AI Reshuffles Construction Teams More Often Than It Cuts Jobs

Forty-six percent of North American construction firms have restructured their teams because of artificial intelligence — more than four times the 11% that cut headcount over the same shift. That finding anchors a new report from Berkeley Research Group, which surveyed 109 executives involved in AI implementation in July 2026, including 58 builders and 51 owners. Most findings reflect the 65 North American respondents.

The message is straightforward: AI is reorganizing construction work, not eliminating it. And the money behind that reorganization is substantial.

Where the money and the headcount are going

Over two-thirds of North American respondents invested at least $250,000 in AI over the previous two years, including 37% that spent $1 million or more. Yet only 15% said they had fully integrated the technology across projects and operations.

The workforce numbers break down like this:

• 46% changed team structures
• 38% retrained employees
• 18% added headcount in certain areas
• 11% reduced headcount because of AI
• 31% redeployed staff to different work
• 29% created new types of roles
• 20% changed the skills they seek when hiring
• 51% changed their reliance on outside vendors, consultants or contractors

Surveyed builders were mainly small- to mid-sized general contractors and construction managers. Owners were primarily larger developers and real estate investment trusts.

What does this change for contractors day to day?

Richard Fultineer, BRG's managing director and head of global construction, said the shift centers on how companies handle project information.

"In recruiting, it is critical to focus on team members who will be able to manage and progress AI-type applications in the future," he said. "The immediate impact is on information-intensive work like cost estimating, procurement, design review, schedule oversight, and contract and compliance review."

Eight out of 10 surveyed North American builders already use AI to help evaluate and plan proposed projects, per the report. Fultineer said AI tools can also review construction drawings to spot errors or missing details that could lead to costly corrections.

"Another example is an estimating model's ability to draw on hundreds of completed, similar projects to calculate material, labor and equipment costs," he said.

The barriers: talent and liability

Scaling those tools presents challenges beyond buying software. Forty percent of respondents cited a lack of skilled talent or expertise as a challenge. Forty-three percent identified liability for AI-generated errors as a concern restricting use.

Closing that skills gap requires training tailored to each phase of construction, Fultineer said.

"Much of this occurs in-house but requires constant usage to become the norm," he said. "Encouragement at the senior levels of companies is necessary to push for efficient and continued use."

Construction trails other sectors on oversight

Construction's adoption depth landed close to BRG's surveys of retail, energy and financial institutions. AI was active in most core functions for 42% of construction respondents, compared with 48% in retail and 54% in financial institutions. Workforce retraining and hiring changes cannot be compared across sectors because the construction survey was the first to ask about them.

On governance, construction ranked lowest of the four sectors. Policy coverage for human oversight and accountability stood at 42%, and for accuracy and reliability at 34%. Fultineer attributed that gap partly to banking and energy's stronger regulatory pressure to formalize oversight.

How to measure whether AI is working

Fultineer's advice is concrete: track estimating accuracy, schedule performance, rework and change orders to evaluate results.

"Overall, it is a hands-on practice," he said. "They should practice on ongoing projects with proper consideration and continuing quality control to check and avoid errors."

With heavy spend but only 15% full integration, the near-term story in construction is execution — closing the talent gap, clarifying liability and formalizing oversight before the restructured teams can deliver returns.