WHITE PAPER EnginEEring consultancy and innovation files/Publications/WhitePaperEN.pdf · WHITE PAPER Engineering consultancy and innovation ... 25 PROJECT MANAGEMENT ENGINEERING

WHITE PAPER

EnginEEring consultancyand innovation

WHITE PAPER

Engineering Consultancy & Innovation

Publisher: Syntec-Ingenierie, Professional Engineering Consultancy Federation, France

Project management: Syntec-Ingenierie innovation committeeProject leaders: Philippe Bisch, Michel RayEditorial coordination: Martine Bastin, responsible for Syntec-Ingenierie events and developmentsEditor: Celine von der Weid

Working group: members of the Syntec-Ingenierie innovation committeeCo-authors:Claude Bessiere (Ingerop)Philippe Bisch (Iosis group, Iosis Industries)Jean-Pierre Bregeon (Abmi Group)Bernard Gausset (Arcadis)Michel Ray (Egis Group)Alain Thirion (Coteba)Jean-Marc Usseglio-Polatera (Sogreah)

Other contributions:Dominique Baujard (Abmi Group)Marie Godard-Le Beux (SCE)Philippe Schvartz (Sodeg Ingenierie)Christian Tarpin (Setec Its)Jan Van der Putten (EFCA, European Federation of engineering Consultancy Associations)

The original White Book is in French and refers to French institutions and legislation. It has beentranslated into English by EFCA with the assistance of Syntec-Ingenierie. In order to make the translationmore understandable for foreign readers, it has been slightly adapted and completed with footnotes byJean Felix (Syntec-Ingenierie).

copyright© Syntec-Ingenierie 2008

| 2 | Engineering consultancy and innovation November 2008

WHITE PAPER

Engineering consultancy and innovation

From the French :« LIVRE BLANC, l’Ingenierie et l’innovation »,© Syntec-Ingenierie, May 2008Translation into English by EFCA,commented and adapted by Syntec-Ingenierie.

This White Paper is based on the situation in France in 2008, and includes

n an inventory, which describes the different aspects of engineering consultancy and the various types ofinnovation implemented therein;

n a part dedicated to the leverage for innovation, that is to say the various factors that are favourable toinnovation within engineering consultancy companies;

n a part dedicated to the obstacles to innovation that often impede its implementation;

n based on these facts, a list of recommendations made by Syntec-Ingenierie to improve the practice ofinnovation in engineering consultancy.

Each of these parts gives details of the same subjects from a different angle (cultural,financial, administrative, organisational, legal aspects, etc.).

A summary of the White Paper lists the major topics tackled and the key recommendations.

November 2008

Engineering consultancy and innovation November 2008 | 3 |

FOREWORD

In March 2000, the Lisbon European Council adopted a programme of reform aimed at making the EU themost competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world by 2010, capable of sustainableeconomic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion, and respect for the environment.In this context, the release of the European potential for innovation is extremely important for allknowledge-based fields of the economy, notably in engineering consultancy. EFCA, the European Federationof engineering Consultancy Associations, therefore welcomes the 2009 Year of Creativity and Innovation andis proud to support the joint publication of this White Paper on innovation in engineering consultancydeveloped by Syntec-Ingenierie.For reasons of compliance with the FIDIC (International Federation of Consulting Engineers) contractterminology, the following concepts have been used throughout this document:

The employer: should be read as “the awarding authority” or “the client”;

The engineer: refers to “the consulting engineer, the engineering consultancy”;

The contractor: refers to the contractor.

EFCA hopes that this publication will contribute to trigger the wider debate on creativity and innovation at EUlevel.

Dr Panos PanagopoulosEFCA President18 February 2009


CONTENTS

9 INTRODUCTION

10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

14 ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY AND INNOVATION

15 WHAT IS ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY?

17 WHAT IS A PROJECT?

18 INNOVATION IN A FEW WORDS

19 CURRENT CHALLENGES

20 I INNOVATION IN ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY

20 ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY IN DEFINING REQUIREMENTS AND CONSULTATION

22 DESIGN ENGINEERINGa) Internal innovation: optimising productionb) Innovations developed on behalf of employersc) Innovation in daily engineeringd) Innovation in consulting engineering and technology

25 PROJECT MANAGEMENT ENGINEERINGa) What is project management engineering?b) Innovation is necessary for project managementc) Managing Projects

- The tools of project management- Risk management tools- Collaborative working tools

d) The contribution of engineering in consulting and technology

28 II THE LEVERAGE FOR INNOVATION

28 THE INTERNAL MOTIVATIONS OF ENGINEERING FIRMS

29 RESEARCH FINANCING STRUCTURESa) At national level

- National Research Agency programmes- “Competitiveness Centres” and company competitiveness funds- OSEO- Programmes of the Ministry of Ecology, Energy, Sustainable Development and Territorial Development- Agency programmes- Miscellaneous sector-based programmes- Aid from the National Association for Technical Research (ANRT)- Regional financing

b) At European level- The 7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development- The EUREKA PROGRAMME- The European Investment Bank- Other programmes of the European Union

c) The Research Tax Credit (RTC)

34 PUBLIC PROCUREMENTa) The French public procurement legislationb) Intellectual and/or industrial propertyc) Competitive dialogue

36 THE ROLE OF THE PROFESSIONAL FEDERATIONSa) The French Engineering Consultancy Federation (Syntec-Ingenierie)b) The European Federation of Engineering Consultancy Assocations (EFCA)c) The International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC)

37 III OBSTACLES TO INNOVATION

37 CULTURAL OBSTACLES IN ENGINEERING FIRMSa) The preponderance of production constraintsb) The importance of standardisation

38 FINANCIAL OBSTACLES IN ENGINEERING FIRMSa) Internal organisationb) Structure of the operating accounts


39 RELATIONS WITH SCIENTIFIC PARTNERSa) University researchb) The Scientific and Technical Network

40 EXTERNAL FINANCIAL OBSTACLES

41 ADMINISTRATIVE OBSTACLESa) Insuranceb) Public procurement legislation

- Procedures for awarding public contracts- The role of the Employer/ Engineer / Contractor chain

c) Partnership contracts- The paradox of partnership contracts (ex-PPP)- Innovation in partnership contracts

45 INADEQUATE PROTECTION OF ENGINEERING INNOVATIONa) Intellectual and/or industrial copyright and innovationb) The risk of “cherry picking” during competitive dialoguec) Private Law

47 IV THE ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY INDUSTRY RECOMMENDATIONS

47 INTERNAL ACTIONS WITHIN ENGINEERING COMPANIESa) Integrating, managing and exploiting innovationb) Benefiting from financial leveragesc) Capitalising on knowledge and experienced) Innovation in internal methods

49 THE STATE AS SUPERVISOR AND REGULATORa) Improving the structure of accounts to encourage innovationb) Improving the Implementation of Research Tax Credits (RTC)c) Developing synergies between public research and the private sectord) Reorganising the technical corpse) Developing more reactive and collegiate cross-pollination between public and private bodiesf) Developing methods for taking global strategic choices into account at national level

51 THE RELATIONSHIP OF ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY WITH DECISION MAKERS ANDEMPLOYERSa) Make better use of the know-how and quality of service of engineering consultancy

- Assistance to decision makers, employers at the upstream stage- Design engineering- In project management

b) Improve the effectiveness of the Employer/Engineer/Contractor chain to encourage innovationc) Improve protection of engineering innovations

- By intellectual and/or industrial property clauses- Better use of innovations

d) Encourage public employers to make use of all contractual possibilities- By enforcement of the Public Procurement Code- By new contracting methods

e) Provide liability clauses and insurance cover consistent with innovation

56 THE RELATIONSHIP OF ENGINEERING WITH RESEARCH AND TRAININGa) Sharing know-how on innovation and researchb) Strengthen relations with the public research network

58 POSSIBLE COLLECTIVE ACTIONSa) Improve information flow about external funding opportunitiesb) To identify centres of strategic competitiveness for engineering firms and facilitate access to themc) To create a technical breeding ground with research partners

59 V GLOSSARY OF KEY WORDS AND ABREVIATIONS

63 ″WHITE PAPER: ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY AND INNOVATION″A TRANSLATION OF ″LIVRE BLANC: L’INGENIERIE ET L’INNOVATION″(MAY 2008)

64 RECENT PUBLICATIONS OF SYNTEC-INGENIERIE, THE FRENCH ASSOCIATION OF ENGINEERINGCONSULTANCIES


INTRODUCTION

The development and implementation ofinnovation has always been at the heart ofthe engineering consultancy profession. YetCEOs realise that today, innovation in the industryis not sufficient to face up to the major economicand environmental challenges. The Lisbon Strategyunderlined the strategic importance of innovation ina “knowledge-based society” faced with worldwidecompetition.

The industry is convinced that it can and must playits part in confronting today’s challenges bycontributing its experience in several fields:anticipation of new requirements and engineeringnew solutions; ever more widespread dispersal ofknowledge; sustainable development; climate andenergy changes; control of risk in response to theincreasing complexity of projects, etc.

In the post-war period and the following 3 to 4decades, engineering consultancy innovated for thebenefit of its customers and the nation. However,this was followed by a more stringent economicperiod, in which budgets were squeezed,discouraging long term investment and focussingon the tasks that brought short-term results.Until recently, the market was flourishing again andengineering consultancy was growing strongly. Inthis new context which enables it to produce moreand widen its range of services, engineeringconsultancy has the means for even moreinnovation.

An Innovation Committee set up bySyntec-Ingenierie in 2005 has been consideringthese problems with a view to proposing solutions.Its members represent the various sectors ofactivity of the industry: constructionengineering and industrial engineering. In theircompanies, they occupy management andoperational positions. The majority of them alsotake part in the control of organisations or nationaland European research programmes.Even though certain engineering companies werealready participating in National Research Agency1

(ANR) programmes, the first action of the InnovationCommittee was to launch cooperative projectsenabling engineering companies to partner inthe ANR 2006 call for tenders. This type of actionwas repeated for the 2007 call. In both cases, anengineering consultancy project was accepted. This

success should greatly encourage engineeringcompanies to work together, and in partnershipwith research engineers, to develop competitiveprojects. Participation in such projects enables thewhole profession to show its clients thatengineering consultancy can provide them withoriginal and innovative solutions.

Syntec-Ingenierie set the Committee a secondtarget of producing a White Paper containingrecommendations for assisting engineeringconsultancies to increase investment inresearch and innovation. For that, it wasnecessary to take stock of the current situation,release the brakes on innovation and make gooduse of the internal and external levers. It soonbecame apparent that the solutions to manyproblems lay within the engineering companiesthemselves, but that other challenges were to befound in relations with the State or other public orprivate partners.

This work was therefore the subject of many veryconstructive meetings; it also included a roundtable with stakeholders on 13 June 2007, with thesupport of the French Public Institutions.

The White Paper, which summarises this work, isintended for CEOs of engineering companies,their principal economic partners and therelevant state departments in France, but itcan also be addressed to these economicplayers in all European countries. It is not asimple statement of the past, rather it marks thebeginning of a new era to which everyone cancontribute in all European countries.

1 French public institution supporting R & D (see glossary)


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Innovation, centre stage today, has in factalways been a daily priority for engineersand technicians within engineeringconsultancy firms.

Finding solutions to make projects possible is a keyissue in both construction and industry. Engineeringcompanies design, study and create works,equipment or industrial products in France andabroad, and for this reason, they are constantlyinnovating.

Thus, to transform a project into reality, from anidea to an execution drawing, then to a completedwork, it is not enough to apply purely pre-existingsolutions; on the contrary each project requiresnew and specific technical, financial, legaland organisational solutions. It is thusnecessary, starting from existing concepts, toinvent a new innovating configuration to suit eachindividual project.

For this reason, the engineering consultancyindustry can play an important role in contributingto the “Knowledge Society”, where innovation mustplay a key part. It is clear today that theeconomies of developed countries mustreinforce their innovation capacities toremain competitive in relation to emergingeconomies, such as China or India.

In addition to this major economic stake must beadded an environmental stake which is gainingimportance: to limit the effects of climate change, tofind an alternative to oil as regards energy, todesign cities offering pleasant living conditions.

However, against the backdrop of innovationneeds, the engineering consultancy industry hasestablished that, due to a number of obstacles, itis not adequately prepared and does notmake optimal use of the innovationcapacities that exist.

The objective of this White Paper is thus clear: torelease the strong potential of innovation atthe heart of engineering consultancy. Itpresents the levers of, and obstacles to, innovation- within engineering companies, but also in theirrelations with the State or with public and privatepartners - and proposes effective actions.

The single most important lever is in-housemotivation, as there cannot be innovation if it is notwanted and planned for at board level in the firm.Financial supports for innovation are equallyimportant, in particular government research grants,which are listed in detail in this White Paper. Lastly,it is worth noting that some clauses in the newFrench public procurement legislation (and in theEuropean pubic procurement directive) do supportinnovation, although they are little known andtherefore not often used.

In general, obstacles to innovation result fromdivisions which hamper potential synergies betweenthe various actors. The situation is compounded byadministrative and financial barriers: insurance,difficulties in the application of the publicprocurement legislation, or the financial value acompany places on innovation. Productionconstraints often take priority over innovation.Moreover, it would be necessary to improve theeffectiveness of the chain betweenemployer/engineering/contractor companies toencourage innovation. Indeed, the current operatingmodel is based on dated concepts (sequentialprocess), which should be re-thought to meettoday’s challenges. Relations between clients andsuppliers on the one hand, and between the variousactors (engineers, architects, contractors,operators) on the other, should be re-organised forsustainable partnerships and improved integrationof the roles of the actors (convergent process).

These obstacles can be overcome. TheSyntec-Ingenierie Innovation Committee’srecommendations are based on the following majorlines:n To convince top management of the importance

of innovation and its promotion in-house.n To reinforce the relations between the State and

engineering companies to encourage jointactions.

n To review the relations between the partiesinvolved in projects.

n To develop technical training programmes,improve the links to research organisations, andvalorise training through research withincompanies.

n To simplify and improve administrativeprocedures.


Overview of Recommendations

Key-players Advice Recommendations

Four recommendationsto managers of

engineeringcompanies

Integrate, manage anddevelop innovation

➢ To dedicate one person to the management of innovationin each company

➢ To promote and recognise internal innovation➢ To promote innovation in the evaluation of staff

Benefit from financiallevers

➢ To take more advantage of Research Tax Credit2

➢ To take more advantage of financial levers of innovation➢ To set up co-financed projects➢ To take more advantage of support from Competitiveness

Centres3

➢ To promote the approval of engineering for Research TaxCredits

Capitalise knowledge andexperience

➢ To organise wide ranging technical awareness➢ To benefit from experience and guidance

Innovate on internalmethods

➢ To integrate sustainable development in managementmethods

➢ To include risk management for complex projects

Six recommendationsto the State assupervisor and

regulator

Strengthen SMEs from afinancial point of view

➢ To release profits held in reserve➢ To allow long-term depreciation of research costs

Make better use ofResearch Tax Credits

➢ To review and adapt approval criteria➢ To improve the definition of eligible engineering services

so that they are better understood by engineering and CIR(2) dossier auditors

➢ To make the approval procedure more flexible

Develop synergiesbetween RST4 and theprivate sector

➢ To develop synergies between RST and engineeringconsultancies

Reorganise the technicalcorpus

➢ To review the method of producing general technicalspecifications

➢ To make use of the facilitating role of the state

Develop more reactive andcollegial cross fertilisationbetween public andprivate participants

➢ To concentrate the capitalisation of knowledge by field➢ To develop synergies between different engineering

activities: public, private, in-house

Develop methods fortaking account of globalstrategic choices atnational level

➢ To bring in engineering upstream of large projects

2 Specific French tax credit scheme : “Credit Impot Recherche” (see glossary). A similar scheme exists in manycountries

3 In France : “Pole de competitivite”. Partners Associations for R & D implemented in many regions, each having aspecific field of competence.

4 Scientific and technical network for R&D, part of the French Ministry MEEDDAT) (see glossary)


six recommendationsfor decision makers

and employers

Improve recognition ofengineering knowledge

To sell engineering services as added value services

Make better use of know-how and quality ofengineering services

To assist the employers in the preliminary phases➢ To communicate better on engineering know-how and its

capacity for innovation upstream of a project➢ To encourage employers to seek support from the start of

a project➢ To encourage employers to allocate reasonable design

budgets from the preliminary phases to ensureperformance levels throughout the project

In design engineering➢ To review the best existing solutions for overall cost➢ To improve the synergy between architect and engineer in

the construction sector

In project management engineering➢ To develop better cross –fertilisation between all

participants for a global vision

Improve the effectivenessof the employer/engineer/contractor chainto encourage innovation

➢ To encourage close collaboration in a relationship ofmutual trust in order to analyse the opportunity of aninnovative method and manage its effectiveimplementation

➢ At employer level, to clearly define the objectives andperformance of the project and be bolder in adoptingproven innovative solutions

➢ At the engineer level, to manage teams by encouragingsuitable innovative proposals and establish relationshipsof mutual trust with the employer

Provide better protectionfor innovations producedby engineeringconsultancy

By contractual clauses for copyright➢ To advocate changes to legislation and protect innovation

in contracts

By a better use of innovations➢ To effectively share the roles and employership that result

from this➢ To encourage employers to share and re-use existing

innovations

Encourage publicemployers to make use ofall contractual possibilities

By the enforcement of public procurementlegislation➢ To make employers aware of the real opportunities

offered by public procurement legislation with regard toinnovation

➢ To facilitate the development of national publicprogrammes by the State and local authorities

➢ To monitor legal responses at European level

Through new contract relations➢ To encourage the proposal of innovative solutions➢ To ensure that all aspects of the design process are taken

into account by the partners➢ To protect all innovative proposals with a confidentiality

clause in the competitive dialogue➢ To reward studies fairly so as to provide the resources to

carry out an innovative project

Provide responsibility andinsurance clauses suitablefor innovation

➢ Better sharing of risks between all participants in a singlecontract

➢ To make each participant more responsible in apartnership contract and encourage insurers to create anad hoc global offer


Two recommendationsto research and

training partners

Share know-how ininnovation and research

➢ To benefit from engineering consultancy/researchdiscussions with professors and post-graduates

➢ To develop relations with public research organisations➢ To participate in common R&D projects. Develop a

dialogue with the AUGC5

➢ To share common themes between research andengineering consultancy

➢ To obtain support from intermediary organisations

Intensify relations with theFrench public scientificand technical network

➢ To have the 2007 circular6 for the RST orientationimplemented

➢ To associate engineering consultancy better with theexpression of priority requirements in the sector

➢ To agree a common plan of action with RST andengineering to maintain the long term quality of expertise

➢ To develop alternate professional careers➢ To invent systems of co- or subcontracting enabling

engineering to rely on research subjects conducted byRST

➢ To promote, from an engineering point of view, theAGORA 2020 procedure from the ministry in charge ofequipment

➢ To develop a bilateral engineering dialogue with theLCPC, the CSTB and INRETS7

Onestrong collective

action

Mutualise actions ofcommon interest

➢ Clearer communication and accessibility to external aidoffers

➢ Identify centres of strategic competitiveness forengineering and strengthen its position

➢ Create a ‘technical breeding ground’ with researchpartners

5 AUGC : University Association of Civil Engineering (see glossary)6 A specific French Ministry (MEEDDAAT) circular7 Different French public institutions dedicated to construction and infrastructure R &D, part of the French ministry

network (RST)


ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY AND INNOVATION

This White Paper was produced by members ofthe French engineering consultancyindustry, who shared their experience andknowledge within the innovation committee set upby Syntec-Ingenierie, the professional engineeringfederation in France.

This White Paper concentrates on innovation, thecentral concern of the engineeringconsultancy industry, but also a matter oftopicality in the contemporary political andeconomic debate.

Innovation has in fact become a necessity; thiswill enable us to respond to the majorchallenges of the present and future. Climatechange, urban population growth, energy and watershortages represent some of the major challengesfor “sustainable” development.

The Lisbon Agenda of March 2000 alsounderlined the importance of innovation in“becoming the most competitive and dynamicknowledge-based economy in the world, capable ofsustainable economic growth accompanied byquantitative and qualitative improvement inemployment and greater social cohesion”, inaccordance with the terms of the objective to beachieved by 2010. One of the major axes of theLisbon strategy was therefore preparing thetransition to a knowledge-based society andeconomy, in particular through the acceleration ofstructural reforms to reinforce competitiveness andinnovation.

The “European Innovation Scoreboard”, publishedby the European Commission in February 20088,reviewed the progress of this strategy: it shows thatmost countries in the EU could improve theirperformance by transforming their “know-how”inputs into “innovation” outputs. It also underlinesthat the most efficient countries are Sweden,followed by Switzerland, Denmark, Finland, Japan,Germany, Israel, the United Kingdom and theUnited States. France lies in 17th place out of the 37countries studied (EU and non-EU). An effort istherefore still required to transforminnovation capacity into a factor ineconomic growth in France.

At the same time, however, it appears that fundsinvested in research and developmentwithin French companies are tending todecrease. The breakdown of internal R&D costs ofcompanies by branch of activity from 1992 to 2005was published on the Ministry of Research andAdvanced Training website; these figures also showa decrease in R&D expenses in theengineering sector.

R&D expenses in the “engineering, designand technical testing” branch for allsectors:

2002 2003 2004 2005

R&D Expenses inmillions of Euros

328 275 282 242

Engineering R&D as apercentage of the totalR&D of all companiesand all sectors ofactivity combined

1.5 1.3 1.3 1.1

Source: French Ministry of Education andResearch, France 2007

8 In the meantime, the 2008 “European Innovation Scoreboard” has been published athttp://www.proinno-europe.eu/metrics


WHAT IS ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY?

Any work, equipment, product or developmentrequires studies and a design.

These can be produced by:n the internal departments of those ordering them,n the technical departments of the manufacturers

or builders,n specialized companies: the professional

consulting engineering sector.

Engineering companies have acquired considerableimportance in modern economies, even extendinginto technological areas of consultancy. They canserve as a one-stop consultancy offering all of theservices necessary for definition/production andthereby assume overall responsibility for theseoperations.

The task of engineering companies is torespond to a requirement and take it toproject level.Engineering companies design, study and bringabout, in whole or in part, works, equipment orindustrial products.They play the part of messenger between thetheoretical knowledge developed by scientistsand its practical applications: using this newknowledge, they make a client’s project feasible,then real.

For example, their mission could consist indesigning a motorway, hospital, factory, bridge ordam (design, calculations and detailed drawings),then supervising its construction by contractors. Itmay also involve designing a product, for example avehicle lighting system for a car manufacturer, asection of the Airbus A380, or tram equipment.

Engineering consultancy companies design theseprojects and look after the objectives of their clientsduring construction and manufacture by specialistcompanies.

Sometimes the word “engineering” is used for onepart only of these services or works.

Designing is similar to the work of the“composer”, who creates a musical score. Thiscreation requires all the following:n perfect mastery of the various elements in play,

that is to say mastery of the solutions in termsof techniques, time delays and costs;

n the ability to integrate all the instruments, that isto say the ability to manage the project in itsentirety;

n the capacity to innovate, that is to say searchfor new solutions for each project, in particularintegrating its impact on the environment.

Production is similar to the work of the“orchestra conductor”. It is a question ofmanaging the project in order to lead it tocompletion within the restraints of cost, deliverytimes and quality and therefore manage the risks.This assumes:n choosing and organising all the numerous

musicians, that is to say the variousparticipants in the project;

n ensuring harmony between all the“instruments”, that is to say ensuring cohesionbetween the various participants in building thework;

n directing the “orchestra”, that is to say directingthe satisfactory progress of the project;

n giving the “rhythm” to this musical ensemble,that is to say ensuring the completion of theproject at a sustained rate.

Engineering consultancy on behalf of theclient➢ What engineering consultancy brings from the

customer’s point of view:n optimisation at all stages of the project;n a response that is relevant to a defined

requirement;n upstream integration of multiple

constraints.➢ To complete a customer’s project, the

engineering consultancy must demonstrate itscapabilities to adapt to concrete and specificproject requirements; innovation necessarily ispart of this process, such as research intosolutions that will meet the specialrequirements of the customer.


The place of engineering consultancy inthe French economyA few figures:n 215,000 jobs, of which almost half are

engineers or managersn Turnover: 36 billion Euros in 2006n 20,000 recruitments per year.Engineering consultancy, the spearhead ofFrench international competitivenessThe skills that will lead to tomorrow’s growth indeveloped countries and give international weightin the face of new economic powers such asChina or India are precisely those thatcharacterise engineering consultancy: thecapacity to innovate, find new ideas andconcepts, manage ever more complexprojects, and value scientific and technicalknowledge. Engineering companies thereforehave a major role to play in maintaining thecompetitiveness of France and Europe atinternational level.


WHAT IS A PROJECT?

It is worthwhile to clarify the term “project”, sincethis term can be understood in different ways. Inthis White Paper, the word “project” is meant in itswidest sense, corresponding to all stages ofinvolvement of the engineering consultancy.

A project follows a sequence of actions includingthree main phases:

➢ A preliminary phase from the emergenceof the requirement to the “decision toact”. During this period, a project covers all theactions to be taken in order to justify theresponse to a requirement which will eventuallybecome something concrete, or a decision to donothing:n The statement of requirement, the justification

of this requirement, the scenarios of solutionsto meet this requirement, the feasibility studyfor these solutions, the choice of a solutionand a decision to act.

➢ A design and construction phase thatstarts with the decision to act, including:n Definition of the subject (programme), the

selection of designers, the design (functional,architectural and technical studies), the cost,the selection of the contractors ormanufacturers, the works up to the delivery.

➢ An operation and maintenance phasecontinuing until demolition, comprisingsetting up normal maintenance and operationprogrammes and putting into operation(especially for works that include processes tobe optimised).

A global approach encompassing all thesephases provides an understanding of thechallenges of the project in terms of the overallcost and long-term development.

It should be noted that the true added value of theengineering industry lies in the people: whether theyare engineers, architects, technicians or specialists(environment, law, etc.) these are the professionalsthat make the completion of complex projectspossible through their capacity to conceive newideas.


INNOVATION IN A FEW WORDS

The French Academy dictionary defines innovationas “introducing something new in application, inpractice or in a particular field”. Innovation is notto be confused with discovery, which is “the act ofdiscovering what had been unknown or passedover” and which typifies the work of the scientist.

Research is a programmed and voluntary activity,the purpose of which is to discover new factscorresponding to a discovery or an innovation. Foruniversities and also, perhaps, for governmentresearch bodies, this word often means “basicresearch”. Engineers consider that they are notdoing basic research, but rather innovation, or even“applied research”.Innovation is quite simply a definition of theactivity of engineers, as distinct from that ofresearchers.

Engineering consultancy and innovation.In reality the engineering consultancyindustry, in the activity of design andachievement of a product or work, consists inrelying on known concepts and adapting orimproving them, and integrating them in an,often original, configuration to best satisfythe requirements of the subject. It istherefore “applied research”.

Innovation can be:n either the search for a permanent improvement,

perfection in the desire for cost saving, simplicityor efficiency;

n or the development of new products, by a newassembly of existing products or by the transferof a defined application to a new field;

n or a true leap forward, a breakthrough; thisaspect of a breakthrough that relies on“discoverers”, whether explorers or engineers (forexample, pre-stressing) is always a result of:- the availability of new tools that enable you to

progress further at a given moment (forexample, the compass);

- new constraints: adapting to climate change,globalisation, competition, etc.;

- questioning beliefs (for example, the world isnot square).

There are three types of innovation in theengineering consultancy:n Innovation within operational projects: this

consists of creating a new method or a newproduct or in producing an innovativecombination of already existing products ormethods.

n Innovation on request, or in anticipation ofcustomers’ requirements: this consists inapplied R&D to propose a precise technicalsolution to a given problem, apart from anoperational project.

n Innovation in the management of projects in aconsortium: this consists in better designing themethods and organisation of the whole project.


CURRENT CHALLENGES

The problem today is as follows:

➢ A certain reluctance within engineeringcompanies to innovate. There are tworeasons for this:n Requirements, usually formulated in terms of

deadlines, leave little or no time to innovate:when a project must be finished by a finaldate, the search for innovation appears as anoverload of work;

n the difficulty of imputing the innovation budgetinto the total project cost often proves aprohibitive obstacle.

➢ On the other hand, it appears that innovationis necessary today for various reasons: therequirements of employers and civil society havean increasing impact on projects: the constraintsin terms of long-term development, health andsafety are now indisputable. Innovative solutionsmust be found to meet these requirements;n the form of projects is also evolving: they are

becoming more complex and encompass anever wider range of fields (environment, legal,social, etc.) making cross-disciplinary andmethodological innovation necessary;internationalisation clearly has directrepercussions on the market and internationalcompetition reinforces that. Today, to remaincompetitive faced with emerging powers suchas India or China, it is necessary to innovateby proposing non-standard products;

n the utilization of new technologies (CAD9,virtual models, GPS10, GED11, etc.) modifies indepth the tools and methods of work. On onehand they permit a massive and extremelyquick transfer of technologies and knowledgeand, on the other hand they create a newworld, combining the real and the virtual,which calls for new working methods;

n in a much wider sense, innovation isunavoidable today to meet the manychallenges of modern society; climate changeand its consequences, the energy problem,urban development, the conservation ofheritage, management of water resources, etc.These challenges constitute the problem,which from now on is central, of sustainabledevelopment.

n finally, it should be noted that it is the youngergeneration who will have to find adequateresponses to these challenges. It is necessaryto introduce them to the scope of innovationto be covered in order to continue to attractthem into the profession, and begin to trainthose who will guarantee our future.

Innovation cannot be avoided, but at thesame time, obstacles often make itsimplementation problematic. The White Paperendeavours to draw up an inventory of the situationfaced today by the engineering consultancyindustry. It lists the leverages and obstaclesencountered when implementing innovation, andmoves on to suggest a certain number ofrecommendations that could alleviate thissituation and enable companies to exploit theirskills fully in terms of innovation.

9 Computer Assistance Design10 Ground Positioning System11 Electronic management of documentation


I INNOVATION IN ENGINEERINGCONSULTANCY

ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY IN DEFININGREQUIREMENTS AND CONSULTATION

Likening the role of engineering consultancy to asimple role of technical design companies is a falseand extremely simplistic view. In reality, engineeringcompanies are recognised for their capacity forproject management, that is to say theirability to design and build the most complexworks. Syntec-Ingenierie groups together thelargest of these French companies.But reducing the role of engineeringconsultancy to a project management rolestill represents a too restrictive view.

By integrating various skills, combining generaldesigners and specialists (programmers, lawyers,economists, environmental specialists, etc.), manyengineering companies have for a long time alsodemonstrated their ability to work in theemployer’s sphere, from the statement ofa requirement to the decision to proceed.

The purpose of this upstream assistance indefining requirements consists of making theappropriate responses prior to any commitment,and to optimise the response to the requirementsby integrating all the constraints and taking part indiscussions.

This upstream assistance cannot be effectivewithout a strong capacity for innovation over arange of services.

Depending on the type of project, engineeringconsultancy can therefore perform:n definition and feasibility studies,n pre-programming,n assistance with discussions,n institutional and financial deals,n socio-economic studies,n environmental and sustainable development

studies,n studies on establishment in the territory and the

location of geotechnical studies,n hydrological studies,n regulatory studies,

n economic modelling: traffic/revenue/costs,n plans for urban transportation,n transport and traffic plans,n etc.

The 2006 FIDIC12 -EFCA-AHCEA Congress inBudapest clearly revealed the concept of “TrustedAdviser”, which qualifies this very specific role ofupstream project engineering. Many largeemployers confirm their requirements for this typeof skill.

Apart from this upstream role, engineering canplay the role of adviser in all phases of aproject. In fact, an employer is not expected topossess skills in all of the areas or even haveaccess to all of the necessary resources toperform his tasks correctly. That is why it issometimes necessary to utilise “employer’sassistants”, whose role is to clarify and assist incertain projects.

Engineering consultancy provides this assistance,which may be:

➢ Of a “specialised” nature:n Upstream studies (before the decision to

proceed), as described above;n risk studies and management,n programmers,n preparation of the programme,n general planning,n financial and economic expertise,n technical, contractual or legal expertise,n sustainable development expertise,n HQE (High Environmental Quality),n contracts and partnership expertise,n etc.

➢ Of an “inter-disciplinary” nature:inter-disciplinary missions consist of assistanceto the employer for all or part of the handlingand/or management of the project:n conducting the operation,

12 International Federation of Consulting Engineers (see glossary)


n project management,n payment or delegation (for public projects),n delegated employership (for private projects),n international “project management”.

➢ Dedicated to the operation andmaintenance phase:The completed work passes to the operator oruser. In this new situation, assistance may alsobe necessary to :n define the operation and maintenance

programme,n ensure start-up,n carry out operation and maintenance.


DESIGN ENGINEERING

At the design stage, engineering can play a role inthe innovation process in a number of differentways:

a) Internal innovation:optimising production

Engineering consultancy continuously innovates tomake progress in its methods and productivity. Inthese situations, it may be a question of eitherinnovations of the “bottom-up” type, by operationalteams improving their production process inrespect of their daily requirements, or top-downimprovements in the productivity of the wholecompany through strategic decisions by themanagement. These actions are self-financing.In this way a systematic and in-depth knowledgemanagement approach enabled the time requiredto make a preliminary estimate of the cost of atransport infrastructure project to be reduced by afactor of 40 (with an uncertainty rate equal to thatfor traditional methods). This improvement benefitsfirstly employers, who can make an optimum choicefrom a large number of variants.Several recent examples of concessions or PPPcontracts 13 with fully integrated design teams alsoshow that large companies have appreciated theengineering consultancy input: general optimisationof the project, introducing design productivity andknowledge of all the upstream constraints.

What is ″Knowledge Management″?

Knowledge Management describes the methodsand techniques used to identify, analyse,organise, memorise and share knowledgebetween members of one or moreorganisations, in particular knowledge createdby the company itself (e.g. research anddevelopment, good practice) or acquired fromoutside (e.g. monitoring and economicintelligence) in order to improve the performanceof the organisation.

For companies, the stakes can be:n an added value of the company associated with

increase in the knowledge capital;n an improvement in the performance of the

company.

To these stakes can be added risk management:risk of loss of skill and risks in general.

The objectives of knowledge management are:n to develop the productivity and quality of

services;n to preserve know-how;n to ensure transfer to subsequent generations;n to develop commercial efficiency;n to stimulate creativity and innovation.

In the case of an engineering company, it is amatter of:

n organising the circulation of data,information and documents useful for theefficient performance of its services andcustomer contracts from their collection,management and updating (professionalreference material, basic regulation monitoring,etc.);

n ensuring the transmission of knowledgebetween individuals by means of the systemof formalisation of knowledge (REX - feedbackof experience, good practice, books ofknowledge, collection of know-how, etc.) andconnecting individuals (tutoring, networks,community practice etc.);

n accompanying transfers of expertise andskills (retirement, promotion, etc.) to ensurethat the level of corporate knowledge ismaintained;

n optimising access to knowledge, itsupdating and enrichment by means ofefficient information systems (professionalwebsites, collaborative working tool, with adefinition of the centres of interest of each and″push″ system, research engine, e-learningplatform, etc.).

b) Innovations developed on behalfof employers

Employers may be: a local authority, a public orprivate owner/institution, an industry, a company,another non-specialised engineering consultancy,etc.

➢ Innovation at the request of the employer

In this case, engineering consultancy develops aninnovation in mutual understanding andagreement with an employer.For example, following the storms of 1999 in Franceit was necessary to reinforce the foundations of

13 PPP contracts : Public Private Partnership contracts


large electric pylons. RTE14 selected an innovativesolution from an engineering company thatachieved this at a cost of 20% less than alternativetraditional methods.

➢ Innovation intended for severalemployers

In this case, engineering consultancy anticipatesthe request from several employers orcollaborates with some of them to develop ageneral method that will be useful to them; this fullor partial self-investment is rewarded by thecompetitive advantage that the company obtainsfrom it. An example of this is the GERICI15 projecton the reduction of vulnerability of the transportinfrastructure to climate change, which developed aGeographical Information System (GIS) for theoperators, facilitating forecasting and preventivemeasures, including immediate action just before orduring periods of crisis. In this particular case, theinnovation’s benefits to society were clear, andjustified the self-investment. It should be noted thatsome European employers, and also the WorldBank, consider it to be of great interest; the widedevelopment of the use of this innovation in Francewould enable useful new references to be acquiredfor international competitiveness.

➢ Innovation pre-financed by severalemployers

Engineering can also gather a group of clientsat the start of a project who will beassociated with the definition of the specificationsof a product and will contribute to financing theinitial development of this product.

In this way, the CANOE project developed amodelling system to assist in the design andmanagement of urban drainage systems byassociating three large towns, two departments anda customer ministry from project start-up. Othercustomer groups joined the initial group throughoutthe project. The CANOE system is now availablecommercially.

➢ Innovation in multi-member consortia

Such innovations can also be developed inmulti-member consortia. In this type of project,there is clearly a general interest.

Engineering can be the catalyst for adecompartmentalising action between themembers of the whole chain.The PROPICE project on “secret sites” includes alarge employer, also an operator, as well as twolarge world-leading French companies. The projectis directed by an engineering company. Thepurpose of the project is to make certain openrecommendations for better preparation of largesites by minimising, for example, the congestionassociated with the work. The interest of the localcouncillors and other European participants in thematter demonstrates the relevance of thisinnovation.

c) Innovation in daily engineering

It is the basic business of engineering to collectand evaluate existing innovations that arealready available “on the shelf” in order to satisfythe functional specifications of the employer. Thisrole is normally included in engineering services.

The functioning of this mechanism is more effectivewhen all the incentives are favourable to it.

The Renault Logan16 is a good example: the ideawas to manufacture a vehicle at a price to beat offall competition. The solution was to have it built incountries where the manufacturing costs were verylow, but with a lower level of engineering skills: so itwas therefore necessary to design a car based onalready-existing techniques and concepts that werereliable and industrially proven, while being simpleenough to permit decentralisation of manufacture. Anew car concept was born. Engineering is thus akey player in the spreading of innovation,both at home and abroad. The legislator mustcreate an adequate environment in which this rolecan be fully performed for the general benefit of all.For example, reinforced soil was a very innovativeway of designing and building large embankments,especially in environments where space is verylimited. The principle of reinforced soil was inventedby Vidal, a French architect and engineer, in 1965:this process gives new mechanical properties to thesoil through close association with reinforcingframes. A construction from reinforced soil is afoundation consisting of horizontal layers of rubblebetween which frame beds are laid. This process isused especially for building supporting walls withfacings, generally made from reinforced concrete

14 The company which operates the electricity transport network in France15 systems developed by the public research network with the assistance of employers, and engineering firms …16 Car produced by Renault.


layers connected to frames. This is a Frenchinnovation that has practically revolutionised thedesign of certain types of work and has spreadwidely on an international level. It brings a verysubstantial gain in terms of costs of filling works, (itis therefore employers that benefit the most fromthis innovation) and provides a suitable technicalsolution when the site constraints are very high.

d) Innovation in consultingengineering and technology

Consulting engineering and technology developedrapidly in the 80s during the deployment ofComputer Assisted Design (CAD) in thedevelopment of industrial products. Previously, thisactivity concentrated mainly on the subcontractingof design, essentially in the mechanical andelectronics sectors. This development took placeowing to the support of large employers who,having requirements in all sectors, enabledengineers to acquire the skills on industrialdevelopment.

This support thus permitted the development, forexample, of vehicle instrument panels, exterior andinterior equipment such as rear view mirrors andbumpers and also mobile telephones and fax(except for the electronics), train and metroequipment as well as aircraft sections.

Reduction of the life of consumer products alsocreated an upsurge in new product designs.Engineering companies were therefore organised toconfront this new demand, firstly by intensive stafftraining in the use of CAD tools in order to supportthe research and development sectors of largecompanies. This was followed by the developmentof trades such as metal working, plastics, quotationand value analysis; essential tools for all designers.


PROJECT MANAGEMENT ENGINEERING

a) What is project managementengineering?

Managing a project consists in ensuring itscompletion within the constraints ofperformance, cost, delivery times andquality in a context of sustainabledevelopment.

“Project management” is becoming increasinglylinked with the management of complexity, dueto:n the multiplication of the parameters that have to

be controlled: performance, cost, delivery times,quality, safety, the environment,contractualisation and health of companies,increased regulation, social expectations,communication and politics;

n the multiplication of stakeholders and interfaces;n the initial immaturity or instability of the project:

insufficient definition (programme), modificationsrequested by the customer or employer;

n multiplication of the uncertainty factors: - thereliability of simulations, methods and estimatesbased on “hazy” items (physical and programmedata, costs, delays);

n random factors inherent in human activities:accidents due to the environment during thecompletion of the project;

n unexpected changes in the project - environment:regulations, economics, competition, etc.

To cope with this complexity, the manager, who hasto manage the project, can use decision makingtools, and also:n common sensen method and rationalityn evaluation and integration of random factors and

safety marginsn his/her knowledge of similar projectsn efficient organisationn reliable and reactive communication.

b) Innovation is necessary forproject management

These resources however are not sufficient inthemselves. The manager must also innovatecontinuously for optimum management ofcomplex projects. Innovating in projectmanagement consists in:

n searching for new methods of working and newtools

n rethinking the organisation and the relationshipbetween key players

n changing the culture of the players: the employer,the engineer, the contractor. In the same way thatproject management has considerably improvedindustrial production; it must be used today torethink the relationships between participants,which are strictly bound by French regulations.For example, it is forbidden for the same team tobe both upstream and downstream of projects.New methods of contracting (design-build,partnership contracts) impose a necessaryrethinking in this area.

c) Managing Projects

➢ The tools of project management

Project management comprises all the decisionsthat must be taken to complete a projectsatisfactorily. This means relying on a certainnumber of indicators which are provided byproject management tools. The tools give acontinuous view of any deviation (at a time andforecast at the end of the project) between areference projection and the true state of progress.These tools have already been in effective use forsome forty years, although computers have madethem even more efficient. Planning tools can beused to control delivery dates. Budgetaryforecasting and monitoring tools are used to controlcosts. Finally, quality is checked by means ofquality compliance follow-up sheets.

➢ Risk management tools

In this field, much still remains to be invented,mainly because it is impossible to develop tools ofthis type without a coherent risk managementmethod.The purpose of these tools is to:n optimise reliability;n capitalise on a wide range of experience;n prioritise risks (consequences of a fault, priorities

to be defined);n simplify actions: what is effective?n choose between two courses of action.


Note that an ambitious three-year project,supported by the ANR17, has brought togetherseveral engineering companies, constructioncompanies, universities and major colleges in acommon objective to draw up an inventory of riskmanagement practices in France andinternationally. The GERMA18 project shouldtherefore produce innovative tools and methods inthis field.

What is risk management?

Project management has evolved over the lastfifty years and now includes more and moreparameters. Technical performance, costs anddelivery times were the first factors to be takeninto account, then came quality, contract formats,managing change in the course of a project,safety, etc. Recently, two quite new approacheshave appeared: sustainable development andrisk management, which are nowindispensable in project managementmethods.In fact there are many factors that can causecomplex projects to fail: financial, contractual andenvironmental reasons, problems with delivery,organisation, failure to reach agreement with localresidents, etc. That is why there are teams of ″riskmanagers″ in large groups whose task is toprevent these risks from arising.The aim of a coherent risk managementmethod is therefore to assess and deal with allpotential risks in a project, that is to say to gobeyond the strict framework of contractualrelations between each of the participants. Riskmanagement forms an integral part oftoday’s management of complex projects.

Risk management tools are also useful forsupporting the decisions of insurers. Theessential thing for an insurer is in factknowledge and management of risk.This knowledge and management involves firstlythe employer, who creates the risk. He must allowall the engineers and contractors engaged in theproject the necessary time for study andsatisfactory completion of the project. In thiscontext, engineering plays an important role. Thetools for design, calculation and simulation, andeven prediction, objectivise the risk, in addition tothe contributions of inspection and certification

organisations. They are therefore efficient tools indecision making and also provide traceability forprojects.

Engineering consultancy, through its skillsand “risk measurement” tools, is thuscapable of providing positive guidance toinsurers in their assessment of innovativeprojects.

➢ Collaborative working tools

These are essentially:n systems for the exchange of information between

participants in the project;n systems for simultaneous engineering and

technical analysis;n project communication systems: intranet and

extranet.

In this field, engineering has invented most of thetools currently in use on projects.Significant progress however remains to bemade in the area of numerical modelling(Computer Assisted Design, or CAD).A virtual, interactive 3D model for infrastructures iscurrently being prepared by a consortium that wonan ANR19 contract; the various participants requiredan engineering company to be the driving force forthis. This project should represent a very significantFrench progress towards a standard engineeringtool, in particular in the design stages of very largecivil engineering projects.

d) The contribution of engineering inconsulting and technology

The opportunity to participate in the development ofnew products enabled engineering firms togradually acquire knowledge and skills in thevarious development phases. By combining theseresources, they are today able to proposesolutions for the overall development ofproducts and/or industrial projects.

This has enabled high level jobs to be created inwhich engineers are involved either in projectmanagement, or in trades where technicians andengineers are chosen for their experience.

Engineering consultancies provide real solutions inthe development of products and processes in

17 See glossary18 An ANR project developed with engineering consultancy firms19 See glossary


industry. They become involved from theexpression of requirements stage, and evenprepare specifications for the consultations theywill be required to process.

Today, services can be provided from a statementof requirements up to the industrialisation ofproducts, which means that the personnel of theconsultancy must have the same high level of skillsas the customer organisations: designers,development engineers, validation engineers(calculation and simulation), project engineers,planners, managers, methods technicians andengineers, specialists, etc. This list is by no meansexhaustive.


II THE LEVERAGE FOR INNOVATION

THE INTERNAL MOTIVATIONS OF ENGINEERING FIRMS

The principal motivation for innovation is quiteclearly internal. It relies on the motivation ofdirectors, management and all personnel in thecompany, even very often on the determination ofone or more highly motivated persons –determination in its real sense, because it requiresa lot of patience and perseverance to overcomethe many obstacles preventing implementation ofinnovation.

Several stimuli can feed this motivation:n the search for increased productivity,

necessary to improve profitability and/orcompetitiveness;

n the necessity of developing new services orproducts to secure competitive advantage,particularly internationally;

n the desire to give a company a certain image andvisibility in the market (communicationstrategy).

n the desire to consolidate links betweenpeople within the company and theirattachment to it, the fact of participating in thecreation of something new arousing in general aform of intellectual enjoyment in the peopleconcerned.

It should however be emphasised that thismotivation can only be transferred to projects if it ispromoted by the will of the managers.


RESEARCH FINANCING STRUCTURES

Over the last few years in France, the trend hasbeen to increase financing for upstream andpre-competitive projects combining publicresearch and private partners.

Special emphasis is placed on SMEs, which aredefined differently from one source to another (from250 staff for the EU and 2000 people for OSEO20).There are many sources of finance for innovationand these are not always clear.The system, which is complex, is evolvingtowards simplification, homogenization andfacilitation of SME access. The merging ofsources is still in progress and the scenariodescribed below may still change in the comingmonths.

Engineering firms are better prepared than SMEs inthe administrative mechanics of organising projectsand submitting tenders. They therefore benefita priori from increased access to researchand innovation programmes. However, eventhough they may be well represented in thesupervision of many programmes, engineering firmsdo not have a sufficient global presence and do notbenefit enough from these leverages.

a) At national level

➢ National Research Agency programmes

The ANR21 is a financing agency for researchprojects selected on the basis of calls for tender. Itis the successor of the former “RRIT” Research andTechnical Innovation Networks. The ANR’smission is directed at public researchorganisations and firms: to produce newknowledge and encourage interaction bydeveloping partnerships between publicly ownedlaboratories and private operators.

The ANR budget for 2008 was about € 1billion. Each programme issues an annual call forprojects. A typical project financed by theANR lasts for three years, involves aboutten partners and receives a subsidy ofover €400,000. On average, 20 – 25% ofprojects submitted are awarded funding.

Significant changes were introduced intothe 2008 planning (www.agence-national-recherche.fr). The programmes of mostinterest to engineering are those run by theDepartment of Sustainable Energy andEnvironment, in particular:n SUSTAINABLE TOWNS, a new programme,

successor of the former plans for civil and urbanengineering, for mobility, land transport andsocio-economy of urban housing;

n HABISOL, Intelligent & Solar housing;n PRECODD, ecotechnologies and sustainable

development;n RISKNAT, management, reduction and

compensaton of natural risks.22

Financing consists of grants which, for a privatecompany, cover between 30-50% ofresearch costs. For administrative reasons (theANR has a fairly small team), management ofproject evaluation and aid budgets is delegated toother organisations with adequate structures (e.g.ADEME23 for the PRECODD programme24). Privatepartners in projects are industrialists andcontractors. Engineering consultancy is fairly wellrepresented in some of these programmes, inparticular those that are not exclusivelytechnological. Prior approval of a projectproposal by a Competitiveness Centre maybe an aid to releasing ANR financing.

➢ “Competitiveness Centres”25 andcompany competitiveness funds

The creation in 2004 of the “CompetitivenessCentres” is the result of a new industrial policyaimed at mobilising innovation capacity. ACompetitiveness Centre is the association of

20 French public establishment supporting SME development (see glossary)21 See glossary22 For more information about these programs, see glossary23 French public agency of environment & energy (see glossary)24 See glossary25 See glossary


firms, research centres and trainingorganisations in a given region, engaged ina partnership (common developmentstrategy) intended to release synergiesaround innovative projects directed at a givenmarket(s). 71 Competitiveness Centres haveopened since the establishment of CIACT26 on 5July 2007. Seven of them have a worldwidevocation.The growth of Competitiveness Centres representsan exceptional opportunity for efficientsynergy between MEEDDAT 27and theprivate sector in general, including engineeringconsultancy. The first interesting stage is inprogress, its real dynamism at the higher level stillremains to be tested. It should also be noted thatthe synergies between ministries such as theMEIE28 and centres such as Systematics29 have apositive effect on the development of innovation.

The French State allocated € 500 million peryear over a three year period (2006 –2008) to the Competitiveness Centres. Ofthis amount, about € 60M p.a. was for tax relief, €170M p.a. to ANR , AII30 and OSEO31 grants. TheUnique Inter-Ministry Fund (held in theCompany Competitiveness Fund) has some€ 270M for financing projects selected under thetwo annual calls for tender.

The contributors of these funds are the ministriesresponsible for Industry, Defence, Equipment,Agriculture, Health and Regional Development.Regionally based authorities contribute to thefinancing of certain centres.The projects submitted must involve at least twofirms and a laboratory or research centre.The average financing for a project is in the order of€ 1.5M. Approval by a Centre does notautomatically lead to financial support, and aproject must often be justified first to the Centreand then to the financiers. Apart from providingfinancial support for innovation, theCompetitiveness Centres provide opportunities forpartnership-building.

Engineering firms took part in the reflection andcreation of certain Centres, but do not yet have arole in either their development or the R&Dmatters they deal with. Engineering firms haveexperience in complex projects and, in thelight of this experience, are prepared to maketheir skills available for the developmentof the Competitiveness Centres.

Competitiveness Centres could utilise engineeringconsultancy skills for various purposes:- external experts: to assess the satisfactory

operation of the centres and efficient use ofpublic funding;

- assistance to the management ofcentres and R&D projects: engineeringfirms are able to bring their skills in themanagement of complex programmes initiatedby the Competitiveness Centres, within thescope of missions such as:

- control and management of an operationwith the centre managers. This type of missionbenefits from good relations between thevarious partners of a centre (researchlaboratory, innovative SMEs, industrial firms,etc.). It would also contribute to optimising themanagement of the centres (choice of priorityprojects, financing, technology transfer, etc.);

- technical expert/partner in projects:participation of engineering firms in applieddevelopment projects or as a technologicalinterface between the various technicalspecialities.

➢ OSEO

Specialized in supporting French small and mediumfirms, (up to 2000 employees), OSEO Innovation(e.g. ANVAR – www.oseo.fr) supports innovationprojects with a technological component showingreal market opportunities.

26 French Interministerial Committee of Development and Territorial Competitiveness (see glossary)27 French Ministry of Ecology & Sustainable development (see glossary)28 French Ministry for Economy, Industry & Employment29 System@tics Paris-Region is a competitiveness Centre dedicated to the development of IT based systems30 AII Agence Innovation industrielle integrated into OSEO in January 200831 See glossary


Founded in 2006, the Industrial InnovationAgency (AII), www.aii.fr, 32with a budget ofsome € 1.7 billion, is a financing agencyfor large industrial innovation programmesundertaken by firms. The AII wasintegrated in OSEO in January 2008. Thisintegration has enabled € 800 million to beinjected into OSEO activities. It should be notedthat € 300 million are to be allocated toR&D projects by medium sized firms (250 to5000 employees) for projects of a declared unitaryvalue of more than € 3 million.

Among the many measures proposed by OSEO,some are especially dedicated to innovation (€ 220million p.a.):n repayable advances up to a maximum of 50%,

as aid for innovative projects. Part of the aid,corresponding to technological know-how, isrepayable, even in the event of failure. Theremainder of the aid is only paid in the event ofsuccess, based on a marketing plan for the endproduct that is written during the project;

n recruitment aid for innovation: OSEOprovides a grant to partially cover employeecosts for the first year.

➢ Programmes of the Ministry of Ecology,Energy, Sustainable Development andTerritorial Development

MEEDDAT (the French Ministry of Ecology, Energy,Sustainable Development and RegionalDevelopment) controls and finances or co-financesprogrammes in the field of development, transportand the environment. Within MEEDDAT, DRAST(Department of Scientific and Technical Researchand Implementation) supports research in the fieldsof transport, civil engineering, town planning andbuilding. Some of these programmes are also listedon the ANR website (www.recherche-innovation.equipement.gouv.fr). DRAST thus actsas the inter-ministerial secretariat of PREDIT(Programme for Research, Development andInnovation in Land Transport) and RGC&U (“Civiland Urban Engineering” Technological ResearchNetwork). It also contributes with the DGUHC(Department of Town Planning, Housing andConstruction), to the implementation of researchand experimentation policy of the PUCA33 (Town

Planning, Construction and ArchitectureProgramme) and PREBAT (Building and EnergyProgramme).

“National projects” involving participants in theconstruction industry, employers and publicresearch are also developing partnershipinnovations. They target the areas in which theinvolvement of all participants in the chain canensure future industrial value. These projectsinclude experimental sites. They are financed jointlyby the professions and MEEDDAT (DRAST). The“National projects” scheme is original and isappreciated as much by the sector as by externalobservers.

DRAST’s Department for Research andFuturology (SRP)34 controls and financesresearch programmes in support of publicpolicies. Among the subjects that may be ofinterest to engineering are environmental risks,climate change, water and soil(www.ecologie.gouv.fr).

➢ Agency programmes

Agencies such as the ADEME (Agency for theEnvironment and Energy Control) publish tendersfor projects on matters related to theenvironment and energy. The principles offinancing are the same as for the ANR.

➢ Miscellaneous sector-based programmes

There are many institutions launching sector-basedprogrammes of various sizes. For example,CLAROM, the club for Research Activities at Sea(www.clarom.com) unites several engineering firmsactive in the petroleum field (more preciselyoffshore) and support field.

Other ministries (the Ministry of Agriculture andFishing, for example), some regional and generalcouncils35 and even private institutes launchprogrammes, generally sector-based, whichsometimes offer engineering firms a small rolealongside the academic participants. Aid may berestricted to a contribution to the financing ofresearchers (thesis grants). The General Council ofIsere36 thus finances an annual research

32 See glossary33 French public plan for research on town planning (see glossary)34 French Department of Research and the Future (see glossary)35 French administrative division (The French region is approx. similar to a county)36 French administrative division in the Alps


programme on natural risks, managed by theGrenoble Centre for Research and Studies on thePrevention of Natural Risks.

➢ Aid from the National Association forTechnical Research (ANRT)37

This concerns especially CIFRE38 agreements,which in 2007 provided financing of about€17,000 per year over a three year period tosupport the research training (doctoral thesis) of ayoung graduate in a company, in conjunction with aresearch laboratory.

➢ Regional financing

There are budgetary lines at regional level tosupport innovation instead of, or in addition to,some of the above-mentioned financing. TheState-Region Plans sometimes have an innovationsection and launch calls for projects. However, withthe foreseen reform for the period 2007-2013, it isnot possible at this stage to give further informationon their programme.

In most regions, there are also associations ornetworks that facilitate the monitoring andinitiation of innovative projects. For example,in the area of water and the environment; EA-IMaGE (www.ea-image.fr) in the PACA Region(French Riviera area), VERSeau(www.verseaudeveloppement.com) in theLanguedoc-Roussillon Region, APESA in theAquitaine Region and NANCIE in the LorraineRegion (www.nancie.asso.fr).

b) At European level

➢ The 7th Framework Programme forResearch and TechnologicalDevelopment

The seventh Framework Programme for Researchand Technological Development (FP7) 39–http://cordis.europa.eu/en/home.html-coveringthe period 2007 – 2013, is the largest investmentprogramme in the European Union for researchand technological development, with a totalamount of aid available of € 50,5 billion

FP7 represents a development opportunity forEuropean partnerships and financing of researchand innovation for research centres and firms. Thepurpose of the Cooperation Programme (€32,4 million) is to stimulate cooperation andreinforce the links between industry and researchon an international basis. It comprises 9 themes,independent in their management butcomplementary in their implementation, of whichthree may directly interest the consulting industry:energy, the environment (including climate change),and transport.Financing consists of subsidies covering30-50% of costs. The rate may be lower becausedifferent criteria are used to assess eligible costs incalculating the hourly cost price of an engineeringcompany (some expenses are excluded).Because of the size of the projects, the number ofpartners and the investment required in producingthe proposal, it is nevertheless difficult for anengineering company to control a project proposal.In addition, competition is tough and the chance ofsuccess can be less than 10 to 15% in somesectors.

The European Commission has alsoencouraged the establishment of EuropeanTechnological Platforms so that the prioritiesset by FP740 correspond well to the priorities ofeach sector.

The ECTP (European Construction TechnologyPlatform – www.ectp.org) was thus set up in 2005.It has about 1000 members from all professions,public and private, from the construction industry,urban development, etc.

This platform has already given rise, in the first callfor tenders, to a focus on energy in construction.One of the priorities, for example, refers to quality ofliving in buildings. The more typical subjects, suchas tunnels, will not start until 2009. Generallyspeaking, all problems that relate to climatechange, sustainable development andengineering are considered a priority by theCommittee. Several engineering firms are activewithin the ECTP, at European level and in theFrench platform. There are very real opportunities todevelop innovations in high-level Europeanconsortia.

37 See glossary38 French financial support for doctoral thesis39 Framework programme of R & D (see glossary)40 the 7th Framework Programme


The WSSTP (Water Supply and SanitationTechnology Platform – www.wsstp.org) founded in2004, groups together participants from the waterand urban environment sectors. The large numberof participants is giving shape to a common visionand a strategic research plan for the industrialsector concerned.

➢ The EUREKA PROGRAMME

EUREKA41 (www.eureka.be) is the result of aFrench-German initiative which todayincludes 36 member countries. EUREKA is notlimited to the boundaries of the European Union. Itaims to strengthen European competitiveness bysupporting innovative projects “borne” by industry.The projects come from industry initiatives,not from governments. A project may thereforebe proposed at any time. This bottom-up approachinduces flexibility, simplicity and rapidity in theprocedures implemented by a very light anddecentralised structure. On the other hand, itrequires vigorous lobbying to convince thefinanciers of the viability of a project.

EUREKA has a special method of operation: thepartners must be multi-national; “EUREKA” labellingat international level is necessary, but the financingof each partner is national, which may lead tounfortunate time lags. In France, the Ministry forIndustry and OSEO-ANVAR are the largestcontributors – up to now mostly in the form ofadvances that are repayable in the event ofsuccess. The ANR may contribute to the upstreampart of the project.Engineering firms can take part in a EUREKAproject, but rarely as leader.

➢ The European Investment Bank

In 2000, the EIB42 launched I2I (Innovation 2010Initiative) to support innovation.But it is mainly a question of financial or bankinginstruments (loans, capital investment, etc.) whichare of little concern to engineering.

➢ Other programmes of the European Union

There are many support programmes for innovationin E.U. financing, in particular in the technicalDirectorate-Generals.

c) The Research Tax Credit (RTC)

The Research Tax Credit43 is an importantsource of finance for engineering firms; itrequires a great deal of organisation and perfectionto show that a project is truly innovative and thuseligible for this credit. The ambiguity of the word“research” in engineering firms should be noted.

Up to now, the mechanism for implementing RTCwas a multi-year mechanism: it comprised one partproportional to the eligible base (which correspondsto the value of the services recognised as able tobenefit from RTC), at a rate of 10%, and one partassociated with the increase in turnover eligible inrespect of the previous two years, at a rate of 40%.The dossiers therefore had to provide visibility onactivities over a three year period.

This old system has been revised and made moreflexible. Since 1 January 2008, the RTC nowrepresents 30% of the total research effort.The eligibility criteria have not changed.The process consists of checks at two levels: oneat tax level, carried out by the General TreasuryPayer44, likened to a check on the form; at the endof this first review, the Ministry of Economy mayrequest the Ministry of Research to carry out asecond review (a detailed analysis of the content).

On acceptance by the administration, the companyreceives approval for a Research Tax Credit.Employers and engineering firms develop researchsubjects. They regularly call on the services ofengineering firms to support them in thesedevelopments. They can then allocate these coststo the research budget, thereby benefiting from taxallowance on these amounts – on the condition thatthey make use of engineering firms that haveobtained approval for a Research Tax Credit.The major interest of Research Tax Creditfor engineering firms relies on its basic principle: toobtain a tax credit in proportion to the internal andexternal research and innovation costs of thecompany. But it is also of value to employees of acompany to see their efforts in terms of innovationrecognised; the RTC enables enterprising andcreative staff to be identified and given recognitionfrom their peers.

41 European Program for technical cooperation (see glossary)42 See glossary43 French credit system for tax exoneration (see glossary)44 A public authority of the French Ministry of Economy


PUBLIC PROCUREMENT

a) The French public procurementlegislation

This legislation includes clauses designed toencourage innovation in public contracts;however, since the purpose of the CMP45 is topromote fair competition, some of its methods ofapplication limit free development. It comes downto correct interpretation by the users.

➢ Article 75: Procurement in respect ofexperimental programmes.

This is certainly the article which, correctly used,provides the greatest opportunities for innovation,by offering employers the possibility to issuerestricted calls for tender for innovativework

The terms fixed by the law are as follows. Thestarting point is a national public programmedefined by:n a programme authenticated by a formal act of a

national authority possessing the appropriatecompetence (in France, this is a Ministry);

n a call for tender, correctly published, with equaltreatment of bidders;

n submission of proposals by competitorsproviding solutions to the problems;

n selection of the winners by a jury that iscomposed in the same manner as if it were adesign contest (art. 21 of the CMP), on criteriaand selection methods that are fully defined, asfor a design contest.

After that, any awarding authority (employer) maylaunch a call for tender only for winners of thenational programme, for the award of designcontracts work for building one or moreconstructions that implement the ideas arising fromthe tender. A protocol must be signed between theawarding authority, the winner and the manager ofthe national programme.

Examples of the application of article 75 show thatthe CMP may be favourable to innovative projects:n the CQFD (Cost-Quality-Reliability-Delivery)

project of the PUCA46 initiated by the Ministryof Housing for the purpose of identifyinginnovative solutions for the construction of socialhousing meeting the requirements of cost,

quality, reliability and time. Thirteen winners wereretained by a jury for various solutions. HLM47

companies can launch construction contractswith those of the winners whose solutions meetthe criteria of the national project;

n the DGR (General Department of Highways) 2007call for tenders for innovation in roadworks formeeting two criteria: reductions in energyconsumption and inconveniences caused byroadworks.

Other clauses of the CMP:

➢ Article 50: permits, when the awardingauthority allows for it, for the formulation ofalternatives, of which one component may bethe introduction of an innovation thatsatisfies the tender specifications in a differentway from that which is pre-defined or expectedby the awarding authority.

➢ Article 53: this article, which deals with theaward of contracts, specifies that the choicemust be based on a set of pre-defined criteria,chosen by the awarding authority on thecondition that they are justified by the purposeof the contract. One of the criteria mentioned isthe “innovative nature”. It is thereforesufficient that a call for tender highlightsthe importance of the innovative elementfor this to become one of the selectioncriteria. It is possible to imagine other criteriathat leave a free field for innovation, for example,the concept of “total cost”, provided it isaccurately defined.

➢ Article 74: design contracts prior to carryingout “work under the heading of research, test orexperimentation” that is to say innovative work,are exempted from competition, even foroperations above the threshold. They can bearranged by a negotiated contract in a restrictedcall for tenders. For that, it is sufficient forthe employer to explicitly specify that thenature of the contract is innovative.

➢ Articles 76-77: Framework agreements andcontracts with order forms. Based on arequirement expressed and explained by an

45 French Public Procurement legislation (see glossary)46 Plan for Urbanism, Construction and Architecture R & D of the MEDDAAT, see glossary47 French public organism for social housing


employer, he may select one or more economicoperators on the basis of his own criteria. Thesatisfaction of a requirement maynecessitate an innovative solution. Thisinnovative element may be specified inthe criteria. The employer may then award acontract to the framework agreement holderwho best meets the accurate requirement. Theframework agreement may not exceed a periodof 4 years unless the initial investments requiredepreciation over a longer period; in which casethere is a possibility to take into accountinvestment for innovation.

b) Intellectual and/or industrialproperty

In carrying out its business, an engineeringcompany naturally produces innovation that can beprotected by law. The public authority has judged ituseful to clarify matters by means of very preciseclauses, which are contained in the “GeneralAdministrative Specifications” and especially,as concerns engineering, in the CCAG-PI48.

These provide three possible options, namely:n option A: all transferable rights (note that the

author’s moral rights remain with the engineeringcompany and are respected) are with the publicauthority which reserves the right to use them;

n option B joint rights of use (by default, the mostfrequent option);

n option C: the holder keeps the rights and canexploit them within certain limits.

In all cases, of course, the administration at leastacquires the right to use the innovation for its ownrequirements within the scope of the contract.In the case of innovations proposed in a call fortender, anti-competitive practices are forbidden bycommercial law. The public procurement legislationpermits persons responsible for the contracts toprovide unsuccessful candidates, upon request,with information on the characteristics andadvantages relating to the successful tender –without however divulging all the information aboutthe method proposed, thereby preserving theconfidentiality of the offer.Intellectual property is guaranteed at thislevel even if there is no contractual bondwith the employer at this stage.

c) Competitive dialogue

The purpose of the competitive dialogue49 is toremedy the rigidity of the currentprocedures, which require the purchaser todetermine his requirements in advance, andcandidates to supply an offer that cannot changefurther during discussions prior to the award of acontract. The public authority can thus resort todiscussion: either when it is not able to define thetechnical means to meet its requirements, or whenit is not able to establish the legal or financial set-upof the project (for example, an integrated transportinfrastructure, large computer networks or projectswhose financing complexity is such that their legaland financial set-up cannot be pre-determined).

The competitive dialogue is first of all aprocedure that enables innovativeresponses of firms to be used. The publicpurchaser defines a functional programmecontaining levels to be reached or requirements tobe met; the firms draw up the particularspecifications (CCTP)50. If no technical solution isdefined by the public purchaser in thespecification, the candidates must be interviewed.This enables the candidates to “describe themethods they propose” and makes it possible to“appreciate as precisely as possible therequirements stated” by the administration.

The dialogue, which is in no way a negotiation, cantake place in as many successive stages asnecessary for the purchaser to define hisrequirements. The circulation of applicationsemphasises that, after each stage, the publicpurchaser can eliminate the proposals ofcandidates that do not meet his requirements. Inany case, this dialogue must above all respect theprinciple of equal treatment of candidates.

48 In French; « cahiers des clauses administratives generales pour les prestations intellectuelles ». Administrativespecifications for intellectual services. In France, they are published by the Ministry of Economy.

49 Procedure described in the Public Procurement Directive and implemented in national legislation50 Technical clauses specific to a contract. In French : « Cahier des clauses techniques particulieres ».


THE ROLE OF THE PROFESSIONAL FEDERATIONS

a) The French EngineeringConsultancy Federation(Syntec-Ingenierie)

Syntec-Ingenierie, which includes the largestFrench engineering firms, felt it important tomotivate its members on the subject of innovationin order to improve the competitiveness of theprofession by means of its creativity.

The Federation therefore set up an InnovationCommittee which has reflected on the situationtoday; its purpose was to propose measures tocreate an environment that encourages innovation.The White Paper constitutes an important stage inthis reflection. The committee also set itself the taskto encourage partnerships on subjects of commoninterest, at a pre-competitive stage, which hasenabled projects to be eligible for grants from theANR.

In addition, Syntec-Ingenierie is responsible, in itsrelations with the various partners (large employers,construction and industrial firms, research ortraining organisations, etc.) for promoting therole of engineering in the process ofinnovation, as a creative participant,integrator of concepts and/or as organiser.

b) The European Federation ofEngineering ConsultancyAssocations (EFCA)51

The European Federation of EngineeringConsultancy Associations (EFCA), which representsengineering consultancy and related services to theEuropean institutions, took action to promote andsupport innovation in local and regional firms.

Within this federation, representatives of the variousprofessional associations are currently working on adraft code relating to the recognition of thequality of the engineering firms’ services.The innovation aspect forms an integral part of thissince it is a factor of competitiveness and addedvalue.

Through its affiliation with ECCREDI(www.eecredi.org), EFCA has participated in thepromotion and communication of R&D results.

ECCREDI, for its part, takes regular action towardsthe European Commission to propose, for example,the establishment of a system of tax and financingmeasures for innovation in commercial contracts.

In order to mobilise firms at regional level to thechallenges of R&D, the European Commissioncould launch joint actions with various Europeanbodies including EFCA.

c) The International Federation ofConsulting Engineers (FIDIC)52

Two major themes were the subject of actionprogrammes by the international engineeringfederation:n firstly, the efficient application of guidelines

for sustainable development in projectmanagement;

n secondly, introducing the decisions taken by theinternational community, in particular OECD,which aims to spread good ethical practicesin business and fight against corruption.

On each of these themes, FIDIC has producedmethodological guides that introduce innovativeproject management processes which should addvalue to the quality of the services rendered byengineering consultancy firms.

In particular, FIDIC has produced a “ProjectSustainability Management” system. Theessential part of this reference system is a list ofobjectives associated with sustainable developmentand indicators associated with them. It forms aguide to innovative practices, indicating theobjectives to be targeted for each project –knowing that sustainable development assumescontinuous progress, since it is an ideal that mustbe approached as closely as possible; the levelsfixed are therefore intended to be surpassed andthe results improved through innovative practices.

51 See glossary52 See glossary


III OBSTACLES TO INNOVATION

CULTURAL OBSTACLES IN ENGINEERING FIRMS

a) The preponderance of productionconstraints

Engineering contracts almost always containobligations to deliver a precise, quantifiable andachievable solution. In addition, this responsemust be produced within a pre-determined timeand almost intangible budget. These conditions,inherent in the profession, make it difficult toembark on a search for solutions based onconcepts that are totally unknown at thetime of signing the contract.

At most, it is possible to extrapolate an existingconcept a little beyond the known limits and thusprogress the technique step-by-step in successiveincrements.

That is why engineering firms are structured asproduction units (as in an industrial company),which must each produce a response to the issueat stake, at the lowest cost and in the shortest time.Either the unit deals with the whole problem, whichis organisation by project, or the unit produces apart associated with a particular competence,which is organisation by function. It is thensometimes difficult to venture into areas that are toouncertain which risk conflicting with the result (cost,completion date, quality, etc.).

Some engineering firms made the choice, or tookthe risk, to authorise one of these units not toproduce a response to the customer’s requestdirectly, but to produce a response of interestto the company for various reasons (image,niche market leader, etc.). These are R&Dservices. Such cases are increasingly rare, sincethe commonly accepted idea remains that theapplication is too random for a reasonablyshort-term return on investment.

Engineers are trained to design and produceproducts or works. Production always involvesreal and tangible objects that are directly usable. Alltheir training and the culture that flows from it areoriented towards this purpose.

Even if engineers do not baulk at intellectualreflection, there is a tendency to consider that,unless it leads to something tangible, it is not within

their domain. In engineering colleges, the study ofbasic materials concentrates on professionalapplications. In addition, some general colleges putaside professional technical concerns in order toteach management methods: but there again, theobjective is “how to construct it well”, and aseffectively as possible.

b) The importance ofstandardisation

The engineering production process is, generallyspeaking, highly regulated as it is controlled by anumber of laws and standards. Yet innovationimplies questioning standard processes in order totry something different. In other words, there aretwo different intellectual structures, that ofcreativity and that of peace of mind. To make thesecompatible, a strong motivation must be shown.In spite of that, engineers innovate continuouslywithin their projects: but this motivation is difficult toidentify and display. What is missing is aninternally planned innovation.Today’s executives are usually managers, ratherthan engineers, which means that they are not theinitiators of innovative ideas. And those who doinnovate have no direct link with the rewards of theirinnovation. In addition, engineers do not adequatelycommunicate the value of their innovations to theoutside world and therefore lose part of the benefits(a communication problem); secondly, they do notacquire adequate recognition as being the authorsof these innovative intellectual products (a problemof intellectual property).


FINANCIAL OBSTACLES IN ENGINEERING FIRMS

a) Internal organisation

Dealing with innovation in a companyrequires time and money. Yet in this profession,the margins are low, which quells the impulse toinnovate. In addition, teams are organised asproduction units which leaves no time forinnovation.

Planned voluntarist innovation rarelyexceeds 1%. Ex-post evaluation identifiesinnovation services at about 5% of turnover (ofwhich 2 to 3% is eligible for a Research Tax Credit).

b) Structure of the operatingaccounts

French SMEs encounter a special obstacle thatdrastically limits the financing of research, that ofunder capitalisation. SMEs do not havesufficient reserves to invest in innovation.

Resorting to bank loans increases financial costs; atthe same time, delays in payments by clients arebecoming considerably longer - over the last twoyears, it has increased from 60 to 100 days and ismoving towards 120. All of this increases the needfor operating funds, and SMEs cannot operatetoday without very large financial resources.One of the first budgets to be sacrificed is researchinto innovative solutions.


RELATIONS WITH SCIENTIFIC PARTNERS

a) University research

The relationships between engineering consultancyand university research, where they exist, areinadequate. In many cases, they are difficult, oreven stormy.In April 2007, the AUGC (University Association ofCivil Engineering) published an in-depth enquiry,conducted with its members, on the synergybetween the AUGC and the professional sectors(entitled “Enquiry and Proposals for more effectivecivil engineering research”). This showed that therelative mutual lack of knowledge betweenthe two environments had led to a numberof misunderstandings, which must be urgentlyremoved. The stakes, on both sides, aresignificantly greater than it appears. The gapbetween the two environments is increasing and itwill become more and more difficult to overcome itif there is not a collective leap.

Several parameters explain thesedivergences.Firstly, the timescale of a university and anengineering company are not the same.Often, for the former, the result will be providedonce it has been resolved, without a precise orpreset date. In addition, starting up a researchproject in a university setting is necessarily long,since a professor must be engaged, then student(s)must be found who are interested in the subject andavailable – since exams always take priority -, etc.In addition, continuity of research is not alwaysguaranteed if it lasts for several years; if that is thecase, it requires passing instructions andknowledge from one student to another, which canbe difficult to ensure.

Secondly, it is true that sometimes there is,explicitly or implicitly, reluctance of anideological nature: “the university will notprovide the private sector with a product that it canuse to make money!” The private sector isconsidered rather as a potential source of financeand often has trouble in gaining acceptance as apartner in innovation, even when its scientific baseis solid.

Engineers and research workersEngineers are trained to think and find solutions ina limited and often very short time. Universityresearch workers must take time to think in orderto progress the subject of their research. Thedifference in time scales makes collaborationmore difficult.

b) The Scientific and TechnicalNetwork

The Scientific and Technical Equipment Network(RST) comprises about thirty organisations,departments and engineering colleges withinMEEDDAT, or under its authority. In many cases,very good cooperation has developed betweenengineering consultancy and the RST. As anexample, from 1970 to 1995, a member companydeveloped many innovations in large motorwaysites for motorway concessionaires in closeassociation with the central and regional bodies ofthe RST (treatment of sub grade soils, layingprefabricated drains with automatic operation,experiments on self-draining coatings formotorways with heavy traffic, etc.).


EXTERNAL FINANCIAL OBSTACLES

In general, eligible labour costs borne bysubsidising organisations are calucluated belowthe cost price of an engineering company, forexample in the OSEO system.

In a project financed at a rate of 30% by the ANR(the Business Competitivity Fund of the CIR), firmshave to take on up to 70% of the finance, anddedicate a significant amount of time to preparethe dossier and its follow-up. By comparison,in research contracts placed by the State, somecompetitors benefit from 100% financing.

Obtaining finance requires, in addition to the qualityof the project proposed, serious lobbying whichis very costly in time, plus considerable effort andexpense. Some Competitiveness Centres remaindifficult for engineering firms to access (exhorbitantfees, strong influence of large industrial groups,etc.).

It is difficult to understand some sources offinance. Their renewal cycle is short and there issometimes a lack of continuity betweenprogrammes for the same sector. In addition, somebudgetary sums are financed from several sources.

The present organisation of financing doesnot offer sufficient incentives toengineering firms, in particular SMEs. Asignificant investment in monitoring andunderstanding of mechanisms is required tomaster the complexity of sources for aid forinnovation, which rules out “small” projects andmay discourage SMEs.


ADMINISTRATIVE OBSTACLES

a) Insurance

Insurers generally distinguish between the nature ofwork associated with “standard techniques” and“non-standard techniques”. A definition of this isgiven below (source: Batiweb):

➢ Work using standard techniques:

n in the traditional domain, work done inaccordance with longstanding, proven practices,standards, the DTU53 and professional rules.

n in the non-traditional domain, workdeparting from the standards of the traditionaldomain, but using ATEC or ATEX54 technicalinstructions (for example, of the CSTB)55 or thatcan be approved by a new technical investigationcarried out by a testing organisation.

Insurance contracts provide automatic cover in thecase of “standard techniques”, but can reserve theright to inspect in the case of non-traditionaltechniques.

➢ Work using non-standard techniques

These are defined as opposed to standardtechniques, but are in fact a contractual conceptwhich can vary from one insurer to another. It isnecessary to refer to the conditions given in eachcontract and, in case of doubt, to ask the insurer.

Works incorporating an innovation clearlycome in the category associated withnon-standard techniques. This is not the casewhere the design processes used are innovative,although the work itself does not incorporateinnovation, for example, in the materials ormanufacturing procedures used.The insured can be deprived of his rights ofguarantee if he does not follow good practice,covered by a regulation, recognised documentationor an agreement. In general, an innovation isnot covered by such a document. The level ofrisk is declared when the policy is taken out. Anincrease in risk can justify the cancellation of acontract. The insurer may, at any time, check therisk he is guaranteeing.

An example of a contractual clause on thissubject:“In the course of the contract, the holder, or bydefault the insured, must declare, on his owninitiative, to the insurer the new circumstancesthat either increase the risk, or create new risks,thereby making the statement given to the insurerinaccurate or null and void, especially in the formmentioned above (art. L.113-2 of the Frenchpublic procurement legislation). Under threat ofcancellation, the holder must declare thecircumstances to the insurer by registered letterwithin 15 days from the time he became aware ofthem. Forfeiture due to late declaration can onlybe imposed on the insured if the insurer canestablish that he has suffered damage. Neithercan it be imposed in any case in which the delayis due to accident or force majeure”.

In this hypothesis, the insurer can either cancel thecontract or propose a new premium. If theincreased risk is not declared in good faith, but isdetected before any incident, the insurer can cancelthe contract or propose a new premium. In theevent of an incident, the indemnity for the incidentcan be proportionally reduced. In the case of badfaith, the contract may be declared void.

In conclusion, if a work contains an innovativeaspect, the RC Pro56 insurance contractdoes not automatically guarantee the work.As a minimum, the insurer reserves the right tocheck. If the risk increases in relation to thestandard conditions of the contract, which theinsurer always considers to be the case for non-standard techniques, the insurer can cancel orincrease the premium. If the increase in the risk wasnot declared before the incident, the indemnity maybe reduced.

b) Public procurement legislation

➢ Procedures for awarding public contracts

The method for awarding engineering assignmentsby traditional public contracts in France normallytakes one of the three following forms:

53 French technical specifications54 technical instructions for experimentation55 French public organism in charge of standards and certification for the building industry56 The professional insurance


1. Design contests2. Definition contracts3. Open or restricted call for tenders

In the first two cases, the tender is launched on thebasis of at least one programme.

Eligible bidders are often encouraged to innovate,but at their own risk, since the intellectualproperty of the ideas is not protected.

The selection of the winning bid is often linked to aprovisional estimate of the investment cost, basedon reliable and proven techniques, andwhich must also remain within the availablebudget (the lowest bidder concept).

If the latter objective is not achieved, the procedurecan be declared unsuccessful and the innovativeideas retained and used to launch a newtender.

In the third case, the price almostautomatically becomes the determinantcriterion.Engineering services are remunerated proportionallyto the forecasted value of the work.The remuneration rate takes into account thecontent of the services to be performed in relationto a complete mission called the reference missionand the specific complexity of the project in relationto projects in the same category.The engineer is obliged to abide by hisundertakings concerning the investment cost. In theevent of his non-respect, in a price rangedepending on the level of precision of the studiesused for the estimate (APS, APD, etc.57), he ispenalised by the application of a reduced rate ofremuneration.

In this context, it is difficult for an engineeringcompany to decide alone, without the priorsupport of the employer, for innovativearrangements that lead to:n additional validation procedures;n additional studies demonstrating not only the

feasibility of these arrangements and theirreliability, but also that they will result in mediumand long term performance that is equivalent orbetter than that achieved by application oftraditional proven techniques;

n any restrictions in the choice of firms assigned to

achieve them;n random costs and delays that could potentially

impact on the completion of the work;n insurance problems, etc.

Whatever the state of the economy, engineeringfirms will have no interest, when submitting tenders,in:n increasing the costs of their own

remuneration in line with that forecast forthe work, by including the development costs ofideas, processes or products in the project;

n taking risks on time scales and the successfulcompletion of the operation.Engineering firms therefore hesitate to embark oninnovative projects, since these imply bearinggreater risks or seeing the project rejected by theemployer.

Only the employers can back an innovativeapproach, but they do not often do so, inspite of certain proposals of the legislationthat encourage innovation.

➢ The role of the Employer/ Engineer /Contractor chain

All members of the decision-making chain of aproject notice that, very often, each feels lockedin, or locks himself in a very strict andrestrictive application of the various lawsthat govern the completion of an operation.This collective self-limitation is certainly oneof the most significant brakes on innovation.

➢ The employer does not dare to include himselfin the establishment of a programme for fear oflimiting the possibilities of competition toomuch. He therefore imposes on the engineeringconsulting firms a contract by enforcement ofthe MOP law58, fixing very strict limits to theaction of his design team for fear of sufferingprice increases or delays.

➢ The engineer imposes limits on himself inorder to remain within the framework of theprogramme, or not to take on a responsibilitythat he believes should be that of the Employer,or to avoid unforeseen costs that would lead to aprice increase in his own contract. In addition,the increasing complexity of the projects leadsthe engineer to employ a very large number of

57 Standardized phases for public procurement in the French regulation (preliminary design, detailed design…)58 Main French legislation which defines the nature and content of the engineering consultancy and architectural

services that must be delivered in public procurement


specialised joint contractors or subcontractors inhis team, whose management is a burden on theengineer and relations with the Employer.

➢ The engineer imposes on the contractorvery restrictive conditions of response to the callfor tenders, from fear of seeing his task ofassessing the offers and chosen proposal highlycomplicated and of being led to take aresponsibility that he does not wish to bearfacing the Employer. In addition, the concept of“change” always leads to the risk of financialdiscrepancies.

➢ The contractors scrupulously follow theconstraints set by the work contract in order notto find themselves in an awkward position withrespect to the engineer; they search the contractfor procedural faults or techniques that theycould use to improve their turnover or margin.

The lack of distribution and valorisation ofinnovations by employers is hindering thecommercialisation of research-basedservices, even though they meet priority needs ofsociety.

c) Partnership contracts

➢ The paradox of partnership contracts(ex-PPP59)

The new procedures (in the French legislation) forpartnership contracts (BEH, LOPSI, LOPJI60,Partnership Contracts) lead to a new type ofrelationship and positioning of all the participants inthe construction process, by introducing into thepractice the concept of “simultaneous engineering”already in use for a long time in the industrialsector.

The contractual novelty of partnership contractsgives rise to two dynamics acting in the reversedirection:

➢ On the one hand, a partnership contract is along duration global contract, requiring theimplementation of innovative, or at least“state of the art”, solutions in order tolimit the risk of rapid obsolescence,which is a source of additional costs inthe event of premature renewal.

The public authority is in fact subjected to a changein paradigm, which leads it to consider its project inregard to its duration and not only from the angle ofthe initial investment (operation – maintenance –renewal). In MOP type projects 61, the technology inareas such as hospitals may have evolved in theperiod between the tender programme and theDetailed Design, requiring changes to theprogramme. On the other hand, in a PartnershipContract, once the contract is signed, the goals andthe price are fixed, and it becomes financiallydifficult and hazardous to request changes to theprogramme. It is therefore tempting to specifythe most recent technology whichencourages innovation.In addition, design in total cost is fully integrated inthe procedure and encourages innovation inoptimising the cost of ownership (cost ofinvestment/cost of use).Finally, simultaneous engineering between thedesigner/builder/maintainer will generate newdesigns by the early integration of downstreamconstraints (designing for better building and bettermaintenance).

However, it should be noted that this optimisationwill only be truly effective if there is a permanentdialogue between the three parties, which is notthe case often enough today because theprocedures have not yet been adapted; therecurrence of this type of contract will howeverimpose this dialogue.

➢ On the other hand, the financial logic of totalcost and transfer of risk to the private partnermay encourage groups to implement welltried solutions in order to reduce the riskof inadequate performance, a source ofheavy penalties.

The pressure on firms to reduce costs does notencourage innovation. This aspect, that firmsfrequently put forward, in fact quite often concerns

59 In European legislation, “Public Private Partnership contract” and in the French version “ partnership contract” (seePartnership contract)

60 BEH, LOPSI, LOPJI : specific French legislation for PPP contracts for hospitals, justice, and police61 French legislation on architectural and engineering services


only the optimisation and rationalisation of buildingmethods developed by themselves, but rarely thefunctionality and quality. Firms consider that anumber of unavoidable risks are inherent inprojects. They therefore mistrust innovate designsthat they liken to additional risks instead ofconsidering them as opportunities.

In the same way, a good knowledge of the lifecycle of equipment is required; this is basedon experience rather than a calculated prediction,which impedes recourse to new techniques ofwhich there is no experience.

In the present situation, the limited weight ofengineering consultancy in the consortium offirms in charge of “partnership” contracts doesnot give it sufficient influence to make good use ofinnovation, and the risks associated with designand definition of operating costs(consumption,maintenance) are not sufficientlycovered.

➢ Innovation in partnership contracts

Two types of innovation can be identified in the fieldof partnership contracts: technological innovations,and procedural and contractual innovations. Wellspecified obstacles make it difficult to implementeach of these.

➢ In the case of technological innovations:

n Total cost: partnership contracts lead to achange in paradigm, the main purpose of whichis optimisation of the total cost. Safety takesprecedence over innovation.

n Remuneration of studies: the publicauthorities expect engineering firms to be thedriving force for proposals, using multi-disciplinary expertise. However, optimisationstudies take place essentially at the tender stage,but the absence or low level of remuneration forstudies at this stage does not permit in-depthwork to be done.

n Technological breakthrough solutions: atechnological breakthrough solution can lead tosubstantial savings in the total cost; the problemis to know who is liable for the risk.

➢ In the case of procedural and contractualinnovations:

n the acceptability of innovative solutions:partnership contract programmes are often toodescriptive and not sufficiently performance

orientated. The acceptability of an innovativesolution is not guaranteed. The risk of rejection ofcandidature is a disincentive to proposing such asolution.

n design process: the collaboration within agroup is often based on a classic sequentialstructure, and the expected effect of synergy isinsufficient.

n confidentiality of competitive dialogue:some innovative solutions are not proposed atthe first stage of the competitive dialogue fromfear of seeing them “shared” with the othercandidates, consciously or not, by publicauthorities and their advisors.

n use of article 10 of the enactment of 17June 2004: this article provides that a groupshould make a spontaneous proposal to thepublic authority in response to a presumedrequirement of the latter. This represents a prioria good opportunity for innovation. But theprotection of the initial idea does not seemsufficiently assured.

n insurance: the “construction” component of aPPP contract is well controlled by insurers (bysetting aside the difficulties identified forengineering). The cover for risks associated withthe “operating - maintenance” component anddivision of the respective responsibilities of thevarious partners are much less well controlled.This lack of visibility blocks innovation.


INADEQUATE PROTECTION OF ENGINEERINGINNOVATION

a) Intellectual and/or industrialcopyright and innovation

Concerning innovation, intellectual property isbased on two considerations:n moral: the creators must receive moral and

material recognition of their position as author;n financial: by guaranteeing exclusivity and

ensuring loyalty in industrial and commercialrelations, the State promotes thecommercialisation of inventions.

The protection of copyright, patent, licence or otherrights is regulated.The problems of innovation and intellectualproperty (IP) are closely linked, in that theconcept of innovation is implicitly understood bybusiness from the angle of protection of theinnovation and the capacity, for the participant inquestion, to make a future profit from hisinvestment, which could not be envisaged withoutestablishing a right.Intellectual property law is fairly ambiguous asconcerns engineering. The famous formulaaccording to which “drawings, principles ormethods in the exercise of intellectualactivities are, in particular, not consideredas inventions” seems to exclude the products ofengineering firms in the field of IP.

Looking more closely at this, things are morenuanced and engineering consultancy couldwithout doubt rely on the principal categories ofIP rights in its activities:n patents, when it invents a process;n drawings and models, when it creates an

original design;n brands, commercial names, etc.;n author’s rights for written and software

products.

The unprotected risks associated with innovationsare mainly:n copies and forgeries by competing firms;n absence of control over end use by competitors

and lack of financial compensation;n unprofitable investment in research and

development.

A lack of organisation in the area of industrial andintellectual property not only delays the spreadingof innovations, but sometimes even blocks the

willingness of management of engineeringfirms to invest in innovation.

Several past cases, in which employers betrayedthe confidentiality of engineering firms which hadinvested significantly in innovation, have hadprofound and long lasting consequences on theprofession.

b) The risk of “cherry picking”during competitive dialogue

Inspired by a joint desire to find a solution tocomplex contracts, the competitive dialogue, asembodied in article 29 of the modified Europeandirective, gave rise to questions in the EuropeanParliament – especially on the subject ofconfidentiality of exchanges and thepossibility of “cherry picking”: how to ensureconfidentiality of information exchanged? Is itpossible to change the contract specificationsduring discussions? To what extent do financialoperators receive remuneration for theirparticipation?Throughout the discussion stage, the personresponsible for the contract cannot alter thespecification (by combining items proposedby the various candidates) without notifyingall the candidates – in order to enable them tomodify future proposals resulting from thediscussions. The specification is frozen after thediscussion stage. Tenders are then submitted andthe most economically advantageous tenderchosen according to the classic methods of thetender procedure. The tender is discontinued if nooffer is considered acceptable.

Implementation of this new procedure certainlymerits a first assessment. Engineering, which is atthe heart of the ideas generated on projects, canonly release innovative ideas with a minimum ofguarantees to protect its skills.

c) Private Law

An obstacle must be pointed out that considerablyhinders innovation in private engineering firms:current contracts contain confidentiality andintellectual property rights clauses whichattribute all the benefits of the innovationdiscovered solely to the employer (since he isfinancing the necessary research).


Engineering firms working on innovative solutionscannot therefore retain any interest: since they donot own the innovation, nor can they sell or takeany credit for their discovery, or evencommunicate their ability to innovate, since theclauses are so restrictive.

In summary, it appears that, looking beyond certainstructural factors, the field of IP offers realopportunities for engineering firms. Thecontractual terms must be controlled in order toexploit these opportunities. This can only beachieved through very early discussions with theemployers, based on true legitimacy.


IV THE ENGINEERING CONSULTANCYINDUSTRY RECOMMENDATIONS

INTERNAL ACTIONS WITHIN ENGINEERING COMPANIES

The future performance of engineering consultancyin domestic and international markets will dependon its initiative and dynamism in meeting thechallenges of innovation.

a) Integrating, managing andexploiting innovation

Innovation is a medium and long term investment,and its financing must be consistent with the stakesand strategy of the company.All internal actors, including management, areconvinced of the principle and necessity ofinnovation, but they do not know exactly how toproduce it. It is essential to remember thatinnovation in firms can only come from thewillingness of the management. It is anessential component of the company and it is onlypossible to have “voluntary” innovation if it isplanned.Innovation can also constitute a method oftransmitting knowledge from the senior to the juniorstaff.

Finally, it is essential to release resources forinnovation in an “area of freedom”, away from therestraints of production.

Recommendations

As far as the internal organisation of firms isconcerned, it is necessary to:

➢ Dedicate one person to the managementof innovation, capable of thinking “outside thebox”, and with sufficient time, even if he/she hasother responsibilities to perform.

➢ Depending on the size and nature of the activityof firms, this function can be undertaken parttime or full time, by a person with experience,but at the same time open to newdevelopments.

This person, and possibly his team, needs a certainbuffer from operational pressures. But on the otherhand, the continuity of the “innovation-operational”

chain must be guaranteed by effectiveco-ordination with operational staff.

The role of the innovation team is to:n prepare the company for new challenges through

new methods and tools to improve productivity;n explore new products in order to secure a

competitive advantage;n assist in the preparation of innovative offers;n create centres of competence responsible for

developing new services (nurturing new ideas);n monitoring technological developments in

domestic and international markets.

➢ Promoting and recognising internalinnovation

Engineers must communicate their innovative ideasmore effectively.It is a good idea for each company to organise aplace (intranet, magazine, seminar, etc.)where innovations can be valorised anddistributed, at least internally.Innovations can also be valorised externally bypublication in specialized press and via otherchannels to be established. This requires allocatingtime to the people charged with this task. Throughits network, Syntec-Ingenierie is also a means ofexternal communication.

➢ Valorising innovation in the evaluation ofpersonnel

A good method of promoting internal innovation isto give credit for a staff member’s ability toinnovate. This should be one of the criteria in staffevaluations.

b) Benefiting from financialleverages

Within the company’s innovation strategy, thereshould be a coherent financing policy. It is thereforeimportant that time spent on innovation isaccounted for as such instead of being consideredonly as a general cost. Without that, there is a riskof non-charged or “hidden” time having a negativeand demotivating effect.


Recommendations

It is necessary to:

➢ Benefit more from the incentive of theResearch Tax Credit.

➢ Benefit more from the financial leveragesof innovation.

For that:n do not hesitate to consult OSEO, even for

intangible innovations;n to develop the role of engineering as coordinator

of innovation teams and thereby profit from thefinance contributed by the other partners.

➢ To have the reflex to set up “innovation”co-financing

➢ To benefit more from the support of theCompetitiveness Centres

➢ To promote the approval of engineeringfirms for Research Tax Credits

c) Capitalising on knowledge andexperience

The capitalisation of knowledge and innovationtakes place by means of an internal process,which covers:n monitoring all technical areas of the profession;n the transfer of knowledge:

- by technical notes,- by coaching (the role of “the old” versus “the

young” in the company),- by training.

n Participation in knowledge networks:- Syntec-Ingenierie;- research clubs- etc.

Recommendations

➢ Organising a multi-disciplinary technicalwatch

The engineering consultancy industry must gofurther in its innovative steps to capitalise onknowledge about future subjects, usingknowledge management tools.

➢ Capturing the knowledge fromexperience and mentoring

The capitalisation of knowledge and experience isessential (especially because of the ”greying” of the

population). Senior staff in firms must transfer theirknow-how acquired on different projectsand their experience of applying innovation.That requires work based on the respectfulcomplementing of the specific knowledge of each.Old models must be reconsidered in order to bemore effective and reactive.

d) Innovation in internal methods

The change towards a knowledge-based society,the more complex nature of projects and presentchallenges lead to the valorisation ofmethodological innovations, in whichengineering firms play a quite special role. It isimportant to make the process of valorising andsecuring the most relevant innovations in relation tocurrent challenges more rapid and effective.

Recommendations

➢ Integrating the sustainable developmentprocess into management methods

The profession must work on integrating thesustainable development process into itsmanagement methods by linking Europeanmethods for tackling sustainabledevelopment with high environmentalquality.

➢ Taking risk management into account incomplex projects

This requires:n making a survey of current methods in France

and internationally;n developing applied methods in our firms (guides,

reference material, project risk mapping, analysismatrices, simple networks, dedicated tools, etc.);

n integrating them into the basic projectmanagement methods;

n bringing additional tasks to light;n alerting all actors to the importance of including

risk management in operational project definition,design and construction processes;

n producing a Syntec-Ingenierie guide (or incollaboration with the relevant ministries).


THE STATE AS SUPERVISOR AND REGULATOR

The role of supervisor and regulator played by theState is fundamental for the medium and long termdevelopment of the engineering consultancyindustry – especially to release its innovationcapabilities and thus increase the competitivenessof the country.

a) Improving the structure ofaccounts to encourage innovation

It is possible to take simple measures to enableSMEs to strengthen themselves financially andenable them to innovate.

Recommendations

➢ To provide tax relief for profits held inreserve

➢ To allow depreciation of research costsover a long period

b) Improving the Implementation ofResearch Tax Credits (RTC)

RTC has changed considerably in France in 2008and offers increased opportunities for financingresearch.

Recommendations

➢ Changing the criteria for obtainingapproval for Research Tax Credit

It would be advantageous to implement measuresaimed at engineering firms that do not have theirown research subjects, but with the technical andtechnological skills to take part in thedevelopment of research topics.It would be interesting to put in place criteria ofinternal project development capacity as well ascriteria for internal skills of the “professionalexpertise” type; presented in the same way as aproject, they could receive the backing of auditorsand enable approval for a Research Tax Credit tobe obtained.

➢ Improving the definition of eligibleengineering services so that they arebetter understood by engineers andauditors of the RTC dossier.

The terminology should be clarified to avoidmisinterpretation.

➢ Making the approval system more flexibleIt should be possible for engineering firms to submita dossier for approval for a Research Tax Credit onsubjects that they have carried out for customers,that were then paid for; they could then obtainapproval without a tax allowance but simply basedon their ability to handle research subjects.

c) Developing synergies betweenpublic research and the privatesector

Today, there is unanimity in saying that, in general,the effectiveness of synergy betweenengineering and public research isnecessary to face current challenges;Developing these complementary factors wouldalso strengthen the international competitiveness ofengineering consultancies.

Recommendations

➢ Developing synergies between publicresearch and engineering firms

Synergies should be developed between the publicresearch network and the private sector in general.Evolution of the strategic context (for example, inFrance, the new remit of the Ministry, the focus ofthe RST, etc.) creates a climate that is currentlyquite favourable to this type of action.Concrete action must be taken in the short term, ata general strategic, as well as at a more specific,level.In the medium-term, a joint reflection is necessaryon the possible configurations of a synergy suitedto the challenges of tomorrow.

d) Reorganising the technical corps

Reorganising the technical corps would optimise itsrole, both in terms of productivity (for example,standard Technical Specifications that can belinked to a database of experience as an aid to thedrafting of project proposals) and in terms ofinternational competitiveness (for example:the World Bank’s “Tool-kit” on concessions,developed by a French engineering company).

Recommendations

➢ Reviewing the method of producinggeneral Technical Specifications

General Technical Specifications (CCTG) are one of


the daily working tools of engineering whichguarantee the quality of work. Information collectedon sites by engineering consultancies is very usefulfor updating these regulations.

The increasing development of technologies,efficient approaches, European standards and rulessuch as Eurocodes demands rethinking based on:n the priority objectives of this type of

document;n their method of design/updating;n their link with the corresponding technical

guides, even the connections withcomputer-based training modules.

➢ Using the State’s role of leverIn these areas, the growth of the regulating Statemay constitute an important lever: it plays anessential role of final decision maker. It couldtherefore encourage more collective work and playa role of renewed driving force of methods(for greater productivity/reactivity of traditionalworking groups). Finally, the State could promotethe use of mature innovations (Knowledgemanagement, IT, interactive sites, etc.).

e) Developing more reactive andcollegiate cross-pollinationbetween public and private bodies

In France, the role of the State in the motivation ofcollective capitalisation of knowledge has beenstronger than in countries such as Germany orEngland. It has become necessary to reconsiderthis role: some present practices are inherited froma system which has aged a great deal.

Recommendations

➢ Concentrating capitalisation ofknowledge by specific topics

Capitalisation of knowledge could be organisedby topic, around a range of diverseorganisations, supported by existing publicbodies, in which representatives of engineeringconsultancy, employers and research couldparticipate. The objective is to provide an interfacebetween all public and private participants (inFrance for example, for the Building sector aroundthe CSTB62, for Transport Infrastructure aroundSetra63, etc.).These organisations would be responsible forkeeping databanks available and up to date,

providing a record of knowledge and innovations(with or without quality labelling or validation).Current subjects could already form a usefulcapitalisation:n the various systems found in a building (heating,

air conditioning, etc.) in terms of ”sustainabledevelopment”;

n IGH buildings (high skyscrapers), resistant to fireand attack;

n the town of tomorrow and sustainable transportsystems (with a comparison of urban designexperiences at global level) in association withthe Town and Long Term Mobility centre of theANR;

n development of the railway infrastructure.

➢ Developing synergies betweenengineering firms:public, in-house and private

It would be useful, for example, to create a thinktank combining professional engineering consultancy,the in-house engineering capacities of largecontractors and public engineering capacities on thesubject of the evolution of project management.The Montreal Club is a good example.

f) Developing methods for takingglobal strategic choices intoaccount at national level

New means of dealing with the challenges arerequired, so that the strategic choices of a countryare made under the best possible conditions.

Recommendations

➢ To associate engineering upstream oflarge projects

From the first discussions on a project, andcertainly before major choices are made, nationalstakes (growth, land management, the environment,socio-economic impact, etc.) must be central to theconsiderations. Engineering consultancy mustbe involved from the start-up of a project.The services of the State are in charge of thismission of general interest. In France, theinterministerial committees (CIADTs) and theprojects they propose are a recent illustration ofthis. But, apart from the fact that these services arenot sufficiently confronted with questions thatwould help to develop the concepts, the meansavailable to the State services are not adequate tofulfil this task alone.

62 French public organism for research and certification in buildings construction.63 French public institution for research on roads construction


THE RELATIONSHIP OF ENGINEERING CONSULTANCYWITH DECISION MAKERS AND EMPLOYERS

Employers are extremely different in theircomposition, methods and objectives. In addition,they have very mixed resources and technical skills.They can be public (State, local groups) or private(firms, industries, etc.). Engineering consultancy hasthe ability to adapt itself to different situations inorder to optimise projects in terms of cost, time andperformance.

a) Make better use of the know-howand quality of service ofengineering consultancy

Employers are, or should be, requesting innovationsin order to widen the range of solutions so that theirprojects provide the optimum response to today’ssocietal, political and financial challenges. But theydo not always have the skill required to elaboratethe various possible solutions or to judge therelevance of the solutions proposed. That is why itis often necessary for them to resort to assistantswhose purpose is to support them in certainprojects, or even possibly to direct themtowards this or that innovative solution.Engineering consultants are able to assistemployers at all stages of a project, especiallyupstream.

➢ Assistance to decision makers,employers at the upstream stage

The success of projects depends on the quality ofthe upstream stages. In fact, a comparison of thevarious proposals, at the technical as well as thefinancial, administrative and legal levels, allows theoptimum solution to be identified.

The experience of one single employer is notsufficient to evaluate the effectiveness of aninnovation. A specialist must be consulted who isaware of innovative solutions that have not yet beenused or who can draw on the experience of otheremployers.Engineering firms, by their multi-disciplinary rolecovering several areas of activity, have closerelations with the world of research and provideservices on behalf of many employers: that is whythey have the means to make a positive anddynamic contribution to the upstream preparationof projects.

Recommendations

➢ Improve communication on engineeringconsultancy know-how and its capacityfor innovation upstream of a project

To enable customers to profit more from itsinnovative capacity, engineering consultancy mustincrease the recognition of its skills in providingspecialised or general assistance, in particularconcerning the upstream stages:n strategic studies,n opportunity studies,n definition of requirements and optimisation of

solutions,n impact studies,n risk assessment,n assistance in mounting operations.

➢ Encourage employers to make use ofassistants from the start of a project

➢ Encourage employers to dedicatesignificant study budgets from thepreliminary stages in order to achievetotal performance

Irreversible decisions, counting for 80% of totalproject costs, are based on studies that representless than 1% of the cost of the project, sometimesonly one thousandth. It is fundamental to put inplace sufficient study budgets from thepreliminary stages to ensure that thesubsequent choices are truly optimal for the generalinterest, and that all the traditional and newopportunities have been explored.

➢ Design engineering

In its role as designer and integrator, engineeringconsultancy assists employers by suggestingand explaining the most appropriatetechnical choices. It is able to propose thechoice of the best materials and systems andrecommend the best solutions for a given work.

Recommendations

➢ “Reviewing” the best existing solutionsfor the total cost

The design phase must be fully rethought with aview to “doing something different”, in order toinclude the total cost, which does not necessarilylead to “doing something new”. It is a matter of


“revisiting” the technical solutions proposed fromthe perspective of reliability, sustainability andmaintainability, the optimum possibly being aproven solution or a new one, depending on thecase; innovation then consists in providingthe best solution within the total cost.

➢ Improving the synergy between thearchitect and engineer in the buildingfield

It would be in the general interest to remove theexisting barriers between the professionals in orderto draw the two complementary approachestogether. A basic reflection (that could result inFrance, for example, in a change in the law) on thestatus of architects and engineers would appear tobe necessary.

Further considerations:n set up joint research between architects,

engineers, landscape designers, townplanners, etc. (for example, in the field of theenvironment) by combining architectural,functional and technical aspects;

n establish or improve links or exchanges(by developing relations between engineering andarchitectural colleges).

➢ In project management

We know that misunderstanding of operationalproblems of project management by certainemployers (public, but also private) can impede theprocess of innovation. These are subjects on whichsome countries are better organised by working inan efficient network with research. Note howeverthat there are attempts at innovative progress in thefield of “management of operational projects”within firms or groups of firms.

Recommendations

➢ Developing improved cross-fertilisationbetween all actors for an overall view

Emerging areas of innovation such as “thesustainable town and its services”, at the frontiersor town planning, processes, technologies andmethods require:n rethinking our views on the innovation process

and the synergy between actors;n removing barriers between the fields: building,

infrastructure, networks, processes, etc.

b) Improve the effectiveness of theEmployer/Engineer/Contractorchain to encourage innovation

The present method of operation relies on conceptsthat are already dated (sequential steps), and whichshould be re-thought in order to adapt to presentchallenges. Relations between clients and supplierson one hand and between the various participants(engineering firms, architects, operating companies)on the other hand must be based on a betterpartnership and better integration of the roles ofeach (concurrent steps).

Recommendations

➢ Encourage close cooperation in a relationship ofmutual trust in order to analyse the opportunityfor an innovative method and manage itseffective implementation

➢ At employer level, clearly define the objectivesand performance of the project and be moreaudacious in respect of acquired innovativesolutions.n Define clear and strong requirements

by a well-founded and drafted programme. Inthis field, engineering firms can provide strongassistance, separate from engineering/architect contracts, to assist employers indetermining their requirements and definingthe essential factors and constraints of anoperation;

n Encourage innovation by enablingengineers to exercise their capacity forimagination and make use of previousexperience. This can also be done by aprogramme defining the expected outcomeswithout imposing the means of achievingthem.

➢ At employer level, manage teams byencouraging innovative solutions, thathave been tested and proven, and thatare consistent with the objectives of theproject.n Implement innovative solutions in the

management of the projectmanagement team, particularly when it islarge and multi-disciplinary;

n Support innovative proposals by a riskanalysis, answering the employer’s questions,and that can be invoked against third parties;

n In the preparation of work contracts,encourage procedures that favourinnovative solutions, are consistent with the


requirements of the operation and complywith all the terms of the programme.

c) Improve protection of engineeringinnovations

➢ By intellectual and/or industrial propertyclauses

There is unanimity of stakeholders of theengineering consultancy industry in stating that onlya real change of mentality in the relationshipbetween employers and suppliers can change thesituation.

Recommendations

➢ A change in legislation and contractualprotection of innovation

By considering the requirements of engineeringcustomers as well as the legal constraints that bindthem, it is considered necessary to add an“innovation clause” to contracts covering:

n the remuneration for performance (which exists inAnglo-Saxon contracts);

n the creation of a period of reflection (or a meetingfor reflection when a milestone is passed) on thesearch for performance and innovation;

n automatically obtaining a licence for the use ofinnovations developed during projects carried outfor clients;

n the issue of a bilateral confidentiality agreementat the tender stage;

n compensation for unsuccessful tenderers in theevent of use of their innovative solution by asuccessful candidate.

Concerning legislation, a review of theregulations on technology transfer shouldbe considered.

➢ Better use of innovations

The speed and extent of the spreading ofinnovations to projects has becomeincreasingly strategic, both in the interest ofcitizens/taxpayers and in the internationalcompetition between stakeholders. In order for theapplications of upstream research to be diffusedrapidly and effectively onto the market, publicbodies have developed special structures. Forexample, in France, CSTB Development64 is a

shareholder in small firms introducing practicalapplications of CSTB research, with an increasinglywide shareholder base of the private engineeringfirms concerned. In the same way, calls for tenderby the LCPC65 in the field of materials monitoringmust improve the transfer of very good researchresults into French and international markets.

Recommendations

In order to accelerate the process of valorisinginnovation in engineering firms, it is necessary to:

➢ Share the resulting roles and ownershipeffectively

The experience of Armines66, which consists ofattributing applied research to companies andgeneric methodology to research laboratories, is agood example of this; it leads to suggesting that theoperational results of applied research areconsidered as the industrial property of thecompany directly concerned, so that the companyis free to market it. On the other hand, ownership ofthe generic methodologies used in this contextremains with the research laboratory (or theengineering company) which developed them, sothat the transfer of the results of this research toother sectors is carried out by those who know besthow to do it. In the same way as a laboratory, theengineering company can offer a client in onesector the benefits of experience from severalsectors: it is thus often the engineering companythat is best placed to maximise the added value ofa generic methodology. For that, it must have theright to use such methodologies. There is aEuropean guide on improving valorisation in thesefields.

➢ Encourage employers to share andre-exploit existing innovations

Engineering cannot sustainably invest in developinginnovations if the group of employers concerneddoes not play its part in promoting the use of theseinnovations. The field of “managing largeoperational projects” is a typical example; it is astrategic tool of all engineering firms, both in Franceand internationally. There are attempts at innovativeprogress in companies or groups of companies.

It is possible to be inspired by practices in someother countries; the United States, for example, hassystematically developed interesting practices,

64 A public organism65 A public French laboratory for research in construction66 Association for research linked to Ecole des Mines de Paris, a top French engineer college


combining:n the bundling of separate innovations into a

coherent package, providing a concrete answerto a number of operational requirements (e.g.: apackage on the rehabilitation of works, in place ofdozens of innovations of the patented type on thereplacement of support equipment, etc.);

n the involvement of a group of employers(for example, the powerful AASHTO67) whicheffectively optimises the innovations that bestsatisfy the priority requirements (the innovativeconcept of “lead-state”, the employercommunicating to his peers the results of hisexperimental works). The “Ivor”68documentsconstitute a first step in this direction.

d) Encourage public employers tomake use of all contractualpossibilities

➢ By enforcement of the PublicProcurement Code

At the present time, the type of contract defined byarticle 75 of the French public procurementlegislation (tenders in the framework of pilotprogrammes”) remains confidential and is solely aninitiative of the French state.

Recommendations

It is necessary to:

➢ Raise awareness of employers to the realinnovation opportunities offered by thepublic procurement legislation

For that, positive action must be taken withemployers so that they are less hesitant in theimplementation of innovative requirements.Misplaced legal action against employers for unfaircompetition greatly increases the reticence of theformer to have an open interpretation of the laws.

Action should be taken:n firstly by the State (supervisor and regulator), to

provide explanation and guidance in theapplication of its laws. Engineering must howeveract with State departments to push for thisaction;

n secondly by the engineering consultancyindustry with its own members, but also with allparties involved in construction.

➢ To facilitate the development of nationalpublic programmes by the State and localgroups

For that, it is necessary to:n make concrete recommendations to State

departments on matters likely to become thesubject of national public programmes;

n take actions so that regions or other local groupscan be initiators of national public programmeson more local subjects (for example,arrangements for fighting or preventing forestfires).

➢ To follow the legal responses at aEuropean level in the various countriesfaced with the same European directiveon public procurement.

➢ By new contracting methods

Process and contractual innovations, in particularpartnership contracts, require special considerationto be given to innovation.

Recommendations

It is necessary to:

➢ Encourage proposals for innovativesolutions

Make sure that the consultation regulationsexplicitly authorize and encourage innovativesolutions which could break with certainrequirements of the programme, apart from thosementioned as intangible. That could lead toprioritizing items of the programme in terms ofrequirement.

➢ Ensure that all aspects of the designprocess are taken into account by allplayers

Modes of operation of the “simultaneousengineering” type must be establishedbetween the various players, under theleadership of the engineering consultancy, in orderto evaluate the logic within the partnership contractfor optimisation of the total cost. For example, thedesired saving of time (the consortium only touchesits first payment on delivery of the work) must neverbe obtained by pure and simple suppression orreduction of the contents of certain study phases.All aspects of the design, controlled by eachof the partners (design, construction methods,

67 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials68 French public label for an innovation implemented in recent works


maintainability, credit worthiness), have to beconsidered simultaneously.

➢ Protect all innovative proposals with aconfidentiality clause in the competitivedialogue

The risk of “cherry picking” inherent in thisprocedure must be minimised by reaffirming the“hermetic” nature of the competitive discussions(“watertightness” between projects) and bytaking explicit measures to limit the risk ofdissemination of information (restricted number ofparticipants, signing an undertaking ofconfidentiality).

➢ To remunerate studies fairly to providethe resources to carry out an innovativeproject

The public authority and the group must remunerateengineering firms fairly to provide them with theresources to conduct their studies with all thenecessary efficiency; all the more so since thisremuneration is not significant for theemployer compared to its later returns.

e) Provide liability clauses andinsurance cover consistent withinnovation

In this field, everything has yet to be done,especially with the employers and insurancecompanies.

Recommendations

➢ Improve risk sharing between allparticipants in a single contract

The most fair and effective innovative solution, eventhe most economical, would be a system based onsharing the risks between all participants in asingle contract.Such a measure would doubtless encourage theemergence of innovative solutions for the benefit ofall participants.This solution would no doubt require a legalproposal that could be put forward by theprofession.

➢ To make each participant moreresponsible in a partnership contract andencourage insurers to make an ad hocglobal offer.

In the case of extremely innovative solutions thatrequire the payment of an excess premium, thisshould be borne by the employer if he consciouslyopted for an innovative solution either in his

programme or at the design stage. It is urgent andimportant that insurers propose a specific globaloffer for partnership contracts so that each partneris fully aware of their responsibilities and therebyassumes the risk of innovation with full knowledgeof the facts.


THE RELATIONSHIP OF ENGINEERING WITH RESEARCHAND TRAINING

a) Sharing know-how on innovationand research

In France, it is necessary to use direct links toreinforce the synergy between engineering firmsand research, in particular university research. Thesharing of the results of the highest level ofresearch is poor, more so in France than in othercountries.In addition, it must be noted that the professionalsector considers that the present training ofpost-graduates is worth less than three yearsprofessional experience in a company; the lecturersof these post-graduates, for their part, regret thatthis training with scientific rigour through research isnot valued, either in terms of starting salaries or jobfunction.This is a recurrent problem which willgradually become a real sticking point if themeans are not put in place to overcome it.Finally, private engineering consultancy, as aprofession, is not nowadays close enough toorganisations that are “innovation levers” (in France,DRAST, ANR and European organisations, etc.).

Recommendations

➢ Benefit from discussions betweenengineering/research with the support ofpost-graduates

The basis of resolving the question ofpost-graduates is wider than engineering andaffects the whole professional sector. However, italso concerns engineering firms, since post-graduates entering engineering firms could beeffective participants in discussions relating toengineering/research.

➢ Develop relations with public researchorganisations

➢ Take part in joint R&D projects

➢ Develop collaboration with the AUGCThe AUGC document could be the catalyst forcloser collaboration between the AUGC andSyntec-Ingenierie, with the aim of identifying bothstrategic and operational synergies.

➢ Share interdisciplinary issues betweenresearch and engineering

CIFRE69 theses are an effective and well-triedsystem that could be developed relatively easily,taking into account the credits available.It should be emphasised that someinter-disciplinary subjects could perhaps be treatedin partnership by research laboratories anda professional association such as Syntec-Ingenierie (for some very inter-disciplinary andprecompetitive subjects).

➢ Rely on intermediate organisationsThe experience of ARMINES70 shows thatresearchers must develop an “appetite” forcontractual research; secondly, companies musttruly understand what researchers can do for them.Intermediate organisations have been developed(e.g.: Armines, some Competitiveness Centres,etc.). In the same way, the development of Carnotlabels facilitates access to public research skillsand provides an example of the type ofopportunities that have to succeed.

b) Strengthen relations with thepublic research network

In France, the RST has a fundamental role to play infavour of innovation and it is in the general interest,in view of the stakes, for engineering consultancy tobuild up contacts with this network.

Recommendations

To meet the aims, it is recommended to:

➢ Enforce the 2007 circular on RSTorientation

Discussions between engineering and theRST must be arranged in order to implement theCircular of February 2007 on the orientation of theRST and possible synergies with the private sector.

➢ Link engineering more closely to thepriority requirements of the sector

The many engineering contracts on the ground andwith employers mean that engineering can be arelevant partner in the identification and

69 agreement with a PhD student70 Ecole des Mines association (See glossary)


prioritisation of requirements – and thereforesubjects for research. Some research organisations,for example the CSTB, have thus made the“downstream research order” routine. TheLCPC involves professionals in its sector-basedcommittees. Such approaches must now be mademore efficient and more general.

➢ Agree upon a common action planbetween RST and engineering to maintainthe quality of expertise

This plan will give rise to follow-up and facilitatecapitalisation within the Public Research Network:some specialist experts at national or internationallevel, as well as engineers who have accumulatedall the specialist memory (e.g., in France:geotechnics, highways, works, etc. in each LRPC)are high added-value profiles for all parties,starting with the employers’ group; in addition,engineering consultancy market constraints ensurethat these experts tend to hold a position in a publicservice organisation where they are at the service ofall participants.

➢ Develop alternating career pathsReciprocal immersion courses would combinethe rigour of research with professional experience.This seems vital for the long-term legitimacy ofresearch organisations and the Public ResearchNetwork, all the more for long-term competitivenessof engineering firms owing to high level innovation.

➢ Invent systems of co- or subcontractingto enable engineering firms to benefitfrom research subjects conducted by thePublic Research Network

These subjects, aimed ultimately at implementation,would facilitate consultancies to acquire references.In international competition in new domains, Frenchengineering firms are increasingly confronted withcompetitors from other countries who can refer tostudies they have carried out for the PublicAuthority in their own country. These systems mustbecome much more fluid than in the past: somecountries are twenty years ahead of Frenchengineering firms in this respect.

➢ Valorise programmes for long-termresearch (such as the AGORA 2020programme of the Ministry of Equipmentin France) in relation to engineeringconsultancy

Reflection on this theme could give rise to researchsubjects, in which engineering firms can play aspecific role. The fact that, according to AGORA2020, about two-thirds of the requirements

identified as priorities have not yet given rise tostructured offers, may make this RST/Engineeringbrain-storming particularly effective for picking upon the societal challenges that were identified.

➢ Develop a bilateral dialogue betweenengineering firms and Public ResearchInstitutions like LCPC, CSTB and INRETSin France

This discussion would develop specific tangiblesynergies. The fact that these organisations havedeveloped four-year contracts with their supervisorsmay be a very good opportunity. A strategic stepchosen together at the highest level is necessary tomake this step effective and sustainableat thedetailed level, and sufficiently rapid in itsimplementation.The above examples essentially concernMEEDDAT; similar actions may concern technicalorganisations, depending on other ministries.


POSSIBLE COLLECTIVE ACTIONS

Certain actions can be shared to give companiesbetter visibility of the external aid proposed, butalso to open the path to new opportunities.

a) Improve information flow aboutexternal funding opportunities

The establishment of a hotline or guide to aid, forexample, is a good course of action. Proposing asingle contact point for information and forrequesting access to various sources of aid wouldcontribute to better visibility.

Recommendations

It would be appropriate in France:

➢ To create a portal, grouping together theprincipal organisations acting as “leverages forinnovation”

➢ To establish an organisational lever to unify theorganisations (in the form of a place for lobbyingand seeking sources of finance) and identify thecentres relevant for engineering.

On this point, members of EFCA likeSyntec-Ingenierie could play a unifying role insharing these actions.

b) To identify centres of strategiccompetitiveness for engineeringfirms and facilitate access tothem

To optimise the role of engineering firms in thecentres, it is necessary to involve members ofEFCA, such as Syntec-Ingenierie, as a partner intheir development.

Proposal

➢ To secure an active role for EFCAmembers like Syntec-Ingenierie in thestrategic research competitivenesscentres

The professional engineering federation is already amember of the “Sustainable Town and Mobility”centre. It would be advisable to extend itsparticipation to the strategic centres and to take upthe role of facilitator between engineering firms and

the centres. This unifying role would therebyencourage access to the SME and micro-enterprisecentres.

c) To create a technical breedingground with research partners

Beyond the knowledge bases of each one, a jointcollaboration with research laboratories wouldprovide answers to today’s challenges.

Recommendation

➢ To initiate research work on the themesof sustainable development and risk


V GLOSSARY OF KEY WORDS ANDABREVIATIONS

ADEME: (www.ademe.fr). A public establishmentof an industrial and commercial nature under thejoint supervision of the Ministries of Ecology,Energy, Sustainable Development, RegionalDevelopment and Ministry of Research. Areas ofcompetence: energy, air and noise, soil and waste,environmental management (sites and products).

AGORA 2020: is a 2020 prospective report fromthe MEEDDAT studying research priorities in thefields of transportation, town, housing,construction, regional development and naturalenvironment.

AII: Industrial Innovation Agency. This latter hasbeen a part of OSEO since January 2008. Thisintegration should remedy the present weakness insupport for medium-sized innovative companies.OSEO will provide a single contact point, offering awide range of aid suited to all sizes of company andinnovative projects.

AMO: Assistance with Employership. AMO is acontract by which an employer engages theservices of a public or private authority to carry outthe studies necessary to undertake a project. Theemployer relies first on the engineering consultingcapacity. But to carry out his own missions, theemployer must implement other skills: definition andcontrol of the programme, times, costs and quality,management of the project, etc. If he does notpossess all these skills himself, external assistanceis justified, hence the idea of “employerassistance”. See the guide published bySyntec-Ingenierie in October 2005: Assignments ofAssistance to the Employer.

ANR: National Research Agency(www.agence-nationale-recherche.fr). A publicestablishment of an administrative nature createdon 1 January 2007. Its purpose is to increase thenumber of research projects from the scientificcommunity, financed following competition andpeer evaluation.

ANRT: National Technical Research Association(www.anrt.asso.frt). A meeting point of research andindustry; the ANRT, set up in1953, groups togetherthe main public and private participants, of R&D:companies, research and training organisations,industrial technical centres, companies for contract

research, engineering and advice. Its purpose is toassist and improve the efficiency of the researchand innovation system in France, encouragediscussions and develop cooperation, at bothnational and European level.

ARMINES: Created in 1967 on the initiative of theParis School of Mines, ARMINES is an associationfor contractual research, a partner of majorEngineering Colleges. (www.armines.net). Itspurpose is “industry oriented” research and itprovides its joint research centres in colleges withpersonnel, equipment and operating resources,proportional to its volume of contractual business.With almost 500 employees of its own, working inover 50 laboratories, the participation of researchteachers in schools and a contractual businessworth 37 million Euros in 2006, it is the largestFrench structure for contractual research attachedto higher education colleges. In this way itstrengthens the R&D activity of the “Ecoles desMines” network under the supervision of theMinistry of Economy,Finance & Employment, thePolytechnic College, ENSTA, ENPC, and the NavalCollege, focusing on industrial issues.

AUGC: University Association of Civil Engineering.It published in April 2007 an in-depth enquiry,conducted with its members, on the synergybetween the AUGC and the professional sectors(entitled “Enquiry and Proposals for more effectivecivil engineering research”).

BEI: French acronym for the EuropeanInvestment Bank – EIB (www.eib.org). The EIB is anorgan of the European Union. It was created by theTreaty of Rome. Its stakeholders are the MemberStates, whose Ministers of Finance constitute itsBoard of Governors. Its task is to contribute to theachievement of the objectives of the EuropeanUnion by granting long term finance in favour ofviable investments.

CIACT: the French Interministerial Committee ofDevelopment and Territorial Competitiveness. It isheaded by the Prime Minister and includes theministries concerned in regional development. Itwas initiated on 14 October 2005 and followed onfrom the Interministerial Committee for regionaldevelopment (CIADT).


CIFRE: Specific convention for the employment ofa student, for elaborating its thesis (with specifictaxes and social incentives).

CIR: Research Tax Credit. Defined in article 244,section B of the general French tax code (CGI), RTCis a system for encouraging companies to carry outresearch and development work. The expendituremust be incurred in carrying out scientific andtechnical research and development, whetherfundamental research, applied research orexperimental development, including buildingprototypes and pilot installations.

CMP: Public Procurement Code (legislation). Inorder to harmonise the provisions of the publicprocurement code with those of the PublicProcurementdirective no. 2004/17 and 2004/18,which were adopted on 31 March 2004, the publicprocurement code was modified by a Frenchdecree N°. 2006-975 of 1 August 2006. The newrules came into force in France on 1 September2006.

COMPETITIVENESS CENTRE: ”pole decompetitivite”. In an increasingly competitiveworld, France introduced a new industrial policy in2004 which mobilises the key factors ofcompetitiveness, especially the capacity forinnovation (www.competitivite.gouv.fr). Acompetitiveness centre is an association ofcompanies, research centres and trainingorganisations in a given region, engaged in apartnership (joint development strategy), aiming torelease the synergies resulting from joint innovativeprojects in one or more given contracts. This policyaims to generate and then support initiativesemanating from financial and academic bodies in aregion.

CSTB: “Centre Scientifique et Technique duBatiment » French public centre for research andcertification in building works. (Part of theMEEDDAT-RST)

DGE: “Direction Generale des Entreprises”Department of the French Ministry of Economy.(www.industrie.gouv.fr/portail/une/dgeso m/htm). Itsummarises the preoccupations of industrial policyand regional aspects for which the RegionalDepartments of Industry, Research and theEnvironment (DRIRE) are responsible.

ECCREDI: The European Council for ConstructionResearch, Development and Innovation. Its aims areto contribute to the competitiveness, quality, safety

and environmental performance of the constructionsector and to the overall sustainability of the builtenvironment, by increasing the extent andeffectiveness of construction research,technological and process development andinnovation.

ECTP: European Construction TechnologyPlatform (www.ectp.org). The technologicalplatforms were created by the EuropeanCommission and are destined to become a key partof European research policy. A technologicalplatform is basically a mechanism for bringingtogether all parties interested, with a long termview, to face a particular challenge. A movetowards partnership contracts is expected in thecommunity of researchers, industrialists, decisionmakers and representatives of civil society with aview to achieving the objectives set by theEuropean Commission. The ECTP, created in 2005and dedicated to the construction sector, has thefollowing objectives: 1) to develop research andinnovation in the field of roads, railways, ports,bridges, tunnels, cultural heritage, etc.; 2) todevelop new and multi-disciplinary approaches inthe field of town planning; 3) to support theEuropean construction industry to make it more“knowledge based” and maintain its worldleadership; 4) to introduce environmental concernsinto the practices of the sector, in particular underconditions of devolution of contracts (source:CNISF).

EFCA: European Federation of EngineeringConsultancy Associations (www.efcanet.org). EFCAis the sole European federation representingengineering consultancy and related services, inparticular to the European Institutions. It represents29 professional associations from 28 countries,which is a network of over 10,000 firms throughoutEurope. EFCA monitors the legislating institutions –in order to ensure that market conditions remainfavourable to the engineering consultancy industry,but also plays a strong proactive role (conductingstudies on the sector etc.).

EUREKA: created in 1985, the Eureka programmeis an intergovernmental initiative which includes 36member countries and the European Union. Thepresidency rotates and changes every year. Theobjective is to provide financial support fortechnological cooperation projects betweenEuropean companies and laboratories. The Eurekaprogramme thus enables European businesses toshare the risks and costs of innovation which canbe very high; it concerns both SMEs and large


organisations.Besides financial support, Eureka awards a label tothe projects supported.

EMPLOYER: the term refers to describe the clientor contracting authority and is used for reasons ofconsistency with the jargon used in FIDIC contracts.

ENGINEER: the term refers to the engineeringconsultancy(ies)/service provider and is used forreasons of consistency with the jargon used inFIDIC contracts.

FIDIC: International Federation of ConsultingEngineers (www.fidic.org). FIDIC represents theengineering sector at international level. As such,the federation defends the interests of theengineering consultancy industry. Its objectives areto develop working methods, promote ethics inbusiness, promote and raise the image of theindustry.

HABISOL: an Intelligent Housing and Solarphotovoltaic research programme of the FrenchANR (2008-2010). HABISOL essentially seeks topromote ground-breaking research into theintelligent housing concept and the use ofphotovoltaic energy as a renewable source for theproduction of electricity. The programme intends todeal with subjects relating to home domotics,modelling types of construction, insulationcomponents, work on materials for thedevelopment and integration of photovoltaic solarcells and innovative concepts involving photovoltaiccells.

HQE: Association (architects, consultingengineers…) for the promotion of high qualityenvironment in construction. Also a label HQE © forthose works or services which are respecting themethodological criteria defined by this association.

INRETS: French public institute forresearch in transportation networks and security(part of the MEEDDAT RST).

LCPC: “Laboratoire Central des Ponts etChaussees”, French public laboratory for researchon public works. Part of the MEEDDAT RST.

MEEDDAT: Ministry of Ecology, Energy,Sustainable & Regional Development(www.meeddat.gouv.fr). MEEDAT was created on 1June 2007; it focuses on ecology, transport,regional development, housing, the sea, etc. Itsactivities focus on five major areas: Resources, land

and housing; Engineering and climate; Riskprevention; Infrastructure and Transport; andSustainable development.

MOE. “Maıtre d’oeuvre” a French concept more orless equivalent to “the engineer”. It is in charge ofthe design of the works and supervision of theconstruction. The engine is therefore responsible,for designating an individual entity to be responsiblefor the satisfactory progress of the contract (projectmanagement). This is the project leader.

MOU: “Maıtre d’ouvrage” more or less similar to“the employer”. He represents the body supplyingthe requirement, defining the objective of theproject, its schedule and the budget for the project.The expected result of the project is the building ofa product, called the work. The employer providesthe basic concept of the project and therebyrepresents the end users for whom the work isintended. The employer is therefore responsible forthe functional expression of the requirements butdoes not necessarily have the skills to build thework.

OSEO: a State establishment, the task of the OSEOis to finance and support SMEs, in partnership withbanks and capital/investment organisations, at themost decisive phases of their development(www.oseo.fr). To perform this task successfully,the OSEO has complementary objectives:supporting innovation with financing of investmentand the operating cycle in partnership with bankingestablishments with a guarantee of bank financeand supplying its own funds with an OSEOguarantee.

Partnership contract (Public PrivatePartnership)A partnership contract allows a public awardingauthority to entrust a group of companies with amission of financing, partial or total design, building,maintaining and managing public works orequipment and services, on a long-term basis paidforby the public authority in instalments. Theobjective is to optimise the respective performanceof the public and private sectors in carrying outurgent or complex projects as quickly as possible:hospitals, schools, information systems andinfrastructure.

PCRD: French acronym for the EuropeanCommission’s Framework Programme for Researchand Development. The programme was created in1984, based on multi-year framework programmes,still remains today the keystone of European policy


for research and technological development: animportant source of finance for SMEs. The 7th

Framework Programme (FP7) started in 2007 andwill run until 2013. It has a budget of 50.5 billionEuros (of which 15% is reserved for SMEs), which isincreasing with a view to achieving the goals set inthe Lisbon strategy.

PRECODD: The French ANR ecotechnologies andSustainable Development programme planned for2008 (4th and final call for projects). Thisprogramme (www.precodd.fr) covers environmentaltechnologies centred on the prevention, treatmentand measurement of polluting emissions ofindustrial and urban origin in the widest sense, andaims to strengthen French R&D on methods of“clean production”. PRECODD covers in particularnew production and treatment processes, theprotection of natural resources and tools andservices for the evaluation of environmentalperformance and integrated environmentalmanagement.

PUCA: Town Planning, Construction andArchitecture Plan of the MEEDDAT(www.urbanisme.equipement.gouv.fr/pu ca). Sinceits creation in 1998, the PUCA has developedincentive research programmes, experimentalactions and given its support to innovation andscientific and technical evaluation in the fields ofregional development, housing, construction andarchitectural and urban design.

RISKNAT: The French agency ANR researchprogramme for the Control, Reduction,Compensation and Repair of natural risks(2008-2010). Natural disasters that occur rapidly(sudden and extremely rare disasters with a heavyimpact) of lithospheric origin (earthquakes, volcanoeruptions, landslides, tsunamis), including someclimatic and hydrological factors (mudslides,avalanches, sudden rises in water level, etc.) are notby their nature “controllable” in advance. To reducetheir physical, human and social impact, it is notonly necessary to control the associated risks(assessment and prevention) but to consider theirreduction (what solution to adopt), or evencompensation and/or repair (. The programmeemphasises the importance of collaborationbetween the technical, social, financial and legaldisciplines.

RST: Public Scientific and Technical ResearchNetwork of MEEDDAT. It consists of about thirtydesign, test, experimentation and teachingorganisations, public establishments or State

departments. Their purpose is to produce thescientific knowledge necessary for public action inthe traditional spheres of action of the ministry(transport, town planning, development, civilengineering, housing), but also concerning, riskprevention, the environment, land, sea andcoastlines, and the elements.. Their staffs are about15,000 employees.

SRP: French Department of Research andForecasting, part of MEEDDAT. In association withthe knowledge requirements of other departmentsof the ministry and decentralised departments, SRPis responsible for coordinating research activities,monitoring and scientific forecasting, in the fields ofecology and sustainable development. SRP is alsoresponsible for the distribution and evaluation ofresearch and forecasting, by managing the variouspublic authorities likely to use these results: the“usual” institutional partners of the ministry,regional groups, organisations responsible for openspaces, industries concerned with ecology andsustainable development, associations, etc.

SUSTAINABLE TOWNS: an ANR researchprogramme (2008-2010). The aim of thisprogramme is to integrate research topics intourban systems, from questions of governance totechnological aspects. The programme has twomajor objectives: 1) engineering efficiency on anurban scale with a view to achieving a factor of 4 by2050; 2) better social and environmental integrationin the context of sustainable development. This newprogramme includes subjects previously dealt withunder the PGCU (civil engineering), PREDIT(mobility) and PREBAT (socio-economics of urbanhousing). It also encompasses the environmentalaspects tackled under PRECODD (urban wastemanagement, metrology and air quality, etc.).

WSSTP: Water supply and Sanitation TechnologyPlatform – (www.wsstp.org): created in 2004, theWSSTP includes bodies concerned with water andthe urban environment. It is part of the ECTP whichbrings together stakeholders in construction. Themany participants produce a common vision and astrategic research plan for the sector.


″WHITE PAPER:ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY AND INNOVATION″

A TRANSLATION OF

″LIVRE BLANC: L’INGENIERIE ET L’INNOVATION″(MAY 2008)

Co-authors:Claude Bessiere1 (Ingerop)Philippe Bisch2 (Iosis group, Iosis Industries)Jean-Pierre Bregeon3 (Abmi Group)Bernard Gausset4 (Arcadis)Michel Ray5 (Egis Group)Alain Thirion6 (Coteba)Jean-Marc Usseglio-Polatera7 (Sogreah)

Other contributors:Dominique Baujard8 (Abmi Group)Marie Godard-Le Beux9 (SCE)Philippe Schvartz10 (Sodeg Ingenierie)Christian Tarpin11 (Setec Its)Jan Van der Putten12 (EFCA, European Federation of Engineering Consultancy Associations)

1 Director, Innovation and Research2 Scientific Director (Iosis Group), Chairman (Iosis Industries), Professor at the ENPC, Chairman of the

Syntec-Ingenierie Innovation Committee3 Chairman4 Director of technical development and member of the scientific and technical committee of the AFGC5 Technical and innovation Director, executive Vice President of the Advancity competitiveness centre,

member of the high level group of the European Construction Platform6 Director of Development, consultant and teacher in project management7 Deputy Managing Director, member of the sectoral committee on environment, climate and urban

systems and the Steering Committee of the ANR Ecotechnology and Sustainable DevelopmentProgramme (PRECODD)

8 Administrative and Financial Manager9 Director of Development10 Chairman, Chairman of the Syntec-Ingenierie PPP Observatory11 Director of Development12 Secretary-General


RECENT PUBLICATIONS OF SYNTEC-INGENIERIE,THE FRENCH ASSOCIATION OF ENGINEERINGCONSULTANCIES

White paper

n Responsibilities and insurance (French), March 2005.n Engineering consultancy and Innovation (French and English), June 2008.

In the “Studies” collection:

n For strategic investments creating jobs for the future.Engineering consultancy as growth factor (Christian Saint-Etienne, in French), April 2008.

n Feasibility and opportunities for standardising engineering services in Europe for the construction sector:comparative analysis of practices sector. ENPC statutes report, June 2007 (in French, English translation inprogress).- Volume 1: Spain, Poland, Czech Republic, United Kingdom (Maria Antonia Alvarez).- Volume 2: Germany, France, Greece, Italy, Sweden (Emmanuel Evrat).

n Feasibility and opportunities for standardising engineering services in Europe for the industry, HEI, statusreport, Dec. 2007 (in French, English translation in progress).- Volume 1 : France- Volume 2 : Italy and Spain- Volume 3 : Germany, United Kingdom

n Standard ISO 9001 implementation to engineering consultancy, January 2006 (in French, Englishtranslation in progress).

In the “Guides” collection (in French):

n Guide to the optimisation of choice, June 2008.n The visa mission for infrastructure works, January 2006.n Assistance to the employer, October 2005.

Yearbook of members of Syntec-Ingenierie (in French and English)

Other publications with Syntec-Ingenierie contribution (in French)

n Model contract for architecture and engineering: New building (Syntec-Ingenierie, Ordre des Architectes,CICF, Unsfa, Untec), September 2005.

n Model contract for architecture and engineering: Buildings renovation (Syntec-Ingenierie, Ordre desArchitectes, CICF, Unsfa, Untec), September 2008.

n Assistance to the employer (Ministere de l’Equipement, Syntec-Ingenierie, AITF), September 2005.n Breakdown of engineering consultancy; tasks, based on MOP law for building sector. (Syntec-Ingenierie,

CICF, Unapoc, Untec), June 2004.n Design and build, guide (Syntec-Ingenierie, EGF BTP), May 2003.

For information on other Syntec-Ingenierie publications, visit:www.Syntec-Ingenierie.fr


SYNTEC-INGENIERIE3, rue Leon Bonnat, 75016 Paris

Tel: 331 44 30 49 60Email: [email protected]: www.Syntec-Ingenierie.fr

EFCA3/4/5, Avenue des Arts, 1210 Brussels

Tel : 32 2 209 07 70Email : [email protected]

Website : www.efcanet.org


Documents

WHITE PAPER EnginEEring consultancy and innovation files/Publications/WhitePaperEN.pdf · WHITE PAPER Engineering consultancy and innovation ... 25 PROJECT MANAGEMENT ENGINEERING