Why your Building Project Might Fail in 2016
This Post is by Christian Ehl.
The new year has just started, but people in the building industry are already worried. Many sense that their building project might go wrong, causing delays, costly revisions, or legal disputes. Already people are late, timelines are not being met and people are spending time arguing why things should be different. And the year has just begun…
And there is one single reason why architects, builders and owners alike are struggling in 2016 – they don’t have data competence. In the 21st century many industries have become data-driven. Financial services, health-care, and large-scale farming, just to name a few, have learned to rely on data for better transparency, optimizing processes, finding mistakes and better planning. Drive your new car to a repair shop and they will connect a data reader, analyze the data and likely find the issue instantly. In some cases, the issues are fixed with a simple software update that changes the way the car behaves. If you own a Tesla, this can even happen remotely overnight. You could wake up to find that your car has brand new features.
Buildings lag behind
Not so in building. 3D modeling, cost and project planning, task management, simulation software, and other new inventions have failed to lead to data-driven building. People have built dashboards, scorecards, and risk systems – but they all seem to come short. Yes, each project is different, employs new teams, embodies millions of objects and constantly evolves. But the core of the problem is that our industry simply doesn’t have data competence.
“But I am using Building Information Modeling, am I fine?” No! BIM is just a method for storing data in a model. It does not define which data to store when and what happens with the data. In analyzing the data of thousands of BIM projects last year, I found out that data is very chaotic and mostly incomplete. So it is hard to analyse, generate reliable forecasts, optimizations, benchmark, and so on. Currently, our industry does not create, value, analyse and leverage data nearly as much as we could.
Why data will save you from making mistakes
If you generate the right data during the right phases of your project and you are good at managing the quality of your data, your building project is much more likely to be successful. In fact, you can:
- Identify and solve clashes between different disciplines
- Calculate, manage and optimize costs in your projects early
- Create reliable and more detailed planning
- Monitor your building progress
- Predict what parts of the building need servicing, and when
- Simulate and optimize
- Identify and track issues and their resolution time
- Manage risks
- Build twice, once digitally, where you simulate and learn, then physically with all the learning being employed
- Monitor the team’s performance and reliability
- Be effective during renovations
- … and much more.
Perhaps you think our industry is special and too complex and too individual? Think again. Look at health care. Each tumor is different and so is the body that houses it. We go to different doctors, who often see patients for the first time. But modern medicine draws from countless data studies, measures, looks for patterns, reads, analyses, predicts, and monitors. Or self-driving cars: they drive in the utter chaos of day-to-day traffic. How do they manage to drive more safely than human drivers? Many industries employ data scientists and use predictive data analytics methods. They engage in education and standards, and in defining data quality, because they know how important qualitative data is to their fields. Why is architecture different?
The future is data-driven building
Most industries have become data-driven already. They have engaged specialists, built data-centric cultures, and developed the tools needed to leverage data, optimize their projects and avoid costly mistakes. I have no doubt that the building industry will follow. The move toward BIM provides a foundation from which to start leveraging data more effectively. The economic pressure and the need to build more, faster and more effectively will drive the data revolution in our industry. The tools are ready. There is a plethora of open source analytics frameworks, predictive analytics tools, and algorithms – and machine intelligence is on the rise.
Start building data competence today. It’s not too late. Don’t try to solve all of your problems and data issues at once. Finding the right data requirements for the right analysis is key for your success. Focus on simple benefits first and build towards larger and more powerful analytical tools. Always collect data with the end result in mind, then expand as you harvest the first benefits. For large projects, it is worth engaging a data scientist to help you leverage your data. It will be well worth it. Get experts to help you define your data requirements to help you obtain good quality information and use it to your advantage.
There is no doubt that the future belongs to data-driven building. But the data needs are complex and will only become more so. Especially in large scale projects, people are likely to be overburdened by the tasks of creating and managing data.
In the future there will be building bots, small software and hardware robots that help you create and manage your data and innovative services will help you get the most benefits from your data. Think of self-optimizing buildings. They are closer than you might think. So start building your data competence today. And have a great start in 2016!
Christian Ehl is an IT expert for the building industry. He created the Open BIM platform bim+ for Nemetschek. He is now CEO of BIMQ (www.bimq.com), a data-focussed start-up in the building industry and is consulting on large building projects as partner of Vrame (www.vrame.com).
Subscribe to the blog so that you don’t miss future posts about the awesome future of the built environment: Shoegnome on Facebook, Twitter, and the RSS feed. You should also go ahead and follow Christian on twitter. He’s going to have a lot more to share on this topic in the coming months and years.
Erich Lutz
Wow, thank you very much. So insightful, revealing and inspiring…
Maybe BIMQ will be the building industry Google, Tesla, Waze etc…
Christian
Thx Erich, we have big ambitions…
Michael
Its “maybe”. I cant think its become real. 😀
Murray Hestley
Before retiring from the construction industry, I spent several years to understand and implement BIM practices. I am currently focused on a building lifecycle, which challenges owners to be more engaged (if you want automatic door locks on your car, ask for it). The owner’s definition of the data needed drives what design and construction actually create and document. This definition moves the argument from quality control (after the fact) to quality assurance (proactive) so that the data is collected when it is created, not after construction is complete. This is the integration of the participants.
Christian
Murray, I fully agree, definition of the data is key. Actually it*s good to define the least amount of data necessary to reach your goals. More is not always better…
Murray Hestley
We can all help owners to engage in the definition of their needs. Collecting information for equipment maintenance is different from wall coverings, but the process would be very similar. At any rate when owners create a template for their organization, designers and builders will have clear direction about what to create when and how to deliver the information directly into a database for owner use. Designers provide intent and have a little bit of information to define. The rest is created and entered by the builder and commissioning agent over the life of the construction process. When the owner is included in the population of the database, they will become familiar with the importance of the information and the effort it takes to be complete, current, and accurate, they will be motivated to continue the process through their own use of the facility.
Jason Smith
Great Post Christian.
What data do you need? (I’m from NZ)
I have found when I ask the question of my fellow Designers, Architects and Consultants on what data to have, no one seems to know what data to have or what not to have.
Clients & Contractors don’t know what they want because its a new process here in NZ. Getting Contractors to trust the model is an issue here (getting better, the more times we push it in there face the better it will get).
Our company has been BIM modelling for 5-6 years. The 3D model is great and the data attached relates to the 2D Deliverables. I’m currently writing up processes so the whole firm will produce consistent BIM models. BIM is happening but there aren’t any required standards so the quality of the data will be hit and miss. Its the old problem crap in crap out. We need to make the mistakes so that we will know what works and what doesn’t. It would be a dream come true to be past this stage.
Jason
Christian
Jason, thx. Yes it totally makes sense to write up the process. In my experience it makes sense to define the data requirements generally but then decide in each projects which ones to put in place for that particular project. Creating and managing the data is work (until the building bots come ). Also, I would keep monitoring the data and generate visual reports for people to experience the difference. We*ll have to do a lot of education, which I think should focus on the owner first, others will follow…
Larry Fredlund
Interesting post. There needs to be an industry wide paradigm shift towards sharing data. Architects are notorious for thinking the only leverage they have is their data. I have a former client wanting to do a second interior remodel, but the firm I worked at before will flat-out not share the data with my, their, former client. When I work for a client I make it clear that they, not I, own the electronic rights to their drawings, and electronic formats. If I didn’t do a good job for them last time, they should be able to move forward with their next project without having to start over. Some will claim there is liability in sharing cad files or bim models, but if you have that fear, have your lawyer draft up a tight disclaimer on use. But again, this is a defensive and protectionist point of view. You cited the medical profession, where open sharing of not only data is the norm, but the sharing of practices, procedures and outcomes, good and bad, is reviewed as a team. (Post-martins). This is one way how the individuals in, and the healthcare industry itself, learn and move forward. If the Architectural profession actually wants to regain the leadership position in the AEC industry we better learn how to be confident through competence, not arrogant through hoarding (Jared, is there a better word than hoarding here?). Risk = Reward. Architects who are chicken, and always in a defensive state of mind, bring less to their clients than a well rounded, experienced, true team player.
As for the construction industry not trusting A/E models, of course they don’t. They don’t trust our drawings, details or specs either. Just as the good firms have experts designing, detailing and specifying their clients projects, these same good firms need to incorporate some training on how contractors use (or re-build) our BIM models for estimating, bidding, obtaining and reviewing shops, and in the construction field.
Well, now I am rambling. Good post, wish the AIA would step up and mandate open sharing of individual office and BIM standards. There is. No way firms using BIM would not benefit from an Apache approach towards building a great system. AIA-MN and all the local firms, I am talking to you!
Jared Banks
I think hoarding is the right word. And that gets my imagination going for an interesting article based on that concept.
Christian Ehl
I think not sharing is a natural reaction and opposition to a bigger change that is happening. But once common data environments and BIM servers are the norm, sharing might become natural. Of course there is also the contractual side and especially from the owner’s persective that makes a lot of sense and I am seeing this in numerous projects. Of course sharing is data is just a start. There are many places that data get’s generated and monitoring, analyzing and optimizing it is where the benefits come in.
Tom Dempsey
I just wanted to chip in to the conversation here. Most of the items on the list in the article are already being done through Synchro PRO. Want to rehearse the project digitally beforehand? Do it in Synchro. Optimise and validate in Synchro, not just Hollywood fly-throughs but real visualisations based on data. Identify risk, responsibility and clashes in Synchro.
What is the biggest blocker to great construction? Designers do not think about how a project will need to be built, that’s for the constructor to work out. As for trusting drawings, once they are in Synchro alongside a programme then the validity of them are there to SEE, not just dream about. Owners do not think about the delivery, only the design and the end result. Well, some do at least. Constructors need to rely on delay to be able to deliver as they don’t have the information that they need up front. All of these parties will be better off through the use of a Synchro. This isn’t a marketing pitch, it is just reality if people open their minds enough.
Synchro is the only real tool on the market that allows for people at all levels to see the project from day one. If there is a basic programme and a 3D model, you can digitally rehearse from 2 years to a shovel hitting the ground to solve problems then rather than on site.
Visit the website – http://www.synchroltd.com – or view the YouTube channel for more examples. It’s happening already but the silos of information that exist within the industry will exist until they don’t need to.
In Synchro, everyone can see what is happening so there is no place for silos of information, or any place to hide. This article is great as it asks the questions that are answered easily and simply when done properly.
Thanks for a good article.
Chuck Kottka
I have my doubts… I fight this war every day, and I often find that no one is interested in buying what I’m selling. There are 3 main problems that answer the open question in the middle paragraph, “Why is Architecture different?”. For one, the economy of scale: Every building is different, but as you said, that can be overcome. The real issue is that every CLIENT is different, as is the reason they need a building, the method they procure it, and the way they operate it. With these variables, little information is repeatable, and therefore, there isn’t a universal data schema that can be reused enough to justify the work to author it (a lot of hours).
Secondly, Architecture is a very small piece of the building pie, when you look at the life cycle holistically. If a building exists for a day, we’re only in charge for the first few minutes. A building is a major expense, and everyone (and every organization) needs a roof over their head… but 95% of them can barely afford what they need. Optimization is a luxury. So we use the minimum staff to do as much as we can in a short time, for a small fee. If we did a good job, the product is durable and requires very little additional interaction.
Third, Architects are mainly Designers, not Managers (most of us make really bad Managers, in fact). We don’t look at data in a linear fashion (which is why we need Engineers). In order to bring all systems together into a functional whole, there is a chaos-theory laced string of connections that defines the design process. If the Architect were to quantify everything in neat columns and rows, there would be no time left for abstract problem solving. Plus, if we were good at that, we wouldn’t have become Architects. And our fees are ridiculously low, so we can’t afford to hire a Building Accountant.
We praise uniqueness, and evangelize the fact that each client receives personalized attention to create a customized product. We do not sell a thing, we sell a service, so we cannot readily attach gizmos and define maintenance schedules for the next 20 years, like car and appliance makers do. Our product can easily be discarded when we’re complete, and the typical Dwayne Schneider building operator has no clue to pick up where we left off. The only way I can see to become that involved, and effectively utilize heavy data-based models, is to work with Contractors on Design-Build projects (otherwise they will undercut everything we do) AND sell Facilities Management services for the life of the facility (which I’ve tried to do… no one is buying). It’s a potential business model, especially since technology will make it easier, cheaper, and less intrusive, but since Building Owners do not NEED that level of service (like they might NEED a Lawyer to keep them out of jail or NEED a Doctor to keep them alive), it’s unlikely to be successful any time soon.
Except, perhaps, in tract housing.