Answer extracted from the Pegasus Radio podcast — listen to the full episode below.
What speed and procurement advantages does the Australian market offer compared to the UK?
Australian clients do move faster with quick planning processes and rapid decision-making, unlike the UK where the Building Safety Act and backlogs create delays. Yet Australia lacks systematic procurement thinking—firms cycle through delivery methods like fashion trends without analyzing project risk or contract fit, whereas the UK market applies rigorous, intentional procurement strategy.
When Australian clients commit to a project, they don't wait. The approval process moves at pace because planning backlogs don't constrain decisions the way they do in the UK. This speed is real and tangible—no lengthy statutory consultation periods, no building control bottlenecks holding up the start. For firms that thrive on momentum, Australia looks appealing.
However, this speed comes with a structural weakness. Australian procurement lacks intentional strategy—as explained in this episode of Pegasus Radio, firms follow procurement "like it's a fashion trend." They cycle between design and construct one project, then switch to early contractor involvement the next, without systematically asking whether the delivery method matches the risk profile, contract type, or actual project requirements.
The UK market, by contrast, faces structural constraints—the Building Safety Act adds approval time, and planning application queues create real delays. But this friction has forced the UK industry to develop deliberate, risk-based procurement analysis. Every delivery method is chosen for a reason, not by habit or market momentum.
"You've got to have a relationship and be so embedded with that client. If you were to walk out the door, that's going to be a hole in the company's bottom line."
Matthew Mackey — Director at Contolo Group. After 16 years in Brisbane building Arcadis's cost management service, Mackey witnessed firsthand how Australian procurement culture differs fundamentally from the UK. He made more career moves in 5 years navigating Australia's market structure than in his first 15 years in Manchester, and built a substantial personal brand through podcasting, networking, and financial media appearances before returning to the UK construction consultancy sector in late 2024.
So the trade-off is clear: speed versus strategy. Australia wins on pace; the UK wins on intentionality. A firm choosing between markets must decide whether faster project approvals outweigh the risk of ad-hoc procurement decisions, or whether building in a regulated environment that demands rigorous thinking is worth the timeline cost. Listen to the full discussion to hear how Matthew Mackey navigated these differences across both markets.
See also
What structural factors limit the development of the QS profession in Australia?
The Australian construction industry is heavily unionized, with all trade contractors generally belonging to one union, creating a fundamentally different market structure compared to the non-unionized UK environment.
How does career progression differ for professionals relocating from the UK to Australia?
Relocating professionals typically experience a significant step backward in responsibility level. Matthew Mackey moved from director level in Manchester to senior cost manager at a smaller Australian firm, despite his extensive UK experience.
What are the key differences between the QS role in the UK versus Australian construction markets?
In Australia, the QS role is diminished compared to the UK—QSs can be appointed as sub-consultants to architects, excluded from design team meetings, and have less strategic influence over project delivery decisions.