Technology Penetration in the AEC Industry: IT Lessons Learned in Other Industries

After receiving a certificate in interior design in the late 1990's in preparation for a possible retirement career, in 2003 I was offered the opportunity to teach Introduction to Computer Aided Design (AutoCAD) to college students studying the business of interior design. Having recently retired from 36 years of corporateITexperience and with an MS in Computer Science, I accepted the offer with considerable excitement. As a part of the course, I took the initiative to add several enrichment modules to broaden the students' overall understanding of technology usage in the AEC industry. I needed to research these topics, which included CAD management, the future of CAD, AutoCAD's competing products, photogrammetry used with AutoCAD to document existing buildings, and others. The research into these enrichment topics was stimulating and continuously brought me back to a reflection ofITin the industries of insurance, manufacturing and technology, where I had spent my preceding career.

I recently read AECbytes Newsletter #18, "Technology for Construction 2005," and I was intrigued by the comment that "the status of technology in the construction industry is still not eminent enough to warrant its own dedicated trade show." This article captures my views on technology adoption in the building industry, based on the lessons I have learned from myITexperience in other industries.

Lesson 1

Maximizing the benefits ofITis most challenging in industries that have physical parts, as opposed to all information parts, and industries in which the key players are separate industries in and of themselves, each with their own sets of standards and terminology.

Unfortunately, the building industry has both these characteristics, as highlighted by its acronym, AEC (Architecture, Engineering, and Construction). Industries whose products are information-based such as banking, insurance, journalism, and so on, have found optimization ofITusage easier than physical industries such as manufacturing and construction. The primary reason is that the initial—and most easily understood—technology products dealt solely with information. For example, robust CAD/CAM and the required supporting technology (robotics, plotters, etc.) in manufacturing came a good 20 years after initial corporateITuse in banking. Furthermore, it was treated as a separate specialty, unconnected to other functions such as parts inventory from which it could have gained great benefit.

Regarding the impact of the fragmentation of A, E, and C, look at the opposite situation in the auto industry. Auto companies do their own design, engineering and manufacturing. Therefore, they have control of the whole end-to-end process. The AEC industry is made up of many separate players and, therefore, has very little control of the end-to-end process. In fact, architects and contractors often do not understand the needs and issues the other faces daily (for example, see the Professional Exchange Project organized by the Boston Society of Architects and the Associated General Contractors of Massachusetts, ongoing from February through May 2005). If you do not have control of the end-to-end process, it is extremely difficult to apply technology end-to-end. And if you do not apply technology end-to-end, you cannot maximize its benefits across your business.

Lesson 2

Implementing technology in isolated unconnected parts of a business may provide short term benefit but won't provide long term gain.

A positive, though diversionary, factor is the new glitzy technology now available. The 3D design and rendering tools are nothing short of spectacular. I, like everyone else, am enamored of the Revits and VIZs of the world. In a profession where we are all visual people and where helping our customers visualize what they cannot do so on their own is so very important, we are drawn like magnets to these new products. While these products have and will provide a useful benefit, they tend to become the center of attention, the answer to all ills, a reason to look no further. They become an excuse for not solving the broader technology maximization goal.

What is the goal of all this technology usage in the AEC industry or in any one AEC company? CEOs need to be sure they view technology as an integral part of their business strategy and not as a back room operation, appropriate for only certain functions such as production of construction documents. Long termITvisions are required to establish incremental milestones based on solid cost/benefit cases. We all know the Alice in Wonderland response to Alice's request for directions: "If you don't know where you are going, then any path will do."

Lesson 3

In order to make industry-wide, end-to-end, technology-enabled progress, the AEC industry needs to push the envelope to get technology vendors, service groups, and industry partners to collaborate in providing solutions that will work together from end-to-end.

Where are the cross-industry collaborative AEC user groups? Are the standards groups, IEEE and ISO, playing a facilitating role? The IAI's IFC data model has been a good effort but is it viewed as "theirs not ours," "intellectual not practical?"it was these kinds of groups that were the movers and shakers for the originalITindustry. If it hadn't been for their proactive stances during the 60's, 70's, and 80's, "open systems" like Linux and many other helpful standards would still not exist. Cross-industry exchanges cannot be accomplished by simply a couple of companies. It requires a true commitment, a lot of time and blood, sweat and tears from a large percentage of the major AEC players.

Lesson 4

Experience has shown that data (information) model standardization can be the most challenging aspect of any standardization initiative. It gets deep into the soul of a company because it attempts to change the internal culture's language and thereby potentially disrupts all existing processes.

One promising new concept is BIM (Building Information Model) or "Building Smart," the newer name for IFC-enabled BIM interoperability. BIM, in theory, could become the end-to-end process automation that could lift the AEC industry technology into the 21st century. BIM technology, at its center, is really based on 1980's vintage relational data models and object orientation. But don't let anyone fool you. These were not easily and readily implemented across industries at that time, not because the technology was problematic, but because the deeply penetrating impact it had on day to day processes and data was very challenging to implement. This will also be the case for BIM in the AEC industry.

Lesson 5

Fully enabled BIM software could be capable of providing a big leap forward for the AEC industry. Speed, quality and cost could all be dramatically improved. But its implementation will be challenged by all those factors cited in the lessons above: lack of big picture planning, lack of standard software and information models, and lack of true understanding of key partners' roles.

Much has been written on BIM, but let us envision one possible scenario. All participating parties (from architect to roofer) have access to a centralized system through a variety of wireless units that would:

• Accept an architect's initial sketch.
• Facilitate the initial sketch being transformed into an intelligent 3D computer model with increasing building component detail.
• Enable creation of timelines and status reports that are knowledgeable about the design objects.
• Compile materials lists, costs, and vendors, derived using the information about the intelligent design objects.
• Accept and reconcile changes anywhere along the way to the design, materials, vendors, timeline or budget using bidirectional reconciliation between all construction drawing types.
• Electronically order and receive all construction material on site and on schedule.
  Provide automated query at any time into any facet of the building project.

While great on paper, successful BIM implementation will require understanding, belief, commitment, collaboration, standardization, time and money from multiple key AEC companies. Companies that provide integrator services can probably help to facilitate progress. And, certainly the software companies (i.e., Bentley, Autodesk, Graphisoft, and others) will also be important players. But the real progress must be accomplished by the participating companies. There will be pain, but there will then be gain.

Recommendations to AEC firms

In conclusion, my recommendation to AEC industry for faster and more effective technology implementation is twofold:

To start with, each AEC company, whether it is an architectural firm, an engineering firm, a building contracting company or other player, should examine (or create) itsITvision for the future. Bring IT out of the CAD back room and look at process automation opportunities throughout your office. Once a vision and strategy has been created, choose the incremental milestones for the next year and work to achieve those.

And then, each AEC firm should foster and join industry wide user groups, standards committees and technology trade shows, which will push for standardization and end-to-end technology solutions of benefit across the whole industry. Work towards collaboration, appropriately trading off your own company's needs with those of the industry needs. And above all, don't give up when progress seems lacking. Stick with the course, and success will come.

About the Author

Pat Douglas (B.S. Mathematics St Lawrence University, M.S. Computer Science RPI) is an Adjunct Professor of CAD in the Interior Design department at Bay Path College. Prior to joining the teaching staff at Bay Path, she spent 36 years as a corporateITtechnician, process engineer and manager in the manufacturing, insurance and technology industries. She can be reached via email at patdouglas50@hotmail.com.

Note: The views expressed in Viewpoint articles are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect those of AECbytes. Also, no advertising or sponsorship is accepted for Viewpoint articles.

Viewpoints > Issue #14 > Printer-friendly format