Overview 

A roundtable discussion held at Utility Week Live, organised by the Civil Engineering Contractors Association, the Association for Consultancy and Engineering, and British Water, brought together clients, consultants, contractors, and the wider supply chain to explore how risk is identified, allocated, and managed across the water sector. 

The discussion considered how current approaches to risk management can better support productivity, innovation, resilience, and long-term delivery performance across AMP programmes. 

Participants recognised that while risk transfer remains an important component of commercial and contractual arrangements, better outcomes are often achieved where risks are clearly understood, proportionately allocated, and actively managed through collaborative working relationships. 

There was broad agreement that improving outcomes depends on earlier engagement across the supply chain, greater transparency, stronger alignment between responsibility and control, and consistent professional behaviours throughout programme delivery. 

Managing risk to improve productivity and delivery 

A number of consistent themes emerged around how risk management practices could be strengthened across the sector. 

Participants highlighted the importance of proportionate and effective risk identification processes that support informed decision making and enable delivery, while avoiding unnecessary procedural complexity. Risk management was viewed as most effective when embedded within programme, project and asset lifecycle governance rather than treated as a standalone compliance exercise. 

Clear communication of risk was repeatedly identified as essential. Risks need to be understood in practical and operational terms, including their potential impact on programme outcomes and which party is best placed to manage or mitigate them. 

There was strong support for earlier involvement of the wider supply chain, including consultants, contractors, and specialist suppliers, to improve the identification and management of technical, commercial, and delivery risks before key decisions become fixed. Participants noted that early technical, engineering and advisory input can play an important role in reducing whole-life cost and improving project resilience. 

Discussion also highlighted the importance of aligning risk allocation with the party best able to influence outcomes, while maintaining clear accountability and appropriate professional responsibilities across all organisations involved in delivery. 

Participants recognised that prolonged negotiation of risk positions can contribute to delay and inefficiency, and there was support for greater consistency and clarity in how risk allocation principles are applied across programmes. 

Supply chain confidence, investment, and capability 

Pipeline certainty emerged as one of the most significant factors influencing supply chain confidence. 

Visibility of future workload, including both volume and duration, was considered essential to enable long term investment in skills, technology, and innovation. Without this certainty, organisations are more likely to prioritise short term resilience over capability development. 

Frameworks were discussed in terms of their role in either enabling or constraining confidence. Effective frameworks were described as those that provide openness, honesty, and clarity around workload expectations. 

There was strong agreement that stable, long-term relationships support better outcomes, particularly where they enable sustained investment and continuous improvement. 

The importance of capturing and sharing lessons learned more effectively was also emphasised. Participants noted that recurring inefficiencies across projects could potentially be reduced if knowledge and experience were shared more systematically across the sector. 

Strengthening partnerships and sector resilience 

Trust was identified as an important foundation for effective collaboration and long-term sector resilience. Participants linked trust closely to transparency, fairness, technical competence, and consistency of behaviour across organisations and delivery teams. 

There was broad agreement that stable and collaborative relationships support improved delivery outcomes, particularly where they enable long-term investment in people, skills, innovation, and capability development across the supply chain. 

Participants also discussed the importance of effective governance, clear decision making, and well-defined responsibilities within collaborative delivery models. It was recognised that contractual models alone cannot create collaboration, and that successful outcomes depend equally on behaviours, leadership, and organisational culture. 

The discussion highlighted the value of capturing and sharing lessons learned more consistently across programmes to support continuous improvement and reduce recurring inefficiencies across the sector. 

Responsibility, ownership, and professional practice 

A central principle emerging from the discussion was that risk should be managed by the party best able to influence and own the outcome. 

There was further discussion around client understanding of risk, particularly in relation to clarity over which risks should remain with clients and which should be shared or transferred appropriately. 

The role of professional standards and design responsibility was also referenced, including whether existing frameworks are consistently applied in practice in line with their intended purpose. 

Accountability was discussed as both an organisational and professional responsibility, underpinned by integrity in decision making and delivery. 

Behaviour, culture, and systemic challenges 

The discussion recognised behaviour change as one of the more persistent challenges facing the sector. 

It was noted that movement of individuals between organisations can transfer both positive and less effective practices, reinforcing existing behaviours unless they are actively addressed. 

Examples from other sectors were referenced to illustrate that cultural change requires sustained commitment and cannot be achieved through process change alone. 

It was also recognised that procurement models, commercial structures, and programme design all play an important role in shaping behaviour and can either support or limit collaboration. 

Conclusion  

Participants agreed that the water sector has the capability, expertise, and experience needed to manage risk more effectively and deliver better long-term outcomes. However, the discussion also highlighted that achieving meaningful improvement will require continued progress in how organisations collaborate, allocate responsibility, and support delivery across programmes. 

There was broad recognition that earlier engagement, proportionate risk allocation, transparent pipelines, and stronger partnership working can all contribute to improved productivity, resilience, innovation and whole-life value across the sector. 

Participants emphasised that clients, consultants, contractors, and the wider supply chain each have an important role to play in creating delivery environments that support effective decision making, technical excellence, and long-term investment in skills and capability. 

The discussion highlighted the importance of continuing to evolve procurement and commercial approaches in ways that encourage collaboration, support professional accountability, and align risk management with the parties best placed to manage outcomes. 

Ultimately, participants agreed that improving sector performance will require sustained behavioural and cultural change alongside process and contractual reform. Risk management was therefore viewed not simply as a commercial or compliance activity, but as a shared leadership responsibility that underpins successful delivery, resilience, and public confidence in the sector.