A First Step in Generating a Decision-Making Framework for the Development of Interactive Workspaces

Interactive workspaces and immersive virtual environments have come under academic and industry scrutiny as viable solutions to support the collaborative delivery process of facilities. However, choosing the appropriate and cost-effective technology for the development of an interactive workspace can be challenging. Therefore, there is a need to investigate the key technological features necessary to develop an interactive workspace. In this study, the researchers have set forward the goal of developing such a framework, which can guide the process of creating an interactive and collaborative workspace. Factors such as space, purpose, processes, cost, and technology were selected as the main drivers of the framework. Once its main components were defined, a decision map was created to indicate the path to achieve the best configuration for an interactive workspace. Future research will aim at validating the framework by interviewing experts in the professional and research world

The “BIM-sustain” experiment – simulation of BIM-supported multi-disciplinary design

Background The AEC practice using BIM technology in Central European (CE) context is still very young; the previous experiences demonstrated a number of upcoming problems with BIM implementation on technical- (heterogonous data, interfaces, large data volumes) but even more so on process-level (question of responsibilities and work-load distribution, lacking standards or conventions on building-representation and in general lack of experience and knowledge on integrated practice). The optimal data management, transfer and synchronization within inhomogeneous software context, as is often the case within inter-firm construction projects, require enormous organization, coordination and communication effort in the earliest design-phases. The BIM implementation implies therefore necessity of fundamental rethinking of the conventional design process, which in CE context is still predominantly based on sequential, segmented practice. Methods At the Vienna University of Technology a BIM-supported multi-disciplinary planning process with students of architecture, structural engineering and building physics, using several BIM-software tools was simulated. From the qualitative and quantitative evaluation of this BIM-supported multi-disciplinary collaboration will enable the compilation of guidelines for efficient use of BIM in design and planning process for the planners and standardization bodies. Results First insights on process-quality, such as team-, process- and technology satisfaction, as well as conflict- and stress levels will be presented in this paper. We were able to identify numerous technical problems related to the data transfer and inconsistencies in translation, which resulted in participant dissatisfaction and significant increasing of work-loads. Conclusion The first results imply at the importance of process-organization techniques such as face-to face communication, coordination and work-load allocation between the team-members in order to conduct the efficient BIM-supported process; as well as at urgent need for advancement of the tools in terms of data transfer and exchange. In the next step, using mandatory protocols and timesheets, a detailed statistical analysis of the people-process-technology issues will be conducted, as well as comparison of "Open-Platform-BIM" to "One-Platform-BIM" model

Yield-to-BIM: impacts of BIM maturity on project performance

How does organizational experience (maturity) with building information modelling (BIM) impact on the broad implementation of BIM and on company performance? A survey of Dutch architectural, engineering, construction, and operation (AECO) professionals (n = 890) is used to examine their perceptions of the impact of BIM maturity on firm performance. Survey items included measures of BIM element maturity (i.e., strategy, BIM uses, process, information, infrastructure and personnel), and key performance indicators (time, cost and quality performance). Surprisingly, the maturity of the BIM implementation strategy was the only reliable predictor of time, cost and quality performance. The result suggests that the impact of BIM maturity on project performance may be limited and it cautions against overoptimistic appraisals of BIM. In addition to the contribution to the literature on BIM performance, the paper should be of interest to the practitioner contemplating BIM investment