be1268_dissertation_clarke_ricky_w13032289
TRANSCRIPT
A STUDY OF THE FACTORS AFFECTING THE QUALITY OF PRODUCTION
INFORMATION USING BIM BASED DESIGN
CLARKE
RICKY
13032289
19 SEPTEMBER 2014
MSC BUILDING DESIGN MANAGEMENT AND BIM
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHUMBRIA AT
NEWCASTLE
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENT
A Study of the Factors Affecting the Quality of
Production Information Using BIM Based Design
A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MSc Building Design Management and Building
Information Modelling
Ricky Clarke
13032289
September 2014
i
Declaration Form
I declare the following:
1. That the material contained in my dissertation/thesis is the end result of my own
work and that due acknowledgement has been given in the bibliography and
references to ALL sources, be they printed, electronic or personal, using the
Northumbria Harvard referencing system.
2. The word count of my dissertation/thesis is 20,620 words.
3. That unless my dissertation/thesis has been confirmed as confidential, I agree to an
entire electronic copy or sections of my dissertation/thesis being placed on the
eLearning portal and shared hard drive, if deemed appropriate, to allow future
students and staff the opportunity to see examples of past students’
dissertations/theses.
4. I agree to my dissertation/thesis being submitted to a plagiarism detection service
where it will be stored in a database and compared against work submitted from this
or any other programme within Northumbria University and from other UK, EU and
international institutions using the service.
In the event of the service detecting a high degree of similarity between the content
of my dissertation/thesis and the documents contained within the database, this will
be reported back to my supervisor and examiners, who may decide to undertake
further investigation that may ultimately lead to disciplinary action (according to
ARNA), should instances of plagiarism be detected.
5. I have read the Northumbria University policy statements on Ethics in Research
and Consultancy and confirm that ethical issues have been considered, evaluated and
appropriately addressed during my research and during the production of my
dissertation/thesis.
6. I agree to the module tutor and/or programme leader nominating my
dissertation/thesis on my behalf for appropriate academic/research awards, such as
the CIOB, RICS and APM annual master’s dissertation awards.
Date ................................................................................................................................
Sign ................................................................................................................................
ii
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Mr Eric Johansen, my supervisor at the University of
Northumbria, for his straightforward guidance and timely feedback in response to all
my requests.
I would also like to express my thanks to the research participants who helped me
with the data collection and were generous with their time and forthcoming with
useful insights.
Lastly, I’d like to thank my family, who have encouraged and supported me
throughout my studies, with special thanks to my mum for proof reading this for me.
iii
Contents
Declaration Form .......................................................................................................... i
Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................... ii
Contents ...................................................................................................................... iii
List of Figures ............................................................................................................ vii
List of Tables............................................................................................................. viii
Preface ......................................................................................................................... ix
List of Abbreviations.................................................................................................... x
Glossary ...................................................................................................................... xi
Structured Abstract.................................................................................................... xiii
1.0 Chapter One - Introduction ............................................................................... 1
1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Background – Industry Wide Problems ........................................................ 3
1.3 Rationale for Study ........................................................................................ 4
1.4 Research Aim and Objectives ....................................................................... 6
1.5 Research Scope .............................................................................................. 6
1.6 Research Design ............................................................................................ 7
1.7 Research Structure ......................................................................................... 7
2.0 Chapter Two - Literature review ....................................................................... 8
2.2 Part A -The problem of Production Information Quality................................... 8
.............................................................. 8 2.2.1 Design Documentation Quality
The Extent of the Problem ..................................................................... 8 2.2.2
General Causes of Poor Quality Production Information ...................... 9 2.2.3
Fragmentation ...................................................................................... 11 2.2.4
Problems with Information Management............................................. 13 2.2.5
iv
Problems with the Existing 2D Drawing-based Design Documentation2.2.6
14
Rework ................................................................................................. 16 2.2.7
2.3 Part B – Solutions ........................................................................................ 17
Introduction .......................................................................................... 17 2.3.1
Drivers for BIM - Government Intervention ........................................ 17 2.3.2
The BIM based Design Paradigm - What is BIM? .............................. 19 2.3.3
The BIM based design paradigm ......................................................... 20 2.3.4
Inherent Characteristics of the BIM Based Design Paradigm ............. 21 2.3.5
....................................................................... 23 2.3.6 General Benefits of BIM
BIM maturity Level 2........................................................................... 24 2.3.7
PAS 1192-2 .......................................................................................... 27 2.3.8
The Information delivery cycle ............................................................ 28 2.3.9
Collaborative Working within the context of PAS1192-2. .................. 29 2.3.10
BIM Model Federation ......................................................................... 30 2.3.11
Specific benefits of federated BIM models .......................................... 30 2.3.12
Improved Visualisation and 3D Design Review .................................. 31 2.3.13
Design coordination and Model Checking ........................................... 31 2.3.14
Multi-disciplinary Integration and Simultaneous working .................. 33 2.3.15
3.0 Chapter Three - Theoretical Framework ......................................................... 34
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 34
3.2 Theoretical Framework for the Study ......................................................... 35
3.3 Principal Factors Affecting the Quality of Production Information ............ 36
3.4 Strategic countermeasures under PAS1192-2 ............................................. 38
4.0 Chapter Four - Research design ...................................................................... 41
4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 41
4.2 Rationale for Research Paradigm ................................................................ 42
v
4.3 Rationale for Inductive research approach .................................................. 43
4.4 Rationale for Qualitative Research Method ................................................ 44
4.5 The Research Sample .................................................................................. 46
4.6 Data Collection Method .............................................................................. 48
4.7 Interview Schedule, Pilot Interview and Interview Process ........................ 49
4.8 Data analysis and synthesis ......................................................................... 50
4.9 Ethical Considerations ................................................................................. 51
4.10 Issues of trustworthiness ......................................................................... 52
5.0 Chapter Five - Data Analysis and Discussion ................................................. 53
5.1 Data Analysis and Discussion ..................................................................... 53
5.2 Factor 1: Virtual prototyping ....................................................................... 55
5.3 Factor 2: Visualisation and Understanding ................................................. 56
5.4 Factor 3: Upfront Investment Driving Downstream Value ......................... 57
5.5 Factor 4: Process Rigour and Transparency ................................................ 59
5.6 Factor 5: Information Cohesion, Integrity & Automation .......................... 61
5.8 Factor 6 - User capability and organisational BIM maturity ....................... 62
5.9 Factor 7 - Harnessing the Potential of Innovative BIM technologies ......... 63
5.10 Factor 8: Balancing Risk and Reward ......................................................... 64
5.11 Factor 9: Integration Barriers ....................................................................... 67
5.12 Summary of Findings................................................................................... 70
6.0 Chapter Six – Conclusions .............................................................................. 73
6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 73
6.2 Conclusions ................................................................................................. 73
6.3 Recommendations ....................................................................................... 77
6.4 Limitations of the Study .............................................................................. 79
6.5 Recommendations for Future Research ...................................................... 80
References .................................................................................................................. 81
vi
Bibliography ............................................................................................................... 87
Appendices ................................................................................................................. 89
Appendix A: The seven core components of Level 2 BIM ................................... 90
Appendix B: Fundamental principles of Maturity Level 2 BIM. .......................... 92
Appendix C: Summary of Research Design .......................................................... 94
Appendix D: Interview protocol and Semi-Structured Interview questions. ........ 95
Appendix F: Extract from Thematic Analysis of research data ............................. 97
vii
List of Figures
Figure 1 2012 UK Industry report based on Key Performance Indicators .................. 3
Figure 2: The Over the wall approach.......................................................................... 8
Figure 3: Cause and effect separated by time and location. ......................................... 8
Figure 4 Some common connotations of multiple BIM terms ................................... 19
Figure 5 Illustration of data integrity across 2D CAD and BIM design paradigms. . 21
Figure 6 Short and long term benefits of BIM. .......................................................... 24
Figure 7 BIM Maturity Levels. ................................................................................. 25
Figure 8 The central relationship between PAS1192:2 and the Government Strategy
documents .................................................................................................................. 27
Figure 9 The Information delivery cycle in PAS1192-2 ............................................ 29
Figure 10 Functions of an integrated virtual BIM model ......................................... 30
Figure 11 The ‘Mcleamey Curve. .............................................................................. 33
Figure 12 Theoretical Framework for the study. ...................................................... 35
Figure 13 Root cause Analysis. .................................................................................. 37
Figure 14 The Interrelationship of Factors affecting the quality of Production
Information ................................................................................................................. 54
viii
List of Tables
Table 1 Inherent Characteristics of BIM associated with production information .... 22
Table 2 Bew-Richards maturity levels explained ...................................................... 25
Table 3 Revised Requirements for Level 2 BIM ....................................................... 26
Table 4 Summary of Categories and concepts contained within the Theoretical
framework .................................................................................................................. 40
Table 5 Rationale and selection of Qualitative research method for the Study ......... 45
Table 6 Research Sample Information and Demographic ........................................ 47
ix
Preface
The motivation for carrying out this study into the impact of BIM based design on
the quality of Production Information stems for the author’s prior working
experience of the challenges, inefficiencies and responsibilities faced when
attempting to deliver high quality contract documentation documents in sub-optimum
project environments. Within this context, this can be taken to mean using traditional
2DCAD based tools and processes with uncollaborative standard forms of contract
and unrealistic design programmes. These arguably typical conditions have been
found to be unconducive to success and a major source of inefficiency in a
substantial body of literature.
Fortunately for many, the long term aspiration for fundamental change to industry
practices has coincided with the advent of functional BIM technologies with a
progressive and ambitious Government Construction Strategy. The momentum this
has generated offers great potential to counteract many of the factors leading to poor
project performance. There are long standing cultural and institutional challenges
that must be also be addressed as part of any solution, however despite the lack of
holistic solutions many are experiencing for themselves the benefits of barriers
brought about by what represents a significant opportunity for industry improvement.
The purpose and scope of this research is therefore to investigate the relationship
between the theory of BIM based design and the practice as experienced by industry
practitioners who have experience of both 2DCAD and BIM based design
paradigms. It is the primary intention to identify the main factors that impact upon
the successful application of BIM. The secondary intention is to make practical
recommendations for organisations considering adopting BIM or for those who may
have already started their transition.
x
List of Abbreviations
BEP BIM Execution Plan
BIM Building Information Modelling
BIMM Building Information Modelling and Management
2DCAD Computer-aided design (Two Dimensional)
COBie Construction Operations Building Information Exchange
DBB Design Bid Build
D&B Design & Build
DFMa Design for manufacture and assembly
FM Facility Management
gbXML Green Building XML
IFC Industry Foundation Classes
IPD Integrated Project Delivery
M&E Mechanical & Electrical
NBS National Building Specification
PAS Publically Available Specification
PoW Plan of Work
RIBA Royal Institute of British Architects
xi
Glossary
Computer-aided design (CAD): is the use of computer systems to assist in the
creation, modification, analysis, or optimisation of a design. CAD software is used to
increase the productivity of the designer, improve the quality of design, improve
communications through documentation, and to create a database for manufacturing
(Narayan, K. Lalit, 2008).
Collaborative BIM: Collaborative BIM is the converse of Lonely BIM and can be
construed as being when all designing parties are utilising BIM. There is, however,
no agreement as to whether level 2 BIM is truly ‘collaborative’, although if all
parties are producing 3D models and working collaboratively then there is no reason
for this not to be the case. (Sincalir, 2013)
Common Data Environment (CDE): A single location (typically a server or
extranet) for storing information that can then be collated, managed and disseminated
amongst multi-disciplinary teams working collaboratively (BSI, 2013).
Federated Model: means a Model consisting of connected but distinct individual
Models.
Information Model: all documentation, non-graphical information and graphical
information which the Project Team is required to provide into the Information
Model by the Scope of Services for the Project Team and which is provided for the
purpose of delivering Project Outputs (BSI, 2013).
PAS1192: Specification for information management for the capital/delivery phase
of construction projects using Building Information Modelling.
Project BIM Protocol: The Project Specific BIM Protocol setting out the
obligations of the principal members of the Project Team in respect of the use of
BIM on the Project.
Project Information Plan: the plan for the structure and management and exchange
of information from the Project Team in the Information Model and the related
processes and procedures.
xii
Production Information: Construction project Information Committee (CPIC)
defines production information as ‘the information prepared by designers that is
passed to a construction team to enable a project to be constructed’ (BSI, 2007).
4D (time) BIM: The intelligent linking of individual 3D CAD components or
assemblies with time- or schedule-related information. The use of the term 4D is
intended to refer to the fourth dimension: time, i.e. 4D is 3D plus schedule (time).
5D (cost) BIM: The ability of BIM models to contain cost information and quantity
schedules.
6D (FM) BIM: The intelligent linking of individual 3D CAD components or
assemblies with all aspects of project life-cycle management information. The
principal means of achieving this is by adding data to the model as the project
develops.
xiii
Structured Abstract
Background: Building Information Modelling (BIM) is a core enabler of digitally
enabled design and construction practices. It offers the potential for
significant improvements in the quality of Production Information
and overall project performance. As such it represents a major
opportunity for change and improved project delivery.
Aim: The aim of the study was to identify and explain the factors associated
with the delivery of improved Production Information quality using
BIM enabled design practices.
Research
Design:
This study used existing theoretical sources to identify the factors
leading to poor quality Production Information. Additionally, the
requirements of PAS1192-2 were introduced to contextualise the
mandated use of BIM based design solutions.
Primary research was carried out using an inductive/qualitative
approach via in-depth semi-structured interviews with seven
experienced project professionals primarily from the Architectural
industry.
Findings:
Nine core factors were identified via a Thematic analysis of the data.
User capability was found to be the most important positive factor in
the delivery of quality Production Information, irrespective of the
design platform used. Uncollaborative procurement practices
incompatible with the workflow required by BIM enabled design
were found to be the most important negative factor, which prevents
discipline integration and erodes the potential presented by BIM
enabled working practices.
Conclusions:
BIM based design presents significant opportunities at both a
business and project level for organisations willing and able balance
the risks and rewards of investment in innovative technology and
development of a capable project team. The study concluded with
twelve recommendations for practice.
Keywords: BIM, Production Information, Quality, PAS1192-2, Rework.
1
1.0 Chapter One - Introduction
1.1 Introduction
The body of evidence supporting the case for a change to the way in design
information is produced and managed has led many, including the UK Government
to embrace the uncertainty of adopting Building Information Modelling, as the
mechanism to instigate wide ranging process changes with the intention of making a
fundamental improvement in the construction project design and delivery process.
In understanding the context of this phenomenon it is necessary understand the
background to the problem and to briefly explain the relationships between three
concepts underpinning the context of the discussion; Building Design, Quality and
Production Information.
Firstly, by defining building design one is able to see how the process of constructing
a building is dependent on the translation of knowledge and information into
something physical that can be used to understand the creative intentions of the
designer, hence building design can be defined as;
‘…a process which maps an explicit set of client and end-user requirements
to produce, based on knowledge and experience, a set of documents that
describe and justify a project which would satisfy these requirements plus
other statutory and implicit requirements imposed by the domain and/or the
environment’ (Hassan,1996).
The provision of graphical and written representations, traditionally in the form of
drawings and specifications allow contractors and subcontractors to transform
concepts and ideas into physical reality. How effectively and efficiently this
transformation occurs, depends largely on the quality of the design and
documentation provided (Tilley and Barton 1997). The assessment of design and
documentation quality can be highly subjective and open to interpretation, when
considering design quality, McGeorge (1988), stated that:
“…a good design will be effective (i.e. serve the purpose for which it was
intended) and constructible with the best possible economy and safety.”
2
But whilst the design itself needs to be ‘effective’, it also needs to be communicated
effectively through the documentation (i.e. drawings, specifications, etc.). When
documentation quality is considered, a number of criteria determine the level of
quality and it is these which form the basis of understanding quality in the context of
this research; (Tilley, 2005).
• Timeliness - being supplied when required, so as to avoid delays;
• Accuracy - free of errors, conflicts and inconsistencies;
• Completeness - providing all the information required;
• Coordination - thorough coordination between design disciplines; and
• Conformance - meeting the requirements of performance standards
and statutory regulations.
Therefore, the quality of the design and documentation process can simply be
defined as:
‘The ability to provide the contractor with all the information needed to
enable construction to be carried out as required, efficiently and without
hindrance’ (Tilley, 2005).
For the purposes of this research the information needed to enable construction will
be referred to as Production Information and is defined as ‘the information prepared
by designers that is passed to a construction team to enable a project to be
constructed.’ In a BIM working environment the delivery may take the form of
three-dimensional models with associated information attached by direct attribution
or population from a database (BSi, 2007). For the purposes of this research the term
is also taken to be used interchangeably with the terms, ‘Contract Documentation’,
‘Working drawings’ and ‘Design Documentation.’
The quality of Production Information remains a major concern to many parties
within the construction industry as it has a major influence on the overall
performance and efficiency of construction projects (Burati et al 1992).
3
1.2 Background – Industry Wide Problems
The need for the Construction industry to improve performance is well recognised. In
the UK, Construction is a significant economic activity which contributes some 7%
of GDP and is worth about £110 billion per annum - more if the whole-life
contribution through planning, design, construction, maintenance, decommissioning
and reuse, is taken into account (Cabinet office, 2011). Yet performance remains
poor against a wide range of benchmarks (See Figure 1 below) and consistently fails
in its capacity to deliver value to industry stakeholders.
The defining characteristics of the UK construction industry are its inability to
complete projects predictably and its chronically low levels of profitability (Crotty
2012). Thus the need for improvements in the construction industry has long been
recognised. Two major reports from the nineties began reform and mapped the
process to change the construction industry. 'Constructing the Team' by Latham,
condemned existing industry practices as being'...ineffective, adversarial,
fragmented, and incapable of delivering for its customers.’ Latham wished to delight
clients by promoting;
‘Openness, co-operation, trust, honesty, commitment and mutual
understanding among team members,’ calling for industry ‘to increase
efficiency and to replace the bureaucratic, wasteful, adversarial atmosphere
prevalent in most construction projects at the time' (Latham 1994).
Figure 1 2012 UK Industry report based on Key Performance Indicators (Adapted from
Constructing Excellence, Author)
4
Of the recommendations in the report, the most notable with reference to this
research included the following;
'The use of co-ordinated project information should be a contractual
requirement.'
However in the last two decades while most other industries have managed to
improve considerably in most aspects of their performance, construction has failed to
show any such improvement (Crotty, 2012). Latham’s aspirations have remained on
the agenda right up until and including today.
1.3 Rationale for Study
With the advent of widespread adoption of Building Information Modelling, the
potential to significantly realise the benefits of improved collaboration and digital
design and fabrication are promising developments in the industry. Over time it is
hoped that BIM will help to reduce the prevailing failure and achieve a higher level
of quality and performance. Capitalising on the opportunity for change, the UK
government has embarked on an ambitious programme of 'mobilisation and
implementation,' (Cabinet Office, 2011) that in order to exploit BIM technology and
design, create and maintain assets more efficiently (BIS, 2011). This premise is
supported a growing body of research which suggests BIM can enable a number of
benefits including time and cost reductions throughout the project life cycle (Bryde
et al, 2013).
In 2014 the UK government has published the results of the Ministry of Justice
Cookham Wood trial project. This appears to have realised an overall cost saving of
20 per cent and a host of other benefits, however these results were achieved not only
through BIM, but also a synthesis of other new procurement initiatives that promote
collaborative working. These included Lean Principles, BIM, Soft Landings, Two
Stage Tendering with early Contractor Engagement and Project Bank Accounts
(BIM Task Group, 2014). While this case study appears to demonstrate success, it
does acknowledge a number of challenges that remain to be overcome. The
challenges for other less high profile projects are likely to be more significant.
5
Examples from the literature include Erodogan, Anumba, Bouchlaghem and Neilson,
(2008) who suggest that companies adopting BIM technologies often fail to achieve
the full benefits of their implementations. The reasons for this were found to be
focusing too much on the technical factors and ignoring or underestimating the
factors related to change, implementation, human and organisational factors and the
roles of management and end users. Similarly, a study by Neff, Fiore-Silvast and
Dossick, (2010) found that most architects were using BIM primarily for
visualisation and analysis instead of increased collaboration and that deeply
embedded disciplinary thinking is not easily overcome by digital representations of
knowledge.
Lu, Zhang and Rowlinson, (2013) suggest BIM adoption in isolation does not change
the fragmented nature of the construction sector and that an understanding of how to
realise a more holistic and collaborative approach in BIM projects is crucial to realise
its full potential. This view is supported by Bouchlaghem, (2011) who suggests that
effective collaboration cannot result only from the implementation of information
systems or approaches that focus exclusively on sociological, organisational or
cultural issues. In order to extract the best possible, any effective implementation of
BIM has to involve a fundamental change in the working procedures in the project
delivery process; a cultural shift the key challenge. (Philp; 2012; Eastman et al,
2011).
The mandated BIM protocols aim to harness the benefits of best practice and
navigate the industry towards greater efficiency. However, as discussed above
organisations will encounter a number of Technology, Process and People (TPP)
related issues during their transition to collaborative BIM working. The rationale for
this study is therefore to identify what factors are currently being experienced by
industry professionals, which factors are the most important and what factors are
preventing project organisations from realising further value for themselves and
other stakeholders. Similarly the research intendeds validate the benefits reported in
the literature with those experienced in practice in order to understand how greater
BIM can be used to greatest effect.
6
1.4 Research Aim and Objectives
In consideration of the preceding paragraphs, the aim of the study is to investigate the
factors associated with the delivery of improved Production Information quality using
BIM enabled design practices.
In support of this aim the research has the following objectives which must be
achieved;
1. To review the literature and identify core the factors resulting in poor quality
Production Information.
2. To review the core principles of PAS1192-2 in conjunction with the literature
to establish how BIM based design impacts upon the process of delivering
Production Information.
3. To interview a sample of industry practitioners to explore their experiences of
BIM enabled working practices when compared to the traditional (2D CAD)
design paradigm.
4. To analyse the research data, to identify and explore the emergent factors
affecting the quality of Production Information using BIM enabled design
processes.
5. To conclude the study with a series of recommendations that can assist design
organisations in maximising the potential of BIM enabled design processes.
1.5 Research Scope
The scope of this primary research is focused upon the views of architects and the
buildings they design. This is because architects often act in the role of Lead
Designer and as such are more likely to have a holistic view of the changes brought
about by BIM. The delivery of Production Information is the area of work in which
particular focus is paid and factors concerning pre-planning and post occupancy
project stages are generally excluded from the scope. Similarly the framework within
which BIM functionality and the research questions are discussed is PAS1192-2,
however owing the time restrictions of the dissertation and the wide ranging
implications contained within this document, the study focuses only on selected
relevant aspects of this document.
7
1.6 Research Design
In consideration of the nature of the aims and objectives for this study, an approach
was taken which would enlist beliefs, opinions and views to gather data, which was
rich in content and scope and open to interpretation (Fellows and Liu, 2003). A
qualitative approach to the research was therefore selected. The primary data was
obtained by conducting semi-structured interview interviews. The secondary data
was obtained from academic journals and government publications. Data analysis
was conducted using a Thematic analysis approach using descriptive and interpretive
coding process. Refer to Chapter four for full details of the Research Design.
1.7 Research Structure
This study is organised as follows;
Chapter 2 presents the Literature review which is broken into 2 parts:
Part A explores the problem of poor quality Production Information.
Part B explores proposed solutions at strategic and functional levels.
Chapter 3 – Concludes the findings form the literature review and presents the
theoretical model for the study.
Chapter four discusses the Research Design, the rationale for the methodology
selected, research ethics and data analysis, and specifies key characteristics of the
research participants.
Chapter five encompasses data analysis, discussion and summary of findings.
Chapter six presents the conclusion, the recommendations, the limitations and
opportunities for future research.
8
2.0 Chapter Two - Literature review
2.2 Part A -The problem of Production Information Quality
2.2.1 Design Documentation Quality
The importance of a new paradigm for managing the design and documentation
process and improve quality is now widely recognised as low quality Production
Information has been identified as a major factor in leading to a reduction in the
overall performance and efficiency of construction projects. As such it can be
directly attributed to variations, delays, disputes, cost overruns and rework (Love &
Li 2000; Tilley, 2005).
The literature reveals a common theme of deficient practice leading to poor quality.
The major issues are indicated below (Swelinger, 1996; Koskela, 1997; Tilley et al.
2002);
1. Poor communication of brief
2. Lack of adequate documentation
3. Deficient or missing input information
4. Poor information management
5. Deficient planning and unbalanced resource allocation
6. Lack of coordination between disciplines
7. Erratic decision making
8. Client changes
2.2.2 The Extent of the Problem
The extent of the substandard, incomplete, conflicting and erroneous design and
documentation information is not only widespread but continues to get worse despite
the negative impact on the industry (Tilley et al.2002). According to Barrett and
Barrett (2004) ‘…projects that run over time and budget are often underpinned by
faulty documentation that looks professional, but in fact does not properly specify or
describe the built solution.’
9
A report by NEDC showed that more than 50% of problems on building sites were
related to poor design information (NEDC, 1987). While according to Hibberd
(1980), 60% of variations were directly design documentation related. Similarly
during a study of defects in construction performed during the period 1986–1990 and
a deeper study performed during 1994–1996, it was found upon analysis that, on
average, 32% of the defect costs originated in the early phases, i.e., in relation to the
client and the design. (Josephson and Hammarlund, 1998). According to Love et al
(1997) a large proportion of rework cost were not only attributable to deficiencies in
design and documentation but also to the transfer of information during the design
process.
2.2.3 General Causes of Poor Quality Production Information
The causes of poor documentation can in part be attributed to the complex and
challenging nature of the design process as it involves thousands of decisions,
sometimes over a period of years, with numerous interdependencies, under a highly
uncertain environment (Tzortzopoulos & Formoso, 1999). In addition, many of the
traditional project management approaches are inappropriate for managing the design
process. For example, the design planning process is typically unstructured which
leads to insufficient understanding of the design process between parties and is a
barrier to people working effectively together (Taylor, 1993), while, Alarcón and
Mardones ,(1998) found that there is a lack of standards and a lack of constructability
of the designs.
Additionally, DeFraites (1989) suggests that overall project quality is greatly
determined by the level of professional services provided and that the quality of these
services is generally determined by how the services are selected and how the fees
are negotiated. Clients that select designers with the misunderstanding that low fees
or ‘cheapness’ can equate to value have been found to experience a limited level of
quality of service and expertise which generally translates into additional project
costs to the owner (Tilley, 2005).
10
Known factors which are the result of low fees include the use of inexperienced staff
that lack technical knowledge (Coles, 1990), as well as ‘time boxing’ which is where
design tasks are allocated to a specific duration, irrespective of whether the
documentation or each individual task is complete or not (Love et al., 2000).
Furthermore Tilley, (2005) suggests that while insufficient design fees are considered
to be the main problem by a large proportion of the industry, insufficient time to
properly carry out the design process, runs a very close second with unrealistic client
demands for earlier completion of projects being a major contributing factor to the
production of incomplete and erroneous contract documentation (Tilley and
McFallen, 2000).
In a survey by Tilley et al. (2002), it was found that the availability of design time
had declined by 37% over the previous 12–15 year period, but in contrast designers
generally spend around 20% more time on a project than was initially budgeted for.
Notably the survey also reported an industry perception that if more time was
allowed for the design and documentation process, then quality would improve.
11
2.2.4 Fragmentation
The integration of design process and all of all key players into a multi-disciplinary
team at both project management and design implementation levels is vital to project
success (Kagioglou et al, 1998).However, the design process is marred by
inefficiencies from fragmentation (Gallaher, O'Connor, Dettbarn, & Gilday, 2004).
The increasing complexity of building design has tended to lead to the specialisation
of professionals with many disciplines having their own distinct body of knowledge,
culture and commercial objectives which fosters competition based on values
associated with each party’s specialty (Ballard, 1999). This un-integrated and
sometimes adversarial working methodology of focusing on one’s own process with
little attention on the development of the whole project process exacerbates the
problem and is generally known as ‘working in silo’s.’ This is where disciplines
work independently of one another while making decisions that inevitably affect the
outcome of what is intended to be a coordinated design product (Karhu and
Lahdenpera, 1999).
This way of working is also characterised by Evbuomwana & Anumba, (1998) as the
‘over the wall approach,’ (See Figure 2 below) where based on the clients brief, the
architect produces an architectural design, which is the given to the structural
engineer, who the passes the project on to the quantity surveyor and so on until the
project documentation is passed onto the contractor who takes responsibility for the
construction.
Figure 2 The Over the wall approach (Evbuomwana, Anumba, 1997)
12
As a result, fragmentation leads to poor communication between the architects,
engineers, contractors and owners leading to a number of detrimental consequences,
including:
Inadequate capturing translating, transforming and delivering (CTTD) client
needs (Shahrin and Johansen, 2013)
Data loss caused by the fragmentation of design, resulting in inefficiencies
due to the inability to reuse information; data generated at one stage are not
readily re-used downstream;
Development of pseudo-optimal design solutions;
The lack of integration, co-ordination and collaboration between the various
functional disciplines involved in the life-cycle-issues of the project;
The fragmentation of design and construction data, leading to
misunderstandings, misconceptions, clashes , omissions and errors
The lack of true life-cycle analysis of projects (including costing,
maintenance, etc.);
and poor communication of design intent and rationale which leads to
unwarranted design
Changes, unnecessary liability claims, increase in design time and cost, and
inadequate pre- and post-design specifications.
Elimination of viable design alternatives due to pressure of time;
Prevalence of costly engineering changes and design iterations;
Characterization of the design process with a rigid sequence of activities;
13
2.2.5 Problems with Information Management
A number of studies have highlighted both the extent (Hendrickson and Au, 2003)
and importance (Howell, 1999) of information management activities in
construction. Owen et al. (2010) neatly sums up the current situation;
“In general, silo mentalities and cultures prevail and document-based
information exchange across professions and throughout supply chains
ensures that information and, particularly, any associated intelligence,
coordination and agility is either corrupted or even lost. Thus decisions are
frequently made autonomously without multidisciplinary participation, and in
the absence of holistic or comprehensive and accurate knowledge. The use of
an iteratively and incrementally developed design, pulled from an end user or
client perspective, is virtually impossible within current structures, or at least
rarely achieved.”
The principal design activity of any project is the processing of information (Baldwin
et al, 1994) yet as described above this is poorly performed (Latham, 1994).
Jacobsson and Linderoth (2010), found that owing to the transient nature of project
teams the drive to deploy better information management technologies is limited.
Similarly, research suggest that information management and exchange within
construction typically still take place manually, predominantly through the use of
schedules which individuals or organizations reformat and manually distribute
normally on a document level (Dawood et al., 2002;Anumba et al., 2008). The
seemingly archaic delivery of information results in wasted time and money when in
data is lost through information exchange, the wasted time taken to identify the
useful information in a document or searching through incomplete, uncoordinated
information which leads to inefficiencies of rework (Anumba et al., 2008). When
Information Management suffers from multiple problems of this kind, this can lead
to the abandonment of design planning (Koskela et al, 1997), perpetuating a cycle
likely to create further difficulties. In addition, the fragmented nature of the
construction industry frequently leads to incompatibilities in semantics, process and
software between collaborating organizations amplifying the waste mentioned above
(Abukhder and Munns, 2003; Anumba et al., 2008).
14
2.2.6 Problems with the Existing 2D Drawing-based Design Documentation
Modern construction projects and the organisational structures which support their
delivery can be extremely complex and communications intensive. On a
conventional 2D CAD/paper based project of modest size this may give rise to a
huge body of 'unintelligent ' information. For example, in 1995 a European
construction IT R&D project found that up to 400 individual documents, or
documents about documents, are generated for every million pounds worth of project
value (CICC 1998). It was also found that there may be up to 60 consulting and
contracting firms in a typical £50m project. The problem therefore appears to be not
a lack of information in itself, but rather ‘…a problem in the lack of information
made for decision-making’ (Winch, 2010).
Crotty, (2012) has suggested conventional drawing-based design documentation,
suffers from four main deficiencies:
1. The use of arbitrary lines and symbols lead to ambiguity and
misunderstanding.
2. It can be difficult to ensure that individual document sets are properly and
internally consistent.
3. It can be difficult to ensure that related document sets are correctly
coordinated.
4. It can be difficult to ensure that the documentation is fully complete.
These deficiencies then lead to 2 main problems;
Firstly, owing to these inherent flaws, the output of the design production process is
essentially of low quality and untrustworthy. Secondly, the information is basically
incomputable and anybody wishing to reuse it has to reconstruct the data, either via
computer if the data is to be reused, or intellectually in one's mind if one attempts to
visualise the 3D form of a design conventionally delivered in 2D on paper.
15
The fundamental problem with this process is explained by Barker (2011), who
suggests;
‘2D CAD essentially replicates the single line graphical processes of the
drawing board and, with a few exceptions, involves the use of unintelligent
unrelated objects. This method of working has been unable to keep up with
the demands of a very risk averse industry which demands greater certainty
in design, cost and programme whilst accommodating increasing levels of
complexity and depth in the information to be delivered.’
It appears that drawing-based design is flawed and a root cause 3 major problems;
Firstly, the clients inability to accurately visualise the design; secondly, the difficulty
of integrating and coordinating cross-disciplinary design information and; thirdly, the
limited ability of contractors to accurately visualise in detail the designer's intentions
(Crotty, 2012).
In general, any piece of discipline specific design or technical information that needs
to be interpreted or coordinated manually requires skill and judgement on the part of
the recipient. It may therefore give rise to errors in understanding and
communication, particularly on complex cross-referenced documentation that is
typical in most construction projects.
16
2.2.7 Rework
Rework is a recognised as a significant factor contributing to poor project
performance. It is defined by Love, (2002) as ‘the unnecessary effort of redoing a
process or activity that was incorrectly implemented the first time.’ Rework
contributes towards delays and cost increases which Barber et al, (2000) found can
be as much as 23% of contract value when taking into account indirect costs which
are the cost of man hours to redesign and manage the deficient documents. This is
separate to the actual (direct) cost of the rectification, such as additional hiring of
resources (including labour and plant), schedule slippage, and reductions in project
scope or quality (Li et al., 2000). Rework is characterised by Eden et al., (2000) as
being hidden within the design documentation as a latent defect, giving the illusion
that the project is progressing smoothly until the latter phases of the project when the
errors are discovered resulting in rework and delay at a time when the impact of
design changes are at their highest. The cause and effect by time and location of
errors in a project is illustrated in Figure 3 below. This shows a (typical) example of
a dimensional error as found in a case study by Love, (2004). The source of the error
resides in the processes and interfaces of the design consultants but is hidden by time
and location, identified and resolved only during construction phase. Ackermann et
al., (1997) (cited in Love 2004) found that adverse consequences of these problems
include higher overall costs and profit loss, delay, reputational damage and costly
litigation over responsibility ultimately leading to risk avoidance among the design
consultants which may transpire as reluctance to sanction the approval of each
other’s work resulting in poor coordination and integration of design team members,
perpetuating the cycle of low productivity and quality.
Figure 3 Cause and effect separated by time and location. (Love, 2004)
17
2.3 Part B – Solutions
2.3.1 Introduction
In Part B of the literature review the intervention that the UK government has taken
to improve the performance of the industry is introduced. This is followed by a brief
introduction to BIM and the requirements for BIM level 2 compliance. Specific
aspects of PAS1192-2 are then discussed in terms of the functionality they enable.
2.3.2 Drivers for BIM - Government Intervention
In 2011, the most recent Government Construction Strategy was launched with the
aim of promoting the public sector as a better client, ‘more informed and better co-
ordinated.’ It also aims to modernise the current business model to reduce overall
costs of Government construction projects by 15-20% (Cabinet Office 2012). Setting
out a range of activities to reform industry practice, reduce waste and drive better
value from its procurement of construction, the hypothesis was that ‘…the
Government as a client can derive significant improvements in cost, value and
carbon performance through the use of open sharable asset information’(HMG Task
Group, 2011).
The fundamental characteristic of the strategy was the recognition and inclusion of
Building Information Modelling; ‘…Government will require fully collaborative 3D
BIM (with all project and asset information, documentation and data being
electronic) as a minimum by 2016’ (Cabinet Office, 2011, p. 14).
By doing so the UK Government aims to strengthen the public sector’s client
capability in BIM implementation so that all central government department projects
will be adopting at least Level 2 BIM by 2016 (Cabinet Office, 2012, p. 6).
In support of these objectives the BIM Strategy Paper (2011), recommended giving a
‘push’ to the supply side of industry to enable all players to reach a minimum
performance level in the area of BIM use within 5 years (BIS, 2011). Similarly, the
report advocated a ‘pull’ from the client side to specify, collect and use the all the
derived information in a value adding way.
18
Moreover, and in support of the strategic objective, the Cabinet Office began to
develop standards enabling all members to work collaboratively because in its
opinion the;
‘…lack of compatible systems, standards and protocols, and the differing
requirements of the clients and lead designers, have inhibited widespread
adoption of a technology which has the capacity to ensure that all team
members are working from the same data’ (Cabinet Office, 2011, p. 13).
19
2.3.3 The BIM based Design Paradigm - What is BIM?
A review of the literature on BIM reveals a plethora of definitions and descriptions
of BIM. Much of the confusion surrounding BIM can be attributed to its potential to
affect many aspects and actors of the Construction delivery cycle. Figure 4 below
gives an overview of some common connotations associated with BIM;
Without being actively involved in BIM related activities it may be difficult for
individuals or organisations to grasp the holistic nature of BIM. The term and
concept of ‘BIM’ is multifaceted and unsurprisingly there is no definitive or agreed
upon definition. It is therefore important to understand each of the main aspects that
BIM represents. It firstly be thought of ‘a technological entity;’ the Building
Information Model itself; (which is essentially a database)
‘…a data-rich, object-oriented, intelligent and parametric digital
representation of the facility, from which views and data appropriate to
various user’s needs can be extracted and analysed to generate information
that can be used to make decisions and improve the process of delivering the
facility’ (Azhar, Hein and Sketo, 2008).
Secondly, it can be thought of as Building Information Modelling, ‘a process’ which
involves; ‘… the structured creation, sharing, use and re-use of digital information
about a building or built asset throughout its entire lifecycle, from design through
procurement and construction and beyond, into its operation and management. This
involves the use of coordinated 3D design models enriched with data which are
Figure 4 Some common connotations of multiple BIM terms (Succar, 2009, p. 359).
20
created and managed using a range of interoperable technologies.’ (BIM Academy,
2012).
Thirdly, the view of BIM as ‘a way of working’ which encompasses both Building
Information Management and Modelling. This last view of BIM (or BIMM) is
described as;
‘…an interoperable process for project delivery, defining how individual
teams work and how many teams work together to conceive, design, build
and operate a facility.’ (buildingSMART alliance, 2012)
If organisations use BIM in a way in which each of the three aspects is not
overlapped or integrated the potential of BIM is diminishes. Hence the terms ‘lonely
BIM’, ‘partial BIM’ and ‘collaborative BIM’ also arise.
For the purposes of this research the term ‘BIM’ can be taken to mean the resultant
change effected by a synergy between each of these aspects; From the technological
perspective the BIM database becomes the central repository of digital design data
enabling value generating processes to efficiently control and manipulate aspects
virtual prototype while also facilitating a collaborative and open methodology of data
exchange for the mutual benefit of all project stakeholders which opens new
possibilities towards improving procurement practices with better communication
and co-ordination across the whole building-sector.
2.3.4 The BIM based design paradigm
As explained in section 2.10, BIM is a methodology to manage the essential building
design and project data in digital format throughout the building's life-cycle
(Eastman 2008; Penttilä 2006, cited in Succar 2009;) and as such has been termed the
‘new paradigm’ in building design technology (Ibrahim, Krawczyk, Schipporeit,
2004). The principal difference between BIM and 2D CAD is that the latter describes
a building by independent 2D views such as plans, sections and elevations composed
of lines, arcs and circles etc. While the former is made up of intelligent contextual
data, where objects are defined in terms of building elements and systems such as
spaces, walls, beams and columns (CRC Construction Innovation, 2007).
21
As discussed in Part A, efficiency losses caused by the flawed drawing based
paradigm are significant. BIM processes inherently counteract the data loss
experienced using paper based processes by storing all information digitally while
also making it easily readable to every person involved. Similarly, while drawing
based design fails in recapturing all information after each stage, BIM assists in
maintaining data integrity (Harty, 2012). A visual comparison of the information
integrity across the two platforms is illustrated in Figure 5 below;
Figure 5 Illustration of data integrity across 2D CAD and BIM design paradigms (BIM Task
Group, 2014).
2.3.5 Inherent Characteristics of the BIM Based Design Paradigm
In essence, Building Information Modelling is a digital representation of physical
and functional characteristics of a facility that create a shared knowledge resource for
information about it forming a reliable basis for decisions during its lifecycle (BIM
Industry Working Group 2011). The corollary of this is the reliability of the data.
Stemming from this is the validity and the trustworthiness of what is distributed or
available. Through a review of the literature the following Table 1 below describes
the inherent characteristics of BIM which positively impact upon the quality of
production information;
22
Inherent Characteristics
of BIM associated with
production information
Description
Maintenance of
Information and
Design Model Integrity
BIM models store each piece of information once and displayed the data
according to the output required by the user. In contrast the 2D paradigm
requires repetition of common information in multiple files and drawings
increasing the coordination effort required and to maintain consistency
between multiple representations of data which increases the work load and
risk of error.
Earlier and More
Accurate Visualisations
of a Design
The 3D BIM model is geometrically consistent and viewable in any
combination of real-time views and perspectives. It can be used to view any
number of design modifications giving an instant and real time update of the
effect of design changes to corresponding elements. This saves time and
effort and streamlines the process
Automatic Low-Level
Corrections When
Changes Are Made to
Design
The rules and relationships between model based parameters have an
inherent intelligence that automatically adjust geometrically to database
driven modifications which allow auto adjustment of corresponding
elements reducing the coordination and document management effort and
assisting to eliminate spatial coordination errors.
Generation of Accurate
and Consistent 2D
Drawings at Any Stage
of the Design
Accurate and consistent drawings can be extracted for any set of objects or
specified view of the project. This significantly reduces the amount of time
and number of errors associated with generating construction drawings for
all design disciplines. When changes to the design are required, fully
consistent drawings can be generated as soon as the design modifications are
entered.
Earlier Collaboration
of Multiple Design
Disciplines
By subdividing the BIM database simultaneous working is possible my
multiple design disciplines. Design issues are identified earlier and can be
resolved in innovative ways at a time when design changes cost less. It also
shortens the design time and leads to less errors and omissions.
Information
consistency and
reliability
As a ‘single source of the truth’ BIM models can be distributed to project
team members with confidence that the model contains the information as it
is intended to be viewed in a complete three dimensional form. This requires
less ‘reconstruction’ of information on the part of the receiver and enhances
communication, understanding and reliability of the information without
having to produce a series of drawings to adequately ‘frame’ the
information.
Table 1 Inherent Characteristics of BIM associated with production information (Adapted from
Sacks, Koskela, Dave and Owen 2010; Eastman el al. 2011)
23
2.3.6 General Benefits of BIM on the associated with Production of
Information
Research by McGraw Hill Construction, (2012) shows that generally the benefits of
BIM increase as teams get more collaborative. Of the short term benefits observed,
reduced documents errors and omissions as well as reduced rework were both in the
top 3 benefits as can be seen in Figure 6 overleaf. Similarly, in a case-study research
study by Barlish and Sullivan, (2012) reduced rework and improved coordination
and visualisation were included in the top 4 benefits reported. While according to
Azhar, (2011) the key benefit of BIM is its accurate geometrical representation of the
parts of a building in an integrated data environment. Other related benefits are;
Faster and more effective processes – information is more easily shared, can
be value-added and reused.
Better production quality – documentation output is flexible and exploits
automation.
Better customer service – proposals are better understood through accurate
visualisation. (CRC Construction Innovation, 2007).
Bryde, Broquetas, & Volm (2012) discussed the benefits of BIM based on their case
study and found the main benefits be to reduced cost and time, improved
communication, coordination and work quality. While according to Jernigan (2008)
and Love et al. (2011), use of BIM technology could reduce the chance of having
design changes, design errors, and improve the quality of design documentations.
Finally, Hansford, (2014) outlined a number of operational improvements that have
been found as a result of BIM Maturity Level 2 including Design visualisation, clash
detection and Constructability.
24
Figure 6 Short and long term benefits of BIM (McGraw-Hill, 2012).
2.3.7 BIM maturity Level 2
As part of the mandate for ‘fully collaborative 3D BIM’ the government published
what is known as the Bew–Richards maturity ramp (as illustrated in Figure 7
overleaf). The purpose of defining the levels from 0 to 3 was to in essence an
attempt to take the ambiguity out of the term BIM and;
‘…categorise the types of technical and collaborative working to enable a
concise description and understanding of the processes, tools and techniques
to be used’ (BIS, 2011).
However, despite being useful to as an aid to visualising the scale of BIM maturity
levels, much debate and ambiguity has remained. Table 2 Overleaf gives a brief
explanation of the requirements necessary for both information and modeling
management for each of the levels of the maturity ramp.
25
Figure 7 BIM Maturity Levels (Department of Business, Innovations and Skills, 2011, p. 16).
BIM Maturity
Level
Explanation/Details Information
management
Information
Modelling
0
2DCAD
Unmanaged CAD. Paper-based and it is characterised
by 2D CAD drawings.
No project wide common
standards for flow and
production of information
2D CAD and
paper issue
1
‘Lonely BIM’
Introduces the adoption of the 3D format, in addition
to 2D data, following the
British Standard BS1192:2007,
However, the model is created only for visualisation
purpose and information is not shared.
A project wide consistent
approach to information
flow (Common data
environment CDE)
2D/3D CAD
Produced
independently
by members of
the team
2
‘Collaborative
BIM’
A series of domain specific models (e.g. architectural,
structural, services etc.) with the provision of a single
environment to store shared data and information in
our case (COBie UK 2012). (BIM Task Group, 2014)
Possible 4D and 5D models are adopted in the
process.
A project wide consistent
approach to flow and
production of information
3Dmodels
produced by all
team members
to common
levels of detail
using common
tools
3
‘iBIM’
Level 3 is the higher level of the index and it is
characterised by an Integrated BIM
process where openBIM data are shared during the
overall lifecycle of the facility via web services. This
is a Vision and undefined.
As BIM level 2 Single project
model
Table 2 Bew-Richards maturity levels explained (By Author)
26
The original accompanying definition of Level 2 was as a ‘Managed 3D environment
held in separate discipline “BIM” tools with attached data. The approach may utilise
4D programme data and 5D cost elements as well as feed operational systems’ (BIS,
2011). However, in 2014 and in line with the ongoing development of the processes
and tools available, as well as with feedback from early adopter projects and other
industry experience, the UK Government refined its definition of level 2 BIM to
include the components as detailed in Table 3 below:
For a detailed description of each of the major components of BIM level 2 as listed
below, refer to Appendix A.
Government Construction Strategy Requirement Level
0
Level
1
Level
2
Data
2D Drawings (PDF) x x x
Discipline Specific 3D (native) x x
Non-Graphical Data (COBie-UK-2012) x
Documents
PAS91:2013 Construction Prequalification Questionnaires (Table 8) x
BIM Employer’s Information Requirements x
Pre-Contract BIM Execution Plan x
Post-Contract BIM Execution Plan x
BIM Protocol x
Collaboration
PAS 1192-2:2013 Specification for information management for the
capital/delivery phase of construction projects using Building Information
Modelling
x
BS1192:2007 Collaborative Information Production x
File-Based Collaboration & Library Management x
Model Federation x
Single Common Data Environment (CDE) x
Information Manager Role
PAS 1192-3:2014 Specification for information management for the
operational phase of construction projects using BIM
x
Government Soft Landings x
In development
Digital plan of works (dPOW) x
BS 1192-4:2014 Collaborative production of architectural, engineering and
construction information – Client information requirements
x
Classification System (UNICLASS2 ) x
Table 3 Revised Requirements for Level 2 BIM (adapted from BIM Task Group, 2014).
27
2.3.8 PAS 1192-2
Publically Available Specification (PAS)1192:2 ‘Specification for information
management for the capital/delivery phase of construction projects using Building
Information Modelling’ is a core publication of the Governments suite of documents
for delivering BIM level 2 compliance as illustrated in Figure 8 below. It is intended
that the use of the PAS is of equal value to small as well a multi-national practices as
the impact of poor information management and waste is potentially equal on all
projects (BSI, 2013). It is also intended to be adopted for both public and private
procurement firstly in the UK by becoming a British standard and then
internationally by becoming an ISO standard.
Figure 8 The central relationship between PAS1192:2 and the Government Strategy documents (BIM
Task Group, 2014)
28
2.3.9 The Information delivery cycle
Focusing specifically on the ‘delivery’ phase of projects (from strategic identification
of need through to handover of asset), PAS1192-2 communicates the explicit set of
requirements for working at BIM Level 2 by setting set out the framework for
collaborative working and providing specific guidance for the information
management requirements and structuring of design data associated with projects
delivered using BIM. The information delivery cycle contained in PAS describes the
process of accumulating of both ‘graphical’ and ‘non-graphical’ project data which
allows for the fact that all information on a project will be originated, exchanged or
managed in BIM format. By doing so PAS mandates all project information to be
managed in a consistent and structured way to enable efficient and accurate
information exchange. The mechanism used to regulate this process is BS119:2007
which is the existing code of practice for the collaborative production of
architectural, engineering and construction information.
Central to the information delivery cycle is the shared use of individually authored
models within the common data environment (CDE) which being a single source of
both BIM and conventional information for any given project, is used to collect,
manage and disseminate all relevant approved project documents for multi-
disciplinary teams (BSI, 2013;BIM task Group, 2014). Refer to Figure 9 overleaf for
a representation of the Information delivery cycle contained in PAS.
Refer also to Appendix B for further details on fundamental principles of Level 2
Building information modeling.
29
Figure 9 The Information delivery cycle in PAS1192-2 (Note the both information and management
processes) (BSI, 2013).
2.3.10 Collaborative Working within the context of PAS1192-2.
Collaboration is a highly complex and challenging activity in which a shared task is
achievable only when the collective resources of a team are assembled. Contributions
to the work are coordinated through communications and the sharing of knowledge
(Bouchlaghem, 2011). Collaboration can therefore said to be the alignment of
individuals, working towards the attainment of a common goal within a common
environment, where knowledge and other resources are shared, outcomes and
decision making is by consensus and communication, respect and trust is present
among the parties. Collaborative working can be taken to mean the coalition of
multi-disciplinary groups and teams temporarily formed to work together as a project
team to deliver greater benefits than they would otherwise be able to achieve
separately. PAS1192-2 makes explicit reference to ‘Collaborative working’, stating
that ‘In a collaborative working environment, teams are asked to produce
information using standardised processes and agreed standards and methods, to
ensure the same form and quality, enabling information to be used and reused
without change or interpretation’ (BSI, 2013).
30
2.3.11 BIM Model Federation
A key enabler of collaborative working practices using PAS is the requirement to
federate models for interdisciplinary working. A Federated Model is defined in the
CIC BIM protocol as ‘…a Model consisting of connected but distinct individual
Models’ (CIC, 2013). In practice discipline specific models will be combined to form
an integrated building model which in effect becomes a virtual building which can be
clearly observed, audited and subjected to a number of value adding analyses. Figure
10 below gives an illustration of a number of functions that the Virtual building
model can perform;
Figure 10 Functions of an integrated virtual BIM model (BIPS, 2008).
2.3.12 Specific benefits of federated BIM models on Production Information
The benefits of federated BIM models on Production Information can be generally
grouped under the following 3 categories;
Improved visualisation and 3D design review
Design coordination and model checking,
Multi-disciplinary integration
31
2.3.13 Improved Visualisation and 3D Design Review
One of the single biggest benefits of BIM is the ability to generate a dimensionally
consistent 3D model that can be used to visualise the design at any stage of the
process (Eastman, 2011). This 'what you see is what you get' functionality resolves
the problem of understanding and interpretation highlighted in Part A of the literature
review. It enables a consistent baseline for communication and understanding,
reducing the room for ambiguity and enabling design problems to be solved
innovatively and collaboratively, ultimately leading to better decisions.
Similarly, the real-time geometrically consistent visualisation benefits inter-
disciplinary coordination, as BIM models can be shared amongst multiple
geographically diverse project design team members, using agreed project protocols
to determine exchange methods. Use of 3D models in design meetings allows a
multidisciplinary review of design enables the team to focus and visualise the issues
quickly and accurately leading to efficient early resolution. Comments from design
reviews can also be recorded directly in the models enabling the team to track issues,
keeps all disciplines up to date avoiding the risk of receiving a large batch of changes
late in the process. Hence, this whole-project view enabled by BIM is a platform that
positively impacts on multi-disciplinary collaboration, improving design quality,
preventing designers from “making do” (Koskela 2004a) and reducing rework in the
field as a result of incomplete design.
2.3.14 Design coordination and Model Checking
On complex projects, conflict identification and resolution is an extremely expensive
and difficult task. In many instances, designers do not have the time or budget to
sufficiently resolve conflict issues. Finding coordination issues or contradictory
dimensions inevitably found within hundreds of traditionally drawn 2D drawings is a
time consuming and particular skill performed manually using traditional 2D CAD
tools to overlay CAD layers to visually identify potential conflicts. These manual
approaches are slow, costly, prone to error, and depend on the use of up-to-date
drawing which are not always available because specialist trade packages such as
HVAC may not be let at the design stage. Complex coordination and clash resolution
using coloured two dimensional overlays is inherently subject to error and omissions
32
(Ashcraft, 2009). As a result some clashes may not be identified only be discovered
on-site. In 3D BIM based design this risk is significantly reduced because the virtual
3D building model is the source for all 2D and 3D drawings, making the
identification of issues and early mitigation easier and reducing design errors caused
by inconsistent 2D drawings, speeding up the construction process, reducing costs
and minimising the likelihood of legal disputes and generally enabling a smoother
process for the entire project team (Eastman, 2011; Hardin 2012).
33
2.3.15 Multi-disciplinary Integration and Simultaneous working
The literature suggests that model based collaboration enables the simultaneous
working or overlapping of design phases by multiple design disciplines (Succar,
2009). It is facilitated through the interchange of models either via propriety or non-
propriety file formats and through network/server technology, allowing early two-
way access to project stakeholders and their information within a common data
environment. As a consequence more design effort and integration is required at the
front-end of the process as illustrated in the widely cited Mcleamey curve shown in
Figure 11 below. A major benefit of simultaneous working on the quality of
production information is to shorten the design time and significantly reduce design
errors and omissions. It also gives earlier insight into design problems and presents
opportunities for a design to be continually improved. This is much more cost
effective than waiting until a design and nearly complete and then applying value
engineering only after the major design decisions have been made.
Figure 11 The ‘Mcleamey Curve’ describes how the preferred design process should evolve
compared to the traditional design process. In the early phases abilities are bigger to impact on cost
and functionality where the cost of change is lower. (Tommasson, 2011).
34
3.0 Chapter Three - Theoretical Framework
3.1 Introduction
A theoretical framework is essentially bridge between paradigms that explain the
research issue and the actual practice of investigating that issue. As a ‘working tool,’
it enables reasoned defensible choices, the matching of research questions with those
choices and it guides data collection, analysis and interpretation (Bloomberg and
Volpe, 2012). In fulfilment of this function this chapter provides detail of the key
constructs for the framework that have emerged from the review of the literature,
combined with the researchers own experiences to inform the design and conduct of
this study.
Figure 12 overleaf shows a diagrammatic overview of the key constructs of the
model, the framework is also discussed in narrative form. The model is broadly into
two sections that reflect the issues identified in the literature;
Part A; Problems and the factors associated the quality of Production Information
and Part B; Solutions and the attributes associated with using BIM based design.
35
3.2 Theoretical Framework for the Study
Problems with low quality and
untrustworthy Production
Information
Failure to deliver quality
across a number of
indicators;
- Timeliness
- Accuracy
- Completeness
- Coordination
- Conformance
Industry wide
performance
problems
Factors;
- Fragmentation/Silo’s = lack
of integration, co-ordination
and collaboration between
disciplines ,misunderstandings
and misconceptions
- Poor Information
management =wasted time
spent identifying useful
information, incomplete,
uncoordinated and/or
inappropriate exchange of
information
- Flawed 2D drawing-based
design paradigm
Inherent functionalities via
BIM based processes;
- Maintenance of Information
and Design Model Integrity
- Earlier and More Accurate
Visualisations of a Design
- Automatic Low-Level
Corrections When Changes
Are Made to Design
- Generation of Accurate and
Consistent 2D Drawings at
Any Stage of the Design
- Earlier Collaboration of
Multiple Design Disciplines
- Information consistency and
reliability
PROBLEMS (Part A) SOLUTIONS (Part B)
Government
Construction Strategy.
BIM Level 2 mandate
Building Information
Modelling (BIM)
Discipline Specific 3D models
Model federation
File based collaboration
Information
Management
using
PAS1192-2
Improvements via
PAS1192-2;
- Improved
Visualisation and 3D
design review
- Design coordination
and model checking
- Multi-disciplinary
Integration and
Simultaneous working
- Better information
flow
Improved quality of
Production
Information
Other
components
of BIM
Level 2
Reduced
incidence of
Rework
Other short/
long term
benefits
Strategic intervention
of BIM based design
into existing 2D CAD
paradigm
Factors affecting
successful
implementation
Other
components
PAS1192-
(Outside scope
of research)
Figure 12 Theoretical Framework for the study (Author).
36
3.3 Principal Factors Affecting the Quality of Production Information
The findings from Part A of the literature review suggests that the many factors
affecting the incidence of rework are not only well known but also that there has
been a systematic failure to successfully implement workable and lasting solutions
that can adequately address the shortcomings of the 2D design management
paradigm. The complex nature of the construction process is such that piecemeal
solutions have been unable to adequately address the problem. Based on the literature
reviewed for this study the principal categories identified as leading to poor quality
production information are;
1. Poor briefing and communication
2. Fragmentation of design disciplines
3. Flawed design documentation and delivery paradigm
4. Flawed drawing based design paradigm
5. Poor information management practices.
Sub factors relating to each are shown diagrammatically on Figure 13 overleaf which
shows a Root Cause Analysis of the problem.
37
POO
R B
RIE
FIN
G A
ND
C
OM
MU
NIC
ATI
ON
LOW
QU
ALI
TY
PR
OD
UCT
ION
IN
FOR
MA
TIO
N
REQ
UIR
ING
R
EWO
RK
FRA
GM
ENTA
TIO
N
OF
DES
IGN
D
ICIP
LIN
ES
FLA
WED
DES
IGN
&
DO
CU
MEN
TATI
ON
D
ELIV
ERY
PAR
AD
IGM
POO
R
INFO
RM
ATI
ON
M
AN
AG
EMEN
T
FLA
WED
DR
AW
ING
B
ASE
D D
ESIG
N
Inab
ility
to
adeq
uate
ly
visu
alis
e th
e de
sign
Clie
nt
chan
ges
Cos
tly
rede
sign
&
iter
atio
n
Uni
tegr
ated
w
orki
ng (S
ilos’s)
Unc
oord
inat
ed
proj
ect
info
rmat
ion
Poor
Coo
rdin
atio
n be
twee
n di
scip
lines
Inad
equa
te C
TTD
of
use
r ne
eds,
m
issi
ng p
roje
ct
info
rmat
ion
Uns
tand
ardi
sed
pro
cess
es
Insu
ffic
ient
fe
es, t
ime
&
expe
rtis
e
Line
ar p
roce
ss
2D C
AD
not
fit
for
purp
ose
Unt
rust
wor
thy
Info
rmat
ion
Line
s &
sym
bols
, am
bigu
ous
& L
ow q
ualit
y In
form
atio
n
Unc
onst
ruct
able
de
sign
s
Lack
of a
gree
d st
anda
rds
Uns
truc
ture
d &
low
un
ders
tand
ing
of p
roce
ss
Mis
sing
, una
vaila
ble,
un
dist
ribu
ted
info
rmat
ion
Uns
truc
ture
d pr
ojec
t in
form
atio
n m
anag
emen
t sy
stem
s
Erra
tic
deliv
ery
of
info
rmat
ion
Aba
ndon
men
t of
de
sign
pla
nnin
g
Figure 13 Root cause Analysis; The factors leading to low quality production information (Author).
Note the causes considered to be the most important in the context of this study are shown in Red.
38
3.4 Strategic countermeasures under PAS1192-2
While it not possible to definitively attribute the occurrence of rework only to those
factors identified in the literature review in this study, it is clear that a number of the
identified flaws of the current drawing based paradigm result inaccurate, incomplete
and uncoordinated production information which in turn directly affect the incidence
of rework. Within this context and according to the theory, BIM based design as
specified in PAS1192-2 contains a number of specific countermeasures which if
implemented may result a range of potential qualitative and quantitative benefits for
project organisations adopting BIM.
Through the process of analysis and reflection conducted during the literature review
each counter measure is in effect a Category that will be used for the purpose of
structuring the questions to be asked to the research participants in support of
Objective 3; To interview a sample of industry practitioners to explore their
experiences of BIM enabled working practices when compared to the traditional (2D
CAD) design paradigm.
The intention of subdividing the research problem into core categories is to construct
a holistic picture of the issues and influences, via the primary data collection.
The principal countermeasure can be taken to be working in BIM itself. In the
context of this study this is categorised as ‘Production Information Processes.’ By
mandating the use of ‘…fully collaborative 3D BIM’ a strategic intervention is made
which adds a ‘third dimension’ to the existing design paradigm. By doing so a
fundamental shift in the process of generating Production Information is enabled via
the inherent functionality of working using 3DBIM. This offers the potential to
resolve a number of the inefficiencies and flaws associated with unintelligent design
information detailed in Part A of the literature review and as summarised in the Root
Cause Analysis.
39
The actual intervention can be considered to be a change to the working practices
experienced by the project team that is enabled by the functionality of new software
and the associated changes to behaviour and the processes involved in delivering of
Production Information in a BIM based environment. The core inherent
characteristics enabled by BIM were explored in detail in Part B of the literature, for
clarity they are repeated here as being;
The maintenance of information and design model integrity, earlier and more
accurate visualisations of a design, automatic low-level corrections when
changes are made to design, generation of accurate and consistent 2D
drawings at any stage of the design, earlier collaboration of multiple design
disciplines and information consistency and reliability.
‘Design review and coordination processes’ is a core category which contains the
concept of ‘Visualisation’. The benefits of enhanced visualisation offered by a virtual
building comprised of intelligent and data rich elements is a direct countermeasure to
the basic problem of understanding of what is to be built, through the process of
modelling each geometric interface and design element. Similarly a federated and
integrated BIM model enables a rigour of coordination and clash detection not
possible in drawing based design, as such this functionality can be considered to be
an intervention which reduces misunderstanding as well as incomplete and
uncoordinated information which leads to poor quality information and rework.
The category ‘Simultaneous working’ is a function of the integration of discipline
specific BIM models which potentially improves the quality of final product by
counteracting the problem of ‘Over the wall’ and unintegrated information
exchanges and working practices among design disciplines. As previously discussed,
it is characterised via the Mcleamey curve which will be used in the primary research
phase as a visual prop that can be used to determine the level of the research
participants understanding of BIM processes as well as visual aid for reflection on
how the adoption of BIM based design has impacted upon the workflow of
consultant teams.
Similarly, ‘Collaborative working’ in the context of PAS1192-2 requires teams to
work together to produce information using standardised processes and agreed
40
standards to ensure the same form and quality of information. Working in this way
requires mutual understanding and trust which is a risk management related
countermeasure that can avoid wasteful practices and reduce disputes.
The final category is ‘Information Management’ which is a function not only of BIM
as a database or repository of data, but also via collaborative procedures contained in
BS1192:2007 used to ensure a standardised and proven quality control mechanism
for ensuring information is consistently produced and authorised for its intended
purpose. In parallel to this is the Common Data Environment through which project
participants can effectively distribute and access current information. Each of these
concepts can be specifically related as countermeasures to the problems of
unstructured project information systems, erratic delivery of information, missing,
unavailable or undistributed information resulting from a lack of agreed standards
and poor Information Management generally.
Based on the theoretical relationships between the categories and concepts of both
the problems and the intervening solutions delivered via PAS1192-2, the Theoretical
model will be tested within the context of the real world project environment. Table
4 below tabulates a summary of categories and concepts used in the development of
the interview questions conducted during the primary research phase of the
dissertation.
Category Concepts
Production information
processes
Better Information integrity, Exploitation of automation, inherent
consistency, facilitation of collaboration.
Design review and
coordination processes
Three dimensional visualisation leading to enhanced understanding,
collaborative 3D design review, Design coordination and element based
model checking.
Simultaneous working Multidisciplinary integration, compression of design programme.
Collaborative working Trust, Win/Win Solutions, Mutual Understanding, better Communication,
facilitated Problem Solving, Innovation, better Decision making.
Information management Standardisation and proven quality procedures for information exchange
Rework Latent errors and omissions, RFI’s/variations, Wasted time, Reputation.
Quality Timeliness, Accuracy, Completeness, Coordination, Conformance.
Table 4 Summary of Categories and concepts contained within the Theoretical framework (Author).
41
4.0 Chapter Four - Research design
4.1 Introduction
The aim of this dissertation was to investigate the factors associated with the delivery
of improved Production Information quality using BIM enabled design practices.
This was explored primarily through the gathering and analysis of secondary data via
the literature review, as well as primary data collection via a sample of industry
practitioner’s reflections and experiences of BIM based processes when compared to
the 2D drawing based paradigm. It was considered that although the benefits of
adoption BIM are becoming clearer as more BIM projects and research are
completed, the specific benefits on the quality of Production Information and the
identification of the critical factors impacting upon quality were relatively
unexplored and worthy of study.
This chapter describes the study’s research methodology and includes discussions
around the following areas;
1. Rationale for research approach
2. Description of research sample
3. Methods of data collection
4. Analysis and synthesis of data
5. Ethical considerations
6. Issues of trustworthiness
The limitations of the study are addressed in Chapter 5.
42
4.2 Rationale for Research Paradigm
A Social Constructivist approach was selected for this study in the form of an
inductive/grounded theory investigation conducted via 7 in depth interviews. The
following paragraphs clarify the rationale for this approach;
Bryman, (2102) suggests that while practical considerations may seem uninteresting
compared to philosophical debates surrounding discussions on epistemology and
ontology, they are nonetheless important ones. Clough and Nutbrown, (2012) suggest
social research is the coming together of the ideal and the feasible;
‘…a characteristic purpose of a methodology is to show not such and such
appeared to be the best method for the given purposes of the study, but how
and why this way of doing it was unavoidable - was required by - the context
and purpose of this particular enquiry.'
Based on this, the circumstances of this study featured strongly in the decision
making process. Most modern construction design projects typically involve a
number of specialist disciplines interacting through a variety of conventional and
digital media where information is shared and converted into design drawings and
documentation. A fundamental principle of BIM based design as specified using
PAS1192-2 is the requirement for project teams to increase and improve their
collaborative working practices for the mutual benefit of the project and ultimately
themselves. The project organisation was therefore the social context within which
this study was conducted and as such the essence of the research data was the
reflections and experiences of what is a socially constructed process. Based on this,
the Social Constructivism approach was the preferred theoretical perspective.
The basic tenet of the constructivism paradigm is that that reality is socially
constructed, that individuals develop subjective meanings of their own personal
experience, and that this gives way to multiple meanings (Lincoln and Guba, 2000).
It therefore challenges the scientific-realist assumption of post positivism that reality
can be reduced to its component parts. (Creswell, 2009). Constructivist research
attempts to understand social phenomenon from a context-specific perspective and it
is the researcher’s role to understand the multiple realities from the perspective of the
participants.
43
4.3 Rationale for Inductive research approach
BIM based design procedures as specified by PAS1192-2 are a relatively recent
development in construction and subject to a large number of factors which the
research aimed to discover, the aim of the research was to develop and explain the
phenomenon inductively via the findings rather than test a preconceived theory
deductively (as in post positivism). Bryman, (2012) suggests that a deductive
approach is associated with quantitative research approach, while an inductive
strategy of linking data and theory is typically associated with a qualitative research
approach.
The 5 main qualitative research traditions suggested by Creswell, (2007) are: Case
study, Ethnography, Phenomenology, Grounded Theory and narrative research. Of
these, a case study was considered relevant for this study, however this was rejected
as the researcher considered being too dependent on accessing information from a
single source within a constrained research period to be a risk to the timely
completion of the dissertation.
Although not strictly as intended by Glaser and Strauss, (1967) the grounded theory
approach was considered to be the closest approach appropriate to the researchers
study as a core component is that the theory development is generated or ‘grounded’
in ‘context-rich data’ from the field. (Strauss and Corbin, 1998).
The goal of grounded theory is to move beyond description and to have the
researcher generate or discover a theory of a process, an action, or an interaction
grounded in the views of the research participants (Strauss and Corbin, 1998). Study
participants would all have experienced the process, and the development of theory
might explain practice, or provide a framework for further research.
Two primary characteristics of grounded theory are the constant comparative method
of data analysis (i.e. the on-going comparison of data with emerging categories) and
theoretical sampling of different groups to maximise the similarities and differences
between of information. However it is noted that the former of these characteristics is
somewhat limited by the timescale and scope of the study and to a large extent the
study can be thought of as having inductive/grounded theory tendencies rather than
as a hard and fast distinction.
44
4.4 Rationale for Qualitative Research Method
The overall perspective to this research was more one of enquiry rather than
hypothesis testing. This suggested a qualitative approach to the research since one of
the chief reasons for taking such an approach is if the subject is relatively unexplored
in which the research seeks to listen to the participants and build an understanding
based on their ideas (Creswell 2008). There is an increasing amount of quantitative
research on the benefits of BIM (Coates, Arayici, Koskela, Kagioglou, Usher and
O’Reilly, 2010; Azhar, 2011; Barlish and Sullivan, 2012; Succar, Sher and Williams,
2012). However, the development of robust metrics that can be used to measure the
benefits of BIM would require a study beyond the scale and scope of this research
and present ethical issues regarding access to commercially sensitive information. In
addition, at the time of writing there is currently little or no available research into
the experiences of UK practitioners with specific regard to the benefits of BIM on
the quality of Production Information using processes as specified in PAS1192-2,
with the exception of the Ministry of Justice Cookham Wood project results (BIM
Task Group, 2014).
An approach was therefore taken which would enlist beliefs, opinions and views to
gather data, which was rich in content and scope and open to interpretation (Fellows
and Liu 2003) while also 'tolerating ambiguity and contradictions which lead to the
prospect of alternative explanations during the process of analysis' (Denscombe
2007).
It was acknowledged that by selecting a qualitative study in lieu of a Quantitative or
mixed methods approach that the research conclusions would have lower validity,
the data may be less representative and the interpretation may be ‘bound up with the
self of the researcher,' however it was considered that due to the scope and time
constraints imposed by dissertation framework that a only qualitative could be
justified.
Table 5 overleaf surmises the considerations and selection of characteristics for both
Quantitative and Qualitative approaches to the study.
For a summary of the Research Design for the study refer to Appendix C.
45
Quantitative Qualitative
Deductive: Hypothesis or theory is
generated and through data collection it is
either rejected or selected (testing of
theory).
Inductive: Starts with data collection and
concludes with hypothesis or theory (theory
emerges from data).
Epistemological position:
Natural science model, in particular
positivism
Epistemological position:
Interpretivism
Ontological orientation: Objectivism Ontological orientation: Constructivism
Some common contrasts between
quantitative and qualitative:
Some common contrasts between
quantitative and qualitative:
Numbers Words
Point of view of researcher Point of view of participants
Researcher distant Researcher close
Theory testing Theory emergent
Static Process
Structured Unstructured
Generalisation Contextual understanding
Hard reliable data Rich, deep data
Macro Micro
Behaviour Meaning
Artificial settings Natural settings
Table 5 Rationale and selection of Qualitative research method for the Study (Adapted from Bryman,
2012)
46
4.5 The Research Sample
A criterion based sampling strategy was selected for this study with the intention of
targeting specific research participants who have experienced the processes involved
with the delivery of Production Information in both 2DCAD and BIM environments.
A primary consideration in the sampling strategy was obtain views from individuals
representing two broad classifications of BIM maturity, in order to identify
distinctions between the factors and benefits affecting organisations operating at
different maturity levels. Architects were identified as the principle research group as
generally they perform the Lead designer role on a project and as such could be
expected to have a holistic view of Production Information processes. The Criterion
for selection was therefore as detailed below;
Criterion 1; Participants must be senior Architectural practitioners at Associate level
or above with a minimum of 15 years total industry experience and have delivered
production information in both CAD and BIM environments. This was achieved by
contacting the authors pre-existing contacts and by identifying participants from a
delegate list from the 2014 BIM Show Live conference. This is justified because
according to the NBS, (2014) only 54% of industry was ‘using BIM’ as of 2013 and
of that potential pool, the diversity of the practices using BIM is considerable and the
definition ‘using BIM’ is itself open to wide interpretation. By using the delegate list
research participants were identified that could reasonably be expected to be using
BIM and in a manner which met the criteria for inclusion in study which was;
Criterion 3; Participants were selected to fall within the category of ‘Early adopter’
with between 4 and 10 years BIM experience, or the ‘Early majority’ category with
between 2 and 4 years’ experience. The rationale for this was that it was considered
to be important to obtain views on the factors and benefits associated with BIM
adoption from both the perspectives of both industry leaders and those recently
commencing BIM adoption to see how the potential benefits of BIM may be
influenced by an organisation’s relative experience in using it. This also
corresponded with the scale of the organization which was generally classified as
falling in the categories of local, national and international.
Refer to Table 6 overleaf for a summary of the sample demographics and data.
47
Table 6 Research Sample Information and Demographic
Interviewee
Code
Interviewee
01
Interviewee
02
Interviewee
04
Interviewee
05
Interviewee
06
Maturity
Classification
Early
adopter
Early
adopter
Early
adopter
Early
majority
Early
Majority
Organisation
type
Architects Architects Architects Architects Architects
No. of
Employees
800+ 100 20 20 40
Interviewee Role Director of
Information
&
Technology
& Architect
Associate
Architect &
Associate
Technologist
Associate
Architect
Associate
Architect
IT Director
&
Architectural
Technologist
Organisational
scale
International
scale
National
scale
Local
scale
Local
scale
Local
Scale
Sex M M M M M
Organisation
BIM experience
(years)
4 10 4 2 3
Interviewees
Total Industry
years’
experience
20+ 15+ 15+ 15+ 15
Interviewees
Years CAD
Experience
20+ 15+ 15+ 15+ 10+
Interviewees
Years BIM
Experience
4 6 4 2 3
48
4.6 Data Collection Method
The data collection method selected for this study was the qualitative semi-structured
interview, used with the aim of eliciting the experiences and views from the
participants via focussed discussion and the gathering of rich, valid and reliable data
(Saunders et al, 2011). Each of the three alternative qualitative data collection types
(Observations, Documents and Audio- Visual materials) suggested by Creswell,
(2009), were rejected as being inappropriate to the context of this study.
The interview options within this data collection type include the email internet
interview, focus group, face-to-face and telephone interviews. The first two types
were rejected on the grounds that email interviews were considered inferior to face-
to-face interviews because the data inputted may be incorrect, incomplete and
unverifiable as without human/non-verbal cues it is difficult to gain clarifications of
responses and explore emerging concepts as they arise. Similarly focus groups were
considered to be an inferior approach in the context of this study as the practicality of
attempting to arrange for the selected research participants to attend a focus group in
a mutually convenient location and time represented a risk to the timely completion
of the study. Overall, face-to-face interviews were considered the best method of
obtaining and managing the data collection technique and this was the primary
technique used, however it is acknowledged that a limitation of the interview is that
of representation and the ‘fusion of the researcher and knowledge’ (Alvesson, 2003).
This is primarily due to the potential of the researcher to bias responses and as such it
is accepted the generalisability of the findings is limited. Telephone interviews were
also used in the study to resolve logistical barriers and their inclusion in the study,
alongside face to face interviews was considered to be a compatible approach.
Interviews can be categorised as structured, semi-structured and unstructured
(Saunders et al, 2011). The semi-structured interview was considered to be the most
preferable option for this study because the flexible nature of question sequencing
using open-ended questions was considered to be essential in discovering as much as
possible about the topics included in the interview. Similarly the structure retained
via the use of an interview guide enabled easy analysis and comparison of data (Qu
and Dumay, 2011).However it was acknowledged that a drawback of semi-structured
interviews is the potential for the researcher to influence the responses of the
49
interviewee. In this regard care was taken to avoid leading questions and direct
prompting, although it is also acknowledged in the literature that that by virtue of the
research design and the role of the researcher in qualitative studies such as this that
some values and bias are inherent and difficult to completely eliminate (Bryman,
2008).
4.7 Interview Schedule, Pilot Interview and Interview Process
The ten Categories derived from the theoretical framework were used as the basis for
developing open-ended interview questions, the categories were;
Production information processes, Design review processes, Coordination
benefits, Advantages of simultaneous working, Collaborative working,
Information management, Rework, Quality, Overall benefits and Barriers.
The interview questions were approved by the dissertation supervisor before being
incorporated with an interview schedule and piloted in a single face-to-face
interview. From the pilot a number of comments we received and incorporated into
final interview question set. Once finalised interviews were arranged via telephone
and email with care being taken to ensure that the research participants met the
criteria for inclusion the study. In total, seven, one and a half hour interviews were
conducted during the period 19th
- 27th
August 2014 at various locations within the
North and South East regions of the UK. All interviews were recorded and field
notes were also taken, on completion the audio was transcribed for analysis.
Refer to Appendix D for details of the Research Questions.
50
4.8 Data analysis and synthesis
The main objective when conducting the data analysis was the discovery of the
factors that impact upon the quality of Production Information. The Grounded theory
approach to analysis not considered to the most appropriate analysis method for this
study as the intention was to identify and explain rather than result in theory.
However the coding process associated with Grounded Theory was considered to be
a relevant method of extracting meaning from the data. On this basis a Thematic
Analysis was selected which uses makes use of codes but is not as prescriptive as
Grounded Theory (King, 2004).The actual process followed in this study was in
keeping with that recommended by Miller and Crabtree (1999);
“…researchers can develop codes only after some initial exploration of the
data has taken place, using an immersion/ crystallisation or editing
organising style. A common intermediate approach is when some initial
codes are refined and modified during the analysis process.”
Using the initial categories identified in the Literature review to frame the responses
the following list represents the sequence and elements of the analysis;
1. The Interviews were transcribed and entered into a spreadsheet so that a
holistic view could be taken of the data set.
2. The data was then printed out at A1 size for an initial exploration of the
data. Important and relevant responses where highlighted manually.
3. Connections between responses were made using a pencil and to draw
link and add relevant notes which informed a complete understanding and
the relationships between data sets.
4. The relevant sections of text were given reference numbers and assigned
an initial descriptive code. Coded data was grouped together into a master
document. The grouping of data was refined as the through a process of
abstraction/interpretive coding.
5. The data was subsequently connected corroborated and legitimised into
group of themes.
Refer to Appendix E for an extract form the initial exploration and of the data.
Refer to Appendix F for extracts from the Thematic Analysis process.
51
4.9 Ethical Considerations
Although during proposal stage the research project ethics form was completed and
approved as no significant ethical risks were posed to the participants, this study
employed a number of safeguards as required in the Northumbria University
Research Ethics and Governance Handbook (REGH, 2014) to ensure the protection
of participants and commercially sensitive data obtained during the study.
As such the study followed the 6 core ethics principles as identified by Economic
and Social Research Council’s Framework for Research Ethics (ERSC, 2010) as
below;
1. Research should be designed, reviewed and undertaken in a way that ensures its
integrity and quality;
2. Researchers and research subjects/participants must be fully informed about the
purpose, methods and intended possible uses of the research, what their
participation in the research entails and what risk, if any, are involved;
3. The confidentiality of information supplied by research subjects re. the
anonymity of respondents must be respected;
4. Research participants must participate in a voluntary way, free from any
coercion;
5. Harm to research participants must be avoided; and
6. The independence and impartiality of researchers
52
4.10 Issues of trustworthiness
Bryman, (2012) suggests credibility is an important indicator of the trustworthiness
of a study because it is the credibility of the account of the researcher that is going to
determine its acceptability to others. Respondent validation and Triangulation are
two common techniques used to validate the researcher has correctly understood the
social reality of the study. Principles of Triangulation were employed in this study.
Respondent validation was rejected because due to the time constraints of the study
and the wish to keep the time commitments of the research respondents to a
minimum was considered important. It was considered important to include an
element of triangulation in the study as the research was in effect asking Architects
to consider the quality implications of work that they themselves produce. As such it
could be argued that their answers could contain the potential for Bias. In order to
have a reference point to validate the credibility of the views of the Architects,
aspects of the interviews which dealt specifically with quality were crossed
compared with the views of two professionals from outside the Architectural
profession in the study. On this basis, one representative from Design Management
and one representative from the Civil Engineering design and contracting professions
were included, making the total interviewees for the study seven.
53
5.0 Chapter Five - Data Analysis and Discussion
5.1 Data Analysis and Discussion
This Chapter presents the qualitative data analysis with the findings that will support
the conclusions and recommendations in Chapter 6. The findings are based on 7 in-
depth interviews, which through the data sorting and analysis process generated 9
main themes. The themes emerged from a process of abstraction of descriptive and
interpretive coding of the interview transcripts.
Each of themes identified in some way affect the quality of Production Information
using BIM based design. In this regard they can be also be thought of as ‘Factors,’
and will be referred to as such in the following discussion provided in part fulfilment
of Dissertation Objective 4;
To analyse the research data, to identify and explore the emergent factors affecting
the quality of Production Information using BIM enabled design processes.
The nine factors, their associated sub-factors and the relationships between them are
presented diagrammatically in Figure 14 overleaf. The following sections of this
Chapter explain and compare each factor within the context of the Theoretical model
presented in Chapter 3.
54
Information
Management using
BIM
Process Rigour and
Transparency
Balancing Risk and
Reward
User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
Skilled people;
Access &
investment
1:Experience
2:Training
3:Education
4:Diligence
Upfront Investment
for driving
downstream value
Harnessing data and
potential of
Innovative
(IM&BIM)
Technologies
BIM execution
planning
Visualisation and
understanding
Taking and making
opportunities
Informed decision
making
Information
Cohesion and
integrity/
Automation
Strategic
Intervention of BIM
based design
Barriers:
Uniformed
clients
Barriers:
Non-alignment/
integration/
procurement issues
Effective
Virtual Prototyping
Improved quality of
production information
Reduced
incidence of
Rework
Figure 14 The Interrelationship of Factors affecting the quality of Production Information (Author)
55
5.2 Factor 1: Virtual prototyping
‘Effective virtual prototyping’ is considered to be the core output resulting from the
interaction of the remaining factors identified in the research. In building projects,
the information which the construction team uses to convert an idea into a physical
element is based upon the quality of output produced during the design process,
which typically manifests as drawings, schedules and specifications. These
documents represent a translation of a design team’s intellectual investment in the
project and their attempts to accurately communicate their intentions. As identified in
the literature review the 2D Production Information processes and the associated data
management practices are inherently unintegrated which leads to problems in
understanding, not only among the construction team but also among clients and the
designers themselves. Virtual Prototyping can be taken to mean the process of
virtually constructing every major element of the building in advance of the
construction phase. Working in this way is a major improvement and offers the user
a range of value adding functionalities and benefits not possible in traditional
drawing based design. It is therefore considered to be a fundamental factor in the
delivery of better quality Production Information.
56
5.3 Factor 2: Visualisation and Understanding
BIM based design directly addresses the core problem of erroneous information
interpretation by generating a virtual prototype capable of enabling the whole team to
accurately visualise and understand the design through the generation of a verifiable
and interactive visual representation. This reduces the risk of wasted effort resulting
from ill-informed decision making and unresolved designs. An extract from
interview 5 gives an example of the potential for major benefits of both 3D and 4D
visualisation;
“…there was a major bit of work to be put it that was on their critical
path...it wasn't until we showed the 3D model and the scheduling that showed
a 4D visualisation program, that they realised within 20minutes that they had
got a real issue because this isn't a 5 minute job,... it allowed them to go
away and rethink about their requirements and rethink how we should phase
that work in order to meet everything else that's going on in terms of the
construction, in this case it was Crossrail, it was important to them, would
they have got that understanding without a 3D model?... that would not have
come about, we would have all carried on quite blindly building what we said
we were going to build without understanding the consequences…”
Other examples notable examples from the research include;
“…I can fly through a model, if I fly through it enough I know where I'm
going and I've never been to site…”
“…what we have found is if you include 3D image on that drawing of what
this is going to look like and how it will function, then we get an instant
reaction…”
In addition to quantifiable benefits such as time and cost saving, the ability to be
being better able to clearly visualise, understand and interact with problems also
appears to facilitate learning among the project team. These types of benefits not
necessarily tangible but that are important nonetheless;
‘…subsequential learning is embedded in the way you work in BIM’
(Interviewee 1).
57
5.4 Factor 3: Upfront Investment Driving Downstream Value
This factor is central to the diagram presented in Figure 16. As such it has
associations with numerous other factors. Firstly, at an organisational level it
manifest as a business’s commitment to invest in innovative technology and the
skills needed to operate it. The cost of adopting BIM is a significant barrier for many
in the industry. For many of the Interviewees it represents a major investment, taken
either proactively with the intention harnessing the potential offered by BIM
technologies to generate downstream value or reactively by seeking to maintain
existing work steams post 2016. In this regard this factor is closely related with Risk
and Reward (See Factor 8).
The second aspect of factor 3, can be taken to be the process of investing increased
time and effort to populate the BIM database at earlier stages of the project as
illustrated in the Mcleamey curve illustrated in Figure 13. The upfront investment in
intellectual effort used to create the BIM database appears to be a function of the
fundamental change to Production Information processes. The adjustments to
working practices required to accommodate this process change appear to bring
about a number of challenges, particularly with regard to managing the design
programme. However, the upside to this Factor can be significant downstream
efficiency savings and the opening of a number of opportunities to manipulate the
data in value adding ways, for example, 4D BIM (Construction programming), 5D
BIM (Cost) and 6D (FM & Asset lifecycle). An Example from the research includes
one given by Interviewee 4, where the BIM database was manipulated to serve as the
platform for the testing and optimisation of sustainable design solutions using energy
modelling software and cloud based environmental databases;
“…we can optimise and validate our designs, reducing (the clients) running
costs by £10k per year, in the end it will become added value coming out
straight out of the BIM workflow, its only now we can justify our design
responses rather than in our head..”
Other day to day benefits driven by the early creation of the BIM database include
being able to respond to queries quickly as the rapid generation of additional views
58
and sections reduces time and cost that it may have taken to manually draw, present
and issue each additional output.
“…normally it would take a week, all together I did it in an afternoon, and
additional requests for information can be dealt with quickly…”
“…you can pull in stuff that potentially is ready to go for construction that
contains all the information they need and that’s backed up with
specifications…”
“…because you are building it virtually, even just to produce a bunch of GA's
a lot more has got to be done up front, it forces you to think about it…”
“…to get the efficiencies we want everything has to have data associated with
it…”
59
5.5 Factor 4: Process Rigour and Transparency
In order to generate a graphical representation of each component in the model, BIM
software requires that the user input sufficient design information into each
component parameter. In doing so the user is forced to consider the ‘preloaded’
design variables for each building element, how the building would be constructed in
reality and how each element interfaces with adjoining elements. The population of
each field in the BIM database with design information not only forces the user to
consider the design variable in the first place, but also to rectify interfaces that don’t
work or that may not have been considered in the first place. Similarly the
standardisation of processes required by BIM based design adds another level of
rigour and transparency to the process which is considered to be a significant factor
in reducing the waste from rework and is a functionality not present in the 2DCAD
paradigm as the constituent parts of the a drawing were geometric primitives with no
inherent intelligence or parametric functionality.
As discussed in Factor 3, the time taken to produce the initial model is increased as
the resolution of design interfaces requires upfront effort on the part of the designer.
However, the increase in time taken to develop the model corresponds with the
increased intellectual effort applied that was always necessary to resolve the design.
That intellectual effort now appears to be increasingly expended during the design
stage where it belongs rather than reactively during the construction. Numerous
examples from the research illustrated this in practice;
“…every single element of the building has been thought about, we have to
model in a way it which will actually be built, even though were putting more
effort in the front end were saving more going forward by the fact that we
haven't got to do more work when it goes to site…”
“…architects are terrible at doing sections where they know it’s easy and
avoiding the change in direction or change in details, whereas Revit does it
for you it and forces you to look at it, you look at it and realise its wrong at a
very early stage and actually tweak it so it does all work much earlier…”
“…it’s very difficult to fudge things; you have to plan them through to be
right when they come out the other end…”
60
“…BIM doesn't let you cheat, you have to think about it a lot more... they're
looking at it as physical element…”
“…there's a risk because you are forced to correct mistakes as you go which
might take you off the critical path…”
“…when people are interacting with the model they fully understand what
they have designed, because they can see it, in the past people drew stuff and
they physically don't know what they've drawn…”
“…internally we have now got rafts of process to control what we do, it’s
influenced our QMS, there's a lot more that we have to do as a company that
is inbuilt to serve BIM processes…”
“…you can’t hide anything by issuing a few sections because they get to see
the whole thing…”
“...the design was completed in a 2D world and signed off and we agreed
with the client we would go into a 3D world and just make sure it all works,
why? because we've got time before we arrived on site, that design suddenly
got brought back to detailed design because it didn't work, big fundamental
errors right up at the concept stage of the design that had been lost and were
just taken as true after that, it would be cost the client quite a lot of money, in
that instance we didn't get an increased turnover because we are not
managing change, but we shouldn't be in the business of managing change
and issues of that nature, we should be in the business of making our money
through building it right first time…”
“…BIM gives us the ability to fix things we were never fixing and were
passing downstream to on site and that is something that puts a greater onus
on the designer…”
“…I don't think there is a stark difference between working in 2D and 3D in
terms of the process, you get out of it what you put in, you put rubbish into
the 3D model you'll get rubbish back out of it, you still have to control it and
apply rigour and check everything…”
61
5.6 Factor 5: Information Cohesion, Integrity & Automation
The ‘single entry, multiple use’ of design information and the digital, centralised
structuring of information is diametrically different to the 2DCAD paradigm where
multiple files contain groups of information about similar design elements, but
without the benefit of being connected or having any inherent building design
parameters. BIM based design as a ‘central source of truth’ counters the problem of
data integrity, coordination and information loss identified in Part A of the Literature
review and in this regard the findings appear to validate the theory. A key benefit of
this with regard to Production Information is that of Automation, where any change
to one element of the virtual prototype is reflected in the output of all corresponding
views bringing about a number of efficiency gains and reducing the risk of errors and
omissions. Illustrations from the research include the following;
“…there's a greater concentration of information at point of source, if you
change a dimension it will changes it in a section and elevation, you have
more consistency of approach in change management…”
“…you don't have the issue of something being in excel and something being
in CAD and somehow that coming together on a PDF…”
“…if you link your specification and schedules to the model you get a
consistency that was never there before…”
62
5.8 Factor 6 - User capability and organisational BIM maturity
An important theme that emerged from the data was that of user capability and the
overall BIM maturity of the organisation. The fact that an organisation has decided
to implement BIM does not necessarily mean that the quality of their Production
Information is necessarily higher. Similarly, and as with most service based
industries, the most important assets are its people, as such the collective capabilities
of its users can be taken to represent the organisations overall BIM maturity. In this
regard the research suggests that the level of type of benefits and the overall project
performance can be partly attributed to these factors regardless of the design tools
employed. The Interviewees were consistent in their view that the outputs of the
Production Information process haven’t significantly changed, although the toolsets
used to arrive at the final product have. BIM tools bring a level of automation into
the process which offer potential savings in time and effort yet the interpretation of
the data output still requires a skilled and experienced user to be able to make
accurate judgments on what is presented within the virtual prototype. An example of
this from the research is provided via Interviewee 3 who represents a leading design
organisation in the ‘early adopter’ category;
“…the quality of our information is absolute, what it does affect is the
process, it will affect how much time and effort we will spend in that process,
I’d like to think that working in 2D or 3D our information would be the same
quality, we still have professional liability no matter what medium you put
that in…”
Similarly, Interviewee 7 who represents a design organisation from the ‘early
majority’ category also displayed confidence in the quality of the final product
delivered;
“…I’d be pretty confident were be able to get the document set right, I think
we have got a very strong pool of staff that enables us to do that, you still
need good people evaluating what's going on otherwise mistakes will
happen...”
These findings counter much of the literature which gives the impression that all
traditional 2D projects are inherently flawed. As such they serve as useful indications
63
of the primary importance of the quality of the human resources over and above any
contemporary technological based solutions and the process automation they bring.
This point was surmised by Interviewee 5;
“…the hard and software is only about 20per cent of what you are doing, it’s
still about people, it’s about peoples interaction how they work with each other
and the information they provide to each other...”
5.9 Factor 7 - Harnessing the Potential of Innovative BIM technologies
BIM is a powerful agent for change because the ‘digitisation’ of design information
enables a large number of potential applications and benefits for project stakeholders
across the industry (Kreider, 2010). An organisations BIM maturity is considered to
be an important factor in improving the quality of Production Information and the
generation of benefits as the research appears to show that a higher relative level of
expertise appears to enable access to value adding technologies, processes and
business opportunities. Each of the ‘early adopters’ provided examples of this in
practice. One example given by Interviewee 3 was the use of the off-site process
innovation ‘DfMA’ (Design for manufacture and assembly) which drives benefits
time, cost, and quality and carbon reduction.
“…we're developing relationships on a number of fronts, one of the more
recent or successful ones is with Laing O'Rouke their Explore faculty, for
DfMA, were picked by them on projects because we can deliver schemes that
work with that system…”
Incidentally the process also requires early contractor involvement in the process
which in itself offers significant benefits. While outside the scope of this particular
study, the effect early contractor involvement on the quality of Production
Information would be an interesting avenue for further research.
Examples from Interviewee 4 include setting up of dedicated BIM consultancy to
capitalise on frequent requests for assistance. A further example was given by
Interviewee 5 who describes how the use of iPads connected to the BIM database has
changed working practices , leading to improved quality;
64
“…we are linking the iPad, the database in the cloud and our associated
information with the objects and elements that we have actually constructed
and that gives us traceability, quality matters.. The iPad has moved 20pc of
the engineer’s time back out on site…”
With reference to the ‘short-term’ benefits identified in McGraw Hill report (Refer
Figure 8) the examples given above seem to fall within the ‘Offer new services’ and
‘market new business’ categories and in this regard the research appears to validate
the literature. For organisations in the ‘early majority’ category, the benefits are
offered by BIM technology are also available, however harnessing the potential
appears to be governed by their capability to manage the significant changes
required. This was illustrated by Interviewee 6 and in part appear to support the
findings discussed in Factor 6;
“…we’re are all aware that's there’s all sorts of advantages of other stuff we
can do, but there's so much out there, but we need to control which bits were
fully engage with because to try and to do the whole thing at the same time
would just blow our collective minds, first we are focusing on how does this
program work and then I suspect we will look at what other opportunities
does it afford us…”
5.10 Factor 8: Balancing Risk and Reward
In order to harness the potential of BIM technologies it is necessary to take the initial
decision to implement BIM and then subsequent decisions thereafter regarding the
pace and scale of the deployment, all of which initiate a process of change both at a
project level and organisational level. As such there are a number risks and rewards
that need to be managed. Ashcraft, (2010) identifies a number of legal risks to be
considered including insurance and design liability related issues as well as
technological and interoperability issues. While these issues may put people off,
there are also the risks of not adopting BIM, for example exclusion from existing
public frameworks as the government mandate come into effect and increasing
numbers of private sector clients and demand BIM and better performance. Similarly
and with regard to Production Information processes, BIM brings both risks and
rewards.
65
Balancing the risks and the rewards can be managed through a process of informed
decision making where investments in resources are carefully targeted to maximise
the potential of opportunities immediately available while also developing a long
term vision for continuous improvement and capitalisation of emerging
opportunities. An important factor in this regard is the ability to understand the
business as it exists in the present while engaging with relevant stakeholders to plan
at both business and project levels. At a project level this alludes to the importance of
BIM execution planning and at a business the importance of having a strategy and
vision in place that places the organisation in a position that balances the risk and
reward. Interviewee 5 illustrates this via analogy;
“…I liken it to riding the crest of a wave, if your windsurfing and you’re on
the wave if you get too far in front, it will just break over the top of you, and
so you have got to ride with everyone else, with the information and
technology you have got at the moment, but with the vision of where you
trying to get to… “
An example of the benefits of getting the balance right was provided by Interviewee
4;
“…without BIM this practice wouldn’t exist, this practice has grown because
of BIM it has allowed us the thrive during the recession…in 2008 we were
working on a series of £1m jobs and few smaller jobs, were now working on
£5m up to £60m…”
While an example of the executing the planning process planning is given below;
“…for every project we have a facilitated meeting with the project team to
work out what's important to them what do they really need to manage so
they can bring the technology and the skills and focus on a particular areas
that are going to give them good return, it’s like picking the low hanging
fruit…”
While specifically on Production Information the following examples were provided
in the research;
66
“…it can be completely automated, a heck of a saving for us, the legal
implications of getting it wrong were massive so it’s a risk mitigation process
for us…”
“…we are doing this because we think it has value not because the client has
asked for it, I don't think we have actually delivered one job yet where the
client has actually demanded it…”
“…do you want to schedule out all the doors on 406 flats?..No, that's soul
destroying if somebody gets a door wrong that’s 60 wrong doors, so we can
limit some of our risk with it…”
67
5.11 Factor 9: Integration Barriers
A significant theme that emerged from the research was the experience of
procurement related barriers that prevent the full potential of collaborative working
using BIM to be realised. Typically this manifested as either a delay to the
consultants information exchange necessary for an effective coordination process, or
a lack of BIM compatibility or capability altogether. The integration of design
disciplines and their respective information is one of the major benefits identified in
the literature and in this regard the degree of integration has a large impact on the
quality of Production Information. As Interviewee 6 put it;
“…because a lot of the other consultants aren't on Revit, we have to revert to
the lowest common denominator which is a bunch of drawings for them to go
through…”.
This alludes to the significant erosion of potential if members of the team are not
aligned with BIM processes as many of the reported benefits are dependent on access
to compatible and timely provision of information into the BIM database.
A particular issue appears to be a fundamental incompatibility between existing
procurement methodologies and the requirement for ‘shifting the effort’ necessary to
resolve design issues early as characterised by the Mcleamey curve. Integration
between Architects and Structural Engineers appears to occur quite satisfactorily
within the context of Level 2 BIM, however most Interviewees noted that delays to
the appointment and limitations on the scope of design services of M&E consultants
and subcontractors was a major barrier for improvements in productivity;
“…they (M&E) won’t want to do anything until design freeze and that’s too
late, on the couple of jobs I've been involved with, we've been basically fitting
in the M&E to an existing building and that's not how this process is
supposed to work…”
“…you see so much reluctance to get involved early doors because there's so
much work that would be abortive…”
68
“…all the wash about BIM being integrated it doesn't really work with the
process at the moment because of the way designs are progressed at
completely different timescales…”
“…if the whole project team isn't working to the same goal and if the whole
project team isn't looking to deliver information, it’s not going to happen…”
These issues appear to be deeply rooted within procurement and contractual related
practices as well as a simple incompatibility in the processes that each discipline
need to follow to execute a design and still achieve a profit. Further rationalisation
of the causes would be speculation and beyond the scope of this particular study,
however a future study into the benefits and barriers of using integrated procurement
methods such as IPD (Integrated Project Delivery) on BIM projects would be an
interesting avenue for further research. The Interviewees offered several views on the
issues associated with this;
“…what we have got to go to is an early contractor involvement where this
can work, because you’re engaging people from the beginning who are going
to take this right until the end…”
“…there are people on the project at execute level that needs to drive it...”
While issues such as hardware and software issues and training costs issues were
reported by the Interviewees as barriers to progress, it is apparent that there are far
greater barriers preventing the full potential of the BIM workflow that may be
beyond the remit of those responsible for the delivery of quality Production
Information to solve. An important factor appears to be the need for comprehensive
understanding of process at client and client advisor level to select a procurement
methodology that enables the BIM process to function as intended. It appears that the
design consultants are capable, willing and able to embrace the changes albeit at a
rate to suit own individual circumstances, the question seems to be if the client side
of industry can align itself to match the requirements of the BIM paradigm, this is
illustrated below;
“…at the moment it’s being left to the designers and contractors to sort out
because the client just doesn't understand…”
69
“…we can do it dead easy, but getting someone to know what they are doing
with it at the other end is a completely different ball game all together, we've
spent so long as a practice promoting 3D integration, with so much
resistance…I'm whole heartedly behind getting there I just wish we could do
it tomorrow…”
“…you explain to them that it’s a party and everyone has got to come to it for
it to work…”
“…we’re finding it very difficult to enforce on projects because the industry
just isn't ready for it, everyone's at different at stages, people won’t pay more,
they won’t pay it even if there's potential savings...”
“…the potential for simultaneous working is not ingrained in the business, it
is within our design office, it may well be within our consultants, as a
construction team or the stakeholders, were not there yet…”
Despite these challenges there remains a huge amount of potential for improvements
in quality. Industry leaders appear to be resolute in the value it brings themselves and
their partners;
“…there's nothing that stops us doing our job we still work the way we work,
if a contractor’s got zero interest in BIM, we’ll still work in BIM and they'll
get their drawings at the end of it…”
“…more and more often were working with people we want to be working
with, most companies that we work with a pretty proficient, increasing were
in a position where we can choose who we work with, I think that's key to
success, we can pick who we want to work with, we still occasionally get the
arranged marriage scenario…”
“…we’re not doing this because the government wants it, were doing it
because we perceive a business need for it...”
“…I think on the next job I think they be a bit more savvy…it’s incredible
really the benefits...everyone tends to have a light bulb moment, and will
never look back…”
70
5.12 Summary of Findings
Based on the analysis and discussion a summary in which key factors arising from
the work are presented below;
Factor 1: Effective virtual prototyping
1. That the ability to effectively virtual prototype is a fundamental difference
between the 2DCAD and BIM design paradigms. BIM enables a process of
delivering Production Information in a way that is fit for purpose. By building
virtually, design problems are brought to the surface and resolved, leading to a
reduced risk of rework.
Factor 2: Visualisation and understanding
1. The ability for the whole team to accurately and quickly visualise and understand
the design is an essential factor in delivering better quality Production
Information. The research verifies the literature on this matter.
2. BIM is a direct counter measure to the problem of erroneous interpretation and
poor decision making as problems are revealed, understood and resolved.
3. Subsequential learning is embedded in the process and is a powerful aid in
improving decision making. Over time improvements in understanding across the
industry will bring benefits from improved understanding of design and the
reduction of ‘black boxes.’
4. Visualisation does not just refer to 3D but can be taken to mean to be able to ‘see
with clarity’ many aspects of the design, e.g. 4D, 5D, 6D. Clarity brings
efficiency.
Factor 3: Upfront investment driving downstream value
1. Time invested in developing the BIM database can save the initial investment
many times over and opens up the potential to use the data for multiple value
adding activities.
2. At an organisational level investment in staff and technology that facilitates
better long term benefits represents a sound philosophy of management and
decision making.
Factor 4: Process rigour and Transparency
1. The BIM workflow forces early intellectual investment in resolving the design by
forcing the user to stop and fix design issues. This reduces the risk of unresolved
information being ‘passed down the line.’
2. The BIM workflow is based on a sound process methodology which demands a
level of rigour that directly counters the problem of incomplete and
uncoordinated information, although this this is heavily dependent on the
capability and diligence of the user.
71
Factor 5: Information cohesion, integrity and Automation
1. Automation and inherent data integrity are fundamental toolset improvements
which have a positive impact on the quality of Production Information. The
research validates the theory contained in the literature.
Factor 6: User capability and organisational BIM maturity
1. A critical factor in the delivery of quality Production Information is the
capability, experience and diligence of the user supported by an organisation with
mature practices.
2. Leading companies will likely deliver quality whatever design paradigm or tools
are used. (User capability is a more important factor)
3. Intellectual effort expended by capable, diligent and experienced staff, supported
by mature organisational processes and appropriate BIM tools are core
requirements for delivering high quality Production Information.
Factor 7: Harnessing the potential of innovative BIM technologies
1. Organisations with the aspiration and capability to take advantage of the
emerging opportunities brought about by the digitisation of the construction
industry are able to make significant advances in process and benefits.
2. BIM facilitates the consistent delivery of quality Production Information and the
generation of significant other benefits and business opportunities.
Factor 8: Balancing Risk and reward
1. BIM brings both risks and significant rewards that need to be carefully managed
and planned for both at a business level and at a project level. Correctly
balancing and managing the risk of BIM implementation brings these rewards.
2. Awareness and holistic understanding of the available options and capabilities of
project partners and the wider industry is necessary to balance the level of risk
and reward.
3. The industry is already experiencing significant changes which will continue to
gather momentum post 2016. It is necessary to be aware of and plan for changes
and opportunities brought about by a rapidly emerging field of expertise.
Factor 9: Integration barriers
1. Although BIM has the potential to facilitate ‘simultaneous working’ and
integration, procurement issues appear to significantly and negatively impact on
the ability of project teams to realise an integrated design process. The theory
contained in the literature is not therefore verified by the research conducted in
this study.
2. Significant erosion of the benefits reported in the literature result from
procurement barriers to providing the level of information required at the correct
time. While structural engineers appear to integrate satisfactorily, M&E design
appears to be a particular issue.
72
3. Regardless of the barriers, there is still inherent value in BIM processes, those
organisations interviewed would not choose to revert back to 2DCAD process.
4. Leading companies who have demonstrated the potential of BIM based design
are able to invoke a ‘light bulb moment’ for change in the thinking of clients who
have experienced the benefits of BIM based design.
73
6.0 Chapter Six – Conclusions
6.1 Introduction
The principle aim of the study was to investigate the essential factors associated with the
delivery of improved Production Information quality using BIM enabled working
practices. This chapter therefore presents concluding remarks of the study by attempting
to connect factors identified in the literature with the data collected during the study.
In support of the aim, Section 6.3 addresses objective 5 which was to conclude the study
with a series of recommendations that can assist design organisations in maximising the
potential of BIM enabled by design processes within the context of the factors identified
in the research.
The Limitations of this study and recommendation for further studies are described in
Section 6.4 and 6.5 respectively.
6.2 Conclusions
The UK construction industry, as discussed in Part A of the Literature review, has been
recognised as suffering from poor performance against a range of key benchmarks.
Untrustworthy Production Information has been found to result in failure across a
number of quality indicators including, timeliness, accuracy, completeness, coordination
and conformance, all of which lead to the waste of rework. Primary contributing factors
presented in the Root cause analysis (Refer Figure 15) included fragmentation, the
inherently flawed nature of the 2DCAD paradigm and poor information management
practices.
In Part B of the literature review, strategic countermeasures initiated by the Government
via PAS1192-2 were identified as were the characteristics and benefits of the BIM based
design paradigm. A summary of the interaction of the findings from Parts A and B of the
literature review were presented in the Theoretical model for the study in Chapter 3
which formed the basis for the research questions and data collection and analysis phase.
74
The conclusions from the primary research are presented here;
The study firstly concludes that adopting BIM based design does result in a beneficial
change to the way people work and the way Production Information is produced and
managed.
Much of this can be attributed to the fundamental change in capability of the software
which was found to facilitate ‘virtual prototyping’ of the building in way that is fit for
purpose. The ability to virtually construct and simulate the building in advance of
construction brings issues to the surface that can be accurately visualised, interpreted and
understood. The clarity that comes from understanding enables better decisions to be
taken that span across the project lifecycle. This can result in a better chance of getting
the build right first time and eliminating the waste of rework.
This study concludes that the decision to invest in BIM technologies represents a sound
long term investment that offers significant opportunities for those willing and able to
take full advantage of its potential.
The emerging standards and protocols, particularly PAS1192-2 are intended to bring
about an improved level of and standardisation and accountability which demands a
level information management many may not be used too, nor see the relevance of.
However, the fact is that BIM is the core facet and mechanism through which the
Governments construction strategy aims to deliver a change to industry working
practices. As such its implementation brings changes to the way people think and work
and with that comes both risks and rewards.
This study concludes that by carefully planning and balancing the risks and rewards of
BIM implementation, the opportunities brought about by industry change and the
development of innovative technologies can bring about significant business and project
level benefits.
The study found that considerable improvements in information integrity, cohesion and
automation enabled by BIM were an important factor in the delivery of quality
Production Information. The sooner that an organisation is able to realise and harness the
inherent potential within the technology the greater the chances of capitalising on the
emerging opportunities as the critical mass of industry begins to understand how the ever
growing applications enabled by BIM technology can enhance their business. The
75
research showed that ‘early adopter’ organisations who have correctly balanced the risk
now appear to be generating significant benefits in many facets of their business
including time and cost efficiencies, but also in terms of reputation, marketing and value
generating collaborations with other leading practices.
Looking forward, the construction industry is well known for its slow pace of change,
this in itself brings both risk and rewards as the industry changes look set to continue for
years to come. BIM maturity Level 3 has not yet officially been defined and the rapid
development of technology is certain to bring about new techniques, technologies and
opportunities for those with the foresight and capability to harness them.
This study concludes that the user capability and organisational BIM maturity is the
most important positive factor in delivering quality Production Information and
increased value.
In contrast to the holistic and wide ranging viewpoint of BIM technology, the research
found that BIM is in effect only a tool. As such, the tool is still heavily dependent in the
capability of the user to operate it, the adage ‘rubbish in, rubbish out’ is most applicable.
Without competent, experienced and diligent users BIM technology cannot realise its
full potential. Furthermore, the use of the increasing array of value adding BIM
applications may be restricted in part only by the an organisations ability to operate it. It
can therefore be concluded that a long term investment in staff development and
capability is necessary to enable those applications that will deliver the highest value.
Looking forward, the latest and most valuable technology is in time, likely to become
commonplace. Focused research, long term investment, development and application of
an organisations best human and material assets towards specific value adding
technologies is likely to bring to significant benefits. To achieve a strong staff capability
and overall BIM maturity it is necessary to invest in one.
This study concludes that uncollaborative procurement practices and a lack of
understanding at client level are major negative factors that prevent discipline
integration, leading to the erosion of the potential of BIM based design to counter the
problems associated with fragmentation.
While user capability is considered to be most important positive factor in the delivery of
quality production information, the lack of disciplinary integration resulting from
uncollaborative procurement practices was found to be the most important negative
76
factor. The quality of the final product can only be as good as the information it was
based up at the time it was produced and issued. If the necessary information is not
available at the time it is required, the major indicators of quality as defined in this study
are all adversely affected. For clarity they are repeated here; completeness, coordination,
accuracy, conformance and timeliness. A major benefit and fundamental principle of
BIM based design is the resolution of design issues in the design stage where they
belong. Regardless of the innovative technologies used rework of some kind can almost
be guaranteed if a design discipline is missing from the design process, in this regard it is
concluded that while BIM offers the potential for more integrated working, in practice
the way in which projects are procured will most likely have a greater effect on the
quality of the final output than the software platform used. BIM enables a process of
virtual prototyping that is fit for purpose, until there is widespread alignment with more
integrated project delivery methodologies, the problems of fragmentation are likely to
remain.
In the long term and on a positive note, increased awareness of the importance of
integration combined with a demonstration of the value that BIM technology can bring
to a project of any size will result in a change in thinking and priorities in favour of using
the right tools to deliver the right results. Ultimately most people seem to have a ‘light
bulb’ moment when the holistic benefits of BIM and the associated working practices
become apparent, given time it is expected that increasing numbers of clients and
executive level stakeholders will demand a process that contains a complementary and
integrated mix software platforms and procurement practices of that allow projects to
succeed in delivering better quality Production Information and overall project
performance.
77
6.3 Recommendations
In part fulfilment of Objective 5 and within the context of the factors identified by
the research, a series of recommendations are offered to those organisations seeking
to future benefits through the use of BIM enabled design;
1. Create a strategic vision that allows capitalisation of the risk and rewards
brought about by industry changes.
2. Undertake an internal and external capability assessment to identify and
understand what factors are affecting the potential level of benefits both at
project and organisational levels.
3. Research and identify the ‘low hanging fruit’ as well as the long term
technology investments that align with an organisations vision. Ensure a
robust business case for innovative technology investments.
4. BIM complements lean thinking and lean project delivery; replace non-value
adding activities with more appropriate processes. Right process will bring
right results (Liker, 2004).
5. Develop a philosophy of developing people and teams. Long term Investment
in staff capability, is the most important investment decision. Bring in
capable staff with experience in the selected technological applications to
increase your available toolsets and increase overall BIM capability.
6. Build value adding collaborations with compatible and capable consultants.
Work together to intelligently harness the BIM database for multiple uses
across stages and design disciplines to offer new and integrated services to
clients.
7. Use the full potential of the technology to present complex design items with
clarity so that clients, contractors and the extended supply chain can
accurately interpret and understand the design intent.
8. Use the full potential of the technology to automate and standardise processes
as much as possible to reduce the risks of human error and lack of diligence.
9. Continuously seek to improve the clarity and quality of the Production
Information produced with the intention of eliminating all forms of rework.
Track progress with appropriate metrics and KPI’s.
78
10. BIM is a rapidly evolving field that will continue to evolve for some years.
Take responsibility for keeping up to date. Regularly reporting and share
knowledge with regard to changes in technologies, standards and
opportunities in order to capitalise on the growing value adding applications
offered by BIM.
11. Track the progress and deployment of more integrated forms of project
delivery (Such as IPD). Research, understand and implement those principles
and practices where possible.
12. Seek to deliver innovative solutions that instil ‘Light bulb’ moments in those
with the authority to direct project procurement routes.
79
6.4 Limitations of the Study
There are a number of limitations of the study. Firstly, the number of research
participants was only seven, to obtain a degree of statistical significance a far larger
scale study would need to be conducted, however this was not the intention of the
study nor was it feasible within the research period. Similarly, the research focused
specifically on Architects, excluding of many other disciplines however this
rationalised as often in the lead designer role, Architects were most likely to have a
holistic view of the change brought about by BIM processes. In justification of this
approach, criterion sampling was used to ensure those selected sufficiently
experienced to provide meaningful data. Triangulation via inclusion of the Civil
Engineering and Design management professions achieved little in the way of
external validity but did offer a useful cross comparison of data which was
considered more important that making wider generalisations. Similarly, because of
the sample was subdivided into the ‘early adopter’ and ‘early majority’
classifications, the transferability of the findings is considered to be limited,
representing only the researchers interpretation of the data available within the
allotted timeframe.
Another limitation was that of researcher bias, this is a well-documented risk of the
qualitative approach. In this regard, conscious efforts were taken to avoid any
preconceived notions and accurately transcribe the interviews to avoid any influence
and misinterpretation of meaning.
Finally, despite the initial intention, this study did not follow a strictly Grounded
theory approach as originally intended by Glaser & Strauss. This was because the
study came to be more one of explanation with an emphasis on providing practical
recommendations rather than generation of theory. As such the research design was
tailored to suit the objectives of the study rather than following a strict adherence to a
particular research tradition.
80
6.5 Recommendations for Future Research
Four avenues for further research were identified.
Firstly, with reference to Factor 9 identified in this study, by seeking to understand
why unintegrated procurement methods continue to be used when alternative options
appear to be available, research could be conducted to investigate the barriers
preventing the widespread use of Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and associated
collaborative contracts in the UK. Evidence from the USA (AIA, 2007; Eastman et
al, 2011) appears to suggest that the combination of BIM and IPD brings widespread
benefits which can address the problems of fragmentation.
Secondly, although the researcher was not specifically looking for associations
between BIM and Lean thinking, many of the factors that emerged from the data
appeared to display a positive correlation with the principles of Lean. Although
PAS1192-2 does reference Lean, a specific study into the association benefits of
between BIM and Lean within the UK context would be an avenue for research.
Thirdly, detailed case studies exploring the issues associated with projects delivered
using BIM level 2 working practices as specified by PAS1192-2 would be useful to
investigate how the documents impact upon the performance of both small and large
scale projects.
Finally, by seeking to emulate the behaviours and practices of leading companies a
wider criterion based study of ‘Early adopters’ could be conducted to investigate in
detail the factors and benefits of highly performing teams who use innovative BIM
technologies to deliver better projects.
81
References
Abukhder, J., & Munns, A. K. (2003). Attributing management problems on
construction projects to project information. Proceedings 19th Annual
ARCOM Conference, Brighton.
Ackermann F., Eden C., Williams T.,(1997) Modelling litigation: mixing qualitative
and quantitative approaches, Interfaces, 27(2), 48–65.
AIA, U. (2007). AIA California Council. Integrated project delivery: a guide
[M/OL]. Washington: The American Institute of Architects, : American
Institute of Architects.
Alarcón, L. F., & Mardones, D. A. (1998). Improving the design-construction
interface. Paper presented at the 6th Annual Conference of the International
Group for Lean Construction. Proceedings… Guarujá, Brasil: IGLC.
Ashcraft, Howard W. "Building information modelling: a framework for
collaboration." Constr. Law. 28 (2008): 5.
Azhar, S. (2011). Building information modelling (BIM): Trends, benefits, risks, and
challenges for the AEC industry. Leadership and Management in
Engineering, 11(3), 241-252.
B. Hardin, (2012). BIM and Construction Management: Proven Tools, Methods and
Workflow. Indianapolis: Wiley,
Baldwin, A.N., Austin, S.A., Thorpe, A. and Hassan, T.M. (1995) Simulating quality
within the design process, in Proceedings of the American Society of Civil
Engineers (ASCE) Second Congress on Computing in Civil Engineering,
Atlanta, Georgia, June, pp. 1475± 82.
Ballard, G. (1999), Can Pull Techniques Be Used In Design Management, Presented
at the Conference on Concurrent Engineering in Construction, Helsinki,
Finland. August 26–27.
Barlish, K., & Sullivan, K. (2012). How to measure the benefits of BIM—A case
study approach. Automation in Construction, 24, 149-159.
BIM task group, (2014). The Case study for HMYOI Cookham Wood Report
Available at: http://www.bimtaskgroup.org/wp-
content/uploads/2013/07/HMYOI-Cookham-Wood.pdf (Accessed: 18th April
2014)
BIPS, 2008 - Cad-Manual 2008; anvisning; C102. Bips, press release June 2008.
Available at: http://bips.dk/værktøjsemne/cad-manual-2008
BIS. (2011). A report for the Government Construction Client Group, Building
Information Modelling (BIM) working party strategy. Department for
Business Innovation & Skills (BIS). Retrieved from
http://www.cita.ie/images/assets/uk%20bim%20strategy%20(summary).pdf
82
Bloomberg, L. D., & Volpe, M. (2012). Completing your qualitative dissertation: A
road map from beginning to end. Sage Publications.
Bloomberg, L. D., & Volpe, M. (2012). Completing your qualitative dissertation: A
road map from beginning to end. Sage Publications.
Bouchlaghem, D. (2011). Collaborative Working in Construction. Taylor & Francis.
British Standards Institute (2007) BS 1192; Collaborative production of architectural,
engineering and construction information – code of practice [Online]
Available at:
http://www.ihsti.com/CIS/Doc.aspx?AuthCode=CC700C&DocNum=285074
&from=%2fCIS%2fSearch.aspx%3fAuthCode%3dCC700C%26fs%3d0_doc
_Type_False_AND%26t%3dBS1192%26pt%3ds%26st%3d0&t=BS1192&pt
=s&type (Accessed: 10 July 2014)."
Bryde, D., Broquetas, M., & Volm, J. M. (2012). The project benefits of Building
Information Modelling (BIM). International Journal of Project Management.
doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.12.001.
Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods: Oxford university press.
Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2011). Business Research Methods 3e: Oxford university
press.
BSI. (2013). PAS 1192-2:2013 - Specification for information management for the
capital/delivery phase of construction projects using building information
modelling. Available at http://shop.bsigroup.com/Navigate-by/PAS/PAS-
1192-22013/ (Accessed 22 January 2014)
Burati, J.L., Farrington, J.J. and Ledbetter, W.B. (1992) Causes of quality deviations
in design and construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 118(1), 34–49.
CIC. (2011). Government construction strategy. Retrieved 1/22/1014, from
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/government-construction-
strategy
CIC. (2013). The BIM Protocol.
Clough, P., & Nutbrown, C. (2012). A student's guide to methodology. Sage.
Coates, P., Arayici, Y., Koskela, K., Kagioglou, M., Usher, C., & O'Reilly, K.
(2010). The key performance indicators of the BIM implementation process.
Coles E. J., Design Management: A Study of Practice in the Building Industry, The
Chartered Institute of Building, Occasional Paper No.42, UK, 1990, 32.
Constructing Excellence (2012) 2011 UK industry performance report based on the
UK construction industry key performance indicators. [Online] Available at:
http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/Journals/1/Files/2011/7/13/KPI2011v7.pd
f (Accessed: 28August 2014).
83
Construction, M. H. (2012). The business value of BIM in North America: multi-
year trend analysis and user ratings (2007-2012). Bedford, MA: McGraw-Hill
Construction.
Crabtree, B. F., & Miller, W. L. (1999). Using codes and code manuals: a template
organizing style of interpretation. Doing qualitative research, 2, 163-177.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches: Sage.
Crotty, R. (2011). The Impact of Building Information Modelling: Transforming
Construction. Routledge.
Dawood, N. N. and Iqbal, N. (2010) 'Building information modelling (BIM): A
visual & whole life cycle approach', CONVR2010, Sendai, Japan, November
4-5, 2010, in Makanae, K., Yabuki, N. and Kashiyama, K. (eds) Proceedings
of the 10th
international conference on construction applications of virtual
reality. CONVR2010 Organizing Committee, pp.7-14"
DeFraites A. A. Jr., Fee versus quality, ASCE Journal of Professional Issues in
Engineering, 1989, 115(2), 125–128.
Denscombe, M. (2010). Ground Rules for Good Research: Guidelines for Good
Practice. 2nd edn. Maidenhead: Open University Press."
Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., & Liston, K. (2011). BIM handbook: A guide to
building information modelling for owners, managers, designers, engineers
and contractors: Wiley. com.
Erdogan, B., Anumba, C. J., Bouchlaghem, D., & Nielsen, Y. (2008). Collaboration
environments for construction: Implementation case studies. Journal of
Management in Engineering, 24(4), 234-244.
Evbuomwan, N. F. O. and Anumba, C. J., (1995) .Towards a concurrent engineering
model for design and build projects. Journal of the Institution of Structural
Engineers, , 74(5), 73–78.
Fellows, R., & Liu, A. (2008). Research methods for construction. Oxford, UK
Blackwell.
Formoso, C. T., Tzotzopoulos, P., Jobim, M. S., & Liedtke, R. (1998). Developing a
protocol for managing the design process in the building industry. Paper
presented at the 6th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean
Construction, Guaruja, SP.
Gallaher, M. P., O’Connor, A. C., Dettbarn, J. L., & Gilday, L. T. (2004). Cost
analysis of inadequate inoperability in the capital facilities industry. National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Technical Report No. NIST
GCR-04-867.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2009). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies
for qualitative research: Transaction Publishers.
84
Hardin, B. (2011). BIM and construction management: proven tools, methods, and
workflows. John Wiley & Sons.
Harty, J.; Laing, R., (2013) Facilitating meaningful collaboration in architectural
design through the adoption of BIM (Building Information Modelling),
Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD), 2013 IEEE
17th International Conference on , vol., no., pp.502,508, 27-29 June
doi:10.1109/CSCWD.2013.6581013
HM Government. (2012). industrial strategy: government and industry in
partnership. Retrieved June 10, 2014, from
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Industrial+strategy%3A+government+an
d+indu stry+in+partnership&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-
US:official&client=firefox-a"
Howell, G.A. (1999) What is lean construction: 1999, Paper presented at the Seventh
Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, 26–28
July.
Berkeley, CA.J. Harty, (2012) The Impact of Digitalisation on the Management Role
of Architectural Technology.
Jacobsson, M., & Linderoth, H. C. (2010). The influence of contextual elements,
actors’ frames of reference, and technology on the adoption and use of ICT in
construction projects: a Swedish case study. Construction Management and
Economics, 28(1), 13-23.
Josephson P-E., Hammarlund Y. (1999)The causes and costs of defects in
construction. A study of seven building projects, Automation in Construction,
8(6), 681–642.
Kagioglou, M., Cooper, R., Aouad, G., Sexton, M., and Sheath, D. (1998). “A
Generic Guide to the Design and Construction Process Protocol”. Research
Report. The University of Salford, Salford, UK.
Karhu, V., & Lahdenpera, P. (1999). A formalised process model of current Finnish
design and construction practice. International journal of construction
information technology, 7, 51-71.
King, N. (2004). Using Interviews in Quantitative Research. Essential guide to
qualitative methods in organizational research, 2.
Koskela, L., Ballard, G., & Tanhuanpaa, V.-P. (1997). Towards lean design
management. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 5 th annual
conference of the International Group for Lean Construction.
Kreider, R., Messner, J., & Dubler, C. (2010). Determining the frequency and impact
of applying BIM for different purposes on projects. In Proceedings of the 6th
International Conference on Innovation in Architecture, Engineering &
Construction (AEC), June (pp. 9-11).
85
Li H., Love P. E. D., Drew D.,( 2000). Modelling the effects of prolonged overtime
work on project cost and quality, Engineering Construction and Architectural
Management, 7(3), 211–221.
Liker, J. K. (2004). The Toyota way: 14 management principles from the world’s
greatest manufacturer.
Love, P. E., Mandal, P., Smith, J., & Li, H. (2000). Modelling the dynamics of
design error induced rework in construction. Construction Management &
Economics, 18(5), 567-574.
Love, P. E., Mandal, P., Smith, J., & Li, H. (2000). Modelling the dynamics of
design error induced rework in construction. Construction Management &
Economics, 18(5), 567-574
Love, P.E.D. and Gunasekaran, A. (1997), "Concurrent engineering: Research and
Applications, Vol5 No.2, June, pp.155-62
Lu, W., Zhang, D., & Rowlinson, S.(2013) BIM collaboration: a conceptual model
and its characteristics. Arcom Conference
M. Bew and J. Underwood, (2010) Delivering BIM to the UKmarket,"" in Handbook
of Research on Building Information Modelling and Construction
Informatics: Concepts and Technologies, J. Underwood and U. Isikdag, Eds.
USA: Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global), pp. 30-64.
M. Ibrahim, R. Krawczyk, G. Schipporeit, (2004) A web-based approach to
transferring architectural information to the construction site based on the
BIM object concept, CAADRIA 2004 Conference, Seoul, South Korea, pp.
1–10.
M. Latham, (1994) Constructing the team: The final report of the
Government/Industry review of procurement and contractual arrangements in
the UK construction industry, HMSO, UK.
McGeorge, J.F. (1988) Design productivity: a quality problem. Journal of
Management in Engineering, 4(4), 350–362.
Narayan, K. Lalit (2008). Computer Aided Design and Manufacturing. New Delhi:
Prentice Hall of India. p. 3. ISBN 812033342X.
NBS. (2014). National BIM Report 2013.
NEDC Report, Achieving quality on building sites, Building and Economic
Development Committee, NEDO, London, 1987.
Neff, G., Fiore-Silfvast, B., & Dossick, C. S. (2010). A case study of the failure of
digital communication to cross knowledge boundaries in virtual construction.
Information, Communication & Society, 13(4), 556-573.
Penttilä, H. (2006). Describing the changes in architectural information technology to
understand design complexity and free-form architectural expression.
86
Philp, D (2012) BIM and the UK Construction Strategy. Building Information
Modelling [Online], Available:
http://www.thenbs.com/topics/bim/articles/bimAndTheUKConstructionStrate
gy.asp [Accessed 05-04-2014]."
Qu, S. Q., & Dumay, J. (2011). The qualitative research interview. Qualitative
Research in Accounting & Management, 8(3), 238-264.
Ralph Kreider, John Messner, and Craig Dubler, “Determining the Frequency and
Impact of Applying BIM for Different Purposes on Building Projects,” in
Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Innovation in
Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) (Penn State University,
University Park, PA, USA, 2010), http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/AEC2010/.
REGH. (2014). Research Ethics and Governance Handbook.
www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/research/reghandbook.pdf (Accessed 11
July 2014)
Sacks, R., Koskela, L., Dave, B. A., & Owen, R. (2010). Interaction of lean and
building information modelling in construction. Journal of construction
engineering and management, 136(9), 968-980.
Saunders, M. N., Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2011). Research methods
for business students, 5/e: Pearson Education India.
Shahrin, F. A., & Johansen, E. (2013, June). Challenges in Engaging the Client
During the Capture, Translation, Transformation and Delivery (cttd) of Client
Requirements (cr) Within The building I. In 7th Nordic Conference on
Construction Economics and Organization (Vol. 2013). Akademika forlag.
Sinclair, D. (2012). BIM overlay to the RIBA outline plan of work. London, UK:
RIBA.
Sinclair, D. (2012). BIM Overlay to the RIBA Outline Plan of Work.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology. Handbook of
qualitative research, 273-285.
Succar, B. (2009). Building information modelling framework: A research and
delivery foundation for industry stakeholders. Automation in Construction,
18(3), 357-375.
Succar, B., Sher, W., & Williams, A. (2012). Measuring BIM performance: Five
metrics. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 8(2), 120-142.
Svelinger P.-O., (1996) Organisational Coordination in the Design Phase Report 44, ,
Chalmers, Goteborg, Sweden.
Thomassen, M. (2011). BIM & Collaboration in the AEC Industry. Construction
Management, Master's (MSc) Thesis (Released 31 August 2011, p. 120, in:
http://projekter. aau.
87
dk/projekter/files/55376698/BIM_Collaboration_in_the_AEC_Industry_by_
Mats_Thomassen. pdf.
Tilley P. A., (2000) McFallan S. L., Design and Documentation Quality Survey
Designers’ Perspectives, BCE DOC 00/113. CSIRO – Building, Construction
and Engineering, Melbourne, Australia.
Tilley, P. A., & Barton, R. (1997). Design and documentation deficiency-causes and
effects. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Construction
Process Reengineering.
Tilley, P. A., Wyatt, A., & Mohamed, S. (1997). Indicators of design and
documentation deficiency. In Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Conference of
the International Group for Lean Construction (pp. 137-148).
Winch, GM,. Managing Construction Projects. (2010) Chichester: Wiley-
Blackwell, , p.xiii.
Bibliography
Arwen, R. (2010). Early Stage Research Training: Epistemology & Ontology in
Social Science Research.
https://www2.le.ac.uk/colleges/socsci/documents/.../EpistFeb10.pdf
De Vaus, D. (2001). Research design in social research: Sage.
Farrell, P. (2011). Writing a built environment dissertation (1st ed.). Chichester,
West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.
Grillo, A. and Jardim-Goncalves, R. (2010) ‘Value proposition on interoperability of
BIM and collaborative working environments’, Automation in Construction,
19, pp. 522-530 Science Direct [Online] DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2009.11.003
(Accessed: 20 May 2013
Holzer, D. (2011). BIM's Seven Deadly Sins. International Journal of Architectural
Computing, 9(4), 463-480.
Humble, Á. M. (2012). Qualitative data analysis software: A call for understanding,
detail, intentionality, and thoughtfulness. Journal of Family Theory &
Review, 4(2), 122-137.
Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2005). Practical research: Pearson Merrill Prentice
Hall Columbus, OH.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2010). Designing qualitative research: Sage.
Neuman, W. L. (2005). Social research methods: Quantitative and qualitative
approaches: Allyn and Bacon.
Robert Eadie, Mike Browne, Henry Odeyinka, Clare McKeown, Sean McNiff, BIM
implementation throughout the UK construction project lifecycle: An
88
analysis, Automation in Construction, Volume 36, December 2013, Pages
145-151, ISSN 0926-5805, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.09.001.
Saluja, C. (2009). A Process Mapping Procedure for Planning Building Information
Modelling (BIM) Execution on a Building Construction Project (Doctoral
dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University).
Saunders, M. N., Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2011). Research methods
for business students, 5/e: Pearson Education India.
Sebastian, R. (2010) Integrated design and engineering using building information
modelling: a pilot project of small-scale housing development in the
Netherlands. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 6(2), 103–
10.
Veal, A. J. (2005). Business research methods: A managerial approach: Pearson
Education Australia/Addison Wesley.
Walliman, N. (2006). Social research methods: Sage.Azhar, S. (2011). Building
information modeling (BIM): Trends, benefits, risks, and challenges for the
AEC industry. Leadership and Management in Engineering, 11(3), 241-252.
89
Appendices
90
Appendix A: The seven core components of Level 2 BIM (Adapted from BIM
Task Group, 2014).
No Document Description Status
1 PAS1192:2:2013
‘Specification for information
management for the
capital/delivery phase of
construction projects using
building information
modelling’
This document provides information on the
management of data produced within a BIM
project environment, and supplements the
processes and procedures contained in BS
1192:2007. As well as expanding the CDE
(Common Data Environment) information
contained in BS 1192:2007. It also describes
documents which should be produced as part of
the BIM process, and details roles and
responsibilities necessary to implement a BIM
process on a project. It introduces concepts such
as employer’s information requirements (EIR) –
the employer’s expression what information they
require from the project and the format it should
be in, and BIM execution plans (BEP) – the
supply chain’s response to the EIR showing how
it will meet its requirements.
Available
- As of
Summer
2014
work has
started to
adopt
PAS
1192-2 as
an ISO
standard
2 PAS1192:3:2014
‘Specification for information
management for the
operational phase of assets
using building information
modelling’
This document describes the same data and
process delivery and use definitions as described
above, but for the operational phase of the asset.
Of key focus is the development of PAS 55
compliance operational strategies and the
effective transfer of data across into operations to
aid soft and effective landings from construction
to operation
Available
3 BS1192:4:2014
‘Collaborative production of
information. Part 4: Fulfilling
employers information
exchange requirements using
COBie – Code of practice’
BS 1192-4 will define expectations for the
exchange of information throughout the lifecycle
of an asset, and will include requirements for
reviewing and checking for compliance,
continuity and completeness. COBie is the UK
Government’s chosen information exchange
schema for federated BIM Level 2, alongside
graphical BIM models and PDF documents.
Draft
Available
Until 31st
July 2014
91
No Document Description Status
4 BIM Protocol Identifies building information models that are
required to be produced by the project team and
puts in place specific obligations, liabilities and
associated limitations on the use of those models.
Can also be used by clients to require the
adoption of particular ways of working – such as
the adoption of a common naming standard.
(CIC, 2013)
Available
5 Government Soft
Landings
A suite of documents describing Soft Landings
policy and processes to ensure effective
involvement of users and operators in the
development of scope, design and delivery. Also
ensuring effective training and handover into
operations and finally the structured gathering of
Post Occupation (Operational) Effectiveness data,
to enhance both the current and future assets.
Available
6 Classification Standardised system being developed to ensure
that data is able to be indexed and structured to
make it easily accessible in a common format
integrates with the Digital Plan of Work.
Currently
being
developed
(2014/15)
7 The Digital Plan
of Works (dPoW)
An industry standard method of describing
geometric, requirements and data deliveries at
key stages of the project cycle.
Currently
being
developed
(2014/15)
92
Appendix B: Fundamental principles of Maturity Level 2 BIM.
No Requirement’s Contents/notes
1 Originators produce definition information in
models which they control, sourcing
information
from other models where required by way of
reference, federation or direct information
exchange.( i.e. independent arch, Struct,
M&E models)
Level 2 Deliverables include:
3D models in native format
on graphical data (COBie)
2D PDF’s
2 (EIR’s)
Provision of a clear definition of the
employer’s information requirements and key
decision points (to form part of the contract
possibly through adoption of the CIC BIM
Protocol).
This document identifies what the client will
require from the supply team throughout the
design, construct and manage process.
Refers to the CIC Scope of Services
Levels of detail
Planning of work
Training
Collaboration process
Integrity and security for the project
Specific inclusions and exclusions
Compliance plan
Definition of project coordinates (space statement)
Schedule of software including version
Exchange of information
Clients strategic objectives
Responsibility matrix
Schedule of standards and guidance
Competence assessment process
BIM tender assessment details
3 Evaluation of the proposed approach,
capability and capacity of each supplier, and
their supply chain, to deliver the required
information, prior to contract award
N/A
4 BIM execution plan (BEP) shall be
developed by the supplier containing:
1) assigned roles, responsibilities and
authorities;
2) standards, methods and procedures; and
3) a resourced master information delivery
index (MIDI), aligned with the project
programme.
The CPix Post-contract BEP template
Roles and detailed resourcing
Revised project milestones
PIM delivery strategy
Approval process/responsibility
Survey strategy/legacy information
Responsibility matrix
Task team information delivery
Detailed project standards including; software
versions to be used, agreed exchange formats and
93
No Requirement’s Contents/notes
methodology, project specific naming conventions,
volume codes and status codes
5 (CDE)
Common data Environment
Provision of a single environment to store
shared
asset data and information
Deliverable is a process for a common environment:
All project information, whether in BIM
environments or in conventional data formats should
be shared using a single collaborative data
environment (CDE)
6 Application of the processes and procedures
contained in associated documents and
standards
BS1192:2007,
CPIx protocol,
CIC, BIM protocol
And others standards as reference n PAS 1192
94
Appendix C: Summary of Research Design
Epistemology: Constructionism
Theoretical perspective: Interpretivism
Methodology: Inductive/Grounded theory
Method: In-depth Interview
(Format taken from Crotty, 1999)
Scope: BIM implementation
Focus: People and process
Unit of analysis: Individuals within Organisational context
Sampling: Criterion
Type: Qualitative
Data managed: Thematic analysis
Analytical Approach: Inductive
Validity: 7 semi-structured interviews, in depth industry experience
When: June to Sept 2014
How Justified: Explanation of/Improvements to theory & practice
Ethical considerations: Signed consent forms
Logistics: Recorded interviews, descriptive coding, interpretive coding, Theme
generation.
(Format taken form Hart, 1998)
95
Appendix D: Interview protocol and Semi-Structured Interview questions.
Category Question
Number
Question
Production
information
processes
1 Please reflect upon your experiences of BIM based Production
Information processes and consider how they have changed when
compared to the 2DCAD paradigm?
Design review
processes
2 Please can you explain the Design review and Coordination
process you follow using BIM based design and reflect on how this
has changed since adopting BIM?
Coordination
benefits
3 With reference to the BIM based design. What are the major
benefits you are experiencing when checking and coordinating
production information.
Advantages of
Simultaneous
working
4 Theory suggests that the BIM based design requires 'shifting the
effort' as per the Mcleamey curve, please can you reflect on your
experiences of this?
Collaborative
working
5 Since adopting BIM based design. What changes have you
experienced in with regard to collaborative working, both
internally and externally?
Information
management
6 Since adopting BIM based design what changes have you observed
in the way Information is managed?
Rework 7 Since adopting BIM based design what changes have you
experienced with regard to the type and extent of rework you
perform that is caused by errors and omissions?
Quality 8 Overall How has BIM based design impacted upon the quality of
the production information you deliver?
Overall
Benefits
9 When compared to the 2D CAD, what have you experienced to be
the greatest Short and long term benefit of the BIM based design
on the delivery of quality production information?
Barriers 10 Can you give any examples of barriers that you have experienced
that prevent you from achieving quality production information?
96
Appendix E Example A1 extract from initial manual sorting and coding of data
97
Appendix F: Extract from Thematic Analysis of research data
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
No. Q1 Production information processes
1 , it makes us do things we should have been doing, easier and it makes it
more transparent, PAS is a measurement tool for what you say you do I1Q1 Rigour and
Transparency
2 you can quantify now what defines a good job it’s not subjective, you have
got a lot of informed data instead of personalised opinion I1Q1 Rigour and
Transparency
3 'before PAS part 2 we said we did it', success depended on the individuals,
PAS demands a rigour, demands projects to be structured and managed in a
way that determines success
I2Q1 Rigour and
Transparency
4 application of PAS demands that designers do what they say they will do,
they have to prove it I2Q1 Rigour and
Transparency
5 BIM tends to not let you cut corners like a CAD sketch drawing does, I4Q1 Rigour and
Transparency
6 when you start to model in 3D it’s very difficult to fudge things you have to
plan them through to be right when they come out the other end I5Q1 Rigour and
Transparency
7 it collects data in a consistent manner that can be analysed, the consistency
in which they approach data is a totally different way they approach
construction information
I1Q1 Upfront Database
investment driving
downstream Value gains
8 so we change one basic model and everything changed, a massive saving for
cost, we have to massively front load the project with information I4Q1 Upfront Database
investment driving
downstream Value gains
9 to wack up a BIM data chunk with a consultant team it takes longer, to get
the efficiencies we want everything has to have data associated with it, I4Q1 Upfront Database
investment driving
downstream Value gains
10 you crop it and spin it can pop and twist it an explode it and pull it apart that
definitely is an upshot and based on the model of being a high enough
quality that allows you to exploit it in that way, if you've got a very basic
model you'll get very basic information out of it,
I3Q1 Upfront Database
investment driving
downstream Value gains
11 that's the benefit, your actually spending more time understanding the real
estate and the infrastructure your trying to put together than making a nice
drawing,
I5Q1 Upfront Database
investment driving
downstream Value gains
12 more skilled people need to be involved in the process I1Q1 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
13 I don't think there is a stark difference between working in 2D and 3D in
terms of the process, you get out of it what you put in, you put rubbish into
the 3D model you'll get rubbish back out of it, you still have to control it and
apply rigour and check everything
I3Q1 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
14 you still have to check on a detail and check it all the way round until you
come back to the beginning, it’s the right thing to do at that time not to
fudge it, it will take you longer, overall the process of fixing things before
you do other things in the big picture it’s an improvement it’s a good thing
I3Q1 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
15 the business actually makes money through lean processes, doing thing
right first time, managing data correctly first time and BIM and the tools and
the management process supports lean processes
I5Q1 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
16 BIM on its own is not going to deliver the savings and the cost analysis and
the improvement of BIM process it has to be connect to lean to do that I5Q1 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
98
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
17 discipline coordination was something people had to go through , not really
any different, tools and workflows facilitate, the outcomes are the still the
same
I2Q1 Process similarity
Toolset improvements
18 it’s not as if working in 3D magically fixes everything and makes it easier,
you still have to go through the same processes, I3Q1 Process similarity
Toolset improvements
19 there's a risk because you are forced to correct mistakes as you go which
might take you off the critical path I3Q1 Risk and Reward
20 it can be completely automated, a heck of a saving for us, the legal
implications of getting it wrong were massive so it’s a risk mitigation
process for us
I4Q1 Risk and Reward
21 were aware enough that BIM takes slightly more information, you need
more knowledge and information about what you’re doing up front as you've
almost got to build it straight away, that certainly is fed back into the project
team and there certainly aware they've got to work out a lot more things in
advance,
I6Q1 Risk and Reward
22 do you want to schedule out all the doors on 406 flats?... No, that's soul
destroying if somebody gets a door wrong that’s 60 wrong doors, so we can
limit some of our risk with it, in other areas it’s probably increased our risk a
little bit, its put the pressure on us to deliver documents on time, it was
calculated risk,
I7Q1 Risk and Reward
23 the design done by one person has a pretty strong understanding of how this
looks but the problem is translating that into a drawing so that the end user
the client the site actually understands what they've got, and quite often the
drawings are quite complicated in 2D and the site team don't always have
time to look at that and so quite often its left to sit and then suddenly they
need and they realise it’s not quite how they need it, and then make a design
change, but what have found is if you include 3D image on that drawing of
what this is going to look like and how it will function, then we get an
instant reaction and we able to bring forward those changes and be able to
manage those better going forward
I5Q1 Visualisation and
Understanding
24 but in terms of all working on the same model, before we would have had
people working on isolated packages, one thing now they've got the model
so they can see if something's changed but also everyone's conscious that
you have to tell everyone things are changing what's happening so team
members are more aware of changes that the project architect may have
made
I6Q1 Visualisation and
Understanding
25 if we change something then it moves the underlay so we know things have
got to change or we link it through to it, scheduling has been great as it auto
corrects itself,
I6Q1 Information cohesion
and
Integrity/Automation
26 I guess that's the other big change working on the same model together,
that's been good, there's no down side to it, normally we have 3 or 4 people
working on it and the overall project architect and they tend to go and check
what the others are doing.....even the first or second project we did it took
fewer people than it would have done rationally in AutoCAD
I6Q1 Information cohesion
and
Integrity/Automation
99
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
No. Q2 Design review processes
27 there's a difference between what the technology can do and people
behaviour, BIM gives us the ability to fix things we were never fixing and
were passing downstream to on site and that is something that puts a greater
onus on the designer
I1Q2 Rigour and
Transparency
28 , it is a new way or working, new roles new responsibilities coming out of it,
its growing, I5Q2 Rigour and
Transparency
29 if you do it right BIM can be better, people draw things knowing there's
potentially going to be a clash and will fix it later, people are lazy, switch
back identify a clash in Navis, part of the problem is not the technology its
getting people to work with better processes,
I1Q2 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
30 it has always been incumbent on the designer to ensure that all trades are
coordinated, with the software tools there's far more potential to better
automate the process providing that everyone is working to the same goals
I2Q2 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
31 your able to find more problems and reduce errors in the construction
information in a way that you had always intended to do two dimensionally,
but it was harder because of human error, the human error part is reduced,
it’s not removed but is reduced
I2Q2 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
32 in the future cloud based systems, so everyone is viewing it in that space, I5Q2 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
33 I don’t your mind-set of the process changes it’s just that you have got a
better tool set to do it, a more complete tool set where you’re not relying so
much on judgement, I think there's a risk that it deskills you as a person, you
always need to check the output,
I7Q2 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
34 so far it’s only the structural engineers that are fully engaging on the Revit,
because a lot of the other consultants aren't on Revit, we have to revert to the
lowest common denominator which is a bunch of drawings for them to go
through,
I6Q2 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
35 the model is just use for an ancillary item to aid the process where we can,
the review process is a major benefit, it’s not as good as it could be because
not everybody works in the 3D environment
I3Q2 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
36 we remove humans from the process, you can then make a judgement on
whether that is a clash or not, reduced risk for the client reduced risk for us
and makes our job a heck of a lot easier
I4Q2 Risk and Reward
37 we are doing this because we think it has value not because the client has
asked for it, I don't think we have actually delivered one job yet where the
client has actually demanded it,
I5Q2 Risk and Reward
38 our work processes are remains the same because our interests are remains
the same, it’s just the technology can actually bring that to a much sharper
and clearer image, it can be broadcast more easily to all the interested parties
I5Q2 Visualisation and
Understanding
39 through the visualisation and technology they get a better understanding,
that's got to be massive, they suddenly know what a 12 inch valve and
accessing looks like
I1Q2 Visualisation and
Understanding
40 in 3D you federate the models together and explore what works and what
doesn't and chop sections in various areas and see the structure as it in that
area
I3Q2 Visualisation and
Understanding
41 your level of understanding of how the thing is physically shaped and sits
together is much better, I can give you a 100 2D drawings of a complicated
structure and say that I'm interested in this bit here, you have to scramble
through 6 or 7 drawings to understand exactly what that means, if you go to
a model to that area and understand what is going on in that location, that
understanding actually happens much faster in the 3D world, it’s that speed
that your investing in, you also get a recognition that there's a problem in the
first place
I5Q2 Visualisation and
Understanding
100
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
42 its more immediate you can look at it straight away and instantly slice
through things for a quick explanation of what's happening I6Q2 Visualisation and
Understanding
43 so I think we've avoided a lot of things, we can go around and have a lock
instantly at what's happening, I suspect that has avoided a lot of problems
that never turn up because what started as little issues are found straight
away and we can get it all to suit
I6Q2 Information cohesion
and
Integrity/Automation
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
No. Q3 Coordination benefits
44 when people are interacting with the model they fully understand what they
have designed they can completely understand the design because they can
see it, in the past people draw stuff and they physically don't know what
they've drawn,
I4Q3 Rigour and
Transparency
45 in a BIM based workflow that doesn't happen because there's no way you
can trick it, the stairs have to work, your much more interactive with them
you can see them you can see how they work
I4Q4 Rigour and
Transparency
46 there's all sorts of horrible junctions that they tackle because they don't want
to in AutoCAD because it’s difficult to draw the lines and work it out etc.
whereas in Revit it does it itself, where we either realise the horrible mess
you've got or its done it you can see it and your forced to see it, architects
are terrible at doing sections where they know it’s easy and avoiding the
change in direction change in details, we all kind of have those whereas
Revit does it for you it forces you to look at it, you look at it realise it wrong
at a very early stage and actually tweak it so it does all work much early,
I6Q5 Rigour and
Transparency
47 we are into iPad technology and capturing al the inspection and testing
plans on the IPads and the drawings all the commissioning, and this is where
information management comes in because we are linking in with the iPad
and the database in the cloud our information and associated information
with the objects and elements that we have actually constructed and that
gives us traceability, quality matters, it gave us great capability in terms of
putting engineers out on site, engineers used to spend 40 per cent of their
time in offices, the iPad has moved 20pc of the engineers time back out on
site,
I5Q3 Upfront Database
investment driving
downstream Value gains
48 a visual indication that your native design has a clash with another design
and you can then fix that at source, whether you choose to fix that is another
thing, the tools are there to fix it one, we can see the problem do we devote
enough time to fix it?
I1Q3 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
49 if you see a problem and you don't have time to fix it all you've done is pass
that problem down the line, but next time you do it you'll remember it and
you'll probably do it better next time, subsequential learning is embedded in
the way you work in BIM
I1Q3 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
50 certain new roles have occurred, trying to ensure that certain processes that
now have to happen are allocated to certain project individuals, so your
responsible for checking the coordination every few or whatever the BEP
says,
I7Q3 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
51 I’d be pretty confident were be able to get the document set right I think we
have got a very strong pool of staff that enables us to do that, I think the
software allows you to have less experienced members of the team do the
coordination, my only question would be do they have the judgement to
decide what's important and what's not important, you still need good people
evaluating what's going on otherwise mistakes will happen
I7Q3 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
52 the hard and software is only about 20pc of what you are doing its still
about people, it’s about peoples interaction how they work with each other
and the information they provide to each other, and all you doing is speeding
that up so that people can actually work faster
I5Q3 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
53 , because in AutoCAD if you made a change to a door schedule you'd know
you have to go round and do it, whereas Revit you go and change a door
somewhere it goes and deletes all the schedules instantly,
I6Q5 Risk and Reward
101
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
54 the difference between building information modelling and building
information management, which is this web of information this connectivity,
there aren't many systems at the mo. that are engaging with that and that
requires that everyone be in the game, and that is your central source of
truth, because you want everyone to share in that information
I5Q3 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
55 and there's an awful lot of people who don't work in Revit yet we have still
got to produce that pdf drawing sheet, so we have still got to check that final
product even though that process of getting there can offer us other ways of
doing it,
I6Q5 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
56 I can fly through a model if I fly thorough it enough I know where imp
going and I've never been to site, I instinctively know the way finding
because I know it through the model,
I1Q3 Visualisation and
Understanding
57 I think we've avoided all sorts of issues because we can go ooh that doesn't
work and sort it out, and it just pixels at that time so easier to do Visualisation and
Understanding
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
No. Q4 Advantages of Simultaneous working
58 allot of it has been done earlier and so you have got the ability to make
changes, because everyone's forced to look at things earlier, changes can be
made so much easier, because it’s still virtual, that very easy to, when it’s on
site it’s a different matter then its outside of CAD
I6Q4 Rigour and
Transparency
59 double whammy of trying to implement BIM and not having the resources
available to make it happen, but once it’s in place, once in place its quite
different
I2Q4 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
60 it is more intensive to begin with so I would begin with that hump because
you need to know so much more about the projects, work out what's its
doing and because you are building it virtually, even just to produce a bunch
of GA's a lot more has got to be done up front it forced you to think about it,
I6Q4 Upfront Database
investment driving
downstream Value gains
61 its right in principle but somewhere along the line you have got to turn it
into a practical application on how you’re going to manage the business
how you are going to manage data, which data is worthy of putting in the
effort you have got to put in to get it for the return you’re going to get for it
I5Q4 Risk and Reward
62 anything that's theorised as being done as a BIM project will be done
properly and we take the risk, be a bit more thoughtful on the project we do
for free, it’s a risk to do it in BIM, but were discovering ways to do this
while minimising our risk,
I4Q4 Risk and Reward
63 the other disciplines need to align themselves I1Q4 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
64 MEP is more calculation based, the quality of the software is not there
mature for MEP, an architect can respond to client changes far quicker than
an MEP engineer
I1Q4 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
65 , I don't think procurements are actually set out in that fashion to allow that
to happen, I3Q4 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
66 I don't think that until procurement methods are geared towards BIM
workflows that it allows that to happen, simultaneous working. It’s a
nonsense the rate if change from its inception to its completion you push me,
their design is predicated on having an architectural design to wrap that
around, so there is a linear flow in every building so trying to get those
curves to overlap will never happen, you see so much reluctance to get
involved early doors because there's so much work that would be abortive
I3Q4 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
67 all the wash about BIM being integrated it doesn't really work with the
process at the moment 25:38 because of the way they are completed and the
way designs are progressed at completely different timescales
I3Q4 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
102
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
No. Q4 Advantages of Simultaneous working
68 the Mcleamey curve isn't going to happen unless people are getting paid,
M&E have to double handle their work, the architect, Structural Engineer
&QS contractor and client on board, its useful, but because of M&E it
flattens out
I4Q4 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
69 the potential for simultaneous working is not ingrained in the business, it is
within our design office, it may well be within our consultants, as a
construction team or the stakeholders, were not there yet, were not all
delving in and changing things on a live basis
I5Q4 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
70 what we have got to go to is an early contractor involvement where this can
work, because your engaging people from the beginning who are going to
take this right until the end, then you can start thinking about the intensity of
the information and when, and that is also controlled by your level of detail,
and that's controlled by risk
I5Q4 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
No. Q5 Collaborative working
71 internally we have now got rafts of process to control what we do, its
influenced our QMS, there's a lot more that we have to do as a company that
is inbuilt to serve BIM processes, to suit new workflows to suit new RIBA
work stages, that's all come on a long way
I3Q5 Rigour and
Transparency
72 you can’t hide anything by issuing a few sections because they get to see the
whole thing, it’s a lot closer certainly with the engineers, because everything
in there on show,
I6Q5 Rigour and
Transparency
73 I think those all working on the same model is more collaborative because
you have to keep everyone working on the model informed I6Q5 Rigour and
Transparency
74 the quality of our information is absolute, what it does affect is the process,
it will affect how much time and effort we will spend in that process, I’d like
to think that working in 2D or 3D our information would be the same
quality, we still have professional liability no matter what medium you put
that in
I3Q5 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
75 it comes down to human nature something's are just mistakes you can’t
account for that just because it’s in a BIM environment, like I said it like the
quality of what you put in you get out,
I3Q5 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
76 a lot on onus has been put on designers now to do full coordination where
before that was a separate duty, now contractors are trying to push that on
them by default,
I1Q5 Risk and Reward
77 more and more often were working with people we want to be working with,
most company's that we work with a pretty proficient, increasing were in a
position where we can choose who we work with, I think that's key to
success, we can pick who we want to work with, we still occasionally get the
arranged marriage scenario
I3Q5 Risk and Reward
78 we're developing relationships on a number of fronts, one of the more recent
or successful ones is with Laing o roué their explore faculty, for duma, were
picked by them on projects because we can deliver schemes that work with
that system
I3Q5 Risk and Reward
79 for every project we have a facilitated meeting with the project team to work
out what's important to them what do they really need to manage so they can
bring the technology and the skills and focus on a particular areas that are
going to give them good return, it’s like picking the low hanging fruit
I5Q5 Risk and Reward
80 you’re putting an infrastructure together that is actually useful to people, so
that it is easy to use and they get back the information back they need, they
need to understand that I may need to take that time because within the
business I can save that many times over with other people
I5Q5 Risk and Reward
81 there are people on the project at execute level that need to drive it, I1Q5 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
103
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
No. Q5 Collaborative working
82 if the whole project team isn't working to the same goal and if the whole
project team isn't looking to deliver information. It’s not going to happen, it
didn’t matter too much two dimensionally, but because you need people
working to an equivalent standard to get the clash detection exercises up and
running, without the support form everybody it just wouldn't happen
I2Q5 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
83 , there is more done up front than the traditional process, the architect will
always have to do something first I2Q5 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
84 internally it’s not a problem everyone's wants to engage in the process, I5Q5 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
85 you certainly notice the difference with the Structural engineers, as you
work in a whole different way on the projects, the rest are as they use to be,
and the slight frustration of the 2D plans on screen and then look back at the
Revit model, and while that's how it used to be its slightly frustrating
I6Q5 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
86 they won’t want to do anything until design freeze and that’s too late, on the
couple of jobs I've been involved with, we've been basically fitting in the
M&E to an existing building and that's not how this process is supposed to
work,
I7Q5 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
87 the client can make more informed decision because they understand I1Q5 Visualisation and
Understanding
88 there's a greater concentration of information at point of source, if you
change a dimension it will changes it in a section and elevation, you have
more consistency of approach in change management
I1Q5 Information cohesion
and
Integrity/Automation
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
No. Q6 Information management
89 as soon as things get tight on timescales or when the pressures on the first
thing that goes out the window is process I3Q6 Rigour and
Transparency
90 if you stick to the process should be fine, but if you start going away from it
just gets in the way of getting things done, mayhem, I'm really interested to
see how it turns out, it’s all put together based on theory, if you can follow
the process you'll be fine
I3Q6 Rigour and
Transparency
91 BS1192 since 2010, the standardisation of information makes everything
allot easier for us, even from a CAD point of view, line weights and drawing
number just makes everything much more easier for us to manage so when
we’re managing information we haven't got to work back through it
I4Q6 Rigour and
Transparency
92 there's pretty good transparency through the IM tools now through thing
like 4projects, but again it’s down to how they are used, on an IM tool I can
find out who was the worse consultant for updating drawings and revisions,
I1Q6 Rigour and
Transparency
93 there is no leeway in that process to vary things like naming conventions
you have to fully comply with naming conventions, you can’t deviate from it
at all, L2 BIM is very different to what it is now,
I2Q6 Rigour and
Transparency
94 externally all the companies we work with are based on 1192 standards, we
have the infrastructure ready for PAS1192, you get something and it works,
it’s just the standardisation of everything
I4Q6 Rigour and
Transparency
95 BIM is not a magic fix, you have to put a significant amount of effort in to
the manage the data and how you assemble it I1Q6 Upfront Database
investment driving
downstream Value gains
96 the quality of that info and the risk built into that information should be
reduced because it has been through a more rigorous coordination process,
derived from a coordinated model in the first place
I2Q6 Risk and Reward
97 it’s not there yet, uncials, riding a crest of wave analogy you have got to
ride with what you have got at the moment or it will break in front of you… I5Q6 Risk and Reward
104
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
98 when it comes to level 2, for us making that change will probably happen
over night I3Q6 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
99 you can see why its reluctance because it’s an idea it’s not cement
yet...there a lot of stuff going on but nothings joined up or coordinated I3Q6 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
100 we’re finding it very difficult to enforce on projects because the industry just
isn't ready for it, everyone's at different at stages, people won’t pay more,
they won’t pay it even if there's potential savings,
I4Q6 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
101 , there's been no impetus for to do the government bit and the data bit too
heavily yet, and because were new to Revit and there's not push on that bit
we've been getting used to it , so were slowly looking at that bit
I6Q6 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
102 the lean processes that need to come out of it and make those changes
gradually, so to think that BIM has been in for two years to think that were
done it, there's no one that doing it, they may be doing it locally or on a
project level but on a business level there's no one doing it
I5Q6 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
103 when I say no were not doing it it’s for the business yes were doing it on a
project level and there's a big difference, I5Q6 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
104 yes its managing the site a little bit better but as an overall business in terms
of making those small percentage profits that were all involved in its not
going to do, you have got to be able to dip into these systems and take things
for other parts of the business, it’s not a project wise for the business, it can’t
be you need all sorts of tool, but you need to work out the sequence and
what you going to get out of them, and then that is BIM, capturing it as you
see, using it as you need it,
I5Q6 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
105 to get it to the level to where I would want it to be is a 6 year plan, there are
paper based systems that we use to get the information out of it but you have
to mine it and it takes time which is not lean, you've got to have a vision for
how you’re going to get there,
I5Q6 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
106 if you link your specification and schedules to the model you get a
consistency that was never there before I1Q6 Information cohesion
and
Integrity/Automation
105
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
No. Q7 Rework
107 a far greater awareness of issues, the clients now got the ability to see these
issues, there's more transparency at client level , I1Q7 Rigour and
Transparency
108 the jobs that we have properly adopted BIM on and that we have taken
through site seem to have run more smoothly an seem to have been more
profitable compared to equivalent 2D projects running at the same time
I2Q7 Risk and Reward
109 there’s always that process of looking at what was in the archive drawings
and what's now on the model to make sure someone hasn't nudged it you
have to make sure it as it was when it went out the door last time and there's
time involved in that, for the benefits it brings it brings disbenefits ,
I3Q7 Risk and Reward
110 design were completed in a 2D world and signed off, and we agreed with the
client we would go into a 3D world and just make sure it all works, why?
because we've got time before we arrived on site, that design suddenly got
brought back to detailed design because it didn't work, big fundamental
errors right up at the concept stage of the design that had been lost and were
just taken as true after that, would be cost the client quite a lot of money, in
that instance we didn't get an increased turnover because we are not
managing change, but we shouldn't be in the business of managing change
and issues of that nature, we should be in the business of making our money
through building it right first time
I5Q7 Risk and Reward
111 there's still an element of due diligence, provided you do that, you can never
eliminate the risk totally, but you can reduce it significantly, its more that
someone hasn’t done their due diligence rather than the software performing
better, regardless of whether you draw it in 2D or 3D, if you haven't drawn it
properly it can still go out the door and be wrong unless somebody checks it
I7Q7 Risk and Reward
112 the information passed to site is much more extensive, the work were giving
them is much more thorough because we have modelled every aspect of the
building, every single element of the building has been thought about, we
have to model in a way it which will actually be built, even though were
putting more effort in the front end were saving more going forward by the
fact that we haven't got to do more work when it goes to site
I4Q7 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
113 the model is created and moved from discipline to discipline many times, the
information that has been developed needs to be consistent enough that it
can be used by all these disparate functions, at the moment we can get the
design side working quite well, there an argument over cost in terms of
planning we can do that, construction we can do that see a benefit there, FM
not happening, because the earlier stages are still immature enough, client
doesn't know what he wants,
I2Q7 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
114 for 80 of the up market where's the relevance I3Q7 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
115 coordination and better understanding and resolution of errors during the
design stage, it gives you a more determined outcome by the time you get to
site
I2Q7 Visualisation and
Understanding
116 actually that 3D-ness of it all has been quite amazing because actually if all
the big bits are in places then the small bit are just trickle down and happen
to be in place, so of the problems on the project might be more how do you
do this in Revit, at this stage in the project where I am you expect more
problems where at the back of your head your always expecting someone to
point out something that doesn't quite work because you haven't all worked
it out but I feel more confident in Revit that that won’t occur, because what
you see on the screen in 3D is now here, I think you just see more of it and
so there are fewer problems
I6Q5 Visualisation and
Understanding
117 the one thing that you can say about working in a BIM based environment is
that if something is wrong it’s going to be consistently wrong on all your
drawings
I3Q7 Information cohesion
and Integrity
106
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
No. Q8 Quality
118 there will be increased standardisation of product, your no longer passing a
problem down the line, transparency is a huge thing, I1Q8 Rigour and
Transparency
119 it forces more rigour and so the information quality will be improved,
whether the resources are available to achieve deliverables, it’s the same in
2D, your still going to have the human intervention, you can still press the
wrong buttons and parameters and you’re going to fail somewhere
I2Q8 Rigour and
Transparency
120 BIM doesn't let you cheat, you have to think about it a lot more, everything
you put in your thinking about your interrogating, from the technicians point
of view, they're looking at it as physical element, whereas in CAD because
it’s not there your thinking about how it works, the quality of the info, if
you've cheated and the data you've used is rubbish they can’t use it
I4Q8 Rigour and
Transparency
121 , its only now we can justify our design responses rather than in our head, I4Q8 Rigour and
Transparency
122 we aim for the same level of production information but we have got a
different tool to get there so I think people are more ofay with the tool then
we can begin to reflect more on what you can
I6Q8 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
123 it’s based on everything being done properly, it does improve the process
there's more work required to do it, 32 details at 1:5 in 6 hours, back in CAD
that would have taken us a lot longer, but that was all because we had set
this thing up correctly so it made it that quick to it, it comes back to the
quality of the model so you can just churn stuff out that right, but if you
have a bad model it’s a nightmare,
I3Q8 Upfront Database
investment driving
downstream Value gains
124 some practices have really got it right and produce a far better product, good
people will take more advantage of the tools than other, good application of
BIM tools will make significant differentiator's of quality of performance of
product, if people correctly apply the tools the gap between skills and
quality will be significant, smarter people get better outputs
I1Q8 Risk and Reward
125 at the moment its being left to the designers and contractors to sort out
because the client just doesn't understand I2Q8 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
126 in some cases the QS is dictating the way we model so they can cost it,
helping the consultants to help the clients and get a better product, clients at
the moment don't care, safira similar to IES, we can optimise and validate
design reduce costs by 10k per year, in the end it will become added value,
coming out of the BIM workflow
I4Q8 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
127 if it’s come from a 3D model and your seeing that information combination
of drawings the quality and the understanding that that gives immediately to
the recipient is there and even going as far as the client
I5Q8 Visualisation and
Understanding
128 there was a major bit of temporary work to be put it that was on their critical
path and they stipulated all the requirements and everything looked that and
it wasn't until we put the 3D model and the rebar 3D model and the
scheduling that showed a 4d visualisation program that showed how it
would be put it that they realised within 20minutes that they had got a real
issue because this isn't a 5 minute job because we will need to the time we
say we will need to do it, it allowed them to go away and rethink about their
requirements for that structure and rethink how we should phase that work in
order to meet everything else that's going on in terms of the construction, in
this case its cross rail, it was important to them, would they have got that
understanding without a 3D model, without the 3D re bar imagery and
visualisations, that would not have come about, we would have all carried on
quite blindly building what we said we were going to build without
understanding the consequences,
I5Q8 Visualisation and
Understanding
129 it’s an improvement on speed, going back to the basic principles of Revit
drawing a plan and it generates a section, its generating multiple views it
generating schedules, you don't have the issue of something being in excel
and something being in CAD and somehow that coming together on a pdf,
the scheduling thing in Revit is a massive improvement in terms of quality
and accuracy, there's a still an element of management in it but essentially
being able to hit a button,
I3Q8 Information cohesion
and Integrity
107
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
No. Q9 Overall benefits
130 Under Pas 2D will not exist. Pas forces you to draw in 3D. We live in a 3D
world, people understand 3D better than 2D. Major benefit is that 2D will
become extinct. 2D is uncoordinated data. 3D is coordinated data.
I1Q9 Rigour and
Transparency
131 2004 we started looking at it from 2008 all projects were in Revit like it or
not, it’s a long process it’s like 10 years to where we are now we've had to
establish protocols and guidelines for people to follow in order to maintain
that quality in the work, to try and make sure that everyone does something
that looks consistent,
I3Q9 Rigour and
Transparency
132 BIM is seen as the goal and it’s not, BIM is the means of facilitating better
project outcomes, not the fact that BIM is on the project, what we’re talking
is about architecture, places and spaces for people, the quality of the built
form
I2Q9 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
133 we are clear that working in BIM will provide better outcomes, will allow us
to determine more coordinated, more rigorous, better tested ,better
prototyped buildings, but it’s the building itself that actually matters, so we
can give the client a better end product, we can show other advantages in
terms of programme and cost management, through simple visualisations
and understanding of what we have created form them, it’s a facilitator it’s
not the outcome,
I2Q9 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
134 Should be better concluded better understood, is facilitated by BIM but
BIM is not the be all and end all, to be honest it was all kind of happening in
2D it was just much harder to more expensive and it took longer,
I2Q9 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
135 you could do a project using 2D lines and in Revit it will still be 30 pc more
efficient than doing it in AutoCAD I3Q9 Upfront Database
investment driving
downstream Value gains
136 working in BIM environment it is quicker, you do get more quality and
control out of what is being produced it does makes us more efficient,
standardised libraries, so instead of using concept stuff you can pull in stuff
that potentially is ready to go for construction that contains all the
information they need and want that's got backed with specs and stuff like
that
I3Q9 Upfront Database
investment driving
downstream Value gains
137 the ability to schedule information quickly and accurately, normally it would
take a week together I did it in an a afternoon, additional requests for
information can be dealt with quickly
I7Q9 Upfront Database
investment driving
downstream Value gains
138 the more rigorous approach demanded by the BIM methodology will help to
reduce risk I2Q9 Risk and Reward
139 cost reduction to the practice therefore better profit margins because we
haven't had to put as many resources and time on a project, the long term;
not closing off the publicly procured market, we work massively with
education projects, without BIM this practice wouldn't exist
I4Q9 Risk and Reward
140 this practice has grown because of BIM it has allowed us the thrive during
the recession, private sector is getting wind of BIM, 2008 a few 1m jobs and
series of smaller jobs, were now working on 5m - 60m, but BIM has been
very much inherent in the process of moving up to bigger projects, bigger
project sand practice growth, 2008 barn conversions now 5m -60m
I4Q9 Risk and Reward
141 BIM strategy limited, asked by surrounding consultants, consulting arm that
drives BIM, content creation, manufacturers, diversified into a BIM
consultancy, a collection of SME's, inundated with requests for help, the
ability to help them
I4Q9 Risk and Reward
142 that's why we want to do it as a business and why the governments are
saying they want it for their own FM management so were not doing this
because the government wants it, were doing it because we perceive a
business need for it which is a fundamental difference
I5Q9 Risk and Reward
108
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
143 , as people get it into their DNA and understand how to get the outputs from
the software....so it will naturally grow, it’s not revolution, you can’t force
this on people, you’ve got to grow this in people and understand the need
and capability they get out of it
I5Q9 Risk and Reward
144 If you can make better quality information with no mistakes that helps you,
also it speeds up the process, its more accurate therefore less risk I7Q7 Risk and Reward
145 were are all aware that's there’s all sorts of advantages of other stuff we can
do, but there's so much out there but we need to control which bits were
fully engage with because to try and to the whole thing at the same time
would just blow our collective minds, first we are focusing on how does this
program work and then I suspect we will look at what other opportunities
does it afford us
I6Q9 Risk and Reward
146 .fewer staff is going to be the major advantage for us because that's more
profit or less loss I6Q9 Risk and Reward
147 we can do it dead easy, but getting someone to know what they are doing
with it at the other end is a completely different ball game all together, it’s
an industry of experts but no doers, it’s all based around theory, none of it
applies, people to start doing rather than saying, we've spent so long as a
practice to 3D integration, with so much resistance, I've got no doubt all of
that aspiration is where we should be in terms of how to build buildings,
getting that streamlined, it’s so inefficient I'm whole heartedly behind
getting there I just wish we could do it tomorrow, but the reality is the
uptake and the education and the intelligence of the people why should be
asking for it don't want it
I3Q9 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
148 the issues are how quickly you can bring something like this out, it is
difficult new technology, which will become commonplace in time, I5Q9 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
149 we may have a programme which is 6 sheets of A0 paper, there's lots of bars
on it, how long is it going to take you to understand that program, but if you
link that program to all the object in the model and you put in with it all the
cranage and the real estate, you can translate to anyone in the room within 3
minutes exactly what that program is about and how it is structured,
I5Q9 Visualisation and
Understanding
150 it is about providing an easy source of information that can be disseminated
and understood very very quickly, and BIM is about doing away with the
understanding - talking about the need, what do we need to do about this
project in order to get it to work properly and so the understanding about the
project and its intricacies and issues can be actually delivered very quickly
and you find with minutes people are sleeves up they understand what the
issues are they understand what the problems are and how were going to
resolve it, and that's where the power will come in for us
I5Q9 Visualisation and
Understanding
109
Interview extract/Code Ref Theme
No. Q10 Barriers
151 skills barrier, the base level education of the practitioner will be
significantly lower, BIM takes the rule book of 40 years and chucks it
away,
I1Q10 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
152 nothing really prevents us, that sort of information has to exist regardless,
there's nothing that stops us doing our job we still work the way we work,
if a contractors got zero interest in BIM, well still work in BIM and they'll
get their drawings at the end of it,
I3Q10 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
153 limitations on the number of people we have got trained up, I7Q10 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
154 training of staff, a cultural change, staff understanding the benefits of
change, to get the staff to want to use the process, changing the companies
ethos, taking a very skilled guy to being an infant again, found it very
hard, you’re not producing drawings your producing model, once the
model is done the drawings appear, unlike CAD once you've started
drawing all the drawings appear, you don't get a set of drawings until the
model finished,
I4Q10 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
155 training and understanding in the technology, the processes and what
they're trying to get out of it, and that manifests in 2 ways one is they are
frightened of it, it’s a black box, they don't want to touch it, that can be
seen along our supply chain, in our clients sometimes and indeed
internally, so that takes time you need the realisation you need the training
and coaching in order to be able to do that, I see that as purely a time
based process,
I5Q10 User capability and
organisational BIM
Maturity
156 but data integrated into the model, they're adopting our processes as they
can see how quickly we can do it, MCC library has been a big success and
they have changed the way they operate because of it
I3Q10 Risk and Reward
157 interoperability isn't uniform, it just doesn’t work, data attached to objects,
cost of software, hardware and training, moving 2D to BIM costs about
12k,
I2Q10 Risk and Reward
158 I think on the next job I think they be a bit more savvy, they'd ask us for
quantities, it’s incredible really the benefits really, .....no any practice that
wants to do well will not do well without BIM, it’s a no brainer, debate
with subcontractor and supply chain, everyone tends to have a light bulb
moment, and will never look back,
I3Q10 Risk and Reward
159 you explain to them that it’s a party and everyone has got to come to it for
it to work, and of one person doesn't its level 2 its not BIM it’s just
working in a slightly different way, it probably benefits us more e than it
does you,
I3Q10 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues
160 its limited by people that aren't working on it, and M&E when they are
working on it will be far more useful we are limited a bit by them at the
moment, all the clashes with structural just don't happen but there's still the
potential with M&E
I6Q10 Non-alignment
/Integration/Procurement
issues