Asset Competency Model & Efficient Facility Management #101

Asset Competency Model & Efficient Facility Management #101

Until Owners understand and are capable of organizational wide deployment of ASSET COMPETENCY MODELS, productivity across the AEC and Facility Management sector will remain poor.

What is an ASSET COMPETENCY MODEL?  An asset competency model is a formalized, detailed description and documentation of the role-specific knowledge domains required to optimize and continuously improve physical infrastructure life-cycle management.  It includes people, processes, and technologies, throughout all phases from conceptualization/planning, construction project delivery, renovation/repair/maintenance, to deconstruction/recycling.

There are three (3) core goals of an ASSET COMPETENCY MODEL:

  1. Driving Positive OUTCOMES
  2. Developing and Managing PEOPLE

You will note that TECHNOLOGY is not a core goal.  Technology is an enabler and used to support established processes and workflows.  Technology is certainly an important consideration, but nonetheless a secondary consideration.  A primary focus upon technology will generally not provide positive outcomes.

Driving Positive OUTCOMES

Critical thinking and problem solving, information-driven decision making, planning and consistent execution, and continuous learning are all prerequisites to achieving a higher percentage of positive outcomes.    LEAN best management practices are applicable in achievement of this and all primary goals.

Developing and Managing PEOPLE

Team leadership, without excessive management and control is the primary mission of any real property owner.  Real property owners are ultimately the stewards of the build environment, and therefore must be capable of leadership.  Historically, lack of owner leadership has likely been the major causal factor for low productivity throughout the AEC and Facilities Management sectors.  Owners must set the tone, provide direction,  and develop talent.  They must COLLABORATE with the building users, services providers (ie. architects, engineers, contractors, building product manufacturers…).  They must develop and operate within an atmosphere of mutual trust and respect, as well as full transparency.  That said, “trust but measure” is an operational element, not to be forgotten.  Key performance metrics (KPIs) must be developed and continuously monitored.   Accurate and timely information is needed in order to drive continuous improvement.


Stakeholder development and management is an equally important area.   Stakeholder includes senior management and oversight groups, and the ability to communicate the importance of physical infrastructure stewardship in order to obtain proper resources.   This is also an area where many facility management professionals have traditionally fallen short.   Communicating the positive and negative ramifications of proper and improperly resource physical infrastructure to funding authorities… in a simple language that they understand… is the primary responsibility of any facility management professional.  Every other activity, action, and result is dependent upon having the appropriate resource to execute upon any facility / infrastructure management strategy.  Internal and external relationships are also developed through the employment LEAN management practices.   Focus should also be upon best value procurement, mutual trust/respect, shared risk/reward, full transparency and mandated collaboration, ongoing training and education, continuous improvement, and monitoring of key performance indicators, KPIs.


The Responsibility of Real Property Owners

Driving positive outcomes is responsibility of any real property owner.  It means Owners must take responsibility for behavior, mistakes, and results.  Also, owners must learns from successes and failures, and teach other collaborative service partners to do the same.

Information-based decision making and associated improvements are only possible if owners collect current and accurate STANDARDIZED data, using common terms, definitions, and information architectures (UNIFORMAT, MASTERFORMAT, OMNICLASS, IFC…). Owner must use timely information to accurately assess areas for improvement and encourage service partners also do so.

Owners must engage in calculated risk taking and encourage other to do the same.  This includes valuing and encouraging creative and innovative ideas from any source, but especially their service providers.

Owner must continuously and proactively seek opportunities for personal and organizational improvement.   They must rely upon and accept the EXPERTISE and COMPETENCIES of their service providers.

Finally, all of the above requires that owners not only participate in but encourage and MANDATE TRANSPARENCY and SHARING.  Owner have the ultimate responsibility for promoting and contributing to a culture of sharing effective practices within their organization and across their business partner network.   While not all services providers may not be up to task of engaging in collaborative LEAN business practices, is up to Owners to select and support their teams appropriately.

Lastly, the best way for Owners to learn about and to begin to apply ASSET COMPETENCY MODELS is to adopt collaborative construction delivery methods such as INTEGRATED PROJECT DELIVERY (IPD) (for major new construction) and JOB ORDER CONTRACTING (JOC) (for renovation, repair, and maintenance.  Both IPD and JOC embed and leverage LEAN best management practices and are proven to increase the percentage of quality on-time and on-budget construction projects, thereby improving an Owner’s ability to become more efficient in infrastructure life-cycle and total-cost-of-ownership management.

Asset LIfe-cycle Costsstrategic facility management and BIM






Standards for Building Economics

Subcommittee E06.81 on Building Economics

ACTIVE standards under the jurisdiction of E06.81    

E833-14 Standard Terminology of Building Economics

E917-15 Standard Practice for Measuring Life-Cycle Costs of Buildings and Building Systems

E964-15 Standard Practice for Measuring Benefit-to-Cost and Savings-to-Investment Ratios for Buildings and Building Systems

E1057-15 Standard Practice for Measuring Internal Rate of Return and Adjusted Internal Rate of Return for Investments in Buildings and Building Systems

E1074-15 Standard Practice for Measuring Net Benefits and Net Savings for Investments in Buildings and Building Systems

E1121-15 Standard Practice for Measuring Payback for Investments in Buildings and Building Systems

E1185-15 Standard Guide for Selecting Economic Methods for Evaluating Investments in Buildings and Building Systems

E1369-15 Standard Guide for Selecting Techniques for Treating Uncertainty and Risk in the Economic Evaluation of Buildings and Building Systems

E1557-09(2015) Standard Classification for Building Elements and Related Sitework—UNIFORMAT II

E1699-14 Standard Practice for Performing Value Engineering (VE)/Value Analysis (VA) of Projects, Products and Processes

E1765-16 Standard Practice for Applying Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to Multiattribute Decision Analysis of Investments Related to Projects, Products, and Processes

See also WK50280 proposed revisionE1804-12 Standard Practice for Performing and Reporting Cost Analysis During the Design Phase of a Project

See also WK54596 proposed revisionE1946-12 Standard Practice for Measuring Cost Risk of Buildings and Building Systems and Other Constructed Projects

See also WK54599 proposed revisionE2013-12 Standard Practice for Constructing FAST Diagrams and Performing Function Analysis During Value Analysis Study

E2083-05(2016) Standard Classification for Building Construction Field Requirements, and Office Overhead & Profit

E2103/E2103M-13 Standard Classification for Bridge Elements—UNIFORMAT II

E2150-13 Standard Classification for Life-Cycle Environmental Work Elements—Environmental Cost Element Structure

E2166-12 Standard Practice for Organizing and Managing Building Data

See also WK54600 proposed revisionE2168-10(2016) Standard Classification for Allowance, Contingency, and Reserve Sums in Building Construction Estimating

E2204-15 Standard Guide for Summarizing the Economic Impacts of Building-Related Projects

E2506-15 Standard Guide for Developing a Cost-Effective Risk Mitigation Plan for New and Existing Constructed Facilities

E2514-15 Standard Practice for Presentation Format of Elemental Cost Estimates, Summaries, and Analyses

E2516-11 Standard Classification for Cost Estimate Classification System

E2620-15 Standard Classification for Program and Project Estimate Summaries

E2637-13 Standard Guide for Utilizing the Environmental Cost Element Structure Presented by Classification E2150

E2691-16 Standard Practice for Job Productivity Measurement

See also WK51496 proposed revisionE3035-15 Standard Classification for Facility Asset Component Tracking System (FACTS)

Showing results 1-3 of 3 matching Proposed New Standards under the jurisdiction of E06.81     E06 Home

WK35212 New Classification for Highway Transportation Elements and Related Sitework UNIFORMAT II

WK54380 Proactive Management of Project Cost

WK48130 New Classification for Sitework – UNIFORMAT II

Facility Life-cycle Costs and BIM

Understanding facility life-cycle costs is a core component of any BIM strategy for Owners, AE’s, Contractors, Subs, Business Product Manufacturers, Oversight Groups, Building Users, … or any stakeholder.

There are many components of life-cycle costs:

  • First Costs – Planning, Selection, Acquisition, Construction
  • Maintenance, Repair – Routine, Preventive, Unscheduled (typically expenditures of $10,000 per job or less)
  • Capital Renewal (major system/subsystem cyclical replacement)
  • Renovation, Adaptation (altering, updating spaces based upon functional needs)
  • Operations (utilization, utilities, security, safety, sustainability, waste, cleaning, grounds management )
  • Deconstruction, Transition, Disposition

BIM is just now beginning to lay the foundation for new processes and supporting technologies to enable more efficient life-cycle management of the built environment.   An important challenge is the establishment of common terms, definitions, metrics, and ‘best-practices’.   Some off these will be new, however, many/most  will likely be existing… the latter simply better shared, communicated, and consistently applied.

Facility Lifecycle Costs
Facility Lifecycle Costs

U.K. National BIM Survey Released 2012 – BIM in UK as Confusing as in the US?

“In the long history of humankind… those who learned to collaborate and improvise most effectively have prevailed.”
Charles Darwin

Latest BIM Adoption Figures for the UK

(Reference Source-NBS National NIB Survey)

As annual industry wide survey, carried out by NBS was completed in late 2011 by nearly 1,000 construction professionals representing a range of business sizes and disciplines from across the industry in the UK, including architecture, engineering and surveying. Over 200 RIBA members were among the participants, making sure the views of the membership came across.


BIM Awareness
Organizational Use of CAD
General Responses
Attitudes towards BIM
  • 78% agree the BIM is the future of project information, though how that future will look is uncertain, with 4 out of 5 agreeing that the industry is not yet clear enough of what BIM actually is
  •  31% of construction professionals are now using BIM – up from 13% in 2010 (to what degree appears uncertain however)
  • 75% of those construction professionals currently aware of BIM predict they will be using it on some projects (another indication of uncertain implementation levels)  by the end of 2012, and almost 19 out of 20 people expect to be using it in five years’ time
  • 80%+ agreed BIM increases the coordination of construction documents, with 65% of those using the technology saying BIM delivered cost efficiencies.

Survey Notes:

1000 Respondents from a range of business sizes, with a quarter coming from very small organisations (one or two employees) and 14% coming from very large businesses (more than 500 employees). A majority, 52%, of respondents came from organisations with 15 or fewer employees.

Job Description
Use of CAD
CAD Tools Used

Noteworthy quotations-

Unfortunately, the second NBS National BIM Survey provides a potentially worrying picture of a divided UK construction industry in which real progress has been made but where real areas of inertia remain.

it still heresy to say that construction is endemic with waste?

… the term BIM has become universally commonplace (though often misused) in our construction vocabulary; so what do we (the Cabinet Office BIM Task Group) mean by BIM? Well,
expectedly, the clue is in the title: constructing a managed digital information 3D model of an asset (interesting as 3D is NOT in the title), be it a building or an infrastructure project (both new-build or retained estate) that is infused with data. This information model can be used to inform the decision-making process and answer questions throughout the entire project life-cycle.

In order for this process to be effectively implemented, however, it needs to be undertaken in a truly collaborative environment (with iterative feedback loops), and here lies the real challenge. Manifesting BIM beyond the technology and process to a cultural paradigm shift (never easy) is where the real challenge lies. BIM is very much more a verb than a noun.

A large part of BIM success and a potential industry shift will be down to education and training, ensuring that new entrants to the
construction arena have the apposite blend of knowledge and skills: a BIM literacy to fit their function.

Although much has been written about BIM, few have truly considered it from the perspective of the Client.  …the real big value proposition lies in the bandwidth consequent to practical completion where the data (in our case COBie) and model outcomes can be used to ensure optimal asset performance… Modelling for better user outcomes and being able to feed this data back to inform future projects is where the real Client value proposition sits.

In the current commercial environment the ability to do more for less has been a considerable advantage. Being able to offer additional services outside our traditional scope has helped to differentiate us in a difficult market particularly with services like Quantity-Take-Off. We are also confident that the consistency in our output is generating repeat business, not least because mwe have been able to drive efficiencies from project to project as our database of standard components has become richer.


BIM Process


The Benefits of BIM, Life-cycle Management, Sustainability and High Performance Buildings

In many ways BIM, Life-cycle facility management, sustainability, and high performance buildings are interchangeable terms… some of us just don’t know it yet.

BIM is the life-cycle management of facilities (vertical and horizontal built environment), support by digital technology.  Thus BIM is part process and part software.  Life-cycle management includes all physical and functional conditions of a structure (physical condition of major systems, sub-systems, components, functional conditions-suitability for current mission, life/safety/security, access/ADA, utilization, ….) and all associated strategic, capital, and tactical planning.  High performance building management and sustainability also includes these factors, with a focus upon environmental impacts-Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, and Indoor Environmental Quality.

The benefits of BIM, Life-cycle management, sustainability, and high performance building strategies go well beyond financial considerations, though productivity and improved performance is sorely lacking within the AEC communities.

The following are just a few of the benefits of Sustainability and High Performance Buildings:

– Improved building occupant productivity ( studies indicate that approximatley $260B Billion lost annually due to poor indoor air quality-Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory).  Productivity gains have also been linked to factors such as day lighting (7-8%), temperature, ventilation,

–  Goodwill, enhanced image.

–  Reduce environmental impact / carbon footprint:  energy, water, waste, pollution (CO2 emissions, pesticides, fertilizers, …)

To put facility costs into perspective, here’s an example from the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS).  Annual costs in the private office building sector average $200 per square foot for salaries, $20 per square foot for building costs, and $2 per square foot for energy use – a 100:10:1 ratio.   It is therefore relatively easy to calculate direct cost savings relative to productivity and energy improvements.

via – Premier software for efficient construction project delivery – visual cost estimating and project management – JOC, SABER, IPD, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, IDIQ, POCA, BOA, and exclusive enhanced 400,000 line item RSMeans Cost Database.


Fram,ework for High Performanc Building Managment, BIM, and Sustainability




Source: Quantifying the Hidden Benefits of High-Performance Building, TAMU Mays Business School Cooperative Study, December 2011

Bryson York, Emily. (2010, August 28). Goodwill, better business grow from going green.
U.S. Green building Counsel. (2010). LEED for New Construction.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Kats, Gregory.(2006). Greening America’s Schools Costs and Benefits.
Beko, Gabriel, Geo Clausen, & Charles J. Weschler. (2008, October). Is the use of particle air filtration justified? Costs
and benefits of filtration with regard to health effects, building cleaning and occupant productivity. Building and
Environment, 43(10), 1647-1657.
Hepner, Christina M. & Richard A. Boser. (2006, December). Architects’ Perceptions of LEED Indoor
Environmental Quality Checklist Items on Employee Productivity. International Journal of Construction Education and
Research, 2(3), 193-208.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Mixed Mode Conditioning Systems.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. High Performance Lighting.
U.S. Green building Counsel. (2009). LEED® for Retail.
Gardner, Ken. (2010). Overcoming Barriers to Green Building.
Miller, Norm & Dave Pogue. (2009). Do Green Buildings Make Dollars and Sense?
WBDG Sustainable Committee. (2010). Sustainable.
Romm, Joesph & William Browning. (1997). Green Building and the Bottom Line.
Issa, M.H., J.H. Rankin, & A.J. Christian. (2010, January). Canadian practitioners’ perception of
research work investigating the cost premiums, long-term costs and health and productivity benefits
of green buildings. Building and Environment, 45(2010), 1698-1711.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Hepner, Christina M. & Richard A. Boser. (2006, December). Architects’ Perceptions of LEED Indoor Environmental Quality Checklist Items on Employee Productivity. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 2(3), 193-208.
Hepner, Christina M. & Richard A. Boser. (2006, December). Architects’ Perceptions of LEED Indoor
Environmental Quality Checklist Items on Employee Productivity. International Journal of Construction Education and
Research, 2(3), 193-208.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Daylighting.
Hoffman, Andrew & Rebecca Henn. (2008). Overcoming the Social and Psychological Barriers to Green Building.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Romm, Joesph & William Browning. (1997). Green Building and the Bottom Line.
Fisk, William J. (2000). Health and Productivity Gains from Better Indoor Environments and Their
Relationship with Building Energy Efficiency.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Daylighting.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. High Performance Lighting.
Gregerson, John. (2010). The Thermal Comfort Zone.
Gregerson, John. (2010). The Thermal Comfort Zone.
Fisk, William J. (2000). Health and Productivity Gains from Better Indoor Environments and Their Relationship with Building
Energy Efficiency.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Mixed Mode Conditioning Systems.
International Society of Sustainability Professionals
Fisk, William J. (2002). How IEQ Affects Health, Productivity.
Fisk, William J. (2002). How IEQ Affects Health, Productivity.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Lipow, Gar W. Cooling It: No Hair Shirt Solutions to Global Warming.
Cascio, Wayne and John Boudreau. (2008). Investing in People. (p. 195-215). Pearson Education, Inc.

Life-cycle Facility Management, BIM, Cloud Technology, and Capital Reinvestment for Facility Repair, Renovation, Adaptation, and Sustainability

The rapidly changing global economic and environmental landscapes demand efficient life-cycle building management processes.

While pro-active, knowledge-based capital reinvestment processes have been successfully applied, such as Capital Planning and Management Systems (CPMS) – which depend upon quantitative physical and functional facility information and enable multi-year “what-if” analyses to optimize capital reinvestment in concert with an organization’s mission and goals – integrated and adaptive construction project management has proven elusive.

Clear benefits and risks are associated with facility capital reinvestment decisions including life-safety, “downtime”, financial impacts, as well as the overall ability to perform an organization’s stated mission.  On a broader scale, buildings directly impact global climate change and the world economy.

The convergence of BIM and Cloud technologies provides the catalyst, tools, and collaborative environment to drive sorely needed cultural changes within the AEC sector (architectural, engineering, and construction) and enable major productivity improvements relative to facility management practices.

A colleague recently commented that the convergence of BIM and Cloud Technology allows for the creation of  “FaceBookTM for buildings”.  I couldn’t agree more.  Imagine FaceBook with enhanced features such as tracking changes, enabling reversal of changes by authorized individuals, instantaneous communication among owner, contractor, sub-contractor, trades, etc. etc.

The integration of life-cycle facility management, BIM and Cloud Technology will catalyze change throughout the AEC sector.  The convergence will enable the following and more!

  • Owners, Contractors, Subs, AEs, Oversight Groups will be able to successfully leverage technology to maximize construction project performance and  project ROI.
  • Consistent processes embedded in technology will increase operational efficiency.
  • Transparency – A single system of record makes it easier to identify projects that are deviating from process. Consistent documentation supports claims avoidance and wins.
  • Better access to project information results in faster decisions and shorter cycle times relative to procurement, award, construction, and post-construction processes.
  • Enhanced communication/collaboration among owners, service providers, contractors and AEs.
  • Contractors/subs/trades will be able to  leverage technology to better differentiate themselves from the competition, win more work, and maximize performance and profitability on jobs.
  • Consistent processes provide a competitive advantage to win more jobs and increase operational efficiency.
  • Better access to project information results in faster decisions and shorter cycle times.
  • Contractors engaged in longer term relationships with Owners.