If you’re like me, you probably got into the construction and engineering sector to build and create things. Real, tangible projects that shape communities – whether it’s roads, rail, schools, hospitals, software, or substations. It was that desire to build infrastructure that attracted me to this profession.

More and more lately, I’ve been wondering: is this still the true purpose of infrastructure projects?

A recent project brought this question to the forefront. It made me reflect deeply, not just about how we manage projects, but about the kind of culture we’re creating along the way.

The Weight of Bureaucracy

On a recent rail project, we had 40-odd management plans sitting in the system. Forty. And yet, when I spoke to the team on site, they could only name four or five they ever actually used – the project management plan, the environmental management plan, and the safety, quality, and design management plans.

The rest? Digital wallpaper. Required for compliance and to justify the existence of a support function in the client’s organisation, but functionally ignored.

For one design submission, we lodged over 500 documents in a single batch, carefully named, cross-referenced, and aligned exactly to the client’s structure. A week later, the client came back frustrated. “We can’t find anything,” they said. I had to laugh, because we’d followed their naming convention and submission requirements to the letter.

And then there was the moment that hit me hardest: seeing an overworked project manager’s eyes glaze over when the client started talking about the pile of assurance documents still needing to be submitted for a minor commissioning event in a month’s time – none of which would improve benefits realisation, planning, safety, time, or cost. Yet they all needed to be submitted, reviewed, tracked, and filed. Urgently.

The growth of project bureaucracy and assurance has been steady over the past 10 years, to the point where it’s no longer about delivering a piece of infrastructure with clear benefits to the end user. It’s about passing assurance gates and supporting a bloated bureaucracy of support functions and specialised consultants.

How Disillusionment Turns into Resignation

Good governance does matter. But when highly capable project professionals spend more time firefighting assurance document trails and managing comment registers than leading teams, planning works, or solving problems – we’ve lost the plot.

And the cost? It’s not just time. It’s people. Good people.

Disillusionment leads to disengagement. Disengagement leads to resignation. And in an industry already struggling to attract and retain top talent, that’s a risk we can’t afford.

We talk about wanting to create environments that are inclusive, diverse, and attractive to the next generation. But who wants to step into a role that feels more like a bureaucratic endurance test than a chance to build something real?

Unfortunately, I can’t see the bureaucracy falling away anytime soon.

So What Can We Do About It?

We can’t always change what’s imposed externally – client demands, government compliance, endless assurance. But we can change how we operate internally. And that’s where the opportunity lies.

Refocusing Internally: The Strengths-Based Advantage

At TMY Advisory, we believe the answer lies in going back to the individual. Specifically, reconnecting people with their strengths.

It starts by guiding each person through their CliftonStrengths profile. They gain a deep understanding of how they naturally think, work, and lead. From there, we use that insight to build a high-performing and engaged team of engineers and construction professionals – where each person is aligned to work that energises them.

When people are set up to do what they do best every day, purpose re-emerges. Disillusionment fades. You get project managers back in flow, leading with clarity, not fatigue. Engineers who find solutions, not problems, because they’re engaged, not just going through the motions.

Gallup’s research backs it: teams who know and use their strengths are 8.9% more productive, 15% less likely to quit, and 6x more engaged.

In an industry where it’s getting harder to find – and keep – great people, that’s not a nice-to-have. That’s business-critical.

A Practical Shift That Energises Teams

This isn’t about layering “coaching” on top of broken systems. It’s about rethinking how we structure roles and teams in the first place.

When people are aligned to roles that fit how they naturally operate, the results are tangible:

• Less burnout and absenteeism

• Lower turnover and recruitment costs

• Stronger reputation in the talent market

• More cohesive, energised teams

We want to keep delivering complex, high-impact infrastructure. To do that, we need to keep good people in the game – and that means building workplaces where they can thrive, not just survive.

Where We Go From Here

Disillusionment doesn’t mean walking away from the industry. But it might be the signal that something deeper needs to change.

We may not be able to remove all the paperwork — but we can put purpose and enthusiasm back into the process.

That’s what Construct with Strengths is about: re-aligning people to what they do best, reconnecting teams with why they do this work, and reigniting the energy that brought us into construction in the first place.

If you’re feeling the drag — or noticing your team slipping into disengagement — let’s talk. Strengths-based project delivery can help your people do their best work.

👉 Explore Construct with Strengths
👉 Contact us for a conversation