This dual role occasionally presents some difficulties, which have to be sorted out impartially and with sensitivity by the two organisations and myself, but for most of the time they are a natural fit.
The JIB's rule book applies to electrical contractors of all sizes, as I frequently have to remind the large firms. A proposal which would be natural commonsense for a big project in London may be completely inappropriate for a small family business in Cornwall or Carlisle. The sites are in the same industry, but the needs and perspectives are totally different.
Chairing the JMCG has been a fascinating but sometimes frustrating role. I suppose that I am there because I am not the chief executive of a major m&e company. When the Group first started, the founder members, of which there were 12 when I joined, had chosen the chairman from among themselves. They subsequently decided that they would prefer to have an independent chairman to bring outside thoughts and experiences to the discussions.
I retired from the impartial position of chairman of the Construction Industry Board (CIB) in July 1996. On my retirement, the ECA and the HVCA asked me to accept the JMCG chairmanship, which I was delighted to do. I felt that my experience in working with the Constructors Liaison Group over the previous three years might be helpful to the specialist engineering sector.
I also had, and still have, the happiest relations with the two Associations. They are very well run and effective trade bodies. Both bodies are highly focussed on the reform programme for the construction industry, which "Constructing the Team" was hoping to bring about. I would not have agreed to work with any organisation not committed to reform.
The first requirement for the JMCG was 'team building'. That might seem an odd aspiration, since the members are chief executives of competitor companies who tender against each other every day. However, if the work of the Group was to be taken forward effectively, the members needed to concentrate on issues which united rather than divided them.
I would not have agreed to work with any organisation not committed to reform
The Group's members looked to the ECA and the HVCA to defend their interests regarding tendering abuse by pushing for the implementation, or indeed revision, of the Construction Act. Productivity, best performance and research projects to assist them, were also crucial, as was training, education and recruitment of quality young people into the m&e sector, whether as apprentices or graduates.
Such 'team building' has not been easy. The chief executives are busy people and attendance at group meetings (about five times a year, and all planned well in advance) is mixed. Some attend very regularly, others more sporadically. It is a JMCG rule that alternates are not allowed. The chief executive is meant to attend personally.
During the last two years, following discussions among the members, the JMCG has increased in size to 16 and its newer members are very active.
Another problem has been the regular changes in membership as chief executives retired, moved onto other positions within their groups of companies, or joined other firms. Only three of the original 12 who were there when I joined four years ago remain.
Further aspects which will increasingly affect the Group's membership are mergers, takeovers, sales or downsizing of JMCG members. These all reflect the wider restructuring of the sector, and none of them are painless. I expect the Group's size to come under further discussion, as new and larger players seem to emerge into the market virtually every month.
Busy people should not be called to meetings unless there is a worthwhile agenda. Together with the ECA and HVCA directors, I have held separate bilateral meetings with the JMCG members over the last year to establish what they really want from the Group.
Source
Electrical and Mechanical Contractor
