Product platforms are starting to move from theory to reality, but they need a fundamental shift in how buildings are conceived and coordinated. Mott MacDonald’s Paul Taylor explains.

The UK’s Construction Playbook first set out to push the sector away from one-off, high-risk projects and towards a more industrialised model with its 2022 update. Yet for many building designers, the product platform concept set out in the report still feels abstract, almost four years on.

That’s a problem, because platforms are no longer a niche procurement idea. They are becoming a practical design framework for delivering more quickly, more predictably and with less waste.

At its simplest, a product platform is a stable design and delivery system that can be used across many projects. It includes repeatable components, agreed interfaces, production methods, digital information and the delivery relationships needed to assemble them.

For a building designer, that means designing within a clear set of rules rather than starting from scratch each time. The aim is not uniformity for its own sake; it is to repeat what adds value, while keeping enough flexibility to respond to site, brief and user needs.

This is a major cultural shift for an industry shaped by bespoke thinking. Designers, clients and contractors have long been rewarded for treating each project as unique, even when many parts are repeated. That habit slows learning, increases coordination risk and makes industrialised delivery harder to achieve. It also keeps manufacturers and specialist suppliers too far from early design decisions, where their input is most valuable.

What product platforms look like in practice

Good examples already exist. The Department for Education’s GenZero programme shows how a platform approach can combine repeatable components, repeatable processes and repeatable relationships in one system. Using a standardised kit of parts and a digitally defined design logic, Mott MacDonald worked with the programme to explore how schools could be delivered with greater consistency, lower carbon and less design rework.

“The aim is not uniformity for its own sake. It is to repeat what adds value, while keeping enough flexibility to respond to site, brief and user needs.”

Paul Taylor

Using a digitally defined structural grid layout based on repeatable blocks, GenZero configured 72 standard school types – some of which are now in procurement or construction – from the same underlying component catalogue. The designs deployed prefabricated timber panels alongside offsite volumetric modules to slash design cycles and carbon.

For designers, the lesson is clear: standardisation does not remove creativity, but it does move effort towards where it has the most impact.

The same thinking is shaping healthcare. Historically, NHS acute facilities have been delivered individually by local trusts as bespoke projects, often affected by budget overruns and delays.

The New Hospital Programme’s Hospital 2.0 model is intended to move hospital delivery away from isolated schemes and towards a repeatable design and delivery system. Its promise lies in reducing unnecessary variation, improving coordination and creating a pipeline that gives suppliers more confidence to invest in capability and capacity.

That matters because platforms work best when they operate across programmes, not isolated buildings. Repetition at scale allows teams to improve details, validate performance and reduce cost over time.

Research from the Construction Innovation Hub’s The Value of Platforms report, published after the 2022 update to the Construction Playbook, suggests that wider adoption of product platforms across public social infrastructure could cut construction costs. The report suggests that a 31% reduction is possible, which could save up to £1.8bn a year and add up to £7.8bn annually to UK GDP.

What this means for design teams

For building designers, two priorities matter most if platform thinking is to move from strategy documents into deliverable schemes.

First, interfaces must be defined earlier and with more discipline. Platform-based design depends on clear rules for how structural, architectural and building services systems connect. If those interfaces remain loose, the claimed efficiency quickly disappears in late redesign and site fixes. For designers, this means more effort up front on coordination, tolerances and information quality, so repeatable elements can be configured within stable boundaries.

Second, demand has to be aggregated. A product platform only performs well when manufacturers, fabricators and specialist partners have enough certainty to invest in tooling, workflows and skills. That is why public programmes matter so much. They create the repeatable demand needed to support industrialised supply chains, which in turn makes platform-based design more viable.

How designers can respond now

The next phase is less about advocacy and waiting for the perfect platform strategy to emerge and more about practical adoption. For design teams and their supply chains, the starting point depends on how far they have already progressed.

If platform thinking is new to an organisation, it is best to begin with a tightly defined area of repetition. That could be an MEP riser module, plant room arrangement, standard room layout or defined repetitive interface, such as a partition connection detail. The objective is to prove where repeatability can reduce risk and improve outcomes, pilot it on a live project and then build a feedback loop around that starting point.

“Platform-based design depends on clear rules for how structural, architectural and building services systems connect. If those interfaces remain loose, the claimed efficiency quickly disappears in late redesign and site fixes.”

Paul Taylor

If an organisation is already using repeated components, the next step is broader integration to accelerate product platform use.

That means using automated configuration tools and digital-twin environments to dynamically validate equipment access zones, maintenance clearances and complex multi-system routing.

In parallel, governance and exception processes must be established to protect platforms. Without that discipline, variations by locally-based project teams can quickly dilute the benefits that platforms are meant to create.

Industry transformation

If new users can get on board and existing users can step up their platform use, then the construction sector could look fundamentally different in five to 10 years.

The change will deliver a shift away from a fragmented industry toward a high-productivity, product-led manufacturing ecosystem. The traditional site will evolve into an efficient, low-risk logistics and assembly environment, operating with millimetre precision and near-zero material waste.

For clients, this transformation means absolute financial and schedule predictability; assets will be delivered on time and on budget, insulated from market volatility. For the people using these facilities – whether they are clinical staff navigating a high-pressure hospital ward, or teachers working within a modern school environment – this approach ensures day-one operational readiness.

If this shift happens, the role of the building designer will change significantly. Design will become less about reinventing every element and more about configuring proven systems intelligently. That is where the real opportunity lies for building designers.

Paul Taylor is a principal consultant for industrialised construction at Mott MacDonald.