The best thing that can happen to BIM
I have realised that I have been working in BIM for as many years as I worked with the traditional methodology. Today, BIM is already present in most of the AEC sector, at least in medium and large companies.
However, it is not so clear to me that this methodology is fully internalised in all links of the supply chain.
In the following lines, I dare to make a small analysis of this issue.
Internalisation of BIM in project management
If we allow ourselves the licence to generalise and say that management is in the hands of people with around 20 years of experience and we analyse the use of BIM by this group of people, we can conclude that a high percentage do not use it, or at least do not have it internalised. Why?
I think it is right and fair to think that those people with around 20 years of experience, who accepted BIM when it arrived, did so because of a natural inclination towards digital tools. In other words: we changed because we liked doing it.
Others, who perhaps dodged the first warning, gradually joined in, but most clung to their comfort zone of resistance to change, or to a more “artisan” way of doing things, or to the fact that, from their management positions, they had no need to learn these new tools for “drawing”.
The latter is important, as I feel that there was a misunderstanding in the pedagogy applied. It was not properly explained that BIM was not only about drawings production. It was not properly explained how BIM and digitisation could be used from a project management point of view. Maybe this is because we only knew about Revit and not BIM?.
And now?
To illustrate my reflection I will show a common pattern that I have found in some real and recent projects I have participated in. These projects were formally done in BIM, as it was a client’s requirement. The project management staff, despite knowing “something” about BIM and in the face of the fact that the projects had been produced in BIM, actually managed them aside BIM. When the day of the presentation arrived, the managers and technicians in charge used 2D drawings to explain the project. The clients protested and demanded an explanation using the BIM models, “which is why we had asked for them”. Nobody knew how to do this.
The solution to this particular anecdote is easy: there is no problem in managers and technicians being able to consume BIM models and data, they can do so from platforms that do not require a deep knowledge of how the data have been produced.
The problem lies in some managers’ lack of interest to know that little bit more that would have made them understand that BIM was not a parallel to the project.
They would have understood that BIM was not an objective in itself, but that BIM was the methodology on which to develop the project with more control, more efficiency, more clarity. BIM was not something that others had to take care of, they had to, even if the technical development was, obviously, delegated.
I must say that this reality was not and is not exclusive to people with more than 20 years of experience; I have also observed it in much more junior groups.
However, all of the above happened more than a year ago, other projects have arrived and I am happy to say that I now see a different scenario.
I see managers asking not to remain in generalities and asking to know that little bit more about BIM. They demand a more accurate idea of what it means to digitise the process of doing projects. In doing so, they get to control the contractual framework, understanding what clients requirements are, or, if they act as a client, what it is in their interest to ask for, and how to document this.
They are also able to better approach project management, set directives, identify gaps in the team and assign responsibilities. In terms of the project itself, they know the advantages of digitisation regarding its delivery and, above all, the extraction and aggregation of its data.
In short, they know what is necessary to make better decisions in this digital environment that is already a reality in the AECO sector. In my opinion, this is very good news.
Internalisation of BIM in the profession
Up to this point I have limited myself to talking about the management link, but it is also the case that other links in the supply chain, with many years of professional experience behind them, feel distanced from digitalisation. Links such as the works manager, the cost estimating team, the planners, the installer, the manufacturer or the facility manager…. This is not good for the sector.
For the sector to truly go digital, we need to close the loop. All stakeholders need to be digitally engaged in order to set up the best possible information exchange flows.
It is also not good to leave BIM orphaned from expert use. For BIM to show its full potential, it needs to be used by the best professionals. We cannot leave out those who have years of experience and who figure things out. We already know that technology alone is not enough, you have to know what to do with it.
I believe that for this to bear fruit we need a step forward from both positions. The non-digitised links must show motivation to listen and predisposition to internalise what BIM can offer them. On the other hand, BIM professionals must provide these professionals with the best explanations, examples and tools to convince them.
Here too, however, we are seeing green shoots. Colleagues have assured me that once these professionals see the advantages of BIM they do not hesitate to adopt it, precisely because they are professionals and it stimulates them to do their work better.
So we can say that the best thing that can happen to BIM is that professionals with years of experience learn BIM and put it into practice. Internalisation will come when it is not BIM that provides possible solutions, but when it is the professionals who demand the solutions they need from BIM.