Can construction deliver more than completed projects? A CE Procurement Group discussion, featuring one of the architects of the Construction Playbook, Huda As’ad, examined why outcomes-based contracting could be key to unlocking greater public value.
Key Insights
- Outcomes over outputs: The discussion highlighted the need to move beyond measuring success by project completion, cost and compliance, and instead focus on outcomes such as improved health, education, environmental performance and overall public value.
- A core principle that remains underused: Although outcomes-based contracting is central to the Construction Playbook, adoption remains limited. Speakers advocated for performance-focused measures, whole-life value, early supply chain engagement, fairer risk allocation and commercial models that incentivise public-benefit outcomes.
- Progress requires cultural and client-side change: While pilot projects have demonstrated the benefits of outcome-led approaches, wider implementation is hindered by risk aversion, rigid funding structures, siloed decision-making and inconsistent policy application. Stronger client leadership, improved capability and tools such as the Value Toolkit were identified as key enablers of change.
Discussion summary
A recent CE Procurement Group discussion explored whether outcomes-based contracting can help the built environment deliver more public value. Led by Rebecca Rees, with insights from Huda As’ad, one of the policy architects behind the Construction Playbook, the session examined the difference between procuring for outputs, such as a building delivered to specification, and procuring for outcomes, such as better health, education or environmental performance. The conversation challenged the sector’s tendency to judge success by cost, compliance and completion, rather than by whether projects improve people’s lives.
Speakers argued that outcomes-based contracting sits at the heart of the Construction Playbook, but is still not widely adopted in practice. Huda highlighted the need to move away from narrow technical specifications and towards measures that reflect real-world performance. In schools, for example, that could mean focusing on thermal comfort, building performance and indoor quality as practical proxies for better educational outcomes.
The discussion also reinforced the importance of whole-life value, early supply chain involvement, better risk allocation and commercial models that reward delivery against public goals.
Participants shared examples of pilot projects that had delivered strong results using outcome-led approaches, but agreed that broader uptake remains slow. Barriers included risk-averse client behaviour, rigid funding structures, siloed decision-making and a procurement culture that still favours control over collaboration. There was also frustration that government, as the sector’s biggest client, does not always apply its own policies consistently. The session closed with a practical message: progress is possible, but it will require stronger client leadership, better capability and a willingness to use tools such as the Value Toolkit to take incremental steps towards more collaborative, outcome-focused procurement.
