BIM Diffusion Policies at Country Level:

BIM Diffusion Policies at Country Level: De-risking and Guiding Policy Development Mohamad Kassem, PhD Associate Professor, Teesside University m.kassem@tees.ac.uk Novotel Amsterdam City, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 19-20 November 2014

BIM Diffusion Policies at Country Level: De-risking and Guiding Policy Development What to implement? How to assess? How to implement?

Country BIM policies Part 1: Retrospective analysis of BIM policies What to implement? Part 2: Strategic BIM adoption How to assess? How to implement?

Part 1: Retrospective analysis of BIM policies of countries Eight Components of BIM Policy Macro Maturity Components v1.2 Post 26 on http://www.bimframework.info/2014/07/macro-maturity-components.html

Part 1: Retrospective analysis of BIM policies of countries Comparing development progress not Quality of implementation Traffic light system Non existent Initiated Under development + Well developed

Part 1: Retrospective analysis of BIM policies of countries Component I: Objectives, stages and milestones Norway Finland Nether- lands United Kingdom Brazil France

Part 1: Retrospective analysis of BIM policies of countries Component I: Objectives, stages and milestones Attributes of BIM mandates UK FRANCE FINLAND NORWAY Standalone Part of an official government construction strategy With stages & milestones UK UK NA New build projects Renovation projects NA Operational phase NA UK etc.

Part 1: Retrospective analysis of BIM policies of countries Component I: Objectives, stages and milestones (Brazil) Asset type and size Project phase BIM use stage Project type 201X Federally-funded housing, school and hospital projects with value greater than R$3 million From design to construction BIM file-based collaboration New builds 201X+ 2 years All federally-funded projects greater than R$3million From design to operation BIM file-based collaboration New builds and renovations Time allowance to develop processes and standards for operational delivery

Part 1: Retrospective analysis of BIM policies of countries Component IV: Guides, Protocols and Standards Norway Finland Netherlands United Kingdom Brazil France

Part 1: Retrospective analysis of BIM policies of countries Component IV: Guides, Protocols and Standards UK FINLAND NORWAY NETHERLANDS Organise ed by Macro project phase (i.e. capital delivery phase & operational phase) BIM use (e.g. energy analysis, structural design, etc.) Discipline (e.g. architectural, mechanical, landscape, etc.) Ad-hoc targeting long term contract with focus on O&M * * Suitable for long-term contracts although they are not developed to target that type of contract only

Part 1: Retrospective analysis of BIM policies of countries Component IV: Guides, Protocols and Standards (UK) Capital Delivery (CAPEX) Programming Design Construction Standard for Capital Delivery (PAS 1192-2) Operational Delivery (OPEX) Operation Standard for Op Delivery (PAS 1192-3) Classification system covering asset lifecycle (Uniclass 2) Implementation Protocols (CIC BIM Protocols) IT infrastructure (dpow: digital Plan of Work) Standard for Info Exchange(BS 1192-4)

Part 1: Retrospective analysis of BIM policies of countries Component VII: Standardised deliverables / Digital libraries Norway Finland Nether- lands United Kingdom Brazil France

Part 1: Retrospective analysis of BIM policies of countries Component VII: Standardised deliverables / Digital libraries NBS BIM digital library CB-NL BIMStore digital library UK France Netherland s

Part 1: Retrospective analysis of BIM policies of countries Component VII: Standardised deliverables / Digital libraries Attributes of digital libraries Private vs Public Free for specifiers and hosting fee charges for manufacturers Objects are classified according to classification standards Digital content is driven by standards Trust, affordability and self-sutainment are key determinants (for public-driven libraries)

Trust & affordability Strategies Part 1: Retrospective analysis of BIM policies of countries Component VII: Standardised deliverables / Digital libraries

Part 1: Retrospective analysis of BIM policies of countries Component I to Component VIII: Comparison United Kingdom France Netherlands Finland Norway Brazil Objectives, stages & milestones Standards, protocols & guides Drivers & champions Standardised deliverables Regulatory Framework Measurement & optimisation Education & learning Technology infrastructure

Part 2: Strategic BIM adoption Logic for developing policy from comparative analysis Development status of the policy component + Institutional and cultural similarity + Country and industry size + Quality of implementation Country 1 Country 2 Country 3 e.g. Policy Component 1 Informing and de-r risking policy developm ment

Part 2: Strategic BIM adoption e-government maturity models for countries e-commerce maturity models for countries BIM Maturity of countries?

Two levels of assessment: Part 2: Strategic BIM adoption Macro BIM Maturity of Countries Low granularity assessment using the Macro Maturity Matrix High granularity assessment using High granularity assessment using specialised and specific metrics for each component

Part 2: Strategic BIM adoption the Macro Maturity Matrix for assessing countries (Low granularity assessment) Policy Component Objectives, Stages and Milestones a low maturity There are no market-scale BIM objectives or well-defined BIM implementation stages or milestones b medium-low maturity There are well-defined macro objectives, implementatio n milestones and capability stages are available c medium maturity BIM objectives, stages and milestones are monitored and managed through a formal mechanism d medium-high maturity BIM objectives and stages are integrated into policies, processes and technologies and manifest themselves across all macro maturity components e high-maturity BIM objectives and stages are continuously refined to reflect advancement in technologies, facilitate process innovation and benefit from international best practices. Succar & Kassem (2015)

Part 2: Strategic BIM adoption the Macro Maturity Matrix for assessing countries (Low granularity assessment) Policy Component Champions and Drivers a low maturity There are no identifiable market-wide champions or BIM implementation drivers b medium-low maturity There are one or more volunteer champions and/or informal BIM drivers operating across the market c medium maturity There is a unified task group or committee driving BIM implementatio n across the market d medium-high maturity Driver(s) coordinate all macro implementatio n activities to minimise overlaps and address diffusion gaps e high-maturity Driver(s) role is diminished by optimised systems, standards and protocols. Succar & Kassem (2015)

Part 2: Strategic BIM adoption the Macro Maturity Matrix for assessing countries (Low granularity assessment) Policy Component Noteworthy publications a low maturity There are no - or a small number of - noteworthy BIM publications (NBPs) across the market b medium-low maturity There are many NBPs with overlapping knowledge content; some NBPs are redundant or in total - include knowledge gaps c medium maturity NBPs are developed and/or coordinated by a single entity thus minimising overlaps and knowledge gaps d medium-high maturity NBPs are authoritative, interconnected and integrated across project life cycle phases and the whole construction supply chain e high-maturity NBPs are continuously optimised and streamlined to reflect international best practices. Succar & Kassem (2015)

Part 2: Strategic BIM adoption the Macro Maturity Matrix for assessing countries (Low granularity assessment) Succar & Kassem (2015)

Part 2: Strategic BIM adoption Distribution of Noteworthy BIM publications US 43% 23% 35% UK 53% 35% 12% NL 57% 29% 14% SG 33% 33% 33% N O 50% 25% 25% FI 43% 29% 29% DE 43% 43% 14% AU 64% 36% 0% Guides Protocols Mandates Kassem, Succar & Dawood (2015)

Authorities Industry associations Universities Part 2: Strategic BIM adoption Who s responsibility is it? Organisations Individuals

Part 2: Strategic BIM adoption Responsibilities: The case of the UK UK Government Cabinet Office / Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) BIM Task Group Construction Construction UK Contractor Academia Technology Industry Product Group (UKCG) (BIM Academic Strategy Board Council (CIC) Association Forum) (TSB) CIC BIM Regional Hubs BIM interest groups (BIM4 Groups) BIM2050 Group, BIM 4 Infrastructure (UK), BIM4FM Group, BIM4SMEs, BIM4Water, BIM4Rail UK, BIM4FitOut, BIM4M2, BIM 4 Steering Group, BIM 4 Data Centres, NIEP, Survery4BIM, Building Smart UK, etc. CIRIA BSRIA BRE NBS RIBA RICS ICE CIOB CIBSE

Part 2: Strategic BIM adoption Responsibilities and Dynamics Authorities Industry associations Universities Organisations Individuals UK approach EU (procurement directive) Succar & Kassem (2015)

Authorities Industry associations Universities Organisations Individuals Part 2: Strategic BIM adoption Responsibilities for BIM guides and protocols Component IV

Part 2: Strategic BIM adoption BIM policy diffusion dynamics UK France Australia http://www.bimthinkspace.com/2014/07/episode-19-top-down-bottom-up-and-middle-out-bim-diffusion.html

THANK YOU m.kassem@tees.ac.uk