Implementing BIM for quantity surveying services

Following the emergence of BIM, there has been a burgeoning increase in its implementation. As a matter of fact, BIM has been claimed to offer a significant advantage in improving the estimating practice, often prone to errors and inaccuracies. While the continued increase in the adoption of BIM globally has been speculated to threaten QS services, studies have shown that BIM, on the contrary, has the potential to revolutionize the QS practice by relieving the tediousness of tasks, thus enhancing job performance and providing more time to devote to other value-added services. Nevertheless, implementation of BIM for QS practices has been a bit slow.

While there is certainly no shortage of information about BIM and quantity surveying practices, there is little yet to guide cost-consulting firms on its practical implementation. The goal of this study was to provide answers to lingering questions surrounding successful implementation of BIM for quantity surveying services, and to understand how BIM impacts the practice. To achieve this, three BIM experts in the QS field reviewed literature and conducted semistructured interviews.

The parametric modelling in BIM is said to facilitate the creation of a relationship among elements, and includes the specification and properties of individual elements and objects, potentially enabling the extraction of comprehensive and accurate information from the model, which can be directly used for costing. Thus, estimators use a variety of options to leverage BIM for quantity take-off and to support estimating. These methods range through a direct interrogation model, an indirect interrogation model and to BIM Quantity Take Off. The direct interrogation model allows schedules of quantities produced from the model to be downloaded into Excel or other estimating software, and then priced. The indirect model involves linking BIM components directly to estimating software by linking a ‘5D Cost Library’ or an estimating package to BIM via plug-in or third-party tools. In the case of the BIM Quantity Take Off method, specialized quantity take-off tools (such as Autodesk QTO, Exactal Cost X, Innovaya, etc.) are used to import data from various BIM tools. The most sophisticated option is working within the 5D BIM environment. According to Exactal Inc., the QS/estimator can participate in data exchange from the outset, rather than working in isolation, to offer cost advice or take-off quantities for a project; however, there has been limited use of the 5D BIM globally, due to lack of use of a single BIM model.

From literature and experts’ responses, identified critical barriers inhibiting adoption of BIM include: high cost of implementation, lack of trained professionals, no demand for BIM, lack of enabling environment (government policies & legislations), and social and habitual resistance to change. Also, this study revealed that while literature envisaged a high impact of BIM on the mode of QS practices – including a threat to the future of the profession – responses from experts show there was little difference in how services were rendered. Respondents did agree on how BIM improves their efficiency in service delivery because, unlike in traditional estimating, quantities were extracted automatically. Models have now been validated using Solibri and standardization has become paramount. Besides, the collaborative environment provided by the BIM process has been established to influence practices and redefine the professional boundaries in the AEC industry. Also, adopting BIM provides these organizations additional opportunities, such as providing information management services on projects.

Furthermore, analysis of responses received confirmed that using BIM for cost consulting services could be frustrating at the initial phase, but does improve over time, hence the adoption plan that suggests following these three

principles: starting with BIM, progressing

with BIM, and successful implementation

of BIM. Starting with BIM involves devising an implementation plan using guides provided by the RICS, investing in estimating software interoperable with BIM and SOLIBRI for validation, training selected staff, networking with national leads and software vendors, and providing an enabling environment within the organization. Progressing with BIM involves continuous development within the organization and on BIM based projects, until BIM becomes an integral part of service delivery.

The plan also incorporates a framework that uses the push and pulls strategy as explained by Walasek & Barszcz (2017) featuring inhibiting factors and identified strategies (all summarized in the table below). The push represents the roles professional bodies play in encouraging BIM adoption, while the pull represents the motivating factors and role governments play towards BIM adoption by mandate, kick starting trial projects, and supporting the adoption of BIM.

About the author Ajibola Soboyejo is a QS with three years experience. She works for Altus Group Vancouver as a cost analyst. Ajibola specializes in project estimation, cost planning, and project cost management. Ajibola is an associate member of the CIQS, an RICS APC candidate, and a PMI Certified Associate in Project Management (CAPM). She possesses both MSc and BSc degrees in Quantity Surveying from the University of Salford UK and the University of Lagos, respectively.

Congratulations Corner

Congratulations to the following ‘Designation Holders’ who have qualified as a PQS or CEC (Including reinstatements):

CIQS – British Columbia

Irene Empleo, CEC Karl Magallanes, PQS Roland Rahoerason, PQS Andrey Tarasov, PQS

CIQS – Members at Large

Abubakar Abdullahi, CEC Ghassan Abutair, PQS Olawale Akinmoladun, PQS Muibat Alabi, CEC Robert George Barnard, PQS James Francisco Bunda, CEC Parag Dhadphale, PQS Lau Cho Dik, PQS Tam Wai Hung, PQS Peter Charles Laing, PQS Fungai Madziwa, PQS Nyikayanzwa

Ndambakuwa, CEC Buddhika Nivunhella, CEC Selvaraj Ramasamy, PQS Stuart Stothard, PQS Indika Welagedara, PQS

CIQS – Maritimes

Richard Edwards, PQS Carlos Lavin, CEC Bryan MacLean, PQS Jerred Ramey, CEC

CIQS – Ontario

Brentnol Archer, PQS Vijay Bichkar, PQS Igor Bogodist, CEC Louis-Philip Bourassa, PQS Elena Buksha, CEC Murat Caliskan, PQS Ayman Chenouda, CEC Rahul Desai, PQS Sandip Desai, CEC Maria Dinescu, CEC Allan Gadd, CE Brent Gould, CEC Yali Liang, CEC Poh Fung Liew, PQS Leroy Miller, CEC Mohammad Pourmofidi

Neyestanak, PQS Melvin Ranes, PQS Ashley Schaeffer, PQS Haiyan Shao, PQS Anurag Sharma, PQS Prasanna Thuraisingam, CEC Yukun (Grace) Wang, PQS Anita Yaw, PQS Adam Zych, CEC

CIQS – Prairies and NWT

Solomon Agbede, PQS Jonathan Corr, CEC Branislav Lapin, PQS Hillary Meju, PQS Richardson Nazar, PQS John Penner, PQS Allen Reid, CEC Timothy Schatkowsky, CEC Michael Volkart, CEC

CIQS – Québec

Nickolas Lamarche, CEC Natraj Kerry Mohur, CEC Mansour Shami, CEC