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.

We didn’t expect to win the GIA award for several reasons:

1. We were new to the process and not members of CoreNet.
2. Past awards seemed to be given to specific projects.
3. Some past winners hired PR firms to help with messaging. We were approached by a few but declined their services.
4. Our “trust-based” turnkey team proposition resonates with early adopters and those fed up but we did not think it would play to main street – at least this soon.
5. We had 10 minutes to make our case to the nine judges and then 10 minutes of Q&A. That works well for a specific tangible project. Its a bit challenging to convey an industry changing message in 20 minutes.

I asked four of the judges, “Why Mindshift?” My thinking went something like this:

• We either dazzled them with our brilliance or there is a shift in the zeitgeist (spirit of the times) of the industry that Mindshift connected with. Rule out brilliance.
• If the judges were attracted to our message then this is also a reflection of how other owners might respond.
• The judges were exposed to over 100 innovative initiatives. It will be instructive to find out what made ours stand out.

Here is the criteria they shared:

1. Many of the case studies involved millions of dollars in investment, technology and specialized skills. Some of the cases were brilliant and dazzling. But the judges had to ask, “How easy would it be for other members to implement?”
2. Some felt that the ideas laid out in The Commercial Real Estate Revolution were open to anyone.
3. Mindshift is scalable to the owner’s interest and resources; they could go all-in or benefit from the different components.
4. There was debate among the judges about just how revolutionary were our ideas? Our proposition is not rocket science. In fact its very simple, but not easy. This part of the discussion may have been the turning point. Different judges began to compare the principles we presented with their past experience. Each said that they had been on jobs with good teams displaying trust, respect and transparency. Communication was good, the results were great – AND – they had fun. One of the judges said, “So, why are we keeping this a secret? Where has anyone actually captured these qualities, framed it in an understandable system and backed it up with solid case studies?”
5. One of the judges shared that he agreed the industry needs to fundamentally change and the story we shared reflects the best attributes of our industry when it does work.

The back story is really the front story for where Mindshift began. Owners want reliable promises, good design without compromises along the way and collaboration instead of conflict. Suppliers are not out to thwart these goals. They want same thing. However, everyone has to work within a system that has evolved to a point where it does thwart all of our best intentions.

If you took a blank sheet of paper and wrote down all of the attributes of a successful team effort you might record:

• Respect
• Good communication
• Common goals and incentives
• An ability to deal with conflict
• Transparency
• Practice

You could say these attributes are nothing but common sense. So what can we do if we all know what makes a good team effort but must work within a system that destroys these qualities?

I think we won because we explained how to recapture common sense using some of the emerging ideas, contracts and technologies that are forcing the industry to change.

Now its your turn. How would you like to see your projects change? If you are curious about The Commercial Real Estate Revolution I’ll send you a free chapter. All you have to do is send an email to rexmiller.net and insert “Send my free chapter” in the subject line.

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.

Mindshift began as a simple dialogue about the current and future state of design and construction. It took a little time for our conversation to get beyond the thinking that the current state was a simple fact of life. When we looked outside our current system we arrived at the following conclusion:

Conventional design and construction is broken. It seems obvious. We all say it to ourselves and express our exasperation at our various networking gatherings. The odd dynamic is that when you get a room full of stakeholders together – for the first time – we talk as if we came from some alternative reality. Our projects all go smoothly, on-time and within budget.

I like to quote one of the executives from our first Mindshift gathering; “We all have good companies, good people and happy clients. We begin each projects with good intentions and high hopes. For some reason there is something about the system that gets in the way of all of our best efforts.”

The system clearly creates a lot of waste and conflict. That seems obvious. What was less obvious is that this waste and conflict is the result of a system that is fragmented, assumes distrust and is designed to defend against that distrust.

So here was our “aha!” We asked, “How do you create a system that assumes trust and is designed to foster it and lead toward integration?”

That is the story told in The Commercial Real Estate Revolution.

This video enhances the theme – innovation through developing a capacity for the obvious. This is Paul Bennet presenting at the TED conference.