The code, developed by the CPA’s Marketing Integrity Group (MIG), aims to set the benchmark for how product information is presented and marketed by manufacturers, thereby addressing the “credibility challenge” building product suppliers face in the wake of the Grenfell Tower fire.
The code comprises 11 clauses that are underpinned by five criteria: product and performance information must be clear, accurate, up-to-date, accessible and unambiguous.
This is not a paywall. Registration allows us to enhance your experience across Construction Management and ensure we deliver you quality editorial content.
Registering also means you can manage your own CPDs, comments, newsletter sign-ups and privacy settings.
The CPA’s decision to trial the code follows the publication of the results of the industry’s (broadly favourable) response to the initial draft of the code.
The CPA praised the “detailed, expert and extensive” feedback that it received from 35 trade associations, while “insightful comments” were also made by 180 providers of construction product information and the end-users of such information.
Nearly 80% of the trade associations said the code was either fairly easy or very easy to understand, while 97% thought it was very or fairly important to comply.
67% of providers and 61% of users said the code either very easy or fairly easy to understand and 86% of providers thought it was very or fairly important to comply with the code.
Concern with compliance
Many caveats were expressed (read the full report for more on those), but the key area of contention is policing of the code. To date, the CPA has proposed peer-based policing, but more trade associations disagreed with this than agreed with it.
Intriguingly, nearly two-thirds of users said they would report manufacturers that failed to comply with the code.
The CPA said: “Comments confirmed that more clarity was needed in some areas of the Code, particularly around the training and competence requirements, and on what exactly was required to comply with the different clauses. More clarity was also sought on how the scheme will be assessed, audited and ‘policed’, as well as practical guidance on its implementation within organisations.”
The CPA said the CCPI and its 11 clauses will be regularly reviewed by the not-for-profit organisation Construction Product Information (CPI) Ltd to ensure “they remain valid and relevant, and continue to develop in line with changes or developments in the industry, be that regulatory or otherwise”.
The CCPI now has its own website: www.cpicode.org.uk. The Considerate Constructors Scheme will administer CCPI registrations and verifications.
Adam Turk, chair of the CPA’s MIG and CEO of Siderise, said: “The overwhelming support and constructive feedback has reassured us that the code is absolutely the right step forward for the industry while also giving us a lot of insightful input to enable the MIG to review the wording of the clauses in line with these detailed responses.
“While changes have been made around the clarity and detail within the code, I can confirm that the 11 clauses remain principally close to those presented in the report.”
