At the forefront of digital integration: An interview with Mark Costello

Our clients expect us to be at the forefront of digital integration, using modern technologies and applying best practice international standards and systems. This aligns with the Irish Governments Capital Works Management Framework (CWMF) BIM Mandate, to fully digitalise the construction sector by 2030. 

Under the CWMF, since January 2024 all projects with a capital value in excess of €100m are required to be delivered using a BIM platform. Over a period of 4 years (i.e. by 2028) the requirements will be extended to include the engagement of consultants and contractors down to projects with a value less than €1m.

RPS, A Tetra Tech company has led the way in digitisation in Ireland and holds the latest UKAS accredited ISO 19650 International Standard Business Systems Certification. By investing in digital leadership, we provide our clients with the technology, guidance and best practice that will enable them to create value at scale.

In today’s competitive market, Architectural / Engineering / Construction (AEC) companies must leverage digital tools to address challenges such as cost overruns, project delays, and resource management. 

We caught up with Mark Costello, Digital Director at RPS, to get his views on how industry is embracing digital integration.

Can you describe the biggest innovation-related challenges your organisation faces?

One of the most pressing innovation-related challenges we face as an organisation is the persistent fragmentation across stakeholders, supply chains, and digital platforms. Despite the strides made in digital design environments, many workflows remain siloed, and interoperability between systems is often inadequate, especially when dealing with legacy infrastructure and long-standing operational procedures. 

Another major challenge is the sheer pace of technological change compared to the pace at which large infrastructure programmes evolve. Keeping our teams continuously skilled, agile, and aligned with these changes places considerable demand on our resources. The responsibility for addressing these challenges is shared across multiple tiers of the business.

As Digital Director, I work closely with our Digital Technology Steering Group, and we rely heavily on embedded Information Management leads within project teams, supported by strategic discipline and operational heads. Ultimately, it’s a collective effort, but digital leadership sets the pace and provides the structure.

How would you prefer to pay for innovation-related support?

We favour a flexible model that reflects the outcomes and nature of the engagement. For project-specific support, we’re comfortable with fee-per-project arrangements, especially for well-defined deliverables or pilots. For capability building, training fees work well, particularly when tied to continuous professional development or academic progression.

In cases where there’s a longer-term or strategic advisory need, a retainer model offers the stability we require. We are also open to models where compensation is linked to the results delivered, especially in high-risk innovation scenarios. The key is ensuring the investment aligns with tangible value and supports scalable growth across programmes. 

If you were to bring in an external innovation partner, what specific services would you look for?

Internally, while we have built a strong foundation of digital capability, we see value in increasing capacity for rapid prototyping - having the time, space, and technical resources to test more ideas before they reach full-scale implementation remains a challenge. We could benefit from more embedded specialists who can sit within major programme teams to bridge operational and strategic delivery. Experienced contract advisors and advanced data governance specialists are also limited across the AEC sector.

What kind of relationship would you expect from an innovation consultant?

Continuous advisory relationships are ideal. We look for specialists who can become embedded collaborators - not transactional suppliers. Innovation is iterative, so we expect co-creation, periodic reviews, and responsive support tied to our project cycles. Where the focus is longer-term strategic change, a continuous advisory relationship provides the consistency and depth of understanding we need. For focused initiatives or technology evaluations, occasional support is appropriate, but the most productive relationships tend to be built on shared learning, trust, and close collaboration.

Who are your current partners in innovation or technology, and what value do they provide that you couldn't achieve in-house?

We partner with a range of international software vendors (Autodesk/Bentley/Epic Games/Microsoft/Other), academic and research institutes and client-aligned delivery teams. These relationships bring specific domain expertise, standard-setting insight, and support us in delivering thought leadership and demonstrable project outcomes. They extend our internal reach and drive capability where the industry is evolving faster than frameworks. 

What are the major cost considerations when it comes to investing in innovation or external consulting?

Major factors include the need for customisation - since off-the-shelf solutions often fall short in complex infrastructure settings and the cost of training distributed, multidisciplinary teams. Integration efforts across systems with varying levels of digital maturity also present budgetary challenges. Another key consideration is compliance, particularly in regulated environments where data security and auditability are paramount. We try to focus investment on innovations that offer long-term value, cross-programme scalability, and demonstrable alignment with client and regulatory requirements.