The Purse-String Problem
- Martin Perks
- Aug 5
- 3 min read

The appetite for digital change in construction is real. So why does adoption keep stalling? The blocker is rarely the engineers. It is usually the people holding the purse strings.
A commercial director on a major rail programme was recently asked how ready the construction industry really was for a proactive, digital approach. His answer turned the question on its head. The appetite, he said, is already there. Most larger consultancies deploy artificial intelligence and digital tools as a matter of course, and the supply chain is full of people genuinely keen to work differently. If readiness were only a matter of willingness, the industry would be most of the way there already.
The stall point
The resistance lives with the budget holders, the financiers, the people who sign off the spend. To them, digital change reads as additional cost now, plus a bill for upskilling, in a sector already squeezed to the bone. That reading is not wrong. It is incomplete, because it prices the cost and ignores the exposure.
Decades of buying on lowest price have squeezed contractor and consultant margins to the point where there is no fat to fund speculative improvement. Working to two or three per cent margin means surviving the month, not experimenting. Capital is genuinely constrained, particularly in the public sector, and asking a finance director to fund something whose payback is a couple of years out is asking them to take a real risk with real scrutiny attached. The trouble is not that budget holders are wrong to hesitate. It is that the way the choice is put to them all but guarantees a no.
Changing what you are buying
The honest fix is not to nag budget holders into enthusiasm. It is to change what they are being asked to buy, and how it is put to them. Set the cost of a digital cost assurance capability against the cost of a single unrecoverable final account position, or an action for failing to pu in reasaonable procedures to prevent fraud, and it is not a close call, provided the case is made in the language a finance director actually speaks: exposure avoided, forecasts that hold, surprises that never happen.
The closest analogy is insurance. Nobody enjoys paying a premium against a fire that may never come, but no serious organisation runs a major asset uninsured, because the premium is trivial beside the cost of the one bad day. Framed as a feature, digital cost assurance loses the argument. Framed as protection against a loss that can actually be sized, it starts to win. The analogy has a limit worth conceding: assurance should be proportionate, heaviest where the value and risk are greatest, lighter where they are not.
As long as we buy assurance by the hour, we will keep under-buying it, and paying the difference at the final account.
The strongest version of the case is nearly always a specific number rather than a principle. Pick one plausible failure the programme has seen or narrowly dodged, put a value on it, and set the cost of assurance beside it. The conversation shifts from whether digital tools are a nice idea to whether spending £x is worth avoiding a well evidenced chance of losing several times £x.
There is a broader shift underneath this: buying this kind of work on the basis of value rather than hours, paying for a standard of cost certainty rather than a count of quantity surveyors at a day rate. It is harder to write into a contract, but it lines the money up with what genuinely creates value. The technology question in construction was largely solved some time ago. The question still open is commercial: how the industry brings itself to value the thing that saves it money, when the saving is a year or three away and the cost is now.
This document was produced with AI assistance. In accordance with the Human Oversight requirements of this AIMS, all AI-generated content has been reviewed, validated and approved by the Director of Black Pear Advisory Ltd before issue.
Dr Martin Perks FRICS FQSi MICW MAC
Director, Black Pear Advisory Ltd
Worcester, UK | +44 7771 865271

Comments