MT - Using BIM as a PM Tool: 4.2.2 – BIM influence on Time/Schedule

The second KPI with higher positive effect results of using BIM is “Time reduction or Control”. The effect of using BIM showed a positive effect on 34% of the projects (12 out of 35).
This KPI was mentioned with positive connotations 17 times. The following are some examples of these positive effects: “project was two months ahead of schedule” and “significant time savings once the construction model took shape” (Research 2 – McGraw-Hill, 2009) or “without [BIM], it would have taken two months to design this scheme, and we were able to do it in a couple of weeks” (Aylesbury Crown Court – McGraw-Hill, 2010a).
The negative effects on time from the case studies are again much less than the positive ones. They were only mentioned 4 times and only 3 projects mentioned more negative effects on time than positive ones. These negative effects were generally related to extra time needed for “creating the initial model” (Festival Place - BSI, 2010) or “restructuring the drawings” (Palace Exchange – BSI, 2010). All 4 mentions to negative effects of BIM on time, were actually related to extra time needed to model the project or rework that needed to be done due to converting the project from traditional CAD standards to a BIM platform.

While the time savings influenced the overall project duration and had positive effects on the schedule’s critical path, time increases were often related to extra modelling time or converting drawings into a model. This is a clear sign that the positive effects on time are much more important than the negative ones. It also means that adopting BIM tools from the beginning of projects and by all stakeholders has the potential to minimize the negative effects on time. Overall, the effects on time were beneficial.
Show me more...

MT - Using BIM as a PM Tool: 4.2.1 – BIM influence on Cost

The results show clearly that the “Cost Reduction or Control” is the KPI that more often was seen as receiving a positive effect of using BIM. Cost reduction or control benefits were mentioned in 29 occasions. 21 of the case studies, a 60%, showed positive effects on cost from using BIM. The cost reduction or control mentions are of significant value, with some of the most relevant being sentences like “Cost savings of 9.8% of project costs” (Endeavour House – BSI, 2010); “savings of around 9% (est) realized in the construction phase” (Festival Place – BSI, 2010); “no change orders originating from field conflicts” (Dickinson School of law – Leicht and Messner, 2008) or “minimize staffing of the project” (Esean Children’s Hospital – McGraw-Hill, 2010a).
On the other hand, the same KPI was mentioned with negative connotations 6 times in the case studies. In two of the projects, i.e. 5.71 % of them, negative effects on cost were mentioned more times than positive effects. The nature of these costs was generally less relevant than the positive ones. Some examples include “CAD rework cost £20–30k” (St Helens and Knowsley PFI – BSI, 2010) or “invest in computer upgrades, training of its staff and technical support” (University Campus Suffolk – McGraw-Hill, 2010a).
Overall, data from case studies show that the negative effects from using BIM are much less and generally less relevant than the positive effects of implementing BIM tools and processes. Some of this extra costs, such as CAD rework, training or computer upgrades, are costs that can be reduced or eliminating by implementing BIM from the beginning of projects or simply by the fact that once people are trained and computers upgraded those costs will not appear in a firm anymore.

Show me more...

MT - Using BIM as a PM Tool: 4.2 Findings from the Case Studies

It is important to highlight here that the approach taken to quantify the number of projects in which a KPI had positive effects was conservative in nature. In some case study projects, a KPI was mentioned once in a positive manner and once in a negative manner. In that case, that project was not counted as one where that KPI had positive effects (or negative) regardless of which effect (the positive or the negative) was more relevant. This can be easily understood with an example. On the CMG Medical Office Building, described by Khanzode et al. (2008) the Coordination KPI was counted once as positive for the “improved workflow due to the use of 3D/4D models” and once as negative for the uncertainty of “How should the coordination process be structured and managed?”. Although it seems from these two quotes that the positive effects of using BIM in terms of coordination were more important than the challenges created, the project was not counted as one were coordination had positive effects. The same criteria were applied for all projects and KPI to create table 4.2, and are the basis for the following description of each KPI.
Show me more...

MT - Using BIM as a PM Tool: 4.1 Results from Case Studies

Several case studies were collected from existing literature to analyze in which areas the application of BIM had improved aspects of the projects studied.
The literature on each case study was carefully read and analyzed and those aspects regarding the benefits and problems or challenges of implementing BIM where collected.
The total number of case studies gathered was 35. The total number was not previously defined, but as relevant case studies were found, they were added to the research until the timeframe of this dissertation didn’t allow more of them to be found and analyzed. The author of this research is confident that the number of case studies used is big enough to extract conclusions.
After each positive and negative aspect of the implementation of BIM had been collected for each case study, these were translated into the key performance KPI described on Table 3.1 and based on the PMBOK Knowledge Areas. It is relevant to mention here that this translation was not always easy. Some benefits or challenges were difficult to translate to one of the KPI. The results and numbers given on Table 4.1 should be seen as based on the authors’ perception and experience. For more details on the exact translation from the information found on the literature into the KPI the reader should refer to the table compiled in Annex IV of this dissertation.
One of the recurring challenges mentioned on the implementation of BIM found in several case studies were Software Related Issues. Amongst others, there were “information transfer bottlenecks” or “lack of parametric content” (Manning and Messner, 2008), “technical difficulties” or “modelling issues” (Kaner et al., 2009) and “3D modelling inconsistencies” (Haymaker and Fischer, 2001). These Software issues were very specific to the Software packages or expertise of the stakeholders, so in an attempt to keep these very specific negative effects clearly separated, a new KPI [Software] was created.
After translating all benefits and challenges of the BIM implementation into the KPI of Table 3.1, none of these were found to fit in the last category “Procurement Help”. It is for this reason that Table 4.1, which shows the summary of the results obtained in each case study, does not show this category.
The projects on Table 4.1 are organized using the added score for each of them (positive indicators minus negative indicators). This is not an attempt to find which one is the best BIM case study but to organize the projects in a way that the reader can see in which case studies it is possible to find more positive aspects of the implementation of BIM. The numbers on the score column should not be seen as an indicator of how successful or unsuccessful those case study projects were, but simply as how many KPI were mentioned positively or negatively. For example, the case study of the Cascadia Center (McGraw-Hill 2010b) shows a score of -3. This means that 3 aspects of the use of BIM related to the Coordination, Organization and Software KPI were mentioned as challenging or causing difficulties, but it doesn’t mean that the use of BIM had negative effects.

To allow better analysis and understanding, the different positive and negative aspects found in each project were separated in two different columns. For each KPI, the approach taken on this step was to count separately the positive and negative values, rather than to give a total score for each one (positive minus negative count). With this approach, it was possible to see which KPI appeared more times as a positive factor and which ones appeared as challenges or problems of the implementation of BIM. Following this approach, a second table was created (Table 4.2) with the results obtained from the case studies. This table allowed us to organize the different KPI according to the times each was mentioned as a positive factor. The table also shows the times and number of projects the KPIs were mentioned as a challenge or negative factor due to the use of BIM. This table was also the basis for the following section, were the results are described and findings on each KPI are analyzed.
Show me more...