Why do I have a problem with BIM in FM?

There are many popular acronyms heard within the world of Facilities Management. BMS. CAFM. CMMS. Joining this growing list is the concept of BIM.

The discussions about BIM – or Building Information Modelling – are seen across many of the popular FM forums on the Internet. Like many new concepts there are multiple early-adopters and strong supporters for expanding the use of BIM from construction into the FM environment. After all, the ongoing operational costs over the lifetime of a building far outweigh the initial construction costs so it makes sense that the investment in BIM should extend into the functional lifespan of a facility.

But while BIM offers some great advantages to the facilities manager, it isn’t right for every contract and should not be touted as a fix-all approach to inefficiency and increasing costs.

Although I am personally in favour of any technology that reduces waste, improves efficiency and enhances the customer experience, I don’t believe BIM use within FM will take off over the next few years to the extent that advocates suggest. Before I explain my position, for those that are new to the topic, let’s first have a brief overview of what BIM is and how it may apply to the FM environment.

Building Information Modelling is the natural progression of 2-dimensional CAD drawings; computer drawn blueprints for the construction of a building. Expanding this design into 3-dimensions allows better visualisation of the prospective building, highlighting issues such as the clash of structural and service components, challenges with lighting and potential aesthetic issues around the layout of the building. Through increased computer processing capability and advances in the sophistication of the software used, a variety of additional functionality can be added such as drawing consolidation, activity scheduling, energy modelling and component performance simulations. This advanced functionality has underpinned the adoption of BIM during the planning and construction phases, providing rapid insight to the ongoing stages of construction and facilitating solutions well in advance of their manifestation in the physical world. As buildings have become more complex in their nature, BIM has become an invaluable tool to designers, contractors and customers when making decisions that affect not only the building of the structure, but also in the ongoing operation of it.

In short, BIM enables more control of the construction process, better control of costs and fewer problems on site; all through the ability to properly stitch together the multiple sources of design information and undertake advance modelling, inspection and scenario testing based upon this consolidated data.

Uptake of BIM: pull and push factors

Push factors	Pull factors
Need to improve productivity	Technologies ready and available off the shelf
Inefficiencies of using unstructured, non-computable information	Sustainable construction a priority for the EU
£100m wasted every year in the UK through non-interoperable working	Expertise in BIM giving companies a competitive edge
	Availability of standards to facilitate BIM use

Extracted from “Constructing the business case Building information modelling”; BSi 2010

Coming from a background in construction – I worked on early BIM models for the house-building industry – I understand the fantastic advantages it offers during design, planning and building. And, as customers need more data from the process to drive decisions around energy use and lifecycle, BIM is an invaluable tool and one that I wholeheartedly support.

But should the enthusiastic uptake of BIM be taken up by the facilities management community as well? At the start of this piece, I suggested that the answer to this is conditional.

In addition to the multiple benefits that BIM offers to construction, it can also aid the lifecycle management of the facility assets, provide a central repository for all operational data, reduce wasted work, establish a comparative baseline for optimum performance and provide a speedy diagnosis in the event of component failure.

The University of Mexico have provided a good overview of the operational benefits of BIM that explains a little more.

On paper – and YouTube – the benefits of BIM are unquestionable. It reduces costs and risk for the lifetime of the facility.

So why then do I believe that BIM shouldn’t be adopted on all FM contracts? Having worked with BIM recently, I understand the challenges that are in place when extending its reach into FM. Challenges with cost, compatibility and skillsets are current hurdles to adoption. More importantly, the responsibilities of participating parties can sometimes be misaligned, negating the benefits that BIM offers.

Significant advantages to FM can be obtained from using it, but in my view only to a limited variety of contract types.

These are:

1. New buildings where BIM has been produced for the design and build process
2. PFI/PPP contracts
3. Facilities where the occupant maintains the upkeep of the BIM; either internally or through a specialist third-party
4. Where the requirements for updating the BIM model is integrated within the main contract specifications and terms
5. Where a collaboration or working agreement is in place to update BIM in a prescribed manner

Let me look at each of these categories in a bit more detail.

New buildings
It can be challenging and expensive to retrospectively create a BIM model on a pre-constructed building. While it is possible to build something from existing CAD files, the model needs to be supplemented by operating and maintenance records, historical asset replacement information, detailed asset surveys, condition reports and as much asset data that can reasonably be expected to collect. Coupled with this, there needs to be a steep learning curve for BIM to become a reporting tool and part of the FM tool-kit. While it is possible to get returns from this effort, it may simply be more cost-effective to invest in other tools instead. Good CAFM integration, predictive maintenance frameworks and asset intelligence to drive lifecycle replacement methodology can all offer positive benefits without as large an investment.

Where BIM already exists and there is the intention to apply it to the operational phase, consideration must also be given to the following items.

PFI/PPP contracts
Where an organisation has an undertaking to design, build and operate a facility for a prolonged period, there is often a long-term view that an investment in BIM can return significant value. With this holistic, extended view and a single point of responsibility, BIM is more likely to become embedded in the DNA of the project and core to the asset lifecycle approach.

Occupant maintained BIM
BIM is a dynamic toolkit that needs to be continually updated with asset information, condition reports and lifecycle information for it to remain a valid tool. Unfortunately, where typical FM contracts are awarded in periods of anything up to 5 years in duration, the lifecycle of a building is 25+ years. During the building lifecycle, there may be anywhere between 1 to 8 (or more) FM providers looking after the facilities and updating the BIM model. Through this period, there is also likely to be numerous inconsistencies in the way information is captured and updated by each provider, so reliability of information can deteriorate rapidly over the years.

Where the BIM model is owned and updated by the occupant – or their appointed specialist – the integrity of the model can be maintained. The disadvantage of course is where the communication of asset performance isn’t as transparent is it needs to be. Again, an integrated CAFM or CMMS system can support this flow of information, but similarly where this platform is owned and operated by the FM supplier, there can be inconsistencies and inaccuracies should the supplier change.

Prescribed approach
It is possible to process map the flow of various types of information and data within the contract specification and legal terms. In fact, I have seen multiple examples of this in the past where internal processes become heavily prescribed to prevent misalignment with established standards. Take for example the nuclear industry where every interaction has to be documented and checked. I’ve seen it too in other critical environments such as data centres, telecom providers, hospitals or manufacturing facilities. The principles of utilising and updating BIM within FM delivery can be captured in this way. The upside to this approach is consistent, predictable performance. The downside is the potential increase in cost.

Through collaboration or working agreement
In recent years I have seen an increase in the formation of mutual or alliance contracting where the FM provider and customer become joint delivery parties through a formal service agreement or legal entity. Such collusions tend to work to standalone frameworks and become more focused on mutual objectives rather than independent ones. They also tend to be mid-to-long term agreements, thereby ensuring that there is sufficient time to realise a payback for the more expensive set-up costs.   These inclusive, longer-term arrangements support the adoption of BIM and the benefits that can be realised.

So, if your prospective FM contract doesn’t fall into one or more of these categories, should you adopt BIM?

My advice for the time-being is no.

Invest instead in building enhanced ways of working that promote more granular reporting and the capture of accurate asset performance data. This information alone can radically enhance performance, reduce cost and establish enduring relationships based around the provision of high-performance FM services. You don’t need BIM for this, just a willingness to continuously improve and strive for better performance.

I have no doubt that BIM will have its day in FM, just not in the immediate future for the vast majority of contracts in place.

___________________________

Chris D. Payne is an FM brain for hire. He has experience of delivering savings, improvements and innovations across a wide range of outsourced facilities management, maintenance and critical environment contracts. He is available to work with your groups to encourage new ways of thinking about everyday issues in the FM sector and to help you establish meaningful account management plans for use within your own enterprise.

• Join Chris on LinkedIn
• Follow Chris on Twitter
• Skype Chris @ chrisdpayne
• Email Chris
• Like Chris on Facebook

3D Image courtesy of TC Projects: goo.gl/6xWaI