Resistance to the use of value management

Although its use was widespread in the US from the 1950s, it took another 3 decades for the concept to be applied in Europe, with its first ever application in the UK by the American company Xerox in 1983.

The growing spread of the quality movement in the 1980s and shift of the initial focus from materials to cost and quality, the concept was eventually accepted in the UK and Europe, where the incumbent design team became a key part of the team undertaking the value audit.

One of the reasons for the slow uptake was probably due to the fact that the US approach to value for money required a separate team to audit the incumbent design team’s proposals. The design team was then expected to implement the audit team’s proposals.

Resistance to value management comes in many forms including:

  • project teams believe value management is part of their day-to-day work and as such think dedicated value management unnecessary;
  • designers concern they have not done their job properly. May be uncomfortable with having others critique their design;
  • clients may suggest there is insufficient time to facilitate value management;
  • nobody likes change;
  • a lack of understanding and the benefits of value management;
  • value management is not necessarily about cost cutting:
    • think about what things do;
    • what their function is;
    • what their contribution is in terms of value;
    • what their cost is; and
    • balance the cost against the value delivered.
It may be possible to identify:
  • items that can be omitted;
  • items that can have their specification changed;
  • items that could be re-instigated later in the programme if the budget allows; and
  • the desire from outsiders to claim the credit for finding savings and improvements in design as such rushing to find savings and improvements in isolation reducing the outcome.

Value management is not rocket science. It’s just the disciplined application of common sense and therefore easy to dismiss as unnecessary. However, without such a discipline, we so often produce an outcome that fails to secure the best value-for-money solution.