The inverted (alternative) BIM triangle

When I first glanced over Pierre Venter’s comment from within a linkedin forum (link below) – 

I thought: exactly! 

Then I realised, he was not thinking the same way as I was when I initially tried to understand this graph/ic and immediately wanted to flip it upside down;

For me, BIM means literally, how Building Information is managed within the Industry;

Not just on what media or with what tools or by whom within the process but how its management adds or removes risks from projects and how that risks then get distributed to the various participants?

This may be a foreign concept for most people, but within the AEC everything lives or dies by how ‘information’ is managed i.e. used, abused and misused.

So, when I first saw the illustration, I thought that it was meant to be describing the development of BIM from a set level in time to a much higher level over time. It included CAD too, so I assumed the start-time was that of the emergence of CAD and related to ‘real (actual) time’.

By now it has been proven that I read the graph in a totally wrong way, for whatever reason, the closest may be what many implied, ‘I just did not get it’;

Let me note it here, that I still strongly believe the real (as opposed to an aspired to) level of BIM maturity changing over a set timeframe and across the AEC industry is worthwhile to be represented on a graph, and how that one would show a falling trend, no matter how many new tools and initiatives have emerged over the last 2 decades that have been added into the process of BIM and qualified as progresses.

So, to satisfy my need for such a graph I drew up a simple diagram and turned it into a slideshow:

http://www.slideshare.net/zolnamurray/the-alternative-bim-triangle

The fact that I use BIM interchangeable for BIModelling  and BIManagement is that in reality the two ARE inseparable.

There is no AEC project info management without ‘modelling’ there never had been. Before the emergence of the smart ‘multi D models’ of the current digital world, the models of yet-to be built buildings and other creatures of the AEC industry lived in their creators’ heads (pre CAD) and/or represented through scale models and/or drawn projections.

Modelling in AEC had not started with the official birth of the BIM acronym, not even with the development of the first digital modelling software.

Arguing to the contrary mocks a long line of history and the achievements of many competent people on one side, but also prevents any progress for those active nowadays because it is blinded to the real issues that stop the contemporary BIM from being effective.

http://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=98421&item=258616690&type=member&commentID=160669475&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_160669475

What is a word worth?

I am a New Zealander because I chose to be.

Proud of it in spite of quite a few obvious flaws and weaknesses.

It is a pretty little place with nice people, although it gets a bit carried away with outrageous claims from time to time. For instance lots of the foreigners who hear the “100% pure” can’t help cringing. 

There was an article in the NZ Herald a couple of days ago headed:

“The Land Of Bad Milk and Fake Honey

Britain's Food Standards Agency has issued a nationwide warning about misleading and illegal claims made on the labels of manuka honey jars, in a worrying blow to the fast-growing Kiwi industry. ”

Showing great timing, the same paper fired back at the British, with a picture of a fishmonger’s display claiming ‘fresh NZ snapper’.

Joking aside; these stories all raise the same questions:

Our world is highly manipulated by the media. Are there some words that have a higher value or weight than others?  Should companies that use them lightly be held accountable?

Words like natural, fresh, pure, honest…

When one or some of these words are used to describe a product, do we as consumers have the right to expect a certain something in the product? Or do natural, fresh, pure or honest depend on small print, or interpretation?

What about the word: integrity?

If Integrity is claimed, does the world read “100% honesty”?

Or is 40% honesty adequate at times?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11113964

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=11117924

Cops and robbers in AEC, has anybody seen a Watch dog?

If the game is ‘cops and robbers’, there have to be some bad guys.

Unlike in the children's game of hiding and chasing, in which the participants pretend to be police and criminals – and almost universally everyone wants to be the good guy, the AEC industry’s version of it is the exact opposite.

There are really no cops in the AEC game to speak of.

Historically the role used to be that of the architect, next the project managers claimed it, more recently the practitioners of BIM technologies.

Unfortunately all have fallen from every type of a watchdog role. There has been compromise, corruption; independence has gone, integrity too.

I’m not saying everyone working in the AEC is bad - I never have and never will. 

Just, that the ones that make the rules have lost the plot and it is no longer fun to play the game even for those that do have the means to get into it (i.e. savvy AEC clients);

So, when Graham and I set up MMA, what we had in mind was the kernel of the ‘good guys agency’ of the global AEC, a private company with two objectives, to tell things as they are for those that ask for true advice within the AEC and are prepared to pay for it and to provide a spring board for talented, smart, experienced, capable people in the industry to do a fulfilling job well and advance their careers.

No, we are not talking about a non-profit organisation.

This is to be a proper, robust business and will fight the current players on their own turf, playing by their rules but with much better weapons.

How are we going to fund this company?

Well, we were going to grow it organically saving up slowly from other employment.

Unfortunately, that was not to be, so instead we decided to raise the funds from two unlikely sources.

One is a somewhat unusual IPO – watch this space for details to be published over the next couple of days.

The other will be the establishing of an ‘industry-guilt-tax’ we will be collecting to provide the seed money.

A couple of large global players are in the queue to be the first to contribute and we will unveil them this week.

(picture drawn by my Nephew Boki)