How to Close the Workforce Knowledge Transfer Gap in the Civil Infrastructure Industry

Defining Challenges Agencies Face in 2026

1. Accelerating Workforce Shortages and Institutional Knowledge Loss

The baby boomer retirement wave is accelerating the decline of experienced civil infrastructure professionals with decades of institutional knowledge. At the same time, fewer graduates are entering the field, and there is a mid-level talent shortage amplified by Great Recession-era hiring freezes and competition from adjacent industries.

The narrowing talent pool is accelerating transitions into leadership roles, often bypassing the more linear career progression that historically allowed professionals to build experience over time through hands-on learning, long-term mentorship, and training. Many new leaders are taking on responsibility earlier, all while managing increasingly complex projects and systems.

“The most successful new leaders will be those who, in humility, recognize their own shortcomings while surrounding themselves with an abundance of strategic advisors,” says Gregg Hostetler.

“New successful leaders will also need a strong appetite for continuous learning and collaboration,” observed Mark Reno, who leads large, complex transportation projects. “We’re asking people to navigate more complexity with less runway. As retirements accelerate, many professionals are stepping into leadership roles without the depth of on-the-job experience that previous generations developed over time. That reality makes it essential to seek out advisors, ask better questions, and intentionally build the context that might otherwise come through years of repetition.

“The engineering fundamentals we learn in school provide the base,” Mark Reno added. “But successful project delivery requires integrating technical judgment with environmental constraints, risk management, stakeholder expectations, and construction sequencing. Those skills are shaped through mentorship and experience. With the bench of seasoned leaders shrinking, being proactive about learning is what allows knowledge and decision context to carry forward.”

The loss of institutional knowledge extends beyond technical execution to familiarity with permitting pathways, agency processes, and lessons learned from prior projects. When that experience leaves an organization, it cannot be replaced immediately through hiring alone.

2. Increasing Infrastructure Complexity and Technology Advancement

As this workforce shift unfolds, agencies are managing more complex assets and programs, often without systems fully aligned to capture and apply institutional knowledge. Technology and regulatory frameworks continue to advance rapidly, increasing both opportunity and risk when knowledge is not transferred with sufficient context. Stretched budgets and delivery demands can limit investment in training, even as expectations for technical proficiency rise. Mentorship opportunities are limited by workload, and teams are increasingly relying on self-directed learning. In many parts of the industry, the adoption of new tools is further slowed by policy constraints and a risk-averse culture, widening the gap between what is possible and what is practiced.

“The last decade has seen huge advancements in technology, and that’s been especially evident in water resources,” noted Mark Forest, a water resources leader with decades of experience in floodplain management and hydraulic modeling. “Because of how rapidly technology is advancing, professionals need formal training to apply tools correctly and avoid risks to firms, infrastructure owners, and the public. When people resort to self-directed online learning, important context and best practices can be missed. Without deliberate investment and mentorship, organizations take on unnecessary schedule, budget, reputational, and liability risks when these tools are not properly applied to complex projects.”

Together, workforce transition and technology acceleration are compressing the margin for error. The challenge ahead is not only adopting new tools but pairing them with the experience and training needed to sustain sound decision making.

3. Disconnected Data and Asset Management Systems

With workforce transitions accelerating, agencies are increasingly focused on reducing reliance on individuals by embedding information into knowledge management systems (KMS), linking asset management systems, data structures, operational workflows, and other resources to act as organizational memory. Data generated across planning, design, construction, operations, and maintenance often lives in disconnected systems, making it difficult to surface context, apply past lessons, or anticipate risk.

“Most organizations already have the data they need,” said Robb Kirkman, who leads digital solutions focused on integrating operational systems. “The challenge is that it’s spread across enterprise asset management (EAM), computerized maintenance management system (CMMS), geographic information system (GIS), and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) platforms that don’t always talk to each other. When information stays siloed or is structured only for reporting, organizations may rely on individual knowledge to bridge the gap, which increases risk as the workforce turns over.”

In many cases, systems were implemented to solve narrow problems or immediate needs. As a result, critical context such as why an asset was designed a certain way or how it has performed over time can be difficult to surface when it matters most. How systems are designed and maintained to preserve context and support continuity will be foundational not only for managing assets but for shaping how projects are delivered and how risk is addressed.

Future-focused Solutions Agencies Can Implement Now

1. Leverage Trusted Advisors

As workforce shortages narrow the bench of experienced professionals, technology accelerates, and institutional knowledge becomes harder to retain, agencies are rethinking how expertise is applied across the project lifecycle. The pressures outlined above are converging at the same moment decisions are becoming more complex and more consequential.

Importantly, the earliest phases of a project offer a distinct advantage. Before scope is fixed and solutions are defined, teams have the greatest flexibility to align around objectives, surface risks, test assumptions, and establish shared context that will shape outcomes for years to come. Engaging trusted advisors at this stage allows agencies to build a broad, lifecycle-level understanding before technical details narrow the focus. These relationships can also help bridge knowledge gaps by extending experience and institutional understanding across teams.

“Trusted advisors go beyond delivering a scope,” observed Mark Reno. “They help agencies ask the right questions earlier, understand tradeoffs across the full project lifecycle, and carry decision context forward as projects move from planning through delivery. In my experience, this also creates opportunities for informal training and mentorship, as less-experienced staff gain exposure to how decisions are made.”

2. Select Delivery Models Strategically

Delivery models have been evolving to better support this kind of early engagement and knowledge transfer, supporting risk identification and mitigation for both the owner and contractor. In traditional approaches, funding requirements, procurement rules, and staffing capacity can limit who is involved during planning and early design. Collaborative (often called “alternative”) delivery models, like progressive design-build (PDB), construction manager-at-risk (CMAR), and construction manager/general contractor (CM/GC), expand participation earlier in the process.

“Collaborative delivery is about bringing the right expertise to the table at the right time,” said Gregg Hostetler, who advises clients and colleagues on complex project and program delivery. “Collaborative delivery methods allow uncertainty to be addressed while options are still open. When risk management, constructability, operations, and maintenance perspectives are part of early conversations, teams can strategically plan every aspect of the project or program from ‘cradle to grave,’ and then simply execute on a solid plan that already accounts for risk contingencies.”

By building and leading high-performing teams of subject matter experts that span planning, design, construction, and operations, collaborative delivery approaches allow experience and institutional context to move across the project lifecycle, reducing downstream rework and supporting clearer, more defensible decisions. Looking ahead, the way agencies capitalize on collaborative delivery models and advisory relationships will play a growing role in how knowledge is transferred and risk is managed over the life of a project or program.

The effect of strong information management strategies, aligned advisory relationships, and collaborative delivery structures also carries measurable financial benefits. When the right expertise is engaged early and decision context is preserved, teams can significantly reduce delivery times, in some cases by as much as half.  More importantly, these models create a foundation for lasting organizational change. Lessons learned and process improvements are not confined to a single project but are integrated into everyday practice, strengthening overall delivery and building institutional capacity over time.

3. Invest in Tools and Systems

Closing the knowledge transfer gap requires intentional investment. In many organizations, day-to-day demands push teams into reactive modes of working, where immediate delivery takes precedence over capturing context or reflecting on decisions. Proactive approaches, by contrast, require time and investment up front—documenting rationale, mentoring newer staff, and using systems consistently. But they create efficiencies over time by reducing rework and reliance on individual people.

“Most agencies understand the value of knowledge transfer, but finding time to act on it is the barrier,” said Gregg Hostetler. “Teams are focused on keeping projects moving, managing limited staff, and meeting immediate obligations. Changing how knowledge is captured and shared requires stepping out of that reactive cycle, which is difficult without leadership support and the right structures in place. Choosing to invest this time despite near-term pressure represents a challenging cultural shift.”

That reality helps explain why tools and systems alone are not enough. Even well-designed platforms depend on consistent use, shared expectations, and clarity around how information supports decision making. Without those cultural reinforcements, systems risk becoming repositories rather than active sources of insight.

“You can’t rely on informal handoffs alone,” said Robb Kirkman. “If continuity matters, organizations have to invest not just in systems, but in training people how to use them and why they matter. That often happens through mentorship—pairing experience with newer staff so knowledge is transferred alongside the tools, not after the fact. Without that, even good systems won’t change how decisions get made.”

Together, these perspectives point to a cultural shift already underway. Organizations that align culture with investment, reinforcing knowledge sharing through both people and systems, are better positioned to manage risk and adapt as conditions change.

Next Steps: Strengthening Institutional Capacity and Delivery Performance

Across regions and disciplines, Consor experts consistently hear from public agencies that the work is getting more complicated and the knowledge-transfer timeline is shrinking. Even as workforce transitions accelerate and systems lag, the volume and urgency of infrastructure work continue to grow. That tension is prompting agencies to find ways to do more with less, while still delivering outcomes their communities rely on.

Agencies that are intentional about how knowledge moves across people, projects, and systems are better positioned to manage risk and make sound decisions under pressure. Strengthening knowledge transfer directly supports building and maintaining resilient infrastructure that communities depend on.

Agencies interested in continuing this conversation are encouraged to connect directly with the thought leaders who shaped this roundtable: Mark Reno, VP/Technical Practice Director, West Region; Mark Forest, VP/Technical Practice Manager, Water Resource Management; Robb Kirkman, Technical Principal, Water Digital Solutions; and Gregg Hostetler, EVP/Strategic Project Delivery. These leaders work closely with public agencies as trusted advisors, supporting planning, large-scale programs, and complex delivery environments where knowledge transfer is critical. Their experience spans early project definition, program and project management, collaborative delivery, and systems that carry decision context forward as teams and demands evolve.