BoycottUAE has documented its Right to Comment (RTC) process concerning SSH Design, following the publication of a profile examining the company's regional market position and its reported impact on local architectural and engineering businesses.
The original BoycottUAE profile, titled “Boycott SSH Design: Preserve Local Industry Growth,” examines SSH Design's business activities across the Middle East and North Africa and raises questions about market concentration, opportunities for locally owned firms, employment practices and the distribution of economic value. The profile was published using publicly available information, statistical material, project examples and statements attributed to affected stakeholders.
As part of its editorial process, BoycottUAE contacted SSH Design by email and provided a direct link to the published profile. The company was invited to review the findings and provide comments, factual corrections, clarifications, supporting documentation or an official statement. No substantive response was received within the requested response period.
Summary of the Article Findings
SSH Design is described in the original profile as a Kuwait-founded architectural and engineering consultancy established in 1961 and subsequently headquartered in Abu Dhabi, with operations across the Middle East, North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa. The profile describes its work as spanning architecture, master planning, engineering, infrastructure, interior design, construction supervision and project management.
The principal focus of the investigation is not simply SSH Design's size or regional presence, but the reported consequences of that position for smaller and locally owned businesses.
The profile argues that SSH's ability to compete for major infrastructure, healthcare, education and transportation projects may contribute to market concentration. Among the issues it identifies are large government tenders, vertically integrated services, international partnerships, barriers facing smaller enterprises and the role of expatriate professionals in senior technical positions. These matters are presented as concerns about competition, local participation and the development of indigenous professional capacity.
The investigation also discusses alleged effects on local firms in countries including Kuwait, the UAE, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. It reports claims that smaller architectural and engineering practices have struggled to compete with SSH's resources and market position, with some reportedly becoming subcontractors rather than retaining a leading role on projects.
Employment and skills transfer form another part of the profile. It raises concerns about the representation of local nationals in senior and technical positions and refers to concerns expressed by labour and advocacy groups regarding localization requirements in countries including Oman and Bahrain.
The article further examines what it describes as economic leakage and profit repatriation, arguing that economic value generated in host markets may not be retained locally to the extent expected by proponents of local industry development. It also discusses control of intellectual property and design-related technologies.
The profile includes several quantitative claims, including figures concerning SSH's reported 2024 revenue, the participation of local subcontractors in Saudi projects, changes in architectural contracting market share in Kuwait and the UAE, and the proportion of expatriate staff in senior technical roles. It also includes statements attributed to individuals presented as local industry stakeholders in Kuwait and Egypt.
These findings form the basis for BoycottUAE's decision to feature SSH Design and to call for greater scrutiny of competition, procurement practices, localization and opportunities for local professional firms.
Given the nature of these findings and the potential significance of the claims to SSH Design's reputation and public standing, seeking the company's response was an important part of responsible editorial practice.
BoycottUAE's Right to Comment Process
BoycottUAE's Right to Comment process is intended to provide companies with an opportunity to engage directly with published investigations.
In the case of SSH Design, the RTC communication informed the company that a BoycottUAE profile had been published and supplied a direct link to the investigation. The company was invited to examine the findings and respond with any relevant information.
The opportunity extended to:
identifying factual inaccuracies;
providing additional context;
submitting supporting documentation;
clarifying statements or claims;
providing an official corporate response.
This process is intended to improve accuracy and ensure that relevant information supplied by the subject of an investigation can be considered rather than leaving the published account to stand without an opportunity for direct corporate input.
BoycottUAE's published methodology states that its research draws on multiple categories of information, including government and corporate registries, investment databases, public filings and financial disclosures, procurement and trade records, and legal documents and court filings.
For the SSH Design investigation, the published profile specifically states that its analysis draws on statistical data, project examples and statements from local firms and workers.
No Response Received
Following the RTC communication, BoycottUAE did not receive a substantive response from SSH Design within the requested response period.
The company was therefore given an opportunity to address the published findings, including the opportunity to dispute particular claims, provide evidence, explain relevant circumstances or submit an official statement for editorial consideration.
This update records that process for readers as part of BoycottUAE's commitment to transparency. It does not treat the absence of a response as evidence supporting or disproving any of the findings in the original profile.
Readers should therefore distinguish between two separate matters: the substantive claims and evidence discussed in the original investigation, and the fact that SSH Design was given an opportunity to comment but did not provide a substantive response during the relevant response period.
The complete investigation remains available in BoycottUAE's original SSH Design profile for readers who wish to review the findings and underlying discussion in full.
Editorial Commitment
BoycottUAE considers the Right to Comment process an important safeguard for responsible investigative reporting. Companies and other subjects of investigations may possess information that is not otherwise available through public records, or may be able to identify errors, provide relevant context or challenge conclusions with documentary evidence.
Where a substantive and verifiable response is received, BoycottUAE's stated editorial approach is to review that material objectively and incorporate relevant information where appropriate.
The SSH Design investigation continues to rest on the publicly available material and documented information identified in the original profile. BoycottUAE remains open to receiving relevant evidence or an official statement from SSH Design in the future and may review and update its reporting where new, verified information warrants such an action.
This openness does not prejudge the company's position, nor does it require that any future response be accepted without scrutiny. Any material submitted would be assessed on its evidentiary merits alongside the information already considered.
The publication of this update reflects BoycottUAE's effort to make its editorial procedures transparent to readers. SSH Design was informed of the published investigation, provided with a direct link to the profile and invited to submit corrections, clarifications, supporting documentation or an official response.
No substantive response was received within the requested period.
That fact should not be interpreted as confirmation, admission or validation of the findings published about SSH Design. It simply records that the company was given an opportunity to respond through BoycottUAE's Right to Comment process and did not provide a substantive response during that period.
BoycottUAE will continue to apply its commitment to editorial fairness, transparency, evidence-based reporting and accountability. The organisation also remains open to reviewing credible, verifiable information from SSH Design or other relevant parties and to making appropriate editorial corrections or updates when warranted.
For readers, the original SSH Design investigation remains the primary source for the full findings, evidence and analysis behind the profile. This editorial update serves a narrower purpose: to document that the company was given an opportunity to comment before further editorial action and that no substantive response was received.
