BIM and efficiency of the design process

01 Who does benefit from process efficiency?

The introduction to the  Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) guidance note about “Managing the design delivery” recaps the essence of any enterprise: optimisation of resources (energy, time, money) to achieve the best result as possible (quality, profits).

The article by David Light “BIM Implamentation – HOK BuildingSMART” describes how Building Information Modeling (BIM) has been demonstrated as a key factor to enhance efficiency in the design and building process. Actually, beside BIM, also delivery methods (procurement routes) play a fundamental role in the play.

However, it is common sense that rules which apply to big projects and/or companies hardly apply to small ones. It's like saying that efficiency is a goal just for big enterprises and small/medium business ventures can afford waste of time and money, which is a non-sense. I started working at Avalon Construction & Design to demonstrate that common sense sometimes is wrong.

Recently I had a conversation with a sale manager at Allplan UK Ltd (Allplan is one of the most powerful BIM software produced by Nemetchek) and he confirmed that BIM is still considered positive in case of big projects but not considered to be useful by companies developing small and medium sized projects.

Let's start with a question: who does benefit from process efficiency?

I would say: mainly the owner does (developer or private client).

It is not by chance that most of the literature about BIM coming from the US (where BIM has been developed) targets mainly developers and contractors. In Europe, BIM forerunners have been architects (I am one of those), but very often for the wrong reasons (nice 3d models to make an impression on the client).

It is not a secret that the construction industry in Europe (including UK) is not very open to change and that the majority of Developers and Contractors (especially small and medium ones) have not adequate knowledge about BIM process. Still, BIM is beneficial to constructors, developers and designers especially where margins for profit are narrow, the timeline is tight, the necessity of a prompt reaction to changes/issues is essential, as it happens in small/medium size projects.

The real BIM promoters today should be those small/medium developers (the big ones are already there) given that BIM is now mature and it is not anymore a unknown territory.

02 The formula: BIM = Software + Process

As explained in the article by David Light, BIM is not about software but it is about process.

I have started working with BIM software (Allplan) in 2001 and I have experienced saving around 50% of the drafting time, gaining more time to check and coordinate information, reducing close to zero the cases of on-site mistakes and delays caused by the lack of management at design stage.

However, my working experiences (including my years of teaching and research at the University in 2007-2014), confirms to me, once again, that using a BIM software is not enough and the software itself (whichever it is) must not be the focus.

I could not agree more with the first line of the article by David Light: “ BIM is not a software solution; it is a process, underpinned by technology and collaborative working”. A statement consistent with Brad Hardin saying: “BIM is not just a software. BIM is a process and a software” [Brad Hardin, 2009, BIM and Construction Management, Wiley Publishing, Inc].

When I first met the MacLeamy curve (Patrick MacLeamy is chairman and former CEO at HOK), I found the best answer to all my concerns about how to make the process more efficient, even considering the high level of productivity and quality enhanced by BIM software.

That graphic perfectly explains what I was investigating since 2001 (first in Italy, then in UK): how to design an efficient process. The suggested answer is: making sure that the biggest design effort happens at the very beginning of the process. The traditional way of working is manifestly inefficient but, being indeed traditional, it is still within the comfort zone of everybody in the industry. However, my only doubt was: is that model suitable just for big firms and huge projects?

03 Hidden cost of inefficiency

A rough estimation suggests that in a small/medium development around 10% of the expenditure is about financial costs (interests). These costs will be paid by the developer, by the contractor and, eventually by the final user (who will pay the final bill for everyone). Any delay on site causes increase of this costs (plus additional costs for renting equipment, design reviews, re-doing works, waste of material, waste disposal, etc) without adding any quality to the final product: on the contrary, the quick way to keep a margin of profit for the developer is decreasing the quality (material, finishes, labour, etc) or changing the design (provoking great frustration on the client side, especially in case of private clients).

As shown in the MacLeamy curve, the peak of the effort is traditionally halfway of the process when client, design team and contractor start working together (traditionally, after obtaining planning permission). It is there that design and a proper estimation cost meet each other and the entropic struggle between budget and design begins.

04 Procurement route: shifting the effort

The preferred design process would require shifting this effort at the very start of the process but this demands changing the traditional delivery method, in other words, procurement route.

To make this happen and to boost innovation, the benefits must be clear to all the players. Consistent reduction of costs (around 20% along UK Government reports about adoption of BIM in public works, and around 30% of profit loss as declared by some contractors) and time, should be enough to interest everybody.

The best ways to shift the effort closer to the start of the process are probably just two: Design and Build contract (D&B) – with an earlier involvement of the contractor - and Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) – where the earliest involvement of the contractor is there by definition. Traditional Tender (TT) and Construction Management (CM) are probably less adaptable but, in principle, this would be not impossible.

One of the problem is that the majority of small and medium contractors don’t have a proper technical department (including Designers and Design Managers) making difficult obtaining that reciprocal understanding between Design team (architects, engineers, specialists, etc) and Construction team which is necessary to develop a collaborative environment.

One other consequence is that, even in case of D&B, the contractor will employ external architects, often inheriting the team previously working for the client and so creating a not so clear relationship Client-Designers-Contractor.

One other problem is that clients try to their financial commitment at a minimum level at earliest stages by employing just the architect so excluding any involvement of the contractor and very often of any other consultant before getting the planning permission.

05 Construction and Design: towards process optimisation

Architecture (interpreted as Design) and Construction (the act of turning Design into a real spaces and experiences) must never be separated: this is the lesson I learned by Leon Battista Alberti’s seminal work “De Re Aedificatoria” (On the Art of the Building). This was true five centuries ago as today and this is true for the most important buildings as for the smallest and modest ones.

At Avalon Construction & Design we hit two birds with one stone: we are one of the rare SME working in the building industry where Construction and Design share the same room, goal, and strategy from day one of a project.

By creating a Design and Design Management Department we can manage properly D&B projects (by collaborating with external teams or designing/developing design in house).

Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) – which is often indicated as the preferred design workflow in the MacLeamy curve - for small and medium projects is a rarity but is a natural reality at Avalon since the Design team and the Construction team work around the same table at the very start of the process.

We are starting this adventure and we will share our experience in order to testify that a smooth process – Imagine, Design, Build, Live – is possible.