Technology is not the primary obstacle to efficient life-cycle management of the built environment!
Technology limitations/issues – come from people
Different meanings for the same parts
Economic impacts – based on people
Different values and attributes for same processes
Social Impacts – outcomes for people
Stakeholders (Owners!!!, AE’s, Contractors, Oversight Groups, Business Product Manufacturers, Users) determine the uses of technology, economic value and environmental impacts
The roadblocks to increased collaboration, transparency, and productivity within the AECOO sector are as follows:
1. Lack of a robust, shared Ontology.
2. Refusal to adopt collaborative construction delivery methods such as Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) for new construction, Job Order Contracting (JOC) for repair, renovation, sustainability, and minor new construction projects.
3. Current focus upon first-costs vs. life-cycle costs.
Standardized terms, definitions, metrics and the deployment of “best practice” business process is not rocket science. Unfortunately too many AECOO participants and stakeholders need build their level of awareness of the above vs. ad-hoc and antagonistic processes such as design-bid-build, or even design-build. The latter is a good attempt to be IPD-like, but is not IPD.
The development and application of robust standardized terms, taxonomies, hierarchies, etc. will enable BLM/BIM. We need to move faster to deal with critical global Economic and Environment realities (global warming, diminishing natural resources, new competitive landscape …).
If one had to name the single most important aspect of BIM, I would select the project delivery method. Collaborative methods are a requirement. They set the tone, establish responsibilities, and determine if/how information is shared (as well as when and the format)… and ultimately determine the success or failure. The good news is they are not new and they are proven. The bad is that the market has cultural objection to change and to sharing. Examples of collaborative methods are Integrated Project Delivery, IPD, Job Order Contracting, JOC, Public Private Partnerships, PPP, etc.
Equally important is a life-cycle view vs. first cost mentality. This provides true value for everyone and removes the disadvantages associated with low bid.
I have been blessed to be able to work with the largest Owners across all market sectors as well as contractors, subs, and AEs of all sizes. My focus is upon both the strategic aspects of life-cycle management and tactical implementation supported by technology and robust data architectures.
As we all know, there’s a lot of dysfunction in the AECOO market, Folks continue to attempt to reinvent the wheel despite proven business best practices, vendors (especially software) mislead by saying the “do everything”…especially the IWMS folks. Also the BIM focus has largely focused upon 3D visualization and many don’t even understand life-cycle management, requirements, and/or metrics.
The 3D visualization aspect BIM has little true value at the moment other that pretty pictures, crash detection, and prefabrication (specific material vendors).
BIM is really BLM (built-environment life-cycle management) and therefore must support a as framework of collaborative project delivery. Many/most current methods and models only support linear and/or serial processes vs. parallel co-existent cycles.
A BIM / BLM primary issue that has been largely avoided to date is the lack of a robust BLM (built-environment life-cycle management) ONOTLOGY. BLM/BIM will continue to be impossible without one. For starters what is a life-cycle…what are the primary phases…competencies…technologies… metrics…? There is a reason BLM/BIM has stagnated… and this is it.
Is there a BIM/BLM clear mission statement, clear value. proposition, robust ontology….documented proven business best practices, quantitative metrics… all of these must precede technology. Tech is just an enabler for cost-efficient deployment, etc.
True North Indicators… what a great term. Collaboration and consensus processes are not the “wave of the future”, but requirement for survival within our changing Architecture, Engineering, Construction, Operations, and Owner sector(so).
True North Indicator (TNI): An expression of something you team values. Something to keep your sights set to.
Key Performance Indicator (KPI): A metric for how you measure your progress toward or deviation from a TNI.
Below is a snapshot of Boiled Architecture’s dashboard for 2013. Why post it?
Well, if more architecture, repair, renovation, sustainability, and construction projects were conceived, procured, executed, and monitored using similar methods and KPI’s the world just might be a better place.
Whether you are cost estimating, designing, managing projects, and/or involved in Integrated Project Delivery – IPD, Job Order Contracting – JOC, and involved any related collaborative construction delivery process… or thinking our it… now’s the time to get more serious, or get on board!
Increased productivity, accuracy, transparency, and collaboration are requirements of success as we move forward.
Whether you are practicing BIM (life-cycle management of the build environment supported by digital technology and forget the 3-D aspect for a moment).. .. practicing a component of BIM but moving toward life-cycle management…. it’s time to adapt robust business processes vs. continue with ad-hoc practices. I simply talking about having sound processes to better control total cost of ownership and return on investment of the built environment.
It’s time to look at everyone’s risk/reward…Owners, Contractors, Subs, AE’s oversight groups, building users, the community…vs. just your own!
Along the left of each column of charts you’ll see vertically-oriented titles. Those are the True North Indicators. Each of the graphs are displaying a Key Performance Indicator for those TNI’s (some graphs are able to display more than one KPI).
Our team practices 100% transparency internally, and this is possible because I train all employees on what these metrics mean, how they are measured, and what the results imply about our performance. If you want to discuss any of these numbers, I’d be happy to share them with you. Feel free to set up an appointment with me to discuss on the phone: www.doodle.com/osciawilson
What we valued and what we measured for 2013:
1. TNI: Collaborative Culture
KPI: Internal collaboration survey
KPI: Hrs spent on community service
2. TNI: Solid delivery
KPI: % of our desired standards established
KPI: Average billing rate
KPI: CO’s resulting from our errors/omissions per project
KPI: Architectural RFI’s per project
3. TNI: Solid client base
KPI: Client sources (referral, repeat, other)
KPI: Acquisition costs
KPI: % revenue per client
4. TNI: Thought leaders in IPD and transparent business practices
KPI: Google search ranking for the phrases “Transparent business model,” “IPD Architect,” “IPD,” “Integrated Project delivery,” “Collaborative Construction.”
KPI: # of blog posts
KPI: Speaking/interview/quote requests
5. TNI: Company wealth
KPI: Cash balance
KPI: Staff utilization
KPI: Overhead rate
6. TNI: Employee wealth
KPI: # of hours worked
KPI: Pay per hour
7. TNI: Ideal project mix
KPI: Delivery models (IPD, Design-Build, etc)
KPI: Sustainable projects
KPI: Transportation projects
What did you measure in 2013? What have you decided to measure for 2014?
via http://www.4Clicks.com – via http://www.4Clicks.com – Premier cost estimating and efficient project delivery software solutions for JOC, SABER, IDIQ, MATOC, SATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA, BOS … featuring an exclusively enhanced 400,000 line item RSMeans Cost Database, visual estimating/automatic quantity take off ( QTO), and collaborative contract/project/document management, all in one application. Our technology is currently serving over 85% of United States Air Force bases and rapidly growing numbers of other DOD and non-DOD (United States Army Corps of Engineers, Army, GSA, Homeland Security, VA..) federal departments/agencies, as well as state/county/local governments, colleges/universities, healthcare, and airports/transportation. RSMeans Strategic Partner
The FMR (RSMeans Facilities, Maintenance, and Repair Cost Book) is primarily for owners and facility managers who must be proactive in planning their budgets for building maintenance. More than 1,600 maintenance and repair assemblies covering many facility components, along with costs for general maintenance such as lawn mowing, shrub and tree care, general cleaning, and window washing. Over 500 preventive maintenance assemblies, listing tasks and frequencies and the number of labor hours to perform each item. Costs are broken down, making it easy to compare using in-house staff to hiring an outside company to perform the tasks.
Three distinct sections of information are included:
Maintenance and Repair
The RSMeans Facilities Maintenance and Repair Cost Data is now available electronically within e4Clicks Project Estimator. Create, estimate, procure, and implement maintenance and repair project within a collaborative environment. Our goal is to provide you with enough information to plan your maintenance work and budget for the life of the building. www.4Clicks.com
The construction delivery method sets the tone, establishes the roles and responsibilities of all parties involved, and impacts ultimate success more so than any technology.
Thus IPD – Integrated Project Delivery for new construction and JOC – Job Order Contracting for renovation, repair, sustainability, and minor new construction, and similar collaborative construction delivery methods should be the primary focus. Technology is certainly a deployment enabler, and sometime also a disruptive catalyst.
Stakeholder collaboration (Owners, AEs, Contractors, Subs, Oversight Groups, Building Product Manufactures…) throughout the life-cycle of a build structure is the fundamental element that ultimately drives productivity and better outcomes. Collaboration is the path to the refinement of associated goals, needs, and activities…. and therefore creates requisite focus.
BIM is being held back by one item…. lack of collaboration, or even the willingness to collaborate.
BIM technology vendors and “standards” organizations are somewhat to “blame” , as they have placed emphasis upon 3D visualization vs. construction delivery methods, a robust ontology, and metrics.
In 2013, KPMG interviewed executives from 165 engineering and construction companies around the world, serving a range of markets including energy, power, industrial, healthcare/pharmaceutical, manufacturing, mining, education and government.
1. “66 percent feel that national governments’ infrastructure plans are the single biggest driver of market growth”
2. Slow recovery / growth continuing with “stable or higher margins”
3. “budget deficits and public funding is the biggest barrier to growth”
4. Growth areas: “power and energy top the list by a significant distance, other target sectors include water, rail, mining, and roads and bridges”
5. Standardization is critical to improving “project and risk management”. “Whenever new people start on a project, they bring with them different processes. To spread good practices, contractors can increase their use of… ” cost estimating and …. “project management software and step up training…. consolidate project delivery, and tighten all leakages as much as possible.”
6. “Become a strategic partner to clients’ businesses By working more closely with clients from all sectors….”
via http://www.4Clicks.com – Premier cost estimating and efficient project delivery software solutions for JOC, SABER, IDIQ, MATOC, SATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA, BOS … featuring an exclusively enhanced 400,000 line item RSMeans Cost Database, visual estimating/automatic quantity take off ( QTO), and collaborative contract/project/document management, all in one application. Our technology is currently serving over 85% of United States Air Force bases and rapidly growing numbers of other DOD and non-DOD (United States Army Corps of Engineers, Army, GSA, Homeland Security, VA..) federal departments/agencies, as well as state/county/local governments, colleges/universities, healthcare, and airports/transportation. RSMeans Strategic Partner.
Why the Job Order Contracting model could work in Canada
STEPHEN BAULD & LISA COOLEY
A proven contracting methodology from the United States may be a model for solving some of Canada’s current contracting demands.
Job Order Contracting (JOC) was born of the United States military contracting world, where small construction projects were taking up to 18 months and 20 per cent of project budget to design and procure. JOC was designed to procure and execute those projects in a more efficient way by providing a competitive and flexible pricing structure for the execution of these small, repetitive projects.
Key to JOC is the availability of a commercial catalogue of construction prices, called a Unit Price Book (UPB), such as those produced by RSMeans Company, LLC. Contractors bid a coefficient, which is applied to the UPB to arrive at contractual prices. For instance, if a contractor’s bid is .97, it means they offer a three per cent discount off the commercial prices as established by the UPB.
In this way, JOC is similar to the standing order contracting that we are familiar with, with a few important differences. The first is reliance on that unit price structure rather than labour and material pricing. This provides a clear pricing structure based on a complete, installed unit of work, which prevents padding with extra hours or expenses and rewards the most efficient contractors. It also provides a higher level of pricing transparency for municipalities and their constituents. By leveraging a commercial price book with tens of thousands of line items, virtually any scope of work for small construction and renovation can be covered. Procurement of the contract including the pricing structure is done once, but is then used for multiple projects over the contract term through individual delivery orders.
Another important difference is that JOC has a well-defined project development process for each delivery order that requires the active involvement of the contractor, not unlike design-build or integrated project delivery.
The contractor under JOC is expected to take an active role in defining the scope of work and providing a facility solution to the owners prior to pricing the project. The delivery order proposal for each projects provides a clear scope and sometimes a simplified design deliverable, as well as line item pricing detail for the outlined scope of work. Once the owner accepts the proposal, the project becomes lump sum for the contractor-defined scope of work, so there is no haggling over quantities and unit prices once construction starts.
After the implementation of JOC in the U.S., numerous studies were conducted and the results were clear: JOC results in fair pricing, better quality construction with fewer claims and litigation and much faster delivery of small projects. JOC is typically used for projects in the $25,000 to $1,000,000 range, with overall annual construction volume under a JOC $2M to $70M.
JOC should not be used for larger construction projects where a full design process is needed. Rather, it is best focused on the kind of ongoing, repetitive facility upgrades that are required in a municipality of any size. Typical JOC projects might include renovations, upgrading classrooms or conference rooms, lighting replacements, paving, or fencing.
The long-term contract structure (3-5 years) covering multiple projects is key to the success of JOC. Typical contract provisions will guarantee a very small amount of work ($25,000 to $50,000) but provide clear opportunity in the form of an annual maximum ($2 million to $5+ million) creating an incentive for the contractor to perform well to achieve maximum contract volume and thus profitability.
Contracts are typically awarded for a base year with two or more options, so that an owner can retain a performing contractor or easily replace one that is not non-performing. The long-term relationship that this promotes between the contractor and the owner leads to multiple project execution efficiency.
While contract bundling of larger projects has been a topic of concern recently, the research on JOC clearly points to increased opportunities for small businesses.
This is because the type and variety of projects requires extensive subcontracting of portions of work, in a project bandwidth where small local companies are the most competitive. Small business can be further supported in a JOC by requiring that a certain percentage of the work be subcontracted, as in Washington State legislation, or by establishing specific goals for awarding of prime or subcontract dollars to small, local business.
It may be time to take a look at JOC as a model for Canada’s municipalities to deal with the increasing volume of small facility upgrades while promoting small local business and making procurement staff more efficient and effective.
This approach would work very well in municipalities throughout Canada, and is available to come and talk to procurement staff to explain how this process could be applied in municipal procurement contracts. Government procurement is always looking for ways to create value for money as well as a way to be completely fair, open, and transparent to all contractors. JOC would be the ideal way to create a level playing field for everyone involved in the process of government procurement.
Stephen Bauld, Canada’s leading expert on government procurement, is a member of the Daily Commercial News editorial advisory board. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Lisa Cooley, LEED AP, is a recognized Subject Matter Expert on Job Order contracting and an employee of RSMeans, a business line of Reed Construction Data Canada. She can be reached email@example.com
via 4Clicks.com: Premier cost estimating and efficient project delivery software solutions for JOC, SABER, IDIQ, MATOC, SATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA, BOS … featuring an exclusively enhanced 400,000 line item RSMeans Cost Database, visual estimating/automatic quantity take off ( QTO), and collaborative contract/project/document management, all in one application. Our technology is currently serving over 85% of United States Air Force bases and rapidly growing numbers of other DOD and non-DOD (United States Army Corps of Engineers, Army, GSA, Homeland Security, VA..) federal departments/agencies, as well as state/county/local governments, colleges/universities, healthcare, and airports/transportation. RSMeans Strategic Partner
BIM is the life-cycle modeling and management of the built environment supported by digital technology. Forget the 3D visualization distraction for a moment and let’s focus on the important component of the BIM acronym; the “I” for information.
As we all know from a quote commonly attributed to Peter Drucker… and I paraphrase ‘You can’t manage what you don’t measure’. Most, if not all failures to implement BIM and/or facility life-cycle management are likely traceable to the fundamental failure to gather the requisite accurate and transparent information required in order to make informed decisions. (Note: I use the terms “facility” or “facilities” to include any built structure.)
First, a few clarifications and items to help frame this discussion:
BIM definition: “BIM is the life-cycle modeling and management of the built environment supported by digital technology.”
While BIM can be applied to any situation, the focus of this discussion is upon – multi-facility portfolios, with extensive capital reinvestment, renovation, repair, maintenance, and sustainability requirements/projects.
We are all faced with a significantly altered economic and environmental landscape: more to do, limited capital/cost cuts, more accountability and transparency, and the need to reduce our “carbon footprint”.
Success in today’s world requires moving from a reactionary and needs-satisfaction mode to longer term strategies with associated options. This is a major shift in thinking for many, but especially for our business or “for-profit sectors”.
Robust, proven processes with associated accurate transparent, and actionable information in support of fact-based decision-marking are drivers for success.
Creation of a business-based capital reinvestment and asset management framework and decision-making capability are central requirements.
Accurate, timely information is required for sound decision-making.
Decisions regarding reinvestment into the built should be made in concert with the attainment and support of an organization’s mission.
Technology is a tool to enable lower cost implementation of strategies and processes. Technology’s role is to assure consistent, cost-efficient application of embedded business process, enabling faster deployment, automation of routine or complex mathematical processes, and associated decision-making and reporting capabilities.
BIM’s SLOW START
Okay, so know let’s look a bit more about why BIM is not fully understood, nor being rapidly accepted across the Architecture, Engineering, Construction, Owner, Operations/Facility Management sector(s).
Many, if not most organizations lack robust, consistent, and transparent planning policies and overall life-cycle management processes.
Existing processes and construction delivery methods are largely antagonistic and outdated, with divergent goals for involved parties.
Stove-piped mandates with many players, and unused or misunderstood information.
Lack of clear direction and leadership focus, process management, and desired, quantitative outcomes.
Lack of appropriate tools to assist the life-cycle management process, inclusive of appropriate data validation and standardization.
The appropriate use of consultants, especially in the areas of “change management”.
Lack of understanding and adopting of newer and more efficient construction delivery methods (Integrated Project Delivery – IPD, Job Order Contracting – JOC), contracts, and supporting technology tools.
All aspects of BIM/faclity life-cycle managment, it’s organization, purpose, policies, assumptions, mandates, methods and scope must be discussed, agreed upon, and re-evaluated on a continuous, cyclical basis. It’s important that process ownership resides with everyone in the organization with appropriate expertise applied and shared from multiple knowledge-domains. Furthermore, that direct involvement and support of decision-makers and appropriate involvement of consultants and/or outsourcing is available.
BIM/life-cycle facility management requires fundamental changes in business practices. Unfortuantely, change management is a tremendous chasm to bridge, and achieving any significant success using internal resource only is unlikely. Just a few of the areas associated with implementing a BIM strategy are shown below.
Anticipated outcomes must be linked to ALL decisions in terms of anticipated financial, functional and/or conditional improvements.
Proprietary (e.g., Excel) and COTS tools for are used for various aspects of facility life-cycle management – strategic planning, capital planning and management/financial modeling, construction delivery, maintenance management, spaces planning/untilization, building automation/security, project management, etc. Relatively limited effort, focus, associated or investment is typically applied in consideration of integrating and rationalizing these various systems in terms of the validation and standardization of information across multiple knowledge domains. The piecemeal/ad-hoc approach is a symptom of process and cultural issues with an organization and/or lack of attention to change management. For example, a common “excuse” relative to this issue of integrating disparate technologies and processes is that the involved technology is” incompatible”. In today’s world, virtually any technology using current technology can communicate with another. The real issues reside in the people and process that create the information. The inherent “fear of change” and traditional lack of collaboration among various professional discipline are the fundamental issues to be address. A good example is the continued use of proprietary spreadsheets for cost estimating and other somewhat complex domains. The use of spreadsheets is well beyond their technologies ability. Spreadsheets are single user and non-collaborative, have no concept of hierarchy, nor full audit capability. In short, spreadsheets are inefficient and costly to maintain at best, and are costly relative to information reuse or updating. Spreadsheet use cost estimating and cost control for facility portfolios is unfortunately both pervasive and untenable.
Similarly CAD-centric visualization tools, such as Revit and AutoCad [from Autodesk], SketchUp (graphical design), Archicad, Bentley, etc. are excellent data visualization tools however, should not be confused as a turnkey BIM life-cycle management solutions. Relational database centric systems offer enhances data management, however, do not afford the flexibility of spreadsheets. Newer cloud-based technologies and associated offer higher degrees of collaboration, transparency, and flexibility.
THE IMPORTANCE OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT
Any attempt at life-cycle facility management – BIM will have little or no value unless based upon a collaborative evaluation of current and planned operations, conditions, and priorities. The objective of BIM is to cost-effectivey meet infrastructure requirements in support of an organizations mission, and to mitigate any preventative and unplanned disruptions to operations and/or compromises the financial position of the organization. This includes an asset management decision support capability the bases capital reinvestment upon financial and functional returns. All projects compete for organizational resources and objective criteria must be established to enable maximum utilization of these finite resources. Informed, goal focused decision support capability is a definitive source of opportunity for efficiency/productivity gains.
Cost awareness across the organization is an important starting point. Everyone in an organization must realize that capital reinvestment decisions are inter-related and impact long term operational expenses.
While uncertainty will certainly be present to some extent, virtually any facility life-cycle project or task can be modeled for decision-makers, and modeled over several timelines… 5 yr, 10yr, 50yr. etc. The mindset that performance and process improvement is ongoing vs. static must be adopted. This accounts for associate organizational “growth” or “shrinkage”, trends, regulatory impacts, etc. The overall goal is to maximize any ability to adapt, renew, renovate, recycle, reuse, and/or grow/shrink physical resources.
WHO IS INVOLVED?
“Everyone impacted by decisions made” is the short answer, including but not limited to Owners, Architects, Planners, Contractors, Sub-Contractors, Business Product Manufacturers, Technology Providers, Consultants, Building Users, Oversight Groups. From an Owner perspective, involved parties would include; Senior Management/HQ, Local Management, Planners, Capital Planners, Finance, Procurement, Project Managers, Building Users,
So, assuming one proceeds down the BIM life-cycle facility path, what are the reasonable expectations? First, it’s important to understand that a phased approach is likely the best approach. Think of BIM as a large pie, one that you are going to put together a piece at a time. That said, you need the to be aware of the list of ingredients and how and when to put the ingredients together.
Secondly, BIM / life-cycle facility management is verb, a process, not a one time thing… like a project. It’s primary gold is to improve upon the efficiency of impacts of the built environment, helping decision-makers compare and better select among available capital reinvestment alternatives. All decisions should consider space, equipments, physical and functional conditions, current construction cost estimates and operational cost estimates over defined periods of time. An ROI, Return-on-Investment business analysis is mandatory for all projects, inclusive of due consideration of any associated potential risks to the organization’s mission. So called , “lean practices” are an important objective, as are simple to use decision support and monitoring tools such as “dashboards” and associated key performance indicators (KPIs).
Ongoing facility portfolio reassessment based on a routine and consistently conducted functional and physcial facility assessments associated with appropriate standardized and well vetted reference cost databases, cost models, and other tools such as GIS and BAS.
Efficient facility construction, renovation, repair, and sustainability process management methods such as IPD [integrated project delivery] and JOC [Job Order Contracting], which involve all stakeholders collaboratively from project concept and design, through construction and warranty periods are core components of BIM/facility-life cycle management.
Thus in summary, anyone involved in BIM, particularly owners would do well to establish clear leadership and organizational ownership of the associated business processes at all levels in the organization ( local, regional, and HQ) as well as defined inter-relationships and expectations of all collaborative partners (Architects, Engineers, Contractors, Consultants, Technology Providers, etc.). Organizations also must
clearly articulate all associated business processes and workflows, and mandate their use, as well as the fact that all decisions must be outcome-based. Full training and support must be available as all levels, including access to all requisite tools, software, information, etc.
The Green Proving Ground program utilizes GSA’s real estate portfolio to test and evaluate innovative and underutilized sustainable building technologies and practices.
Findings will be used to support the development of GSA performance specifications and inform decision making within GSA, other federal agencies, and the real estate industry. The Program aims to drive innovation in environmental performance in federal buildings and help lead market transformation through deployment of new technologies.
For FY 2011, the agency will investigate forward leaning and emerging HVAC, lighting, metering, policy, power generation, building envelope, water, and solar water heating systems through enhanced measurement and verification.
GREEN PROVING GROUND TESTBED TECHNOLOGIES
Source: gsa.gov – via www.4Clicks.com premier cost estimating and project / document / and contract management software for efficient / LEAN construction delivery methods: JOC, IPD, SABER, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, POCA, and BOA.
There are those that believe that the desire to utilize BIM is outpacing technology.
This belief is ill-founded.
The REAL issue is that many Owners, Contractors, AE’s, BPMs (business product manufactures), and oversight groups are being outpaced due to their lack of understanding of “basic” BIM PROCESSES.
BIM is NOT 3-D rendering or collision detection. Tools like Revit, ArchiCAD, Bentely, et al, are only components of a total BIM solution.
BIM is a PROCESS, combined and integrated with supporting TECHNOLOGY(IES) to enable life-cycle management of the built environment.
Cloud technology will support web-centric collaboration and associated secure/rapid data exchange, as well as associated taxonomies, data architectures, etc. such as COBIE, IFC, OMNICLASS (and associated UNIFORMAT, MASTERFORMAT, etc.), STEP…
The integration of the following TECHNOLOGIES, PROCESSES, and COMPETENCIES via CLOUD enablement will expedite BIM:
Efficient Construction Delivery Methods and Software: ( IPD – Integrated Project Delivery, JOC – Job Order Contracting, JOC is IPD specifically for repair, renovation, sustainability and new construction; whereas IPD is for major new construction).
Capital Planning and Management Systems-CPMS: Facility condition assessment, multi-year capital planning scenario analysis.
Space Planning – CAFM: Utilization, hoteling.
Computerized Maintenance Management Systems – CMMS: Routine/preventitive maintenance of “moveable” equipment (typically under $5,000-$10,000, vs. capital issues.
Building Automation Systems – BAS: Automated HVAC, Security, Energy monitoring and control systems.
Geographic Information Systems – GIS: Physical location systems.
A single “BIM” system will not support the above, and likely will not for a long time.
(Those that have implemented “ERP” systems, are honest with themselves, know the folly of assuming that implementing a single technology will improve and/or manage disparate processes.)
Technology is not the limiting factor relative to BIM, however, a thorough understanding of the basic concepts, components, and processes associated with BIM, and gaining the appropriate level of competency within each domain, is certainly a challenge.
Equally daunting is gaining the associated requisite support of upper management within the Owner, Contractor, AE and other communities.