The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation_Ofoaiye by Solomon_ofoaiye

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

ARC3060: Dissertation in Architectural Studies (18/19)

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation The realities of BIM Level 2 adoption and implementation in UK architectural practice since the 2016 government mandate, highlighting challenges UK practices face in delivering projects at minimum BIM Level 2

160368244

Solomon Olufemi Adeyinka Ofoaiye

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation

Table of Contents Acknowledgements

Introduction

1. 1.a. 1.b.

Literature Review Adoption Implementation

7 7 10

2. 2.a. 2.b. 2.c.

Research Methodology Choice of Methodology Interviews How was Data Analysed?

13 13 13 16

3. 3.a.

Findings Skills and Capabilities of the Current Workforce Clients and The Supply Chain Potential Isolation for Smaller Practices BIM Level 2 Realities Conceptual Framework

17 17

Conclusion

Appendix Development of BIM Level 2 Models Interview Overview Template Sample Interviewerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Questions Sheet Sample

29 29 31 32

Endnotes

Bibliography

List of Illustrations

3.b. 3.c. 3.d.

I. II. III.

22 24 25

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation

Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to thank God for helping me achieve this dissertation and giving me the courage and willingness to step out of my comfort zone and conduct interviews. I am eternally grateful. I would also like express my gratitude to each interviewee for showing interest in my dissertation, giving up their time to share their experiences of BIM in architectural practice. Also, I would like to applaud Willmott Dixon, and everyone involved in the organising and running of BAA Innovationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s first event in August (2018), for bringing together local professional and BIM technology enthusiasts under one roof. Showcasing current and new advancements in BIM enabling technology as well as sharing experiences through interesting case study presentations. I believe that these actions are what will help the UK edge closer towards Digital Built Britain. In addition, appreciation is due to my good friend Harry Nelson, for assisting me in proofreading this research paper during his own exam period. Last but not least, after months of rigorous research, I would like to also thank my dissertation tutor and senior university lecturer Dr John Kamara, for always being available to provide wise council as well as critical feedback. - Solomon Ofoaiye

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ Introduction

20 (GCS 2016-20) which would help better steer the UK Construction Industry towards total BIM Level 2 compliance and steps towards BIM Level 3 by 2020.⁸

Introduction In May 2011,¹ the UK government published the Government Construction Strategy 2011-15 (GCS 2011-15), mandating that all public sector projects are to be carried out at minimum BIM Level 2 by April 2016; in aims of minimising project time and costs that results from waste.² GCS 201115, calls for a ‘profound change in the relationship’³ between the government as a construction client and an underperforming UK construction industry. It recognises that the UK has yet to unlock the full value of the construction industry and demands a greater exploit of this potential for infrastructure and public procured projects,⁴ with the possibilities of initiating higher degrees of efficiency and growth opportunities within the industry.⁵ This document was then supplemented a year later by the Government Construction Strategy One Year On Report And Action Plan Update,⁶ phasing ‘mandated milestones showing measurable progress at the end of each year’.⁷ Upon the arrival of the April 2016 deadline, the UK government published the Government Construction Strategy 2016-

In architectural practice, both design and construction phases often generate large amounts of information and data, Building Information Modelling (BIM) Level 2 supports efficient collaboration between clients, designers and end users during the design stage⁹ and feeds this data into the post construction, operational life of the built environment.¹⁰ One of the government’s requirements for BIM Level 2 mandated projects is to digitalise ‘all project and asset information, documentation and data’¹¹ and despite being two years into the 2016 BIM level 2 mandate, many professional practitioners feel that architectural practice has yet to deliver on this objective. The dissertation module undertaken in the second year of architecture undergraduate study at Newcastle University, included seminars which involved a visit to a local practice. During a discussion there, one of the firm’s partners expressed that this target has yet to be met in practice. This was also brought up during an RIBA North East Mentoring Scheme visit to another local architectural practice. In the course of the visit, a project director stated that although they aim to deliver all projects at a BIM Level 2 minimum standard, they still needed to communicate with manually annotated 2D technical drawings, thus further highlighting that BIM Level 2 does have its own challenges. In addition, current attitudes towards UK

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

BIM adoption articulated through articles mostly speak of the proportion of the UK construction industry who can actually play their part on a BIM level 2 project to the required standard is still relatively small.¹² This evidence suggests a lop-sidedness between current architectural practice and the government’s BIM Level 2 mandate. This dissertation explores insights into those challenges and how UK practices can overcome them. Having studied various reports and research papers such as the Winfield Rock Report¹³ and Architectural Management: Exploring Definitions and Impacts,¹⁴ which also deals with topics of professional practice in the construction industry, one can quickly pick up a distinct pattern in the structure of these research papers and this dissertation will be following a similar layout. Firstly, the topic of the realities of BIM Level 2 adoption and implementation in professional architectural practice is raised; backed by comments from architectural practitioners, highlighting a genuine gap in knowledge that needs to be addressed or even filled. Expectations are also declared quite early on in order to give the research paper the right direction and focus. Next, BIM enabling documents and books will be reviewed to aid in the understanding of the resources available to practitioners or anyone who wants to work in BIM Level 2. Alongside this literature review, data is collected through a series of interviews with selected professional architectural practitioners who have experiences

and knowledge of BIM adoption and implementation in practice, depending on their roles as well as the type and size of their architectural practice. This will result in a varied data collection. From this combined data, a model will be constructed to manage and make sense of this information which can then be concluded from. Finally, resources used to achieve this dissertation will be presented in an appendix; model developments, an interview overview template and the interviewer’s questions sheet. This topic does have its limitations. It is important to note that the BIM Level 2 process affects and is designed to include the whole of the UK construction industry, but in order to fulfil the government’s main objective of industry wide waste reduction, one can recognise that ‘architects have the most influence here,’¹⁵ with the potential of reduction at the source. Therefore, for the purpose of this dissertation, the focus of this topic has been narrowed down around professional architectural practice. Within the context of this study, professional architectural practice (practice) can be defined as businesses that deal with the ‘design and erection of building and civil engineering, but also the maintenance of buildings and other structures.¹⁶ The term professional architectural practitioners is employed as point of reference for qualified architects and other architectural designers in architectural practice.

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ 1. Literature Review

practices’.¹⁷ It goes on to explain the following various benefits BIM can unlock at each stage of the construction process.

1. Literature Review This part of the study analyses publications and government released documents that informs practice on BIM Level 2 adoption and implementation for the construction industry to operate effectively on BIM Level 2 mandated projects as of April 2016. Part 1.a. (Adoption) aims to understand what BIM and the BIM Levels of Maturity are, with attention to Level 2, and the themes which underpin them in regard to practice. Part 1.b. (Implementation) investigates into the ways in which the UK government projects BIM implementation onto practice, the importance and keys to BIM implementation as well as the potential barriers and challenges to BIM Level 2 implementation for practice. In addition to this, literature is also reviewed to develop further research questions in preparation for subsequent interviews.

1.a. Adoption The BIM Handbook promotes the adoption of BIM as it believes ‘BIM technology can support and improve many business

First, feasibility can be tested at the preconstruction stages with ‘relative certainty’,¹⁸ by modelling a micro building model and linking it to a cost database in aims to find out if the owner’s goals and expectations are achievable within their budget much earlier on, rather than later into the project which can be considered as wasteful.¹⁹ Yet from a different point of view, one could assume the introduction of BIM this early, limits the chances of innovation, as often problems regarding costs can be tackled in the design phases leading to revolutions via creative problem solving. Also, more work is now demanded from the design team to model at a prior stage and although the mitigated risk can result in savings for the client, the demand for BIM can now oppose as an initial added cost which was previously not required of. During the design stages, The BIM Handbook boasts of numerous benefits of BIM, ranging from efficient ‘automatic low-level corrections when changes are made to design’²⁰ to more collaborative, earlier inclusion of ‘multiple design disciplines’²¹ through a digital common data environment or ‘CDE’.²² The topic of collaboration resurfaces in The BIM Handbook’s stated construction benefits as it includes the ‘use of design model as basis for fabricated components’²³ although assuming the supply chain also has adequate BIM tools in place. Lastly, better asset operation and management, an as-built model and

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

‘improved commissioning and handover information’²⁴ are the book’s claimed benefits of BIM during the post-construction stages. Yet, one could infer the amount of information gathered for handover could potentially be overwhelming for the client. Albeit optimistic, these benefits can only be attained at BIM Level 2 onwards. Before practice can even begin BIM adoption and implementation, what does the government define as BIM, specifically BIM Level 2? BIM can be defined alongside its levels of maturity in the BIM Overlay to the RIBA Plan of Work 2012 (Overlay 2012). Overlay 2012 opens up by declaring from the offset that BIM is, ‘digital representation of physical and functional characteristics of a facility, creating a shared knowledge resource for information about it forming a reliable basis for decisions during its life cycle from earliest conception to demolition’.²⁵ Although Overlay 2012 goes on to list the requirements for BIM Level 2; the publication does not provide an actual definition for the term or it’s preceding levels. A definition of BIM Level 2 surfaces in GCS 2012 concisely put as, ‘3D fully collaborative BIM’.²⁶ Overlay 2012 describes the BIM Levels in company with Meryn Richards and Mark Bew’s BIM Maturity Diagram 2008 (figure 1), which can be regarded as being a critical component to the April 2016 BIM mandate as ‘the Government’s phased implementation is based on these levels’.²⁷ When placing BIM Level 1 next to BIM

Level 2, collaboration is the most significant factor that separates the two, as Level 1 BIM is often referred to as ‘Lonely BIM’²⁸ because the modelled data only benefits a single stakeholder, excluding the rest of the supply chain. Whereas BIM Level 2 requires 3D models to be produced by all key members of the supply chain, working in full collaboration.²⁹ Ultimately, the government’s end goal for the construction industry is to progressively move towards BIM Level 3 adoption and implementation, bringing about an even higher degree of collaboration in a much more robust integrated process.³⁰ ‘All disciplines and contributors to a project would be able to access and modify a single shared model, held centrally which would remove the remaining risks of conflicting information and support the development of whole-life approaches.’³¹ Reflecting on GCS 2011-15, one can notice the document only speaks of BIM Level 2 as it begins to describe BIM and the same can be said for The BIM Handbook. However, one must accept that the BIM Levels were not yet introduced to the industry at the time of their publishing, but it does raise the thought of that perhaps BIM Level 1 might have been overlooked. Furthermore, Overlay 2012 doesn’t emphasise or offer guidance for industry to implement full BIM Level 1. Could the government be assuming all practices operate at minimum BIM Level 1? This can be evidenced considering prior to the April 2016 BIM Level 2 mandate, there has not been a Level 1 mandated strategy. Nevertheless, Overlay 2012 does confess

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ 1. Literature Review

that the move from BIM Level 0 to BIM Level 3 is monumental.³² Expressed in GCS 2016-20, the government acknowledges that Level 3 BIM cannot be achieved without addressing BIM Level 2, ‘the continued embedding of BIM Level 2 is crucial to support government adoption of BIM Level 3 at a later date.’³³ In the same light, one could infer ensuring a thorough embedding of BIM Level 1 can also be considered as imperative to support government adoption and implementation of BIM Level 2. In the release of GCS 2016-20, the government targeted the move from Level 2 to Level 3 to take place between 2017 to 2020.³⁴ With this goal being just over a year away as of the writing of this dissertation, it would be profitable to gain insights into how current practice is preparing for this move as well as identify any new, potential challenges that may hinder Level 3 adoption and implementation. Upon closer review of the BIM Maturity Diagram, asset life cycle management is framed at the rear end of BIM Level 3, whereas in more recent documents, the government is pushing for asset life cycle management to be enclosed within BIM Level 2 subsequent to full collaborative data management, as also stated within the same publication; confirming that as of summer 2012, the industry will be mandated to implement BIM Level 2 across it’s publicly procured projects,³⁵ adding that the government aspires to have fully collaborative BIM including asset

management by 2016. This conflict of interest could be one of the components which has the potential to trigger misconceptions of the government’s true expectations of BIM Level 2. BIM has evolved from being modelling focused to process driven, which is evidenced in the development of its definition. The Overlay 2012 also states that the M in BIM (Modelling) could instead stand for ‘Management, as it is more accurate’.³⁶ Overlay 2012 is not the only publication which recognises BIM as holding divers’ connotations. Within The BIM Roadmap, the term BIM can be understood as possessing more than one clear application. When explaining Tender Evaluation Plans, The BIM Roadmap stated ‘Building Information Models will be submitted during the tender process’,³⁷ declaring BIM as an entity or product, whereas at the beginning of the guide, BIM is boldly defined as ‘the management of information’.³⁸ This begins to suggest a development in the usage and application of the term BIM within practice. On the other hand, this evidence also demonstrates a conflict of understanding in the definition of BIM from the author or even the industry. BIM Level 2 has also been redefined in recent years. According to The BIM Roadmap, ‘in 2011, the Government Construction Client Group defined Level 2 BIM as being managed 3D environment held in separate discipline and BIM tools with attached data.’³⁹ Following a combination of further developments in processes and BIM enabling technology, feedback from

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

special case study projects and experiences; this term has been redefined as an ever growing and developing list of BIM enabling documents and tools, with revisions being a constant for the reason that technology and processes continue to develop.⁴⁰

1.b. Implementation BIM implementation in practice can be perceived as an essential factor for the government’s vision for a ‘productive construction industry’.⁴¹ One of the methods in which the government aspires to reduce construction costs and improve the construction industry as well as propagate development and advancements, is by unlocking innovation via government investment and engagement into BIM implementation.⁴² As aforementioned, the government, alongside BIM Task Groups published documents to support full industry implementation of BIM Level 2 prior to the April 2016 mandate. A way in which these documents support BIM implementation is by setting out definitions as soon as it encountered new terminology and then locating them where they would be implemented in a BIM Level 2 process example, in hopes of the practitioner to then apply it to their own BIM projects. Standards not being defined or widely adopted by practice was once considered to be a barrier to BIM implementation in practice. Until as of recent years as a result 10

of the government and dedicated BIM task groups publishing publicly available specifications or ’PAS’ and international standards, commonly referred to as ’ISO’ as well as British standards, ‘BS’, suites of standards: • • • • • • •

PAS 1192-2 PAS 1192-3 BS 1192-4 PAS 1192-5 PAS 1192-6 BS 8536-1 BS 8536-2

This is to ensure ‘the wider adoption of BIM technologies, processes, and collaboration by ensuring that the same accurate data can be accessed throughout the supply chain’.⁴³ Another potential barrier to BIM implementation is the way in which work is legally carried out in practice, ‘as BIM Level 2 grows in maturity and becomes increasingly a contractual document’.⁴⁴ With the addition of new and efficient BIM enabling processes in BIM Level 2, The BIM Handbook anticipates a change in ‘the relationships of projects participants and the contractual agreements between them’⁴⁵ to become a future challenge in regard to BIM implementation. Despite the fact that The BIM Handbook claims ‘several government agencies and private companies have overcome these barriers,’⁴⁶ it would be useful to further investigate whether liability remains a possible challenge for SMEs. Even if this supply of BIM enabling publications can be said to appear

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ 1. Literature Review

resourceful and beneficial for effective BIM implementation, one begins to wonder perhaps this could result in BIM becoming less accessible to anyone who wishes to implement its processes, as evidenced in The Winfield Rock report where although documents similar to ‘ISO19650 [aim] to use simple language and a logical order to its contents’,⁴⁷ a consultant interviewed in that study commented ‘you more or less need a degree in a number of subjects’ in order to make sense of these types of documents.⁴⁸ Thus, highlighting accessibility and standardisation as potential topics to explore in subsequent interviews. The government recognises the current workforce’s skills as a potential hinderance

to future implementation. This can be evidenced in GCS 2016-20, in the way that the government expresses a need for an increase in skills development in order to attain the full advantages of BIM Level 2. Still, the government plans on tackling this issue by attracting young, skilled employees and supporting construction apprenticeships to develop future skills capacity⁵⁰ in hopes of ‘[mitigating] the risk of future skills shortages’.⁵¹ The government portrays this strategy as a vital component to forthcoming BIM implementation, as the document further emphasises the importance of a future, highly skilled industry so that eventual targets of BIM efficiency can be reached.⁵²

Figure 1. BIM Maturity Diagram

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ 2. Research Methodology

practice. Finally, this information was analysed and articulated into a new model of understanding for BIM Level 2 in professional architectural practice.

2. Research Methodology This part of the dissertation discusses the methodology used for this research. 2.a. looks at why the research was conducted this way, 2.b. describes the interview stage of the research and 2.c. describes how data was then analysed.

2.a. Choice of Methodology Interviews with a local director and design manager suggested a gap in knowledge surrounding BIM Level 2 in current architectural practice, triggering further interest. Then, data was captured through a literature review of BIM enabling documents in order to assess what the government and government lead BIM groups have put in place regarding BIM Level 2 adoption and implementation for practice. Interviews then followed, in order to obtain personal insights across the different types of practices as well as the different roles within architectural practice in order to find out the challenges regarding BIM Level 2 adoption and implementation in current

Supported by findings from the literature review, a qualitative research method was used to capture data as the aim of this study is to gather insights into the realities of BIM adoption and implementation in current practice, but, qualitative methods are not as helpful for making generalisations. Also, due to time constraints it was much more favourable to employ face to face personal interviews as a way of collecting qualitative data than perhaps if given the opportunity; a quantitative approach of larger focus groups, questionnaires and surveys would be employed alongside this study in order to give a more equitable representation of current UK architectural practice which would be profitable to this study.

2.b. Interviews As previously mentioned, data was also collected through a series of interviews in order to obtain a more personal understanding into the realities of BIM Level 2 around UK architectural practices. A mixture of professional architectural practitioners was interviewed for this dissertation (see Table 1). This pool of interviewees mostly operates in small to medium sized enterprises (SMEâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s) as they account for over 99.9% of UK private sector businesses.â ľÂł Some of the interviewees were individually 13

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

selected from a group of professional architectural practitioners which attended the BAA (Birmingham Architectural Association), Innovate event in August 2018, in Birmingham. The reasoning behind this was that their attendance at a BIM event displayed their enthusiasm, interests and awareness of the progression of BIM in the construction industry. It also served as an indicator for who were currently accessible for potential interviews. It is crucial to observe that this method does have its constraints, as this dissertation could’ve benefited from the inclusion of professional architectural practitioners who are not as familiar with BIM in the construction industry, which could then present a much fairer representation of current UK architectural practice. Recorded face to face interviews were manually transcribed and sent back to each interviewee for their permission and validation. This was done to make sure that the information they have provided did represent them fairly and if they were content with this information being used as part of this study. Permission was obtained and the general response was positive, although the majority consensus was to anonymise the interviewees from their responses within the main body of this dissertation, most adding that their responses reflected their own personal views and not the views of their practice. This request is understandable and beneficial to this study, as it reveals to an extent the honesty, trust and passion displayed by each recorded interviewee. In response to their request, anonymised information regarding

each interview can be found in Table 1. An interview overview template example followed by an interviewer’s questions sheet example will be provided in the appendix section of this dissertation. The opening question was an icebreaker, ‘What is the most BIM that you’ve achieved in practice?’ (see Appendix III). This is a generic question used to relax the interviewee and begin a natural conversation. On the other hand, the question was also used to find out the interviewee’s current understanding of what entails full BIM level 2 implementation in projects. This method was found to be quite effective, as it gave an insight into the extent at which the interviewees operated at BIM level 2 mandated project, in addition to the way their firm went about conducting Level 2 mandated projects. The icebreaker also highlighted a new challenge practices face in BIM level 2 mandated projects. Most interviewees responded to the question by reciting BIM Level 2 elements for a fully mandated project, whilst some found it difficult to answer, further explaining that although they can provide the right elements for BIM Level 2 mandated project, in reality some clients were less inclined on full implementation. The interviews were semi structured. A structured question template was used to conduct each interview (see Appendix III), but in order to capture the best responses, questions which proceeded after the first were asked in different sequences, following the natural flow of the conversation. This was done deliberately in order to help

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ 2. Research Methodology

make the interviewee feel at ease and relaxed about answering questions. This was evidenced when comparing face to face interview responses with written-emailed format interview responses. The majority of the face to face interview responses were longer and less structured in comparison to the written format interview responses. When asked, ‘Was extra education put in place to educate stakeholders or clients on BIM?’ (see Appendix III), an interviewee’s written format response was: ‘Yes, BIM managers were employed by the client directly.’ (Interview 3- see Table 1) Whereas when asked the same question, one of the face to face interviewees responded: ‘... extra education has been done and is continuing... the one thing that we do here is… we subscribe to a system called Knowledge Smart Assessment Online. And every person that comes in is assessed on: a, their Revit skill because that is our BIM authoring tool, b, on their BIM process knowledge which is an inhouse assessment that we’ve written and that’s logged. And if there [are] requirements needed then we would train them on those specific aspects, at that works quite well. We have to do that it’s part of, it’s a requirement for a BIM level 2 certification which we’re going through at this moment in time. So, we’re just currently putting all of our processes and documentation together to go for the certification. Otherwise I’m

out of a job [laughing].’ (Interview 2- see Table 1) This illustrates the effectiveness of conducting face to face interviews, in introducing a sense of urgency in the interviewee as the interviewer’s presence demands an immediate response whilst the written format interview allows for more time to develop and self-assess a response. These responses also highlight the evidence that face to face interviews generate longer and more abstract responses, triggering various connections the interviewee might have with the theme of the question. Further connections were triggered during the education segment of some interviews, when sharing one’s own personal experience of BIM in education. As personal interviewing skills developed in later interviews, personal experiences of first learning about BIM in architectural school was shared; about mistaking BIM authoring softwares for being what BIM is. In mutual understanding, the interviewees also opened about their own experiences with this issue, one adding, ‘you’ve picked that up in the education environment and let me tell you that is still very prevalent in the commercial environment,’ (Interview 2- see Table 1) Then further elaborating into the topic. These instances were essential to this study as it depicted more accurate realities of BIM adoption and implementation in current UK architectural practice.

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

2.c How was Data Analysed? First, all the recorded interviews were replayed multiple times in order to familiarise with the data. Next, themes which emerged from the literature review, alongside new themes which have materialised through the interviews, were prescribed to categorise the data. These analysed responses were assessed against one another, drawing attention to reoccurring themes forming new bridges and connections. The outcome of the analysis is presented in the following findings chapter alongside a model of BIM Level 2 reflecting insights of current UK architectural practice.

Table 1. Interviews Information Job Title Interview 1 Part II

Architectural Assistant Architect

Experience of BIM

Practice Size Practice Type Duration

BIM Lecturer

Medium

Limited Company

1:06:23

Completion of government mandated education sector projects

Interview 2 BIM Lead

Former BIM Consultant & Government mandated residential and education sector projects

Medium

Limited Company

33:18

Interview 3 Senior

Coordinates BIM and Revit methodologies

Medium

Sole Principal

N/A (email)

Interview 4 Associate &

17 years working in industry & Government mandated blue lights sector projects

Medium

Limited Company

27:20

Interview 5 BIM

Formerly working at NBS Asset management

Large

Public Company

26:05

Architect BIM Manager

Consultant

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ 3. Findings

government targets. The following key question that was asked during each interview was: were there any reoccurring challenges in later (BIM Level 2 mandated) projects? (see Appendix III) Surprisingly, all interviewees shared a common response, that response being people, more explicitly practitioners, clients and the supply chain.

3. Findings Since the government planned developments towards BIM Level 3 adoption to take place between 2017 and 2020;⁵⁴ an important question that arose from the literature review was, with the government’s 2020 deadline being under two years away as of the writing of this study, has practice taken steps in working towards BIM Level 3? (see Appendix III) When asked about it, all interviewees responded by revealing that despite being a year away from the mandated goal, steps towards BIM Level 3 adoption and implementation have yet to materialise because practice is still trying to adopt and successfully implement BIM Level 2 on mandated projects. In Interview 4 (see Table 1) a BIM Lead responded, ‘Not even talking about level 3 at the moment but we do level 2, we are in the process of doing level 2 projects’ (Interview 4- see Table 1) This supports the purpose for this dissertation, as it highlights that potential barriers or challenges may be currently hindering practice from reaching expected

From this, findings can be divided into the following four sections: • 3.a. deals with the themes and challenges surrounding the skills and capabilities of the current workforce • 3.b. looks at issues regarding clients and the supply chain • 3.c. deals with discussions concerning BIM Level 2 potentially isolating smaller practices • 3.d. illustrates a new model of representation of BIM Level 2 for current architectural practice

3.a. Skills and Capabilities of the Current Workforce Firstly, ‘people [are] afraid of change’ (Interview 2-see Table 1) as simply put by a BIM Lead. The majority of the interviewees also perceive this as 17

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

being an hinderance to BIM adoption in practice. Likewise, staff carrying what a few interviewees referred to as ‘’baggage’’, an employee’s preconceived methods of practising that doesn’t align or conform with the rules and standards of their new place of practice. An interviewee further explains, ‘…BIM doesn’t negate design or construction experience…you’ve got people who’ve worked in industry for years and years, they’ve got loads of construction experience but not necessarily sort of the technology experience.’ (Interview 5- see Table 1) The BIM consultant then added, ‘…you’ve got an upskilling… from technology and process, but you’ve also kind of got a mindset change, a change in people’s behaviours. There’s always a resistance to change.’ (Interview 5- see Table 1) This view was also shared by an interviewed associate and BIM manager, where they described that although BIM has been a recent development for practice, it’s not too far from previous traditional practice, ‘That’s what we’ve done for years... We’ve built buildings for thousands of years without BIM, we’re just trying to make life easier for ourselves. And there’s that cross over that people have got to get over…’’ (Interview 4- see Table 1) In agreement with the previous responses,

an architectural assistant expressed, ‘It’s not something that we haven’t been doing before… we’ve been collaborating before, we’ve been sending people our DWGs for them to crosscheck for years. It’s literally the same thing, it just happens to be that it has a name, they just can’t get past that information model phrase.’ (Interview 1- see Table 1) These findings suggest BIM may be an intimidating process to take up and achieve and one of the reasons for this, also supported by findings from the literature review, is that BIM and BIM Level 2 are terms which remain unclear to an extent and therefore are misunderstood in practice. Responses concerning the definition of BIM revealed that the term often gets mistaken for a technological entity due to the fact a component of the BIM acronym holds direct connotations with technology as the M in BIM stands for ‘Modelling’. In addition to this, whilst analysing several BIM literatures, in order to find a coherent definition of BIM Level 2, the majority of publications assumed that the reader had a pre-established definition of BIM Level 2 and then went straight on to affirm the components of BIM Level 2. From this, one could infer the need for a contemporary BIM and BIM Level 2 definition has led to repercussions in practice, equally the interviews reveal that practice has yet to adopt a definition for BIM level 2. Further responses speak about the term BIM having developed and become more process driven, as when describing BIM an interviewee explains that BIM is,

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ 3. Findings

‘…a process, not a piece of software.’ (Interview 2- see Table 1) During another interview, a BIM consultant suggested, ’that’s to do with particular vendors and their marketing campaign,’ (Interview 5see Table 1) often promoting BIM enabling software packages as being the entirety of BIM, and adding, ‘BIM is a process that’s just enabled by technology, it’s about the information.’ (Interview 5- see Table 1) To help clarify this statement they then went on to give the following BIM analogy: ‘So, you go buy a washing machine and you have a set of questions that you have to ask to buy that. What’s the first thing you think of?... how quickly does it take to do a washing cycle, how big is the drum, what’s the efficiency rating and all that? So, we’re asking a lot of fundamental questions, but nowhere have we started to look about the geometry side of that washing machine, … so it’s not always just about the geometry and the modelling, there’s a lot of the… non-graphical information that we need to consider as well.’ (Interview 5- see Table 1) As well as the non-graphical information, one must acknowledge that modelling does

have its own part to play in the BIM Level 2 process. To help illustrate this argument, the interviewee presented another analogy: ‘It’s a bit like buying a car… [the]…whole processing which the car’s manufactured is not really of interest to me as a client, I just want to make sure that… they understand the brief, I want a red car it’s got to have 4 seats, it’s got to be fuel efficient and when I get that car at the end I got to make sure that it’s tested and… it performs as we agreed…, I’m getting the miles to the gallon that we agreed on.’ (Interview 5- see Table 1) These analogies depict a non-singular approach or fix-all scenario for BIM Level 2, but it’s about getting the right information to the client and at the right time. Whether the information required may be graphical or non-graphical, technology remains a vital component. Therefore, corresponding to the non-modelling aspects of BIM, technology acts as a catalyst, promoting the efficient implementation of BIM Level 2 on mandated projects. It is understandable that BIM can be mistaken for BIM enabling softwares as both co-exist within such close proximities. Conflicts on the obsession with modelling resurfaces during an interview with a BIM lead. As aforementioned in the research methodology (1.b.), during the interviews it was worth sharing a personal pitfall in learning BIM, experienced during the second semester of the first year of architecture undergraduate study, at Newcastle University. Since BIM was introduced

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

through an architectural representation module, BIM was mistaken for only being a modelling tool. In response to this, the BIM lead revealed how BIM getting mistaken for a software rather than a process is very still prevalent in the commercial environment, which they then went on to further mention: ‘…I wouldn’t say arguments, but I still have conversations internally; a new project comes in and our client wants it in BIM, okay but where’s his employer’s information requirements? ‘’Oh no we’re not, no.’’ But what do you mean he wants it in BIM? ‘’He means a Revit model.’’ You know they don’t understand what BIM is really, but they hear the buzz word, ‘’we want it in BIM, we want it in BIM.’’ ‘’Oh yeah we do BIM, we’ve got Revit.’’ Don’t say that.’ (Interview 2see Table 1) Many interviewed practitioners believe in a direct correlation between the number of acronyms found in BIM terminology and the current struggles of BIM Level 2 adoption in practice. When asked about the number of acronyms and initialisms in BIM literature, a BIM lead responded by calling it, ‘a nightmare.’ (Interview 2- see Table 1) This can be further evidenced in a response given by an associate and BIM manager, ‘There’s too many [acronyms] and then there are arguments about what those mean as well so I think as an industry we’re not helping ourselves educate people, we’re actually confusing them…

but it’s [about] trying to find that balance and mediation of where we can educate people without scaring them off.’ (Interview 4- see Table 1) During a different interview, an architectural assistant explains a method they employ in order to get around this problem, ‘I won’t use the acronym like when I’m talking about CDEs I’ll [say] ‘‘Common Data Environments’’ and I’ll straightaway say ‘’like Dochosting, Hsite…’’ because it’s not fair for me to exclude people from this by using terminology they don’t understand…’ (Interview 1- see Table 1) They then went on to reveal that the inaccessibility BIM terminology potentially possesses can have a negative impact on the practice’s attitude towards BIM implementation. ‘And it puts off so many people in the office, you say BIM and their… eyes [start] closing and it’s just completely because it’s inaccessible to people who don’t want to read PAS documents.’ (Interview 1- see Table 1) To fix this, some practices have redefined the acronym by promoting BIM as, ‘Better Information Management’ (Interview 3- see Table 1), likewise observed in the Overlay 2012⁵⁵, as they too believe the management of information best interprets the processed driven acronym.

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ 3. Findings

But why is it the way the term is acknowledged important to the adoption and implementation of BIM Level 2? During interview 5 (see Table 1), a BIM consultant portrays the potential influence of a rechristening for BIM as being a key indicator of successful adoption and implementation of the Level 2 process, ‘Hopefully in time people won’t use the term BIM because it would just be part of the process and people would do it as a matter of given.’ (Interview 5- see Table 1) This can be supported by the following depiction of current attitudes towards the topic of BIM in practice expressed by an interviewed architect, ‘...if you mentioned BIM, I would say that 75% of the office would switch off.’ (Interview 1- see Table 1) Another way practices aim to realign its staff with the BIM Level 2 process is by providing internal meetings prior of undertaking BIM Level 2 mandated projects so that the process can be implemented to the required standards. When asked whether extra education was put in place for those unfamiliar with BIM Level 2 (see Appendix III), an associate and BIM manager responded by explaining how their practices prepares for mandated projects, ‘…we always do BIM kick off meetings to make sure everyone’s on the same page and if no one understands or if someone

doesn’t understand we explain the benefits, the pros, the cons and what it actually means in just… layman’s terms.’ (Interview 4- see Table 1) An amalgamation of further interview responses suggests the misunderstood definition of BIM has also contributed to further repercussions, in regard to behaviours towards training in professional architectural practice. Some practitioners have taken steps in rebranding BIM in order to make it more accessible and clearly understood, making it the everyday practice vocabulary in hopes of better adoption. This can be evidenced in Interview 1 (see Table 1), where an architect and an architectural assistant described their experience in running an in-house BIM training session for their office. ‘I’ve just started calling it ‘’Design Strategies’’ now… people are a bit resistant to that but I think that everyone can see common sense for what common sense is… if I badged it ‘’oh we’re going to go through this design strategies document’’…’’How to collaborate’’…‘’How to work better as a team’’… And if they’ve never heard of BIM before they’d be absolutely fine with it…’ (Interview 1- see Table 1) As highlighted in the literature review, the government expresses a want for attracting young professionals into the construction industry as a mean to tackling an anticipated challenge in the skills required for successful industry wide BIM Level 2 implementation. This is in fact a concern shared with current

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

practitioners, as one declared, ‘…we have got an issue within construction… we need to get younger people in, we need to get them excited about it.’ (Interview 5- see Table 1) Another practitioner further explained, ‘We are at a point where young people are not getting into construction and we as an industry need to find a way to make it sexy and make them want to get into it... We struggle for staff now, in the last recession ten years’ ago, a lot of the architects I’ve worked with or anyone who had a degree went off to teach because there was work. So, we lost a lot of architects ten years ago, and ten eleven years ago you could interview ten people and you’d want to employ nine of them. Now we can interview people and there can be significantly less people.’ (Interview 4- see Table 1) Nevertheless, headway is being made concerning upskilling future practice workers for effective BIM implementation in practice by introducing BIM in earlier stages of education, as described by an interviewed BIM consultant, ‘…we’re starting to look at… getting collaboration and things like that earlier into the curriculum and there’s things like… ‘Class of Your Own’ and things like that that starts to look at primary school ages as well.’ (Interview 5- see Table 1) Likewise, an architect also affirmed the

urgency in teaching BIM related skills in education, ‘Revit – teach yourself, but BIM… [the] principles of it is a way of thinking, it’s collaboration, it’s working as [a] team, that can be taught. The importance of that can be emphasised.’ (Interview 1see Table 1) These responses illustrate a mutual concern towards the need for further BIM components embedded within education. Emphasis is placed on fundamental skills such as collaboration as the interviewed practitioners believe it to be a way of easing the skills required for BIM implementation in practice, onto future young professionals because as earlier stated, BIM Level 2 relies on effective collaboration between the project stakeholders.⁵⁶

3.b. Clients and The Supply Chain During interview 1 (see Table 1), the interviewees declared that not all clients are inclined on implementing BIM Level 2. Amid a conversation about the uncommonness of government mandated BIM Level 2 projects, the practitioners expressed, ‘They’re actually probably less common than you would think they would be especially in public funded aspects… we’ve done more primary schools, they’re just not really interested in it and the client uptake is not great… they don’t have the best understanding of what BIM is or how it’s useful to them

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ 3. Findings

and… they don’t really know what to ask for and what’s useful for them and they don’t know what they should have with the end of it so facilities management software and things like that. They are not really advised by the government of what they should get for that so…, [we do] BIM level 2 but… probably not past [RIBA Plan Of Work 2013] stage 4 or 5' (Interview 1- see Table 1) In keeping with the interview, they then went on to explain that asset management didn’t appeal to local councils responsible for the primary schools, as they didn’t have the infrastructure in place to manage the post construction information and data, and despite being a government mandated project, the clients still decided not to have asset management as it was deemed not financially viable and therefore viewed as a hinderance. ‘A council is not going to hire a BIM manager… to manage five schools, it’s ridiculous costs for them, it’s not really equitable…we’ve even had councils which have said, ‘’Design team do BIM if you want, if it helps you guys work together, but the costs [of asset management]...’’ they’re just absolutely not interested.’ (Interview 1- see Table 1) On the other hand, the architect also mentioned an example of clients who had embraced full BIM Level 2 implementation on government mandated projects because they saw the opportunity as being commercially viable.

‘You get some really good clients like Cambridge or Oxford… the big universities have the money to invest in this higher facilities management because they’ve got such a big estate… the benefits they can get from BIM are enormous… Because they can get a complete model of their full estate; if something breaks down, they’ve got all the information there and then…’ (Interview 1- see Table 1) In another interview, an associate and BIM manager described their experience of a client also wanting asset management as part of their project mandated at BIM Level 2, ’…IKEA… told us they want Level 2… Myself, the structural engineers and BIM lead, we sat down beforehand and we said, ‘’we think that they just want a 3D model.’’ No, they wanted Level 2 BIM including full COBIE.’ (Interview 4- see Table 1) This suggests that perhaps asset management might only be considered as a benefit for bigger companies who are willing to invest in the service. However, all the interviewed practitioners expressed that the long-term benefits of asset management applied to all stakeholders regardless of size, ‘…clients need to know… [and] understand the costs of designing and building a building pales in significance when you consider how much it will cost to run and maintain [it] throughout its life [of] about fifty years...’ (Interview 5-

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

see Table 1) From this, it can be said that greater emphasis needs to be placed on asset management, for BIM Level 2 to be fully implemented in practice. Similarly, because of related commercial reasons, other parts of BIM Level 2 can also be considered as barriers for smaller businesses to an extent. In like manner, most interview responses also portray sections of the supply chain as being potentially excluded from full BIM Level 2 implementation in practice. A senior architect stated, ‘…the further down the supply chain you go, the less BIM capable companies are.’ (Interview 3- see Table 1) The requirement for project contributors to be working in a 3D environment is essential to BIM Level 2, as potential design errors and changes can be anticipated and dealtwith before construction.⁵⁷ With the supply chain failing to exercise the full benefits of BIM Level 2 implementation, it can be regarded as a breach in the efficiency of the process. During interview 1 (see Table 1), the interviewees explained how the choice of supply chain can affect the implementation of BIM on a mandated project, ‘…we sometimes get odd requests from councils who say… ‘’We also want to use local contractors and local materials.’’ Are any small [local] timber frame subcontractors able to work in BIM [Level 2]? I don’t know, but I can’t imagine

there are many and certainly if there are, they will put the price up.’ (Interview 1see Table 1) Ideas of commercial viability re-materialises as a significant factor in the implementation of BIM Level 2 and the interviewed architect further added, ’…if somebody was to insist… [of having] all sub-contractors working in BIM [Level 2], the price would be phenomenal, or… and it would really limit you to using large companies.’ (Interview 1- see Table 1) From this, one could infer that the interviewed architect suggests that BIM Level 2 implementation may be excluding smaller construction businesses.

3.c. Potential Isolation for Smaller Practices Corresponding to the previous sub-section, the topic of isolation emerged towards the end of all the interviews, as interviewees recognised it to be a possible issue for practice. When each interviewee was asked whether the BIM Level 2 mandate potentially isolated smaller practices (see Appendix III), less than half of the interviewees agreed to an extent that, the costs of BIM enabling software could oppose as a barrier for smaller practices who are just starting out. An architectural assistant further explained, ‘… you’re excluding a whole next generation of people who want to set up

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ 3. Findings

their own practices, because they… can’t afford the software.’ (Interview 1- see Table 1) Even though a BIM consultant who works at a large company acknowledged, ’often smaller companies are excluded from [the] tender process,’ (Interview 5see Table 1) they, alongside most of the interviewed practitioners believe BIM Level 2 can be an enabler for smaller practices who embrace the technology which underpins the process. This is further evidenced in another response given by the same interviewee, as they also later stated, ‘…I’ve found that sometimes smaller companies can be more agile… so they can produce information a lot quicker… I don’t see it as a barrier as such.’ (Interview 5- see Table 1) Similarly, a senior architect also responded by proclaiming, ‘Technology is more accessible than it ever has been before, if anything smaller practices have an advantage where they can change and adapt much faster. Also, the size of their projects are less likely to mandate requirements.’ (Interview 3- see Table 1) Moreover, even though BIM Level 2 possesses other non-technological components, technology remains a significant factor in the implementation

of the mandated process. This can be demonstrated in the response given by a BIM lead who also believes technology to be an enabler for smaller practices who wish to implement BIM Level 2, ‘we tend to think of technology as a helper rather than a hinderance and I think the office that …might feel isolated and that goes for architectural, engineers and MEP guys… those offices that… haven’t got the thirst for technology as much as other people, therefore they may or… I know for a fact there’s a few that are lagging behind. And I think they could start to feel isolated that way… ‘’I’ve done it this way for 50 years [why change?]’’… But if you do it this way, you can do twice as much in half the time. I think that’s where you might find an isolation in certain things.’ (Interview 2- see Table 1)

3.d. BIM Level 2 Realities Conceptual Framework The broadness of the topic of BIM Level 2, despite being architectural practice focused, can still be regarded as immense to a certain extent, and to answer the research question, all areas pertaining to BIM Level 2 had to be explored in order to reach a more accurate conclusion. One of the benefits of conducting qualitative research was that the quality of information and data gathered was profound and once analysed, it revealed various other components which can be deemed as 25

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

relevant to BIM Level 2. Although only the most significant themes were disscused in the previous sub-sections, one must acknowledge the other important factors that were also mentioned by the interviewed practitioners. This model illustrates all the themes which arose from the interview responses; themes and topics which pose as potential barriers and challenges to BIM Level 2 adoption and implementation in current practice, according to data

Figure 2. BIM Level 2 Conceptual Framework

gavethered from interviewed practitioners. The model also reveals the interelated relationships between the larger components that came out of the interviews (white circles) and the theme of technology. The grey areas in-between are topics which interviewed practitioners have identifed as the current concerns and problems that need to be cleared up in order to have better BIM Level 2 adoption and implementation in architectural practice.

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ Conclusion

economics of long term BIM investments limit the effective application of the mandated process; asset management in regard to local government, and BIM enabling tools for smaller practices and the supply chain.

Conclusion Moreover, the aim of this dissertation was to explore the realities of BIM Level 2 adoption and implementation in current UK architectural practice since the 2016 government mandate, looking at the challenges and barriers UK practices face in delivering projects at minimum BIM Level 2. Although findings show that the most significant challenges towards BIM Level 2 adoption and implementation in current practice are: the current workforce’s resistance to change, a lack of long-term investments from local governments and parts of the supply chain as well as the BIM Level 2 process potentially isolating smaller practices. Also, interview responses indicate that practices have begun to address the need for BIM to become more accessible for practitioners by rechristening BIM as a process of information management, alongside running in-house meetings to upskill the current workforce; in hopes of alleviating BIM Level 2 adoption and better subsequent implementation in mandated projects. Still, issues surrounding the

This research has also reveals that other factors such as: training, management, trends and attitudes, as well as people, pose as potential barriers that practice needs to resolve and overcome in order to achieve the UK government’s mandated target of BIM Level 2 business as usual by 2020;⁵⁸ as shown in the BIM Level 2 Conceptual Framework (see Figure 2). Despite the fact that the findings of this study do not represent the whole of UK practices, one can recognise the qualitative research method employed for this dissertation has led to detailed insights on the realities of BIM Level 2 adoption and implementation, insights that can be regarded as being beneficial for architectural practice in understanding BIM Level 2 and its current challenges to then overcome and progress towards industry wide business as usual, including steps towards future Level 3 BIM adoption and implementation. The BIM Level 2 Conceptual Framework (see Figure 2) highlights key areas that would benefit from future research, in the interest of the construction industry’s goal for waste reduction and efficiency. In addition to this, findings have also revealed a need for further exploration into potential government incentives to asset management for all project participants; as a way of

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

promoting full BIM Level 2 implementation. As aforementioned in the research methodology (2.a.), further research could benefit from undertaking a quantitative methodology in order to better represent UK architectural practice as a whole. Lastly, granting many aspects of BIM Level 2 can be regarded as non-technological, the people who adopt and implement the process have as much of a significant bearing on the development and success of the governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s target of BIM Level 2, as the technology which underpins the whole process. Still, current interviewed practitioners call for all construction businesses, including local governments, to embrace BIM enabling technology however unappealing initial investments costs may first appear in order to later reap the longer term benefits of asset management and efficient construction.

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ Appendix

Appendix I. Development of BIM Level 2 Models Throughout this research, models were made to explore and manage data. Appendix Figure 1, illustrates the components which construct BIM Level 2 in architectural practice. The model also highlights the current gaps, seen as potential challenges and barriers, which co-exist in the current adoption and implementation of the grey area that is BIM Level 2 in current architectural pratice. However, after further analysis, it was discovered that technology was the true base of BIM Level 2 as all other themes could also be linked back to technology (see Figure 2). After producing the final conceptual framework (see Figure 2); it was worth revisiting the literature review and draw up a model of what the BIM Level 2 issues and challenges looked like according to government documents and published BIM guides (see Appendix Figure 2), in comparison to the realities depicted from analysed data and information obtained from the interview responses. It would be interesting in the future to investigate the differences between government expectations and quantitative findings obtained from architectural practice.

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

EDUCATION ing

in Tra Upskilling

Investments

Collaboration Innovation

Local government Supply Chain

Events

Asset Management

Tools

Commerciality vs. Social Benefits Definitions Expectations

Government Soft Landings

Plan of Work 2013

PROCESS

Contracts & Liability

CULTURE

Accessibility

Management Appendix Figure 1. BIM Level 2 Gaps Conceptual Framework

Asset Management Future Skills Shortages BIM Level 1 Skipped Expectations

Process

Contracts Terminology Oversaturation

Definitions Mitigated Risks vs. Added Costs

Accessibility Level 3 by 2020?

Appendix Figure 2. Literature Review BIM Level 2 Venn Diagram

itude

Jobs

& Att

BIM LEVEL 2

Cloud Portals & Scans

ECONOMICS

Trend s

Efficiency

Clash Detection PASs, ISOs & BS Documents VR & AR Digital Plan of Work

ple

BIM Task Groups

Young People Class of Your Own

TECHNOLOGY

Pe o

NBS

Technology

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ Appendix

II. Interview Overview Template Sample Below, is a research outline document sent to interviewees prior to the interview: Newcastle University Research Dissertation Project on the realities of UK BIM adoption and implementation – Solomon Ofoaiye [“The realities of BIM adoption and implementation in UK architectural practice since the 2016 government mandate, highlighting challenges UK practices face in delivering projects at minimum BIM level 2.’’] Background Current conversations in UK architectural practice regarding UK BIM adoption mostly speak of the proportion of the UK construction industry who can actually play their part on a BIM level 2 project to the required standard is still relatively small. Although government has mandated that all public sector projects should be procured at minimum BIM level 2, many feel this goal has yet to be achieved across UK practice. The long-term aim of this dissertation is to further develop upon the 2016-2020 UK government construction strategy’s methodology on total BIM level 2 implementation and, transition to BIM level 3 for medium and small UK architectural practices. Part of this process involves understanding of UK BIM adoption with a focus on UK architectural practice. This understanding will be gained through case studies of specific projects (e.g. interviews with key stakeholders, etc.), UK government 20162020 construction strategy document as well as other key BIM documents and, will feed into the development of the assessment methodology. Topic / Areas to Explore: 1.

Background/timeline of BIM Project

2. a. b. c. d.

General BIM management Different stakeholders (and/or departments) involved Interrelationships between stakeholders Time-scales Challenges

3. 4.

Changes to the way practice has had to change since the 2016 mandate Other specific BIM questions

To aid the flow of discussion, I would like to record our discussions on tape. The recording will be transcribed and the interviewee will have the opportunity to confirm and/or amend the transcript. The transcript and audio recording will become part of the data for the research, and will be used purely for the purpose of this (and similar) research. Thank you very much for your time. 31

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

III. Interviewer’s Questions Sheet Sample This template was used as guidance and structure during the interviews: Newcastle University Research Dissertation Project on the realities of UK BIM adoption and implementation – Solomon Ofoaiye [“The realities of BIM adoption and implementation in UK architectural practice since the 2016 government mandate, highlighting challenges UK practices face in delivering projects at minimum BIM level 2.’’] Background Current conversations in UK architectural practice regarding UK BIM adoption mostly speak of the proportion of the UK construction industry who can actually play their part on a BIM level 2 project to the required standard is still relatively small. Although government has mandated that all public sector projects should be procured at minimum BIM level 2, many feel this goal has yet to be achieved across UK practice. The long-term aim of this dissertation is to further develop upon the 2016-2020 UK government construction strategy’s methodology on total BIM level 2 implementation and, transition to BIM level 3 for medium and small UK architectural practices. Part of this process involves understanding of UK BIM adoption with a focus on UK architectural practice. This understanding will be gained through case studies of specific projects (e.g. interviews with key stakeholders, etc.), UK government 20162020 construction strategy document as well as other key BIM documents and will feed into the development of the assessment methodology. Topic Areas to Explore with Interviewee [X] (Detailed Questions) 1. Background/timeline of BIM Project a. BIM level i. What is the highest level of BIM that has been achieved in a project? ii. What level of BIM was it mandated at? iii. Who was the client? 2. a. i. ii. b. i. ii.

General BIM management Different stakeholders (and/or departments) involved How was BIM implemented? Who are the key stakeholders (people/departments) involved in its operation and management of BIM? Was the project fully procured at a minimum BIM level 2? Or were individual BIM level 2 elements employed in some areas of the project? Interrelationships between stakeholders Could the common data environment be achieved in the project? Was extra education put in place to educate other stakeholders or clients on BIM?

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ Appendix

c. i. ii. d. i. ii. iii. iv. 3. i. ii.

iii. iv. 4. a. b. c. d. e. f. g.

Time-scales Roughly, from inception to completion and post management, how long does a BIM project take? Do you have any comments on the effectiveness and efficiency of this process? Challenges What have been the challenges that arose at the design and construction phases of the project? How did you overcome them? Where there any reoccurring challenges in later projects? How is learning captured in your office? Changes to the way practice has had to change since the 2016 mandate What was [your firm's] response to the mandate? Have your methods or processes changed? According to my understanding, the RIBA Plan of Work 2013 was developed and placed into common UK practice years before the 2016 UK Government BIM mandate, yet in some ways it tries to accommodate BIM processes and procurement methods. What are your thoughts on this? What would you change or amend in the RIBA Plan of Work 2013? What procurement method(s) do you favour and why? Other specific BIM questions Do you think that UK government used an appropriate timescale for the realisation of ‘business as usual’ BIM level 2 adoption by 2017-2020? Should architectural practice lead the BIM process? Does BIM level 2 face a battle with liability? Has the UK government provided enough clarity on legality issues concerning BIM level 2? (i.e. BEPs being delivered on time, contracts, etc…) What is the biggest obstacle for the UK construction industry to achieve BIM level 2? Would BIM have been better introduced to UK architectural practice as just a new and more efficient design, construction and management strategy? (With less acronyms.) What are your thoughts on the BIM level 2 mandate potentially isolating smaller practices and inexperienced practitioners? (Has it made it more difficult for architects to set up new practices?)

Thank you very much for your time.

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ Endnotes

Endnotes ¹ The Cabinet Office, Government Construction Strategy 2011-15, (2011) <https://assets.publishing.service.gov. uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61152/Government-Construction-Strategy_0. pdf> [accessed 25 October 2018] ² Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Government Construction Strategy 2016-20, (2016) <http:// www.ihsti.com.libproxy.ncl.ac.uk/CIS/document/313978?PreviousPage=search%3ff%3dAll%26t%3dPAS%2b1192-5%26sqm%3dAllTerms> [accessed 11 October 2018] ³ The Cabinet Office, Government Construction Strategy 2011-15, (2011) <https://assets.publishing.service.gov. uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61152/Government-Construction-Strategy_0. pdf> [accessed 25 October 2018], p.3. ⁴ ibid., p.3. ⁵ ibid., p.5. ⁶ The Cabinet Office, Government Construction Strategy: One Year On and Action Plan Update, (2012) <https:// assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61151/GCS-OneYear-On-Report-and-Action-Plan-Update-FINAL_0.pdf> [accessed 25 October 2018] ⁷ The Cabinet Office, Government Construction Strategy 2011-15, (2011) <https://assets.publishing.service.gov. uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61152/Government-Construction-Strategy_0. pdf> [accessed 25 October 2018] p.14. ⁸ Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Government Construction Strategy 2016-20, (2016) <http:// www.ihsti.com.libproxy.ncl.ac.uk/CIS/document/313978?PreviousPage=search%3ff%3dAll%26t%3dPAS%2b1192-5%26sqm%3dAllTerms> [accessed 11 October 2018] ⁹ Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Government Construction Strategy 2016-20, (2016) <http:// www.ihsti.com.libproxy.ncl.ac.uk/CIS/document/313978?PreviousPage=search%3ff%3dAll%26t%3dPAS%2b1192-5%26sqm%3dAllTerms> [accessed 11 October 2018], p.7. ¹⁰ John Sands, The BIM Roadmap: A building owner’s guide to implementing BIM, (2015) <http://www.ihsti. com.libproxy.ncl.ac.uk/tempimg/41FD64D-CIS888614800311548.pdf> [accessed 10 October 2018] ¹¹ The Cabinet Office, Government Construction Strategy 2011-15, (2011) <https://assets.publishing.service.gov. uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61152/Government-Construction-Strategy_0. pdf> [accessed 25 October 2018], p.14. ¹² Andy Bouttle, UK BIM adoption: reality is difficult to fathom, (2017) <http://www.bimplus.co.uk/people/ uk-bim-adopt7ion-rea6lity-diffic8ult-fathom/> [accessed 27 October 2018] ¹³ May Winfield, Sarah Rock, The Winfield Rock Report: Overcoming the legal and contractual barriers of BIM. UK BIM Alliance, 2018) <http://www.ukbimalliance.org/media/1185/the_winfield_rock_report.pdf> [accessed 04 January 2019] ¹⁴ S. Emmitt, P. Demian, M. Alharbi, Architectural Management: Exploring Definitions and Impacts (Department of Civil and Building Engineering- Loughborough University, UK, 2011) ¹⁵ Simon Hacker, Circular Economy and Construction Reduction, Reuse, Recycling. Lecture. Architectural Technology 3 from Newcastle University. Newcastle upon Tyne. 25 October 2018 ¹⁶ Sarah Lupton, Architect’s Handbook of Practice Management, 7th edn (London: RIBA Publications, 2001), p.3. ¹⁷ Chuck Eastman and others, BIM handbook: a guide to building information modeling for owners, managers, designers, engineers, and contractors, 2nd edn, (Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley & Sons, 2011), p.19. ¹⁸ ibid., p.20. ¹⁹ ibid., p.21. ²⁰ ibid., p.21. ²¹ ibid., p.22. ²² M. Winfield, S. Rock, The Winfield Rock Report: Overcoming the legal and contractual barriers of BIM. (2018) UK BIM Alliance. Available at <http://www.ukbimalliance.org/media/1185/the_winfield_rock_report.pdf> [accessed 1 January 2019] p.18 ²³ Chuck Eastman and others, BIM handbook: a guide to building information modeling for owners, managers,

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

designers, engineers, and contractors, 2nd edn., (Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley & Sons, 2011), p.23. ²⁴ ibid., p.24. ²⁵ Royal Institute of British Architects, BIM Overlay to the RIBA Outline Plan of Work, (2012) <https://www. architecture.com/-/media/gathercontent/riba-plan-of-work/additional-documents/bimoverlaytotheribaoutlineplanofworkpdf.pdf> [accessed 17 November 2018], p.3. ²⁶ The Cabinet Office, Government Construction Strategy: One Year On Report and Action Plan Update, (2012) <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61151/ GCS-One-Year-On-Report-and-Action-Plan-Update-FINAL_0.pdf> [accessed 04 December 2018], p.16. ²⁷ Royal Institute of British Architects, BIM Overlay to the RIBA Outline Plan of Work, (2012) <https://www. architecture.com/-/media/gathercontent/riba-plan-of-work/additional-documents/bimoverlaytotheribaoutlineplanofworkpdf.pdf> [accessed 17 November 2018], p.3. ²⁸ ibid., p.4. ²⁹ ibid., p.4. ³⁰ Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Government Construction Strategy 2016-20, (2016) <http:// www.ihsti.com.libproxy.ncl.ac.uk/CIS/document/313978?PreviousPage=search%3ff%3dAll%26t%3dPAS%2b1192-5%26sqm%3dAllTerms> [accessed 11 October 2018], p.7. ³¹ ibid., p.7. ³² Royal Institute of British Architects, BIM Overlay to the RIBA Outline Plan of Work, (2012) <https://www. architecture.com/-/media/gathercontent/riba-plan-of-work/additional-documents/bimoverlaytotheribaoutlineplanofworkpdf.pdf> [accessed 17 November 2018], p.5. ³³ Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Government Construction Strategy 2016-20, (2016) <http:// www.ihsti.com.libproxy.ncl.ac.uk/CIS/document/313978?PreviousPage=search%3ff%3dAll%26t%3dPAS%2b1192-5%26sqm%3dAllTerms> [accessed 11 October 2018], p.8. ³⁴ ibid., p.16. ³⁵ Royal Institute of British Architects, BIM Overlay to the RIBA Outline Plan of Work, (2012) <https://www. architecture.com/-/media/gathercontent/riba-plan-of-work/additional-documents/bimoverlaytotheribaoutlineplanofworkpdf.pdf> [accessed 17 November 2018], p.3. ³⁶ ibid., p.3. ³⁷ John Sands, The BIM Roadmap: A building owner’s guide to implementing BIM, (2015) <http://www.ihsti. com.libproxy.ncl.ac.uk/tempimg/41FD64D-CIS888614800311548.pdf> [accessed 10 October 2018], p.27. ³⁸ ibid., p.3. ³⁹ ibid., p.3. ⁴⁰ ibid., p.3. ⁴¹ Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Government Construction Strategy 2016-20, (2016) <http:// www.ihsti.com.libproxy.ncl.ac.uk/CIS/document/313978?PreviousPage=search%3ff%3dAll%26t%3dPAS%2b1192-5%26sqm%3dAllTerms> [accessed 11 October 2018], p.4. ⁴² The Cabinet Office, Government Construction Strategy: One Year On Report and Action Plan Update, (2012) <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61151/ GCS-One-Year-On-Report-and-Action-Plan-Update-FINAL_0.pdf> [accessed 04 December 2018], p.3. ⁴³ British Standards Institution, BIM Level 2, (2016) <https://bim-level2.org/> [accessed 02 January 2019] ⁴⁴ May Winfield, Sarah Rock, The Winfield Rock Report: Overcoming the legal and contractual barriers of BIM. UK BIM Alliance, 2018) <http://www.ukbimalliance.org/media/1185/the_winfield_rock_report.pdf> [accessed 01 January 2019], p.7. ⁴⁵ Chuck Eastman and others, BIM handbook: a guide to building information modeling for owners, managers, designers, engineers, and contractors, 2nd edn, (Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley & Sons, 2011), p.26. ⁴⁶ ibid., p.187. ⁴⁷ May Winfield, Sarah Rock, The Winfield Rock Report: Overcoming the legal and contractual barriers of BIM. UK BIM Alliance, 2018) <http://www.ukbimalliance.org/media/1185/the_winfield_rock_report.pdf> [accessed

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ Endnotes

01 January 2019], p.20. ⁴⁸ ibid., p.20 ⁴⁹ Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Government Construction Strategy 2016-20, (2016) <http:// www.ihsti.com.libproxy.ncl.ac.uk/CIS/document/313978?PreviousPage=search%3ff%3dAll%26t%3dPAS%2b1192-5%26sqm%3dAllTerms> [accessed 11 October 2018], p.7. ⁵⁰ ibid., p.7. ⁵¹ ibid., p.7. ⁵² ibid., p.9. ⁵³ BIS, Business population estimates for the UK and regions 2017, (2017) <https://assets.publishing.service. gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/663235/bpe_2017_statistical_release.pdf> [accessed 05 December 2018] ⁵⁴ Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Government Construction Strategy 2016-20, (2016) <http:// www.ihsti.com.libproxy.ncl.ac.uk/CIS/document/313978?PreviousPage=search%3ff%3dAll%26t%3dPAS%2b1192-5%26sqm%3dAllTerms> [accessed 11 October 2018], p.16. ⁵⁵ Royal Institute of British Architects, BIM Overlay to the RIBA Outline Plan of Work, (2012) <https://www. architecture.com/-/media/gathercontent/riba-plan-of-work/additional-documents/bimoverlaytotheribaoutlineplanofworkpdf.pdf> [accessed 17 November 2018], p.3. ⁵⁶ Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Government Construction Strategy 2016-20, (2016), <http:// www.ihsti.com.libproxy.ncl.ac.uk/CIS/document/313978?PreviousPage=search%3ff%3dAll%26t%3dPAS%2b1192-5%26sqm%3dAllTerms> [accessed 15 January 2019], p.6. ⁵⁷ Chuck Eastman and others, BIM handbook: a guide to building information modeling for owners, managers, designers, engineers, and contractors, 2nd edn, (Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley & Sons, 2011), p.23,24. ⁵⁸ Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Government Construction Strategy 2016-20, (2016) <http:// www.ihsti.com.libproxy.ncl.ac.uk/CIS/document/313978?PreviousPage=search%3ff%3dAll%26t%3dPAS%2b1192-5%26sqm%3dAllTerms> [accessed 11 October 2018], p.16.

The Realities of BIM Level 2 Adoption and Implementation \ Bibliography

Bibliography Alharbi. M, Emmitt. S, Demian. P, Architectural Management: Exploring Definitions and Impacts (Department of Civil and Building Engineering (Loughborough University, UK, 2011) Bouttle, A. UK BIM Adoption: Reality is difficult to fathom, (2017) <http://www.bimplus. co.uk/people/uk-bim-adopt7ion-rea6lity-diffic8ult-fathom/> [accessed 27 October 2018] British Standards Institution, BIM Level 2, (2016) <https://bim-level2.org/> [accessed 02 January 2019] Department for Business Energy and Infrastructure, Statistical Release: Business population estimates for the UK and regions 2017, (2017) <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/ government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/663235/bpe_2017_statistical_ release.pdf> [accessed 05 December 2018] Eastman, Chuck and others, BIM handbook: a guide to building information modeling for owners, managers, designers, engineers, and contractors, 2nd edn (Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons, 2011), p.19-187. Hacker, Simon, Circular Economy and Construction Reduction, Reuse, Recycling (Newcastle University, UK: Architectural Technology 3 Lecture: 2018) [25 October 2018] Royal Institute of British Architects, BIM Overlay to the RIBA Outline Plan of Work (2012) <https://www.architecture.com/-/media/gathercontent/riba-plan-of-work/additionaldocuments/bimoverlaytotheribaoutlineplanofworkpdf.pdf> [accessed 17 November 2018], p.3-5. Sands, John, The BIM Roadmap: A building ownerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s guide to implementing BIM, (2015)

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

<http://www.ihsti.com.libproxy.ncl.ac.uk/tempimg/41FD64D-CIS888614800311548.pdf> [accessed 10 October 2018], p.3-27. The Cabinet Office, Government Construction Strategy 2011-15, (2011) <https://assets. publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/ file/61152/Government-Construction-Strategy_0.pdf> [accessed 25 October 2018], p.3-14. The Cabinet Office, Government Construction Strategy: One Year On and Action Plan Update (2012) <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/ attachment_data/file/61151/GCS-One-Year-On-Report-and-Action-Plan-Update-FINAL_0. pdf> [accessed 25 October 2018], p.3-16. The Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Government Construction Strategy 2016-20, (Crown Copyright, 2016) <https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/governmentconstruction-strategy-2016-2020> [accessed 15 October 2018], p.4-16. Winfield, M. Rock, S. The Winfield Rock Report: Overcoming the legal and contractual barriers of BIM, (UK BIM Alliance, 2018). <http://www.ukbimalliance.org/media/1185/the_ winfield_rock_report.pdf> [accessed 05 December 2018], p.18-20. Lupton, Sarah, Architectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Handbook of Practice Management, 7th edn (London: RIBA Publications, 2001), p.3.

Newcastle University Architecture Planning and Landscape

List of Illustrations Figure 1: BIM Maturity Diagram Royal Institute of British Architects, BIM Overlay to the RIBA Outline Plan of Work (2012) <https://www.architecture.com/-/media/gathercontent/riba-plan-of-work/additionaldocuments/bimoverlaytotheribaoutlineplanofworkpdf.pdf> [accessed 17 November 2018]