The real estate and construction industry has often been criticized, right on the subject, for being old-fashioned and unwilling to develop its operations and products or listen to its customers. But how does the Finnish real estate and construction industry compare to other countries, for example the United States? This is what we set out to find out behind the rapako.
Labor productivity, measured by value added, has stagnated in the construction sector in Finland to the level of the 1970s. Although productivity has not improved in absolute terms, buildings are certainly more complex and contain, for example, more technology than 50 years ago.
According to studies, there have been some differences in development between different countries, but comparison is not easy. For example, the same things are talked about in different terms in different countries, and comparing the degree of maturity of things is also really challenging. Often the comparison requires seeing with your own eyes.
In June 2022, we took a study trip to the west and east coasts of the United States with an agile kira industry group. The goal was to gain an understanding of how the Finnish real estate and construction industry and research in the field compare to the regions of San Francisco and New York.
We got to know local pioneering and technology companies, pre-fabrication production, startups and two top universities in the field. Of course, the conversation with individual organizations or people does not meet the criteria of critical research, but it gave some sort of picture of the current situation.
Three things in which the Finns are one step ahead
The construction industry in the USA is struggling with many topics we are also familiar with, the biggest of which was the shortage of skilled labor. Correspondingly, the industry is very fragmented and competitive, the main contractors' project margins are even lower than the Finnish level. Neither had significant leaps in productivity or technological breakthroughs been achieved from the point of view of individual companies or the industry.
In many places, we noticed that Finns are at the same level or even ahead of our American colleagues. We have a strong culture of working together and trust, the fruits of which include YSE, RYHT contract terms, RATU publications, the BES system, and the increasing use of the alliance implementation method. The level of information modeling is also at a significantly better level in Finland, and often in the United States "real design" is still done separately from 3D modeling.
The third thing where we are clearly ahead of the US kira industry is our understanding of the green transition, its risks and opportunities. This knowledge of the green transition can create a genuine competitive advantage for Finnish companies and new business in the world's second largest kira market.
Three factors where we have to tighten up
We also have things to learn. The biggest impression was the enormous pride of all the people we met in their own work and appreciation for what others do. To a Finnish ear, this bragging may sound like self-righteousness at first, but in my opinion, genuine pride in one's work and respect for the work of others are the basis of the quality of construction.
Another consideration was how pioneering companies boldly pilot new technologies and startups and invest in university collaboration. These companies also had the right attitude towards the pilots, i.e. they were not supposed to produce results immediately, but the effects were supposed to be achieved through long-term work in the spirit of continuous learning.
The companies also invested in genuine, long-term partnerships with designers, subcontractors and product suppliers. With these partners, the planning of the projects started already months or years before the hoe hit the ground. Of course, we have also tried a similar development phase, especially in alliance projects.
The role of universities was more clear than in Finland in researching and creating future solutions for the construction industry and in challenging current operating models, and not just in producing top talent for the industry. The universities also had strong ties to companies in the field that co-financed research or were involved in similar consortiums like ours, Aalto University's Building 2030 and Talotekniikki 2030.
However, the main thing that stuck in my mind was that there is nothing to be ashamed of in the Finnish kira industry, on the contrary. The fact that we have an old culture of working together gives us a head start in developing the industry together and harmonizing systems and processes. We should invest even more in training in the field and in tki, so that we could even dream of reaching the 4 percent tki investment goal. This is a common challenge of the entire industry, not of an individual company. If we succeed, we have excellent conditions for a genuine leap in productivity that benefits everyone, including society.
The text has been published in Rakennuslehti on February 16.9.2022, XNUMX.
Antti Aaltonen
Director, Construction Development
antti.aaltonen@rt.fi + 358 40 514 3626Confederation of Finnish Construction Industries (CFCI)
Write a comment