Solving the Modern Methods of Construction Puzzle

In an era of pressing housing shortages, productivity shortfalls and growing sustainability concerns, the construction industry finds itself at a crossroads. Modern Methods of Construction (MMC) may well be the way forward, promising increased efficiency, improved quality, and reduced environmental impact. MMC refer to so-called smart construction processes designed to improve on traditional design and construction approaches by focusing on such areas as component and process standardisation, design for manufacture and assembly, prefabrication, preassembly, off-site manufacture [including modular building] and onsite innovations such as additive manufacture [3D printing]. But developers eager to travel down this road face a complex web of regulatory challenges and uncertainty. What are the major roadblocks for MCC? Master Builders Australia national policy director Alexandra Waldren believes a fragmented regulatory landscape has left many in the industry hesitant to fully commit to MMC. This lack of standardisation across jurisdictions creates a significant barrier to entry for developers, who fear potential compliance issues down the line. Australian Building Codes Board chief Gary Rake agrees. “If we’re going to look at new methods of construction, if we’re going to try to focus on things like standardisation and introducing new methods, we need to recognise that the regulatory system has to keep up with that,” Rake says. The challenge extends beyond regulatory compliance. Risk management presents another substantial hurdle for those looking to adopt MMC. This delicate balance of risk distribution requires careful consideration and potentially new frameworks to protect all parties. Traditional certification and compliance processes, designed with conventional construction methods in mind, often fall short of this goal. Certifiers and developers also find themselves in uncharted territory when it comes to proving the suitability of innovative products and conducting meaningful onsite inspections for off-site manufactured components, Emeritus Professor Perry Forsythe said during a panel discussion at the Building 4.0 CRC Annual Conference 2024 in Melbourne this month. ▲ Alexandra Waldren, Gary Rake and Perry Forsythe during the Regulatory Reform and the Industrialisation of Building panel at the conference. Image: Building 4.0 CRC Emerging solutions Despite these challenges, proposals for regulatory reform are beginning to take shape, offering hope for a more streamlined approach to MMC adoption. These include implementing traceability in evidence of suitability pathways and harmonising inspection processes across states. Perhaps most promising is the potential development of a national building products assessment and registration scheme, which could provide much-needed clarity and confidence in MMC products. Looking beyond domestic borders, international models offer valuable lessons. Systems such as the UK’s Buildoffsite Property Assurance Scheme (BOPAS) accreditation and New Zealand’s MultiProof scheme demonstrate how standardised categories for off-site assemblies and streamlined approval processes can foster innovation while maintaining rigorous safety standards. One particularly innovative approach gaining traction is performance-based auditing. “If scheme rules had administrative processes in there, the frequency with which a product manufacturer is audited could be based on their performance record,” Rake says. “Compliant manufacturers would be audited less frequently. Their audits would cost a little bit less, while bad ones would be audited more frequently, which would cost them more.” This model incentivises quality and compliance while reducing the burden on high-performing manufacturers and government regulators. The way forward The path to implementing MMC has been fraught with valuable lessons. Many attempts at modular construction have often fallen short of expectations and highlight the pitfalls of rushing into new methods without proper planning. A lack of standardisation between projects often negates many of the potential benefits of using prefabricated components. Consumer desire for ‘bespoke’ designs also undermine the economies of scale that modular construction could achieve. These experiences have yielded valuable insights for the future of MMC. Key among these is the need for a product-based mindset, rather than viewing each project as a unique custom fabrication. Successful implementation of MMC requires a fundamental shift in how buildings are designed and procured. ▲ Building 4.0 CRC project lead Daryl Patterson speaks during the conference. Image: Building 4.0 CRC Building 4.0 CRC project lead Daryl Patterson says we need to “use the Lego that’s in the bucket to make the building. We don’t design the building and then go looking for a way of turning it into parts”. Patterson thinks the path forward for MMC lies in adopting a systems approach to construction. This involves simplifying structural approaches, implementing regulating grids for standardisation, and carefully balancing fixed, flexible, and free design elements. By decoupling and recoupling building elements, developers can achieve greater flexibility without sacrificing the benefits of standardisation. “[Currently,] the parts are standard but the designs are not,” Patterson says. He believes that five conditions are essential for the success of MMC. First, that it generates learning effects throughout the industry, just as many other industries operate. Second, is the application of the economic principle of “rights law”, where doubling production volume reduces costs and increases quality. Third, MMC must establish consistency of solutions and standardisation, to create scale and efficiency. Fourth, a military-inspired distributed supply chain should be leveraged by using interchangeable parts and, finally, the procurement model must be adapted to purchase parts directly instead of relying on traditional methods. He says interoperability is critical to the success of MMC, ensuring that components from different manufacturers work seamlessly together. This approach could foster competition and innovation among suppliers and provide greater flexibility for developers and architects. ▲ Challenges remain for the implimentation of MMC, but its benefits are many. A collaborative future As the industry moves forward, collaboration between regulators, manufacturers, and developers will be crucial. Establishing a shared database of performance solutions and developing agreed-upon terms for MMC could pave the way for wider adoption of these innovative construction methods. “We have options around accreditation, around licensing and professions,” says Waldren. “We have options around planning procurement processes and contractual processes. “What we really need here is, is the federation of governments to look at it all together and pull out the best parts and make it work in an effective national way.” While challenges remain, the potential benefits of MMC in addressing housing supply and sustainability issues make overcoming these hurdles worthwhile. With concerted effort and regulatory innovation, the construction industry can build a future where modern methods become the new standard. What was learnt at the Building 4.0 CRC conference earlier this month is that it demands a paradigm shift in how the construction industry approaches design, procurement, and assembly. Developers must embrace a system philosophy that governs all aspects of the building process, from initial concept to final assembly. Firms that can successfully navigate the transition to MMC will likely find themselves at a significant advantage. The key lies in learning from past mistakes, embracing standardisation where appropriate, and maintaining the flexibility to adapt to unique project requirements. Only then can the promise of MMC be fully realised, ushering in a new era of productivity and innovation in the built environment. You are currently experiencing The Urban Developer Plus (TUD+), our premium membership for property professionals. Click here to learn more.

Solving the Modern Methods of Construction Puzzle

Get the full story.

Nurse Housing Shortage a National Crisis Only Government Can Fix

Architect’s Resurrection of Ararat Shoptop Points Way to Regional Reinvigoration

Replacement Cost Realities Spark Regional Hotel Renaissance

The Great Densification: Zoning Alone Won’t Fix Housing Crisis

Prefab, Modular, Ready-to-Go: Construction Innovation Evolves

Melbourne Long Lunch | Panel discussion with Tim Price, Jeremy McLeod, Katya Crema & Anne Michaels

A fireside chat with Troy Daffy | Managing Director, Silverstone Developments

Brisbane Long Lunch | Panel discussion with Rob Comiskey, Frank Licastro, Steve Laffey & Alexandra Stuart-Robertson

Sydney Long Lunch | Panel discussion with Jamie Durie, Jennifer Macquarie & Michael Romano

Retail Dropped for Homes Under Maribyrnong Revision

Billionaire Racing Titan Plots Gold Coast Highrises

Second Stage Floated for $400m Perth Precinct

Missed Deadline Sinks Council Bid to Block Dingley Estate

2026 Developer Outlook Lunch | Melbourne

2026 Developer Outlook Lunch | Brisbane

2026 Developer Outlook Lunch | Sydney