Inside a railway arch in Brixton, a piece of history was brought back to life. First built in 1928 by Captain Richards & A.H. Reffell, Eric is one of the UK’s first robots. Eric’s design was relatively simple. He was automated, but the interesting thing about Eric is how much extra stuff people read into him. Ingenious electrical instruments enabled Eric to hear questions and answer in a human voice.
On September 28 1928 Eric stood up at the Royal Horticultural Hall, bowed, looked right and left and moved his hands as he proceeded to give an opening address as sparks flashed from his teeth.
The New York Press described Eric as the “perfect man,“ built less than a decade after the word robot was used for the first time, Eric toured the world with his makers but then vanished, seemingly forever.
Nobody knows if the robot was thrown out, or lost, but it’s apparent that Eric once lauded for his technical prowess became an early victim of technological obsolescence. He may have no longer been needed or wanted even though he may have still been in working order.
In May 2016, over 800 Kickstarters investors campaigned to bring Eric back to life. Roboticist and artist Giles Walker created a replica of Eric using just a handful of archived news cuttings, pictures, and video. The robot is built with the same finesse as modern robots but purposefully lacks their capabilities. Eric is controlled by a pre-programmed sequence, using software similar to that used for controlling lights in theatres.
By resurrecting Eric, Russell and Walker want to make people reevaluate the place of robots within our history and society at large.
Commissioned by the Science Museum and funded through a successful £51,000 Kickstarter campaign, Eric is on display at the South Kensington museum ahead of a Robots exhibition in 2017 and will thereafter tour the world just like he did more than 90 years ago.
The new exhibition will feature more than 100 robots, from a 16th-century mechanical monk to robots from science fiction and modern-day research labs.
In whose image are robots made?
According to Russell, Curator, London Science Museum the answer seems to be “ourselves.”
Robots are almost like mirrors, they reflect back on ourselves, tell us who we are Ben Russell, Curator, London Science Museum
As research into artificial intelligence continues, we will continue on the path of making artificial intelligence (AI) in our image. But can Christian thought provide an alternative approach to how robots are made?
The original Eric is a product of a time when an intelligent robot was still a far-off possibility. At the time, filmmakers and audiences treated these robots instrumentally; there was little sympathy for the robot dead.
Times, however, have changed. Christopher Orr, writing in The Atlantic, notes that there is a major philosophical shift in the newest version of Westworld: A shift from concern for the creators, made of flesh and blood, to concern for the created, made of steel and silicon.
Over the past decade business procurement has experienced rapid technological upheaval that, in the main, has made life easier for everyone involved.
The first ever Global Procurement Technology Summit was held in March 2016. It shows the emphasis procurement is now putting on understanding and utilising new technologies, and that it’s clearly a huge talking point for professionals across the world.
Looking in greater detail: which technology has been responsible and what has the effect been on procurement and buying professionals?
1. More informed decisions are being made
The digitalisation of procurement processes and integration of data-sharing across buyer behaviour, ratings and history of purchases over extended periods of time, has made for smarter and more informed decisions.
Despite the greater insight into decision-making, a study of US procurement professionals still revealed accurate forecasting to be the biggest challenge, something that’s possibly down to the rise in budget responsibilities over the last ten years.
The Coupa ‘Top 5: Constants and Change in Cloud Procurement’ report revealed that in 2003, budgets were reported as an average of $31m, compared to $100m in 2013.
2. Response times have drastically reduced
Procurement solutions are now quicker and easier than ever thanks to new marketplace technologies.
Buyers can take advantage of online purchasing possibilities, using websites like Amazon to source, purchase and arrange delivery of items.
The speed of procurement reflects the new speed in which consumerism moves ’’ the integration of digital mediums with online shopping has made the process of deliberation through to transaction much easier, a trend which has been reflected in the world of procurement.
3. Integration has brought its own problems
Technological integration has created many positives for procurement, but it’s also created challenges.
Millennials will make up 40% of the workforce by 2020, which is great for improving current procurement solutions as younger generations have higher expectations for technology and are early adapters.
However, the average age of procurement professionals in the UK is currently 44 – much older than the next generation of workers, who fully understand the capabilities of technology, and who will be easier to train and able to work with increased speed and accuracy.
The gap will close in the coming years, but procurement faces a struggle as older workers need to ensure their skills are relevant to the changing world around them.
Additionally, Hays’ ‘Procurement Salary Guide’ revealed that demand for procurement professionals has increased at all levels within the public sector, pushing salaries up. This demand is the result of a squeeze on public finances and attempts to cut costs following the slowdown in the economy.
4, Technology and the future of procurement
To conclude, technology is clearly a powerful enabler that’s here to stay. Plenty of companies are now seeing the importance of procurement technology as a means to improve their bottom lines, which was reflected in the inaugural Global Procurement Technology Summit earlier this year.
Integration of contract management, risk management and supplier lifecycle systems through investment in improved systems with added capabilities, has ensured more accurate sourcing is possible and due to the skills involved in running these systems, has driven salaries up.
Sophia Chapman is a guest contributor from Portfolio Procurement, expert recruiters in the compensation, benefit and reward sector.
There’s a reason why Mega-projects are simply called “Mega-projects.” Extremely large in scale with significant impacts on communities, environment and budgets, mega-projects attract a lot of public attention and often cost more than 1 billion. Because of its grandiose, a successful mega-project requires a lot of planning, responsibility and work. Likewise, the magnificence of such projects also creates a large margin for failure.
Mega-projects Come with Big Expectations. But a Project’s Success Is Often in the Eye of the Beholder
Despite their socio-economic significance mega-projects – delivering airports, railways, power plants, Olympic parks and other long-lived assets – have a reputation for failure. It is thought that over optimism, over complexity, poor execution, and weakness in organizational design and capabilities are the most common root causes of megaproject failure.
Blinded by enthusiasm for the project, individuals and organizations involved with mega-projects often miscalculate the complexity of the project. When a mega-project is pitched, its common for costs and timelines to be underestimated while the benefits of the project are overestimated. According Danish economist Bent Flyvbjerg, its not unusual for project managers who are competing for funding to massage the data until it is deemed affordable. After all, revealing the real costs up front would make a project unappealing, he said. As a result, these projects are destined for failure.
For example, building new railways spanning multiple countries could prove to be disastrous if plans are overly complex and over-optimized. Such a large-scale project involves national and local governments, various environmental and health standards, a wide range of skills and wages, private contractors, suppliers and consumers; therefore, one issue could put an end to the project. Such was the case when two countries spent nearly a decade working out diplomatic considerations while building a hydroelectric dam.
Complications and complexities of mega-projects must be considered thoroughly before launch. One way to review the ins and outs of a project is through reference-class forecasting. This process forces decision makers to look at past cases that might reflect similar outcomes to their proposed mega-project.
Poor execution is also a cause for failure in mega-projects. Due to the overoptimism and overcomplexity of a project, it’s easy for project managers and decision makers to cut corners trying to maintain cost assumptions and protect profit margins. Project execution is then overwhelmed by problems such as incomplete design, unclear scope, and mathematical errors in risk assessment and scheduling.
Researchers at McKinsey studied 48 struggling mega-projects and found that in 73 percent of the cases, poor execution was responsible for cost and time overruns. The other 27 percent ran into issues with politics such as new governments and laws.
Low productivity is another aspect of poor execution. Even though trends show that manufacturing has nearly doubled its productivity in the last 20 years, construction productivity remains flat and in some instances has even declined. However, wages continue to increase with inflation, leading to higher costs for the same results.
According to McKinsey studies, efficiency in delivering infrastructure can reduce total costs by 15 percent. Efficiency gains in areas like approval, engineering, procurement and construction can lead to as much as 25 percent of savings on new projects without compromising quality outcomes. This proves that planning before execution is worth its weight in gold.
We Tend to Exaggerate the Importance of Contracting Approach to Project Success or Failure
Finally, weaknesses in organizational design and capabilities results in failed megaprojects. For example, organizational setups can have multiple layers and in some cases the project director falls four or five levels below the top leadership. This can lead to problems as the top tier of the organizational chain (for example, subcontractors, contractors and construction managers) tend to focus on more work and more money while the lower levels of the chain (for example, owner’s representative and project sponsors) are focused on delivery schedules and budgets.
Likewise, a lack of capabilities proves to be an issue. Because of the large-scaled, complex nature of mega-projects, there is a steep learning curve involved and the skills needed are scarce. All the problems of megaprojects are compounded by the speed at which projects are started. When starting from scratch, mega-projects may create organizations of thousands of people within 12 months. This scale of work is comparable to the significant operational and managerial challenge a new start-up might face.
In the end, it seems that if organizations take the time to thoroughly prepare and plan for their mega-projects, problems like overcomplexity and overoptimism, poor execution, and weaknesses in organizational design and capabilities could be avoided. After all, mega=projects are too large and too expensive to rush into.
Due to the large scale and outlook attached to them, mega-projects have a large opportunity for failure. Typically, the failure begins at the outset of the project, whether that be due to poor justification for the project, misalignment among stakeholders, insufficient planning, or inability to find and use appropriate capabilities.
Underestimated costs and overestimated benefits often offset the baseline for assessing overall project performance. This is why it is important for organizations to first establish social and economic priorities before even considering what projects will answer their needs. Once social and economic priorities are established, only then can a project be considered. Selecting projects must be fact-based and transparent in order to ensure accountability with stakeholders and the public.
Successful Megaprojects Must Have Robust Risk-analysis or Risk-management Protocols
It’s also important to maintain adequate controls. Successful megaprojects must have robust risk-analysis or risk-management protocols and provide timely reports on progress relative to budgets and deadlines. Typically, progress is measured on the basis of cash flow, which is less than ideal as data could be out of date and payments to contractors do not correlate construction progress. Instead, project managers should deliver real-time data to measure activity in the field. For example, cubic meters of concrete poured relative to work plans and budgets.
Overall, improving project performance requires better planning and preparation in three areas: doing engineering and risk analysis before construction, streamlining permitting and land acquisition, and building a project team with the appropriate mix of abilities.
Project developers and sponsors should put more focus into pre-planning such as engineering and risk analysis before the construction phase. Unfortunately, most organizations and sponsors are reluctant to spend a significant amount of money on early-stage planning because they often lack the necessary funds, they are eager to break ground and they worry the design will be modified after construction is underway, making up-front designs pointless.
However, it’s proven that if developers spend three to five percent of capital cost on early-stage engineering and design, results are far better in terms of delivering the project on-time and on-budget. This is because through the design process, challenges will be addressed and resolved before they occur during the construction phase, saving both time and money.
It’s not unusual for permits and approvals to take longer than the building of a megaproject. However, if developers look to streamline permitting and land acquisition, that would significantly improve project performance. Best practices in issuing permits involve prioritizing projects, defining clear roles and responsibilities and establishing deadlines.
In England and Wales, developers applied these approaches to cut the time needed to approve power-industry infrastructure from 12 months to only nine months. On average, timelines for approval spanned four years throughout the rest of Europe. Likewise, the state of Virginia’s plan to widen Interstate 495 in 2012 was able to cut costs and save hundreds of homes thanks to land acquisition planning by a private design company.
Investors and Owners Must Take an Active Role in Creating the Project Team
When it’s all said and done, projects cannot deliver the best possible return on investment without a well-resourced and qualified network of project managers, advisers and controllers. Investors and owners must take an active role in creating the project team.
It’s not enough to have a vague overview of what the project might look like in the end. Instead, it’s necessary to review risks and costs and draft a detailed, practical approach to tackle various issues. An experienced project manager cannot do it all alone. The project team must include individuals with the appropriate skills, such as legal and technical expertise, contract management, project reporting, stakeholder management, and government and community relations among others.
Failure to Properly Plan for These Projects Could Have a Negative Impact on Society
While mega-projects are important in filling economic and social needs, failure to properly plan for these projects could have a negative impact on society. Take Centro Financiero Confinanzas (Venezuela), the eighth tallest building in Latin America at 45 stories, located in the financial district of Venezuela’s capital, Caracas for example.
To those unaware of its history, the Centro Financiero Confinanzas is actually home to over 700 families, a “vertical slum” that is a truly fascinating example of reappropriation of space in an urban environment. An ironic symbol of financial failure that was intended to represent the unstoppable march of Venezuela’s booming economy.
It’s much more than an unbuilt building, bridge or tunnel, failed mega-projects are a blow to the economic growth and social improvements of communities around the world.
The term ‘Modern Methods of Construction’ (MMC) embraces a range of technologies involving various forms of prefabrication and off-site assembly.
MMC is increasingly regarded as a realistic means of improving quality, reducing time spent on-site, improving on-site safety and addressing skills shortages in the construction of UK housing.
Bridge Crossing Modern Design
The variety of systems now available potentially allows the designer enough choice to sidestep problems deriving from constraints posed by the use of any one method. MMC systems, from closed-panel timber framed systems to bathroom pods are a palette from which designers can make choices. They are not necessarily stand-alone solutions that anticipate all the needs of an individual site and can be mixed and matched as appropriate.
These limitations are not obstacles to achieving the good design in MMC-based schemes, but may hinder the incorporation of more complex and innovative types of MMC from which greater overall benefits may be obtained which are considered under the following headings:
1. COST UNCERTAINTY
There is no doubt that, given products of comparable performance the key issue in purchases of MMC construction systems is the price. At present not enough is known about the potential costs of using volumetric and closed panel systems to enable confident specification at an early date. This inhibits designers from exploring the full potential of MMC systems. This is particularly true of the less repetitive, small, one-off scheme, where a smaller margin of benefits is gained from using MMC. The principal barrier to the uptake of MMC, therefore, seems to be the perception of cost uncertainty with respect to using more complex systems. Without doing substantial project-specific research, consultants and their clients simply do not know with enough degree of certainty how much the volumetric or closed panel systems are likely to cost, and what would be the savings to overall project costs produced by potential speed gains to offset against increased capital expenditure.
This is due to the complexity of assessing the ratio of cost of repetitive elements where pricing is relatively straightforward to the cost of adjusting elements or building in another method for the abnormal condition. Decisions to use innovative systems are likely to be made once designs are well progressed to enable teams to be more certain of costs. This can increase the potential for change or result in design compromise as the designer attempts to incorporate the specific limitations of a particular system in their design.
In an attempt to improve this situation, the MMC consultant and or clients could pull together a directory of MMC expanded to include cost comparison data. The huge range of variables involved inevitably makes this difficult, but a database of current construction cost information would be an invaluable resource.
Contemporary Building Facade
2. PLANNING PROCESS AND EARLY COMMITMENT TO A SYSTEM
The time it can take to obtain planning permission has obvious implications both for project cost but also, in some circumstances, for architectural design innovation.
Most of the more complex types of MMC have an impact on dimensioning, the choice of external finish and detailing may have some effect on the buildings mass. Therefore, the construction system should be chosen prior to a planning application to avoid abortive work, redesign or amendment, or even resubmission for planning permission.
However, developers whose money is at risk, frequently hold off deciding on the construction technique until the last practicable moment, in order to get any advantage from fluctuations in material or component pricing.
Given the potential for lengthy duration of planning applications, this means that there is little incentive to prepare initial designs for planning with a prior decision to incorporate MMC firmly embedded. In cases where the developer has a financial or business link with the supplier, this is less likely to be the case. As the majority of commercial or residential developments involve some kind of arrangement with a developer, agreement on construction systems is often left to the stage after planning.
3. TIME INVESTMENT
Another very significant factor is the time investment required at the early stages of projects. This is needed to develop the design when the project is still at risk. There is a direct relationship between the scale and complexity of MMC component and the amount of time required to develop a design at an early stage.
The introduction of advanced or complex MMC techniques into the design process is potentially costly to the design team. A significant amount of research is needed to explore alternative systems, to obtain verification of suppliers’credentials, investigate mortgage and insurance issues, visit previous sites, talk to system suppliers, obtain technical performance guidelines, understand junctions and interfaces, coordinate other consultants, obtain building control input and so on.
For a consultant, the only way of investing in this research is either through timely payment of increased fees by a visionary understanding client or through the anticipation of increased future productivity through repetition when a project is phased, or large enough, or likely to be followed by another similar project.
The potential of learning a system and then being able to repeat lessons learned efficiently is a powerful incentive for both client and consultant. By contrast, HTA’ s project at Basingstoke is an example of a phased project with a three to four-year duration allowed the design team to repeat various elements of the design, and the manufacturer to develop improved solutions to technical and supply problems.
HTA’ s project at Basingstoke
4. INSUFFICIENT COMMUNICATION
Improved dialogue at the outset of the project is vital if design quality is to be maximised. Constraints and opportunities implicit within a particular system are more easily incorporated into design if partners communicate pre-planning. Increased early communication can be fostered through improved long-term partnering relationships.
Clients should also partner with a range of suppliers and architects so that choice and flexibility is not restricted.
5. INEXPERIENCE
Generally, the inexperienced client or design team will have to do more research, with the result that there is likely to be significant design development without a specific system being incorporated.
This is a disincentive to using a more complex system involving a higher proportion of MMC, where early decision making and knowledge of a system’ s capabilities have a decisive influence on the nature of the architecture. However, encouraging the take up of MMC through the use of a dedicated funding mechanism may assist clients in finding time for research into suitable MMC techniques.
Dome Construction Berlin
6. SUPPLIER’S ROLE
Site capacity studies and early stage pre-planning design studies could be undertaken directly by system suppliers on behalf of clients, cutting out the usual procedure of commissioning design work by independent consultants.
7. ASSUMPTIONS
There are a number of assumptions that are generally held about certain types of MMC that may have been valid at one time but are no longer true today. There is a need for reliable and up to date information comparing system criteria, performance data, timescales, lead in times, capacity, construction time, sequencing issues, limitations, and benefits.
Therefore it would be helpful if a forum for discussion and experience exchange was set up.
8. DEMONSTRATING THE BENEFITS OF MMC
There is still a large amount of skepticism about the need to go very far down the line with MMC. This is reflected in the acceptance of the desirability of maintaining or indeed enhancing the pool of traditional craft skills throughout the UK.
A balanced view is that there is a demonstrable need for the wider use of MMC which is recognized by both industry and government. The best way for clients and the public generally to become more confident and knowledgeable about the quality of design achievable through MMC is to see it demonstrated.
9. FINANCIAL INCENTIVES
There is no doubt that spreading the burden of investment through the life of a project helps to ensure a higher standard of specification and hence quality. In the Netherlands, a ‘ Green Financing’system has been developed by the Dutch government that provides favorable loan finance when certain sustainable standards are reached. In the UK, the Gallions HA has pioneered a study of this, based on a scheme in Thamesmead, ‘ the Ecopark project’.
Eco Park is an eco-friendly business park built on the False Bay coast. This business park is at the cutting-edge of sustainable design and offers a unique working environment in a secure, well-managed facility.
