A construction firm doesn’t usually talk about delivery the way CB Construction Management does. Not as a phase, not as a final handover, but as a discipline—something practiced, refined, and carried across every decision. On site, in procurement meetings, through contract negotiations and client reviews. It’s an approach that feels increasingly rare in a sector often defined by fragmentation and shifting responsibility.
When Oliver Burleigh co-founded CB Construction Management Ltd, it wasn’t to chase volume. It was to prove that residential delivery could be better—more consistent, more transparent, more joined-up. The firm’s rise coincides with a wider reckoning in the UK housing sector: chronic undersupply, climbing regulatory complexity, and a rising sense that speed and scale aren’t delivering the homes people actually need.
CB isn’t pitching a silver bullet. Its offer is more grounded: principal contracting, joint venture participation, and full-spectrum delivery services that hold planning, procurement, and build execution in one hand. The structure is built for control, not convenience. It works because it aligns financial, technical, and risk decisions before momentum makes change difficult.
When the company takes on a project, whether as lead contractor or JV partner, it brings a different rhythm. Site teams aren’t just builders—they’re embedded decision-makers. Commercial leads aren’t offstage—they’re tuned into buildability and delivery pressures. That cross-functional pairing means decisions land differently. They’re weighed not just by short-term budgets but by the question: will this still hold value in five years?
The influence of Burleigh himself runs deeper than his title. With a background that spans the full delivery chain, he’s not leading from abstraction. His instinct is to bring clarity into processes others might obscure: who owns what risk, what is the real status of delivery, and how well is that matching what was promised. These questions drive CB’s internal culture and its external partnerships.
Risk, in this structure, is not the enemy—it’s the constant. The firm doesn’t try to engineer it out but redistributes it intelligently. Early-stage planning is built around risk tolerance, not blind optimism. If costs climb or conditions shift, teams are already primed to respond rather than retreat.
That same maturity shapes CB’s attitude toward growth. Expansion is deliberate, capacity-led, and infrastructure-backed. There’s no rush to stack projects for appearance’s sake. Reputation, in Burleigh’s view, is built not on moments of success but on the way problems are handled when they arrive—and they always arrive.
Sustainability, too, is handled without posturing. CB treats it as a matter of integration, not aspiration. Efficiency targets, material choices, and occupant experience are mapped against practical regulation and enduring value. This isn’t about box-ticking for compliance—it’s about reducing rework, enhancing performance, and delivering homes people actually want to live in.
The result is a delivery model that answers the question so many developers and investors quietly ask but rarely voice out loud: who’s really accountable here?
CB’s answer is direct. We are. Not because it’s fashionable to say so, but because it’s embedded in the very structure of how the company works.
In a sector under pressure to do more, faster, with less margin for error, CB Construction Management Ltd isn’t offering shortcuts. It’s offering a system that holds. One shaped by realism, sharpened by complexity, and sustained by people like Oliver Burleigh who still believe that doing things the right way is the only way that lasts.