The “C” in AEC is a BIG problem, and almost certainly THE problem
Don Bowden
Founder, Chairman @ BuilderPay | Construction Blockchain | We Help Construction Firms Attract the Best Contractors and Finish Projects Faster - Using Enterprise Blockchain Technology
Unless we address the system constraint, and that is significantly skewed to the construction capacity issue, it will not matter how productivity gains are realized within the “A” or “E” elements of a construction process.
I'm all in for the amazing technological advances occurring within the architectural and engineering communities. We are now seeing A.I. driven iterative design that uniquely optimizes how buildings will be built and used in the future.
I likewise recognize and appreciate the fact that not only does this technology dramatically increase design delivery capacity, it also elevates the design process itself to new levels of utility and benefit, even when applied to one-off projects.
The problem is, design nor engineering are the system constraint.
If our goal is to increase “industry” efficiency, then working on secondary constraints, as the case may be with design and engineering productivity gains, without addressing the system constraint itself, will have no impact on total output, as measured by finished construction projects. I can make the argument this is a quantifiable, measurable observation, not a subjective one.
Most certainly I am not discouraging those massive productivity gains being realized with design and engineering, it’s a wonderful thing. But let’s not do it at the expense of addressing the construction capacity and project execution issues, or what most likely is the clear system constraint.
My final comment, “I don’t believe we will need to generate more drawings at a higher rate of productivity for buildings that can’t be built do to construction capacity constraints”.
I look forward to your comments. Thank you.
Rebar and rebar cage sales and consulting at Factory Direct Supply
6 年The supply chain is also facing issues as productivity increases in a highly competitive markets do not encourage any increased costs due to "productivity" gains. If the dollars do not support the increase in technological outlays then they will not be implemented. BIM is an excellent example, A/E has embraced it only on a limited basis, but unless the downstream from the A/E cannot get a LOD that all can agree upon it is an expense that wont help the bottom line.
Architect, Maker, Champion of Integrated Practice
6 年The graph showing research funding and innovation between manufacturing and construction looks exactly the same as this.
Product Manager @ TEC Canada
6 年Let me ask: why is the focus on 'more' drawings but 'better' construction. Would construction bottlenecks not be alleviated by A and E better front-loading C aspects into their designs. Quality, not quantity...
Head in the clouds; feet on the ground.
6 年The are lies, damn lies and productivity statistics......
President, American Concrete Pipe Association
6 年We are overwhelmed with evidence that this is pervasive across the entire AEC community. As is the case throughout history, when those leading professions and industries do not find timely solutions, their competitors surely will.