Video

41. Macro Diffusion Responsibilities

This conceptual model (Figure 1) identifies nine BIM player groups (industry stakeholders) distributed across three BIM Fields (technology, process and policy) as defined within the BIM Framework. The nine player groups are: policy makers, educational institutions, construction organisations, individual practitioners, technology developers, technology service providers, industry associations, communities of practice, and technology advocates.


image from www.bimframework.infoFigure 1. Macro Diffusion Responsibilities v1.0 (full size, current version)

 

The nine player groups belong to either BIM Field or their overlaps. Pending further research, the tenth player group at the intersection of the three fields is intentionally excluded from this model. Table 1 below provides a succinct description of each player group followed by how this subdivision can be used in evaluating BIM diffusion within and across different markets.

 

Macro-Diffusion-Responsibilities-TableTable 1. Macro Diffusion Responsibilities matrix (player groups with sample players – market scale)

 

Each of the nine player groups identified in Figure 1 includes a number of player types. For example, player group 3 (construction organisations) is composed of varied player types including: asset owners, architects, engineers and project managers. Also, player group 4 (individual practitioners) is composed of professionals, associated professionals and tradespeople. These distinctions between player groups, player types and unique players (e.g. a specific person, group, association, company or university) allow the targeted assessment and comparison of stakeholders’ involvement.

 

Below is a short video explaining the above, as available on the Framework's YouTube channel:

 

 

Please note that the above model and table are part of five macro adoption models collated within "Succar, B., & Kassem, M. (2015). Macro-BIM adoption: Conceptual structures. Automation in Construction57, 64-79". Download full paper from here: https://bit.ly/BIMPaperA8


35. Point of Adoption

The Point of Adoption (PoA) model is a distillation of three implementation phases: readiness, capability, and maturity. As a term, PoA identifies the juncture(s) where organizational readiness transforms into organizational capability/maturity. It also identifies the juncture(s) where technological invention and a procedural innovation transforms into organizational - as well as market wide - diffusion:

Point-of-Adoption

Point of Adoption model v1.1 (full size, current version)

As explored in Figure 1 above, transformative BIM adoption starts at the Point of Adoption (PoA) when an organization, after a period of planning and preparation (readiness), successfully adopts object-based modelling tools and workflows. The PoA[1] thus marks the initial capability jump from no BIM abilities (pre-BIM status) to minimum BIM capability (Stage 1). As the adopter interacts with other adopters, a second capability jump (Stage 2) marks the organization’s ability to successfully engage in model-based collaboration. Also, as the organisation starts to engage with multiple stakeholders across the supply chain, a third capability jump (Stage 3) is necessary to benefit from integrated, network-based tools, processes and protocols (refer back to BIM Stages).

Each of these capability jumps is preceded with considerable investment in human and physical resources, and each stage signals new organizational abilities and deliverables not available before the jump. However, the deliverables of different organizations at the same stage may vary in quality, repeatability and predictability (refer to BIM Maturity Index). This variance in performance excellence occurs as organizations climb their respective BIM maturity curve, experience their internal BIM diffusion, and gradually improve their performance over time[2].

The multiple maturity curves depicted in Figure 1 reflect the heterogeneous nature of BIM adoption even within the same organization (e.g. sample Organization X) has a compiled rating of 1c, 2b and 3a). This is due to the phased nature of BIM with each revolutionary stage requiring its own readiness ramp, capability jump, maturity climb, and point of adoption. This is also due to varied abilities across organizational sub-units and project teams: while organizational unit A1 (within Organization A) may have elevated model-based collaboration capabilities, unit A2 may have basic modelling capabilities, and unit A3 may still be preparing to implement BIM software tools. This variance in ability necessitates a compiled rating for organization A as it simultaneously prepares for an innovative solution, implements a system/process, and continually improves its performance.

Note: the Point of Adoption model is also discussed  (along with the UK BIM Maturity model) in Episode 22 on BIM ThinkSpace.

Update (May, 2016): below is a short video explaining the above on the Framework's YouTube channel:

 



[1] The Point of Adoption (PoA) is not to be confused with the critical mass ‘inflection point’ on the S-curve (E. M. Rogers, 1995) (Everett M Rogers, Medina, Rivera, & Wiley, 2005); or with the ‘tipping pint’, the critical threshold introduced by Gladwell (2001).

[2] The X-axis in Figure 1 represents time relative to each PoA, not as an absolute scale. That is, this version of the chart does not represent a snapshot view of compiled capability/maturity at a specific point in (absolute) time.


34. Diffusion Areas

This conceptual model (Figure 1) clarifies how BIM Field types (technology, process and policy) interact with BIM Capability Stages (modelling, collaboration and integration) to generate nine areas for targeted BIM diffusion analysis and BIM diffusion planning:

  Diffusion-Areas

Figure 1. Diffusion Areas model v1.0 (full size, current version)

The nine diffusion areas, explored in the below table, can be assessed independently or collectively. For example, the diffusion of BIM software tools within a population (modelling technologies [1TE]) can be assessed separately, and using different assessment methods, than establishing the proliferation of integrated project delivery contracts (integration policies [3PO]). Also, the diffusion of multidisciplinary BIM educational curricula (collaboration policies [2PO]) can be assessed separately, or in combination with, the proliferation of collaborative BIM roles and responsibilities (collaboration processes [2PR]).

  Diffusion Areas Matrix

Table 1. Diffusion Areas matrix (with sample granular metrics within each diffusion area)

The nine diffusion areas, their structured subdivisions and combinations, provide an opportunity for granular assessments of BIM diffusion within a population of adopters. Rather than being treated uniformly as a single set of data, or separated into disparate topics without an underlying conceptual structure, the Diffusion Areas’ model (Figure 1) allows the generation of targeted ratings for comparative market analysis - as exemplified in Figure 2:

Diffusion-Areas-Comparison-Chart-sampleFigure 2. Diffusion Areas Comparison sample chart v1.1 - updated April 24, 2016  (full size, current version)

 

Below is a short video explaining the above, as available on the Framework's YouTube channel:

 

 

Please note that the above model, table and chart are part of five macro adoption models collated within "Succar, B., & Kassem, M. (2015). Macro-BIM adoption: Conceptual structures. Automation in Construction57, 64-79". Download full paper from here: https://bit.ly/BIMPaperA8


10. BIM Maturity Index

BIM Maturity Levels at Capability Stage 1 - 2010

The BIM Maturity Index (BIMMI) is a conceptual model depicting five distinct Maturity Levels:

 

Level

Level Name

Textual Rating

Numerical Rating

a

Ad-hoc or initial

Low maturity

0-19%

b

Defined

Medium-Low maturity

20-39%

c

Managed

Medium maturity

40-59%

d

Integrated

Medium-High maturity

60-79%

e

Optimised

High maturity

80-100%

 

The progression from lower to higher levels of BIM Maturity indicates (i) better control through minimizing variations between targets and actual results, (ii) better predictability and forecasting by lowering variability in competency, performance and costs and (iii) greater effectiveness in reaching defined goals and setting new more ambitious ones. BIMMI apply to BIM Stages and BIM Steps at organizational or larger scales (e.g. Disciplines, Industries and Markets). 

Update (July, 2015) - below is a short video explaining the above on the Framework's YouTube channel:

 


4. BIM Lenses

BIM_Lenses

BIM Lenses represent the third dimension of the Tri-Axial Model and generate its depth of enquiry. BIM Lenses are distinctive layers of analysis applied to Fields and Stages to generate Knowledge Views. They abstract the BIM domain and control its complexity by removing unnecessary detail. Lenses allow domain researchers to selectively focus on any aspect of the DCO industry and generate knowledge views that either (a) highlight observables which meet the research criteria or (b) filter out those that do not.

Below is a short video briefly explaining the above on the dedicated BIM Framework YouTube channel:

 


3. BIM Stages

BIM-Stages-Linear-Model

The BIM Framework introduces the stages separating Pre-BIM (the status before BIM) from viDCO (virtually integrated Design, Construction and Operation) - the ultimate vision from implementing BIM. These revolutionary stages, and the evolutionary steps separating them, are intended to both clarify and measure BIM adoption.

Note 1: this model depicts BIM Capability Stages at Maturity Level C...Also, starting in Paper A4, the term viDCO replaces the term IPD as used earlier in Papers A2 and A3

Note 2: The ‘BIM Stages’ model was first introduced by the author through BIM ThinkSpace (Episode 8 – Feb 18, 2008) and then published in Paper A2 as ‘BIM Maturity Stages’. As of Paper A3, the BIM capability/maturity concept embedded in the original model was split into two metrics/models: BIM Capability Stages and BIM Maturity Levels.

Update (July, 2015) - below is a short video explaining the above on the Framework's YouTube channel:

 


2. BIM Fields

 

BIM-Fields-v2.5Download full size image (current v2.5 - 2012),  (v2.0 - 2010), (v1.2 - 2008) or (v1.1 - 2007)

This conceptual model represents BIM Fields, the first dimension of the Tri-axial Model. BIM Fields refer to all topics, activities, and actors across the BIM domain. The Venn diagram (three overlapping circles) identifies Field Types (TechnologyProcess and Policy), Field Components (Players, Deliverables and Requirements), Field interactions and Field overlaps.

The model was first referred to as ‘three interlocking knowledge nodes’ in Paper A1 "A Proposed Framework". The term ‘nodes’ was later replaced with ‘fields’ to match the notion of ‘players’.

Below is a short video briefly explaining the above on the dedicated BIM Framework YouTube channel:

 


1. The Tri-Axial Framework

 

BIM_Framework_Tri-axial_Model

 

This Tri-axial framework explains the multi-dimensional relationship between three main axes of the BIM domain: the BIM Fields of activity (x-axis) identifying domain players, their requirements and deliverables; the BIM Stages (y-axis) delineating minimum capability benchmarks; and countless BIM Lenses (z-axis) providing the depth and breadth of enquiry necessary to identify, assess and qualify BIM fields and BIM stages.

Below is a short video briefly explaining the above on the dedicated BIM Framework YouTube channel: