July 7, 2026
You are never explicitly asked to choose between right and wrong, you are asked to make decisions in grey areas where the ethical implications often only become clear later.
For many years, building safety has been discussed primarily through the lens of systems: roles and responsibilities, competence frameworks, gateways, documentation and assurance processes. These elements are essential. They provide structure, clarity and consistency in an increasingly complex regulatory environment. But they are not the whole story.
What is often left unspoken and sometimes assumed rather than addressed is behaviour. Not organisational culture as a broad or abstract concept and not training as a one-off intervention, but the everyday decisions, judgements and actions taken by individuals when responsibility genuinely rests with them.
The introduction of the Building Safety Act represents a subtle but important shift in emphasis beyond skills, knowledge and experience. Alongside clearer accountability and strengthened competence expectations sits a growing recognition that how people behave matters just as much as what systems exist.
BS8670-1:2024 Competence Frameworks for Building Safety introduced five foundational behavioural competencies that apply across all dutyholder roles, regardless of discipline, seniority or organisational size. These behaviours are not aspirational value statements and they are not ‘soft skills.’ They describe the human capabilities that determine whether safety systems are applied with integrity, whether information can be trusted and whether decisions are made in the best interests of safety, particularly when pressure, ambiguity or competing priorities are present.
Taken together, these five behaviours define what good building safety leadership looks like in practice.
From tick-box competence to behavioural competence
Traditional approaches to competence have focused heavily on qualifications, experience and technical knowledge. These remain vital. However, they only tell part of the story.
Two individuals with similar qualifications and experience can behave very differently when faced with uncertainty, challenge or risk. One may escalate concerns early, challenge assumptions and prioritise safety despite commercial pressure. Another may defer, rationalise or remain silent. The difference is not technical competence, it is behavioural competence.
Behavioural competence concerns how individuals think, decide, communicate and take responsibility when exercising their role. It influences whether systems are used properly, whether assurance is meaningful and whether learning genuinely occurs.
This is why behavioural competence cannot be assumed. It must be deliberately developed and critically evidenced.
Introducing the five foundational behavioural competencies
The five foundational behavioural competencies as outlined in BS8670-1:2024 Competence Frameworks for Building Safety apply to all dutyholders under the Building Safety Act. They describe the minimum behavioural expectations required to discharge responsibilities effectively and ethically.
While they are often listed individually, their true strength lies in how they operate together as a coherent whole. At a high level, the five behaviours can be described as:
1. Acting ethically and prioritising safe outcomes
Demonstrating integrity, professional judgement and a clear commitment to safety over convenience, pressure or short-term gain.
2. Demonstrating leadership, teamwork and effective communication
Creating clarity, encouraging challenge, sharing information appropriately and contributing to psychologically safe environments where concerns can be raised and addressed.
3. Managing and contributing to competence
Recognising the limits of one’s own competence, supporting the development of others and ensuring that work is undertaken by those with the appropriate capability.
4. Taking personal responsibility and accountability
Owning decisions and actions, understanding the impact they have on safety outcomes and avoiding the diffusion of responsibility.
5. Exercising an appropriate duty of care
Considering the foreseeable consequences of decisions and actions, particularly in relation to those who may be affected but not directly involved.
These behaviours are intentionally broad. They are designed to apply across different roles and contexts, while still setting clear expectations about conduct and judgement.
Why these behaviours matter now
Although these behavioural competencies are currently most explicitly associated with the Building Safety Act, their relevance extends far beyond regulatory compliance.
The built environment is becoming more complex, more interconnected and more scrutinised. Decision-making often involves incomplete information, competing objectives and significant uncertainty. In such conditions, systems alone cannot guarantee safe outcomes. Behaviour fills the gap between intent and reality.
When behavioural competence is weak, organisations may appear compliant on paper while remaining vulnerable in practice. When it is strong, systems are used as intended, learning is continuous and accountability is real rather than symbolic.
This is why these behaviours are likely to become the baseline expectation for competent leadership across the sector. What is currently framed as building safety-specific will, over time, shape broader definitions of professional competence, assurance and trust.
The challenge: behaviour is rarely made explicit
Despite their importance, behavioural competencies are often poorly understood and inconsistently addressed.
In many organisations, behaviour is assumed to be a by-product of experience or seniority. In others, it is discussed in general terms but not translated into observable expectations or evidence. As a result, conversations about behaviour can feel subjective, uncomfortable or vague.
This creates two risks. First, organisations may believe behavioural competence is present without being able to demonstrate it. Second, individuals may not receive the support or challenge needed to develop the behaviours their roles genuinely require. Neither outcome supports safe, sustainable performance.
What good attention looks like at this stage
At this point in the sector’s journey, the most important step is not to rush to diagnostics or solutions, it is to pay deliberate attention. For dutyholders and organisations, this means:
- Taking time to understand what the five behaviours mean in practice for specific roles and decisions.
- Creating space for honest reflection and conversation about behavioural expectations.
- Recognising that behavioural competence develops through dialogue, feedback and lived experience, not policy statements alone.
- Beginning to think about how behavioural expectations can be evidenced in a way that is proportionate, meaningful and credible.
This is not about perfection. It is about intent, clarity and consistency.
Looking ahead
The introduction of explicit behavioural competencies under the Building Safety Act signals an important evolution in how competence is understood and assessed. It shifts the focus from what people know to how they act when it matters most.
As the sector continues to mature, these five behaviours will increasingly shape how leadership is judged, how assurance is provided and how trust is built, both within organisations and with those they serve. Those who take behavioural competence seriously now will set the precedent for our industry in the years ahead.
