The Problem with the UK’s BIM Strategy

The Problem with the UK’s BIM Strategy

The fundamental problem with the UK’s BIM Strategy is found within the following quotation “digital technology is changing the way we plan, build, maintain and use our social and economic infrastructure.”(Source: 2015, Level 3 Building Information Modelling – Strategic Plan,  HM Government).

Digital technology can not, and will not, change how the physical infrastructure is planned, built, or maintained.  History has taught us that technology, without a primary focus upon robust, proven processes/workflows and associated outcomes, does little but automate and perpetuate ‘ad-hoc’ inefficient methods.

The exact same situation has occurred here in the U.S., where BIM has stagnated due to an unfortunate focus upon 3D visualization versus building awareness and competency with respect to LEAN collaborative AEC/construction delivery methods.

Despite the obviously limited nature of our economic and environmental resources, the disproportionate level of waste associated with the renovation, repair, maintenance, sustainability, and new construction of buildings and infrastructure (dams, roads, utilities, airports, bridges…) continues unabated.

The barriers to positive change across the Real Property Owner and AEC (architecture, engineering, and construction) sector remain strong.   The principle barrier is that Owners lack requisite education and awareness relative to sound life-cycle / total cost of ownership practices, and therefore are are incapable of leading efforts to improve productivity and mitigate waste.

The following aspects of LEAN Collaborative Construction Delivery Methodology, which have been present in Integrated Project Delivery – IPD, and Job Order Contracting – JOC for decades,  should be the primary teachings of educational institutions and professional training:

  1. Focus upon Outcomes
  2. Collaboration
  3. Financial Transparency
  4. Common terms, definitions, and data architectures
  5. Shared Risk/Reward
  6. Mutual Trust/Respect
  7. Ongoing Monitoring / Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
  8. Continuous education, training, and improvement

Note that none of these require technology, although technology would certainly aid in lower the cost of consistent deployment.

10 steps toward real property stewardshipOpenJOC Detailed Process DiagramBIM asset life-cycle competencies


Technical (Source: 2015, Level 3 Building Information Modelling – Strategic Plan,  HM Government)

1. Level 3 A (Enabling Improvements in the Level 2 Model)

a. Technical systems to enable requirements documentation and integrated working (in sector interoperability)

b. Technical systems to enable e-Planning and e-Regs

c. Complete the scope and package work for IFC data definitions

d. Complete the scope and package work for MVD process definitions

e. Update Level 2 dPoW system to support MVD process definitions

f. Define and deliver security capability and guidance

2. Level 3 B (Enable new technologies and systems)

a. Complete the scope and package work for UML (simple interface) definitions

b. Define and deliver Internet of Things data and process standards

c. Create and integrate common “apps” store capability with cross sector teams

d. Improve electronic survey capabilities and services for existing structures above and below ground

e. Deliver geotechnical capabilities

f. Complete tools and controls for “infrastructure” development and operation

3. Level 3 C (Enable the development of new business models)

a. Update Level 2 Classification system to support sematic web

b. Data streams and telemetry integration

c. Integration of security measures and protocols

d. Advanced analytics and algorithms

e. Integration to paperless contracts

f. Integration to people based security

g. Integration across associated sectors

h. Developments required for Semantic contracts (including provenance)

i. Establish and deliver methods to publish outcomes to

j. Establish cross sector interoperability requirements

4. Level 3 D (Become a world leader)

a. Deliver “English” language dictionary and ontology framework and methods

b. Provide international Internet of Things Standards

Asset Life-cycle Model, Asset Information Model, and Why BIM Won’t Work

The U.S. tried to foster BIM with NBIMS,  also others in the world tried PAS this and PAS that, and ISO this and ISO that… the issue remains that standards can’t replace knowledge and competency.

At the end of there day BIM represents nothing new relative to the efficient life-cycle management of the built environment.  Sure, software firms, and folks that love 3D and make a living from it will tell you otherwise, but the simple truth is that BIM, as we now know it, can not and will not survive.

The fact that BIM is a failure is sad because the world desperately needs to get a grip on how to manage its limited economic and environment resources and built structures are significant in that process.   Furthermore, there are critical life-safety and security issues associated with our crumbling and mismanaged physical infrastructure.

The primary issue is that many facility management and AEC professionals confused 3D visualization with asset life-cycle management.  While 3D visualization is nice tool, is is just that, an individual component in the toolbox.  It’s not even the most important tool.   Large, multi-site, multi-national real property portfolios can be efficiently managed WITHOUT 3D visualization and BIM software as now available.

Thus the pressure by countries, such as the UK to use BIM is misdirected.

Any government regulation should be directly solely at Owners.  More specifically, asset life-cycle management practices and collaborative construction delivery methods (integrated project delivery – IPD, job order contracting – JOC)  should be mandated.  This includes a formalized set up key performance indicators (KPIs), robust lean best management practices, and ongoing education and training.

The methods to eliminate the rampant environment and economic waste endemic to the Architecture, Engineering, Construction, Operations, and Owner sectors has been available for decades,  we simply don’t require Owners to do their jobs.

Owners must be required to develop technical and business competencies with respect to asset life-cycle modeling and total cost of ownership, and be able to LEAD collaborative teams of service providers.     Until this happens….   nothing will change, it is indeed as simple as that.

BIM asset life-cycle competencies

Asset Comptency Model




  1. Owner competency & leadership
  2. Life-cycle asset management philosophy
  3. Best value procurement
  4. Collaborative construction delivery methods (IPD, JOC, …)
  5. Mutual trust & respect
  6. Common terms, definitions, and data architectures….all in plain English
  7. Shared risk/reward
  8. Monitoring via key performance indicators (KPIs)
  9. Ongoing education, training, & awareness buildling
  10. Continuous improvement






Building Information Modelling (BIM) is the integration of disparate competencies, business processes, and technologies to accomplish the efficient life-cycle management of the built environment.

Per the above definition, BIM has not moved from theory to reality to any significant extent. Improving facility and infrastructure construction, management, operations, and sustainability is indeed possible, if Owners provide competent leadership.  

Owners must also recognize the value of collaboration, LEAN management methods, and information-based decision-making.   

The fundamental way in which Owners, Architects, Engineers, Contractors, Building Users, and Oversight Groups interact must change.   The issue is not, nor has ever been, shortcomings in technology.  The vacuum is one of lack of change management skills and lack of overall asset life-cycle management competency.

Asset life-cycle management, as demonstrated in the figure below, requires an integration of business areas and competencies.

BIM asset life-cycle competencies

The primary driver is actually the construction delivery method.  It is the construction delivery method that contractually defines roles, responsibilities, timelines, deliverables, relationships, and sets the tone for a project from day one.   The construction delivery method can actually REQUIRE COLLABORATION of all participants, right down to the terms, definitions, and information used.

Thus a collaborative construction delivery CONTRACT and its associated OPERATIONS or EXECUTION MANUAL are the detailed road map to completed a significantly higher percentage (90%+) of quality  renovation, repair, and construction projects on-time and on-budget, and to the satisfaction of ALL participants.

Collaborative construction delivery methods such as Integrated Project Delivery, IPD for major new construction, and Job Order Contracting, JOC, for renovation, repair, maintenance, and minor new construction aren’t new.  The both have proven track records spanning decades.

asset life-cycle model for buildings and infrasructure

OpenJOC win-win

So, why isn’t everyone using collaborative construction delivery methods, and why aren’t 90% of projects delivered on-time and on-budget?   The answer has already been noted… owners are providing the necessary competent leadership, and many players are satisfied with the status quo.




It’s not simply a a learning curve issues,  it’s a culture change.  The multi-party nature, required financial transparency, and sharing of risk and reward is a definite hurdle for many.   Some current owners, contractors, and AE’s, quite simply, won’t be able to make the required transition.

Would it not be nice to stop focusing upon pretty 3D pictures, dated IWMS systems, and other technologies that dictate process and/or embed antagonistic workflows?  As stated previously, technology isn’t the solution, it can however be a crutch, and a problem… if it prevents us from asking the right questions… and dealing with positive change.







Asset Competency Model – The Road to Excellence

Asset Competency Model – The Road to Excellence

…at the end of the day the single issue of importance is whether or not Owners, Architects, Engineers, Contractors, Consultants, and Oversight Groups have the basic skills and/or competency required to efficiently manage the life-cycle of the built environment.

Accreditation, standards, business processes, certification… all are important, yet at the end of the day the single issue of importance is whether or not Owners, Architects, Engineers, Contractors, Consultants, and Oversight Groups have the basic skills and/or competency needed to efficiently manage the life-cycle of the built environment.

Before even addressing the obvious requirements for restructured education and professional training among all stakeholders, understanding the core business areas/processes and associated competencies is step #1.

strategic facility management and BIM

The primary business process areas involved in asset and/or facility management are:





The competencies,  that is to say the skills and activities performed within specified primary business areas, are:

  1. Programming

  2. Design

  3. Construction

  4. Operations

  5. Planned/preventive/emergency/general  maintenance

  6. Repairs

  7. Retrofits/Upgrades

  8. Improvements

  9. Replacements

  10. Space Planning

  11. Utilization

Asset LIfe-cycle Costs

Owners must demonstrate LEADERSHIP, in their role as steward of the built environment, and foster fundamental knowledge among their peers and all other parties involved.   Formal and professional education must be updated, as must the overall “culture” of the AEC and Facility Management industry, to provide visibility into proven, efficient methods for life-cycle management of the built environment.

As we have seen, technology is not the cause of the lack of productivity throughout the AEC sector, not is technology going to be the savior.  For example, the adoption of BIM for life-cycle management (its most significant value proposition), despite the trivia from marketers and poorly  designed research studies, has stagnated in the U.S.  and the U.K.    The reason for poor adoption is clear.   Requisite focus and competence relative to asset life-cycle management doesn’t exist.

While facility managers and associated organizations tout their prowess, the reality is that fewer than 5% of the AEC sector practices, or even understand the core requirements of efficient life-cycle management.  Nor do these individuals have the skills to communicate the needs and drive change management within their organizations.

Value Gap
It’s the role of Facility Management Executives to close the VALUE GAP.

We all know that in today’s world budget have dramatically shifted away from new construction to renovation, repair, maintenance, and sustainability of built structures.   We all are also aware of the ad-hoc procedures and rampant associated waste associated with the billions of dollars being spent annually.

Until we education ourselves and our community on the importance of early and ongoing collaboration, LEAN construction delivery methods, mutual respect/trust, team-based decision making, long term relationships, best value procurement, life-cycle costs versus first-cost, owner leadership without excessive management and control, continuous improvement, and key performance indicators….    the shift toward positive outcomes will simply not occur.

Job Order Contracting - LEAN Construction Delivery

2015 optimized facility renovation and repair

standardized cost data

Best Value Construction

job order contacting strategy

job order contracting value-based

job order contracting

job order contracting

People Model

Value and Outcome Based Construction

Best Value Construction

A shift in focus to OUTCOMES and VALUE, and away from ad-hoc and commoditized services would greatly benefit the AEC and Facility Management sectors.

Operational excellence on the part of real property owners and their supporting service providers has traditionally proven elusive.

Facility management professionals can not remain complacent and/or satisfied with current levels of performance.  Owners must demonstrate LEADERSHIP and support true strategic partnering with architects, engineers, contractors, business product manufactures, and building users.  Focus must be upon transformation to truly collaborative LEAN construction delivery methods and innovation.  Decisions must be team oriented and based upon current and actionable information.  Information standardization in terms of common terms, definitions, and robust shared data architectures must be mandated.

Owner focus upon teaming, best value procurement, outcomes,  life-cycle costing, financial transparency, and shared knowledge,  drive lower total cost of ownership,faster project delivery timelines, and higher quality.

While globalization and centralized oversight will continue across all industries, the AEC sector and facility management are lagging.  Local knowledge, capability, and consistent execution at a local level also requires rapid improvement.  Competence development at all levels internal and external to the organization is necessary to meet increasing economic and environmental imperatives.


Current and Future Use of BIM – 2013 – UK

The following  is from a Master’s thesis prepared by James Murray as part of the MSc individual project 2012/13, via: http://www.4Clicks.com –  Premier cost estimating and efficient project delivery software supporting JOC, SABER, IDIQ, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA … and featuring integrated contract, project, document management, visual estimating/quanity take-off. QTO, and an exclusively enhanced 400,000 line itme RSMeans Cost database

The study centered upon the development of Building Information Modelling (BIM) in the UK construction industry and its pontential affect  on the role of the client’s construction manager (CM).

BIM in the UK was not as advanced as claimed in the literature.

The majority of BIM use remained in the design, procurement and planning stages and as such, only isolated current impacts on the CM were suggested.

More guidance is needed, in order to place BIM in the future of UK construction…. if this does not occur, the development of BIM may stall.

Potential impacts to the CM range from increased efficiencies on site, to loss of project control and increased legislation.

The UK government 2016 deadline for BIM implementation on all UK public construction projects almost guarantees BIM in the future.


The problem with the Construction sector – ‘In a building project, each partner usually plays a specific role. This role follows from the partners’ primary interest, and results in a specific view on the building. A designer’s primary interest is for example the spatial structure, a structural engineer’s primary interest is the load bearing structure, while an energy engineer is interested in climate zones.
As a result of this, buildings and building parts are viewed differently by each partner…’(van Nederveen and Tolman in 1992)

The Origins of BIM -” BIM (Building Information Modelling/ Building Information Management) is a combination of 3D modelling technology and an open and sharing culture (Davies & Harty 2013). The first documented use of the term BIM can be dated back to 1992 (van Nederveen & Tolman). However, the theories behind the culture of BIM can be dated to 1975, when C.M Eastman suggested the use of integrated databases and standardized drawings to aid in project control (Eastman, Teicholz, Sacks & Liston 2008). The software vendor’s competition for BIM dominance began in 1997, after the launch of Autodesk’s Revit Architecture software (Hasan & Yolles 2009). This has since developed into a thriving market, which has resulted in a series of slightly different, competing BIM applications (Howell & Batcheler 2005).   The combination of culture and technology makes BIM unique. To perform BIM on a project, members of the team blend the use of modelling technologies, with behaviors and policies that run throughout a project lifecycle, from cradle to grave (Autodesk 2011).”

“The combination of culture and technology makes BIM unique. To perform BIM on a project, members of the team blend the use of modelling technologies, with behaviors and policies that run throughout a project lifecycle, from cradle to grave (Autodesk 2011).”

“The cultural aspect of BIM implementation requires all contributors to a project to openly share information they hold about the build with the other parties to the contract (Eastman et al 2008). It is this sharing culture that is considered revolutionary in the construction industry, as it is a move away from traditional trends of secretive parties and regular disputes (Davies & Harty 2013).”

Industry resistance to change   “ BIM requires a change in culture to implement the technology available. For example, the use of the BIM model to produce cost and time estimates has been identified as a paradigm shift (Gier 2008). A paradigm shift is a change from an established process and school of thought, to a new one, thus creating a change in cultures. It is in this paradigm shift where the barrier lies. As identified in the Egan report, 1998, the UK construction industry has a reputation of being slow to accept change (Egan 1998), which has caused it to lag behind the adoption of 3D modelling, when compared to other industries (Cabinet Office 2011).
This reluctance to change could also create resistance to overcoming the barriers of trust detailed above. To increase trust, a change away from the current culture of information hording, to one of sharing and transparency should be made.
These barriers of trust and culture could have secondary impacts on the CM, whereby if they are not removed the benefits of BIM may not be realised.”

BIM Levels:

4 Levels of BIM4 Levels of BIM Implementation


Market Share:  BIM Market Share

Facility Management Executives Lax in Helping to Define BIM?

Facility management executives need to play a role in defining BIM.  Having personally reached out to several leading FM professional organizations I am amazed at how little interest and/or awareness there is relative to BIM… not to mention other ‘disruptive technologies’ such as ‘cloud computing’.
Unfortunately this also appears to be the case for many large facility portfolio Owners.

As a direct result, the ‘life-cycle management of the built environment supported by digital technology’, BIM, which is so critically linked to major economic and environment factors, continues to falter.

True, BIM is in the ‘disillusionment’ phase of a typical technology adoption curve, however, the degree of resistance to ‘getting everyone on the same page’ (Owners, AEs, Contractors, Sub, Building Product Manufactures, Oversight Groups, Building Users), is almost overwhelming in the US…. vs. other Countries.  

It’s beyond time for everyone to “visualize the possibilities and realities of what we can do quickly and what will take more time to really get right.”

The best “starting point” is to understand that the ‘ construction delivery method ‘ sets the tone and ultimately plays a key role in defining the success or failure of any renovation, repair, sustainability, or new construction project.  The method must be collaborative, value-based, and have some form of risk/reward and/or performance basis.  Integrated project delivery, IPD and Job Order Contracting, JOC and other “emerging” construction delivery methods have this characteristics.

facility-life-cycle-technology-and-process-roadmap1-300x172BIMF - Building Information Management Framework


The Metrics of BIM – The Manage the Built Environment

As the old saying goes…”you can’t manage what you don’t measure”.



Here’s the beginning of a list of information requirements spanning various domains/competencies, technologies, etc.,
While an important component, the 3D component of BIM has been a very unfortunate distraction.  It appears that many/most have “gone to the weeds” and/or are “recreating the wheel” vs. working on core foundational needs such as the consistent use of appropriate terminology and the establishment of robust, scalable and repeatable business practices, methodologies, standards, metrics and benchmarks for facilities and physical infrastructure management.

It is common terminology that enables effective communication and transparency among the various decision makers, building managers, operators and technicians involved with facilities and physical infrastructure investment and management.

Here are examples of metrics associated with the life-cycle management of the built environment:

Annualized Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) per building per gross area = Rate per square foot

Annualized TCO per building/Current replacement value = Percent of Current Replacement Value (CRV)

Annualized TCO per building/Net assignable square feet = Cost rate per net assignable square feet per building

Annualized TCO per building/Non-assignable square feet = Cost rate per non-assignable square feet per building

Annualized TCO per building/Building Interior square feet = Cost rate per interior square foot per building

Churn Rate

Utilization Rate

AI (Adaptation Index) or PI (Programmatic Index) = PR (Program Requirements) /
CRV (Current Replacement Value)

Uptime or Downtime – Defined in percent, as amount of time asset is suitable for the program(s) served.

Facility Operating Gross Square Foot (GSF) Index (SAM Performance Indicator: APPA 2003)

Custodial Costs per square foot

Grounds Keeping Costs per square foot

Energy Costs per square foot

Energy Usage

Utility Costs per square foot

Waste Removal Costs per square foot

Facility Operating Current Replacement Value (CRV) Index (SAM Performance Indicator: APPA 2003)

Planned/Preventive Maintenance Costs per square foot

Emergency Maintenance Costs as a percentage of Annual Operations Expenditures.

Unscheduled/Unplanned Maintenance Costs as a percentage of Annual Operations Expenditures.

Repair costs (man hours and materials) as a percentage of Annual Operations Expenditures

FCI (Facility Condition Index) = DM (Deferred Maintenance) + CR (Capital Renewal)
/ CRV (Current Replacement Value)

Recapitalization Rate, Reinvestment Rate

Deferred Maintenance Backlog

Facilities Deterioration Rate

FCI (Facility Condition Index) = DM (Deferred Maintenance) + CR (Capital Renewal) /
CRV (Current Replacement Value)

AI (Adaptive Index) or PI (Programmatic Index) = PR (Program Requirements) /
CRV (Current Replacement Value)

FQI (Facility Quality Index) or Quality Index or Index = FCI (Facility Condition Index)+ AI (Adaptive Index)

BIMF - Building Information Management FrameworkVia – Premier cost estimating and efficient project delivery software for the built environment – , …

The “I” for Information if Building Information Modeling or Life-cycle Facility Management

While articles and discussions continue about Facility Management and BIM, in reality they are virtual synonyms.

Facility management is a profession that encompasses multiple disciplines to ensure functionality of the built environment by integrating people, place, process and technology. – Definition of Facility Management – IFMA

Building Information Modeling (BIM) is a digital representation of physical and functional characteristics of a facility.  A BIM is a shared knowledge resource for information about a facility forming a reliable basis for decisions during its life-cycle; defined as existing from earliest conception to demolition. – NIBS

In order to achieve either efficiently I argue that Information and Process must be shared in a consistent, mutually understood format among all stakeholders of the built environment: Owners, AEs, Contractors, Sub-contractors, Business Product Manufacturers, Building Users, and Oversight Groups.

The problem remains, however, that many don’t understand the multiple knowledge domains or competencies associated with the life-cycle management of the built environment, nor how to integrated them.  What is even worse, is that some of those that do understand are unwilling to share that information due to perceived issues with doing so.

NBIMS and similar efforts are steps in the right direction.  NBIMS attempts to consolidate and communicate information requirements, models, and associated usage processes, with an “open industry” approach.

Owners must clearly push for BIM and Life-cycle Facility Management.  Why?  Simple…they pay the bills and it is in their best interests to optimize their return on investment (ROI).  That said, Owners can’t do it alone.  By the very nature of the industry, all stakeholders must collaborate.  Unlike an airplane, or car… buildings are around for 50-100 years, have multiple uses, and can be adapted to changing situations.. also a far greater number of suppliers and service providers are involved, as well as a virtually infinite number of configurations.


Here’s are quick graphic of just a few of the areas, competencies, and technologies involved:

BIMF - Building Information Management Framework


via – Premier cost estimating and efficient project delivery software featuring an exclusively enhanced 400,000+ RSMeans Cost database and support for JOC, SABER, IDIQ, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA, BOS, and more!

Construction Disruption – BIM, Cloud Computing, and Efficient Project Delivery Methods

By Peter Cholakis
Published in the March 2013 issue of Today’s Facility Manager

Emergent disruptive technologies and construction delivery methods are altering both the culture and day-to-day practices of the construction, renovation, repair, and sustainability of the built environment. Meanwhile, a shifting economic and environmental landscape dictates significantly improved efficiencies relative to these facility related activities. This is especially important to any organization dependent upon its facilities and infrastructure to support and maintain its core mission.

The disruptive digital technologies of building information modeling (BIM) and cloud computing, combined with emergent collaborative construction delivery methods are poised to alter the status quo, ushering in increased levels of collaboration and transparency. A disruptive technology is one that alters the very fabric of a business process or way of life, displacing whatever previously stood in its place. BIM and cloud computing fit the profile of disruptive technologies, individually, and when combined these stand to create a tidal wave of change.

BIM is the life cycle management of the built environment, supported by digital technology. While a great deal of emphasis has been placed upon 3D visualization, this is just a component of BIM. The shift from a “first cost mentality” to a life cycle cost or total cost of ownership is a huge change for many. Improving decision making practices and applying standardized terms, metrics, and cost data can also prove challenging. An understanding and integration of the associated knowledge domains important to life cycle management is required, resulting in what is now being referred to as “big data.”

Cloud computing is also a disruptive technology, and it’s one that impacts several areas. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) definition of cloud computing is as follows, “Cloud computing is a model for enabling ubiquitous, convenient, on demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources (e.g., networks, servers, storage, applications, services) that can be rapidly provisioned and released with minimal management effort or service provider interaction. The cloud model is composed of five essential characteristics, three service models, and four deployment models.”

It is perhaps helpful to define cloud computing in terms of its benefits. Cloud computing enables far greater levels of collaboration, transparency, and information access previously unavailable by traditional client/server, database, or even prior generation web applications. Multiple users can work on the same data set with anyone, anywhere, anytime, in multicurrency, multilanguage environments. All changes can be tracked to “who did what” within seconds (potentially the best form of security available), and information is never deleted.

The disruptive technologies of BIM and cloud computing will accelerate the adoption of emergent construction delivery methods and foster new frameworks. Design-bid-build, the traditional construction delivery method for decades, is inherently flawed. As a lowest bid deployment it immediately sets up adversarial relationships for involved parties. Owners prepare a solicitation for construction projects based on their understanding of them1, with or without third-party A/E assistance, and in most cases they go out in search of the lowest bidder. Then without a thorough understanding of the owner’s facility, bidders base their responses on the owner’s solicitation, plans, and specifications. Owners typically allow a period of time for bidders’ questions and clarifications; but the quality of this interchange is at best questionable if based solely on a written scope, plans and specifications, and/or a meeting with suppliers.

Design-build, arguably a step in right direction, falls short of bringing all stakeholders together. More responsibility of design and construction is shifted to the contractor and/or A/E. However, the dual level participation structure doesn’t assure the interests of all parties are equally addressed. Furthermore, the design-build process is typically reserved for major new construction projects versus the numerous sustainability, repair, renovation projects, and minor new construction projects typically encountered by facility managers (fms).

Because BIM brings together previously disparate information into a framework that enables decision support, using the technology requires a collaborative construction delivery method. The integration of the domain knowledge and robust processes required to allow fms, A/Es, and other stakeholders to achieve heightened levels of information sharing and collaboration is enabled by methods that include Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and Job Order Contracting (JOC).

Key characteristics of these emergent construction delivery methods include: choices based on best value; some form of pricing transparency; early and ongoing information sharing among project stakeholders; appropriate distribution of risk; and some form of financial incentive to drive performance.

Both IPD and JOC allow, if not require, owner cost estimators and project managers to “partner” with contractors, subcontractors, and A/Es to conceptualize, create, cost, prioritize, start, and report upon projects—in the very early phases of construction.

IPD, JOC, and Simplified Acquisition of Base Civil Engineering Requirements (SABER)—the U.S. Air Force term for applying JOC practices—are practiced simultaneously by a growing number of organizations and supported by digital technologies. These construction delivery processes are embedded within software to allow for rapid, cost-effective, and consistent deployment as well as the associated level of collaboration and transparency.

BIM and cloud computing are disruptive technologies that will accelerate the adoption of emergent construction delivery methods such as IPD and JOC. Construction delivery methods set the tone and level of interaction among project participants and can be viewed as the management process framework. When supported by BIM and cloud computing, the life cycle management of the built environment, and the associated management of big data, can be expected to become commonplace for many construction projects.

1303 profdev a 150x150 Professional Development: Construction Disruption


Cholakis is chief marketing officer for 4Clicks Solutions, LLC, a Colorado Springs, CO provider of cost estimating and project management software. With expertise in facilities life cycle costs and total cost of ownership in various market segments, he is involved in numerous industry associations and committees including the American Society of Safety Engineers, Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering, Society of American Military Engineers, BIM Library Committee-National Institute for Building Sciences (NIBS), and National Building Information Model Standard Project Committee.

1 “The Art of Thinking Outside the Box;” Vince Duobinis; 2008.