Two recent
posts on LinkedIn have caused me to return to my blog.
Luke Johnson
wrote about the changes we have all seen in the role of the BIM Manager, and
the challenge presented by AI. Phil Bernstein cited a Harvard design Magazine
article about overall change in the AEC industry.
As one of the
dwindling numbers of BIM professionals who started their career “on the
boards,” and also having some global experience, I offer these thoughts.
I never
wanted to be a BIM Manager. Never saw it coming. I am a BIM leader and
champion. I have been called “guru” but will never claim to be an expert if
there is something new to learn. I liked the title Provocateur, but
it was taken. I settled on BIM Aficionado. There are thousands of us. Just not
enough.
BIM arose out
of necessity and from the desire of (mostly) architects and designers to
improve drawings (collaboration) and remove errors (risk) from drawings. And to
eliminate boredom, as the mindless repetition of tasks often leads to errors.
BIM did not
magically appear to replace manual methods. BIM evolved.
BIM was
preceded by Composite & Overlay drafting aka “Systems Drafting,” pioneered
by a forgotten hero, Fred A. Stitt. 2D & 3D CAD evolved together. There
were many choices for 2D drafting, and “friendly” competition among the vendors
vying for a share of the growing industry. Autodesk had the best business
model: free software. While Macintosh-based 3D systems sold for thousands of
dollars, the entrée to CAD was significantly less expensive. And so, 3D
adoption languished. 2D CAD did not eliminate hand drawing. The process was
slow and painful.
A few firms
adopted BIM by Executive Caveat, but for most it was a gradual process, led by
a member of the design staff who somehow became engaged with the technology.
Those were exciting times! BIM implementation typically began with hybrid
projects. But the lack of continuity between 2D and 3D forced BIM advocates to
fully commit.
The
Cosmopolitan Resort + Casino was my first large Revit project (2007). And this
one was by caveat. We modeled from scratch, tracking the design as it evolved.
We created our own structural model for coordination purposes.
Back then, it
was easy to recognize the obstacles to adoption; they were all the same:
resistance to change. So, to find courage for the effort, we speculated that
all resistance would be gone in a generation. These “old fogies” who couldn’t
do CAD, and couldn’t even conceive of BIM, would be retired. And replaced by
professionals who would be rewarded for their leadership in BIM’s adoption.
How naïve. It just didn’t happen that way.
The evolution
of BIM drove the complexity of building design in a symbiotic relationship,
with each feeding from the other. That complexity led to increased
specialization.
Graduate
architects do not aspire to become BIM Managers. They want to design. To
create. The satisfaction we get from a smoothly run project (having experienced
the opposite) really has no appeal. Experience builds appreciation. Even
Gratitude.
When BIM
finally took off, there were not enough leaders and visionaries to go around.
Some of these (eventually) found permanent homes. You will find them at the
largest and most innovative design firms. But even that does not guarantee
consistency throughout the projects they produce.
BIM became a
specialty. As many have noted, decreasing profit margins for design firms who
were lucky enough to survive the economic recession and recent pandemic, have
had a significant effect. When the industry began to recover from the last
decade’s recession, industry partners, who originally sold hardware, software,
and training, began to offer BIM Services, which could be anything BIM-related.
The driver for BIM adoption changed from the intangible and unmeasurable
“improvement” to the bottom line.
Many BIM
service providers and BIM technology consultants have flourished! Project
Management in AEC has also became a specialty, and attracted those with
different skills and different goals into the mix. The anticipated increase in
computing power and the decentralization to the cloud of models and
data in a Common Data Environment, unheard of just a few years ago,
have contributed to advancement. Any progress is good.
I know most
will agree that while drawings have not been eliminated, and wasteful practices
still exist, we have made substantial gains, most notably in sustainable design
practices and healthier buildings.
On the design
side, the potential uses of AI in AEC and BIM present us with an already
overwhelming array of choices. There are a growing number of BIM enhancements
and generative AI platforms, ensuring that agreement on a single concept is
both impossible and undesirable.
However, I
disagree that BIM is dying, nor the courage to find a better way. With the
rapid development of AI BIM, we once again are all facing a common challenge. A
common opportunity.
A champion
must believe in his success. A leader must project the qualities of that role.
Our thoughts about the future will shape our future.
(Part Two to
follow)
Allen Jay
Holland
