- News
All the latest updates on building safety reformRegulations latest
- Focus
- Comment
- Programmes
- CPD
- Building the Future
- Jobs
- Data
- Subscribe
- Events
2024 events calendar
Explore nowBuilding Awards
Keep up to date
- Building Boardroom
Assael Architecture has been named the best employer in Building’s Good Employers Guide for the second year in a row. Followed by runners-up Oktra, Alinea, Architype and Buro Four
Below you will find an interactive table containing data for all 50 of this year's Good Employers. Search, sort or rank this data using the symbols (see key on right for what each symbol represents) in the headers of the table. You are able to sort two columns at the same time by holding the Shift button on your keyboard and selecting the two columns you wish to sort. You are also able to see further details of each employer, including what they say about themselves and staff ratings, by clicking on their names.
Employer | Staff t/over 2014 | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3PM | 0 | 13 | 26 | 40 | DCSP/GPP | 2 | 0% | All | All | All | All | Enhanced | Enhanced | 1 |
AA Projects | 8.5 | 99 | 30 | 50 | GPP(C) | 7 | 7% | All | All | All | All | Enhanced | Enhanced | 5 |
Airey Miller Partnership | 7 | 33 | 33 | 50 | GPP | 3 | 15% | Some | All | N/O | Some | Enhanced | Enhanced | 5 |
alinea consulting | 0% | 65 | 30 | 76 | GPP | 8 | 10% | All | All | N/O | N/O | Enhanced | Enhanced | 8 |
Architype | 14.06 | 54 | 25 | 27 | DCSP(C)/PP | 24 | 13.50% | All | All | N/O | Some | Enhanced | Enhanced | N/O |
Assael Architecture | 4 | 63 | 40 | 54 | Comb(C) | 14 | 6.30% | All | All | N/O | Some | Enhanced | Enhanced | 4 |
Bastows | 6 | 21 | 28 | 60 | N/O | 1 | 20% | All | All | N/O | N/O | Enhanced | Enhanced | 1 |
bptw partnership | 12 | 95 | 28 | 36 | GPP | 32 | 14% | Some | All | N/O | All | Enhanced | Enhanced | 7 |
Buro Four | 9 | 89 | 30 | 50 | GPP(NC) | 25 | 8% | All | All | All | All | Enhanced | Enhanced | 7 |
Child Graddon Lewis | 6 | 42 | 28 | 50 | GPP(C)/DCSP(NC)/PP(NC) | 17 | 30% | Some | All | N/O | Some | Statutory minimum | Statutory minimum | 2 |
Clancy Consulting | 15 | 116 | 32 | 27 | GPP(C) | 9 | 7% | All | All | Some | All | Statutory minimum | Enhanced | 9 |
Couch Perry & Wilkes | 8 | 222 | 30 | 76 | GPP(C) | 17 | 7% | All | All | All | Some | Enhanced | Enhanced | 9 |
Crofton Design | 8 | 48 | 25 | 75 | GPP | 2 | 10% | Some | Some | N/O | Some | Statutory minimum | Enhanced | 3 |
Croudace Homes | 9.27 | 241 | 28 | 35 | DCSP(C)/GPP | 55 | 3% | Some | All | N/O | All | Enhanced | Enhanced | 26 |
Cundall | 15.6 | 354 | 30 | 21 | GPP(C) | 45 | 12% | N/O | All | All | All | Enhanced | Enhanced | 26 |
Curtins Consulting | 13 | 291 | 30 | 25 | GPP(C) | 25 | 6% | All | All | N/O | Some | Statutory minimum | Enhanced | 13 |
David Miller Architects | 19 | 19 | 25 | 53 | PP | 7 | 21% | Some | All | N/O | All | Enhanced | Enhanced | 2 |
DBK Partners | 9 | 132 | 40 | 35 | MP(C) | 17 | 22% | Some | All | Some | Some | Statutory minimum | Enhanced | 11 |
Elliott Thomas Group | 33% | 149 | 25 | 14 | GPP(C)/PP(C) | 2 | 15.5% | N/O | All | N/O | Some | Statutory minimum | Statutory minimum | 1 |
Elliott Wood Partnership | 28 | 125 | 38 | 100 | DCSP | 19 | 12% | All | All | N/O | All | Enhanced | Enhanced | 15 |
EPR Architects | 6 | 164 | 32 | 50 | DCSP/GPP(C) | 46 | 11% | All | All | Some | Some | Enhanced | Enhanced | 8 |
Granit Chartered Architects | 6 | 19 | 37 | 90 | DCSP(C) | 6 | 5.50% | N/O | Some | N/O | Some | Statutory minimum | Statutory minimum | N/O |
Hardies Property & Construction Consultants | 15 | 78 | 30 | 20 | PP(C)MP(NC) | 1 | 3% | N/O | All | N/O | All | Statutory minimum | Statutory minimum | 3 |
Henry Riley | 6% | 101 | 31 | 35 | GPP | 10 | 9% | N/O | Some | Some | Some | Statutory minimum | Statutory minimum | 3 |
Hilson Moran | 11 | 189 | 29 | 45 | GPP | 18 | 14% | All | All | All | All | Statutory minimum | Statutory minimum | 5 |
HKS Architects | 8 | 55 | 30 | 45 | DCSP | 19 | 22% | All | All | All | Some | Enhanced | Enhanced | 6 |
HTA Design | 31 | 130 | 30 | 103 | GPP(C) | 52 | 10% | All | All | N/O | N/O | Enhanced | Enhanced | 10 |
John Rowan and Partners | 15 | 96 | 36 | 23 | GPP | 10 | 26% | All | All | Some | Some | Enhanced | Enhanced | 6 |
Keegans | 8 | 63 | 33 | 45 | DCSP(C) | 7 | 17% | Some | All | N/O | Some | Statutory minimum | Statutory minimum | 6 |
Lakesmere Group | 10.5 | 523 | 26 | 32 | GPP | 49 | 7.10% | All | All | Some | Some | Statutory minimum | Statutory minimum | 14 |
LSI Architects | 2 | 57 | 32 | 16 | GPP(C) | 10 | 0% | All | All | N/O | All | Statutory minimum | Statutory minimum | 4 |
maber architects | 1.5% | 61 | 25 | 35 | DCSP/PP | 7 | 9% | N/O | All | All | All | Statutory minimum | Statutory minimum | 7 |
Mace | 27% | 2895 | 27 | 12 | GPP(C) | 375 | 15% | All | All | All | All | Enhanced | Enhanced | 88 |
Martin Arnold | 5.6 | 79 | 26 | 74 | DCSP | 10 | 21% | Some | Some | N/O | Some | Enhanced | Enhanced | 8 |
Max Fordham | 11 | 204 | 22 | 65 | GPP(C) | 37 | 5% | All | All | All | N/O | Enhanced | Enhanced | 22 |
Method Consulting | 5% | 18 | 24 | 37 | GPP(C) | 4 | 5% | N/O | All | N/O | All | Enhanced | Enhanced | 6 |
Mount Anvil | 16 | 170 | 30 | 50 | GPP(C) | 11 | 12% | N/O | All | N/O | All | Enhanced | Enhanced | 5 |
MSMR Architects | 25 | 29 | 30 | 50 | GPP(C) | 12 | 10% | N/O | Some | Some | Some | Enhanced | Enhanced | 4 |
Oktra | 0 | 142 | 30 | 40 | DCSP(C) | 20 | 16% | Some | All | All | Some | Statutory minimum | Statutory minimum | 2 |
Penoyre & Prasad | 18 | 42 | 25 | 30 | GPP(C)/PP(NC) | 18 | 15% | Some | All | N/O | N/O | Enhanced | Enhanced | N/O |
Peter Brett Associates | 18% | 663 | 30 | 48 | GPP(C) | 134 | 8% | All | All | All | Some | Enhanced | Enhanced | 39 |
Pick Everard | 17% | 470 | 26 | 38 | DCSP(C)/MP(NC) | 62 | 13.8% | All | All | All | All | Enhanced | Enhanced | 12 |
Ryder Architecture | 8 | 135 | 66 | 83 | GPP(C) | 30 | 8% | All | All | All | All | Enhanced | Enhanced | 28 |
Silver | 0% | 54 | 25 | 20 | GPP(C) | 6 | 6% | All | All | N/O | Some | Statutory minimum | Statutory minimum | 10 |
Skelly & Couch | 12% | 30 | 28 | 65 | GPP | 5 | 26% | Some | All | Some | All | Statutory minimum | Enhanced | 4 |
Solomons Europe | 19 | 31 | 30 | 15 | DCSP | 4 | 0% | N/O | All | N/O | All | Statutory minimum | Enhanced | N/O |
Stanton Williams | 11 | 92 | 25 | 20 | GPP(C)/DCSP(NC) | 21 | 9% | Some | All | All | N/O | Enhanced | Enhanced | N/O |
Telford Homes | 7.7 | 211 | 25 | 7 | GPP | 38 | 11% | N/O | All | N/O | Some | Enhanced | Statutory minimum | 5 |
Troup Bywaters + Anders | 17% | 184 | 27 | 72 | GPP | 17 | 19% | All | All | N/O | All | Enhanced | Enhanced | 17 |
WCEC Architects | 5.1 | 144 | 33 | 47 | GPP(C) | 14 | 5.50% | All | All | N/O | All | Statutory minimum | Enhanced | 27 |
Methodology
Readers of Building that are eligible to enter Building’s other “Top” tables, such as consultants, contractors and housebuilders, and other industry firms were invited to take part in the selection process for the Good Employer Guide 2015, through a call for entries published in print and online. Each interested firm was sent a link to an online staff survey to send to all employees, which had to be filled in anonymously by a minimum of 33% of total staff, excluding those who worked in purely support functions such as HR. This survey gauged strength of feeling on the company’s performance in nine key areas: leadership, corporate social responsibility, employees’ opportunity to contribute, working atmosphere, opportunities for smarter working, career progression, the company’s response to current market conditions, the promotion of mental wellbeing, and how likely staff would be to recommend their company to a new entrant to the industry. Staff were also given the opportunity to provide additional information. Survey responses were sent direct to Building magazine, and not seen by the company in question.
Separately, each interested firm was asked to complete an entry form giving the following information:
Companies were also asked to provide a 500-word statement in support of their entry, addressing the following areas: stand-out benefits; how the company has adapted to current market conditions; leadership and development; employee engagement; staff wellbeing and the “feel good factor”; mental wellbeing; diversity and inclusion; corporate social responsibility, including attitude towards sustainability; and outreach to promote career opportunities in construction to new entrants.
Companies were also invited to submit supplementary information, in the form of case studies or testimonials to support their entry.
The entries were assessed by a judging panel comprising: Michael Ryley, Partner in Weightmans LLP, Nicola Ihnatowicz, Partner in Trowers & Hamlins LLP, Rosalind Connor, Partner in Taylor Wessing, Sarah Richardson, editor of Building magazine, Joey Gardiner, deputy editor of Building magazine, and Deborah Duke, acting production manager and special projects editor of Building magazine.
The top five firms were identified from a shortlist selected in the first judging round by a weighting system that rewarded firms for the benefits offered under the various entry headings and the strength of endorsement from staff gathered through responses to the survey. The weighting system was adjusted to take account of company demographics – for example, the size of the firm was taken into account when assessing the range of benefits offered, as was the sector in which the company worked. So, for example, a small regional contractor would not be penalised for not offering staff the opportunity to work abroad. The final top five were selected by amalgamating individual scores awarded to firms on this shortlist by each of our final round judges.
Beyond the top five, the firms selected for this year’s guide have been listed in alphabetical order. The guide contains the top 50 companies from the entries received. Approximately 200 companies registered to be considered for the guide.