THE EVOLUTION OF THE BRITISH CONTRACTING SYSTEM

Refurbishing Canterbury Cathedral A Courtier's Castle The Queen Anne Churches The London Institution From Brill Farm to Somers Town The Millwall Docks

Refurbishing Canterbury Cathedral In September 1174, the choir of Canterbury Cathedral was badly damaged in a fire. Various French and English masters were consulted, but the one who won the confidence of the monks was William of Sens. After a careful survey, he recommended the demolition of the reamains of the choir and the construction of a new structure. He arranged the purchase of the stone from quarries in Caen, and devised the lifting tackle for the loading and unloading of the ships that were to transport it across the channel. He also prepared the templates for the masons who were doing the actual carving. He supervised the works in detail for the next five years, until he was badly crippled in a fall when a scaffolding collapsed under him. After attempting to direct the works from his bed, he resigned his commission and returned to France, to be replaced by an English master who was also called William. As the works progressed, it became possible to place the relics of the saints rescued from the tombs in the old choir in their new resting places, and use parts of the structure for worship by 1180. Although no progress was made in 1183 due to lack of funds, 1184 saw the substantial completion of the works with the roofing of the structures. (Harvey 1972 Appendix A) The Craft System Market relations in construction had emerged in the middle ages as the state and church required large concentrations of labour to build their castles and cathedrals, particularly in the period of relative labour shortage after the Black Death in the mid fourteenth century. These demands led to a labour market, particularly for masons, outside the traditional feudal ties of obligation which was how most building was accomplished during the period (Locock 1992). In this period the master craftsman predominated and the prospective owner of the building bought the materials directly, and paid the labour by the day in what might be called the craft system. Two examples of this system in operation are provided in The Refurbishment of Canterbury Cathedral, and A Courtier's Castle. On larger projects such as cathedrals, considerable amounts of design activity were required in order to coordinate the works. This was usually carried out by master-masons who became increasingly specialised in design, as opposed to construction, activities, and much sought after by bishops wishing to glorify God in gothic stone (Harvey 1972). However, these "architects" grew from the ranks of masons, and remained intimately involved with the work of the craftsmen they directed. As Kostof put it "the actual separation of the architect conceiver from the reality of the building process did not occur until the Italian Renaissance" (1977 p 93). The craft system passed on its distinctive organisation of construction around the materials used - carpenter, mason, and so on - which is still prevalent today. In the craft system, conception and construction were the combined responsibility of the master craftsmen, while control was carried out directly by agents of the client such as its clerk of works. Clients were also very happy to involve themselves deeply in the design and construction processes. A Courtier's Castle The workings of the craft system can be illustrated by the building of Kirby Muxloe Castle . Work commenced in 1480 on a large rectangle with towers at each corner on the site of an earlier castle, from which were incorporated some of the foundations. The client, Lord Hastings appointed his steward as clerk of works who made all the payments to the craftsmen and labourers who were paid on day-rates. Many of the workers were local, but the labourers came from Wales, while a number of bricklayers came from Flanders to execute patterned brickwork. The master-mason was not on site continually, but came for a few weeks each year. Unfortunately, both the client and the project were cut short when the former was beheaded in June 1483 by "a poisonous bunch-backed toad", but his widow carried on and completed the works that were already in hand (Emery 1989). The Craft System The rise of a rich merchant class in fifteenth and sixteenth century Florence led to the emergence of a new actor - the architect - who was capable of articulating the merchants' desire for expression through building (Goldthwaite 1980). The architect took on the task of coordinating the building crafts that had emerged from the medieval guilds, but now had a much reduced range of responsibilities in what might be called the trade system, which became widespread throughout Europe. It is distinguished from the craft system by the role of the architect independent of the crafts. Perhaps the most important legacy of the trade system is in the organisation of conception in the role of the architect - particularly as theorised by Alberti - as a unique combination of conception and control actor. Acting simultaneously as the artist of the built form, the client's advisor on cultural matters, and coordinator of the construction process, the architect slowly developed as the principal actor in the system. For the first time, under the trade system, a project actor emerged who could preconceive the built form on behalf of the client independently of the construction process. The trade system was slow to diffuse to England, but during the 16th century houses became more explicitly designed (Airs 1978; Newman 1988). During the great rebuilding of country houses during Tudor era (Hoskins 1953; Platt 1994), an architectural consciousness slowly emerged with Robert Smythson, a master-mason, as its best known exponent. Inigo Jones, widely acknowledged as the first English architect in the Renaissance sense, practised as Surveyor of the King's Works during the first half of the 17th Century. However, it was not until the even larger rebuilding of country houses after the restoration (Machin 1977; Platt 1994), and the rebuilding of London after the Great Fire of 1666 that the trade system became fully established, heralding the first golden age of English architecture. Because the works were now conceived in advance, new forms of payment could emerge, and the tradesmen were increasingly paid on a measure and value basis, in which they were paid on the basis of the work done. Thompson (1968) argues that the number of surveying treatises published at the time show that surveying, in the sense of after-measurement, was also being placed on a much more systematic footing. Yeoman's study of the building of the Queen Anne Churches provides a good illustration of the logic of the trade system. The Queen Anne Churches In the early 18th century, a programme of church building was commissioned - a programme that became known as the. "Queen Anne churches". The surveyors appointed were responsible for designing the church, providing an estimate of its costs, selecting the trade contractors, measuring their work, and supervising the works on site. These surveyors include some of the most illustrious names of English architecture, notably Hawkemore. Contractors for each trade were selected on the basis of a competitive tender - known as a "proposal" - organised at the appropriate point in the construction programme. Masonry was by far the most important trade, but bricklaying, plastering, carpentry, plumbing and plastering were also significant elements of the works. The tender was on a schedule of rates, and payment was on the basis of the weight or quantity of materials fixed, or the area of work completed against this schedule. While the proposals were against a previously developed architectural design, they tended to include such details as timber sizes. The surveyors were also in the habit of changing the design as the works progressed. Trade contractors normally supplied their own materials and labour. In addition, dayworks would also be agreed with the surveyor. Cost and time overruns were endemic on this building programme, and there were continual problems with the quality of the bricks supplied to the works by the bricklaying trade contractors (Yeomans1988). The Trade System Under the pressures generated by the French wars in particular, and the industrial revolution more generally, the trade system began to break down. The Barrack Office was established in 1793 in order to provide accommodation for the unprecedentedly large numbers of soldiers mobilised against France. At first this relied upon the trade system, but the urgency of the building programme meant that a shift to "contracting in gross" where a single contractor undertook financial responsibility the entire works in a single contract was made. Thus both pre-design and pre-measurement became essential parts of the new system, and the first important British general contractor - Copland - emerged. A government enquiry in 1828 pronounced in favour of the new system, despite complaints from architects. Although contracting "by the great" was not unknown in previous centuries (Locock 1992), it does not appear to have been in conjunction with a separate surveyor, and was not typical. The dynamics behind the emergence of the professional system are well illustrated by Cubitt's London Institution project. The London Institution London Institution contract was undertaken by Cubitt in 1815. This building, now demolished, was let on a contracting in gross basis, to a very tight programme. It was a very large contract for its time, and the Institution was in a hurry for the building. Stiff penalty clauses for non-completion within the specified time were therefore attached to the contract. In order to reduce his risk in the face of this penalty clause, Cubitt decided to employ all the trades directly, rather than subcontracting them. The project ran into a number of problems that remain depressingly familiar - the haste of the work meant inadequate preparation; considerable modifications were required to the foundations of the building; the architect was slow to deliver the working drawings; and considerable cost overruns were experienced. However, the project was successfully completed, the blame for the problems fell largely on the architect, and the project formed the basis of Cubitt's subsequent career (Hobhouse 1971 chap 1) The Emerging Professional System Increasingly during the latter part of the 18th century, the task of after-measurement had been delegated to the measurer by the architect. As general contracting emerged, the measurer began to take responsibility for measuring the quantities to be built in advance so as to facilitate the accuracy and fairness of the tendering process. This new task became institutionalised in the role of the quantity surveyor, around the distinctive competence of the bill of quantity as a control tool. The task of coordinating the separate trades was delegated to the new master builder who took on the entire works for a fixed price. The architect was left mainly with the tasks of conception and quality control; indeed those occupied with measuring or building were excluded from membership of the Institute of Architects which was founded in 1834. Thus the architect's role became even more clearly focused on conception, with important control tasks delegated to the quantity surveyor, and all responsibilities for coordinating construction passed to the general contractor. These changes had the advantage for the architect of reinforcing his role as a professional rather than a craftsman; a gentleman rather than a tradesman (Saint 1983; Wilton-Ely 1977). These developments were not a foregone conclusion. Much of what we now call Georgian London (Summerson 1991) had been built by speculative developers, some of whom aspired to considerable architectural status. The like of Nash and Adam were developer/architects, yet in the debates around the role of the newly emerging architectural identity, the strand of architect/surveyors which descended from Jones and Wren through to Soane as crown appointed surveyors won the day, as the developer/architects faced rising competition from the developer/builders such as Cubitt (Saint 1983 chap 3). Webster (1995) argues that the professional position of the architect was much reinforced by the provisions of the 1818 Church Building Act which provided for the formalisation of the architectural role. From the end of the 17th century on, this speculative system has existed alongside the trade and professional systems, yet stands apart because its logic of action is the valorisation of land, rather than generating profits from the construction process itself. Its dynamics are well illustrated by the building of Somers Town. From Brill Farm to Somers Town The development of the Somers Town area of London illustrates the way in which the speculative system, by which so much of London was built, operated. The architect/developer Leroux took on the principal lease of the area of Brill Farm from Lord Somers in 1783 in return for the additional income from the improved ground rents with the obligation to provide all the urban infrastructure for the area. Leroux then sold building leases on a 99 year basis to artisanal builders who developed a small number of units at a time, and were reimbursed for their efforts through renting out the completed houses to tenants. Leroux also had the rights from Lord Somers to manufacture bricks on the site, which he then sold to the artisanal builder/ developers. The rhythm of brick-making meant that Leroux had an interest in ensuring a steady rate of construction on the site, and he facilitated this through providing mortgages to the developer builders, and even loans for working capital. Progress was checked by the recession of the 1790s, and when building restarted in the early 1800s under John Johnson, a paving contractor who had acquired Leroux's interest after his death, the developer builders were more substantial enterprises taking on leases for up to 10 houses at a time. This was associated with a shift towards maximising not the ground rents (returns on infrastructure investments), but rather building rents (returns on building investments), and as a result the density of the development rose, and its quality fell (Clarke 1992 Part II). The Speculative System The most important feature of this system - which may be called the professional system - was the general contractor undertaking work conceived by others, and subject to independent control. For the first time, a project actor emerged to whom the client could effectively transfer some of the risks inherent in the construction process. During the same period in the early 19th century many of the institutions that later served to give the system is enormous momentum were founded - the Institution of Civil Engineers in 1818; the (Royal) Institute of British Architects in 1834: and the (Royal) Institution of Chartered Surveyors in 1868. By the 1860's the general contracting system was fully established with price-based competitive tendering for works in response to full bills of quantities which relied upon fully detailed drawings for their production widespread (Summerson 1973). Encouraged by Ruskin, architects increasingly defined themselves around a distinctive competence based on creativity; as artists rather than intimate participants in the construction process (Saint 1983 chap 8). The Millwall Docks The way in which the charter system worked is well illustrated by the construction the Millwall Docks, currently the site of the Canary Wharf development. The story is complex, but the basic details of interest here are that the docks were promoted by a loose consortium of a railway engineer, and two civil engineering contractors. Once the act of parliament had been obtained in 1864, the new company pressed ahead with a public subscription for capital. This was underwritten by the English branch of Crédit Mobilier. Immediately upon conclusion of the financement in March 1866, the construction contract was signed with the two promoting contractors, who included in their contract sum the costs of providing cover for the shareholders loans for the first two years of the project. However, this was already well in excess of the company's approved borrowing power. Lack of confidence in the management, generated by some rather dubious dealings led to many shareholders not meeting the second call for funds, and loan capital had to be sought. The financial collapse in May 1866 meant that while a further act of parliament raised the capitalisation ceiling, there was no chance of raising further funds. The sponsoring contractors therefore provided the working capital themselves. However, the crisis also hit shipbuilding on the Thames very severely, and meant that the original market for the dock was now in question. Further capital had to be raised to fund investments in warehousing and other transport dock installations. The docks opened for business in March 1868 following much acrimony between the contractors and the company which completed the works using direct labour. The ensuing court case was dropped in favour of a negotiated settlement in which the promoting contractors were paid the outstanding sums they were owed in equity (Guillery 1990). The Charter System In civil engineering the trend had a different trajectory, but a similar outcome in the adoption of the professional system during the second half of the 19th century. The building of the infrastructure of the first industrial nation - turnpikes, canals, and railways was undertaken on the basis of private promotion. These promoters were sometimes landowners or other interested parties, but particularly with the advent of the railways, they were themselves engineers such as the Stephensons and the Brunels. Initially, the actual works were divided into small lots and let to local contractors who were closely supervised by the engineers. During the 1830s, Joseph Locke on the Grand Junction Railway developed the role of the general contractor to take over all a broader responsibility for the works in partnership with the engineer (Joby 1983). As the momentum of railway building grew, contractors such as Thomas Brassey increasingly took over the promotion task, and between 1844 and 1866, half the lines were promoted by contractors, often working in partnership with engineers. In 1845, Peto began the practice of accepting payment in the shares of the line being built (Joby 1983). The 1850s saw the emergence of project finance companies such as Crédit Mobilier working in close collaboration with the great contractors (Middlemas 1963), and the railway contractors were increasingly vertically integrated operations, providing rolling stock as well as the tracks. The logic of action in what may be called the charter system is illustrated by the building of the Millwall Docks. The financial crash of 1866 took away much of the competitive advantage of the promoter-contractors, and banks increasingly preferred to lend to governments and established firms rather than to finance projects directly. Clients were increasingly public authorities such as the Metropolitan Board of Works, and during the last quarter of the century competitive tendering for civil engineering contracts became universal (Middlemas 1963). The railway companies increasingly developed their own engineering expertise. The consulting engineer became more important, earning Brunel's jibe that the consulting engineer was a man who was prepared to sell his name but nothing more (Rolt 1974 p 239), while the enterprise increasingly took the form of the civil engineering contractor of today. It is notable that while some of today's names such as McAlpine and Mowlem stem from this period, none stem from the earlier period of contactor-promoters. The main difference from the contracting system in building was that no equivalent of the quantity surveyor emerged - surveying remained a sub-discipline within engineering, and the engineer retained a strong control role in addition to the conception role. While the crash of 1866 is undoubtedly the proximate cause of this shift to a professional system in civil engineering, it can also be located within a more general shift after 1860 from a society dominated by the entrepreneurial ideal and regulated by Smith's hidden hand, towards the beginnings of a society dominated by the professional ideal in which the role of the state was to regulate the free market in the interests of the wider community. This "implied a major change in attitude towards the entrepreneur, from the assumption that he could, unless proved otherwise, be trusted to pursue the common good by pursuing his own self-interest to the assumption that, unless the temptation to exploit the weak and the community at large were removed, he would pursue his own self-interest to the detriment of the common good" (Perkin, 1969 p 439). The manifestation of this more general societal development within the contracting system was the insulation of the activities facing the highest uncertainty in the design stages from market forces altogether through the development of the professionally organised consultant engineer reimbursed on a fee basis, and the evolution of control actors responsible for regulating those activities that remained subject to market forces - principally construction - on behalf of the client and the wider community. As the public sector became a client of greater and greater importance in the market, it opted for the professional system, seeking reassurance from appointed architects, quantity surveyors, and consulting engineers for conception and control, and relying on competitive tendering for construction on fully detailed designs. This generated generally high standards in the built product and met public concern for transparency and accountability in the system, but led to relatively high costs and a deskilling of those responsible for construction. A number of themes can be identified in these developments. Firstly, the changes are, to a very important extent, associated with changes in the nature of the client and its needs. The principal client, if that is not too much of an anachronism, for the craft system was the church, and to a lesser extent the crown (Knoop and Jones 1949 chap 2). The emergence of the architect/surveyor and the trade system is associated with the rise of rich merchants, and an educated aristocracy influenced by the ideals of the renaissance (Goldthwaite 1980). As Summerson put it, "taste in architecture arrived in London about 1615: taste, that is, in the exclusive, snobbish sense of the recognition of certain fixed values by certain people" (1991 p 15). The emergence of the professional system in the UK is associated with the emergence of new types of clients needing new types of buildings associated with the industrial revolution, but particularly with the large-scale building programmes mounted by the crown during the French wars (Cooney 1955). Secondly these developments are associated with important changes in the organisation of labour. The medieval mason was a wage labourer, outside the traditional guild system of the towns (Knoop and Jones 1949 chap 6), but he was not a free labourer as impressment was a common form of recruitment to projects. As the trade system developed, the guild became more important in the supply of labour, but this was a different guild from the medieval one. Increasingly, guilds became hierarchical rather than egalitarian organisations (Clarke 1981; Leeson 1980), ensuring apprenticeship standards and restricting the supply of labour. The rise of the professional system coincided with the birth of the first trade unions. The Operative Builders Union was founded in 1832, and mounted a series of strikes against general contractors (Postgate 1923). Although it did itself not last long, the OBU was the forerunner of the building trade unions which emerged during the latter part of the 19th century. Thirdly, while these succeeding systems replaced each other as the dominant model, the earlier ones survived to meet particular client needs. Particularly in the vernacular tradition, the craft system survived, and has a place today in the repair and maintenance sector as well as its more pervasive legacy of the division of labour on site. The trades system survived well into the 20th century in Scotland and elsewhere in Europe, and left its profound legacy of the architectural role. The history is more one of successive layering than elimination. Self-build, too, remained very important throughout the period, which today is characterised by do-it-yourself. Fourthly, alongside these systems, at least from the 17th century on, was a speculative system whose logic of action was aimed at the valorisation of land through building housing, rather than the meeting of a specific client need. Much of London's housing was built in this manner, and it remains a major element in the organisation of the British construction industry today. In terms of its labour organisation, at least, it relies heavily on an adaptation of the craft system in which quasi-firms consisting of small subcontractors and labour-only gangs are mobilised directly by the developer "client". It was not until the implementation of the Housing and Town Planning Act of 1919 that a significant proportion of house-building came within the professional system, and even at its peak such social housing accounted for only about one half of all output. Fifthly, the method of establishing the price for the work changed in important ways with profound consequences for the motivation of project actors within each system. The medieval mason was paid on a time basis. These rates were subject to market forces, and the periodic attempts to regulate wages by law generally failed. However, there was little motivation to improve productivity or change methods, and the client had no way of passing risk onto others. A more sophisticated system of measure and value became associated with the trade system, where each master tradesman was paid a sum in proportion to the amount of work completed related to the cost of inputs plus a mark-up for profit. While the award of the contract by competition did provide some incentive to reduce input costs, risks associated with the works remained with the client. Competitive tendering on a lump sum basis was first associated with the contracts for military works during the Napoleonic wars (Cooney 1955), and rapidly became the norm. This is turn, stimulated further developments in the surveying role and led to the emergence of the quantity surveyor. Competitive tendering for general contracts intensified competition, and many risks associated with budget and programme, particularly the latter, could now be more effectively transferred. Each of the three systems, in their ideal-typical forms, have their own way of solving the problems of conception, construction and control. The craft system, combines all three roles, in the activities of the mason, while the trade system witnesses the separate definition of separate actors for conception and control on the one hand, and construction on the other. One of the professional system's most distinctive features is the separation of the conception and control functions, together with a reinforcement of the construction function with development of the general contractor. The next section will explore the professional system in more detail.