The RICS publishes its first global professional standard for responsible AI in surveying.

I sat down with two leading experts to explore what it means for the profession.

I was engaged in an enlightening discussion with Chris DeGruben, senior director and head of AI at Artifacts, and Matthew Lavy KC a barrister at Four Pump Court specialising in technology law, on the implications of the RICS's groundbreaking new guidance. 

Hosted by Paul Hemming of the Own the Build podcast, the conversation centred on the world's first global professional standard for the responsible use of AI in surveying, which comes into effect in March 2026.

Chris brings a comparative perspective from deploying AI across twelve different industries at Artifacts, a global property technology firm with 2,000 people. Matthew, co-editor of The Law of Artificial Intelligence, offers deep expertise in how different regulatory frameworks shape innovation. 

Together, we explored what this moment means for surveyors, valuers, quantity surveyors, and the broader property sector.

The Inflection Point

The property profession stands at a profound inflection point. Over the past two to three months, something remarkable has shifted in the collective consciousness of professionals across the sector. 

What was once viewed as a distant threat or an optional curiosity has become an urgent necessity. 

We discussed how demand for AI education has skyrocketed, with professionals urgently seeking guidance on how to begin their AI journey responsibly.

The RICS has responded to this moment decisively. The new standard covers a wide scope: valuation, cost management, construction, and land and infrastructure. 

This is not a minor procedural update. It represents a fundamental commitment to helping the profession navigate what many describe as the most transformative technological revolution since the internet itself.

Why Now? The Drivers Behind the Standard

We observed that the drivers for this guidance were multifaceted. Members of the profession were asking for it. Valuers in particular, facing pressure on fees and rising client expectations, wanted clarity on how to use AI responsibly without jeopardising their professional indemnity insurance. 

They were asking questions that had no clear answers: if I use AI, will I lose my licence? Will my PI cover this? How do I do this responsibly?

Beyond member demand, there were regulatory pressures and market realities. The RICS itself recognised that unless it embraced AI, it risked becoming irrelevant. The professional body also faced a deeper identity question: how do we remain relevant in a modern world? How do we attract younger surveyors to the profession? 

These questions forced a reckoning, and the result is a standard designed not to restrict, but to guide.

The Great Enabler Versus the Heavy Hand

One of the most fascinating debates that emerged from our discussion was around the very nature of this new standard. 

Is it another layer of restrictive bureaucracy, or is it a framework designed to empower professionals? The answer matters enormously, because it will shape how the profession adopts AI.

In response to Paul's probing questions on this distinction, Matthew offered a thought-provoking perspective. Standards like this are not meant to be hoops to jump through but are, in fact powerful enablers. They provide a framework of confidence, a structured way for surveyors to navigate the complexities of AI without fear. 

He contrasted this with the EU's heavyweight AI Act, a complex piece of regulation that can stifle innovation, particularly for smaller firms. The RICS guidance, he suggested, is intentionally a "lighter touch" document.

Light Touch, Not Heavy Burden

The distinction matters. The mandatory clauses in the RICS standard are few. They are, in essence, things that any competent professional should be doing anyway to protect themselves and their clients. 

The language used throughout is deliberately flexible, employing words like "appropriate" and "reasonable," recognising that what is appropriate for a sole practitioner may differ from what is appropriate for a large firm.

When I asked how surveyors should approach reading the guidance, Matthew emphasised that if you read it with an open mind, asking "how does this help me embark on the AI journey and protect me?" rather than "how is this restricting me?", the entire tone shifts. 

The standard becomes a tool, not a trap. This distinction is not semantic; it is fundamental to how the profession will respond.

The Three Pillars of Responsible AI

We discussed how the guidance rests on three core pillars, each designed to protect both professionals and their clients:

1. Risk Register and Governance

The first pillar is maintaining a risk register. This sounds bureaucratic, but it is actually quite practical. A risk register is simply a document or spreadsheet where you identify the risks you see in using AI for specific tasks. 

What are the black box elements? Where might the algorithm fail? How might clients use the output? What are the data security and privacy implications?

When we were asked about the practical burden this places on firms, Chris emphasised that for most firms, this exercise takes a couple of hours and yields enormous value. 

It forces you to think through where AI makes sense and where it does not. It becomes the foundation for all your other decisions about AI deployment.

Far from being a burden, it is a protective framework that gives you confidence to move forward.

2. Explainability and Professional Judgment

The second pillar is perhaps the most powerful: explainability. A chartered surveyor must be able to explain the output of any AI tool they use. 

You cannot simply point to the machine and say, "The AI valued it." You must understand the process, validate the results, and take ultimate responsibility.

This principle has profound implications. It means that certain uses of AI are fundamentally incompatible with professional practice. An AI should never provide the final opinion of value; that remains the domain of the human expert, whose professional indemnity relies on their ability to defend their judgment. 

However, AI can do tremendous work in the background: analysing datasets, finding comparable properties, generating reports, supporting email writing, and facilitating research.

In response to questions about the practical implications, Chris offered an illuminating analogy: you would never let a junior or an intern send a report out without senior oversight, and the same principle applies to AI. 

The tool is powerful, but the professional remains accountable.

3. Transparency and Client Communication

The third pillar is transparency. Your clients must know where you are using AI. 

If you have an agreement with your client saying that for their portfolio of properties below a certain value threshold, you will use an automated valuation model, that is perfectly acceptable, provided it is disclosed, documented, and agreed in advance.

What the guidance explicitly warns against is using AI without telling your clients. Many surveyors have been doing this, thinking it is merely a behind-the-scenes efficiency tool. 

But if the AI generates something that does not represent your professional opinion, and you have not disclosed its use, you may find yourself in serious trouble.

The Human in the Machine

Whilst we explored the cutting edge of technology, the conversation consistently returned to a very human core. AI is not a replacement for professional judgement; it is a tool to augment it. 

The real promise of AI is that it will free up professionals from mundane, repetitive tasks, allowing them to focus on the high value, strategic work that truly benefits their clients.

Consider the practical reality: AI is exceptionally good at verifiable tasks. It can crunch through spreadsheets, analyse data, and identify patterns. But it struggles with the non-verifiable, the contextual, the human.

In property, so much of value depends on things that cannot be measured: the quality of a sea view, the character of a neighbourhood, the intangible appeal of a location. 

An AI cannot know these things. A human expert can.

This is not a limitation to be lamented; it is a feature to be celebrated. It means that the future of the profession is not one of obsolescence but of transformation. 

Surveyors will not disappear; they will evolve. They will spend less time on data entry and report generation and more time on negotiation, complex problem solving, and building relationships. 

That is where the real value lies.

A Profession at a Crossroads

We discussed how the conversation touched upon the near future of humanoid robotics, the mind-bending potential of quantum computing, and the emergence of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). 

We are moving from an era of experimentation to one of core integration, where not using AI will become a greater risk than using it.

Universities are already embedding AI into their curricula, recognising that graduates who are not AI literate will be at a significant disadvantage. Employers are now saying they will not hire juniors or seniors who are not confident in using AI critically and responsibly.

This is just the first step. The RICS guidance is phase one of an ongoing process, a foundation upon which the profession will build as the technology evolves. 

The guidance itself will need to adapt as new capabilities emerge and new risks become apparent.

What Comes Next

The full podcast episode delves much deeper into these fascinating topics. Matthew explores the geopolitical implications of different regulatory approaches, comparing the EU's measured stance with the American approach to AI innovation. Chris discusses the very real threat of bias in AI algorithms and how software vendors should navigate the new landscape. 

We also share specific, practical advice on how surveyors can start their AI journey today, from simple experiments with free tools to documenting their thinking process for client work.

Perhaps most intriguingly, we explored what the future of valuation might look like, how the profession might evolve over the next few years, and what it means for the next generation of surveyors entering the field. 

There are also thoughtful reflections on the tension between innovation and caution and how the profession can move forward responsibly without being paralysed by fear.

To understand the nuances of this technological revolution and what it truly means for the future of the property profession, listen to the complete conversation on the Project Flux podcast.

All content reflects our personal views and is not intended as professional advice or to represent any organisation.