Reflections after Grenfell: A safety-first approach to construction procurement

By Louise Roberts

The Grenfell Tower Enquiry’s Phase 2 report highlighted significant failings in the procurement process that contributed to the tragedy in June 2017, which claimed 72 lives. While procurement failings were not the sole cause, poor supplier selection significantly compromised resident safety. What role can procurement leaders and professionals in both the public and private sectors play in preventing similar disasters in the future?

This article examines how we must shift from treating safety as a site-specific concern to embedding it as a core principle across every stage of project execution, including procurement. Procurement professionals and leaders responsible for sourcing construction services must adopt a safety-first approach, prioritising securing the right supplier capabilities and complying with regulations. 

Background: Grenfell Tower refurbishment and procurement failings

Grenfell Tower, a 24-story residential building in London, underwent a major refurbishment between 2012 and 2016. The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC) owned the tower and delegated its management to the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (TMO), which was responsible for procuring services for the tower’s refurbishment. 

At the time, TMO was subject to the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) procurement rules, which required open tendering for services costing more than £174,000. However, an inquiry later found that TMO encouraged suppliers, particularly Studio E Architects, to keep fees below this threshold. This allowed Studio E – which lacked the expertise required to refurbish residential high-rises – to bypass an OJEU-compliant competitive tender process. Further procurement failings were identified in the appointment of the Principal Contractor, Rydon, which was given an unfair advantage through closed-door agreements regarding price reductions upon award. 

This relentless focus on reducing costs over ensuring safety and quality also shaped the choice of the external cladding system. The selected aluminium composite panels with polyethylene cores were found to be highly combustible; fire testing was also inadequate, and expert recommendations were disregarded. 

The enquiry revealed a lack of accountability among the client, suppliers, and contractors regarding safety compliance. Ultimately, the report emphasised how TMO’s price-driven procurement process led to the failure to appoint an architecture firm with the right knowledge, skills, and experience, creating severe and avoidable safety risks. 

How can Procurement enhance safety in construction projects?

Whether it takes place under regulated procurement processes (such as public sector rules) or in the private sector, procuring for construction should never be treated as a purely price-centric exercise. Instead, it must ensure supplier competency, fair competition, and long-term value delivery. 

In order to appoint the appropriate teams and individuals, a comprehensive and robust pre-qualification assessment must be undertaken to ensure bidders have the right knowledge, skills, and experience to provide services or works as needed. UK construction procurement exercises should align with three key legislations and regulations:

1. Procurement Act 2023
2. Construction Design Management (CDM) Regulations 2015 
3. Building Safety Act 2002

Procurement processes for construction professional services or principal contracts should typically follow the two-stage process below to ensure safety and compliance.