To view a PDF of the 2009 Top Performers List, click here.

Not all finish lines lead from a straight path. Some races are run on circular tracks, while others cut through jagged terrain. Those competing in boating regattas must adjust their sails and speed based on the prevailing winds and weather.

The same can be said for performances turned in by businesses, including structural engineering firms. As the end of another year approaches, structural engineering practices that have survived one of the most difficult climates and rockiest roads to success have gotten to that point by fine-tuning strategies, constantly finding ways to move forward and benefitting from, as in some sporting races, a bit of luck.

Each firm on Structural Engineer’s inaugural Top Performers list has reported steady, if not impressive, growth during the turbulent last few years. As they have won new projects, these organizations attribute their relative strength to key factors.

Diversification is one of those factors. “All of our partners were in agreement that we needed to stay diverse. We remember the early 1980s and even though the temptation was there to go into profitable sectors heavily, we made a conscious effort to diversify,” reports Chip Hurley, executive vice president for Matrix Structural Engineers in Houston, which eschewed projects like high-rise condominiums at a real cost a few years ago, a decision that in hindsight appears wise. According to Hurley, the company has instead taken on diverse developments related to public works, schools, and the Department of Defense, in addition to some international projects in the oil business.

Mixing it up has also been beneficial for Irving, Texas-based Fluor Corporation, according to Dwayne Wilson, president, industrial and infrastructure. “Serving diverse markets and regions of the world goes a long way in helping weather the economic conditions which can affect a more narrowly focused company. This of course requires a company to build resources in terms of people and work platforms to effectively serve global clients. So you have to carefully select where to diversify,” Wilson advises.

Another driver of peak performance in structural engineering activity takes place behind the scenes through ongoing internal evaluation. Wilson notes that his firm’s structural engineering group has used recent times to look inside its function, build on its strengths, and prepare its people for the eventual market rebound through professional development programs.

Likewise, Rob Turton, technical director of structures in the Phoenix-based bridges and structures group of HDR, observes that his firm has sustained its structural engineering practice by focusing on improving its team’s technical capabilities. “This means providing for the professional development of our employees, as well as looking at strategic opportunities to expand our practice,” he says, adding that work sharing is another important tool. “As some markets have slowed down, we’ve been able to ‘lend’ staff to other offices where demand is stronger. Work sharing has provided stability in our overall workforce, and has also ensured that we can meet client needs and commitments in areas where the market has not slowed or where we have been able to increase market share.”

About the list
The inaugural Structural Engineer Top Performers 2009 presents a list of firms — in order by revenue — that responded to a public invitation to participate and met financial criteria set by Structural Engineer. Financial performance data used for evaluation and presented here was submitted by a representative of each firm.

Firms included on the Top Performers list reported that they achieved at least three of the five criteria set by Structural Engineer, including the following:

• Total revenue from professional services performed in 2008 exceeded the first quartile of participating firms.
• Average percent growth during the last three fiscal years was 10 percent or more.
• Average net pre-tax, pre-bonus profit/loss percent for 2007 and 2008 was 5 percent or more.
• Revenue per employee exceeded the first quartile of participating firms.
• Description of 2009 backlog as of June 1, 2009, compared with one year ago is higher or about the same. Backlog is defined as work under contract not yet performed.

Do you wish to be contacted regarding the 2010 list? Click here to give us your contact information for the 2010 Top Performers List. We will contact you when applications are being accepted.