Too many suppliers?
Many project teams use multiple suppliers to deliver the technical elements of a site set up. One company installs the internet connection, another runs the structured cabling, a third provides WiFi, a fourth installs CCTV, and the list goes on.
While it’s obvious to understand that there’s a desire to find the right technical expertise, this also creates operational challenges.
These contractors frequently need access to the same cabins and the same installation routes at the same time. Each is working to its own schedule with limited visibility of the wider project plan. This can and does lead to delays, unexpected costs and unnecessary friction.
There are many jobs that we have worked on where multiple people need the shared site equipment at the same time, such as mobile elevated work platforms (MEWPs). Accessibility of site locations is also another common concern. It’s just not feasible to have two contractors working in the exact same location at the same time. Someone has to wait. But, as a result, this means work inevitably gets delayed, which in turn leads to increased labour hours and increased costs.
This problem could clearly be managed if fewer contractors were on site. But the order that work is completed in is also another factor that is causing extra costs that could absolutely be avoided.
Should connectivity be the first priority instead of the last?
Without connectivity, a site cannot operate its cloud based systems or remote management tools. CCTV cannot be commissioned, WiFi cannot be configured and teams cannot access data or communication platforms. Even access control and health and safety systems increasingly rely on connected infrastructure.
But as it stands, on many projects, connectivity is often the final consideration.
If things were to change, and connectivity was planned first, other elements such as cabling, switching, CCTV and wireless access could be scheduled around a single, coordinated installation.
Whether this is practical will vary from project to project. However, the question remains relevant: if a site cannot function without connection, why is connection often addressed at the final moment?
Could there be a more efficient model?
With all of this in mind, does that mean that the traditional multi-supplier model is actually not the most efficient way to manage the site experience?
If the trends were to move towards opting for a single supplier that was responsible for connectivity, cabling, switching, WiFi, CCTV and related technologies, then this would instantly eradicate many of the unnecessary issues that are found onsite today.
This centralised approach would instead mean:
- one survey
- one installation schedule
- one engineering team working sequentially rather than simultaneously
- fewer access conflicts
- simplified billing
- a single point of responsibility for support
While there are always exceptions to every rule, there are many projects that could vastly benefit from this new way of thinking.
Is it time for change?
While there is no single solution that fits every project, it is clear that the current approach can place unnecessary strain on both suppliers and project teams. And as demands on digital infrastructure continue to grow, it may be time for the industry to review how connectivity is prioritised and how the supply chain is structured around it.
TrellisWorks is already offering single supplier packages to clients, where we can utilise our multiple strands of expertise to provide a more seamless journey, both during the site implementation, as well as before and after.
Have you considered the advantages of using one supplier? We’d love to know your thoughts, and we’d welcome the chance to discuss this with you if you are exploring how to improve your project management.
Get in touch with us to find out more.
