Research and the ACA

John Held , 8 April 2025

In a rapidly evolving professional landscape, industry associations play a vital role in supporting their members with practical guidance while advocating for their interests at a broader societal and governmental level. To do both effectively, associations must rely on credible, well-directed research that informs decision making and advocacy, writes John Held.

I’m often surprised by how incurious architects can be. Buried in their projects, trying to make sense of the brief and the technical requirements while avoiding the ever-present regulatory traps, it’s not surprising that architects don’t spend much time thinking about research. Overall, spending on research in the construction industry in Australia is very low compared to other industries – one of the reasons why we still design and build in much the same way as we always have.

An industry association has different objectives to individual practices – it needs to be promoting better ways of doing business to its members, while being an effective advocate to government and the public for its members. Both require effective voices backed by evidence. It’s easy to be cynical about those facts – we know many examples of research that are commissioned to agree with the position already decided. But a truly inquisitive association should always be aiming to find new facts, ask new questions and discover relevant new information that can improve outcomes for both the profession and wider society.

Good research costs time and money, and must be sufficiently focused to get real answers. The recent ARC research on the Wellbeing of Architects, led by Naomi Stead, is an example of a well-resourced, relevant and detailed study, which should help to change the nature of architectural practice in Australia. In a different way, the ACA Pulse Checks that commenced within a week of lockdowns and continued through the pandemic enabled the ACA to best understand the impact of lockdowns on projects and target the specific needs of management, mid-career architects, and graduates. It helped us respond to the different stresses on senior managers, those with families and the specific issues of remote work. Our current Pulse Check survey will help us understand the impacts of current economic headwinds on practices and the most effective ways the ACA can offer support, advocacy and resources.

Earlier research within the construction industry also had tangible benefits. For example, the GFC was the first time governments recognised the ability of the construction industry to help smooth out major financial downturns, and the BER program helped Australia emerge relatively unscathed. The research of the systems used and the outcomes undertaken in the Orgill Report on the BER will hopefully mean some of the mistakes made at that time are not repeated next time – and at the moment there are fears of another recession. Are we ready to face that, and do we have the facts ready and at our disposal?

There are many topics that the ACA could sponsor if funding were available. The recently released Consult Australia work on Unravelling Risk highlights the need for quantitative research on issues of risk allocation, indemnity insurance and models of contracting. Engineers Australia’s work over a decade ago on Getting it Right the First Time – the cost of poor documentation – has not been updated, and there is very little contemporary research available on evaluation of price risk in tender assessment.

Research informs policy, and good policy leads to good decision making. Good decision making leads to a better profession. You join the dots…