Introduction

BIM, as associated with 3D visualization, has existed for decades.  In itself, 3D visualization and current “BIM software” offers little in terms of improving the life-cycle management of the built environment.    When discussing facilities or vertical infrastructure, the implementation of cost-effective strategies that address total cost of ownership versus first-cost independently requires the integration of multiple professional competencies, technologies, and business processes (ICTB).   A standardized framework of ICTB, tailored for specific built environment stakeholders (Owners, Contractors, Architects, Engineers, Business Product Manufacturers, Oversight Groups, Building/Infrastructure Users), must consider and leverage current and past information and share a common ontology.

The single, most critical, aspect of the efficient life-cycle management of the built environment, and a fundamental requirement, is the adoption, implementation, and ongoing improvement of collaborative and integrated construction project delivery methods.  More than any other element or factor, it is the construction delivery method that sets the tone, establishes the responsibilities, assures proper definition of scope, defines risk/reward, and ultimately directly impacts the success or failure of a renovation, repair, maintenance, or major new construction project.

The path toward improved productivity, reduced waste, and meeting desired economic and environment outcomes within the AECOO sector (Architecture, Engineering, Construction, Operations, Owner) is easiliy defined, however, ICTB remains  practiced on a limited basis.

Keywords:  BIM, IPD, building information management, integrated project delivery, construction productivity, joc, job order contracting, life-cycle management, facilities management, infrastructure

A Framework for Success

Numerous articles and research papers have tagged the AECOO sector with 50% waste, endemic declining productivity, and overall mismanagement.   While there are certainly multiple players responsible for these issues, Owners, the people of pay the bills, are ultimately to “blame”.  Owners determine what is acceptable, and therefore singularly own the responsibility for assuring they have the proper knowledge, resources, tools, processes, partners, etc., to determine how to build, operate, and dispose of their built assets.   At the same time, one might argueGovernment mandates and greater Community involvement are also required due to the significant impacts that the built environment has upon or worldwide economy and environment.

Fundamental requirements for efficient construction and life-cycle management of the built environment are as follows:

1. Collaborative Construction Delivery Methods
2. Information-based Decision-making focused upon Total Cost of Ownership
3. Robust Ontology
4. Supporting and Enabling Technologies
5. Metrics, Benchmarks, and Continuous Improvement

Collaborative Construction Delivery Methods:  Integrated Project Delivery, IPD for major need construction and Job Order Contracting, JOC, are notable examples of collaborative construction delivery methods that improve productivity and quality.  Both have been proven in the field for decades.  Unlike low bid and/or design/bid/build, IPD and JOC are value-centric.   Common features of collaborative construction delivery include:

1.  Early and ongoing information sharing using common terms, including some form of pricing transparency
2.  Shared risk-reward
3.  Qualifications Based or Best Value Selection
4.  Performance-base reward
5.  Well defined, LEAN best management practices and processes

Information-based Total Cost of Ownership Decision-making:  Shifting the prevalent focus from “first costs” to  “life-cycle costs”, will be required a cultural shift.  Lowest bidder and associated tradition design-bid-build is costly, unproductive, and results in proving the return on investments and reducing costs can be achieved, while preserving asset value and without sacrificing the short or long-term realization of organizational objectives;

Robust Ontology: Information sharing requires the use of a common and open set of terms, definitions, and relationships.  The ranges from standardized cost databases organized for example by MasterFormat, to broader UNIFORMAT and OMNICLASS data architectures.

Supporting and Enabling Technologies:  The concept of a single, monolithic software application managing the life-cycle of a building portfolio is both unrealistic and unsupportable (sometimes referred to a IWMS).  The current and near term future will include multiple domain-specific and application-specific plug-ins to a public, private, and/or hybrid cloud.  Similarly traditional databases will give way to technologies that enable users to build current and/or historical information “on the fly”, tailored to there need.

Metrics, Benchmarks, and Continuous Improvement:  “You can’t manage what you don’t measure”, period.  The fact that many/most organizations don’t understand the basic tenants of life-cycle management of the built environment, let alone practice the concept, certainly presents issues for measurement.  Nonetheless, standardized, common metrics exist and must be applied which reflect relative progress toward organizational goals.   Metrics ranges from the number of projects completed on-time and on-budget per time period, to specialized quality indices reflecting physical and functional conditions and needs associated with the built environment.

Conclusion

Building Information Modeling (BIM), as many perceive it in association with 3D visualization, is not in itself a viable or complete solution.   It is obvious that a broader, more robust framework of life-cycle management is required.  A framework that considers and leverages multiple competencies, needs, and technologies.

The focus upon productivity improvement within the AECOO sectors must be upon efficient construction delivery methods and their associated best management practices and/or processes.   While all parties must indeed collaborate, Owners must honor their responsibility as change agents.  If Owners persist in accepting the status quo and associated abysmal performance associated construction, there will be no change.  Owners must take advantage of currently available tools and technology and drive accelerated adoption of IPD and JOC, as well as other collaborative construction delivery methods.  Owners must also deploy appropriate technologies that embed the management best practices to assure consistent delivery, monitoring, and continuous improvement.

http://www.4Clicks.com