By: Avtandil Mekudishvili, APAC Regional Lead at PlanRadar
In Dubai, some of the region’s largest developers are bringing construction in-house rather than relying on general contractors. It is a striking shift in an industry that has traditionally depended on external delivery partners, and it reflects growing frustration over delays, rising costs and limited visibility into project execution.
But while Dubai may represent the sharp end of this trend, Southeast Asia is taking a more measured path.
In Singapore and Malaysia, developers are not broadly moving to fully internalise construction. Instead, they are looking for ways to maintain the traditional contractor model while gaining tighter control over project delivery. The focus is increasingly on stronger governance, clearer accountability and real-time visibility into what is happening on-site.
That shift is being driven by mounting pressure across the market.
Construction costs remain elevated, labour shortages continue to affect delivery timelines and competition for land has intensified. In Singapore, aggressive land bids have raised concerns about whether developers can maintain margins if construction costs continue to climb. Contractors are also warning that both public and private sector projects are under strain from rising operating costs and manpower challenges.
Against this backdrop, developers are asking a more fundamental question: how can they reduce risk and make faster decisions during construction, without taking on the full burden of becoming a contractor themselves?
The real issue is visibility, not ownership
Traditionally, developers depend on contractors to manage day-to-day delivery. The contractor controls the site, coordinates subcontractors and oversees progress reporting. While this model has worked for decades, it also creates an information gap.
By the time issues around delays, budget overruns or design changes reach the developer, the opportunity to respond early may already have passed.
This is where the conversation around “internalisation” becomes relevant. What developers are really seeking is not necessarily ownership of construction operations, but greater control over information and decision-making.
That means having visibility into project risks earlier, understanding how changes affect programme and budget in real time, and ensuring decisions are documented clearly across all stakeholders.
For many developers in Southeast Asia, the answer is not replacing contractors. It is working with contractors in a different way.
A more realistic model for Singapore and Malaysia
Rather than bringing delivery fully in-house, developers in the region are increasingly prioritising:
- stronger project governance structures,
- clearer performance and risk-sharing frameworks,
- tighter documentation and approval processes, and
- digital tools that provide real-time oversight across projects.
Technology is playing a growing role in enabling this.
Shared project platforms now allow developers and contractors to work from the same live set of information, with RFIs, variation orders and approvals tracked transparently in one place. Instead of waiting for periodic updates, developers can see issues as they emerge and approve decisions before delays escalate.
360-degree site capture technology is also becoming more common. Regular visual records of construction progress allow developers to remotely monitor site conditions, compare progress against plans and maintain a permanent digital record of the build. This reduces disputes, improves accountability and helps teams identify problems earlier.
Importantly, these tools do not replace contractors. They strengthen collaboration while giving developers greater confidence that projects are being managed effectively.
What this means for contractors
For contractors, expectations are changing.
Developers no longer want visibility only at milestone reporting stages. Increasingly, they expect transparency to be built into the delivery process itself.
Contractors who can provide real-time project insights, faster issue escalation and clearer documentation will be better positioned to maintain long-term developer relationships. Those relying on fragmented reporting and delayed communication risk losing competitive advantage in a market where developers are under increasing pressure to manage costs and timelines more closely.
In this sense, the regional trend is less about developers becoming contractors, and more about redefining what a modern contractor relationship looks like.
The bottom line
Dubai’s move towards internalising construction reflects a wider industry desire for greater control over project delivery. But in Singapore and Malaysia, the more likely direction is not full ownership of construction operations.
Instead, developers are seeking tighter oversight, earlier visibility into risks and better coordination across the project lifecycle, while continuing to work with external contractors.
The lesson for the industry is clear: control does not come from ownership alone. It comes from having the information needed to act early, make informed decisions and keep projects moving before problems become unmanageable.
The developers and contractors that succeed in the years ahead will likely be the ones that can combine traditional delivery expertise with a far more transparent and connected way of working.
