The Executive Forum and Other Sessions at Technology for Construction 2006

In AECbytes Newsletter #26 published last week, I described some of the construction-specific technology products that were on display at the recent Technology for Construction show, held alongside the World of Concrete in Las Vegas from January 16 to 20. In addition to the Exhibit Hall, the Technology for Construction show also featured, just like last year's conference, several sessions on different aspects of technology implementation in construction and an Executive Forum moderated by Scott Shuster of McGraw-Hill Construction. This issue of the "Building the Future" series captures the highlights of the Executive Forum and some of the general sessions I was able to attend, and wraps up with my overall analysis of Technology for Construction 2006.

The Executive Forum

Recall that the major highlight of the Technology for Construction show last year was the Executive Forum, featuring executives from leading owners, contractors, design firms, and BIM (building information modeling) vendors in a highly charged and stimulating panel discussion on BIM. The main points that emerged then were that full-fledged BIM adoption is still 6 to 7 years away, and that what is needed to speed up adoption is better awareness of the benefits of BIM, improved interoperability between AEC applications, more openness to sharing information, and legal and contractual changes to the building process.

This year the Executive Forum returned with different topics and different speakers, but still under the aegis of Scott Shuster, who did an excellent job of moderating it once again. Unlike last year where the focus was almost entirely on BIM, only one of the three sessions in the Executive Forum this year was related to BIM. Of the other two sessions, one was focused on emerging technologies such as RFID (Radio Frequency IDentification), while the other dealt with the more practical issue of how an AEC firm can improve its relationship with its technology providers. The main points that emerged in each session are described below.

The session on emerging technologies was the first in the Executive Forum lineup, and it brought together representatives from FIATECH (a consortium whose mission is to "identify and accelerate the development, demonstration and deployment of fully integrated and automated technologies to deliver the highest business value throughout the life cycle of all types of capital projects"), NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology), and the Emerging Trends and Technology division of Intel Corporation, which is not only involved in the development of the computer chips needed for RFID but is also interested in AEC technology in its capacity as the owner and developer of many facilities for its employees across the world. RFID is a generic term for technologies that use radio waves to automatically identify people or objects, and in construction, it offers the possibility of tagging building components and construction tools to automate the processes of issuing and receiving, obtaining accurate real-time inventories, and reducing the overhead labor cost of managing materials and tools. Retail chains such as Walmart have already started using RFID technology to automate tracking and inventory of their supplies. In a more construction-related analogy, RFID is being used by oil drilling companies to automate tracking and other logistics of offshore materials. In construction, the use of RFID can go beyond simple tracking of objects. It is possible to develop sophisticated RFID tags that can track various kinds of information about an object and can also include instructions. This is being demonstrated in an ongoing FIATECH field study of the visitor center at the US Capitol, where RFID is being used to develop a wireless sensor system to monitor stresses on structural steel during construction and detect any problems as they arise. Needless to say, RFID will also be very useful for post-construction operations and maintenance applications to keep track of equipment and furniture, and monitor lighting, heating, cooling, and so on. FIATECH is leading an ambitious initiative labeled "Capital Projects Technology Roadmap" to establish a consensus vision for the capital projects industry and a unifying initiative to achieve the vision. The RFID technology, also labeled as "smart chips," forms a critical component of this technology roadmap.

The second session in the Executive Forum discussed how BIM was already being used in advanced ways by some architectural and engineering firms. It included representatives from GHAFARI Associates (a multi-disciplinary firm providing full-service architecture, design and engineering solutions, manufacturing engineering solutions, professional staffing solutions, and consulting services), The Orcutt/Winslow Partnership (an architectural firm that has won several awards including AIA Arizona 2004 Architectural Firm of the Year and AIA Western Mountain Region 2005 Firm of the Year), the Public Buildings Service of the GSA (the largest builder-owner of federal projects in the USA), and Kristine Fallon Associates (an IT consulting firm). All these participants have extensive experience with BIM: GHAFARI is a forerunner in the application of BIM technology across the design/construction supply chain, as described in a recent AECbytes case study; The Orcutt/Winslow Partnership has been using Graphisoft's "Virtual Building" technology for several years and was one of the three winners of the inaugural AIA-TAP BIM awards in 2005; the GSA has been very proactive in BIM implementation, mandating the use of IFC-based BIM to support concept reviews for projects receiving design funding starting from 2006; and Kristine Fallon Associates has been actively involved in putting together the BIM awards. Both GHAFARI and Orcutt/Winslow described how they had successfully implemented BIM in-house and were now extending its use outside their firms. Orcutt/Winslow, for instance, now has its contractors requesting walkthrough movies generated from their BIM models, and is teaming up with them to go into newer markets outside their home city of Phoenix, Arizona. The consensus was that for BIM to extend beyond the design phase, the owner had to get actively involved. For instance, in the project GHAFARI did for General Motors, the push to use BIM came from the owner and resulted in the delivery of a collision-free building 2 months ahead of schedule. At the same time, the GSA, in its capacity as an owner, pointed out that BIM should not be driven by cost savings alone, but for its many other benefits such as the ability to explore different engineering systems, perform energy analysis for LEED certification, derive specifications automatically, and eventually eliminate the use of paper and paper-based processes. It is critical to get the owners' buy-in on BIM as soon as possible, because BIM will not have any noticeable impact on the AEC industry until the deliverables are changed.

The final session of the Executive Forum was entitled "My Vendor, My Friend…" and it brought together the technology heads from three AEC firms—Gilbane Construction, CH2M Hill, and HOK—to share their experiences with their technology providers and offer practical tips on how to maximize the client-vendor relationship. To begin with, the advice for approaching a new vendor—for implementing a new technology or changing an existing one—was to start small, start slow, and establish trust. Firms should look for stability when it comes to choosing a vendor rather than simply settling for the lowest cost solutions. Another critical factor in choosing vendors is the support structure they offer for their accounts—there should be dedicated support staff that can be contacted directly whenever there is a problem rather than having to call a 800 number for general support. Also, vendors should be able to communicate effectively with the firms and not talk over the layman, as is sometimes the case when complex technologies are involved. Another aspect to consider is if the firm will be communicating with the vendor directly, or with a local VAR (value added reseller); sometimes, the VAR is very good, but at other times, it might be better to transcend the local relationship and go straight to the vendor. Negotiation is another important skill firms have to learn, and in the case of technology providers, the negotiation can be not just on the price but also on other issues such as licensing and training. Any technology acquisition has to be properly managed and should follow a step-by-step process—of planning, purchase, and implementation. Firms should put their most knowledgeable person to talk to the vendor. And finally, once they have made their choice of vendor, they should invest the time to cultivate a good relationship tht is based on candor and trust, and is supportive rather than adversarial.

Sessions on Project Management, Project Collaboration, and BIM

One of the general sessions that I attended was a panel discussion bringing together five of the leading project management solution vendors: Meridian Systems, Primavera Systems, CMiC, Intuit Construction Business Solutions, and Sage Software. (I wrote about the solutions offered by some of these vendors in last week's article.) Moderated by the editor of Constructech magazine, most of the session was devoted to Q & A, with the participants responding to questions from the audience on various aspects of the technology such as interoperability and integration between the various products, the integrated suite approach versus selecting the best of breed, future trends for Web-based project management applications, support of desktop applications for Linux and other open-source systems, how the industry can drive the development of the software, how firms can transition to using project management solutions, and so on. This session was actually very similar to the BIM panel discussion in the Executive Forum in last year's conference, except that this was very much focused on contractors and construction whereas the BIM session was broader in scope and dealt with architecture, engineering, and construction. It was interesting to see contractors asking the same questions about project management solutions that architects and engineers have been asking about BIM. And surprisingly or not, the responses from the vendors were also quite similar. So for instance, some vendors such as CMiC believe in providing a one-stop shop for all their clients' project management needs, whereas other vendors believe that one size doesn't fit all and they need to work on integrating their products using APIs. The lack of standards in this field is being felt—XML is an important technology that allows data transfer, but there is no standard like IFC or CIS/2 yet, which will promote interoperability in the long run. As with BIM, training and implementation are serious challenges for project management solutions, and firms were advised to invest some time in developing an IT strategy roadmap that aligns with their future vision and planned growth. It was agreed that the key to success was not only the technology but the implementation strategy, and firms should think of training as an ongoing process rather than a one-time event and plan accordingly. A recent survey conducted by Constructech showed that project management was the leading technology that construction firms were planning to invest in, so the topic was certainly pertinent, the session was very well attended, and the questions from the audience were sharp and penetrating. Surprisingly, there was no mention of BIM at all in this session, showing that the most critical technologies in AEC are being developed in relative isolation from each other.

Another session on project collaboration that I attended was presented by two of the participants from the BIM session of the Executive Forum: the GSA and Kristine Fallon Associates. Project collaboration technology (labeled by them as ePM, standing for electronic project management) is critical to large organizations like the GSA to reduce the amount of paperwork and increase the efficiency of the multiple projects it has to manage. Its Public Buildings Service is currently responsible for 188 major projects that add to up to $10.7 billion! Of these, it is using ePM on 27 pilot projects, including the $450 M Department of Transportation Headquarters and the $105 M WWII Memorial, both of which are located in Washington DC. No one technological solution was found to be adequate, and the GSA is currently using solutions from 7 different vendors, including Buzzsaw, Constructware, Prolog, and Tririga. Having a centralized repository for drawings, documents, RFIs, and submittals not only has the benefit of enhanced collaboration but other advantages as well: up-to-date and real-time information, faster and better communication, increased accountability of each team member, elimination of duplicate data entry, reduction in mailing and printing costs, and avoidance of disputes and claims because of the project archive. At the same time, there are also challenges involved in ePM implementation such as the reduced band-width at job sites, the question of who takes up the ownership and responsibility of the system, and reliability and security concerns. Kristine Fallon Associates went on to point out that the high cost of inadequate interoperability, conservatively estimated to be $15.8 billion for the U.S. capital facilities industry alone in the oft-quoted 2002 NIST report (discussed in AECbytes Newsletter #14), provides a strong business case for the use of ePM. One of the clients this firm is consulting for is the Chicago Transit Authority, which has successfully implemented ePM and clocked many significant milestones with it, such as processing 255% as many RFIs per person per day in 27% less time, completing 2888 RFIs in an average of 8 days, and closing 2367 submittals in an average of 15 days. The real key to reaping the benefits of ePM, according to Kristine Fallon Associates, is universal adoption of the system, elimination of the requirements to use paper documents, and the elimination of parallel systems. Once again, it sounds a lot like what is needed for success with BIM, doesn't it?

And finally, I attended a session on who else will benefit from BIM apart from designers, and was surprised to find that it was not as well attended as some of the other sessions, indicating that BIM is still not seen as a critical subject by the majority of construction professionals. In addition to the GSA, this session brought together representatives from the construction group at Autodesk, the architectural firm of Stubbins Associates, and the building firm The Beck Group. The focus of this session was on demonstrating how BIM can benefit not just architectural design but processes down the chain as well, including construction. Stubbins Associates described their "hypertrack" process, where the entire team—architect, engineer, owner, and construction manager—is brought together at the very beginning of a project. This has resulted in projects being delivered 2 to 14 months ahead of schedule, and budget savings ranging from 5% to 10%. Stubbins was doing this even before its BIM implementation got underway, but is finding that BIM is ideally suited for the hypertrack process. The Beck Group described how it had developed its own BIM solution, DESTINI, to integrate the different building disciplines, and was using it to realize manifold improvements in design, cost, and schedule. DESTINI is currently customized for office buildings, and captures not just building information but also some intelligence and rules specific to office design. (I hope to take a closer look at DESTINI at some point.) The session was wrapped up by Autodesk highlighting a host of benefits of BIM for construction, including the ability to build complex geometry, doing a full construction simulation before building, detecting interferences and clashes and fixing them before construction, deriving accurate cost estimates early on in the process, fuller stakeholder participation, better coordinated documents, fewer change orders, faster bidding process with fewer misunderstandings, prevention of litigation, and many more. The Q&A from the audience for this session, though, highlighted once again what has remained one of the thorniest issues for BIM in construction—the fact that a BIM model for construction is substantially different from a BIM model for design. To some, this means that the construction model has to be re-created from scratch. To others, this runs counter to the concept of BIM integrating information across the building lifecycle. Only when we have found a satisfactory solution to this problem can real progress in BIM for construction be made. And hopefully, by then, we should have figured out whether we need a separate BIM model for facilities management as well!

Analysis and Conclusions

With over 80,000 visitors this year, the World of Concrete ranks as one of the largest trade shows in the AEC industry, and offers a terrific opportunity for spreading awareness of new technology, which in turn will promote speedier implementation and change. This is why it was surprising to find little or no representation from BIM software vendors such as Autodesk, Bentley, and Graphisoft in the Exhibit Hall, and, but for one exception, in the conference sessions as well, considering that they are otherwise actively promoting BIM as a revolutionary technology that goes beyond the design phase to impact construction and lifecycle management as well. While BIM, as we saw, was the topic of some of the sessions at the conference, there was no sign of it in the Exhibit Hall. BIM may be gaining momentum among architects and engineers, but going from what was on display at Technology for Construction, it seems to have made scarcely a dent in the construction industry. Most of the technology products for construction—including highly expensive project management and collaborations solutions from leading vendors like Meridian, CMiC, and even Microsoft—still revolve around the paper-based processes of design, communication, collaboration, and construction.

Also, looking at emerging technologies in construction as a whole, there seem to be three distinct movements—BIM, ePM, and smart chips. While it is terrific to see so much potential for technological improvements ahead, it is also troubling to see these technologies being developed in relative isolation rather than in conjunction with each other. What we really need are project management and collaboration tools that work with model-based design and construction processes, which in turn incorporate the smarts provided by RFID and other wireless technologies. The benefits this integration of technologies can bring to the AEC industry are mind-boggling and can hardly even be fully imagined. Let's hope we see some move towards this integration at the Technology for Construction conferences in the years to come.

About the Author

Lachmi Khemlani is founder and editor of AECbytes. She has a Ph.D. in Architecture from UC Berkeley, specializing in intelligent building modeling, and consults and writes on AEC technology. She can be reached at lachmi@aecbytes.com.

Building the Future > Sessions at Technology for Construction 2006 > Printer-friendly format