What would it take to walk away from a 50 year old strategy of success?

Patrick Doyle, the new CEO for Dominos, shares how their company confronted the brutal facts about their pizza and began a campaign of change. It is interesting to hear the process.

1. Acknowledge reality – the pizza just isn’t very good
2. Change the pizza formula and process
3. Change the internal culture
4. Get the word out by going to the very channels that were criticizing them – social media

When the world forces change we all resist – at first.

Confronting the “brutal facts” is hard but also the 1st job of leadership.

In a recent ENR article a respected industry leader dismisses the rise of Integrated Project Delivery and calls it hype. Nowhere, however, is there any acknowledgment of the miserable track record of the 50+ year formula for design and construction. The formula once worked, and worked well. However, in an era of speed and complexity the old model becomes inefficient. That inefficiency leads to conflict and conflict erodes into systemic dysfunction. The by-product is tremendous waste and dissatisfaction.

I’ve been tracking IPD’s rise for five years along with the different emerging components driving change in the AEC industry.

First – it works. There are 18 case studies in The Commercial Real Estate Revolution showing the results of the various elements of IPD. The AIA recently published 6 case studies of “pure” IPD projects.

Second – any leader who challenges the reasons that owners are adopting IPD (because the pizza is lousy) needs to also demonstrate what they are doing to improve the poor coordination, conflict and waste in the current model.

I picked Dominos example because it parallels the kind of passion and willingness to confront the brutal facts that AEC leaders need – before a real dialogue can take place.

I also picked it because pizza makes the analogy simple. There are still skeptic – this is for them.

Click HERE for the video link.

Domino’s Pizza : Interview with Domino’s Pizza CEO, Patrick Doyle from Petrus Hansen on Vimeo.

I attended an AGC BIM Forum this summer and heard that very sentiment. These contractors and subs said, “If architects don’t begin to behave more collaboratively then all we really need them for are schematic design models, we’ll be to do the rest ourselves.”

Those sentiments were precipitated by a frustrating presentation by three architectural firms to a forum of contractors and subs. During this presentation the architects presented a traditional role of controlling the design process, owning the documents and keeping clear separation between providing design intent and the contractor providing means and methods. In addition, when an architect in the audience shared their expanded role with BIM, the blurring of roles and the positive benefits it provided their client – this panel challenged both the validity of their claims and questioned why they ventured into collaborating deeply on the means and methods of construction.

This exchange represents a crossroads for architectural firms that could determine the industry’s future.

Architectural firms can view BIM as an opportunity to expand their domain, provide better solutions for projects and improve their margins by delivering higher value to clients. Or, they can hide behind the traditional separation of roles and try to ward off other stakeholders using BIM and encroaching on design and the design process. They can point to liability issues, problems with insurance, the challenge of charging more and added risk as reasons not to change. By doing so, however, architects will narrow their boundaries and influence.

The architects who have fully embraced BIM and make it part of their standard practice have somehow found answers to liability, insurance and risk questions. They do not see BIM as an added cost that they must find a way to convince owners to pay more. They earn more because these architects shorten the schedule, reduce the cost and nearly eliminate change orders.

The traditional firms who feel a sense of encroachment and loss of influence due to BIM are at a disadvantage to contractors when adopting BIM. I’ve heard from many that it is hard to make the investment in BIM when clients are resistant to pay a premium for the added cost. This logic makes perfect sense when the mindset focuses on the added time and cost, not the added value.

Contractors, on the other hand, are no more progressive or smarter when it comes to BIM. But the traditional contractor can find immediate financial value using BIM simply by removing trade collisions, more accurate quantity take-offs, more detailed means and methods and tighter coordination.

This is why McGraw Hill sees contractors adopting BIM at a faster rate, using it at a deeper level.

I’m rooting for the architect because they offer something that no one else can. They see the whole and are able to translate concepts and vision into something tangible and meaningful. However, here is the choice I see:

1. Adopt BIM to the greatest level possible because of enlightenment self-interest.
2. Adopt BIM to the greatest level possible because if not, you’ll become marginalized as providers of concept and style.

The slide show below is embedded from a website called Slideshare. Marc Goldman created the presentation. He provided an excellent overview defining BIM and illustrating many of its applications and value. I’m providing this because for every 2 architects I hear fully embracing BIM technology I still hear 8 that are debating the many challenges I referenced above.

You can still view and listen to the webcast and review answers to questions by going to WEBCAST. I’m offering a free copy of our the BIM chapter from our book. You can submit your request at the end of this blog.

One of the statistics shared during the Webcast is that BIM use has reached 50%. It is an accurate number if counting the number of architectural firms who have bought BIM software. However, this is where the mirage comes in.

My take is by no means scientific but I have probably visited close to 100 firms in the last two plus years and I always probe how firms are using BIM. Here is what I hear.

Most use BIM for visualization and some for clash detection. The clash detection is again a derivative of the visualization. Both of these applications only require “dumb objects.” A dumb object is a door, a run of ductwork or any part of a building that includes the geometric information but none of the objects properties or rules for how it behaves in relation to other objects. In other words these have the “M” or modeling part of BIM but none of the “I” part that provides analytics.

What are analytics? They can be anything. For example, analytics can contain the data and rules to provide the weight and compression for a section of concrete showing the required tension for reinforcement. One can then model the required balance between rebar and concrete. This not only allows one to make sure there is adequate reinforcement (safety issue) but also not too much (cost issue). A Dallas architect who is the real deal when it comes to BIM use was able to reduce the original concrete spec for a project by $300,000 through BIM modeling and analytics.

The most common use of analytics is clash detection. When objects have data that tell the object where it is in space and what is next to it can tell if someone is trying to design another object that will interfere; like plumbing through ductwork. But I seldom hear that use. Most of the clash detection I hear about from firms is the old fashion visual scan of a plan. I’d rather have the model tell me that I messed up than counting on catching it 100% of the time solely by human review.

There are several deeper levels of BIM use that distinguish the novices and wannabees from what I call the BIM Savants. If you think you are a BIM Savant let me know who you are and why you think you’re the real deal. When I go out to speak I try to recognize those I consider the real deal.

I’m asked less frequently if I think BIM will catch on – its been caught and rapidly growing. However, with the rapid adoption of BIM comes a side effect. Similar to what has been happening to the Green bandwagon. We now have a lot of BIMwashing. Half of the architectural firms are now out telling their clients that they “do BIM” when less than 10% are fully using analytics. Owner’s can’t tell the difference.

So if you are the real deal here is a checklist to see just how proficient you are. If you can check off most of these then pass this list along to your clients so they can test the next firm who promotes their BIM capabilities.

1. Programming and feasibility – converting programming data into massing models
2. Visualization of complex shapes – nonlinear fabrication (i.e. Disney’s Opera House in LA)
3. Visualization of finished products, the reference model – photo-realistic renderings and virtual tours
4. Design iterations and variations – showing the evolution of the design and different solutions
5. Construction Documentation and layout
6. Quantity take offs and cost analysis
7. Automated integrated specification; material properties and attributes (objects know what they are)
8. System clash or conflict resolution (objects know where they are)
9. Construction Administration (scheduling and work optimization)
10. Communication tool in all phases of a project
11. CAD CAM manufacturing and offsite fabrication
12. Shop drawings and installation data
13. As-built corroboration and systems commissioning
14. Facilities management interface
15. Maintenance and operations
16. Inventory Control
17. Database for renovations and additions
18. Equipment performance simulation
19. Building energy use simulation
20. Virtual collaboration (i.e. BIMStorm)

I also recommend you look on pages 182-183 in our book to see the evolution path for a firm developing its BIM capabilities.

Here is a short video of Kimon Onuma, a BIM Savant, sharing BIMStorm. Every firm serious about BIM may want to consider playing in a BIMStorm.

For a free copy of the BIM Chapter send me an email at rex@rexmiller.net. Once you read this chapter you’ll probably want to read the rest of the book.