Richard Sanderson on EPCM vs. Construction Firms

Richard Sanderson, vice president in the Project Business Services group, IPS, sat down with PharmTech following a panel discussion at INTERPHEX 2026 on deploying lean, sustainable, and tech-enabled delivery platforms on large engineering, procurement and construction management (EPCM) projects. In this part 1 of a two-part interview, he reflects on the evolving pressures facing pharmaceutical capital project teams and how IPS is responding.

Sanderson identifies cost reduction as the defining trend shaping the industry. Large branded pharma clients are increasingly looking to CDMO and CMO organizations for inspiration, seeking to adopt their leaner ways of working. Beyond operational changes, procurement groups are playing a more active role, exploring alternative contracting models, including limited agency agreements, and in some cases choosing to hold contracts directly rather than through an EPCM partner to eliminate associated fees.

Sanderson highlights the issue of bloated deliverable libraries. "Over a period of time, [pharma clients] have built up a large library of deliverables that they expect during the engineering phase, and quite frankly, the extent of some of these lists of deliverables is really, really large and not fit for purpose," he says, adding that IPS must engage clients early to right-size these expectations and arrive at a leaner, more practical set of requirements.

On the merits of the EPCM model itself, Sanderson is confident in its advantages, particularly the ability to overlap design, construction, and compliance phases to compress timelines. However, he acknowledges a persistent perception problem. "Some clients don't view the EPCM firms like IPS as real builders," he notes, adding that while IPS has strong construction capabilities, the company must work harder at the proposal stage to prove it can deliver the full end-to-end scope as effectively as dedicated construction management firms.