VALUE ENGINEERING: THE SEARCH FOR UNNECESSARY COST

S.D.GREEN and P A. POPPER

Preface

Value engineering is currently attracting considerable attention in the UK construction industry. An increasing number of leading client organisations are demanding that their building designs are subjected to the value engineering process. However, there also exists a widespread misunderstanding regarding its nature and objectives.

Value engineering has perhaps suffered by becoming the latest construction 'buzz phrase'. The terminology is often used without a true appreciation of the underlying discipline. Many practitioners are claiming to provide a value engineering service which is, in reality, often limited to the provision of advice on buildability. Other advocates of value engineering mistakenly perceive it to be a cost cutting exercise.

It is important, if the UK industry is to realise the potential benefits offered by value engineering, that the express meaning of the term is fully understood. Value engineering should not be confused with buildability. It merely draws upon the principles of buildability as it draws upon many other areas of specialist expertise. The perception of value engineering as a 'cost cutting' technique is equally false; the emphasis is on the enhancement of value rather than on the reduction of cost. The objective is to eliminate only that cost which does not contribute to value, ie unnecessary cost.

Value engineering is an established discipline, possessing both an extensive theoretical literature base and a successful track record of practice in North America. Value engineering requires the rigorous phased application of a number of distinct techniques. The precise methodology it offers provides a unique vehicle for the incorporation of a wide range of construction expertise into the design process. The construction industry has traditionally suffered from an absence of effective 'feedback'. Building details known to be defective continue to be included in new designs. Value engineering offers the opportunity to overcome this failing. The ultimate objective is the achievement of building designs which offer clients better value for money.

In common with other innovative practices which threaten the status quo, value engineering is not without its detractors. There is extensive resistance from the architectural profession; designers often perceive the results achieved as a direct criticism of their own competence. Many clients are also sceptical of the benefits of paying for value engineering as an additional service, maintaining that it should be carried by a good design team as a normal part of its duties. If value engineering is to achieve its full potential in the UK industry then both these objections will need to be overcome.

March 1990