be significant, but it needs to also be considered at the additional levels of infrastructure systems and wider society – seen across, top. The connection is important. Having clear objectives to outcomes at infrastructure system and wider societal levels will help to direct to the most meaningful efficiencies.


“Civil Engineers do not build bridges or bore tunnels for their own entertainment. We exist because we deliver certain societal outcomes.”Tim Broyd, President of Institution of Civil EngineersConcluding remarks, Shaping a Digital Nation 2017

How digital innovation creates value – tomorrowUltimately, civil engineers should aspire to achieve wider societal benefits through their work.

Effe

ctiv

enes

s

Greater understanding of the problem

Greater integration of solutions

More digital functionality

Effi

cien

cy

Greater Automation

More streamlined

collaboration

The thriving zone – empowered by new soft infrastructure, civil engineering can embrace digital innovation of all theoretical opportunities across all challenge levels.

57

Starting with expanding how efficiency opportunities are understood was described as by many engineers in interviews as “the next step” in realising benefits from digital technologies.

“We need to have a better understanding of whether digital is actually bringing tangible benefits to projects – and what more is possible.”

Ultimately however, through this study we have seen that the opportunities for increased effectiveness are likely to be both more numerous, more significant in the degree they bring benefit and the most unexploited at present. Civil engineers should investigate the potential of using digital technologies to make their outcomes more effective. This would be a step-change compared to approach to digital innovation in civil engineering today.

“It’s about having sight of the outcomes, and how we apply digital technology to achieve those outcomes.”

This will require consideration of outcomes and benefits beyond a single organisation or project, and may require new methods of measuring value beyond traditional return on investment. These new measures are likely to require collaborative development, to account for the complexity and subjectivity that is encountered. This is likely to require an element of creative and divergent thinking.

“We also need to take a holistic, blank canvas view of how we use these technologies.”

Either approach must be careful to appreciate longer timelines. The benefits that digital technology may be most significant in the long term. Effectiveness benefits in particularly will often not materialise until after the project itself has been completed.


We believe, empowered through the new soft infrastructures explored in this section, civil engineering can access new world of digital innovation: one with more variety, more impact and a closer association with the societal challenges they were founded to solve.

Director, Civil Engineering Consultancy

Programme Manager, City Council

Programme Manager, City Council

1

2

3



Dig

ital t

echn

olo

gie

s

Poor understanding

of role



Better Connectivity

Increased Data

Availability


Power

The profession expands to the thriving zone


Effe

ctiv

enes

sE

ffici

ency

Effe

ctiv

enes

sE

ffici

ency




The profession is unable to embrace all opportunities The profession exists in the surviving zone

?

Commercial Practice

Does it make commercial sense?


Are the appropriate processes and frameworks in

place?

Human Capital

Do we have the right knowledge,

skills and behaviours to deliver?

Developing soft infrastructure will empower the profession to respond

58

59

We believe there is an alternative path forward for civil engineers.Digital innovation clearly demonstrates great potential to the civil engineering profession; possible benefits manifest themselves across two opportunity types and spanning 3 challenge levels.

In reality, injecting hard infrastructure alone does not deliver this. Just as we have suggested that digital innovation should not be simply undertaking existing processes faster and cheaper, we do not think that civil engineering can resolve existing difficulties simply by investing more heavily in the innovation approach used to date.

Currently, Civil engineering captures only a small fraction of digital innovation’s potential, ignoring the benefits of effectiveness, the concept of societal outcomes or long-term perspectives. The barriers around improving are not technical, but focus around soft infrastructure. Three stand out to us as powerful enablers of change- commercial practices; governance and process; and human capital.

Civil engineering needs to take a bolder, more proactive role in shaping its future if it is to succeed in a smart city age. The profession needs to come together to achieve digital solidarity. Civil engineers should transition from a view of isolated infrastructure outputs to industry-wide societal outcomes. This is essential to maintaining competitiveness and purpose in the future’s markets; this is essential for addressing the societal challenges the profession was founded out to achieve.

Civil engineering may have a reputation for being slow to change. However, we have seen little to suggest this has to remain the case.

Section 3 – Conclusion: thriving in a smart city age

Despite the future facing nature of this report, it is important to reflect that the civil engineering profession has demonstrated the ability to produce bursts of innovation historically.

In the ‘golden age of civil engineering’, Brunel created new business models through ownership of his own infrastructure; Locke lobbied for new frameworks around designing and delivering railway tunnels; and Baker demonstrated new ways of teaching civil engineering principles through practical demonstrations of the suspension bridge.

We do not propose Brunel would have created a better BIM, but the prioritisation of soft infrastructure had a demonstrable effect on the ability to implement technological innovations emerging from the industrial revolution.

History aside, the profession is running out of time to change. Societal challenges are exacerbating, competition is approaching, and digital innovation in wider society is inevitable. At the ICE’s Shaping a Digital World 2017, 91% of participants said the ‘Digital Revolution’ had already started.

These changes are substantial, require the support of others on the journey, and intentionally address areas that the profession admit are long standing difficulties. However, while digital innovation may be at odds with the profession’s current culture, it is highly complementary to its purpose.

If engineers can rise to this challenge, we believe the pursuit of our recommendations will result in a civil engineering profession that can thrive – both today and long in to a coming, smart city age.

60

Through our study, we make the case that digital innovation in the civil engineering profession is currently restricted by a lack of three key soft infrastructures. We make targeted recommendations to develop these, summarised below, to steer the profession on to a preferable future.

Summary of recommendations

Soft infrastructure

Stakeholder

Individual civil engineers Civil engineering organisations Institution of Civil Engineers

Commercial Practices

• View commercial innovation on a parity with technical innovation

• Pilot new business model innovations with targeted clients

• Strive for coopetition to establish new business model precedents

• Raise business model innovation as a key theme in the Digital Transformation agenda

Human Capital

• Build awareness of emerging digital trends and their link to wider societal benefits

• Be proactive in developing their own human capital to fulfil new roles.

• Consider the balances of skills in the company, and whether there is a need for new, digital-based roles to be integrated with existing civil engineering departments.

• Consider the best mechanisms to enable the changes in human capital.

• Consider the appropriate changes in human capital in different sectors and types of organisations, and provide targeted guidance for these.

• Work with educational institutions to consider the balance between theoretical teaching and digital skills development.

• Consider “Continuous Chartership”


• Take an active role in providing feedback to, and maintaining, governance systems

• Work with professional institutions and other stakeholders to implement governance systems for digital innovation and implementation.

• Provide practical guidance for civil engineering organisations on how to deal with uncertainties related to digital technology.

• Assess how digital technology has affected other industries in the past, and take lessons learnt into consideration when developing new frameworks.

61

Authors

Authorship team

Lottie MacNairPeter CooperAnn CousinsTheo TryfonasDan JamesWendy TipperPhilippa Ivens

Graphic design

Cerys WilcoxEddie IonMatt Cox

With thanks to

Phil HarrisonLuke CooperSarah NivenHenrietta RidgeonJayne EvansDave HuntAmit DuttaSam StacyLouise EllisRick RobinsonHelen Charlick

Neil CarhartGraham HerriesLuke LoveridgeHenry ChanMatthew EvansTim StonorJeremy WatsonEllie CosgraveDan BylesAmanda ClackChris Gage

Catherine WengerTim ChapmanIan GardnerLynne GouldingCian O’DonnchadhaTim GammonsLucy AndersonEmily Bowden-EyreJames Rickerby

62

About us

Arup is an independent firm of designers, planners, engineers, consultants and technical specialists working across every aspect of today’s built environment. Together we help clients solve their most complex challenges, turning exciting ideas into tangible reality as we strive to find a better way to shape a better world.Established in 1946, Arup has over 12,000 employees based in more than 92 offices across 40 countries, working on up to 10,000 projects at any one time. Its unique structure, with the firm held in trust on behalf of our employees, gives us complete independence. We live in a digital world that continues to evolve at an astonishing pace. The ever-changing digital built environment presents new opportunities to enhance the way we live and work.

Bristol is one of the most popular and successful universities in the UK and was ranked within the top 50 universities in the world in the QS World University Rankings 2018.We aim to bring together the best minds in individual fields, and encourage researchers from different disciplines and institutions to work together to find lasting solutions to society’s pressing problems.The University of Bristol conducts world-leading research in one of the top Civil Engineering departments in the UK. In particular, we are a founding partner in the UK Collaboratorium for Research on Infrastructure and Cities (UKCRIC) which will extract greater value from our infrastructure and cities, whilst simultaneously improving their sustainability and resilience, and improving the wellbeing of our citizens.The University was one of the first to offer a course in smart cities, and regularly publishes in this field from an interdisciplinary perspective.

With over 91,000 members worldwide, ICE supports civil engineers and technicians throughout their careers.We award professional qualifications that are the industry standard, lead the debates around infrastructure and the built environment and provide an unmatched level of training, knowledge and thinking.One of our key themes is Digital Transformation, exploring how the industry can embrace and understand new digital technologies for the good of all.2018 marks the 200th anniversary of the founding of the Institution of Civil Engineers.To celebrate ICE is running a year of events and activities that show how civil engineering has for over 200 years transformed the way we live. As civil engineers we need to do more to help explain why our work is important to society and how what we do everyday helps the modern world work. We support research such as this report that explores how civil engineers can continue to deliver for society in the face of new technological trends.

63

References

[1] Institution of Civil engineers, “https://www.ice.org.uk/,” [Online].

[2] J. W. Hall, J. J. Henriques, A. J. Hickford and R. J. Nicholls, “A Fast Track Analysis of strategies for infrastructure provision in Great Britain,” Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, 2012.

[3] Defra, UK 2012 Climate Change Risk Assessment: Built Environment, London: Defra, 2012.

[4] McKinsey Global Institute, “Reinventing construction: a route to higher productivity,” McKinsey Global Institute, 2017.

[5] National Infrastructure Commission, UCL, Arup, Briefing Note: Infrastructure and Digital Systems Resilience, London, 2017.

[6] Constructing Excellence, “Section 2: Construction and Sustainable Development,” in Plain English Guide to Sustainable Construction, London, 2008, p. 5.

[7] Institution of Civil engineers, “State of the Nation 2017: Digital Transformation,” London, 2017.

[8] R. P. Dameri and A. Cocchia, “Smart City and Digital City : Twenty Years of Terminology Evolution,” Progress in IS, pp. 1–8, 2013.

[9] C. Mercer, “What is Li-Fi? The ultimate definition of Li-Fi,” 20 July 217. [Online]. Available: http://www.techworld.com/big-data/what-is-li-fi-everything-you-need-know-3632764/. [Accessed 24 August 217].

[10] K. Fitchard, “Mapping out the world’s LTE coverage (It’s in fewer places than you think),” 20 September 213. [Online]. Available: https://gigaom.com/2013/09/20/mapping-out-the-worlds-lte-coverage-its-in-fewer-places-than-you-think/. [Accessed 24 August 2017].

[11] OpenSignal, “The State of LTE (November 2016),” November 2016. [Online]. Available: https://opensignal.com/reports/2016/11/state-of-lte. [Accessed 24 August 2017].

[12] IBM, “The Four V’s of Big Data,” [Online]. Available: http://www.ibmbigdatahub.com/infographic/four-vs-big-data. [Accessed 30 August 2017].

[13] UK Government, “data.gov.uk,” [Online]. Available: https://data.gov.uk/. [Accessed 29 08 2017].

[14] Met Office, “Met Office DataPoint,” [Online]. Available: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/datapoint. [Accessed 29 08 2017].

[15] Ordnance Survey, “OS OpenData,” [Online]. Available: https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/business-and-government/products/opendata-products.html. [Accessed 29 08 2017].

[16] Ofcom, “Fast facts – UK,” Ofcom, 2017.

[17] A. Sneed, “Moore’s Law Keeps Going, Defying Expectations,” 19 May 2015. [Online]. Available: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/moore-s-law-keeps-going-defying-expectations/. [Accessed 29 August 2017].

[18] T. Cross, “Technology Quarterly: After Moore’s Law,” 12 March 2016. [Online]. Available: http://www.economist.com/technology-quarterly/2016-03-12/after-moores-law. [Accessed 29 August 2017].

[19] HM Government, “Digital Built Britain: Level 3 Building Information Modelling – Strategic Plan,” London, 2015.

[20] A. Cambridge, A. Gill, M. Barker, M. Tant, C. Simmonds and N. Watt, “Understanding the impact of water management on people for investment in sustainable infrastructure in the UK,” Smart Infrastructure and Construction, vol. 170, no. SC2, pp. 28–38, 2017.

[21] Arup, RIBA, “Designing with data: Shaping our future cities,” Arup, London, 2015.

[22] M. Gerres, “Seizing the opportunities of digitalisation,” 08 June 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.ice.org.uk/news-and-insight/the-civil-engineer/june-2017/seizing-the-opportunities-of-digitalisation. [Accessed 9 October 2017].

[23] Arup, Digital Tide: A 2050 View of the Water Sector, 2017.

[24] Arup, Schneider Electric, The Climate Group, “Urban Mobility in the Smart City Age,” 2014.

[25] Arup, [CONFIDENTIAL REPORT FOR UK UTILITY] 2016.

[26] Arup, “Greentech in the City Whitepaper,” 2015.

[27] Centre for Public Impact, “Rio de Janeiro’s centre of operations: COR,” 25 March 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.centreforpublicimpact.org/case-study/ioe-based-rio-operations-center/. [Accessed 10 October 2017].

[28] Balfour Beatty, “Innovation 2050: A Digital Future for the Infrastructure Industry,” Balfour Beatty, 2017.

[29] E. Cosgrave, L. Doody and N. Walt, “Delivering the Smart City: Governing Cities in the Digital Age,” Arup, Liveable Cities, UCL, Smart City Expo, London, 2014.

[30] The Climate Group, Arup, Accenture and Horizon, University of Nottingham, “Information Marketplaces: The New Economics of Cities,” 2011.

[31] M. Farmer, “Collaborate or Die,” RICS Construction Journal, no. April/May, pp. 15–17, 2017.

[32] Arup, “Reimagining property in a digital world,” London, 2017.

[33] World Economic Forum, “Shaping the Future of Construction: A Breakthrough in Mindset and Technology,” World Economic Forum, 2016.

[34] T. B. a. D. v. B. Clayton M. Christensen, “The Hard Truth About Business Model Innovation,” MITSloan Management Review, 2016.

[35] NBS, “National BIM Report 2017,” RIBA, London, 2017.

[36] I. Ng, “Connectivity / Why you should own your own data,” 21 November 2014. [Online]. Available: http://thoughts.arup.com/post/details/398/why-you-should-own-your-data. [Accessed 9 October 2017].

[37] L. Hardesty, “Own your own data,” 9 July 2014. [Online]. Available: http://news.mit.edu/2014/own-your-own-data-0709. [Accessed 9 October 2017].

[38] S. Curtis, “House of Lords calls for compulsory registration of drones,” 5 March 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/11451167/House-of-Lords-calls-for-compulsory-registration-of-drones.html. [Accessed 5 October 2017].

[39] United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, “World Urbanization Prospects: The 2014 Revision, Highlights,” United Nations, 2014.

[40] http://www.constructionenquirer.com/2015/12/07/ameys-project-heineken-to-co-ordinate-hole-digging/ Construction Enquirer 2015

[41] http://www.laingorourke.com/engineering-the-future/digital-engineering-2/eej/influence-on-the-supply-chain.aspx Laing O’Rouke

Bibliography

How can Civil Engineering thrive in a Smart City World? · -How digital innovation creates value...

Documents

Transcript of How can Civil Engineering thrive in a Smart City World? · -How digital innovation creates value...