Building Pathology: Root Cause Analysis – Moving Beyond the Defect
- Sarah Chaudhry MBA FRICS
- Aug 10
- 3 min read
A defect is often the most visible part of a building problem. However, what we can see is not necessarily the reason the problem has occurred.
This is where Root Cause Analysis (RCA) becomes an important part of building pathology.
RCA is a structured investigative approach used to identify the fundamental cause of a defect, failure or recurring problem, rather than simply treating its visible symptoms.
For building surveyors and other property professionals, this means moving beyond the question:
“What is wrong?”
and asking:
“Why has this occurred?”
From observation to understanding
A structured approach to building pathology can be considered through four stages:
Observe → Investigate → Analyse → Conclude
1. Observe
The starting point is the visible evidence.
This may include:
cracking;
damp staining;
mould growth;
timber decay;
defective finishes;
corrosion;
movement; or
deterioration of building elements.
Observation is important, but it is only the starting point. A visible defect may have several possible causes.
2. Investigate
The next step is to establish what evidence is available.
Depending on the defect, this could include:
inspection and testing;
moisture measurements;
photographs;
construction details;
maintenance records;
historic repair information;
drawings and specifications;
information from occupants or building managers; and
further specialist investigation where appropriate.
Good diagnosis should be evidence-led rather than based solely on assumption.
3. Analyse
The evidence then needs to be considered in the context of the building and the defect mechanism.
For example, cracking could potentially relate to movement, settlement, thermal effects, materials, construction or alterations.
Dampness could arise from a number of sources, including plumbing defects, rainwater penetration, ground moisture, condensation or failures within the building envelope.
The important question is not simply where is the defect?
It is: What mechanism is causing it?
4. Conclude
The final stage is to establish the most likely root cause and determine an appropriate response.
This distinction is important.
Cleaning mould, redecorating a wall or filling a crack may deal with the manifestation of a problem without addressing the underlying cause.
Where the underlying cause remains, the defect may return.
The objective should therefore be to identify the cause, specify proportionate remedial action and, where possible, prevent recurrence.
Awaab’s Law and the importance of diagnosis
This principle is particularly relevant to housing professionals as the implementation of Awaab’s Law develops.
The requirements place greater emphasis on landlords identifying, investigating and addressing hazards within prescribed timescales. As the scope of the legislation expands, the ability to recognise hazards, investigate their causes and determine appropriate action becomes increasingly important.
For example, where damp and mould are present, simply removing visible mould may not resolve the underlying problem.
A professional investigation may need to consider the building fabric, ventilation, heating, moisture sources, external envelope, plumbing and other contributing factors.
The objective should be to understand why the hazard exists, not simply to remove its visible manifestation.
RCA is bigger than building surveying
Although RCA is highly relevant to building pathology, the principle is not unique to surveying.
It is used across many professional disciplines, including:
engineering;
facilities management;
health and safety;
healthcare;
project management;
asset management; and
quality management.
Comments