What Builder Hesitation About AI Is Really About

In Builder, our CEO Maor Greenberg wrote about something many people in construction feel but rarely say out loud: the hesitation around AI is not fear of technology. It is fear of losing control over work that carries real consequences for safety, cost, and reputation.

His article, “Four Reasons Builders Are Hesitant About AI,” resonates because it sounds like jobsite reality, not a product pitch. This post pulls out a few of the key themes and shares how we think about them at Spacial.

You can read the full piece on Builder for the complete context.

Four real reasons for hesitation

Maor outlines four reasons builders are slow to adopt AI:

High stakes for error. Small mistakes in drawings or schedules can derail multimillion dollar projects. If AI gets a detail wrong, it is not a minor bug. It can affect safety, budgets, and trust on site.

Perception problems. Outside of tech, many people still see AI as a gimmick that produces fake images and unreliable answers. If a system is known for “hallucinating,” builders are not going to hand it their structural design or code compliance.

Job anxiety. Designers, architects, and engineers are protective of their craft. They worry that AI will chip away at professional judgment or reduce their role to signing off on work they did not truly own.

Integration headaches. Construction workflows are complex and deeply established. Tools that do not plug into existing processes, from BIM to permitting systems, feel like extra work rather than real help.

None of these are abstract concerns. They show up in real conversations with builders, reviewers, and design teams.

What builders actually want from AI

The core point in Maor’s piece is that builders are not anti AI. They are anti uncertainty.

What they want is:

• Fewer surprises in the field

• Fewer plan check cycles and RFIs

• Clear accountability when decisions are made

• Tools that respect how the work actually gets done

Market data points in the same direction. Research cited in the article notes that AI for smart buildings and infrastructure is projected to grow from about 41 billion dollars last year to more than 350 billion dollars by 2034.

That growth is not driven by novelty. It is driven by teams who find ways to use AI to cut waste, improve safety, and move projects through approvals with less friction.

Trust, transparency, and control

In Builder, Maor argues that AI has to earn trust the same way any new foreman or engineer does: by explaining what it is doing, fitting into the workflow, and owning its part of the result.

We think about that in three practical ways:

Transparency. AI should show its work. Builders and engineers need to see which rules were applied, which checks were run, and why a specific decision was made.

Workflow fit. The system should read the same architectural sets teams are already using, connect to the same permitting requirements, and output drawings and calculations in familiar formats.

Human control. Licensed engineers stay in charge. AI can propose, flag, and automate, but people sign, stamp, and stand behind the final plans.

At Spacial, this is why we talk about being “one partner for engineering” instead of selling “AI that replaces engineering.” Our system unites structural, MEP, and energy from day one, uses AI to check against local code, and then has licensed engineers validate and stamp the set before it leaves our hands.

Why this matters beyond one project

The article also connects AI in construction to the wider housing picture. AI enabled retrofits are already showing 20 to 30 percent energy savings in some cases, and smarter planning can reduce waste and speed up delivery on new projects.

At the same time, first time homebuyer share has fallen to historic lows, with affordability keeping many people on the sidelines.

If we can shorten the path from design to permit and reduce costly rework, we can help get more homes built faster, with better performance and lower operating costs. That is not just good for builders. It is good for the families waiting on those homes.

How we are building toward that future

For us, the takeaway from Maor’s Builder article is simple: hesitation around AI is not a problem to brush aside. It is a signal.

Builders are telling the industry they need:

• Clear, traceable rules

• Coordination across disciplines

• Early risk detection

• Plans that reviewers can trust and crews can build from

Our job at Spacial is to build technology and services that respect that reality.

We pair AI with licensed engineers to deliver coordinated, code compliant, permit ready plans so architects can protect design intent and builders can move from plan to permit with confidence.

To read Maor’s full perspective, start with his article on Builder. Then see how we are putting those ideas into practice on our Technology page at spacial.io/technology.