Why cutting corners in specification is costing you more

In today’s tough economic climate, the construction industry is under immense pressure from escalating material costs; a challenge we’re all too familiar with. But with this pressure has come a troubling trend: specification breaking.

A recent report shows that 46% of architects and engineers have seen contractors swap out specified products for cheaper alternatives after securing tenders. While this might seem like a smart way to cut costs in the short term, the reality is far more troubling than it first appears.

What may seem like a quick cost-saving measure often leads to serious long-term problems, and in many cases, ends up costing far more than if the original specifications had been followed.

When contractors break specifications, it’s not just a simple product swap, it can have serious implications for safety, longevity and cost. Architects and engineers specify particular products for good reason, drawing on years of training, research and practical experience. These specifications aren’t arbitrary; they are carefully considered decisions that balance performance, safety, compliance and whole-life costs.

In the fencing sector, we frequently see high-quality, guaranteed products replaced with inferior alternatives that may look similar but lack crucial performance characteristics.

Perhaps most concerning is the growing compliance risk associated with specification breaking. Many suppliers only CE/UKCA mark individual components rather than entire systems, creating a dangerous gap in certification. This approach leaves projects exposed to significant legal and safety issues.

This is particularly problematic with acoustic barriers for road and rail projects. These systems must function as a complete unit to deliver the required noise attenuation performance. System certification ensures that all components work together effectively to meet required standards. When specifications are broken and uncertified alternatives are used, the entire system’s performance is compromised, potentially leading to regulatory non-compliance.

As we are all aware, the Building Safety Act has strengthened requirements around the golden thread of information, making it all the more important that what’s specified is what’s installed. Breaking this chain of information integrity creates significant liability issues for everyone involved in the construction process.

The supposed savings from specification breaking quickly evaporate when considering whole-life costs. Lower-quality fencing systems typically require more frequent maintenance, earlier replacement and may fail to provide the security or aesthetic performance originally intended.

Protecting specifications should be a priority. This means:

• Clear contractual requirements that prevent post-tender substitutions without approval.
• Thorough documentation of specified products, including performance requirements and certification.
• Rigorous site inspections to verify that installed products match specifications.
• Whole-life costing approaches that look beyond initial purchase price.
• Engagement with reputable manufacturers who can provide evidence of compliance and performance.

The construction industry faces enough challenges without creating additional problems through short-sighted cost-cutting. By respecting specifications and understanding the true value of quality products, we can build infrastructure that’s safer, more sustainable, and ultimately more cost-effective over its lifetime.

The cheapest price today almost always leads to the highest cost tomorrow. When it comes to critical infrastructure like security fencing and acoustic barriers, that’s a price none of us can afford to pay.