THE MASTER BUILDER – PERCEPTIONS ABOUT OUR MEMBERS

In a survey recently undertaken, 92% of our members who responded indicated that Master Builders Association membership afforded them credibility with clients and prospective clients.

Many of our members display our logo, and/or make special mention of their membership in their stationery, signage, vehicles and advertisements.  There are some members who display the Association’s logo even more prominently than their own corporate identity.

Many clients and members of the public indicate that they have a perception that the Master Builders Association is a standards regulating body or even a “governing body” which oversees the workmanship of builders.

The name Master Builders connotes the concept of “Mastery” and real estate advertisements often boast of having a “Master Built” residence or other building.

Numerous Master Builders Associations, both within South Africa and beyond, have marketing campaigns which are aimed at enticing members of the public to utilise the service of Association members over others. 

There is clearly a significant brand built around the perceived superiority of Master Builders Association members over non-members, or, in other words, over builders who are not so called Master Builders.

There is a powerful perception in the market place that Master Builders Association members have undergone some form of quality assurance process, whether it be on entry to the Association, or on an ongoing basis.  In addition, it is not uncommon to find members of the public who expect Association members to have their work guaranteed by the Association.

THE NEED FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE – PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER PERCEPTION

It is unfortunate that complaints about builders generally, as well as personal accounts of unhappy relations with builders, are all too common.  Clients of all types often recount stories of how their various building projects have been fraught with difficulty and have ultimately caused financial and emotional hardship.  The agents of some of these clients on larger projects, generally the architects and/or quantity surveyors, often seem all too happy to get on this bandwagon and confirm how difficult it was to deal with the builder.

Complaints often relate to:-

• Workmanship which is felt to be inferior in some way.
• The conduct of the builder in relation to contractual matters and particularly the financial aspects thereof.
• Delays and the time taken for work to be completed.
• Poor or insufficient communication between the builder and the client/agent.
• Insufficient supervision of unskilled and semi-skilled staff by principals / responsible persons of the building enterprise.
• Poor housekeeping and disregard for client’s adjacent and movable property.

The truth is that the industry, and the standards to which various participants operate, is extremely varied.   On the one hand you have sustainable and successful enterprises, regardless of the magnitude of projects undertaken, which are skilled, professional and conduct themselves in such a manner which leads to satisfaction on the part of clients and agents alike.  On the other hand there are innumerable unscrupulous, unskilled and opportunistic operators whose conduct is totally unacceptable.  Unfortunately the latter category of contractor results in a particularly jaundiced view of the profession as a whole and even the best operators are prejudiced by the ongoing activities of the worst.

This issue is exacerbated in the case of a closed community such as the Master Builders Association where it is easy for a disgruntled client to write the Association and its members off after an unhappy encounter.

The need for quality assurance is further enhanced by the high value of the products that builders produce.

THE NEED FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE – EXTERNAL PRESSURE

Consumer Protection Bill

The Consumer Protection Act, sponsored by the Dept of Trade and Industry, was promulgated in April this year.  The Act purports to impose a very comprehensive regime protecting consumers.

There are a number of other state sponsored quality assurance mechanisms that have been established in the last decade. 

CIDB

The Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) has, as its primary focus is, the establishment of a register of contractors along with a grading system.  The grading system is divided into various categories and is designed to measure a construction enterprise’s ability to perform the work it tenders for.  At this point in time, the grading system predominantly takes into account the financial and infrastructural wherewithal to complete any project it undertakes. 

Currently a CIDB grading is mandatory for any enterprise who tenders for work on behalf of any organ of state.  The CIDB has repeatedly stated the ambition to have the grading system adopted by non governmental clients and it does seem likely that the system will become more widely used. 

In addition to the register, the CIDB has been doing an immense amount of work on the development of a register of professionals.  Further work is also being done on a satisfaction index which will rate registered enterprises based on the satisfaction of clients for whom such enterprises performed work.

The CIDB is introducing a best practice register of contractors, based on the Australian model which is aimed at enabling organs of state to manage risk on their contracting strategies.  This will be invoked by accrediting the competencies of contractors in terms of knowledge, skills and experience of contractors that are deemed to be minimum standards necessary for running a contracting enterprise and for supervising building and construction work in various categories within the fields of:-

• Business Management
• Building and Construction Management
• Building and Construction Technology
• Legislative Issues

It is envisaged that the Minister of Public Works will gazette the requirement that, after a particular date and above a prescribed tender value, CIDB accreditation with regard to the above will be required to be taken into account as a quality factor in construction procurement.

NHBRC

The National Home Builders Registration Council (NHBRC) was established in 1998.  The objective of this body is to ensure protection for housing consumers in terms of the Housing Consumers Protection Measures Act.  The system provides for the registration of all enterprises purporting to perform the work of the building of homes on behalf of clients and also provides for the enrolment of actual projects. 

The next tier is a risk management system which essentially relies on a structure of inspections undertaken on such building projects during the course of building work.  The inspections are designed, at least theoretically, to ensure that no major risks arise out of the improper use of building technologies, techniques and materials.  The NHBRC has established a fund which is used to back a warranty scheme which will ultimately pay for remedial action where a home builder has prejudiced the structural integrity of a home through improper conduct. 

CIDB and NHBRC expanding their activities
Both the NHBRC and the CIDB have been established to ultimately provide quality assurance and ensure that standards are observed.  Both of these bodies and the systems they employ are not without flaws, but both are perceived by their clients and government sponsors to be desirable in their objectives.  Because both of these bodies are statutorily established, they have access to considerable resources financially speaking and both have evolved to be large organisations with a considerable amount of both technical and marketing expertise at their disposal. 

Building and other Standards
There is a relatively comprehensive regulatory regime consisting of the Building Standards Act as well as the Building Standards (SANS 1-0400) and other standards as issued by the South African Bureau of Standards.  These are laws and regulations which are broadly applicable but are often generally only policed by local authority and other government institutions which are generally not that well resourced but do provide a layer of quality assurance protecting consumers.

Market Forces
The Banking Council takes a keen interest in the standards and quality of building. Banks run extensive risks if the building projects that they finance have quality concerns. SAPOA and other organised or large clients have no tolerance from poor quality building work, and can exercise considerable influence through how they spend their money. Consumer bodies and consumer oriented journalism is on the increase.

TAKING CONTROL OF OUR OWN DESTINY

The purpose of the previous section is to highlight the fact that regulatory intervention is increasing and the general trend seems to indicate that this would increase even further as time goes on.  Ultimately the risk for Master Builders Associations and their members is that the standards to which they work, and the quality assurance of their products, is increasingly being enforced by outside bodies. The follow-on risk here is that such outside bodies may have their own agendas and that the industry and our members will be subject to rules not of their own making and in which they have little or no say.

From the above it would seem that it is necessary for the Association, and the movement more broadly, to take control, to whatever degree possible, of ensuring best practice and quality assurance.  Failure to do this will result in outside parties filling the gap created.  Consumers are getting more and more savvy and clients who have in the past suffered financial and other hardship as a result of dissatisfaction with building work undertaken for them, will continue to place pressure on the industry to deliver.

Brandon Abdinor | Executive Director

Discuss this article on the Forum...