January - June 2010
description
Transcript of January - June 2010
January - June 2010
Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey
Salient Features
Fewer responses combined with a much lower representation from smaller firms (4% compared to 38% in preceding survey (Dec-09)) Marginal increase in fee income, up 3% since the last six months of 2009, but still down 5% compared to same period in 2009. Fee income in real terms down 8,1% y/y (constant prices) No real change in employment estimated at 19 632 as at June 2010 Salaries represented 54% of total turnover, estimated at R8,3 bn (current prices) Confidence levels were better than expected in the first six months, and marginally higher at 87,1 compared to the preceding quarter. Confidence
however deteriorates in the second half to 71.9, with a much improved outlook for 2010, recovering to 93.6. Although the bulk of earnings are in the civil sector, earnings dropped 19% y/y constant prices, but increased by 12% y/y in structural services.
There was an impressive 98% increase in earnings in the environmental sector in the last 6 months to an estimated R749m constant prices. Earnings in Gauteng improved in the last 6 months (up 15,8%) but is still 31% lower compared to the same period in 2009 Earnings in the Western Cape deteriorated in the last 6 months, but was up an impressive 59% y/y There was a notable increase in earnings across South African borders in the last 12 months. Earnings within the central government were up 135% y/y, to over R1,4bn in June 2010, with a 19% increase in provincial government earnings.
Earnings within the private sector were 32% lower compared to last year. Earnings in transportation increased by 24%, and a 35% increase was reported in earnings in the commercial sector. Housing edged up by 7%. Earnings on water services fell by a disappointing 30% compared to last year. Competition in tendering intensified, with 73% of respondents reporting fierce competition (compared to 44,7% in the preceding survey) Profits only deteriorated slightly, in spite of higher levels of competition, and averaged 15,4% during the first 6 months. Discounting however increased from an average of 16,4% to 18,9% Fewer firms are expecting to increase staff Capacity utilization has fallen to 87.5 (from 89.5 in the December 2009 survey) The value of bursaries increased to 0.86% of the salary bill The issue of payment has become a greater problem in this survey, up to 23,4%, from 18,5% in the preceding survey, mainly due to poor payment
from parastatals, and the private sector. A weakening was also reported in payment received from central government. There was no change in local government, but it remained unacceptably high at 16% of payment outstanding for longer than 90 days.
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey June 2010
Civil Industry Outlook: 2nd Quarter 2010
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey June 2010
According to the SA Reserve Bank, the general economy contracted by 1,8% during 2009, the ‘overhang’ of whichis still felt in a rising unemployment rate. The good news is that most indicators show strong recovery and grossdomestic product grew (annualised) at 4,6% during the 1st quarter of 2010. Consumption expenditure (bothconsumer and government) increased strongly, and the decline in inventory holdings by companies slowed down.The general economic outlook is still subdued for 2010 (2.5%) and somewhat better during 2011/12 (3.5% to 4%).Whereas the general economy is coming out of its sharp recession quite strongly and despite the much talkedabout R845 billion to be spent over 3 years, capital expenditure is slowing down. Gross fixed capital formation bydifferent clients showed mixed trends; all tiers of government recorded lower capital expenditure (-1,2% for 2009 & -8% for 1st Q 2010), and so did private sector investment spending (-7% for 2009 & -0,7% for 1st Q 2010). Publiccorporations’ fixed investment grew by 41% during 2009, but only 7% recently (1st Q 2010).
The Confidence Index recovered to roughly the same level it was at the beginning of 2009. Over the last 12 monthsit declined 41%, the last 6 months by 24% and improved 20% over the last quarter! This is a VERY good sign andindicates an expected turn of fortune a year and a half away. The cumulative number of tenders invitations declinedby 16% over a year, by 20% over 6 months but actually improved quarter on quarter (ending 1st quarter 2010). Theaverage value kept on declining though. This still indicates tough times in the short term. The latter is reflected inthe value of contracts awarded dropping by 55% over 12 months, 62% over 6 months and again over the lastquarter (ending 1st quarter 2010). It seems as if the bottom of this indicator is still some time away. The result is thatestimated civil engineering turnover declined by 23,5% in real terms compared to a year ago, and 33% over a 6months period (ending 1st quarter 2010). It is expected to decline by 39% (real) in calendar 2010 compared to 2009.Re-estimated annual employment started to show stronger signs of contraction; a decline of 7% on a year ago, and-13% over a 6 months period. The fear expressed in our last report that companies cannot hold on to theirunoccupied staff is becoming a reality.
The general economy is recovering well after the sharp recession but despite the much talked about R845 billion tobe spent over 3 years, capital expenditure is slowing down with delivery bottlenecks to execute micro economicpolicies at the heart of the problem. The lack of a coherent policy framework (between macro and micro policies),political fractions within the ruling elite and a growing, yet increasingly underperforming ‘developmental state’ allcontribute to this.
Source: SAFCEC
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Firm distribution based on Annual Turnoverbased on responses received: January – June 2010
Category by gross annual income
% of firms
0 – R1,5m 4%R1,5m – R11,5m 34%> R11,5m 62%
Total 100.0%
0-1.54.0%
1.5-11.534.0%
>11.562.0%
Firm distribution based on turnover
0-1.538.0%
1.5-11.543.0%
>11.519.0%
Firm distribution based on turnover: Dec-09
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Economic Impact
Relationship to Gross Fixed Capital Formation
Consulting Engineering IndustryFee income, Rm Constant 2000 prices (CPI Deflated) Annualised
Jun-96 Jun-97 Jun-98 Jun-99 Jun-00 Jun-01 Jun-02 Jun-03 Jun-04 Jun-05 Jun-06 Jun-07 Jun-08 Jun-09 Jun-100
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Survey period
PER
CEN
TAG
E
% 13% 12% 8% -20% -18% -11% -8% 6% 14% 5% 5% 5% -8% -8% 2% 8% 8% 17% 51% 38% 14% 20% 40% 43% 2.10% -16.90 -8.10
Jun-
97
Dec-
97
Jun-
98
Dec-
98
Jun-
99
Dec-
99
Jun-
00
Dec-
00
Jun-
01
Dec-
01
Jun-
02
Dec-
02
Jun-
03
Dec-
03
Jun-
04
Dec-
04
Jun-
05
Dec-
05
Jun-
06
Dec-
06
Jun-
07
Dec-
07
Jun-
08
Dec-
08
Jun-
09
Dec-
09
Jun-
10
Consulting Engineering IndustryReal Fee income (CPI deflated), 2000 prices: Annual Change
-60%
-40%
-20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
Jun-
95
Jun-
97
Jun-
98
Jun-
99
Jun-
00
Jun-
01
Jun-
02
Jun-
03
Jun-
04
Jun-
05
Jun-
06
Jun-
07
Jun-
08
Jun-
09
Jun-
10
Jun-
11
% C
hang
e fr
om p
revi
ous
surv
ey
-10
10
30
50
70
90
110
% R
espo
nden
ts s
atis
fied
% Chg Index
CESA Confidence Index
Industry Confidence
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
Jun-
96
Jun-
97
Jan-
98
Jun-
98
Jan-
99
Jun-
99
Jan-
00
Jun-
00
Dec
-00
Jun-
01
Dec
-01
Jun-
02
Dec
-02
Jun-
03
Dec
-03
Jun-
04
Dec
-04
Jun-
05
Dec
-05
Jun-
06
Dec
-06
Jun-
07
Dec
-07
Jun-
08
Dec
-08
Jun-
09
Dec
-09
Jun-
10
Dec
-10
Jun-
11
CO
NFI
DE
NC
E IN
DE
X
0
2 000
4 000
6 000
8 000
10 000
12 000
Fee
inco
me
(con
stan
t pric
es)
Confidence Fee income Constant prices
Consulting Engineering IndustryReal Fee income (CPI deflated) vs confidence
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
Jun-
96
Jun-
97
Jan-
98
Jun-
98
Jan-
99
Jun-
99
Jan-
00
Jun-
00
Dec
-00
Jun-
01
Dec
-01
Jun-
02
Dec
-02
Jun-
03
Dec
-03
Jun-
04
Dec
-04
Jun-
05
Dec
-05
Jun-
06
Dec
-06
Jun-
07
Dec
-07
Jun-
08
Dec
-08
Jun-
09
Dec
-09
Jun-
10
Dec
-10
Jun-
11
CO
NFI
DE
NC
E IN
DE
X
200030004000500060007000800090001000011000120001300014000150001600017000180001900020000
Fee
inco
me,
R m
ill, c
urre
nt p
rices
Confidence Fee income Current prices
Consulting Engineering IndustryNominal Fee income vs confidence
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Jun-
98
Jan-
99
Jun-
99
Jan-
00
Jun-
00
Dec
-00
Jun-
01
Dec
-01
Jun-
02
Dec
-02
Jun-
03
Dec
-03
Jun-
04
Dec
-04
Jun-
05
Dec
-05
Jun-
06
Dec
-06
Jun-
07
Dec
-07
Jun-
08
Dec
-08
Jun-
09
Dec
-09
Jun-
10
CESA Labour Cost Indicator: Y-Y Change
8 500
9 500
10 500
11 500
12 500
13 500
14 500
15 500
16 500
17 500
18 500
19 500
20 500D
ec-9
7
Jun-
98
Dec
-98
Jun-
99
Dec
-99
Jun-
00
Dec
-00
Jun-
01
Dec
-01
Jun-
02
Dec
-02
Jun-
03
Dec
-03
Jun-
04
Dec
-04
Jun-
05
Dec
-05
Jun-
06
Dec
-06
Jun-
07
Dec
-07
Jun-
08
Dec
-08
Jun-
09
Dec
-09
Jun-
10
Em
ploy
men
t
2 000
3 000
4 000
5 000
6 000
7 000
8 000
9 000
10 000
11 000
Fee
inco
me
(con
stan
t pric
es)
Employment Revised Income: CPI 2000 prices Income : CESA LCI 2005 prices
Consulting Engineering IndustryEmployment vs REAL fee income (CPI / LCI Deflated)
9 500
10 500
11 500
12 500
13 500
14 500
15 500
16 500
17 500
18 500
19 500
20 500
Dec
-97
Jun-
98
Dec
-98
Jun-
99
Dec
-99
Jun-
00
Dec
-00
Jun-
01
Dec
-01
Jun-
02
Dec
-02
Jun-
03
Dec
-03
Jun-
04
Dec
-04
Jun-
05
Dec
-05
Jun-
06
Dec
-06
Jun-
07
Dec
-07
Jun-
08
Dec
-08
Jun-
09
Dec
-09
Jun-
10
Em
ploy
men
t
03006009001 2001 5001 8002 1002 4002 7003 0003 3003 6003 9004 2004 5004 8005 1005 400
Sala
ry/W
ages
(R m
ill, 2
000
pric
es)
Employment Salary/Wage bill (Constant)
Consulting Engineering IndustryEmployment vs Salary / Wage bill
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Discounting
0.0%2.0%
4.0%6.0%
8.0%10.0%
12.0%14.0%
16.0%18.0%
20.0%
%
% 15.10% 16.62% 15.30% 15.30% 18.20% 16.40% 18.90%JUN07 DEC07 JUN08 DEC08 JUN09 DEC09 JUN10
Question: What is the prevailing discount being offered in a tendering situation to clients by your firm, benchmarked against the ECSA Guideline Fee Scales?
43% of firmsdiscounted by 20% or more
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Fee income earned by Sub-disciplines: % ShareJune 2010
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%
Agricultural
Architecture
Mechanical building Services
Civil
Electrical / Electronic
Environmental
Facilities
Geotechnical
Industrial Process / Chemical
GIS
Hydraulics
Information Systems / Technology
Marine
Mechanical
Mining
Project Management
Quantity Surveying
Structural
Tow n planning
Question: What type of work did your company engage in during the past 6 months?
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Fee income earned by Sub-disciplines: % ShareJune 2009 – June 2010
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Civil
Mining
Project Management
Structural
Jun-09 Dec-09 Jun-10
Question: What type of work did your company engage in during the past 6 months? 80% of fees are earned in four
disciplines namely civil, project management,
structural and mining
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Fee income earned by Sub-disciplines: % ShareChange in the last 12 months
-10% -8% -6% -4% -2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
AgriculturalArchitecture
Mechanical building ServicesCivil
Electrical / ElectronicEnvironmental
FacilitiesGeotechnical
Industrial Process / ChemicalGIS
HydraulicsInformation Systems / Technology
MarineMechanical
MiningProject ManagementQuantity Surveying
StructuralTow n planning
Question: What type of work did your company engage in during the past 6 months?
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Jun-10
Oth
er, R
mill
200
0 pr
ices
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
Civi
l, R
mill
200
0 pr
ices
Structural Proj Mang Mining Civil
Fee income earned by Top four disciplines: R mill 2000 pricesAnnual average: 2002 – June 2010 (annualised)
Civil
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
Wat
er
Tran
spor
tatio
n
Ene
rgy
Min
ing/
Qua
rryin
g
Edu
catio
n
Hea
lth
Tour
ism
Hou
sing
Com
mer
cial
Agr
icul
ture
Oth
er
Perc
enta
ge s
hare
Dec-08 Jun-09 Dec-09 Jun-10
Fee income earned by economic sectorPercentage market share December 2008 – June 2010
Section A General Questions: Question: Income distribution per economic sector
Jun-06 Dec-06 Jun-07 Dec-07 Jun-08 Dec-08 Jun-09 Dec-09 Jun-100
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
Water (Full water cycle) Transportation (land, air, road, rail, ports)Energy (electricity, gas, hydro) Mining / QuarryingTourism / Leisure Housing (residential inc. land)Commercial
Fee income earned by key economic sectorsJune 2006 – June 2010
Section A General Questions: Question: Income distribution per economic sector
Fee income earned by key economic sectorsJune 2005 – June 2010
Jun-05Dec-
05Jun
-06Dec-
06Jun
-07Dec-
07Jun
-08Dec-
08Jun
-09Dec-
09Jun
-100
200400600800
1,0001,200
Housing
Jun-05Dec-
05Jun
-06Dec-
06Jun
-07Dec-
07Jun
-08Dec-
08Jun
-09Dec-
09Jun
-100
200400600800
1,0001,2001,4001,6001,8002,000
Water
Jun-05Dec-
05Jun
-06Dec-
06Jun
-07Dec-
07Jun
-08Dec-
08Jun
-09Dec-
09Jun
-100
5001,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,0004,500
Transportation
Jun-05Dec-
05Jun
-06Dec-
06Jun
-07Dec-
07Jun
-08Dec-
08Jun
-09Dec-
09Jun
-100
100200300400500600700
Energy
Jun-05Dec-
05Jun
-06Dec-
06Jun
-07Dec-
07Jun
-08Dec-
08Jun
-09Dec-
09Jun
-100
5001,0001,5002,0002,5003,000
Commercial
Jun-05Dec-
05Jun
-06Dec-
06Jun
-07Dec-
07Jun
-08Dec-
08Jun
-09Dec-
09Jun
-100
50100150200250300
Health
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
E-C
ape
W-C
ape
N-C
ape
F St
ate
N-W Lim
Gau
t
Mpu
Kw
az
Afr
ica
Int'l
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
% Share Change last 12 months
% S
hare
(bar
)
Provincial Market Share: June 2010Vs change in market share from June 2009
GAI
N
mar
ket
shar
e
Section A: General Questions: Question 10Income distribution per province
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
R m
ill, C
onst
ant 2
000
pric
es
E-CAPE W-CAPE GAUT KWA-NAT
E-CAPE 289 288 353 344 388 450 400 395 465 588 655 667 750 694 654 828 866
W-CAPE 538 527 518 560 478 438 572 681 1058 1164 1077 1253 1285 1 303 1 127 1191 1461
GAUT 1 380 1 343 1 120 947 1 122 1 253 1 239 1 452 1769 1954 2113 2408 2813 3 582 4 212 3485 2802
KWA-NAT 393 387 379 473 436 420 535 591 688 756 839 871 1066 1 300 1 620 1728 1280
Jun'02 Dec'02 Jun'03 Dec'03 Jun'04 Dec'04 Jun'05 'Dec'05 'Jun'06 'Dec'06 Jun'07 Dec'07 Jun'08 Dec'08 Jun'09 Dec'09 Jun'10
Fee income earned by province(High Capacity economies) – Annualised smoothed
Gauteng
Section A: General Questions: Question 10Income distribution per province
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Dec-98 Dec-99 Dec'00 Dec'01 Dec'02 Dec'03 Dec'04 'Dec'05 'Dec'06 Dec'07 Dec'08 Dec'09
Inde
x De
c'98
=100
High capacity Low capacity
Fee income earned (Constant 2000 prices)High Capacity vs lower capacity provincial economies (Smoothed)
Section A: General Questions: Question 10Income distribution per province
68.00%
70.00%
72.00%
74.00%
76.00%
78.00%
80.00%
82.00%
84.00%
86.00%
88.00%
Perc
enta
ge
% 76.04% 75.53% 80.12% 80.68% 80.70% 80.63% 80.07% 79.14% 78.25% 79.42% 81.27% 82.57% 82.07% 81.64% 80% 80.23% 83.25% 86.05% 86.95% 84.80%
Dec'00 Jun'01 Dec'01 Jun'02 Dec'02 Jun'03 Dec'03 Jun'04 Dec'04 Jun'05 'Dec'05 'Jun'06 'Dec'06 Jun'07 Dec'07 Jun'08 Dec'08 Jun'09 Dec'09 Jun'10
Fee income earned (Constant 2000 prices)% of RSA Earnings : High Capacity provincial economies
(Smoothed)
Section A: General Questions: Question 10Income distribution per province
Fee income earned : RSA vs EX-RSAR mill, 2000 prices (Annualised, smoothed)
Section A: General Questions: Question 10Income distribution per province
Dec-98
Jul-99Fe
b-00Se
p-00Apr-
01Nov
-01Jun
-02Jan
-03Aug
-03Mar-
04Oct-
04
May-05Dec-
05Jul
-06Fe
b-07Se
p-07Apr-
08Nov
-08Jun
-09Jan
-100
200400600800
1,0001,2001,4001,6001,800
01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,00010,000
Ex-RSA - left axis RSA - right axis
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
% S
hare
Jun-08Dec-08Jun-09Dec-09Jun-10
Jun-08 9.7 15.8 21 12.8 40.7
Dec-08 7 17.7 27.9 10.4 37
Jun-09 6.4 10.7 23 9.8 50.2
Dec-09 15.7 9.9 27.4 12.8 34.2
Jun-10 16.4 13.9 20.4 12.7 36.6
Central Provincial Local Parastatals Private
Fee income earned by type of client% Share
Section A: General Questions: Question 11Local (SA) Income distribution per fee paying client type, during the past 6 months
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
JUN
01
DEC
01
JUN
02
DEC
02
JUN
03
DEC
03
JUN
04
DEC
04
JUN
05
DEC
05
JUN
06
DEC
06
JUN
07
DEC
07
JUN
08
DEC
08
JUN
09
DEC
09
JUN
10
R m
ill, C
onst
ant 2
000
pric
es
CentralProvincialLocalParastatalsPrivate
Fee income earned by type of clientR mill 2000 prices
(Annualised, smoothed - avg over 2 survey periods)
Section A: General Questions: Question 11Local (SA) Income distribution per fee paying client type, during the past 6 months
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2009
0
1 000
2 000
3 000
4 000
5 000
6 000
7 000
Rm
, 200
0 pr
ices
PublicPrivate
Public 1 962 2 013 2 108 2 353 2 219 1 996 2 180 2 389 2 417 2 705 3 200 3 470 4 187 3979 5633 6556 4840 5694 5650
Private 1 595 1 627 1 634 1 471 1 440 1 513 1 366 1 290 1 407 1 437 1 941 2 498 2 587 3204 3866 3851 4870 2959 3263
JUN01 DEC01 JUN02 DEC02 JUN03 DEC03 JUN04 DEC04 JUN05 DEC05 JUN06 DEC06 JUN07 DEC07 JUN08 DEC08 JUN09 DEC09 JUN10
Fee income earned by type of clientConstant 2000 prices
(Annualised, smoothed - avg over 2 survey periods)
Section A: General Questions: Question 11Local (SA) Income distribution per fee paying client type, during the past 6 months
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Competition in tendering
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
% R
espo
nden
ts
Jun-07 0.00% 2.42% 22.11% 56.29% 19.18%
Dec-07 0.00% 3.01% 17.55% 55.57% 23.86%
Jun-08 0.00% 1.40% 20.80% 48.70% 29.10%
Dec-08 0.00% 0.00% 21.42% 42.28% 36.29%
Jun-09 0.22% 0.51% 62.73% 28.36% 8.18%
Dec-09 0.00% 0.10% 21.80% 33.50% 44.70%
Jun-10 0.00% 8.67% 3.28% 14.79% 73.26%
Very Low Low Keen Very Keen Fierce
Section B: Business Cycle Indicators - Question 16During Jan – June 2010 competition for work was (Tick selection)
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Competition in tendering
80%
82%
84%
86%
88%
90%
92%
94%
96%
98%
100%
% R
espo
nden
ts, c
ompe
titio
n k
een
to fi
erce
% 99.9% 99.9% 97.5% 98.9% 98.0% 99.3% 99.0% 98.2% 99.1% 97.8% 98.7% 97.1% 99.5% 99.1% 97.6% 96.9% 98.6% 100% 99.30 99.90 91.30
Jun-00
Dec-00
Jun-01
Dec-01
Jun-02
Dec-02
Jun-03
Dec-03
Jun-04
Dec-04
Jun-05
Dec-05
Jun-06
Dec-06
Jun-07
Dec-07
Jun-08
Dec-08
Jun-09
Dec-09
Jun-10
Section B: Business Cycle Indicators - Question 16During Jan – June 2010 competition for work was (Tick selection)
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Eng O Tech Technologist Technicians Support staff
Jun'06 Dec'06 Jun'07 Dec'07 Jun'08 Dec'08 Jun'09 Dec'09 Jun'10
% of Firms wanting to increase staff
New June 2005 survey
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Engineering Skills Shortfall
-100
102030405060708090
100
Dec
-97
Jun-
98
Dec
-98
Jun-
99
Dec
-99
Jun-
00
Dec
-00
Jun-
01
Dec
-01
Jun-
02
Dec
-02
Jun-
03
Dec
-03
Jun-
04
Dec
-04
Jun-
05
Dec
-05
Jun-
06
Dec
-06
Jun-
07
Dec
-07
Jun-
08
Dec
-08
Jun-
09
Dec
-09
Jun-
10
% o
f res
pond
ents
% Wanting to increase engineers Difficulties
Fewer firms want to increase engineers
% Experiencing difficulties
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100En
g
O T
ech
Tech
nolo
gist
Tech
nici
ans
Oth
er
PDI E
ng
PDI T
ech
PDI T
echn
o
% R
espo
nden
ts
Jun'08 Dec'08 Jun'09 Dec'09 Jun'10
Recruitment problems
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Bursaries% of Salary / Wage bill
0.00%
0.20%
0.40%
0.60%
0.80%
1.00%
1.20%
Dec-
96
Dec-
97
Jun-
98
Dec-
98
Jun-
99
Dec-
99
Jun-
00
Dec-
00
Jun-
01
Dec-
01
Jun-
02
Dec-
02
Jun-
03
Dec-
03
Jun-
04
Dec-
04
Jun-
05
Dec-
05
Jun-
06
Dec-
06
Jun-
07
Dec-
07
Jun-
08
Dec-
08
Jun-
09
Dec-
09
Jun-
10
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Dec
-96
Jun-
98
Jun-
99
Jun-
00
Jun-
01
Jun-
02
Jun-
03
Jun-
04
Jun-
05
Jun-
06
Jun-
07
Jun-
08
Jun-
09
Jun-
10
R m
ill, 2
000
pric
esBursaries
R mill 2000 prices (Annualised)
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
June
200
5
Dec
embe
r20
06
Jun-
06
Dec
-06
Jun-
07
Dec
-07
Jun-
08
Dec
-08
Jun-
09
Dec
-09
Jun-
10
Training (Salaries and Direct Training Costs) % of Payroll
Dat
a no
t ava
ilabl
e
Large % of respondents did not complete information on salaries in December 2009 survey
Dat
a no
t ava
ilabl
e
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
june
200
5
Dec
embe
r20
05
Jun-
06
Dec
-06
Jun-
07
Dec
-07
Jun-
08
Dec
-08
Jun-
09
Dec
-09
Jun-
10
Training (Salaries and Direct Training Costs) Rand millions, Constant 2000 prices
Dat
a no
t ava
ilabl
e
Large % of respondents did not complete information on salaries in December 2008 and 2009 survey
Dat
a no
t ava
ilabl
e
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0.00%
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%
2.00%
2.50%
3.00%
3.50%D
ec-9
7
Jun-
98
Dec
-98
Jun-
99
Dec
-99
Jun-
00
Dec
-00
Jun-
01
Dec
-01
Jun-
02
Dec
-02
Jun-
03
Dec
-03
Jun-
04
Dec
-04
Jun-
05
Dec
-05
Jun-
06
Dec
-06
Jun-
07
Dec
-07
Jun-
08
Dec
-08
Jun-
09
Dec
-09
Jun-
10
%Training (Direct costs only)
% of Payroll
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100De
c-97
Jun-
98
Dec-
98
Jun-
99
Dec-
99
Jun-
00
Dec-
00
Jun-
01
Dec-
01
Jun-
02
Dec-
02
Jun-
03
Dec-
03
Jun-
04
Dec-
04
Jun-
05
Dec-
05
Jun-
06
Dec-
06
Jun-
07
Dec-
07
Jun-
08
Dec-
08
Jun-
09
Dec-
09
Jun-
10
R m
ill 2
000
pric
esTraining (Direct costs)Rand millions, Constant 2000 prices
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
25000020
01
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Student enrolments in public higher education institutionsScience, Engineering & Technology
Increased by 39% between 2005 and 2007
214 341
Source: Department of Education
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
Jun-
98
Jan-
99
Jun-
99
Dec
-99
Jun-
00
Dec
-00
Jun-
01
Dec
-01
Jun-
02
Dec
-02
Jun-
03
Dec
-03
Jun-
04
Dec
-04
Jun-
05
Dec
-05
Jun-
06
Dec
-06
Jun-
07
Dec
-07
Jun-
08
Dec
-08
Jun-
09
Dec
-09
Jun-
10
Utili
satio
n
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
Net %
cha
nge
expe
ctin
g in
crea
se
Net % Change Utilisation
Industry Capacity UtilisationOf existing technical staff
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Total fee income outstanding, by client Exceeding 90 days
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Cen
tral
Prov
inci
al
Loca
l
Para
stat
als
Priv
ate
% o
f Tot
al fe
e in
com
e ea
rned
Jun-08 Dec-08 Jun-09 Dec-09 Jun-10
Fee income outstanding for longer than 90 daysJune 2010
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Total fee income outstanding for longer than 90 days% of total fee income earned
0
5
10
15
20
25De
c-99
Jun-
00
Dec-
00
Jun-
01
Dec-
01
Jun-
02
Dec-
02
Jun-
03
Dec-
03
Jun-
04
Dec-
04
Jun-
05
Dec-
05
Jun-
06
Dec-
06
Jun-
07
Dec-
07
Jun-
08
Dec-
08
Jun-
09
Dec-
09
Jun-
10
% o
f Tot
al fe
e in
com
e ea
rned
Surv
ey a
men
ded
to in
clud
e fo
reig
n cl
ient
s
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Escalation trendsYear-on-Year % Change
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Annu
al C
hang
e, %
% 8.7 6.9 5.8 5.3 5.7 9.2 5.9 1.4 3.4 4.6 6.6 11.6 7.13 5.6 5.1 5.7 5.6 6
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Based on headline consumer inflation (CPI)Forecasts Industry Insight Economist Poll
Source: ABSA
CPI Basket Revised in January 2009
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Consulting Engineering ProfessionLabour unit cost indicator: Year-on-Year % Change (Smoothed)
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
LUC 15.2% 11.4% 22.5% 21.8% 9.2% -1.9% 3.7% 15.0% 8.0% 2.88% 4.30% 14.30% 22% 11.30% 5.30% 7.20% 9.50% 10.60% 9.10% 10.20%17.80%25.50%20.60%10.70%4.30%
J un-98
Dec-98
J un-99
Dec-99
J un-00
Dec-00
J un-01
Dec-01
J un-02
Dec-02
J un-03
Dec-03
J un-04
Dec-04
J un-05
Dec-05
J un-06
Dec-06
J un-07
Dec-07
J un-08
Dec-08
J un-09
Dec-09
J un-10
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Consulting Engineering ProfessionLabour unit cost indicator: Annual Average Y-Y Chg
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
LUC 22.2% 3.7% 9.4% 5.4% 9.3% 16.3% 6.30% 10% 9.65% 21.67% 15.64% 4.30%
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Jun-10
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Typical Employment BreakdownJanuary – June 2010
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Professional Engineer Pr.Eng
Professional Architects
Professional Quantity Surveyors
Professional Other
Technologists Pr TEchENg
Technicians PrTechni
Unregistered technical staff: Engineer
Unregistered technical staff: Technologist
Unregistered technical staff: Technician
Unregistered technical staff: Other
Technical Assistants
Draughtspersons
Laboratory / Survey Assistants
Administration / Support staff
Total
Black Coloured Asian White
Typical Employment profile: January – June 2010
Total employment 19 632
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
'Dec-03
Dec-04
Jun-05
Dec-05
Jun-06
Dec-06
Dec-07
Jun-08
Dec-08
Jun-09
Dec-09
Jun-10
Black Coloured Asian White
Overall Employment Breakdown, by raceDecember 2003 – June 2010
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Dec
-99
Jun-
00
Dec
-00
Jun-
01
Dec
-01
Jun-
02
Dec
-02
Jun-
03
Dec
-03
Jun-
04
Dec
-04
Jun-
05
Dec
-05
Jun-
06
Dec
-06
Jun-
07
Dec
-07
Jun-
08
Dec
-08
Jun-
09
Dec
-09
Jun-
10
%Employment profile: Black only (excluding Asian / Colourds)
representation of total employment % Share of total employment
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
Professional Indemnity InsuranceRisk profile
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
%
Dec-07 65.2% 30.3% 4.6%Jun-08 58.7% 39.7% 1.6%Dec-08 65.8% 34.2% 0.0%Jun-09 71.4% 28.6% 0.0%Dec-09 75.0% 17.5% 7.5%Jun-10 68.80% 28.10% 3.10%
Low Medium High
In terms of firm’s perceptions of risk, close over 70% of respondents said that their firm had a low risk exposure, compared to almost 30% saying it was regarded as medium.
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%JU
N06
DEC
06
JUN
07
DEC
07
JUN
08
DEC
08
JUN
09
DEC
09
JUN
10
%
Pty Ltd CC Partnership
Equity Distribution by firm type
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
JUN
06
DEC
06
JUN
07
DEC
07
JUN
08
DEC
08
JUN
09
DEC
09
JUN
10
Ownership / Equity: % Share of total employmentPTY, CC & Partnerships
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
JUN
06
DEC
06
JUN
07
DEC
07
JUN
08
DEC
08
JUN
09
DEC
09
JUN
10
Bla
ck e
quity
as
% o
f tot
al E
quity
Black equity as % of total equity
Black Ownership / Equity: % Share of total ownership / equityPTY, CC & Partnerships
Black, including Asian & Coloured
- Women represented 4,7% of total ownership / equity compared to 6% in the June 2009 survey- Black women represented 3,5% of total ownership / equity compared to 3,4% in the December June
2009 survey
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0%
Pty_exec
Pty_nonexec
Member of CC
Partner
%
Jun-07 Dec-07 Jun-08 Dec-08 Jun-09 Dec-09 Jun-10
Jun-10 25.50% 28.60% 47.60% 0%Dec-09 19.6% 88.9% 51.8% 0.0%Jun-09 14.2% 70.0% 20.0% 0.0%Dec-08 13.5% 81.5% 36.8% 0.0%Jun-08 18.5% 72.0% 41.2% 0.0%Dec-07 16.9% 55.0% 24.1% 0.0%Jun-07 21.9% 58.5% 32.5% 7.7%
Pty_exec Pty_nonexec Member of CC Partner
Black ownership / equity as % of total ownership / equity by type of company
June 2007 – June 2010
Black includes Asian and Coloureds
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
120.0%
%
Jun-08 100.0% 72.7% 94.4% 75.0% 84.0%Dec-08 100.0% 93.0% 100.0% 75.0% 84.0%Jun-09 100.0% 93.3% 100.0% 75.0% 93.0%Dec-09 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%Jun-10 100.0% 91.0% 100.0% 100.0% 97.0%
Large Medium Small Micro Total
Quality Management System
CESA Biannual Economic and Capacity Survey January – June 2010
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
120.0%
%
Jun-08 81.8% 36.0% 11.0% 0.0% 30.1%Dec-08 87.5% 46.7% 20.0% 0.0% 42.0%Jun-09 90.0% 20.0% 20.0% 12.5% 34.8%Dec-09 90.9% 42.1% 14.3% 16.7% 45.2%Jun-10 100.0% 27.0% 17.0% 20.0% 50.0%
Large Medium Small Micro Total
ISO 9001:2000 Certificate