Automation (across several industries) is a very hot topic and is gaining momentum. Automation is reshaping industries around the world, including construction. I thought it might be interesting and perhaps useful to broadly discuss the concerns regarding machine-based technologies and then draw parallels to construction and our trades. 

I will put the disclaimer front and center here that I am by no means an economist or any sort of expert regarding the impact of large-scale automation on entire industries. I can only relate my understanding of history and what I have seen inside the construction companies and fabrication facilities I’ve visited.

Many arguments are made against expanding the use of automation. I draw on examples in construction and other industries to either counter the arguments or to at least provide a rosier view. My goal is not to flat-out cheer for automation, but to highlight areas where the innovations have truly benefited the workforce and how we all may mindfully lean into the continuing press for more. 

Even as a technologist, I do not advocate for technology implementation at all costs. However, I am also a techno-optimist and believe one thing that has proven over time is our ability as people and a society to adapt and adjust with the times.

The first and most immediate concern is, of course, the loss of jobs. This point is valid and needs to be carefully and humanly addressed. Without a doubt, positions will be eliminated when certain types of automation are introduced. This does not necessarily mean net job loss, though. 

The example I cite the most when speaking about this is the introduction of ATMs in the 1970s (https://bit.ly/4f72eru). As banks began rolling these out, there was a great deal of talk of machines stealing jobs, but over the years the opposite has been the case. 

By automating the routine and often tedious work done, such as check-cashing and making deposits, banks could operate more cost-efficiently. This allowed them to open more branches, thus increasing the total workforce. 

The type of work these employees took on was different as well. Many were able to achieve a more meaningful and fulfilling role as they were relied upon to help build the brand of the bank, as well as assist customers with more challenging tasks. I will note that there may indeed be roles eliminated entirely when automation systems are implemented, so we should make sure we provide appropriate training and assistance so the people in those roles can adapt.

Slow and Repetitive Tasks

To bring this into our world, a comparison might be made between introducing ATMs to implementing equipment such as coil lines, plasma/laser tables or multi-axis cutters. On the surface, these tools reduced the number of workers needed to perform the task of cutting sheet metal and pipe. However, if you pull back from the machinery itself and look down the line at the follow-on activities, you can see how one or two people working those stations can feed two or three times more people. 

I feel like this is the best example of how implementing a piece of technology took a slow, repetitive task with many workers and streamlined it to keep more people busy than the previous process could. 

Another concern often expressed is the loss of the craft within the trade. While I am not a tradesman, in my experience, with tasks such as in the previous example, workers still need to know and understand the skill within the process. They can then leverage that knowledge to ensure the equipment produces the desired, quality result. 

Not that there is a lack of skill in those steps, but I feel there is a far greater skill and personally fulfilling challenges in the processes afterward. Joining the complex parts and pieces into larger assemblies takes a lot of imagination and ingenuity. Workers need to understand the total picture of a building currently under construction and constantly changing to ensure that the assembly they put together will fit into the whole when it arrives on site. 

I would also like to think there is a sense of accomplishment at this stage, seeing the parts that arrived at your workstation carefully built into a quality piece that will join others to serve a building and its occupants in various ways.

A Balancing Act

I would be remiss if I left out an upside of automation that I feel fuels job creation in construction. I will not totally liken it to the ATM that created the opportunity for banks to start opening more branches, but still, the speed and efficiency of the machines in this workflow step allow for one or two workers to feed several workstations further down the line. 

It becomes a careful balancing act to ensure that the output of the coil machines and cutters produces the right number of parts for the assemblers and welders in the next step. When that balance is struck, the shop hums and works together like a well-conducted orchestra. Improving this step in the process allows for more follow-on stations where, from what I observe, the work has more craft and skill. Of course, the higher output accuracy level these tools have creates less waste and rework.

A feather in the cap of construction, I believe, has been how these tools were developed. Many of them have been developed along with workers, not created externally and then forced upon the workforce. At least in the world I’ve experienced, tool companies work with the unions: they interview the shop workers, and try to understand what tasks could be improved upon in a way that augments and enhances the workforce, not to replace them. 

The construction companies I’ve engaged with are doing the same thing. They spend time with workers on the floor to explain and demonstrate that the goal isn’t to replace them, but to help the shop run safer and more efficiently. They seek input from the workers to understand what might make their work better and what tweaks and adjustments might be made from their point of view. 

This co-development has also created jobs on its own: Tool companies and manufacturers employ engineers and technicians to design, install and maintain the equipment.

These improvements in process and efficiency allow contractors to take on more work. The argument that automation reduces labor hours can be proven true when one looks at it on an assembly-by-assembly or project-by-project basis. 

Yet most construction companies in the current market have large backlogs. The hours on one project may be reduced, but companies able to bid more competitively and have the capacity to take on more work means the total number of hours most likely will increase in the aggregate.

Much like computers and the internet, technology and automation are not going away. I feel it is somewhat ironic that our industry has been called out as one of the slowest to adopt technology when many of these tools have been a part of our workflows for decades. I am proud of how open our industry is to welcome these tools. 

I am especially proud of how labor, management and tool companies work together to augment and enhance our workforce. I am proud of how the workforce, while sometimes cautiously, leans into the change. These people are hardworking and take great pride in a job well done. I hope we continue working hand in hand with them to provide the tooling to continue to do so.