SAFed AcademyStrategy

1. The Case for Sector-Level Action

The Testing, Inspection and Certification (TIC) sector employs a specialist workforce across inspection, certification, welding certification, audit, technical assessment, conformity assessment, quality assurance and regulatory assurance activities relevant to SAFed member organisations. Within this wider sector, Engineer Surveyors perform a particularly safety-critical role through the statutory inspection of pressure systems, lifting equipment, power presses, transportable pressure receptacles and other high-risk assets across the national economy. More broadly, TIC professionals provide independent assurance that products, systems, processes, equipment and organisations meet defined standards, legal requirements and safety expectations. Their decisions support public safety, workplace safety, regulatory confidence and market trust. When this workforce contracts, the national safety and assurance infrastructure is placed under pressure.

This is a workforce under structural pressure. The evidence gathered by Cohort 1 indicates a sector characterised by an ageing professional demographic, limited visibility in the national careers ecosystem, and regulatory entry requirements that, while grounded in legitimate safety considerations, present material barriers to expanding the talent pipeline.

1.1 Why the Talent Pipeline Is Constrained

Note: While the RG series requirements referenced below are specific to Engineer Surveyors, the workforce challenges described apply particularly to Engineer Surveyor and inspection personnel pathways, and to other TIC roles where similar regulatory and supervisory constraints apply.

The research paper identified four interlocking constraints on TIC workforce growth, each grounded in regulatory requirements established by UKAS under the international ILAC framework:

• Minimum age requirements: UKAS RG documents set minimum ages of 18 (trainees) and 21 (independent inspection) for most TIC categories, meaning significant deviation would require justification and may place accreditation at risk.
• Qualification requirements: Reaching Category 2 (Incorporated Engineer), the standard working level for a TIC Engineer Surveyor, requires a minimum Level 4 qualification (HNC or equivalent). Candidates who do not hold a relevant engineering qualification at this level face a longer development pathway and cannot access the full range of inspection work until the threshold is reached.
• Supervision requirements: Category 6 personnel are subject to defined supervision requirements, meaning trainees operate under supervisory oversight throughout training: a resource cost that shapes how many trainees employers can support.
• Authorisation requirements: TIC bodies are required to formally authorise each inspector before independent operation. This is a substantive competence assurance process that should not be shortened without evidence, governance approval and assessment of accreditation implications.

1.2 The Visibility Problem

Independently of regulatory constraints, the research found that TIC careers are effectively invisible in the national careers ecosystem. TIC does not appear in standard engineering careers guides, is absent from most careers advisory platforms, and is unknown to the majority of careers advisers, teachers, and parents who influence young people's decisions. This is a solvable problem, and solving it does not require regulatory change.

These two challenges, regulatory barriers and low visibility, require different responses and sit in different strategic horizons. Visibility work can begin immediately, at low cost, and with no regulatory complexity. Regulatory dialogue requires a long-term, evidence-based, relationship-centred approach. This framework initiates both, but makes clear the distinction.

1.3 The Economic Stakes

1.4 The Representation Problem

The research paper established that approximately 57% of qualified women leave engineering before age 45, and that women represent only 16.9% of the engineering workforce against 52% of the overall labour market. For TIC specifically, this means the visible talent pool is smaller than it should be, and retention: not just recruitment: is a strategic issue. Initiatives under Pillar 1 (Awareness & Visibility) and Pillar 2 (Entry Pathways) should be evaluated for their differential impact on women's entry and retention, and the annual workforce survey (P5.1) should track gender representation explicitly.

1.5 The Career Changer Opportunity

While youth pathways attract most attention in workforce discussions, the research identified career changers as the most immediately viable and potentially highest-ROI talent pipeline for TIC. The relevant populations are large, technically qualified, and already motivated by the prospect of career development:

• Gas engineers: approximately 150,000 registered gas engineers in the UK, many with directly transferable pressure systems knowledge.
• Armed Forces leavers: approximately 13,500–14,000 service leavers annually, many from REME, Royal Engineers and related engineering trades, with directly applicable technical experience and safety discipline.
• NDT personnel: non-destructive testing technicians already operating within inspection environments, often familiar with TIC processes, equipment categories and regulatory expectations.
• Maintenance engineers and industrial technicians: a large and underutilised population with hands-on equipment knowledge relevant to inspection categories including pressure systems, lifting equipment and electrical systems.
• Engineering career changers: a broader population of qualified engineers from automotive, utilities and manufacturing seeking purposeful mid-career transitions.

These groups represent the most accessible near-term workforce pipeline for TIC. Unlike school-leaver routes, which face regulatory age barriers and long development timelines: career changers can enter structured training immediately, typically completing authorisation within 12–18 months. They should be positioned by SAFed Academy as short-to-medium-term workforce solutions while longer-term youth pipeline work develops in parallel.

For career changers aged 21 or over with relevant engineering backgrounds, the regulatory pathway is relatively clear: the 12–18 month structured training period and authorisation process are significant, but not prohibitive for adults who have already chosen TIC as a career. The barrier is awareness, not regulation. Pillar 3 initiatives (P3.1, P3.2, P3.3, P3.4) address this directly.

2. The Implementation Plan

2.1 Purpose of This Document

This document provides a phased implementation plan for addressing the TIC sector's workforce challenge over time. It has been designed to be inherited, updated and built upon by successive N30N cohorts: each arriving with different skills, contexts and opportunities, but all needing a starting point. This plan is that starting point.

The plan does not prescribe what future cohorts must do. It identifies what initiatives exist, provides an initial assessment of their feasibility, and offers a structured way of thinking about which to pursue first, which to build toward, and which require further investigation before any commitment is made.

2.2 Scope and Governance

This plan commits to Horizon 1 actions as immediate priorities for SAFed and the incoming N30N cohort. Horizon 2 initiatives will be developed through feasibility studies and stakeholder engagement, with delivery subject to governance approval at each stage. Horizon 3 initiatives are strategic ambitions that depend on Horizon 1 and Horizon 2 foundations being substantially in place.

All expenditure beyond existing operational budgets requires SAFed CEO and/or SAFed Board approval.

2.3 The Five Strategic Pillars

Five permanent strategic pillars define the scope of SAFed Academy activity. These pillars are structural: they will not change between cohorts, even as the specific initiatives within them evolve. They provide the organisational logic for the initiative register and ensure that all Academy activity can be understood within a coherent long-term purpose.

2.4 The Three Strategic Horizons

Initiatives within this framework are mapped across three strategic horizons based on their complexity, dependencies and time to first impact:

• Horizon 1 (H1): 0 to 2 years: Quick-win initiatives that can be initiated with minimal cost and limited or low-complexity regulatory and partnership dependencies. These are the starting point for any future cohort.
• Horizon 2 (H2): 2 to 5 years: Initiatives of moderate complexity requiring active partnership development, feasibility work and potentially modest investment. These should be in active development once H1 foundations are established.
• Horizon 3 (H3): 5 to 10+ years: Transformational initiatives that require long-term commitment, significant resource and the completion of prerequisite work in earlier horizons.

3. Initiative Register: All 21 Initiatives by Pillar

The following register defines 21 initiatives across the five strategic pillars. Each initiative has been assessed for purpose, feasibility, cost, complexity, regulatory impact and dependencies, and is positioned within a phased delivery timeline.

Pillar 1: Awareness & Visibility

Pillar 2: Entry Pathways & Early Career

Pillar 3: Career Changer & Military Transition

Pillar 4: Competence & Professional Development

Pillar 5: Research, Data & Workforce Intelligence

4. Strategic Horizons: Initiatives Mapped by Timeframe

The 21 initiatives in this register have been mapped across three strategic horizons. The horizons are not rigid timescales: they reflect the relative complexity, dependency and time-to-benefit of each initiative. Future cohorts should treat H1 initiatives as the natural starting point and build toward H2 and H3 as foundations develop.

These seven initiatives will be initiated as immediate priorities, with minimal cost and limited or low-complexity regulatory and partnership dependencies. They build the foundations: visibility, professional relationships, and evidential infrastructure: that all higher-horizon initiatives depend upon. Each incoming cohort should expect to progress at least 2–3 of these.

These eleven initiatives will be developed through feasibility studies, active partnership engagement and modest investment as Horizon 1 foundations are established. Each warrants a dedicated feasibility study as the primary output of the cohort that takes it on.

These three initiatives define what the sector could achieve over a generation. They require H1 and H2 foundations to be substantially in place before meaningful progress is possible. Current cohorts should note their existence, contribute to the evidential base, and not attempt to commit to delivery.

5. Delivery Through Successive N30N Cohorts

5.1 The Cohort Model

SAFed Academy will not be built by a single group of people in a single year. It will be built incrementally, through the cumulative contributions of successive N30N cohorts: each inheriting the work of their predecessors, possibly selecting 2–4 initiatives to advance in depth, and leaving a better-documented foundation than they found.

This model has two critical requirements: that each cohort takes the handover seriously, and that SAFed provides the continuity that prevents knowledge being lost between cohort cycles. Without both, the cumulative model fails.

5.2 What Each Cohort Contributes

5.3 The Handover Protocol

At the conclusion of each N30N programme, the outgoing cohort will produce a handover document comprising:

• An updated assessment of each initiative in this register (status: not started / in development / active / complete)
• A summary of the cohort's specific contributions: what was done, what was learned, what is in progress
• Updated stakeholder contacts and relationship notes
• Honest recommendations for the incoming cohort's priorities
• Any updated feasibility assessments based on experience or new information

This document should be held by SAFed and provided to each incoming cohort at the start of their programme. It is the instrument of institutional continuity.

5.4 Expert Working Groups and Technical Committee Delivery

SAFed Academy operates through two parallel delivery mechanisms. The N30N Cohort Programme is the primary vehicle for developing and advancing initiatives through successive cohorts of practitioners. The Expert Working Group mechanism addresses matters that require deep specialist expertise, direct regulatory engagement, or practitioner authority that cohort-based development cannot provide. Both mechanisms sit under SAFed Academy governance; neither is subordinate to the other.

Initiatives should always be aligned to the most appropriate delivery route. The cohort model and the Technical Committee or Expert Working Group route are complementary, not competing: the choice follows from the nature of the initiative, not from convention.

Where other initiatives are identified as better suited to Technical Committee delivery than to cohort development, the same principle applies: establish a clear working group mandate, define membership by expertise, set a concrete output, and report through SAFed governance. TC 9 and TC 11 are identified as particularly relevant for technically-focused initiatives, but appetite from other Technical Committees should be confirmed through direct engagement rather than assumed.

6. Concepts Identified for Future Exploration

Three strategic concepts have been identified during Cohort 1's research that warrant dedicated exploration by future cohorts, but which are not yet sufficiently developed to be treated as fully-formed initiatives. They are presented here to ensure they are not lost between cohort cycles.

6.1 Surveyor Time

6.2 The SAFed Academy Development Portfolio

6.3 Extended Reality (XR) in TIC Training and Careers Engagement

7. Communicating the TIC Story: A Framework for Future Cohorts

This section provides narrative frameworks developed through Cohort 1's research. These are the stories that the evidence supports: tested against what motivates young people, career changers, parents, teachers and the media. Future cohorts are encouraged to use, adapt and build on these frameworks in their outreach activity.

7.1 For Young People: "CSI Engineering"

TIC professionals are the people who ensure that the world does not fail. They are the engineers who inspect the bridge before the lorry crosses, who assess the pressure vessel before it goes into a chemical plant, who inspect the lift before it carries its first passenger, who evaluate the offshore wind turbine before it generates its first megawatt. When they get it right, and they almost always do, nothing happens. That is the point. They are engineers who prevent disasters, not engineers who respond to them.

This is not only regulatory compliance work. It is applied engineering at the intersection of materials science, failure analysis, and increasingly, artificial intelligence. The equipment they inspect now increasingly includes AI-assisted monitoring systems, autonomous diagnostics, and remote sensing technology. An engineer who can evaluate both the pressure vessel and the AI layer governing its monitoring is not a box-ticker. They are operating in a technically demanding and increasingly sophisticated discipline.

The framing that works with young people: particularly those drawn to purpose-driven careers and to technology: is CSI Engineering: sophisticated diagnosis, real consequences, detective-level problem solving. That is TIC. Tell that story.

7.2 For Career Changers: "Your Skills Already Work Here"

Gas engineers, REME veterans, and automotive technicians are not being asked to start over. They are being asked to apply what they already know in a sector that values it enormously. A gas engineer who has spent ten years working safely with pressure systems may already have relevant practical pressure-systems experience that directly supports TIC work. A REME corporal who has maintained complex military engineering systems under pressure already has the discipline, technical maturity, and safety awareness that TIC employers spend years developing.

The career changer story is one of lateral movement, not starting from scratch. The 12-to-18-month structured training builds on that foundation, not replaces it. The foundation they already have. That needs to be said clearly, because most potential career changers do not know that their background is exactly what TIC needs.

7.3 For Career Changers: The International Dimension

One of the most powerful and least-communicated aspects of TIC careers is that experience gained within a UKAS-accredited inspection environment can support international career mobility, particularly where employers, regulators or accreditation bodies recognise comparable competence and accreditation frameworks. This is a valuable career message for Armed Forces leavers and mid-career professionals who value the portability of their skills. Future cohorts should explore this carefully in career changer outreach: choosing TIC may expand career options rather than narrow them.

7.4 For Parents and Teachers: "Stable, Purposeful, Well-Paid"

Parents are the most influential people in a young person's career decision. They respond to different signals than the young people themselves. For parents, the TIC story is one of employment security, professional status, and purpose: the work keeps people safe. These are the three signals that parents respond to most strongly.

Teachers respond to the same signals, plus one more: evidence that a career pathway exists and is accessible. The T Level Simulated Placement, the clear route from engineering technician to Engineer Surveyor, and the SOE professional chartership route give teachers the information they need to advise with confidence rather than guesswork.

7.5 The Technology Story: AI and Modern TIC

The research paper identified an underused communications asset: TIC is increasingly a technology-forward discipline. Modern TIC involves technologies such as drone inspection systems, thermal imaging, robotic crawlers, acoustic emission sensors, and AI-assisted analysis tools. The equipment they inspect increasingly includes AI-assisted monitoring and diagnostic systems. A TIC professional who can evaluate both the pressure vessel and the AI layer governing its condition monitoring brings a distinctive and valuable combination of technical skills.

This story works particularly well with two groups. For young people: it repositions TIC from "clipboard engineering" to "CSI meets AI": purposeful, technological, and increasingly sophisticated. For career changers from tech and engineering backgrounds: it signals that TIC is not a retreat from technical complexity but an advance into a field where AI literacy will command increasing premium. Future cohorts developing campaigns under P1.1, P1.3 or P1.4 should build this technology dimension into the messaging from the outset.

7.6 The Long-Term Vision

8. Governance and Accountability Framework

This section defines the governance model for SAFed Academy.

8.1 Continuity and Cohort Handover

The governance of SAFed Academy is built into the cohort cycle itself. Each N30N cohort inherits the framework from the previous cohort via the formal handover document, selects its priorities from the initiative register, and reports progress through the handover process.

Between cohort cycles, the Project Sponsor and SAFed CEO provide strategic oversight: ensuring each incoming cohort receives the handover document, maintaining Academy momentum, and reporting progress to the SAFed Board. The Project Sponsor is responsible for ensuring the Academy framework remains live and that each cohort transition is properly supported.

8.2 Annual End of Cohort Reporting

An end of cohort report: brief, honest and specific: could serve as the Academy's primary accountability mechanism. Suggested contents:

• Progress against the potential KPIs below
• A summary of each active cohort's contributions against the initiative register
• Qualitative evidence: partnerships formed, engagements conducted, outputs produced
• An honest assessment of what did not work and why
• Updated priorities for the incoming cohort

An honest failure analysis is more useful than a polished success narrative. The audience for this report is SAFed's CEO and future cohorts: not a marketing audience.

8.3 Potential KPIs for Consideration

The following indicators are offered as a starting point for the Project Sponsor to select and adapt. They should be reviewed annually as the initiative portfolio evolves.

As the initiative portfolio matures beyond Horizon 1, outcome metrics: including the number of career changers entering TIC employment through Academy-supported pathways and measurable shifts in TIC career awareness among target audiences: will be introduced alongside these activity indicators. The SAFed CEO and/or Project Sponsor should review and update the KPI set annually.

Key Partners for SAFed Academy

The following organisations have been identified as priority partners for SAFed Academy across the initiative register. Relationship development with these organisations is itself a valuable output for future cohorts.

Regulatory Reference: UKAS and ILAC Constraints

This summary is provided for future cohorts who may not have read the companion research paper in full. Understanding the regulatory constraints is essential context for any Academy activity: it shapes what is possible, what requires UKAS engagement, and what can be pursued without regulatory complexity.