% who say current cost-based and billable-hour incentives have some or high correlation with excessive cost escalation (excluding “No opinion”)
Note: Values are based on respondents in each role who selected “Some correlation” or “High correlation,” excluding those who chose “No opinion” or left the item blank.
Source: State of Construction Survey (n = 12)
% of respondents who say many in each role would embrace a value-aligned contracting approach enthusiastically (excluding “No opinion”)
Note: “Many enthusiastically” reflects respondents who selected “Many (enthusiastically)” for each role, excluding “No opinion” and non-responses.
Source: State of Construction Survey (n = 12)
Overall willingness vs. anticipated enthusiastic adoption of a rewired contracting approach, across owners’ reps, designers, builders, design-builders and trade contractors
Note: “Willing to pilot” includes responses of “Some (reluctantly),” “Some (enthusiastically),” “Many (reluctantly)” or “Many (enthusiastically)” across owners’ reps, designers, builders, design-builders and trade contractors, excluding “None,” “No opinion” and non-responses. “Many enthusiastic” includes only “Many (enthusiastically).”
Source: State of Construction Survey (n = 12)
% who say current cost-based and billable-hour incentives have some or high correlation with excessive cost escalation (excluding “No opinion”)
Note: Values are based on respondents in each role who selected “Some correlation” or “High correlation,” excluding those who chose “No opinion” or left the item blank.
Source: State of Construction Survey (n = 12)
% of respondents who say a data-derived, value-based compensation model would significantly influence the following
Note: Respondents were asked how a value-based compensation framework would affect adoption of industrialized construction and automation.
Source: State of Construction Survey (n = 12)
% of respondents who say participants would be willing to pilot, and who would embrace it enthusiastically (“many” in each role)
Note: “Enthusiastically” refers to respondents who selected “Many (enthusiastically)” in each role as likely to embrace the new contracting approach.
Source: State of Construction Survey (n = 12)
% seeing correlation between incentives & cost escalation vs. % expecting “many” in their role to be enthusiastic
Note: Dots represent % selecting “Some” or “High” correlation vs. % selecting “Many (enthusiastically)” for each role.
Source: State of Construction Survey (n = 12)
Difference between % seeing correlation and % expecting “many” to embrace a rewired contract
Note: GAP values = correlation % minus “many enthusiastic” % for each role.
Source: State of Construction Survey (n = 12)
% seeing correlation between incentives & cost escalation vs. % expecting “many” in their role to be enthusiastic
Note: Dots represent % selecting “Some” or “High” correlation vs. % selecting “Many (enthusiastically)” for each role.
Source: State of Construction Survey (n = 12)
% of respondents who see a correlation between incentives and cost escalation, and who say many in each role would embrace a rewired, value-aligned contract
Note: “See correlation” reflects respondents in each role who said current incentive structures are at least somewhat correlated with excessive cost escalation. “Enthusiastic” reflects respondents who said many in that role would embrace a rewired, value-aligned contracting approach. GAP values are simple percentage-point differences between the two.
Source: State of Construction Survey (n = 12)
% of respondents who say each statement about piloting or enthusiastically adopting a value-aligned contracting model is true
Note: Values reflect respondents who said each statement is at least somewhat likely. Percentages are based on all survey respondents.
Source: State of Construction Survey (n = 12)
% of respondents who say participants would pilot or enthusiastically adopt a rewired, value-aligned contracting approach
Note: “At least some” includes respondents who expect any level of adoption in that category; “many” reflects those who expect broad, enthusiastic uptake among design-builders.
Source: State of Construction Survey (n = 12)
% of respondents who expect design-builders to be at least somewhat enthusiastic vs. many being enthusiastic adopters
Note: The darker segment shows the share who believe many design-builders would be enthusiastic adopters. The lighter segment represents additional respondents who expect at least some, but not many, to be enthusiastic.
Source: State of Construction Survey (n = 12)
% of respondents who say addressing overhead, support costs, waste, and related profit is important — and whether they believe the problem can be solved
Note: “Important” reflects respondents who agreed that non-value-added costs (overhead, support, waste, and related profit) represent a critical problem. “Unsolvable” reflects respondents who believe the issue cannot be meaningfully addressed; others believe improvement is possible.
Source: State of Construction Survey (n = 12)
100% of respondents say overhead, support costs, waste, and related profit are an important problem to solve. Within that group, views differ on whether the problem can be solved.
Note: All respondents agreed that non-value-added costs (overhead, support, waste, and related profit) represent an important problem. Among them, 17% believe the issue cannot be meaningfully addressed; 83% believe improvement is possible.
Source: State of Construction Survey (n = 12)