All Together Now
The acronym IPD (Integrated Project Delivery) was once a lot more common than it is now in the AECO industry. Likely, this has to do with the fact that a lot of studies over the past three years show some inefficiencies in the workflow of a typical IPD-driven model, combined with recently logged lessons-learned for this very hopeful and idealistic delivery method.
More importantly, I think that the growing prevalence of the use of BIM on our projects has all but eradicated the IPD hoop dream. Now, the two acronyms (for those who were on the IPD bandwagon, at least) are used almost synonymously. The reason that we associate utilizing BIM on a project with “project collaboration” and IPD’s famed mantra, “shared efforts, shared gains”, is because when utilizing BIM on a project, all project stakeholders need to work very closely with one another in order to make it work. This is because it benefits their individual success as a company on a project when they do.
What actually occurs from this—on a larger scale—is far less selfish in nature, intended or not, with all stakeholders working together in a holistic manner that benefits the entire project’s budget, goals, deadlines, dates, and milestones. This mimics that of what IPD initially stood for—“collaboration.” This is not to say that we don’t play nice for the good of the project without BIM—there is just not as much incentive to do so (depending on the project’s contract type, among other things).
You may think that was a pretty bold statement and that it is simply my opinion based on my personal, subjective experience. But in reality, it is a fact taken from a recent international poll administered by the AIA. Hundreds of professionals in developed nations from around the world were asked whether they notice a marked decline in project collaboration, teamwork, and project-driven decisions (versus internal, company-based decisions) as it relates to information sharing on a project that utilized true BIM, versus one that did not. The vast majority (89 percent) answered the expected result: Utilizing BIM on a project nudges all stakeholders into doing the right thing for the good of the project, not for the good of the bottom line.
This puts emphasis on all designers, architects, CMs, GC reps, BIM designers, and CAD drafters to focus on the overall, cooperative success of the project by interactively communicating with all of their MEPF+A counterparts. If the Owner, GC, or CM didn’t necessarily see a need for labor-intensive BIM/VDC on one of their projects for one reason or another, yet wanted everyone to participate as a group with shared interests in order to get the project done on-time, under budget, and include a stuffed animal at commission, they might want to look at none other than BIM. At the very least, they get the “all-in” mentality that IPD promises, with a side of great marketing material and decreased office and construction hours, if only using even a very small attribute of BIM.
When working on any BIM project, small or large, all stakeholders from MEPF+ subcontractors (“+” denotes the specialty contractors such as controls, drywall, framing, curtain-wall, acoustics, etc., who have been participating more and more lately) the architect, who is starting to become more involved with the BIM collaboration process, General Contractors or CMs, Training Vendors, Overflow ‘Virtual Bench’ Staffing services offered by the CM or technology companies such as BIMAnywhere, laser scanning vendors such as F3, Inc., site surveillance companies and the like all need to work very closely together in order for the project’s BIM execution plan and overall “fast-track” project planning to fare well. With every project completed, we get greedier with the schedule.
A few years ago, I first heard of a BIM project that was an aggressive, “fast track” project. It was not so much a rarity, per se, but at least there was an alternative: A “normal” project (based on the previous years’ estimating and design/construction schedule testaments) that had more realistically achievable dates for milestones and goals. These days, “fast track” is the norm. You don’t even need to say the phrase anymore, especially when it pertains to BIM projects, in which they utilize BIM full-force for their “fast track” jobs, because it gets them there even quicker.
Obviously we all know that it isn’t that cut and dried, but that is now how owners think. A few projects go pretty smoothly, given their aggressive schedules, and the construction industry thinks, “Why do it in three years when we can do it in one?” They think that “BIM” saved the day, when in reality it was five parts intense BIM-driven collaboration, which eliminated time-consuming RFIs (and other bothers that can kill a deadline very quickly), two parts BIM optimization and strategy, and three parts added manpower and equipment/resources.
The articles in ENR that speak to this say that “BIM software” is to thank for this—along with the industry tech leaders coming up with more efficient workflows, which I will agree with to a certain point. But plain and simple, it isn’t “BIM software” that drove these fast-track projects into attaining almost unachievable deadlines. It was the way in which BIM forces us to hold hands and sing ‘Kumbaya’ by the campfire.
In a BIG Room environment, you have no choice but to get out of your chair and walk to the architect three cubicles down to ask a question about ceiling heights, and how you can’t fit your run of bus duct into a recently changed height for aesthetic purposes driven by owner request. The architect calls and shares some PDFs with the owner’s rep, and gets the lowered ceiling approved within 30 minutes.
Outside of the BIM Process or a BIG Room environment, this would have been an RFI that would have taken two weeks of pain and torture from the electrical subcontractor to the architect. It is for reasons such as this that make the process side of BIM so appealing to all. Obviously, not to discredit the model-based intelligence and software, etc., we all know that I am a staunch BIM advocate. But in this case, it isn’t the BIM that we all know and love that saves the day. It is the collaboration between trades, working together in symphony, with the GC acting as the conductor. Sometimes it is music to my ears. Other times, it is Justin Bieber. It is all relative.
Bill Campbell works as “Director of Preconstruction Technologies & BIM” for Balfour Beatty Construction. In his free time, he is busy developing a Construction App that brings 4D and 5D, FM, and Augmented Reality into the BIM world via SaaS on a tablet. He is also in the demo stage of his other App, set to pre-launch in the fall, which is based on the ‘Pay it Forward’ concept. He is happily married with two boys, and lives in the San Francisco Bay Area.
