A software vendor proves their innovation works on a project. Results are clear. ROI is measurable. But when they try to scale across the organization, momentum dies. This isn't a product problem. It's structural.

Darren Martin spent years as Chief Digital Officer at Atkins Realis, where he led enterprise digital transformation across a 40,000-person global organization. More recently, he transitioned to advising private equity firms on AEC acquisitions and now serves as Chief Investment & Technology Officer at AInvested, a firm focused on purposeful innovation investment and transformational strategy. He sees a pattern repeatedly: the vendors with the best technology aren't necessarily the ones that scale. The ones that scale are those that understand why organizational bottlenecks exist in the first place.

Bottom line: Scaling in AEC is an organizational and GTM problem. Tie your tech to board-level outcomes, or it won’t scale.

Projects succeed. Pilots prove value. And then enterprise adoption stalls.

The reason isn't technical. It's organizational, and it runs deeper than most founders realize. Project managers are fighting daily fires: labor shortages, supply chain disruptions, weather impacts, and pricing constraints from original bids. These managers are accountable for their project's P&L, not enterprise transformation. They have neither the mandate from above nor the discretion in their contracts to allocate resources to scale innovation across the organization.

It's a pattern he's seen across multiple organizations, and it reveals something important about how AEC is structured differently from other industries.

In manufacturing or retail, centralized decision-making authority can force scaling. Here, it can't. Project managers operate in silos, each protecting their own economics. Even when a technology demonstrably works, the person incentivized to scale it doesn't have the authority or resources to do so. This bottleneck is unique to AEC, and understanding it is critical for founders trying to scale software and AEC leaders trying to implement innovation.

The real question becomes: if the problem is organizational, how do you get past it? The answer lies in who you're actually selling to.

Tech teams love your product. They see the value immediately. The problem is that tech teams don't control budget decisions.

Decision-makers at the board, C-suite, and CFO level think differently. They care about safety, schedule reduction, margin improvement, and labor efficiency. Not features. Not ease of use. When a vendor presents a workflow demo, decision-makers are asking themselves something entirely different: how much faster can we build, what's the margin impact, and can we serve more clients with the same headcount?

Most vendors spend months perfecting the first conversation. They talk about workflows, dashboards, and integration. Decision-makers want outcomes.

Your GTM strategy is broken until you tie product value to board-level outcomes, not user workflows. Understanding how PE thinks about valuation makes this clear.

When private equity evaluates an AEC acquisition, they ask one fundamental question: What would this company be worth if we digitally transformed it?

The acquisition price isn't based on current revenue. It's based on the gap between the current state and the transformed state. Consider the math. Current state: $100 million revenue with a traditional labor-intensive model. Transformed state: the same revenue plus 30 percent margin improvement through technology, plus the ability to scale without proportional headcount growth. That gap equals the valuation multiple PE is willing to pay.

This matters because if you're considering an exit, your valuation depends on PE's belief in a digital transformation story. If you're acquired, you're measured on whether you deliver that transformation. But Darren also sees a deeper issue: many companies have sunk investments in digital initiatives that didn't work. PE will want to understand what failed and why, and whether the next bet will succeed. That's where the diligence gets rigorous.

Baby boomer ownership is exiting. Proprietary firms, not publicly traded ones, are being acquired at accelerating rates. Consolidation is happening at the mid-tier level through geographic roll-ups, service-line carve-outs, and portfolio builds.

What's driving it: Infrastructure investment is forecast to grow to $13.9 trillion by 2035. PE sees predictable cash flows. Market leaders see geographic expansion opportunity. Timing matters.

Who's acquiring: Market leaders including AECOM, Jacobs, ARUP, and Atkins Realis have been consolidating through acquisitions. Private equity is also active in this space, building portfolios of mid-tier firms rather than pursuing the largest global players, as demonstrated by the trend of baby boomer exits creating acquisition opportunities.

If you're a mid-tier leader, the window is open. Exit timing is material. The consolidation wave isn't slowing.

Capital and market timing aren't enough, though. PE needs to solve a fundamental problem that's held AEC back for decades.

AEC attracts top engineering talent: master's degrees, PhDs, brilliant minds solving complex problems every day. But commercial thinking remains weak in the industry.

The problem is structural. AEC operates on time-and-materials contracts: hire smart people, bill hours, margin on headcount. If you use technology to reduce hours, you don't make more money. You make less. This creates a perverse incentive against optimization. Manufacturing, retail, and energy moved faster toward outcome-based business models. AEC is still catching up.

PE's job post-acquisition is to unlock this value by changing contracts, pricing models, and go-to-market. But that requires a cultural shift, and this is where many acquisitions fail. Darren frames it differently: "How do we get to that price point using brilliant minds quickly, or do we just kind of stick to the fact that the commercial model typically is time and material from a build perspective?"

This gap matters for founders and AEC leaders alike.

The myth is straightforward: PE installs their own CEO, rips out the team, and runs the company from New York.

The reality is different. PE rarely gets involved operationally. They rely on existing management to execute the transformation they funded.

PE provides capital, strategic advice across their portfolio, and board-level coaching. But management is accountable for delivering the digital transformation thesis promised during acquisition. You get autonomy. You're measured ruthlessly on results.

PE doesn't typically replace leadership unless performance falters. They might appoint a new CEO or CFO if they believe existing management can't execute the transformation, but the operating team usually stays. The acquired company's management becomes accountable for proving that the digital transformation thesis is real and achievable.

If you're acquired and you perform, you stay in control. If you don't deliver the transformation, that's where things change. Understanding this dynamic before you enter negotiations matters significantly. It's not about maintaining autonomy for its own sake. It's about recognizing that PE is placing a bet on you and your team to execute. The burden of proof shifts immediately after the acquisition closes.

The consolidation wave is real and accelerating. If you're an AEC leader, your company's valuation depends on a clear digital transformation story. Your biggest scaling bottleneck is organizational, not technical. Start tying innovation to board-level outcomes now.

The window for mid-tier exits is open. The capital is flowing. The question isn't whether PE will keep buying AEC. It's whether you understand the game they're playing.

Watch the episode with Darren Martin here 👇👇👇

Reply with your thoughts. We're building a community around construction tech go-to-market, and consolidation is reshaping the entire industry.

You can’t outsource rhythm

Speed, clarity, and tight integration

Bridging the AI gap