We recently caught up with a familiar face from across the offsite sector and spoke with Trudi Sully, UK and Europe Lead – Industrialised Design & Construction at Mott MacDonald, about the role Design for Manufacture & Assembly (DfMA) plays in driving improvements across the built environment.

Q: Can you say a little about your role at Mott MacDonald and how the business fits into the offsite landscape?


Trudi Sully (TS): I joined Mott MacDonald two years ago, having been a director with the Construction Innovation Hub for the previous four years, working with government departments and industry partners to steer the development of the tools and approaches to support the transformation ambitions for the industry. I wanted to see those concepts being put into action on real projects, which drove me to join Mott MacDonald where we have a dedicated multi-disciplinary practice in all areas of Industrialised Design and Construction (IDC). We cover MMC, offsite, lean, DfMA, product platforms and industrialisation – the application of approaches that improve the productivity and performance of what we build and how we build it.


Q: As a design approach, how can DfMA help improve the UK’s poor productivity levels and what barriers to understanding do you encounter when discussing DfMA?


TS: DfMA is about simplifying the production process. It involves designing products with ease of manufacture and efficiency of assembly in mind, thereby enabling reduced production time and costs. This approach offers ways to enhance the quality and sustainability of the product and enable a smooth transition from design to production, to on-site assembly. The off and on-site efficiencies this enables offers routes to improved productivity. DfMA can, and probably should, be used on any construction project.

One of the barriers to understanding it is not so much in the principles of DfMA – but like so many other elements considered under the umbrella of offsite (or industrialisation – as we use) – it has limited capability to maximise impact if used in isolation or deployed poorly.  This is by no means a reason not to apply it. I encourage those adopting it to consider the needs up and down the supply chain in implementing it as part of a wider holistic change.

Q: How is the use of digital tools central to offsite manufacture with the growing plethora of toolkits, platform approaches, repeatable components and harmonised demand – how are these things developing an Industry 4.0 approach?


TS: I struggle with the way ‘digital’ is used as a ubiquitous term nowadays. I also think the inherent anxiety that many have with technology is sometimes exploited by companies that feed on the confusion they can create with jargon. It feels similar to how BIM was used/misused as a term to be wedged into every sentence several years ago.

Data and the intelligent creation, analysis and iterative use of it, is key to advancing and transforming construction. The more we apply industrialised approaches, the smarter we need to be in managing the data generated to maximise the benefits we can achieve. But let’s keep it simple. Better data, to support integrated processes, that is represented in clear, accessible ways at the right level of detail for the audience, will reduce error, enhance quality and improve efficiency – in delivery, in use and at end-of life.

Harmonising demand creates clarity of the demand profile for the supply chain. Which in turn gives confidence and enables development of repeatable systems or components, delivered to a higher quality, to meet the needs of a product platform, that results in better delivery of our built assets. We know the impact of adopting these approaches could be huge. In the ‘Value of Platforms in Construction’ report we wrote for the Construction Innovation Hub last year, we identified the potential for government to save £1.8billion/year through the adoption of a platform approach. Industry 4.0 is about bringing all these things together and embedding continuous improvement, to deliver ever-improving whole life outcomes.

Q: Decarbonisation is critical across the construction industry generally – how can offsite technology address the many issues surrounding the circular economy, waste reduction, embodied carbon and overall sustainability?


TS: This is such a great area for almost incidental wins, though I would prefer more proactive work to make them intentional! Every aspect of offsite should be about optimisation of process and materials to realise better outcomes. Through DfMA and lean we can reduce material usage or select better materials, and improve overall performance, while hugely reducing waste. Through the adoption of manufacturing approaches, you can also reap benefits in terms of resources, utilities, energy, transportation and logistics.

Central to any good industrialisation approach is considering whole life value. So that incorporates not just optimising design and delivery, but how the built asset is used, maintained and what happens when it needs to be repurposed or demolished. The majority of a building’s impact on the environment comes from the operational phase rather than the construction, so this upfront consideration hugely impacts those long-term effects. In short, there is no aspect of an industrialised approach that doesn’t also offer opportunity for reducing our impact on the environment.

Q: A criticism often levelled at offsite is the lack of interoperability amongst systems and providers in the event of business failures – is that a genuine worry and how can it be overcome?

TS: Some projects have faced this challenge, but I don’t believe the risk of these incidents could be considered to outweigh the impact of over-cost and over-time projects that continue to plague the industry as a whole. The certainty that can be provided from offsite delivery models, through the data that is generated, should provide far greater knowledge of the structure and the way it was delivered to enable remedial or recovery work to be undertaken when necessary.

We are also starting to see development of product platforms where a level of design details (or indeed full systems) is shared, such that multiple providers can deliver common assets to expand the supply chain. This reduces the risk to clients and offers greater opportunities to the market, and particularly SMEs. Indeed, the major infrastructure programmes required to fulfil our societal needs could not currently be met by the existing supply chain capacities in many areas, so developing these systems and programmatic approaches will enable more balanced demand for greater delivery efficiency.

Q: The Golden Thread attempts to connect the fields of design, manufacturing and delivery with the huge volumes of data generated during a project – how can this data be used to its maximum potential to prove the benefits behind offsite and DfMA choices? 


TS: This really comes back to that bigger holistic view. All the areas we’ve discussed so far will help, and actually are integral to the strength of the Golden Thread. Of course, when we talk about the fact that we ‘just’ need to change everything – planning, contracts, procurement, design, delivery – it can be overwhelming. The scale of change is enough to make anyone pause, but what I always try to explain is that we are on a journey. Yes, we are impatient and want to go faster, but we must recognise that this level of change takes time, and we are moving fast if you look at the increasing use and demand. As to the proof – we are seeing that all the time in the amazing projects being delivered.

Q: How do you see the offsite landscape changing in the next 18 months? 

We are still very much evolving – and this is a good thing. Yes, there have been some high-profile failures, but that will always be a feature of an industry in transformation. What frustrates me is that failures are often highlighted and reactions to them are so strong, while success stories are always more muted. I’ve just recently finished judging the Offsite Awards for the fifth year and that is where I get a concentrated hit of the good news stories and the changes coming through.

We now have a new government that has already committed to make big changes in relation to housing and prisons. Two areas that massively impact wider society. The opportunities for industrialisation here are immense and I have confidence that it will play a major role in addressing the challenges we face. However, what I really want to see is a faster shift from the ‘them and us’ positioning between traditional and offsite. Offsite or industrialisation is not a different sector, they are just increasingly proven mechanisms to meet the demands in a modern world and should complement traditional delivery approaches, for everyone’s benefit.

Q: Finally, as the official spokesperson for Offsite Construction Week, how exciting a development do you see this in bringing the many differing aspects of offsite manufacture together to showcase what it does for the UK and International built environment?


TS: Offsite Construction Week has been my litmus paper for what is happening in the industry since I’ve been working in it. To be acting as its spokesperson is a real honour, and perhaps also reflective of our progress overall. The advisory group is a diverse collective of industry thought-leaders, representing those with years of construction experience, as well as those of us who come from other backgrounds, but all with a passion to use that experience to support transformation. We are determined to make Offsite Construction Week, with the Expo, Summit, Awards, tours and round tables, a melting pot of positivity! It’s going to be more inclusive with wider diversity of thought than ever before. The built environment is central to all of our lives and I’m looking forward to celebrating our achievements and shaping our ambitions in making it better for everyone.