Building Safety Act - impact on leadership
Barbra Carlisle • January 15, 2026
Leading in the Building Safety Act Era: Competence, Confidence and the ‘Golden Thread’
What’s changed for UK construction leaders?
In short: almost everything. The industry is operating under tighter compliance (the Building Safety Act), persistent skills shortages, output volatility and rising labour costs. The BSA has raised the bar on competence and accountability, making leaders - rather than compliance teams alone - responsible for consistent, documented, risk‑aware decisions across the project lifecycle. Meanwhile, the skills and digital capability required to deliver the golden thread are still catching up. That combination is why projects stall - not for technical reasons, but because leadership, communication, and team competence aren’t keeping pace.
Against this backdrop, Alan Brookes, CEO of Arcadis
in The Unlikely Executive Podcast,
offers timely counsel for leaders under pressure:
“It’s not a weakness to ask for help. It’s actually part of your own learning and development.”
along with
“Show up with some confidence. Believe in yourself. Don’t hesitate. Somebody else may not back you, so you’ve got to back yourself.”
These principles map directly to BSA‑era delivery. (Context: Arcadis operates at global scale, circa €4bn net revenue and ~35k people.) [ons.gov.uk]
The State of Play: Compliance Up, Capacity Tight, Margins Squeezed
Output & cost pressure.
ONS data show late‑2025 weakness - monthly output fell in October and November - while BCIS notes subdued demand, sticky inflation and labour‑led cost pressure. In that environment, inconsistency and rework get punished; leaders need planning discipline, visible accountability, and competence, not last‑minute heroics.
Skills & capacity.
CITB’s 2025–2029 outlook projects the industry needs c47,860 extra workers per year (c239,300 over five years). Skills England highlights long‑standing productivity underperformance and the need to strengthen competence pipelines. You won’t meet BSA expectations with “bums on seats”; you need competent, evidenced capability.
Why this matters now.
The BSA imposes dutyholder obligations, competence requirements and the golden thread, comprehensive, reliable information from design to operation. Non‑compliance attracts penalties and liability; leadership must align people, process and data, across the supply chain, to evidence decisions, not just make them.
What the Building Safety Act Means for Leaders (Not Just for Compliance)
1) Competence is a leadership problem, not an HR file.
The BSA expects that those designing, building and managing higher‑risk buildings are competent with the skills, knowledge, experience and behaviours to do the job. That’s hard across mixed supply chains and variable subcontractor standards. Leaders must define competence expectations by role, align them with PAS guidance where relevant, and evidence that competence is maintained.
2) The golden thread demands usable, trustworthy data.
You won’t achieve the golden thread with siloed emails and file dumps. You need consistent information management, clear ownership, and digital workflows that teams actually use. BIM and CDEs help, but adoption and skills still lag; treat digital as a behavioural change, not an IT procurement.
3) Accountability is personal and cultural.
Gateways, dutyholder roles, retrospective liabilities, these shift risk onto leadership choices. The BSA isn’t “tick‑box”; it’s an operating model. Leaders set the tone: clear responsibilities, transparent escalation, and no‑surprises reporting when problems arise.
The Digital Reality Check: AI & BIM Are Enablers - If Teams Are Ready
Reports show a sector at a digital tipping point: AI/BIM use rising but capability and integration patchy. RICS finds optimism about AI’s value yet low scaled adoption due to skills, data quality and integration. NBS notes anxiety about being left behind is growing, while daily use of digital tools is increasing. Leaders must insist on right‑sized, standardised practices teams can repeat under pressure, not grand platforms that don’t change behaviour.
Leadership implication: the golden thread is only as strong as the weakest behaviour. Agree the minimum digital behaviours (where issues are logged, who approves what, how decisions are captured, where models/documents live). Train them, coach them, audit them.
Alan Brookes’ Playbook for the BSA Era
Listen first.
“Listen. Understand the business.” In BSA terms: listen to where documentation breaks, where competence is assumed not evidenced, where subcontractor onboarding fails. Don’t move tech or org charts until you’ve heard the reality from site to boardroom.
Ask for help.
“It’s not a weakness to ask for help.” Establish mentoring and coaching routines so leaders surface uncertainty early before it becomes non‑compliance. Create a culture where “I don’t know -show me” is professional, not perilous.
Back yourself -then build the best team.
“Somebody else may not back you, so you’ve got to back yourself,” and “get the very best team around you.” Bring in the skills for the future: information management, digital coordination, competent principal designer/contractor capability, and project controls that withstand regulatory scrutiny.
Stay grounded. The childhood photo is more than sentiment; it keeps ego in check and sustains service‑centred leadership - critical when the law raises expectations and the pressure to perform narrows your field of vision. “Remember where you came from. Don’t get big‑headed.”
If you’re leading in construction or housing and want to strengthen communication, competence, and delivery under the BSA—without drowning in operational noise—my 6‑month coaching programme is designed for this context. We focus on:
Decision clarity and authority under pressure
Competence frameworks and real‑world evidence gathering
Golden‑thread behaviours your team will actually use
Mentoring/feedback cadences that build confidence and reduce rework
→ Book a clarity call
to discuss your context and goals.
Ideas and thoughts on how to lead well through complexity and change
It sounds counterintuitive but many people feel more shame when they succeed than when they fail. Leaders describe the same sensation: an urge to minimise achievements, downplay their role, or avoid using job titles that signal authority. The psychology beneath “success shame” Research shows that shame is a social emotion triggered when we feel we’re not meeting internal or external expectations, or when we fear being judged for who we are rather than what we did. Success raises the stakes. As visibility increases, so does the fear of exposure. This is the foundation of imposter syndrome, which affects up to 70% of high-performing individuals, especially when stepping into roles that carry authority. According to psychologists, imposter syndrome is characterised by persistent self-doubt, attributing success to luck, and fear of being “found out.” Why job titles trigger discomfort Job titles serve as identity markers and identity is where shame hits hardest. Psychological research distinguishes: - Embarrassment (“I did something silly”) - Guilt (“I did something wrong”) - Shame (“There is something wrong with me”) Shame, not embarrassment, is the emotion most tied to identity, which explains why stating a job title can feel exposing. Many leaders fear that owning their title invites scrutiny they may not live up to. This internal conflict intensifies with success, when expectations feel higher, visibility increases and vulnerability rises. Others fear social disapproval or judgment for appearing “too confident.” The evolutionary and cultural roots Shame evolved as a mechanism to maintain group cohesion, effectively a social brake to prevent behaviours that risk group rejection. Modern workplace dynamics amplify this: senior roles often come with public accountability, performance pressures and comparison with peers. Psychology research highlights that success can activate the same vulnerability circuits as failure, just in different ways. Practical ways leaders can reduce “success shame” 1. Name it. Recognising shame reduces its power, literally bringing it into conscious awareness disrupts avoidance. 2. Separate identity from performance. Your role describes what you do, not who you are. 3. Rehearse your job title neutrally. Build comfort stating it without caveats or humour. 4. Assign credit accurately. Neither minimising nor inflating your contribution: just being factual. 5. Use mentoring or coaching to normalise visibility discomfort. Exposure is easier when shared. The leaders who struggle most with shame are often the ones who care deeply, lead well and hold themselves to high standards. But owning your authority isn’t arrogance, it’s clarity. And you deserve it! If you are struggling with your identity as a leader just get in touch and we can talk. email barbra@gleecoaching.com
A Sector Under Pressure The UK construction industry is slowly diversifying which is great news. BUT the data shows progress is still painfully uneven. Women now make up around 14.7–15% of the overall UK construction workforce based on recent ONS and industry reports, but only 1–2% work in on-site trades, and just 7% hold senior leadership positions. Even when women enter the sector, they are disproportionately funnelled into administration, design or management support roles rather than operational or technical tracks. Industry surveys show 81% of women are in admin/design roles while only 1% are in skilled trades, highlighting the structural gap in visibility and progression. Why mentoring matters and why it’s missing Women repeatedly point to lack of visibility, sponsorship and informed guidance as barriers that begin as early as secondary school. Studies report that young women still receive outdated or discouraging advice about construction careers from school mentors and advisors. Even once inside the industry, women may find it difficult to find the right mentors who understand the cultural terrain: navigating male-dominated teams, bias (one in three women experience workplace gender bias), and the isolation of being the only woman on a team or site. Formal mentoring programmes like Construction for Women have shown measurable benefits like - increasing confidence - improving retention - widening access - access to new opportunities - better understanding on how to navigate a career in construction BUT uptake across the broader sector is inconsistent. We need more active mentors who show up for their mentees. The commercial case for mentoring The push for more mentors isn't just a touchy feely nice thing to do - it makes absolute business sense. - Diverse teams make better decisions and solve problems more effectively. - Companies with strong inclusion practices see higher productivity and retention. - A wider talent pipeline protects the industry from skills shortages. Evidence from diversity and inclusion studies shows that representation boosts performance, innovation and workforce stability. Practical steps construction leaders can take now 1. Build structured mentorship pathways not informal “tap on the shoulder” systems that favour those who look like current leadership. 2. Integrate mentoring into apprenticeship routes especially for young women entering technical roles. 3. Champion internal female role models as visibility is fuel. 4. Track progression data by gender: eliminate blind spots in promotion and training. 5. Equip male leaders to mentor women effectively as this isn’t just “women supporting women”; it’s about shared responsibility. 6. Use an external specialist like a qualified coach or mentor to support your male and female mentors, providing a safe space for them to learn and share their experiences of mentoring, and gaining practical skills like listening as well. Mentoring isn’t a “nice-to-have”. It’s the infrastructure that enables women not only to enter the sector but to stay, grow and lead. If you want to find our more about mentoring programme support email barbra@gleecoaching.co.uk
