How much value should one quantity surveyor manager?
Insights From a Closed-Door Roundtable With 20 Quantity Surveyors
A few months ago, I hosted a private roundtable with twenty Quantity Surveyors from across the UK, Australia, and New Zealand.
A mix of senior directors, commercial managers, and client-side leads.
Don't forget a QS in Australia can often be called a Contract Adminstrator (CA).
We spent two hours dissecting industry issues, but one question stopped the room.
It came from a Commercial Manager who was fronted the question by one of the Junior contributors within his team.
“Realistically, how much project value should one QS be responsible for?”
It sounds simple.
But the discussion that followed was anything but
You see there are so many positions within the QS spectrum.
Whether your a Professional QS (PQS), a Project QS (CA), a Client Side QS, a Sub Contractor QS - each will have their own take on what "a lot" looks like.
Below is a short summary of the insights, disagreements, and surprising consensus that emerged from that one ice breaker.
Everyone Agreed on One Thing: Project Value Is a Terrible Metric
The room laughed when someone said:
“If we staffed projects purely on value, every £50m job would have 50 QSs.”
And it’s true.
One QS explained he was currently running:
A £20m project requiring almost no day-to-day management, and A £1m project consuming half his week due to variations, client demands, and major documentation gaps.
The message was clear: Value alone tells you nothing.
And a small project can be a bigger energy burn, that something 100X it's value.
As many old school QS's tell me "It's just zero's on a page, the real differentiatior is in the complexity and programem"
Complexity, Not Value, Is the Real Workload Driver
A senior commercial manager put it perfectly:
“A £20m warehouse is easier than a £5m airport refurbishment.”
Different sectors have different gravitational pull.
Live, open environments are challenging.
The matetrial being used - needs to be considered.
A £1 billion nuclear project will likely be more challenging than a £2 billion Mixed Use Development.
From the discussion, these patterns emerged as sectors that offer genuine challeges.
High-Complexity Sectors
Hospitals Airports Prisons Universities Heritage Rail Nuclear Energy Defence Marine
£500k–£1.5m per QS was the general benchmark here.
Lower-Complexity Sectors
Industrial Repetitive residential Warehouses Greenfield sites
Here, one QS can run £10m–£20m+, often with an AQS.
The Number of Trade Packages Matters More Than Anything
One of the directors said:
“I’d rather run one £15m job with 20 packages than three smaller jobs with 60 packages and three sets of clients and headaches”
And that sparked nods across the table.
More packages mean:
More procurement More payments More change More risk More client management More documentation
Value doesn’t dictate stress. Interfaces do.
Consultant & Client-Side QSs Play a Different Game Entirely
One PQS quietly mentioned:
“I currently oversee around £1bn of work — but I’m dealing with two contractors, not 200 packages.”
This opened a whole separate discussion.
Consultancy & client side workload is:
Higher-level Less granular More governance-driven
The consensus: Hundreds of millions — even billions — is not unusual on the client side.
So What Does “Normal” Look Like?
(According to 20 QSs in a room)
Here’s the averaged output:
Main Contractor (Typical Guideline)
Straightforward project: £10m–£20m per QS Moderate complexity: £5m–£10m per QS High complexity / heavy VO: £500k–£3m per QS
With Support (QS + AQS + Visiting Senior)
Up to £15m–£25m was considered manageable But multiple sites drastically increases workload
Client-Side
£200m–£1bn+ per QS Depending on how many contractors and procurement cycles they’re handling
The Real Insight From the Roundtable
One of the senior QSs closed the conversation with a line everyone agreed with:
“A QS can manage as much value as they can control without dropping standards.”
Because the truth is:
Great QSs reduce noise They get ahead of risk They build strong relationships They prevent chaos They aren’t defined by the project value — they’re defined by their ability to stay in control
And that’s the message I want the industry to hear.
If you're in a hiring management position, think of that - how much can one QS handle without losing control, regardless of the value?
This balance between challenge and growth is what keeps your A-players engaged. People are far less likely to leave when they know they’re continually developing.
Written by Mick Donaghy
Quantity Surveying Recruitment Expert
Managing Director of GEDON Executive Recruitment
wwww.gedonexecutive.com
