5 Reasons Why BIM is Not Working

7/31/2019 5 Reasons Why BIM is Not Working

1/5

06/06/2012 5 reasons why BIM is not working

1/5www.pauleycreative.co.uk/2012/01/5-reasons-why-bim-is-not-working/

Home What We Do How We Work Who We Are What Others Say Portfolio My Digital Insider Blog Contact Us

Home Blog 5 reasons why BIM isnt working

Like Be the

first of2

MONTHLY BLOG ROUND UP

Sign up to receive a monthly roundSign up to receive a monthly round

up of our digital marketing forup of our digital marketing for

construction blog.construction blog.

SUBSCRIBE NOWSUBSCRIBE NOW

MOST POPULAR POSTS

Content marketing: 10 things aContent marketing: 10 things a

building product manufacturerbuilding product manufacturer

could write aboutcould write about

How are the top 15 UKHow are the top 15 UK

Construction Companies usingConstruction Companies using

Social Media in 2011?Social Media in 2011?

Infographic: How do UKInfographic: How do UK

Architects use Twitter?Architects use Twitter?

5 reasons why construction5 reasons why construction

companies should be bloggingcompanies should be blogging

SEARCH

What you looking for?

SEARCHSEARCH

CATEGORIES

BloggingBlogging

BrandingBranding

Construction MarketingConstruction Marketing

Construction WebsitesConstruction Websites

Content MarketingContent Marketing

Cool StuffCool Stuff

DesignDesign

2

call us +44 (0)1908 671707

ShareShare 24

JAN

205 reasons why BIM isnt working

Last night saw an impres sive gathering of senior industry figures congregated at One Birdcage Walk for the invite

only CIMCIG chairmans event at the equa lly impress ive HQ of the Institute of Mechanical Engineers [IMechE]. On

the menu, BIM and the barriers to adoption. Chairm an Ian Exall, CIMCIG (and Aqualisa) gave a brief but concise

introduction to the panel and suggested that the audience participate at will.

Speakers:

Paul Morrell, Government CCA

Mike Sheehan, Director of Sus tainability, WSP

Alan Crane, President CIOB

Chris Gilmour, Des ign and Marketing Director, BAM Construct UK

Karl Redmond, Cons truction Sector Network, Leeds Metropolitan University

Opening gambits from the panel came thick and fast:

Paul Morrell (my interpretation of what he s aid): Supply chain collaboration is key to success ful adoption.

Contractors need to work with consul tants and consul tants to learn about 3d model ing from product manufacturers.

There neednt be stringent standards that everyone adopts however there needs to be enough universal s tandards

that allow confidence in adoption s o as not to give rise to fear of investment in the wrong place.

Mike Sheehan (my interpretation of what he s aid): The main concern i s too m uch fluffery around the s oftware. The

actual 3d model i tself (in mos t cases) was not BIM but purely cosm etic. Clients need to understand the whole-life

value of BIM; from design through to the FMs once the build is complete. Adoption of holistic project management

throughout an en tire project, irrespective of BIM, is vital but still not wides pread.

Alan Crane (my interpretation of wha t he s aid): BIM is becoming an out of favour buzz word before adoption has

really even started. There is too m uch talk and not enough adoption. Real ly,BIM is a business issue not a design

issue. There is a tremendous opportunity to improve waste reduction in UK p rojects with BIM adoption. A huge

amount of production time could be gained by clarifying the design digitally before any work commences .

Chris Gilmour(my interpretation of what he said): Echoing Alans comments Chris cem ented the need for design to

be agreed before buil d. The point being that all too often actual build ing projects are finish ing at exactly the sametime their designs are finishing. Chris imparted that the solution was simple: Design on the computer first and

then build. He was also concerned by just how many large household consultancy firms were designing in 2d and

the contractors des igners having to then convert those 2d drawings into 3d mode ls in orde r to get the build s tarted.

Karl Redmond (my interpretation of what he s aid): Karl started by suggesting that BIM should be m aking

businesses more efficient. He noted that large consultancy firms were s lower at adoption than the sm aller more

nimble SMEs who can s ee the benefits of BIM adoption. (This point was taken up by a couple of consultancies in

the audience who wondered why contractors were insisting on using large household name consultancies who

didnt use s imilar BIM software whilst there were many sm aller consul tancies who did). Karl continued that there is

a fear that adoption in the wrong software would mean wasted investment and therefore, as a consequence the

investment is not being made anywhere.

At this juncture the chairm an invited the audience to participate and it was nt long before key chall enges were being

raised and confirmed:

The question oflibrary standards across the industry was discussed. Some felt these were necessary others felt

that standards m ay be too restrictive for an evolutionary process to happen. Paul Morrell raised an interesting po int

on adoption that related to email adoption in the late 1990s . In his mind it is absolutely a case now that you just

have to do it; there was no shall we s hant we, if you dont start adoption now youre more l ikely than not to be le ft

very much behind. The audience generally agreed that now was a great time to adopt BIM but influence and

education was essential, not only down the supply chain but throughout the whole indus try including clients. The

Email Address

MORE IN CONSTRUCTION MARKETING, EVENTS (16 OF 63 ARTICLES)

A collection of in fographics for the cons truction indus try


2/5



Digital MarketingDigital Marketing

Email marketingEmail marketing

EventsEvents

InternetInternet

Lead GenerationLead Generation

Marketing StrategyMarketing Strategy

MDi TVMDi TV

MeasurementMeasurement

Mobile AppsMobile Apps

Pauley CreativePauley Creative

PRPR

PresentationsPresentations

Product manu facturersProduct manu facturers

SEOSEO

Social MediaSocial Media

TwitterTwitter

UncategorizedUncategorized

Web applicationsWeb applications

COPYRIGHT NOTICE

Blog under theBlog under the CreativeCreative

Comm ons Attribution-NoDerivsComm ons Attribution-NoDerivs

3.0 License3.0 License

question o f who shou ld drive BIM adoption gave rise to a debate about whether the lead should be taken by the

client or by the industry arguments on both sides were convincing.

My own point of view is that the clien t ought to be educated by his cons ultancy firm and their chos en contractor right

from the start of a project. They are the experts after all. To me it beggars be lief that a client will agree to a multi-

milli on (multi-billi on) design/build cost where no clear collabo rative BIM process exists throughout the entire

supply chain. However, that is the reality.

It became quite clear as the evening progress ed that the main issue was with both the software and the users .

Ideally consultancies and contractors will be using the sam e system. In reality, the consultancies have their

preferred route (often 2d bu t possibly 3, 4, 5, 6 or as was s ugges ted, 7d) and then the contractors a different system

altogether (most probably 3d) and the two systems jus t dont speak the sam e language . Whether it be Autodesk

Navisworks or Revit or whatever, it was clea r that a collaborative consis tency or even confidence in the s oftware

was lacking. Contractors laid blame squarely with the large household name consultancies for not catching up

with the indus try and being stuck in their old ways.

As the evening continued dis cuss ions around BIM being no t des ign m odels but manufacturing models.

Contractors believing they were in the business of manufacturing the building to the specifications o f the models

produced in whatever d was put in front of them. The subtleties of a holistic project managem ent approach was

discussed and the use of gateways and build phases as a discipline to help reduce wasted time, effort and well,

waste in general, was the core of agreeable BIM adoption.

The key point here was about not racing ahead into building areas that hadnt actually been designed yet. One

cannot run into running.

Zaha Hadids ears must have been burning towards the end of the evening as the discussion turned towards none

standardized products. The question was rais ed around the value of common lib raries of products when architects

like Hadid des igned bui ldings that often had very few off the she lf elements wi thin it the Glasgow Transport

Museum as an example.

Richard Waterhouse, CEO of RIBA Enterprises s uggested that this was no longer a problem as his com panys

suite of specification products actually let product manufacturers, consultancy firms and contractors des igners

input new and bes poke building elements data on the fly. In my basic m ind, this functionality iss ue is key if

buildings like the Transport Museum in Glasgow are to be encouraged and delivered in an efficient way.

The main concerns for the product manufacturers in the room were that actually they had been producing 3d

drawings for around 20-30 years, more out of necessity within their own design process es. It was agreed that

product manufacturers have led the way in 3d modeling since the 80s and there was much dismay that

consultancies had his torically taken those 3d models and converted them back into 2d drawings to give to the

contractors. Just nuts. Product manufacturers agreed that it would be less o f a challenge if specifiers and

contractors would agree a format (or several consistent formats) for the sharing of their 3d models.

However, as Stephen Hamil (not present at the event), head of NBS software development suggests in h is articleBIM and building properties It is unlikel y that all of the information from a construction project can be contained

in a single BIM. More typically there will b e a numb er of BIMs that are stored in different proprietary format. For

example, the architects CAD model could b e in ArchiCAD format, the engineers CAD model in Revit and the

specification i nformation within NBS

So, thats good then.

Back to the event, it was noted (on quite a few occasions) that many consul tancy firms (large and sm all) had not

adopted BIM for various reas ons from cost to laziness and it was als o suggested that frameworks within which a

design process had been agreed might be stifling creativity and strangling innovation. Neither scenarios were

good for the adoption of BIM. There was also a feeling that some m ain contractors were not helping their sub-

contractors in the design stages and that historically (and may I say fairly obviousl y) this led to further problem s of

cost, delay and was te throughout the supply chain. Product manufacturers also worried about the issue o f cost and

price. How were they expected to offer clarity in that area when different audiences were privy to different price?

Contractors, from an asset management and facilities management perspective, welcomed the idea of product

manufacturers producing 3d d rawings that could be dropped into their own models. And a representative from

CIBSE also p ressed for a standard format for building product manufacturers to produce 3d models to and then

input standardized data into. This however gave rise to the suggestion of the mother of all databas es, which was

generally accepted as unreali stic The point that clients m ight want different data meant the variations of data

would becom e unm anageable very quickly.

Paul Morrell suggested more flexibi lity and less standards and let innovation and creativity decide the flow and

adoption of the management of information over time.Or words to that effect. I liked Paul .

On that note the Chair sum maris ed the evenings topic by allowing the panel to air their closing s tatements.

Five key points from the panel to takeaway:

1. To actually want to work together. The industry and its clients mus t all change & Darwin would s ort out the rest.

In the end was te will be the winner. (Paul Morrell).

2. Get back to working in a discipl ined way. A holistic approach to project management is fundamental to the

success of any large project. (Mike Sheehan).

3. Work with software producers on what the industry actually wants not on what they dont want. (Alan Crane).

4. The industry needs to make the change to BIM quickly. (Chris Gilmour).


3/5



Like Be the

first of2

Comments

5. Collaboration with s oftware producers and contractors. The contractors need to take the lead and bring their

sub-contractors with them. (Karl Redmond)

The event was incredibly educational for me, CIMCIG doing a great job in attracting a talented crowd. Yet, I went

away feeling sli ghtly frustrated. Frustrated at the cons ultancies and the contractors who were, in effect, pushing

blame back and forth and pushing on wi th their own agendas . In my mind both camps were on ly reacting to BIM

and not pro-actively encouraging process change. Major projects were won and cons ultancies s elected. The

basis of consultancy selection (if there was that luxury) being well, theyre the consultancies weve always used,

an odd a ttitude to take given that their systems are incompatible and that dupli cation of effort was inevitable.

In a perfect world maybe large contractors could pull together i n a m ore collabo rative way. And in perfect world

maybe clients could bring in the cons ultancies, contractors and their sub -contractors to start to format som e BIM

standards across the industry outside of projects. And maybe in a perfect world progress ing BIM compatibility and

adoption across the industry could be a general goal and not be seen as an excuse to gain competitive advantage.

The unsung heroes of BIM in my mind are clearly the product manufacturers themse lves. There was no talk of

collaboration with product manufacturers and yet closer collaboration with them would help shape the broader 3d

modeling landscape and probably wider BIM adoption. Product manufacturers are an untapped resource. Their

skill at producing 3d m odels i s undis puted however, their innovation is being overlooked while the contractors and

consultancies fail to communicate clearly thems elves. All this and just across the pond the first BIM Lawsuit hits

the headlines. Apparently for lack of clear com munication.

What are your thoughts on BIM? It will be interes ting to see how far this conversation has m oved on in 12 m onths

time.

Related Posts

How important is marketing to Main Contractors when it comes to product specification?

Guest Post: BIM. Rubbish In, Rubbish Out!

Infographic: Results of the national BIM survey 2012

Wrapping up a busy 2010 for construction marketing

What is BES 6001, do your building products meet the grade and more importantly are you telling your

customers?

About Nick Pauley

Nick Pauley is the founder and m anaging director of Pauley Creative. Aside from manag ing the s trategic direction

of Pauley Creative, Nick is primarily involved in the early planning and m arketing direction of each o f Pauley

Creatives fabulous clients.

POSTED IN CONSTRUCTION MARKETING, EVENTS. BOOKMARK THE PERMALINK.

ShareShare 24

StephenHamilNBS January 20, 2012 7:54 pm

Nice post Nick. Thanks for the mention too.

I listened to Paul Morrell earlier in the week check out my post with some of his sound bites at::

http://constructioncode.blogspot.com/2012/01/paul-morrell-london-revit-user-group.html

Reply

Nick Pauley January 21, 2012 1:41 pm

Thanks for the feedback Stephen, very much appreciated. Paul has a really interesting take on BIM adoption.

Thanks for your pos t link too, youre blog is providing s ome excellent educational content to help the i ndustry get to

grips wi th BIM and its clea rly needed.

Reply

Mike ListerJanuary 25, 2012 2:29 pm

Interesting article but across the industry at the moment there seems to be a lot of we need to do this but not

many clear ideas on how this should be done. It seems like designers are pushing BIM along with the large

contractors but I think more needs to be done with medium sized contractors who pick up 2 10million jobs.

These s ize projects would still benefit hugely from BIM but a lot of contractors working on that size dont have a

realistic abi lity or capacity to adopt BIM. It can be taken further down the supp ly chain to speciali st manufacturers

such as a staircase maker, are we expecting them to have an expensive version of BIM software so they can

receive info from the architect and reciprocate with their model? This i s the impres sion that is gi ven.

As a slight as ide, I think that BIM Laws uit is clutching at straws a bit. The fact that no-one is named alm ost gives

it a sens e of being made up. More importantly though it seems l ike the failings are not BIM related at all but pure

communication breakdowns. Had the drawings been produced by traditional 2D methods then the outcome

Reply


4/5



Strategy

Digital Marketing StrategyDigital Marketing Strategy

Search Marketing StrategySearch Marketing Strategy

Social Media StrategySocial Media Strategy

Training SessionsTraining Sessions

Web DesignWeb Design

Graphic DesignGraphic Design

Email MarketingEmail Marketing

Pay Per Click & Landing PagesPay Per Click & Landing Pages

Online ApplicationsOnline Applications

Content Management SystemsContent Management Systems

Mobile MarketingMobile Marketing

Social Media Tools & PlatformsSocial Media Tools & Platforms

Web AnalyticsWeb Analytics

Our Services

Pauley Creative 2012. All Rights Reserved What cookies do we use? Privacy Policy Terms & Conditions Links

Like Be the

first of2

would have been the sam e, although Im sure that the BIM helped the cons ultants squeeze all those services into

a smaller space.

Wayne CoulterJanuary 25, 2012 3:07 pm

There isnt a day goes by when the letters BIM dont appear on m y desk in s ome format but it just seems an

awful lot of conceptual discussions going on all the time.

From a manufacturers point of view how far down the chain does the information have to go or at leas t expected

to go.

In simplistic terms, a room is essentially made up of basic elements a floor, walls and a ceiling. Each acomponent part in the overall BIM model.

However, each of these component parts are made up o f several components thems elves. A precast wall for

example, may have several fixing, reinforcing and connecting pa rts each one with its own s et of performance

data.

Is the expectation that this level of data is included? If thats the case, then every manufactured com ponent part

needs i ts performance data in s ome way attributed to the 3D model. The variations are virtually endles s

especially when you consider bespoke and project-designed solutions.

Standardisation of the software is a s tart, but a more in-depth dis cussion/guidance on how far down the chain

would be a more fruitful beginning.

Reply

Brian Lighthart January 28, 2012 5:46 pm

Midst all the concern for common formats, it surprised me that there was apparently no mention of IFC, which is

jus t that a comm on BIM format. According to S. Hami l, P. Morrel l cited COBie in his Jan. 2012 talk with the

London RU G, as the first step towards interoperabi lity. I thought IFC held that position. Not a big deal i n itself, but it

does m ake me wonder why IFC and buildingSMART were not prominent in the discus sion. The answ er to that

might make it a bigger deal for me.

As for whether s ub-com ponents are expected to be represented in BIModels; I am s ure it depends on who you

ask, and what s tage of project development one is talking about, but for me, the short ans wer is Yes, they are;

along with applicable s pecification data (See COBie and SPie). The realization of that expectation is dependent on

the kind of software, expertise, and proclivities each m ember of the project team has to work with, as enabled (or

not) by the project delivery system chosen and the contract provisions each com mits to i ncluding their budget.

Reply

Name * Mail (will not be published) *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail

Leave a Comment

Message *

SUBMIT COMMENTSUBMIT COMMENT

ShareShare 24


5/5



Broughton Manor, Broughton, Milton Keynes, MK10 9AA

T: +44 (0)1908 671707 F:+44 (0)1908 695376 E: [email protected]

Pauley Creative is a trading name of Pauley Design Ltd.

Registered in England and Wales Number: 03677825

VAT Registration No. 745713718

Like 13

people

Documents

5 Reasons Why BIM is Not Working