The concept of BIM has existed since the 1970s, with the first description of a Building Information Model appearing in a paper in 1992. The BIMinNZ.co.nz website proposes; “Few things have the potential to improve the performance of New Zealand’s building, construction and asset operation sectors as Building Information Modelling (BIM). BIM is the only improvement initiative likely to deliver a step-change, rather than an incremental gain in productivity.”

Yet, here we are in 2020 and we still struggle to get BIM off the ground. Why is it that BIM hasn’t revolutionised the industry in the way it should? Many of the arguments for BIM’s slow uptake centre around lack of demand by clients, fear of investing in the wrong software or lack of expertise to use it. However, after trying to get this thing off the ground for so long, surely we need to start asking ourselves if there is something fundamentally wrong?

The ability of software to capture more and more detail is the basis of BIM’s offering. As the design progresses, the plan is modelled to the finest detail. This, in theory, allows coordination, clashes and construction sequences to be solved while the building is in its virtual state and the contractor to then build it on the site, avoiding the usual issues.

In reality, this information is not arriving at the labourer putting up a wall, or the plumber placing the pipes. While the foreman may look at the 3D model, the labourer gets given a brief along the lines of ‘can you build a wall, like the one you built yesterday, on this setout line’. The builders rely primarily on their practical knowledge of past projects to construct the wall, not the detail held within the plans that they haven’t seen.

The first rule of good communication is “know your audience”. Building information models (and all drawings and specifications, when it comes down to it) are communication documents, and they aim to communicate design intent to the people who are trying to build the design. However when you take it from a communication lens, the way the information is provided is not structured appropriately for the audience. What BIM is currently missing is effective information infrastructure to transfer information from designers to constructors. In short, the fundamental problem with BIM is a communications issue.

There’s an obvious dissonance between the technical detail of the computer model and the relevance of this for the practical people who are going to build it. A recent example that springs to mind of effective communication is the NZ government communication around Covid 19. Communicating to the country via a 2000 word document isn’t going to work, instead you turn it into 5 easy to understand posters so the right information can be communicated effectively. Who in NZ didn’t understand their “bubble”.

So if BIM does not communicate well, how can it add value, how does it smooth out the information exchange? The goal of all construction professionals should be the shortest path between design intent and building construction. If we consider this from a communications angle, we need to be providing the right information at the right level of detail – and this involves stripping away what’s not needed, rather than continually adding in more.

Watch this space, we are currently working on a different communication strategy for our technical documents, not a set of plans and reports, but a solution that enables the practical people that build our world to see design intent in a much more effective way.

Contact Us