Productivity in construction: still poor at times

Productivity in construction: still poor at times

“How productive do domestic construction companies really work?” The Future Agency for Construction (ZAB) and the consulting company Baukybernetik Solutions worked together to find an answer to this question. As part of the “Construction Productivity Check” they analyzed the processes in eleven local construction companies in detail - from construction site organization to calculation and digitalization. The goal: To survey the status quo, highlight obstacles to productivity and identify potential for improvement.

Lots of room for improvement

The focus was not on numbers, but on the concrete processes: How are we planning, calculating and controlling? Which digital systems are used? How does communication work between the construction site and the office? The results show that there is still a lot of room for improvement. On average, in the companies examined, the processes are only 58 percent systematically regulated. This means that in many companies there is know-how, but there is a lack of standardized, company-wide processes. This in turn not only makes control and quality assurance more difficult, but also prevents efficiency gains through digitalization and innovation.

Georg Hanstein, ZAB division manager for digitalization and innovation, explains the shortcoming using an example: "The worst case scenario is when each employee uses their own systems to record data - one works with Excel, another with Word, another makes handwritten notes. This means that data cannot be compared and processes cannot be optimized." A uniform approach is not only the prerequisite for business management, but also for the sensible use of new technologies such as artificial intelligence. “AI needs structured, consistent data – if this is missing, even the best algorithms cannot achieve anything,” says Hanstein.

The study identified three levers that can be used to effectively increase productivity. First: strategic planning. Many companies have strong technical expertise, but there is a lack of product offerings with recognizable unique selling points. “In the competition for construction contracts, it is no longer enough to score points through quality craftsmanship alone,” says Norbert Hartl, deputy construction master of the federal guild. “What is needed are solutions that are tailored to specific target groups – with a clear value proposition that can also be easily communicated.” Strategic specialization not only enables efficiency gains to be achieved, but also competitive advantages that are less easily undermined by price.

ZAB expert Hanstein gives an example: "A construction company that produces prefabricated brick walls in the hall manages to build the shell of a single-family home in just two days. For the builder, this means better planning and time savings. That is a clear USP." Examples like these are still rare, but they do exist. Hanstein sees “first approaches to strategic alignment” in the construction industry – for example through specialization in renovation, energy-efficient construction or modular housing solutions. "These positionings not only offer new markets, but also provide better protection against price pressure. Anyone who offers a clearly defined product can market it more easily - and calculate it more easily."

Lever number two is digital process management. Here too there is a need to catch up. Although many companies use digital folder structures, consistent systems for process mapping, resource planning and project control are often missing. “A digitally managed process management system brings order, creates transparency and forms the basis for modern tools such as AI,” says construction industry representative Hartl. According to the study, the current level of application is 62 percent: a value that clearly shows the existing reserves. The willingness to digitize is particularly present in medium-sized companies. But there is a lack of know-how, human resources or a clear strategy. The result: Digital systems are introduced but not used consistently. Employees continue to work in parallel in their usual structures - this leads to inconsistencies.

The study identifies construction site controlling as the third central area of ​​development. When construction projects are clearly divided into sections and work packages and the necessary resources are precisely allocated, control improves immediately on site. “It is precisely on the construction site that it is decided whether a project is economically successful,” emphasizes Hartl. “If construction managers and foremen can work with clear target specifications, they not only gain orientation, but also independence - and that is exactly what makes a company more productive.” Through transparent specifications and accompanying calculations, deviations can be identified at an early stage and targeted measures can be taken.

The project managers of the study – Baukybernetik Solutions managing director Hannes Kraxberger and ZAB managing director Harald Kopececk – see the results of the construction productivity check as a clear call to action: “The construction productivity check shows that many construction companies work successfully, but systematic, company-wide standards are missing and this is exactly where there is great potential for efficiency,” they say. The results should now help to implement targeted measures to improve processes in companies.

The ZAB is currently working on a meta-study that will record existing research results and derive concrete recommendations for action from them. All relevant studies should be viewed, compared and evaluated by February 2026. The aim is then to approach the companies with concrete suggestions. ZAB expert Hanstein: “Productivity does not begin on the construction site, but in the processes that lead there.”