CIOB identity crisis

I refer to Peter Matthew's letter in last month's CM ('Non-serviced Industry'). My decision to join CIOB as an ASI member was a matter of trust in the CIOB. Following the Egan and Latham reports the industry was re-shaping, integrating construction professionals across the board from designers to the supply chain.

However our chief executive Chris Blythe increasingly writes in this magazine in terms of the institute's future for 'construction managers', and, as Mr Matthews points out, other rival institutes offer more value for money and have a marketing edge.

It's time for a review. Do clients understand that the CIOB is not just composed of builders or construction managers? Do the other professionals under CIOB get anything other than a magazine and letters for their membership? Has the initiative been lost to become the industy's leading multi-disciplinary institute? Have money-making schemes over and above membership fees clouded the aims and objectives of the institute?

RICS, for example, is more relaxed about its identity. It expands its own profile and does not charge for separate 'consultancy schemes'. The general public are reasonably aware of what an RICS professional does, and they do not focus on one specific area of their membership. If the CIOB wants to get ahead it needs to put its wealth of members' skills on show and give members more for their money and make them feel valued. Lead by example and others will follow. Dismiss such and they will walk.

Chris Blythe responds: I feel encouraged by Lord Sandland's support of my attempt to stimulate the debate on how the CIOB fully engages across a very broad and diverse membership. Of course clients know that the CIOB is more than builders. A major client is to become president in June. As to the RICS; Lord Sandland has not kept up-to-date with what's been going on there and this perhaps indicates that he reads CM more than the RICS publications.