Thursday, January 10, 2013
Let me spell this out for you… (a footnote to my ‘Qatarlist’ BIM-blogpost)
I wrote a post on a real and possibly ground-breaking BIM/AEC project some time ago (links below)
It turned out to be one of the most visited posts of mine (so far) and has ignited some lively discussions on various BIM forums.
My success to enlighten relevant people within my own organisation on the nuances of this phenomenon and possible implications on us not appreciating its weight has been (unfortunately) much less successful.
So, with the idea that one should never let a ‘good argument’ go to waste, here is my thinking behind the ‘why the client would have asked for this?’
and the corresponding
‘how a requirement like this should be treated’
for those that occasionally DO read-or-listen to me (i.e. visitors to this blog):
This AEC client on this particular project has asked for an unusually ambitious and highly demanding BIM approach to be employed on its information project management due to one of the following two reasons:
Because it is very well aware that a project of this size, complexity and targeted timeframe can only be delivered through a genuine BIM;
Because it does not trust the AEC project information management processes that current ‘mainstream’ and ‘traditionally minded’ consultants and contractors use, misuse and abuse.
Because it wants to know what is going on its project at any time and manipulate the others as opposed to being manipulated.
Because it wants to carry on changing its mind about the design till the last minute but have someone else carry the can for it without jeopardising project success.
Because it wants the project to be finished on time.
Because it wants to know how much it is really going to cost at any time.
Because it wants the level of sophistication of the IM/PM of the construction to match that of the trains it will run.
Because it is a gold-plated client in a troubled market and CAN ask for whatever it wants.
It was the next step on some aspiring BIM expert’s career progression plan.
Anyone bidding for this project should ascertain what the REAL reason was behind the BIM brief (ONE or TWO) and respond by:
For ONE – design and propose a robust, practical, working – possibly ground-breaking and smart BIM system that will comply with the requirements of the brief; (very few people can do this, in the world)
For TWO – bluff through the process with whatever BIM-fluff you can get from the internet;
possibly outsource the entire problem to the cheapest bidder; (anyone can do this)
image from here: