## No turning back 

**An industry ready to transcend**

2021 Global Construction Survey


-----

#### Turning point or business as usual?

In the 20 years that we’ve been surveying project owners The past 18 months have seen some welcome changes
and engineering and construction companies’ performance, in approach to major projects. There’s been an imperative
we’ve never lost sight of their core objectives: to deliver step change in the use of remote and collaborative
high-quality projects on schedule and on budget. Over technology, in order to keep projects running despite fewer
decades, the industry has invested heavily in construction people on site. We’ve also witnessed a renewed spirit of
methods, controls, risk management and technology in collaboration, as owners acknowledged the truly unique
pursuit of these goals. nature of the pandemic and lockdowns and accepted their

share of the associated risks and costs. Having come

However, increasing project complexity, plus the pressure

through this difficult period relatively unscathed, there’s a

to build bigger, faster and more cost-effectively, has

sense that contractors may finally be turning their backs

outpaced the ability to control risks, costs and schedules,

on projects with unmanageable risks that could jeopardize

resulting in continued failures—sometimes, regrettably, on

their entire business. We’ve seen too many instances

an epic scale.

where a few poor-performing mega-projects can destroy an

Which is why it’s so pleasing to report how the sector esteemed legacy.
responded to the pandemic. Yes, most of the players

Are these accommodations a signal of more permanent

weren’t fully prepared. And yes, companies felt a lot of pain

shifts or merely temporary adjustments?

in terms of cost overruns and schedule delays. But, with the
exception of only a few sectors, contractors had enough True and meaningful transformational innovation in
diversity in their portfolios to ride the shocks, as owners construction techniques is long overdue. It also remains
continued to fund public and private projects like healthcare to be seen whether, once a form of ‘normality’ returns,
facilities, wind farms, data centers, roads, rail and bridges. engineering and construction companies continue to shun

high-risk, turnkey projects. Let’s hope that leaders work

Consequently, there’s an abundance of positivity, with

together to establish a more optimal way to allocate risk to

two-thirds of owners predicting an expansion in their

those most capable of bearing it.

capital programs, and half of all respondents are ‘very’
or ‘somewhat’ optimistic about the future direction of the
construction market. A vast majority of contractors expect
revenue growth over the next year, and nearly 30 percent
believe this will be 10 percent or more.


-----

This 13th edition of KPMG’s Global Construction Survey **Geno Armstrong**
also shines a light on the significant challenge of diversity International Sector Leader—
in the sector. Enriching the talent pool with a wider range Engineering & Construction
of skills and perspectives can bring enormous benefits, KPMG International
creating more equal and inclusive working environments
and helping to attract the best young people to the industry.

As industry professionals who have worked in engineering

**Clay Gilge**

and construction for many years, we maintain a passion for

Lead, Major Projects Advisory

the sector and an admiration for the ‘can-do’ attitude and

KPMG in the US

fortitude shown by all those engaged in projects, large or
small. We sincerely hope that we’re on the cusp of a long
overdue era of progress characterized by sophisticated
risk management and dramatically improved project

**Kevin Max**

performance.

Principal, Major Projects Advisory

On behalf of our team, we would like to personally thank all KPMG in the US
those who took time out of their busy lives to contribute to
the annual survey, which serves as a platform for continued
dialogue and debate on advancing the industry.


-----

#### Contents


##### 4


##### 2


##### 3


##### 1


**Resilience:**
Paradigm shift
opportunity

Recognizing resilience
as a core capability.

##### 5


**Technology and**
**innovation:**
Time to be bold and
brave

Coherent adoption of
technologies to enhance
project performance.


**Integrated risk**
**management:**
A joined-up view of
risk

Taking a high-level,
cross-enterprise
view of risk.


**Portfolio project**
**management:**
The impossible job?

Intelligence over intuition
leads to more rational
planning.


**Diversity, equity**
**and inclusion:**
Enriching capabilities
through diversity—
from a low base

Companies with higher
diversity can outperform
their peers.


##### 7


##### 6


##### 8


**Transcendent** **About the** **Contacts**
**action plan** **survey**


-----

# Resilience

##### Paradigm shift opportunity


-----

The engineering and construction industry is accustomed to coping with
disruption. Whether it’s macroeconomic and financial cycles, natural and manmade disasters, or increasingly varying and impactful weather conditions, the
sector routinely overcomes design, schedule and budget changes, supply
delays, equipment failure, labor disputes and accidents.

And so it was with COVID-19, where all over the world, projects continued
in the face of remote working, lower workforce numbers allowed onsite, and
illness. Although just 36 percent of respondents say they were ‘well prepared’
for the pandemic, the vast majority feel they were able to respond quickly and
decisively recover (Figure 1).

**Figure 1: How did your organization respond to the pandemic?**


70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%


62% [64%]


59%


2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 0%

40%

36%

34%


Well prepared; Not prepared Responded May not fully
responded but responded slowly and recover
immediately and quickly and expect a delayed
adapted well with decisively to recovery
little impact recover


Total (n=186) Engineering/Construction
firm (n=113)

Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


Project or infrastructure owner
organization (n=73)


**Survey participant feedback**

We deliver in an
environment of
continuous change,
adapting to the
conditions of the
physical location of our
projects, interacting
with multiple third
parties who influence
the cost or duration
of our projects, and
coping with a very
dynamic workforce.


-----

Rebalancing contract risk


For many years now the sector has been looking at ways
to break the cycle of at-risk, lump-sum contracts. These
‘bet the farm’ projects carry a significant risk imbalance
weighted heavily in favor of owners, placing existential
pressure on contractors. All it takes is for one contractor to
accept such a burden, and others follow suit in a vicious
cycle. Recently, however, for complex, multi-year, megaprojects, contractors have been shifting to hybrid or costplus arrangements with lower liability for cost and schedule
overruns.

Consequently, project owners, faced with a shared
responsibility for risks, are now taking greater interest


in controls over scoping, budgeting, and planning, and
investing in risk management to support their capital
investment decisions.

The pandemic accelerated the risk transfer away from
contractors and also saw an unusually high level of
cooperation, to cope with the increased impacts on
cost and schedule. Owners were largely appreciative
of the challenges—most notably the health and safety
restrictions—and, as our survey suggests, appeared
willing to absorb a higher proportion of cost overruns;
consequently respondents from owner organizations were
considerably more likely to suffer excess costs (Figure 2).


**Figure 2: Percentage of projects experiencing a schedule delay or cost impact attributable to**
**COVID-19?**


n=

186

113

73


Total

Engineering/Construction firm

Project or infrastructure
owner organization


2% 19% 18% 19% 37% 6%

1% 22% 19% 20% 31% 6%

3% 14% 15% 16% 47% 5%


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

0% 1–5% 6–10% 11–20% More than 20% Don’t know/not sure

Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


-----

Acquiring tools for resilience


[In KPMG’s 2017 Global Construction Survey, Make it or](https://home.kpmg/xx/en/home/insights/2017/10/global-construction-survey-make-it-or-break-it.html)
_[break it, fewer than half of respondents had a technology](https://home.kpmg/xx/en/home/insights/2017/10/global-construction-survey-make-it-or-break-it.html)_
road map for improving project controls, and only a fifth
used project management information systems (PMIS)


across all projects. Fast-forward 4 years and both
contractors and owners report technology as the second
most important capability to help deal with disruptive events
(like COVID-19 and other shocks) (Figure 3).


**Figure 3: Rate the attributes that influence your organization’s success or failure in dealing with**
**disruptive events.**


Average

3.4


Ownership

Company leadership

Workplace demographics

Adoption of technology

Focus on innovation

Size and scale

Regions of operations

Maturity of business
continuity programs

Industry focus


49% 27% 24%


4.6

3.3

4.0

3.7

3.7

3.7

3.8

3.8


92% 7% 1%

42% 41% 17%

77% 17% 6%

60% 32% 9%

62% 28% 10%

62% 26% 12%

67% 27% 6%

65% 25% 11%


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

4–5 More important 3 Neutral 1–2 Less important

Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


The sudden COVID-19 lock downs, experienced in
countries around the world, has forced companies’ hands
in improving communications and connectivity, to keep
projects running while adhering to far stricter health and
safety criteria. Having enjoyed the dramatic improvements
from remote working and digital collaboration, 50 percent
of engineering and construction firms (and 33 percent
of project owners) plan to build on this with significant
investment in technologies designed to enhance their
delivery of capital programs (Figure 16, page 33).


Other factors driving resilience are strong company
leadership, diversity of regional operations, business
continuity planning, and innovation. When asked how they
could improve their resilience, respondents cite financial
management, risk management, and labor/resource
management as the top three areas of focus, along with
supply chain and governance.


-----

Recognizing resilience as a
core capability


The engineering and construction sector has started to
recognize that it’s not enough to simply respond effectively
to shocks, and that resilience must be operationalized and
treated as a key strength.


A large majority of respondents (87 percent) say it’s very
or quite important to plan for resilience in capital projects/
programs (Figure 4), while an even larger proportion are
committing resources to achieve this goal (Figure 5).


**Figure 4: How important is building resilience into the delivery of your organization’s capital projects**
**and programs?**



70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

|Col1|n= 186 113 73|
|---|---|
||60% 54% 50% 33% 35% 32% 15% 12% 7% 1% 0% 1% 0% 1% 0%|
|||
|||
|||
|||
|||
|||


Total


Engineering/Construction firm


Project or infrastructure
owner organization


5 Very important 4 3 2 1 Not at all important


Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


**Figure 5: What level of commitment is your organization taking to improve resilience of your capital**
**projects and programs to future disruptive events?**


n=

186

113

73


Total

Engineering/Construction firm

Project or infrastructure
owner organization


25% 57% 11% 4% 2%


27% 52% 14% 4% 3%

22% 64% 7% 5% 1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Completed In-process Planning No action Don’t know/not sure

**Survey participant feedback**


Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


We are continuously looking to improve resilience. As a general contractor, that often means
looking at the diversity of the projects we pursue ... to protect ourselves in the event of
economic changes, be that in the private or public sector.


-----

KPMG thinks:

**Adapting to permanent disruption could increase efficiency**


In many respects, the sector responded admirably to the
challenges of COVID-19. Owners tended to acknowledge
the unforeseen pressures on contractors and frequently
compensated them for delays. The move away from
imbalanced, fixed-price contracts feels like a re-balancing
of risk after too many years of contractors suffering huge
losses, which in some cases pushed companies into
liquidation—with inevitable knock-on effects for owners
who saw projects stalled. Hopefully this will signal a more
collaborative approach to risk sharing that should benefit
all players, with risks allocated to those most equipped to
manage them. It would be unfortunate if over-competitive
bidding once again saw contractors saddled with burdens
that they couldn’t live up to.

The pandemic also meant that contractors had to work in
different and smarter ways, speeding up the adoption of
innovative technologies like video communications, cloudshared files and walk-throughs by drones. This has been a
game changer for efficiency, enabling project managers to
communicate remotely, change plans in real time and track
people on site, enabling projects to proceed at pace. It


feels like we’re embracing a new breed of agile specialists
working anytime from anywhere.

As vaccines are rolled out, the pandemic appears to be
slowing in many parts of the world, but that doesn’t mean
that other emerging risks won’t surface. Both owners and
contractors will have to plan for continued horizontal and
vertical integration of the construction supply chain in the
form of business consolidation and reorganization. These
changes are driven by improved productivity (a result of
technology integration) and shifts in regional demand
for construction services. Industry leaders will continue
to integrate diversity and inclusion into recruitment and
training, changing patterns of government infrastructure
investment, new social policies and regulatory changes,
and rising investor demands for higher environmental,
social and governance (ESG) standards.

Such challenges can only be met by a strong focus on
assessing, prioritizing and responding to risks, and a full
understanding of the impact of future disruption on the
workforce, the operations, costs, revenue and reputation.


-----

**View from the industry**

Integrated project delivery is a concept that’s coming
of age. As an owner, we have seconded our people
to the vendor, with a ‘one team’ concept, to make
them and us more successful. Now we can go into to
a room and talk to project managers or construction
managers, and I honestly don’t know which company
they work for. This approach could work for any of our
vendors and it really speeds up the project. The lesson
here is to integrate and work together, with more
transparency.

**Gary Rose,**
_Deputy Vice President,_
_Ontario Power Generation_


**View from the industry**

The digital and technological environment around us
is forcing change more rapidly. We can’t continue as
we are. Highways England is taking the opportunity
to consider how best we contract with our supply
chain partners and get serious about an integrated
approach. This is about our operating model: how we
better understand the supply chain at every level in
order to extract value, and how we influence suppliers
to invest in digital adaption and drive innovation.

We must ensure that our partners get plenty of
opportunity and that we are working seamlessly with
them through our commercial models. We can’t just
wish things to be true. We work and partner with
private sector organizations and we must help them
shape their investment and change towards the new
digital world.

**Peter Mumford,**
_Executive Director, Major Projects & Capital_
_Portfolio Management,_
_Highways England_


-----

# Integrated risk management

##### A joined-up view of risk


-----

In the very first KPMG Global Construction Survey in 2005, a majority of
respondents cited ‘managing risk’ as one of their top three challenges.
COVID-19 is just the latest in a series of ‘black swan’ events over the past
decades, and once more the engineering and construction industry has
struggled to manage the complexities at both enterprise and project level. More
than one-third (37 percent) of respondents say their companies missed budget
and/or scheduled performance targets (by a factor of 20 percent or more) as a
result of COVID-19 (Figure 2, page 7).

Not surprisingly then, risk management is considered one of the most critical
areas to address in order to improve organizational resilience. There’s a
particular desire to achieve a more holistic view of risks, with 60 percent
acknowledging the need to increase integration and visibility between enterprise
risk management, portfolio risk management and project risk management
functions (Figure 6).

**Figure 6: How important to the success of your capital projects**
**and overall capital program is the level of integration and visibility**
**between enterprise risk management, portfolio risk management**
**and project risk management functions?**

n Average


Total

Engineering/
Construction firm

Project or infrastructure

owner organization


8% 32%

8% 35%

8% 26%


60%

57%

66%


186

113

73


3.5

3.7

3.8


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1–2 Less important 3 Neutral 4–5 More important

Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


-----

Both owners and contractors have pushed money and resources into risk management in recent years, a trend that’s set
to continue, with two-thirds planning a moderate or high level of investment in future (Figure 7).

**Figure 7: What level of investment does your capital projects organization plan to spend on risk**
**management?**

n Average


34% 39%

30% 42%

40% 33%


27%

27%

276


186

113

73


2.9

3.0

2.9


Total

Engineering/Construction firm

Project or infrastructure
owner organization


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1–2 Low investment 3 Moderate investment 4–5 High investment

Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey

Risk management game-changers


The engineering and construction executives taking part
in this year’s survey are determined to improve their
organizational risk management and recognize the need to
get the ‘basics’ right. Clear and standardized risk processes
and controls are the top priority, along with a risk culture
and accurate risk reporting (Figure 8, page 15). Risk
management across the sector can vary widely in quality
and these elements are table stakes.


Relatively few respondents (27 percent) consider
quantitative risk analysis tools as important, which could
turn out to be an oversight, as boards increasingly expect
to see more detailed analysis of the financial impact of
events. These tools have tremendous potential, but the
relatively low adoption may signal a wider lack of trust in
the underlying data, which can undermine the ability to
develop reliable, accurate risk analyses.


-----

**Figure 8: Elements most important to achieving successful risk management across a capital project**
**portfolio**


70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

|Col1|19% 18% 21% 23% 27% 18% 40% 38% 42% 38% 43% 30% 54% 50% 59% 35% 34% 38% 17% 16% 19% 26% 25% 27%|
|---|---|
|||
|||
|||
|||
|||
|||


Formal risk
management
training


Boardlevel risk
management
committee


Clearly
defined
risk culture


Integration
between
enterprise,
portfolio and
project risks
functions


Clearly defined
and standardized
project risk
management
processes
and controls


Accurate
risk
reporting


Dedicated
risk
management
department


Quantitative
risk analysis
tools


_Up to three responses allowed_ Total (n=186) Engineering/Construction firm (n=113) Project or infrastructure owner organization (n=73)

Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


Risk processes and controls are only as good as the
people that operate them. In the same way that the
sector has made safety second nature, companies must
embed risk management into their DNA. Forty percent
of respondents say their organizations are committed to
creating a clearly defined risk culture, where people feel
comfortable voicing concerns and raising challenges. This
can only work if the messages from the top are aligned
and consistent, with leaders seen to be taking firm action
to address any failings. Having the right tone at the top and
consistent communication and reinforcement throughout
the organization is critical.


However, it appears that risk management has some way
to go before it’s treated as seriously as other functions.
Only a small proportion feel their organization needs a
board-level risk management committee and/or a separate
risk department, while formal risk management training is
also lacking—for both owners and contractors.

Which is why integrated risk management is such a big
deal. Yet at present, a mere 34 percent (Figure 9) say their
organization has a joined-up ethos that encompasses
enterprise, portfolio and project risk management. Without
integration, it’s hard, if not impossible, to work out the
impact of different events and phenomena.


**Figure 9: To what extent is your organization’s level of risk management integrated, from enterprise**
**risk management to portfolio risk management, and project risk management?**

n Average


Total

Engineering/Construction firm

Project or infrastructure
owner organization


25% 40%

21% 46%

32% 32%


34%

33%

37%


186

113

73


3.1

3.1

3.1


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


1–2 Low integration 3 Moderate integration 4–5 High integration


-----

KPMG thinks:

**Understanding the interconnectedness of risks**

As a sector, engineering and construction has some way to go in developing
sophisticated and holistic risk management practices. Standards vary widely
between different companies and between different project owners’ industries.

An independent risk function would be an excellent step forward. Currently it’s
hard to take a high-level, cross-enterprise view of risks in projects, procurement,
supply chain, markets, contracts and finance. For instance, a project team
tends to focus on construction risk, but also has line of sight into other risks
including supply chain, IT and operations—and may be aware of other risks.
Yet, there may be no process to capture or disseminate this critical information.
Similarly, a risk in one region could affect the wider organization, but may go
unnoticed if risk management is not managed centrally and integrated across
the organization.

With a complete, transparent and real-time view across all regions, business
units and projects, it may transpire that the organization is facing a larger—and
possibly unsustainable—level of portfolio risk than it had imagined, which would
influence decisions to take on new projects. It’s especially challenging for project
owners, who may not be able to see what’s happening with operators and
contractors and may not receive data for days or even months.


-----

**View from the industry**

There’s a need to take enterprise risks more seriously, to get good linkage between project level activities,
business units and regions. Find ways to capture and categorize risk items to roll up to enterprise level, to
make sure that what you do operationally aligns with strategy, from an enterprise risk appetite and management
perspective. This means having bigger conversations at the board table than used to happen.

**Jon Nield,**
_Chief Executive Officer,_
_Engineering & Construction Risk Institute_


**View from the industry**

You must collect a whole lot of data on project risk, categorize it, prioritize it, quantify it, and be very process driven,
to aggregate risk and assess what it means for the entire enterprise. Much of this is regularly done at the project-
level. For example: projects already address hazardous materials, so why not compile all project information as it
relates to hazardous materials—along with proven mitigation strategies. Another example is local resources. Some
countries require local labor, which brings a substantial risk to productivity if you can’t access this resource. Out of
necessity, projects mitigate this risk by developing local resources resulting in a social benefit to the workforce and
community. We should capture and process this available project information to recognize how the enterprise may
deliver on ESG objectives through its regular course of business.

**Gregory Amparano,**
_Senior Vice President and Corporate Risk Officer, Engineering & Construction Risk Institute_


-----

# Portfolio project management

##### The impossible job?


-----

Managing a significant portfolio of programs and projects involves juggling a
complex set of criteria to gain maximum value—a task made harder by the size
and complexity of individual mega-projects that can soak up resources and carry
huge risks. Political factors also intervene: in some cases, shiny new initiatives
take precedence over less exciting but important maintenance projects. A wellrun portfolio aligns project decisions with organizational strategy and aims to
optimize return on investment.

The responses from this year’s survey indicate that owners have more mature
portfolio management than contractors (Figure 10, page 20), with the larger
organizations the most advanced—which is to be expected given their superior
resources. In our experience, engineering and construction companies are,
however, making progress and, indeed, are ahead in terms of screening
potential projects and employing financial and risk analysis tools—a sign that
they’re no longer willing to undertake any project without regard to margin
or risk. This may also mean that engineering companies and contractors are
becoming increasingly cautious about bidding on very large, highly regulated,
complex, extended duration projects in competitive markets, fearful of repeating
past failures.

Interestingly, respondents from real estate and hospitality companies suggest
that these sectors lag behind others in their portfolio controls. Real estate in
particular is often not the core business of investors, who are more typically
corporations looking to expand into new space, with decisions often driven by
the most powerful business units.

Government, on the other hand, appears to lead the way in its portfolio
management, which suggests a big leap after years of under-investment.
Certainly the approval process in the public sector is typically long and onerous,
although there remains a question mark over how funds are allocated and how
resources are used on actual projects.


-----

Project owners making strides—
but key gaps prevail


More than two-thirds of project owners have defined
portfolio governance processes and an established capital
allocation framework, which lets executives stay abreast of
the overall portfolio direction and performance and ensures


that resources are applied in an optimal fashion
(Figure 10). Healthcare, government, and power and
utilities are the sectors that appear to practice the most
effective allocation of capital.


**Figure 10: Which attributes apply to your organization’s construction portfolio?**

Defined construction portfolio governance

framework with policies, procedures
and controls


65%

67%


60%


73%


47%
34%

39%
38%

40%

37%
25%

39%
29%


An established capital allocation
framework established to drive efficient
capital allocation

Portfolio planning software to plan, analyze,

prioritize, track and report

A formal asset management group/program
integrated into our capital planning and
portfolio optimization processes

Defined processes for identifying,
screening, analyzing, reviewing, prioritizing
and selecting construction projects

Quantitative tools to perform financial
and risk analyses on projects as part of
our project analysis and screening

Defined strategies for Environment, Social,
Governance (ESG)/Sustainability as key
components of our capital allocation
framework and capital planning processes


55%

54%
53%

56%

53%


69%
72%


64%


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

_Multiple responses allowed_ Total (n=186) Engineering/Construction firm (n=113) Project or infrastructure owner organization (n=73)

Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


One concern is that only four in ten owners say they use
portfolio planning software (Figure 10). With a crisis like
COVID-19, there’s often an urgent need to reallocate
resources, but to do so requires real-time data to do


scenario analyses and figure out how best to shift people,
equipment and money. In an asset-intensive organization,
running multiple projects worth billions of dollars, this
represents a big opportunity to improve performance.


-----

Similarly, 45 percent of owners do not have an embedded
asset management team to oversee capital allocation
between projects (Figure 10). The tension between
competing interests puts pressure on leaders to funnel
resources into certain projects that may be higher profile
or satisfy immediate issues. For instance, in the public
infrastructure sector, we often see expensive new programs
such as new lanes on highways to reduce congestion,
with critical maintenance taking second place. The result?
The immediate needs of commuters are satisfied, while
crumbling bridges and roads get worse and eventually have
to be replaced at enormous cost.

Another gap in owners’ portfolio management is
quantitative tools for financial and risk analysis, which help


in screening big projects. Respondents from oil and gas
and chemicals score more highly in this category, reflecting
the longer life spans of their assets, and the need to plan
ahead accordingly.

And it’s interesting to note that more than half of owners
say they now factor ESG factors into their capital allocation
and planning (Figure 10). Technology, government, and
power and utilities are ahead of the curve in this respect,
to some extent due to the heavy regulations and various
purchase agreements to limit CO2 emissions from power
plants and data centers. With growing demand for greener
and more equitable business practices, expect to see these
figures rise.


Engineering and construction
companies playing catch-up


Contractors appear to be a long way behind owners in
integrating ESG frameworks into their key capital decisions,
although respondents serving the technology, media and
telecoms industries look to have closed the gap somewhat.
Capital allocation is a further challenge for contractors—
just one-third of respondents say they have an allocation
framework (Figure 10).

Given the huge potential risks inherent in large projects,
contractors may want to consider why 47 percent do not
employ quantitative tools to perform financial and risk
analysis as part of the project selection process. One big
project failure can undermine the rest of the portfolio, so
rigorous due diligence is essential to reduce the risk
(Figure 10).


The bright spots for engineering and construction
companies are screening and prioritizing projects, where
they actually exceed owners in having robust processes.
Part of being a contractor is to produce a pipeline of
projects, so it’s understandable that there’s a greater focus
on this element of portfolio management.

Overall, it’s the contractors with annual revenue between
US$1 billion—US$5 billion who report the highest scores
for portfolio governance, processes and controls. Some
of the larger companies have grown rapidly through
acquisition and may still be coping with fragmented IT
systems, with management yet to fully integrate into the
organization.


-----

KPMG thinks:

**Intelligence over intuition can lead to more rational planning**


Today’s construction projects involve a range of
stakeholders including owners, contractors and suppliers,
each with multiple projects of their own. One failure—like
a cost overrun—can have a devastating impact upon the
rest of the portfolio. In managing finite financial and human
resources, owners must take tough decisions on capital
allocation that fit the strategic goals of the organization,
rather than satisfying individual empire builders or
responding to short-term challenges. Infrastructure
illustrates this dilemma perfectly: a failure to maintain
existing assets can lead to an inability to cope with
environmental shocks like fires, flooding and unseasonably
hot and cold weather.


When a portfolio management process is based around
reliable data insights, decisions like screening and
selection and capital allocation become more rational;
there is less reliance upon power plays by different groups
and individuals, or knee-jerk responses to public opinion
(especially in the case of government infrastructure
programs).

Ongoing tracking of benefits is a key area for improvement.
Currently a minority of owners and contractors deploy
sophisticated software which gives assurance that their
investment strategies are generating value. Which may
explain why only 58 percent of the survey respondents
say they consistently monitor, track and report on benefits
realized from capital projects and programs (Figure 11).


**Figure 11: Does your organization consistently monitor, track and report on actual benefits realized**
**from your capital projects and programs?**


n=

186

113

73


58% 31% 3% 8%

58% 30% 2% 10%


Total

Engineering/Construction firm

Project or infrastructure
owner organization


58% 33% 4% 5%


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Always Sometimes Never Don’t know/not sure

Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


-----

**View from the industry**

Especially with the rising importance of ESG, organizations must get
better at managing issues from board strategy level right the way into the
organization. This may cause companies to change strategies and make
some tough and good decisions about what they will choose to do and no
longer do. It could take them into other areas around types of contract,
types of business, types of market they operate in. Some may exit and
others may enter, so it is likely to be a very dynamic environment.

**Jon Nield,**
_Chief Executive Officer,_
_Engineering & Construction Risk Institute_


**View from the industry**

When we conceive and implement capital projects, we ensure that any
ideas generated are aligned with our long-term goals, carefully prioritized,
and subject to a rigorous capital allocation process that looks at project
risks and potential revenues. This approach has helped us to focus our
energy, efforts and investment towards the right kind of projects with
long-term growth potential and profitability.

**Satish Pai,**
_Managing Director,_
_Hindalco Industries Limited_


-----

# Diversity, equity  and inclusion

##### Enriching capabilities through diversity— from a low base


-----

Across all sectors, companies are striving to create more diverse and
[inclusive working environments. According to KPMG’s Global 2021 CEO](https://home.kpmg/xx/en/home/insights/2021/03/ceo-outlook-pulse.html)
_[Outlook, 96 percent of leaders say they’re increasingly scrutinizing their](https://home.kpmg/xx/en/home/insights/2021/03/ceo-outlook-pulse.html)_
organization’s diversity performance. But a majority (58 percent) also
admit that the business world as a whole has been far too slow to embrace
diversity and inclusion.

The global engineering and construction sector has not been historically
renowned for its diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), something reflected in
this year’s survey, where most organizations’ efforts are shown to be
at a nascent stage—although owners seem to have made greater progress
than contractors. Only 46 percent of respondents’ organizations currently
have a formal program for building diverse and inclusive teams (Figure 12,
page 26), with the Americas ahead at 66 percent and Europe, Middle East
and Africa trailing with 29 percent.


-----

**Figure 12: Which of the following workplace culture plans or initiatives does your company have**
**related to diversity, equity, and inclusion?**


68%

Training, education, and awareness 64%

75%

41%

Employee resource groups 37%

47%

58%

Recruitment initiatives 61%

53%

49%

Retention and development initiatives 51%

45%

39%

Total rewards (e.g., flexibility, benefits) 39%

38%

46%

Program or initiative for building diverse

42%

and inclusive teams

53%

43%

Leadership program for increasing gender

39%

and racial diversity in leadership

49%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%


_Multiple responses allowed_ Total (n=186) Engineering/Construction firm (n=113) Project or infrastructure owner organization (n=73)

Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


Given the growing pressures on DEI in public projects,
it’s notable that relatively few of the companies who
participated in the survey say they have a strong focus on
diversity and inclusion in the supply chain. When asked
whether their company tracks and measures supply chain
diversity, 37 percent of executives from engineering and
construction companies responded that they don’t know
(Figure 13, page 27).


In the US, federal, state and local authorities have for
decades demanded supply chain checks and diligence,
which may explain why respondents from the Americas
region (53 percent) are the most likely to have assigned
specific jobs and functions dedicated to diversity and
inclusion in their suppliers.


-----

**Figure 13: How does your organization encourage, track, and measure diversity and inclusion in your**
**own construction supply chain?**


26%

24%
24%

25%

26%
21%


Formal supplier diversity
program

Formal supplier development
initiatives

Track/measure percentage of bids/
solicitations sent to diverse businesses

Established diverse supplier
spend goals

Track/measure percentage of bids/
solicitations sent to diverse businesses

Track/measure the number or percentage
of diverse suppliers that are successfully
pre-qualified to work with your organization

Track/measure the percentage of
contracts awarded to diverse businesses

Track/measure the percentage breakdown
of diverse spend by spend category

Track/measure spend with diverse
businesses who are subcontracted
with projects

Tier 2 supplier diversity program

Don’t know/not sure


19%


37%


34%


21%
17%

24%
24%

23%


27%


25%
22%

24%
20%


29%

24%

30%

25%
27%

32%


13%
12%


16%


22%


7%
6%

8%


35%
37%


0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

_Up to three responses allowed_ Total (n=186) Engineering/Construction firm (n=113) Project or infrastructure owner organization (n=73)

Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


There are a few bright spots, with 68 percent stating
that their company carries out training, education and
awareness in diversity, and 58 percent striving to embed


greater diversity into their recruitment processes. Once
again, the Americas leads the way, with organizations from
Asia Pacific a close second.


-----

KPMG thinks:

**Good for society; good for the construction**
**sector; good for business**

[In KPMG’s 2019 Global Construction Survey - Future-Ready Index, the](https://home.kpmg/xx/en/home/insights/2019/04/global-construction-survey-future-ready.html)
organizations defined as ‘innovative leaders’ in the sector demonstrated
significantly greater commitment to diversity as part of their drive to re-define
their cultures (Figure 14). They were more proactive in recruiting a diverse set
of workers and tracking their progress towards DEI. Innovative leaders were
characterized by cutting edge contractors with strong innovation cultures, and
owner-innovators who focus on technology—with an emphasis upon forwardlooking recruitment strategies.

A number of studies have shown that, across multiple industries, companies
with higher diversity outperform their peers in terms of revenue, profitability,
innovation and staff turnover (Figure 15, page 29). Additionally, a vast majority of
job candidates say that an organization’s approach to diversity and inclusion will
impact whether they accept a position.

**Figure 14: Which attributes apply to your organization’s**
**construction portfolio?**

100%

80%

20%


0%

|Col1|97% 74% 76% 69% 61% 41%|
|---|---|
|||
|||
|||
|||


Percent that believes Percent that tracks
diversity is important diversity metrics


Top 20 percent Middle 60 percent Bottom 20 percent

Source: 2019 Global Construction Survey


-----

**Figure 15: Observed benefits of a more diverse company culture**

**Enhances company**
**Increases revenue gains** **Fosters innovation**
**performance**


of big revenue

companies strongly
###### 56%
believe that diversity

**helps drive innovation[3]**


Companies with increased diversity are
###### 36%
more likely to outperform their

**peers in profitability[1]**


Companies with more diverse

management teams have

**higher revenues[2]**

###### 19%


**Impacts recruiting** **Reduces turnover** **Improves decision-making**


would consider finding a

###### 83% of candidates report that 70% new job if their employeer

**diversity and inclusion is important** did not demonstrate


Teams with inclusive leaders are
###### 20%
more likely to make high-quality

**decisions[5]**


Sources: 1) “Diversity wins,” McKinsey, May 2020; 2) “How diverse leadership teams boost innovation,” Boston Consulting Group, 23 January 2018; 3) ”Fostering innovation
through a diverse workforce,” Forbes Insights, page 5; 4) Yello white paper: Job seeker survey reveals what matters; 2019; 5) “Why inclusive leaders are good for organizations, and how to become one,” Harvard Business Review, 29 March 2019.


A diverse and inclusive culture enriches organizational
capabilities and creates a talent pipeline, where the most
in-demand jobseekers are attracted by the potential to
have a fulfilling career in a safe and nurturing environment.
For women, people of color, LGBTQ+ and people with
disabilities, the knowledge that they are less likely to face
implicit bias, career roadblocks and ceilings is an enormous
plus and opens up a larger and more skilled resource pool.

But the level of commitment required to achieve such a
culture cannot be underestimated. The organization must
hold itself, its leaders and entire workforce accountable for
practicing DEI, should track and incentivize its performance
and highlight its successes and challenges in a fully
transparent manner.


Engineering and construction companies have the
additional pressure of ever-stricter contractual obligations
from project owners to meet DEI targets in their own
company and along the supply chain. National and local
government in many countries have already established
such criteria, with private sector owners moving in the
same direction as they seek to embed ESG principles. It’s
common now to see tender proposals stipulating use of
minority or women-owned vendors, diverse recruitment
policies and inclusive workforce and leadership quotas.
Failure to adapt to such demands can severely undermine
contractors’ ability to win new contracts.


-----

**View from the industry**

Delivering major projects is a team sport, dependent on a vast number of people coming together. We cannot deliver
them alone and we cannot continue doing things the way we have in the past.

Capital investment in infrastructure is money well spent and helps create a better world. We must embrace the
opportunity to be part of the green recovery and economy. Highways England will be part of the solution, integrating
our network with other transport modes and using investment in strategic roads as an enabler. We’ve reorganized,
creating strong alliances that are accelerating the trend to offsite production with digitally rehearsed and designed
modular components. We have digital design teams and project management hubs who are making production
management and efficient delivery happen at pace.

Our industry needs to move on beyond the image of building everything on a muddy construction site. We are
listening, adapting and setting the tone for the future. The skills of people running major projects will change, creating
an opportunity to recruit from a wider field of skilled people. We will need more than just experienced civil engineers
as over the coming years, 50 percent of roles in our industry will be brand new. We will need people who have a
relationship with digital capability, as this is where the real opportunities lie.

In the future we want our supply chain and our industry to employ a more diverse workforce, with wider skills. One
that creates more challenge and stimulates creativity, that welcomes what makes us each unique and builds on what
we have in common, to improve our industry.

**Peter Mumford,**
_Executive Director, Major Projects & Capital_
_Portfolio Management,_
_Highways England_


-----

# Technology and innovation

##### Time to be bold  and brave


-----

Technology has become ubiquitous to all sectors and is no longer something
left to the innovators. Which is why the response to the pandemic has been
so interesting, in that the more forward-thinking companies really enjoyed
the benefits of their previous investments. With large numbers working from
home, and site workers on staggered shifts, remote collaboration came
into its own, enabling managers to plan and design, keep abreast of project
progress, make virtual inspections, and communicate instructions and
changes in real time.

These successes cannot, however, mask the mixed efforts to adopt
technology, with many contractors and, especially, owners, lacking the
tools that could create a step-change in project performance and increase
resilience to further shocks.

What’s driving
investment choices?

The desire to adopt technology appears strong, with most of the
respondents reporting that their companies plan a moderate or high level of
investment. But there’s a noticeable gap between owners and contractors,
with the latter considerably more likely to invest heavily (50 percent versus
just 33 percent for owners) (Figure 16, page 33).

This presents an opportunity for owners to step up their program
management—especially as ‘adoption of technology’ was rated as the
second most important factor that enabled engineering and construction
companies to cope with disruptive events.


-----

**Figure 16: Planned technology investment for your capital program**


n=

186

113

73


Total

Engineering/Construction firm

Project or infrastructure
owner organization


12% 41% 43% 4%


8% 39% 50% 4%

18% 44% 33% 5%


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1–2 Low level of investment 3 Moderate level of investment 4–5 High level of investment Not sure

Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


With projects getting larger and more complex, it’s
surprising that less than four in ten are using portfolio level
planning software (Figure 17). Such tools are essential
for planning and tracking projects across the portfolio—
especially relevant to owners with a number of ongoing
initiatives across different geographies.

**Survey participant feedback**

During the pandemic-forced lockdowns,
we switched to virtual meetings on
collaborative platforms to keep our
projects operational. We also used
internet enabled devices such as smart
glasses to support remote inspections and
overcome travel constraints.


When asked which technologies have the greatest
potential, the top three responses are integrated PMIS,
Building Information Modeling (BIM) and advanced data
and analytics (Figure 10, page 20). Both owners and
engineering and construction companies believe these
innovations can give a healthy return on investment by
increasing efficiency and improving decision-making.


-----

In stark contrast, there is negligible interest at present
in many up-and-coming technologies like artificial
intelligence (AI), radio frequency identification (RFID),
3D Printing, cognitive machine learning (ML), robotics,


process automation (RPA), digital labor and augmented
reality. It seems as if the industry is waiting for some
positive use cases before buying into such advances.


**Figure 17: Technologies with the potential to deliver the greatest overall return on investment to your**
**organization**

Use of basic data analytics 14%

Radio frequency identification 1%

Robotics proceses automation/digital labor 15%

Cognitive machine learning 6%

3D printing 3%

Virtual reality 4%

Augmented reality 4%

Machine engineering and design 13%

Other (please specify) 1%

Don’t know/not sure 6%

|45% 14% 31% 21% 42% 1% 15% 6% 3% 23% 23% 4% 4% 16% 13% 1% 6%|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|
|---|---|---|---|---|
||||||



0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


-----

Integrating technology for a richer
picture


Integration offers a great opportunity to automate and
streamline projects. Project managers can survey a rich
history of past projects to develop early cost estimates and
schedules, as well as making more reliable cost forecasts.
Procurement and logistics should also become more
accurate, as decision-makers can see what’s happening
across multiple sites and work out a logical flow of supplies
to meet the pace of projects. Data security and privacy is
another beneficiary of integration, reducing the number
of attacks and introducing common access protocol to
decrease the chance of breaches by malicious and/or
criminal hackers.


Faced with a wide range of geographies, fragmented
supply chains, and a constant stream of new software,
companies can struggle to effectively integrate risk
management and project management. Only 16 percent of
the executives surveyed say their organizations have fully
integrated systems and tools (Figure 18). It’s a similar story
when it comes to automation—with just 6 percent claiming
to have automated all or most of their business processes
(Figure 19, page 36). Automation has the capability to
replace and speed up manual tasks and provide more
current and accurate intelligence. The three areas where
capital projects could most benefit are listed as project
reporting, estimating and budgeting, and performance
monitoring.


**Figure 18: Integration of construction technology within your organization?**


80%

60%

40%

20%

0%


|Col1|68%|
|---|---|
||68% 63% 54% 21% 16% 18% 15% 13% 12% 11% 4% 0% 2% 3% 1%|
|||
|||
|||


Fully integrated Partially Not integrated, but Not integrated, and Don’t know/
systems & tools integrated planning to integrate do not plan to integrate Not sure


Total (n=185) Engineering/Construction firm (n=113) Project or infrastructure owner organization (n=72)

Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


-----

**Figure 19: To what extent has business process automation been**
**incorporated into your organization’s future capital program plans?**


Total

Engineering/

Construction firm

Project or infrastructure

owner organization


|5% 51% 26% 186 10% 4% 4% 7% 60% 19% 113 8% 1% 5% 6% 56% 22% 73 9% 2% 5%|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|Col6|Col7|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||||||||


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%


Most (if not all) of the processes have already been automated

Some processes have been automated

Started to explore the processes that would benefit from automation

Undertanding the importance, but no substantive actions taken yet to explore which processes

No plans to automate processes currently

Don’t know/not sure

Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


-----

Lack of alignment in technology
ambitions


The responses to this year’s survey suggest that owners
and contractors don’t always pursue the same technology
investment patterns, with the latter tending to be the early
adopters across many categories, notably integrated
PMIS, drones, BIM and advanced data and analytics
(Figure 20). Project owners’ focus has often been on

**Figure 20: Level of technology adoption**


investment oversight, tracking, performance reporting,
and governance, whilst engineering and construction
firms’ minds are firmly on the task in hand, calling for
better management of project data and on-ground project
delivery.


Engineering/

Construction firms
Project or infrastructure
owner organization

Engineering/
Construction firms
Project or infrastructure
owner organization

Engineering/
Construction firms
Project or infrastructure
owner organization

Engineering/
Construction firms
Project or infrastructure
owner organization


Integrated Project
Management Information

Systems PMIS

Drones
(remote monitoring,
quantity verification,
construction status

Building Information
Modeling (BIM)

Use of advanced data
analytics


35% 36% 29%

27% 48% 25%

26% 45% 29%


21%

14%

7%


45% 34%

44% 40% 16%

33% 30% 37%

44% 42%

44% 49%


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Adopting across all projects Just started Not adopted

Source: 2021 Global Construction Survey


Interestingly, owners are keen on the potential of
automation to improve performance monitoring, contract
management and payment management, reflecting their
role as buyers of services. Engineering and construction


companies, on the other hand, value the power of
automation in areas like construction, design and schedule
management.


-----

KPMG thinks:

**Collaboration can lead to common gains**

One of the questions that senior industry executives should
ask themselves is: how can we develop a more uniform
and coherent adoption of technologies to enhance project
performance metrics? If all parties can access the same
platforms and software, then it will be easier and faster
to move through the various stages of conceptualization,
design, implementation and even operationalization.

The industry collectively stands at a crossroads: either
continue the current path of conservative, disjointed and
experimental investment by individual stakeholders—or
collaborate for common gains. In certain sectors, such
as government infrastructure and construction programs,
the use of technology is already stipulated in the contract
for tools like BIM, to approve designs. Yes, owners can
force digitization via contracts, but this eats into alreadythin margins for contractors. Surely it’s preferable for
project owners to go one step further and invest in these
groundbreaking innovations in a way that benefits every
contractor they work with?

Such a move may start to break down the lines of
responsibility between owner and contractor, in the
interests of efficiency, safety and quality. When owners
have a large pipeline of known projects, a common data
environment enables each contractor to ‘plug in’ to access
cloud-based software and hardware. Take the increasing
demand to demonstrate ESG: a common platform and
reporting enables the owners to track carbon footprint,
people management and community contributions. All
of which should make projects more robust and less
susceptible to delays, cost-overruns and accidents.

Finally, both owners and engineering and construction
companies should invest in relatively untapped
technologies like AI, machine learning, robotic process
automation and digital labor.


**View from the industry**

We have adopted digital tools like drone-based
analytics for progress monitoring, real-time CCTV
monitoring of project site and dashboard-based
reporting. Additionally, we’ve initiated use of smart
glasses: a head-mounted, hands-free, voice-controlled
device for bi-directional audio-visual communication
between a project person and remote expert. This has
facilitated installation and commissioning activities and
minimized site visits.

**Satish Pai,**
_Managing Director,_
_Hindalco Industries Limited_


-----

# Moving construction into the 21st Century


-----

**Bent Flyvbjerg,**
_BT Professor and Chair of Major Programme Management,_
_Saïd Business School, University of Oxford_

We still build houses the way we did 4,000 years ago—the main difference
is electricity and glass. With a lack of competition on a global scale, the
sector has struggled to innovate, leaving a productivity gap compared to
other industries. One obvious solution is to go modular, to have everything
manufactured off site and assembled on site like Lego. Using standardized
station designs and other new approaches, between 1995—1999, Madrid
managed to build 56 km of railway lines at a cost of US$26.7 million per km,[1]
whereas shorter but comparable rail projects performed relatively poorly,
taking significantly longer to complete at a much higher cost per kilometer.

Owners are looking at the wrong place by focusing on companies delivering;
they need to create demand for innovation by insisting contractors use
BIM and prefab, and in a competent manner. For instance, wind turbines
used to be built like houses by pouring concrete on site, but that’s not the
case anymore—they’ve gone modular and prefab. This happened because
governments, through subsidies, created a market for wind, in the process
moving towards a global, competitive market. The industry won't change by
itself. It needs to be pushed and pulled from outside.

1 Comparison of Capital Costs per Route-Kilometre in Urban Rail, Bent Flyvbjerg*, Nils Bruzelius**
and Bert van Wee*** * Department of Development and Planning, Aalborg University, Denmark


-----

# Transcendent action plan


-----

**1**

Owners should explore collaborative and integrated project teaming
models, rebalance risk allocation in projects, avoiding excessive risk to
engineering and construction companies, who in turn should exercise
greater caution in taking on high-risk, fixed price projects.

**2**

Establish an independent risk management function for portfolios and
projects, reporting into a board-level risk management committee. This
provides an extra layer of awareness and comfort over the total level of
risk across the project portfolio. At the same time, it’s important to continue
to focus on the fundamentals of risk management at all levels of the
organization, with a commitment to a culture of continuous improvement.

**3**

Invest in portfolio planning software and a formal, embedded asset
management team. This should help ensure that capital allocation
decisions reflect the organization’s wider interests, and that investments in
projects generate the optimum ROI.

**4**

Commit at leadership level to embrace diversity, internally and across the
supply chain, forming a dedicated diversity team, setting targets, awarding
incentives, and tracking and publishing diversity and inclusion numbers.

**5**

Bridge the technology gap between owners and engineering and
construction companies, with owners investing in shared platforms to
enable contractors to access technologies like integrated PMIS, BIM and
advanced analytics.


-----

# About the survey

In this survey, you will find the perspectives of 186 people from engineering and construction companies and project
owners from a variety of industries.

Many of the responses were gathered through face-to-face interviews in 2021 with senior leaders—many of them chief
executive officers. The vast majority of respondents are from organizations carrying out significant capital investment
projects.

**Organization category** **Industry sector (multiple selections allowed)**


Healthcare/

Life sciences

Technology

Retail/Consumer
products

Financial services/

Insurance

Natural resources/

Chemicals

Government/
Education

Industrial
manufacturing

Media/Telecoms

Power/Utilities

Real estate/
Hospitality
Other
(please specify)


27%

25%

30%


Project or
infrastructure
owner
organization


18%

15%

18%


10%

6%

9%


Engineering/
Construction
firm

39%

61%


Total count (answering): 186


**Entity type (multiple selections allowed)**


Quoted (public company)

Subsidiary of a quoted
company

Private company

Govvernment agency

Other (please specify)


27%


9%

8%

4%


35%

37%


56%


0% 10% 20% 30% 40%


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Total count (answering): 186


-----

**Approximate entity revenue from operations in the**
**last 12 months**


**Headquarter region**

ASPAC


Less than US$1 billion

US$1 billion or more to

less than US$5 billion


37%

35%


EMEA


US$5 billion or more to
less than US$20 billion

US$20 billion or more


17%


10%


26%

39%

39%

Americas

Total count (answering): 186


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Total count (answering): 186


**Regions of operation (multiple selections allowed)**

50%

40%

30%

10%


0%

|Col1|49% 40% 27% 27% 23% 23% 23% 22% 21% 13% 11%|
|---|---|
|||
|||
|||
|||


North Central/
America South
America

Total count (answering): 186


UK Europe,
excluding
UK


Middle Africa India China Australia Rest Other
East of Asia (please
specify)


**Headquarter country**

30%


0%

|Col1|%|
|---|---|
||31% 13% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%|
|||
|||
|||


US India Australia Turkey

Total count (answering): 186


-----

KPMG’s Global
Engineering &
Construction practice

When engineering and construction leaders turn to KPMG member firms for
advice, they do so because KPMG professionals understand the industry at
a local, national and global level. For decades, we have provided services
tailored specifically to meet the needs of the industry. To do this, we have
created a diverse practice that includes certified public accountants,
professional engineers, architects, project managers, owner representatives,
contract and procurement specialists, finance and tax professionals, business
valuation specialists, cost estimators and specialists, certified fraud examiners
and forensic technology specialists. KPMG’s Engineering & Construction
professionals provide strategic insights and relevant guidance wherever
our clients operate. Services are delivered through the global network of
KPMG member firms by over 2,000 professionals in more than 40 countries
worldwide. KPMG professionals help clients identify and mitigate project risks
throughout the project life cycle. Our methodology encompasses both ‘doing
the right project’ and ‘doing the project right’. Engineering & Construction
practice services include construction program evaluations, project risk and
controls assessments, contract compliance analyses and cost investigations,
as well as project support on complex and troubled projects. We provide
industry knowledge, multidisciplinary teams, and substantive experience in
managing both the financial and technical aspects of major capital projects
and programs. Our Major Projects Advisory practice consists of professionals
from diverse formal backgrounds. By combining valuable global insight with
hands-on local experience, we can help you address challenges at any stage
of the life cycle of infrastructure assets or programs—from planning, strategy
and construction through to operations and hand-back.


-----

**For more information, or to view a selection of**
**other relevant KPMG reports and insights, please**
**visit:**
### home.kpmg/be/ infrastructure


-----

Contacts

**Veerle Coussée**
**Partner, Head of Real Estate,**
**Infrastructure & Construction**
KPMG in Belgium
E: vcoussee@kpmg.com


**Thomas De Ruyck**
**Director, Corporate Real Estate**
**Advisory Lead**
KPMG in Belgium
E: tderuyck@kpmg.com


**Arno Vanheuverswyn**
**Senior Advisor,**
**Corporate Real Estate Advisory**
KPMG in Belgium
E: avanheuverswyn@kpmg.com


Some or all of the services described herein may not be permissible for KPMG audit clients and their affiliates or related entities.

The information contained herein is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity.
Although we endeavor to provide accurate and timely information, there can be no guarantee that such information is accurate as of the date it is
received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. No one should act on such information without appropriate professional advice after a
thorough examination of the particular situation.

© 2021 Copyright owned by one or more of the KPMG International entities. KPMG International entities provide no services to clients. All rights
reserved.

KPMG refers to the global organization or to one or more of the member firms of KPMG International Limited (“KPMG International”), each of
which is a separate legal entity.

KPMG International Limited is a private English company limited by guarantee and does not provide services to clients. For more detail about
our structure please visit home.kpmg/governance.

The KPMG name and logo are trademarks used under license by the independent member firms of the KPMG global organization.

Throughout this document/film/release/website, “we”, “KPMG”, “us” and “our” refers to the global organization or to one or more of the member
firms of KPMG International

Limited (“KPMG International”), each of which is a separate legal entity.

Designed by DAS Design. DASD-2021-4851

Publication name: No turning back

Publication date: August 2021


-----

