Anda di halaman 1dari 56

Research

June 2015

Building Information
Modelling and the
Value Dimension

rics.org/research
Building Information Modelling and the
Value Dimension

2 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

Report for Royal Institution


of Chartered Surveyors

Report written by:


Associate Professor Sara J Wilkinson BSc MA MPhil PhD FRICS AAPI
School of the Built Environment, University of Technology,
Sydney, Australia
sara.wilkinson@uts.edu.au

Associate Professor Julie Jupp BA BSc PhD


School of the Built Environment, University of Technology,
Sydney, Australia

RICS Research team


Dr. Clare Eriksson FRICS
Director of Global Research & Policy
ceriksson@rics.org

Amanprit Johal
Global Research and Policy Manager
ajohal@rics.org

Pratichi Chatterjee
Global Research & Policy Officer
pchatterjee@rics.org

Published by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS)


RICS, Parliament Square, London SW1P 3AD
www.rics.org
The views expressed by the authors are not necessarily those of RICS nor any body
connected with RICS. Neither the authors, nor RICS accept any liability arising from
the use of this publication.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any
form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any
information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Copyright RICS 2015

RICS Research 2015 3


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Contents
Glossary of Terms .................................................................................................... 6
Executive Summary ............................................................................................... 7
1.0 Introduction and scope of research ...............................................10
1.1 Rationale for the research ...............................................................10
1.2 Research question, aims and objectives.......................................10
1.3 Limitations...........................................................................................11
1.4 Structure of the report......................................................................11
2.0 BIM and the Value Dimension...............................................................12
2.1 Property Life Cycle ............................................................................13
2.2 Data Types and Needs........................................................................14
2.2.1 Property Information Requirements .............................................14
2.3 Education Issues ................................................................................16
2.3.1 BIM within AEC Education (project-level lifecycle).....................16
2.3.2 BIM within Property Education (property-level lifecycle).........17
2.3.3 Developing New Knowledge Competencies in RICS....................17
3.0 Research design and methodology..................................................19
3.1 Stage 1 Workshops ............................................................................19
3.2 Stage 2 Online Questionnaire Survey ............................................21
4.0 Workshop Analysis and Discussion ................................................22
4.1 Workshop 1 Identifying Data Types and Needs............................22
4.2 Workshop 2 Identifying the Challenges ........................................25
4.2.1 Technology-based Challenges.........................................................27
4.2.2 Socio-technical Challenges..............................................................27
4.3 Workshop 2 and 3 Identifying Timelines & Mapping
Data Needs Through Life ..................................................................29
5.0 Survey Data Analysis and Discussion.............................................31
5.1 Part 1 Respondent Profiles, Current Awareness and
Usage of BIM........................................................................................31
5.2 Part 2 Experience Working with Information Technologies...33
5.3 Part 3 Information Frequency and Need of Use........................35
5.4 Part 4 Challenges & Benefits of BIM............................................40
6.0 Overall conclusions and further research ..................................43
6.1 Data through-life................................................................................43
6.2 Challenges & Benefits of BIM...........................................................43
6.3 Integration of BIM in Property Education......................................44
6.4 Recommendations and further research......................................44
7.0 References.....................................................................................................45
Appendices ................................................................................................................47
Appendix 1 Property professionals data types and needs....................48
Appendix 2 Key to symbols used in figures 5 and 6 and Appendix 3......49
Appendix 3 Managing data through the property lifecycle
(Workshop 2 output). .......................................................................................50
Special Thanks .........................................................................................................52

4 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

List of Tables
Table 1 Information Categories Developed for Workshops and Survey......15
Table 2 Descending relative importance of data types for
Stakeholder Groups (highest to lowest)..............................................23
Table 3 Relative Importance of Five Main Information Types
& Stakeholder Groups...............................................................................23
Table 4 Challenges to through-life information management and
corresponding RII......................................................................................25
Table 5 Comparison between Australian and UK participants perspectives
regarding the key drivers and challenges when sourcing,
integrating and generating data through-life....................................28
Table 6 Frequency of use of data types by area of practice / discipline.....36
Table 7 Data need score by data type / area of practice................................37
Table 8 Tests of Professional Differences in Information Importance.......39

List of Figures
Figure 1 Property Development and Management processes compared
with Single Facility Project Processes (Source: Authors) ...............13
Figure 2 Selection of sort cards showing data types adapted from
Lutzendorf & Lorenz, 2011 ....................................................................20
Figure 3 Importance of Main Information Types according to
Stakeholders and Activities across CPDM/ Project
Lifecycle Phases........................................................................................24
Figure 4 Relative Importance of Challenges to Through-life
Information Management .......................................................................26
Figure 5 Data needs for a Buildings Surveyor Technical Due
Diligence survey ........................................................................................29
Figure 6 Data needs for Portfolio Management Surveyors through
the lifecycle ................................................................................................30
Figure 7 RICS region respondent work in ............................................................31
Figure 8 Respondents area of current practice ...............................................32
Figure 9 Land use types and sectors of property respondents work on ......32
Figure 10 Use of Information Technologies in the workplace ...........................33
Figure 11 Understanding of BIM ..............................................................................34
Figure 12 Experience of BIM .....................................................................................34
Figure 13 Source of BIM training .............................................................................34
Figure 14 Information Type Need versus Frequency ..........................................38
Figure 15 Key Challenges in information management through life ...............41
Figure 16 Key benefits of digital information through life ................................42

RICS Research 2015 5


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Glossary of Terms

AEC Architecture, engineering, construction


AECO Architecture, engineering, construction and operation
BIM Building Information Modelling
BMS Building Management Systems
PDM Property Development and Management
O&FM Operations and Facilities Management
PLM Product Lifecycle Management
RICS Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors
ROI Return on investment
VBM Virtual Building Model
TM Transaction Management
3D Third Dimension in BIM 3D geometry.
4D Fourth Dimension in BIM the time perspective
5D Fifth Dimension in BIM the cost perspective

6 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

Executive Summary
Building Information Modelling (BIM) offers rich
opportunities for RICS property professionals to use
Methods
information throughout the property lifecycle. However, the This research adopted a two-stage research design.
potential benefits of BIM for property professionals have The research had the characteristics of qualitative
been largely untapped to-date. BIM tools and processes research, in that it sought to investigate the potential
were originally developed by the architecture, engineering for property professionals to use BIM data. To do
and construction (AEC) sector to assist in managing this, it was necessary to ascertain and gain a deeper
design and construction data. As these technologies and understanding of their information / data needs and the
processes mature and evolve, so too does the opportunity type of data required. The first stage of the research
for other professional groups to utilise various types of data employed a Delphi approach, which seeks to aggregate
contained within, or linked to, BIM models. the opinions of a panel of experts through successive
This report outlines the findings from a research project rounds of questionnaires and interviews. The results
investigating the potential for RICS property professionals to from each round were collated and fed back to the panel
utilise BIM data. Workshops were carried out in Sydney and anonymously and then the panel was asked to provide
London with property professionals, and a global online further comment. Two groups of diverse and experienced
survey was conducted. From these, data types and needs property professionals were invited to share their
were identified and then mapped across the property knowledge and experiences in real time, in Sydney and
lifecycle. Alignment with BIM data was undertaken. London, over the course of three workshops. The scope
Following on from this, issues around training and of each workshop was as follows;
education for existing and future members were reviewed Workshop 1 Objectives: Identify the types of data that
along with the ways in which BIM can be integrated into each of the professional groups use in daily activities
property education on RICS accredited courses. and, the associated challenges of through-life information
management,
Research question and aims Workshop 2 Objective: Identify upstream and
downstream data requirements related to professional
The research question investigated was: what is the role property service tasks,
of the value dimension in BIM? This question is examined
relative to the activities and professional services performed Workshop 3 Objective: Analyse upstream and
by RICS property professionals. For example, could BIM downstream data requirements relative to data
help increase property income yields, by providing better characteristics, such as; quality and accessibility.
quality data on: minimising risk on investment returns; Following analysis of the data generated by the
increasing capital growth; and managing and optimising workshops, an online survey of RICS members globally
deprecation? As a scoping study, this project aimed; was undertaken. This stage of the research adopted a
a) to identify the specific types of data that various quantitative approach to validate the earlier qualitative
property professionals use throughout the property data collected in the workshops. The survey comprised
lifecycle, four parts to ascertain members knowledge and
understanding and discover how best BIM data can be
b) to evaluate the importance or need for these data types
used most effectively within the property professions.
to property professionals,
The survey allowed us to;
c) how information requirements compare with those of
AEC project level processes and the extent to which 1. Map the property information/data that members use
this data is generated in AEC focused BIM deliverables, currently,

d) to explore the potential to expand education about BIM 2. Understand the value and significance of those data
into property education, and; needs; and,

e) to identify steps that RICS can take to increase 3. Reveal what opportunities exist within BIM to enhance
knowledge, skills and competency of BIM within the professional practice.
membership of the property disciplines.

RICS Research 2015 7


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Key findings 2) When different property professionals ranked the


importance or need for these data types for property
The key findings are that there is potential for BIM in the different profiles emerged. Different data types were
Value Dimension; that is for the property profession. In required at different stages of the property lifecycle.
respect of the five research objectives this research finds; Some professionals, such as Portfolio Management
Surveyors (see figure 6) have repeated data needs over
1) The specific data types that are used by a number of longer periods of the lifecycle, whereas others, such
property professionals through the property lifecycle as Building Surveyors (see figure 5), had a need for a
were identified in the workshops. Property professionals more limited range of data types at specific points in the
undertake a very diverse range of professional tasks lifecycle.
through the building lifecycle and participants use
a total of 24 data types listed below (see table 2 also). 3) When information requirements are compared with
those of AEC project level processes and the extent
1) Building Description this data is generated in AEC focused BIM deliverables,
2) Health & User Comfort we found the AEC projects focus on design and
construction phases, though this is being extended
3) Tenant & occupier Situation
into the operational phase and this falls within the
4) Functional Quality field of Facilities Management. Property professionals
5) Payments In who require data relating to building performance and
maintenance costs will find BIM data useful, where
6) Construction Quality
it is available, in their professional practice. The number
7) Land Features of existing buildings with BIM, as a proportion of the
8) FM Quality total stock is small, however BIM enabled stock is
more highly represented in higher quality new
9) Surrounding Characteristics commercial property.
10) Technical Quality 4) It was found that there is great potential to expand
11) National Market education about BIM into property education at
12) Design/Aesthetic Quality undergraduate and post-graduate level across all
RICS regions. This potential will increase over time as
13) Payments Out the rate of uptake of BIM technology increases in the
14) Market & Letting Vacancy Situation built environment. Property management students
and subjects will initially benefit most from increased
15)
Design Process Quality
awareness and knowledge of BIM and Building
16) Site Features Management Systems (BMS) technology. Valuation
17) Planning Quality subjects can also start the process of awareness
raising though most of their data needs currently lie
18) Macro-Location
outside of BIM, this may change over time.
19) Environmental Quality
5) There are several steps identified that RICS can take
20)
Micro-Location to increase knowledge, skills and competency of BIM
21)
Cultural/Image Value within the existing membership base of the property
disciplines. These measures are outlined in the
22) Operational Quality recommendations below.
23) Environmental Context
24) Urban Design Quality

8 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

Conclusions and 3. Develop a set of CPD events to raise


awareness among property professionals
recommendations of BIM
This research has shown that there is a place for BIM As a priority RICS should develop some online education
and the value dimension and that this will grow over time. resources for members to raise awareness and knowledge
There is great potential to expand the current use of BIM in respect of BIM and how property professionals could
data for property professionals. There is also potential use data within the models.
to expand the range of data linked to BIM for use by
property professionals. 4. Develop RICS training courses for existing
members of the property disciplines in BIM
1. Map data needs and types across all
Concurrent with the roll out of CPD events for members
RICS disciplines
and the development of online education resources, RICS
One of the key priorities is to undertake a comprehensive should develop a series of training courses for existing
mapping of data needs and types across all RICS members globally to realise the potential of using BIM data
disciplines to identify (a) what is currently within BIM that in their professional practices.
could be used by property professionals, and (b) data
needs and types currently in a digital format but found 5. RICS BIM & Property Education Task Force
in databases outside of BIM that could be easily made
compatible to BIM. Additionally this review would identify With regards to the integration of BIM into property
those data needs and types that are outside of BIM that education, RICS should form an Education Task Force
could be digitised and incorporated due to the extent to champion the roll out of BIM across RICS accredited
of potential usage within the property profession. property courses globally to ensure new members have
The full list should be categorised and prioritised, and the requisite awareness, knowledge and skill with respect
where necessary negotiations with third parties should to BIM and property or; the value dimension. Some
be initiated. In particular details on data source, format, other professional bodies are also establishing education
quality (with respect to reliability and accuracy) are needed. task forces and there may be some opportunities for,
and benefits in collaboration. After all BIM is about
2. Introduce BIM professional competency collaboration between various stakeholders to share
information for optimum outcomes.
into RICS APC for property professionals
The RICS APC group should develop appropriate property
discipline BIM competencies with the APC structure
so that property professionals can obtain recognition
for knowledge, skill and capability with the application
of this knowledge in their professional practice. It is
acknowledged that RICS have established the first
BIM certification BIM Managers, for members in the
construction sector. There may be some aspects that
may be transferable to a property focussed certification.

RICS Research 2015 9


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

1.0 Introduction and scope of research


1.1 Rationale for the research Today, information technology is readily employed across
different lifecycle stages of building and infrastructure
Building Information Modelling (BIM) is shaping the way facilities. Sourcing data from BIM technologies and
that architecture, engineering, construction and operation building management systems (BMS) is becoming
(AECO) professionals will work in the future (Macdonald, more common in the delivery and operational stages
2012) and is integral to real-time coordination across the of commercial, multi-residential, health, and education
disciplines within RICS. Whilst advocates for BIM claim buildings (McGraw Hill 2014). The use of semantic web
numerous client-side benefits such as quicker approvals technologies for operations and facilities management
due to clearer design intent, the broader scope for (O&FM) offers a means of structuring different built
client-side stakeholders such as property developers, environment data sources for more effective and
property managers, investors, and valuers has been largely efficient through-life information management (Becerik-
overlooked to date. Commercial property professionals Gerber et al, 2011). For those who are unfamiliar with
require good quality through-life information about the term semantic web, it is the next major evolution
buildings, the surrounding environment and the market. in connecting information. It enables data to be linked
Professional property activities require robust and reliable from a source to any other source and to be understood
data from many sources to deliver a complete view of by computers so that they can perform increasingly
performance and value during the building lifecycle or sophisticated tasks on our behalf (Cambridge Semantics,
through life. Effective information management across 2015). This research is predicated on the premise that
various sectors of property encompasses the sourcing, some of the same information management capabilities
organisation and reuse of a variety of built environment derived from a BIM-enabled approach that benefit AECO
data and data sources. stakeholders can serve property professionals and add
value to their professional services. This research explores
BIM is defined as a modelling technology and associated the potential to expand BIM beyond the AECO disciplines
set of processes to produce, communicate and analyse and project stages, as well as beyond current approaches
building models (Eastman et al, 2008), where intelligent to project and organisational notions of the value of BIM.
3D models allow data to be shared. Over time the 3D
model has developed to incorporate 4D (time, or workflow,
scheduling) 5D (cost) data. As such, BIM can be viewed 1.2 Research question, aims and
as a series of interlinked databases (typically represented
graphically using models) that can be shared and updated
objectives
for design and construction tasks. Each iteration of BIM is On this basis, the research question posed is: what is
referred to as a D, a dimension; hence the value dimension. the role of the value dimension in BIM? This question
Value can be characterised by three principal is examined relative to the activities and professional
characteristics of property, namely risk, growth and services performed by RICS property professionals.
depreciation (Millington, 2014). The value dimension For example, could BIM help increase property income
of BIM is therefore defined by the information or data yields, by providing better quality data on: minimising risk
required during the assessment of the risk, growth on investment returns; increasing capital growth; and
and depreciation status of a property and provides managing and optimising deprecation? As a scoping
a description of its performance through life. This study, this project aimed;
lifecycle perspective includes its original commissioning, 1) to identify the specific data types various property
project execution, operations and maintenance, and professionals use throughout the property lifecycle,
recommissioning / disposal. Whilst value has been
2) to evaluate the importance or need for these data types
addressed partly in the research literature relative to
for property professionals,
BIMs return on investment (ROI), this research has been
typically at the level of the AEC project and has sought 3) how information requirements compare with those of
to understand value relative to participating project AEC project level processes and the extent this data is
stakeholder organisations. To date, these studies have generated in AEC focused BIM deliverables,
largely neglected the broader processes of client-side 4) to explore the potential to expand education about BIM
stakeholders and the activities that lie upstream and into property education and;
downstream of design and construction. This report
is aimed primarily at property professionals, who are 5) to identify steps that RICS can take to increase
less familiar with BIM, the technology and its associated knowledge, skills and competency of BIM within the
jargon. It is written in a style to avoid the overuse of jargon membership of the property disciplines.
to make it accessible to this new audience within the
RICS professional membership.

10 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

1.3 Limitations
The research is limited to the investigation of these
considerations from a property development,
management and valuation perspective. This perspective
encompasses a large range of professional property
service tasks surrounding property development,
property and portfolio management, property investment,
property transactions and real estate, property valuation,
property and facilities management, and building
surveying. Whilst the research study and methodology
sought representation across these different property
professionals, the researchers encountered some
difficulties in obtaining equal representation across
those dealing with commercial, retail, multi-residential,
health, and education properties. This research limitation
surrounding stakeholder representation was encountered
in the workshops, where commercial property interests
were more widely represented.

1.4 Structure of the report


Section two analyses the literature around BIM and
the value dimension, through an examination of the
property lifecycle and data types and needs. It reviews
the educational aspect of BIM in respect of the project
and property lifecycles and discusses the integration of
BIM into property education. The research design and
methods are outlined in section three. Section four reports
on the data analysis and findings of focus groups held in
Sydney and London. In section five, the data analysis and
findings of the online survey are presented. The report
closes with a discussion of the main findings and BIMs
ability to support client-side decision-making relative to
risk, growth and depreciation variables as well as outlining
areas for further research.

RICS Research 2015 11


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

2.0 BIM and the Value Dimension

The lifecycles of complex, long-lived buildings mean that that 50% of the industry was using BIM, representing
it is important for property professionals to have robust a 75% increase in a two year period. A McGraw-Hill
and reliable through-life information about a buildings Construction report, titled, The Business Value of BIM
performance and value. Property professionals considered in Europe (McGraw-Hill 2010), shows construction
here include property and facilities managers, development professionals in France, Germany and U.K. have been
and asset managers, investment and valuation surveyors, using BIM longer, but overall BIM adoption is greater in
building surveyors. However, whilst the value of BIM has North America. The study shows that a little over a third
been addressed in the research literature relative to its return (36%) of Western European construction professionals are
on investment (ROI), these studies most often centre on the using BIM, where in a previous report McGraw-Hill found
project lifecycle and define value relative to AECO interests. that 49% of contractors, architects and engineers reported
BIM usage, (McGraw-Hill 2009). However, there is no clear
In the past five years more than 250 articles have
and consistent demand for adoption by clients. Currently
investigated the impacts of BIM relative to project
BIM adoption is largely in the larger AEC companies and
performance and its impact on business value (e.g. Carroll
within larger construction projects, buildings and estates.
2009, Becerik-Gerber & Kensek 2010, Rowlinson et al.
Furthermore given that typically only 1-2% is added to the
2010, Sebastian & van Berlo 2010). However they are
total stock of buildings annually (Wilkinson, 2015), it will be
limited in terms of their definition of value, which focuses on
many years before a majority of stock has BIM.
project and/or an AEC business level outcomes. Research
studies on the value of BIM relative to client-side and wider El-Gohary (2010) argued that potentially, BIM can add value
property interests are lacking. Most studies include client when assessing sustainability in a property development
perspectives on the perceived benefits, costs and risks of feasibility study, where the costs and the potential of
new technological, process and organisational change. different options can be assessed in respect of likely
For example, industry surveys undertaken in Australia, sustainability rating levels say, under BREEAM or Green
the UK and US (McGraw Hill 2014) have shown that most Star. Studies by Fuerst and McAllister (2012) and Newell
clients perceive a positive ROI when BIM is adopted. et al, (2011) have indicated that there is a value premium
However, these studies are limited to the project lifecycle, in sustainable commercial property in the UK, US and
and consider only single facility project processes Australia. Using BIM data and simulations, clients can be
neglecting the broader property perspective. advised of the social, environmental and economic costs
and benefits of various options allowing them to make
A number of studies undertaken across the U.K., Europe,
more informed decisions that optimise, or at least consider
the US and Australian/New Zealand AEC industries show
the impact on property value. However it is not known
that BIM uptake has in recent years been accelerating and
whether the information specified in AEC BIM models
is likely to accelerate over the next few years (McGraw Hill,
currently meets the needs of the property professionals.
2014). In the US in 2009, it was reported (Young et al., 2009)

12 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

2.1 Property life cycle When the two different levels of lifecycle are compared, the
requirements of information management is more complex
Property development and management activities and the opportunities to maintain and leverage the data
encompass more than the combination of single or contained within, or linked to, a BIM model is apparent.
multiple AEC projects and the application of BIM in this However there is a lack of literature reporting studies
wider scope of property services is not well understood. of well-defined property based or client-side strategy
Typically, at the level of an AEC project, the general surrounding the business case for deploying BIM either
lifecycle process of the design and construction project on single facility projects or relative to property portfolios.
is defined as: The recent increase in digital information generated
1) Pre-design (PD) in which the decision maker from the during AEC projects and throughout a propertys
client side evaluates project feasibility; operation and maintenance creates potential for a
new approach to information management within
2) Schematic Design (SD);
property. The development of new approaches must
3) Detailed Design (DD); consider the lengthy time periods that information must
4) Construction Documentation (CD); be managed over and complexities surrounding the
different consumers and generators of information, where
5) Construction (CO); and information must be able to be accessed and used by
6) Operation/Maintenance (OM). numerous property professionals. The established role for
BIM in managing information within AEC professions can
Only the client is involved in the entire process and
be extended to property professionals. Questions arise
other professionals join and depart from the project as
such as; what are the information needs, at what periods
required. When taking the wider property development
during the lifecycle is information needed and; what is
and management activities that surround the AEC project
the frequency of which such information is required? In
into consideration, a more extensive lifecycle process
seeking to provide answers to these questions the first
becomes evident. This property perspective of lifecycle
step was to identify and then make an assessment of
includes not only the AEC phases described above, but
relevant property data.
also activities that encompass property such as;
1) Conception;
2) Planning and Feasibility;
3) Preparation;
4) Execution;
5) Operation and Maintenance (O&M) and
6) Recommissioning (see figure 1).

Property Development and Management processes compared with Single Facility


Figure 1 Project Processes

Single Facility Project


Lifecycle Phases (PD) (SD) (DD) (CD&CO) (OM)

Commercial Property
Development Conception Planning & Preparation Execution Operation Recommissioning
& Management (C) Feasibility (P) (E) Maintenance (R)
Lifecycle Phases (SD) (OM)

Source: Authors

RICS Research 2015 13


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

2.2 Data Types & Needs These information types are shown in the second column
of Table 1. The classification developed in Table 1 was
The data sources that are required to provide a description compiled on the basis of information traditionally sourced,
and assessment of a propertys performance and value organised and (re)used by property developers, property
are disparate, extensive, and correspond to the type and portfolio managers, property investment surveyors,
and variety of professional AECO and property activities valuers, property and facility manager, building surveyors
that span the building lifecycle. The data collected and in property transactions. This data can be sourced
encompasses market, property, building, financial, project, from building documentation, consultants reports, industry
operations and maintenance data. Together in various databases, building inspections, facility managers, a
combinations and at different lifecycle stages, this data variety of building reports, and documentation of the
is reused by a variety of property professionals to inform design and planning process typically created during the
performance and valuation tasks. design and planning stage for verification of conformity
with regulations. Each information type was identified
2.2.1 Property Information Requirements based on its mapping with property development and
management activities and its classification as either an
Currently a range of separate and distinct sources are economic, environmental or social indicator of value.
used to access property, development and management
information. Distinct data types may coexist in isolation and These attributes and characteristics formed the basis
the quality, completeness and accuracy of this information of workshop discussions. Based on outcomes and
is often unknown and sometimes unchecked (by those who learning from the workshops, the main categories and
generated the information or who may consume it), making sub-categories were modified to cover a wider range of
information management in property disciplines complex. property activities and were re-structured according to
Ltzendorf and Lorenz (2011) identified a comprehensive information and data formats that are readily available
list of descriptors to represent information types used by throughout the property lifecycle, and also re-worded into
property valuation and related professions. A list of 22 language more familiar to property professionals. The final
descriptor categories shown in the first column of Table categories developed for the survey are shown in the third
1, identified by Ltzendorf and Lorenz (2011) according to column of Table 1.
information traditionally gathered and used for property Sourcing data from BIM technologies and building
valuation and risk assessment purposes. Their sources management systems (BMS) is becoming more common
included The European Group of Valuers Associations in the delivery and operational stages of commercial
(TEGoVA 2003), RICS (2009) as well as a cross-section buildings (McGraw Hill 2014). This research is based
of sustainability assessment schemes such as the United on the premise that the same information management
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP 2009), and the capabilities that are being derived from a BIM-enabled
Green Property Alliance (GPA 2010). These studies were approach to benefit AECO stakeholders can be extended
examined to ascertain whether BIM might offer for the to serve property professionals and thereby add value to
broader scope of property development and management their services.
activities; in other words, the value dimension.
With the volume of data generated, it is necessary to
The researchers analysed each information requirement evaluate the relevance and importance of each data
relative to the scope and processes identified in Figure 1 type. The authors developed a method for identifying
and developed an information requirements framework and determining the importance of information types.
consisting of five main types of property, development and The first step was to prioritise information based on the
management descriptors, 25 sub-types and 90 individual need for the information, the frequency of use, the effort
attributes. The five main categories of information include of reacquisition, and finally, duration of reacquisition.
descriptors relevant to property development and Modifications of this method were used to analyse the
management of; workshop and survey findings.
1) Market and Location Data,
2) Property Data describing Plot of Land,
3) Property Data describing Economic information,
4) Building Information, and;
5) Process Qualities.

14 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

Table 1 Information Categories Developed for Workshops and Survey

Information types identified for Categories of data defined for


Property descriptor types workshops (Adapted from RICS survey (Based on Workshop
(Lutzendorf & Lorenz 2011) Lutzendorf & Lorenz 2011) Outcomes & Learning)
L ocation National Market Descriptors 1. Location Information Types, including:
1.  1. Market Data including;
National Market Data National Market Data
Macro Location Data S tate, Regional and Neighbourhood
Micro Location Data Market Data
Listings, Recent Sales, and Auctions
Data
Property Transfers Data
Property Marketing Statistics
2. 
L ocation Macro Location Descriptors 2. Property Location Data;
3. 
L ocation Micro Location Descriptors Macro Location Data
Micro Location Data

4. 
Plot of land characteristics and 2. Property Information Types, describing 3 Property Site Data including;
configuration descriptors Plot of Land, including: Property Lot Attributes
5. 
Plot of Land Surrounding Context Characteristics and Configuration, Utilities
Descriptors Surrounding Contextual Data) Environmental Attributes
Surrounding Building Context
Property Development Details
6. 
Mechanisms / Instruments 3. Property Information Types, describing 4. Financial Data including;
Economic and Financial Data, including:: Payments In,
7. Economic Quality Payments In
Descriptors Payments In, Payments Out,
8. Economic Quality Payments Out Payments Out, Vacancy / Letting and
Descriptors Vacancy/Letting and Tenancy Occupier Data
9. Economic Quality Vacancy / Tenancy/Occupier Information
Letting Descriptors
10. Economic Quality / Cash Flow
Tenancy/Occupier Descriptors
11. Building Basic Building Quality 4. Building Information Types, including: 5. Building Data, including:
Descriptors Building design information Spatial attributes
12. Building Technical Quality Technical and building systems 3D model objects (elements) and
Descriptors information properties (parameters)
13. Building Functional Quality Functional information, Building Documentation and Images
Descriptors Environmental design information,
14. Building Environmental Quality Design/ Aesthetics information
Descriptors
Contribution to urban quality
15. Building Design / Aesthetics Quality 6. Real Estate Data (Added to incorporate
User comfort & Post-occupancy
Descriptors data typically collected that describes
evaluation information
16. Building Urban Quality Descriptors intangible value descriptors), including:
Cultural value information
Property Value Attributes
17. Building User Health / Comfort Image and reputation value
Quality Descriptors Property Imagery
information
18. Building Cultural Value Descriptors Property Activity
19. Building Brand Value Descriptors Property Insurance Attributes
Property Insurance Rate Variables

20. Process Quality Planning 5. Process Information Types, including: 7. Project Data, including:
Descriptors Planning process information Planning and Feasibility Data,
21. Process Quality Construction Design process information Design Management Data
Descriptors
Construction process information Construction Process and
Operations and Facilities Management Data
Management information
22. Process Quality Management 8. Operations and Maintenance Data,
Descriptors including;
Maintenance, Alteration and Repair,
Asset Monitoring and Tracking,
Space Management

RICS Research 2015 15


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

2.3 Education Issues Teaching with virtual building models, and related BIM
technologies, has the potential to increase student
This section examines some key issues around understanding, not only of design and construction
the education of property students and existing processes, but also (perhaps most importantly) of how to
property professionals with respect to BIM knowledge collaborate and share information with other professionals
competencies. An overview of the integration of BIM across the property lifecycle (e.g. Macdonald & Mills, 2012;
within the AEC disciplines is provided and the potential Macdonald & Granroth 2013). Buildings can be analysed
to leverage off this experience is discussed. This section rigorously, simulations performed and design performance
considers; firstly, BIM models or virtual building models benchmarked, moving AEC students from abstract
(VBMs) as an integrated source of information for teaching concepts to applied knowledge. Model-based building data
and learning and the re-usability of building information can be shared, value-added and re-purposed according
generated to meet AEC deliverables for property education to subject content and requirements. Other educational
purposes. Secondly it considers, a potential roadmap for advantages are the engagement and exploration of building
the adoption of BIM for teaching and learning, and; finally products and process via simulation and, of particular
the needs of existing practitioners and the role of continuing import to property focused subjects, the simulation
professional development (CPD) and short courses. of integrated planning, feasibility and implementation
processes. From this perspective, utilising virtual building
Broadly, BIM provides an appropriate and potentially models within AEC and property programmes provides a
beneficial suite of technologies for the development of vehicle to introduce principles of teamwork, collaboration
new teaching and learning approaches that can enable and continuity across multiple lifecycle stages, including
the incorporation of valuable property related data that is
used through the property lifecycle for property investment, 1. BIM and preconstruction planning a BIM project,
property maintenance and property management purposes. defining responsibility and ownership, information
exchange, model coordination planning, digital
2.3.1 BIM within AEC Education (project- information transfer standards.
level lifecycle) 2. BIM and design management design coordination,
integration, inter-disciplinarity, inter-operability, clash
The adoption of BIM technologies and processes offers
detection and reporting, model coordination and
many benefits to educational programmes offered by
management.
universities. In particular where faculties, departments
or schools have Quantity Surveying, Construction and 3. BIM and construction scheduling, constructability,
Project Management and Property undergraduate trade coordination.
and post-graduate provision; there is the potential for 4. BIM and Assembly and Manufacture because
cross-disciplinary and inter-disciplinary projects (e.g. digital product data can be exploited for downstream
Macdonald, 2012). The benefits to students studying processes, students can engage with (automated)
the AEC disciplines that BIM offers include increases assembly and manufacturing problems.
in knowledge and understandings of:
5. BIM and updates pre-bid, estimate updates, model
1) More effective workflows for improved information updates, clash detection updates, budget management.
sharing between disciplines;
6. Cost and lifecycle analysis target cost modelling,
2) Digital methodologies for time and costs savings simulated construction timelines, requirements, design,
that translate into productivity gains; construction and operational information can be utilised
3) Digital methodologies to improve product and in Facility Management subjects.
process quality. 7. Production quality documentation output is flexible
4) Sustainability for the built environment; and and exploits automation, enabling students to quickly
and more easily analyse building solutions and propose
5) Greater transparency and accountability in
alternate construction technologies and methods.
decision-making
8. Customer focus often the customer or client is
A key benefit of BIM in education is the virtual building left out of the equation in the teaching environment.
models as a visual tool for learning. Due to its geometrical As virtual building models can be understood through
representation of the parts of a building in an integrated data accurate visualisation, students are able to gain
environment, virtual building models can allow students to a clients perspective.
understand design and construction technology with ease
and speed. Virtual building models, as visual teaching aids, Given the benefits highlighted by researchers in AEC
provide AEC subjects with a means of visually simulating education (e.g. Macdonald, 2012), the next section explores
design and construction details, component relationships, the potential and issues for the integration of BIM within
construction materials and activities. Geometric modelling Property education. With the property lifecycle extending
and virtual reality techniques can be used in the visualisation far beyond the project lifecycle, the property lifecycle forces
of typical and be-spoke AEC methods, allowing students to a broader more enterprise level view of BIM for information
access information in the classroom (Jupp and Awad 2012). management than the (AEC-based) project lifecycle.

16 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

2.3.2 BIM within Property Education The experiences of the BIM and Product Lifecycle
(property-level lifecycle) Management communities can be used to understand the
practice-based issues. The construction industry is in the
One approach to deliver education that could be adopted early phases of BIM adoption and stands to benefit most
in undergraduate and fast track post-graduate conversion in learning from PLM experiences of professional practice
courses, is to set up introductory BIM subjects to provide and cultural change. Moreover property professionals
initial understanding of the concepts of BIM, including within RICS can benefit from this experience also in the
its processes, technologies, protocols and jargon, which development of CPD courses that focus on the changes
could, where possible, possibly be co-taught with AEC to roles and responsibilities.
students. Thereafter the specialised application of BIM in
the various property knowledge fields, such as valuation, Product Lifecycle Management focuses on the whole
property management, property funds investment would lifecycle of a product and is not the responsibility of
see BIM-enabled teaching and learning embedded within one unit or department; but a whole organisation. At a
those subjects. Further opportunities lie in multi and general level Product Lifecycle Management deployment
cross-disciplinary subjects, as described in the framework requires greater levels of collaboration and communication
proposed by Macdonald (2012). between professionals. This approach to information
management requires the implementation team works
RICS may be able to learn from the integration of closely with business teams; for example, people from
Product Lifecycle Management in engineering systems purchasing, order management, sales and marketing, and
education. With the increasing uptake of BIM, some inventory management (Hewitt, 2009). Product Lifecycle
AEC professionals are experiencing significant changes Management implementation requirements dictate that
to their professional working practices (Jupp & Nepal, in manufacturing based industries, a broader lifecycle
2014), which may be experienced in due course by approach to information management is desirable.
some property professionals. BIM reflects many of the Similarly across some property service tasks there
changes, challenges and opportunities prompted by the would be a requirement for close integration of products,
introduction of Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) data, applications, processes, people, work methods,
in the automotive and aerospace industries during the and equipment from across the supply chain. PLM
1990s. During the implementation of Product Lifecycle deployment in supply chains raises significant changes
Management, changes to professional practices relating to roles and responsibilities and it is vital that the roles
to new activities, roles/responsibilities, knowledge and responsibilities are determined at the outset (Stark,
competencies, and relationships was required; and many 2011). Likewise responsibilities in relation to partnering
characteristics reported on the adoption and deployment companies and their role in the process must be carefully
of BIM and Product Lifecycle Management information considered (Hewitt, 2009). Jupp and Nepal (2014)
systems are shared (Jupp & Nepal, 2014) and may be identified a number of new responsibilities within existing
applicable to the expansion of BIM into property. traditional roles in the Product Lifecycle Management
BIM and Product Lifecycle Management differ mostly literature as well as how these roles are shared between
around the capacity for technical and organisational administration executives (typically with an engineering
integration, leading to differences in approach to data background) and project engineers. Over time it is
governance and information management (Ford et al, possible new responsibilities and roles will emerge within
2013). The key differences lie in the information system some of the RICS property professions as a result of
and tools utilised by their different application domains, a BIM-enabled approach to information management
which are underpinned by vastly different BIM/ Product through the life of property assets.
Lifecycle Management platform specifications and data
requirements. BIM and PLM, share similarities such as 2.3.3 Developing New Knowledge
the approach to data sharing, project management, Competencies in RICS
organisation of teams around deliverables and timelines,
Hewitts study (2009) showed that the shift of perspective
and object-based visualisation activities. The challenges
from product delivery to a lifecycle approach represented
that follow from these shared characteristics provide fertile
a knowledge gap for many manufacturing companies;
grounds for sharing lessons learned. Issues surrounding
RICS can learn from this by adopting a proactive lead in
changes to professional practice and cultural change
the implementation of BIM in property education. Hewitt
affect the practical deployment of BIM and Product
(2009) found educational establishments and professional
Lifecycle Management concepts within their respective
bodies needed to align curriculums, assessments and
sectors. These challenges stem from various new
accreditation relative to PLM and manufacturing; and
activities that change the nature of professional roles and
RICS should consider starting this process with respect
responsibilities at practice and project level. The changes
to targeted areas of property education and professional
are predicated on the development of new technical skills,
competencies. RICS members need to be versatile, cross-
new knowledge fields and stakeholder relationships (Jupp
functional professionals who are up-to-date with emerging
& Nepal, 2014). To some degree, this would be the case
technologies; able to perform new professional services
also for property professionals.
associated with through-life requirements and activities.

RICS Research 2015 17


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Hutchins (2004) noted that US manufacturing


professionals were asked to perform tasks not traditionally
included in their professional scope of works and that they
lacked the capability to undertake the tasks successfully;
RICS needs to ensure new entrants to the property
profession, as well as, existing members are equipped
with the necessary, and appropriate level, knowledge
and skills in BIM. RICS has taken the lead in developing
the BIM Managers Certification (RICS, 2015) route to
membership and some aspects may be transferable to
the property disciplines.
The Society of Manufacturing Engineers researched
competency gaps and developed a Manufacturing
Education Plan (Fillman et al, 2010) and RICS could
consider a similar approach in respect of BIM and
property. Likewise, academia responded to the needs of
the changing workforce from one that was task oriented
to one that is competency based through the development
of innovative curricula, such as Purdue Universitys
initiative to develop a PLM-literate workforce (Fillman et al,
2010). RICS could constitute an Education Task Force to
champion the rollout of a global initiative to develop a BIM
literate property profession.
For existing members, RICS should consider a series
of BIM & the Value Dimension training programmes
that will provide members with an understanding of
BIM technology and applications in respect of their
professional practice and services.

18 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

3.0 Research Design and methodology

3.1 Stage 1 Workshops Workshop one objectives were to:


a) Identify the types of data that each of the professional
To identify the main information types used by the different groups use in their daily activities, and;
property stakeholders the research design was based on
the Delphi method (Dalkey and Helmer 1963). The value b) The associated challenges of through-life information
of Delphi is demonstrated in a wide range of applications management.
on complex, interdisciplinary and technology based issues Workshop one was convened over a half-day period.
using a method for structuring group communication The workshop was divided into two sessions with four
processes (Linstone and Turoff, 1975). The research design groups, with each session including a presentation by the
employed a series of workshops with industry experts facilitators to frame and introduce the exercises, followed
followed by feedback reporting and surveys. As such the by individual brainstorming tasks, group break-out
research used an inductive approach to qualitative data sessions, and finally a full workshop discussion. Results
analysis (Silverman, 2013). were reported to participants via email for feedback and
To address the objectives, property and AEC professionals this data was then used as the basis for the subsequent
working for different companies in Australia and the UK workshops. The first exercise (1A) comprised a clustered
were invited to participate. Practitioners had a minimum list of 24 relevant information requirements elicited from
five years post qualification experience as the findings the literature as being important to property professions.
should reflect business practice as closely as possible. The information requirements were presented on 24
The company types of invited participants included: cards and participants asked to sort them on the basis
Development and Asset Management, Property of the information types they perceived as essential,
Management and Valuation, Design and Construction, nice to know or irrelevant to their work tasks (see
and Transactions Management. The participants were figure 2). The aim was to establish the main information
industry experts who were content matter experts on their types and identify correlations between stakeholder
respective fields and regularly engaged in the sourcing, data requirements.
organisation and reuse of disparate data sources during
their work tasks. The same participants attended each
of the three workshops to ensure consistency. In Sydney
13 participants attended the workshop and researchers,
representing the property and construction disciplines from
the University of Technology, Sydney (UTS), facilitated. In
London six participants attended the workshops facilitated
by a Chartered Building Surveyor and academic.

RICS Research 2015 19


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Figure 2 Selection of sort cards showing data types adapted from Lutzendorf & Lorenz, 2011

20 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

Workshop two had the objective to: 3.2 Stage 2 Online Questionnaire
a) Identify upstream and downstream data requirements
related to professional property service tasks
Survey
The same respondents participated in the second Having ascertained the data types and data needs of
exercise, cards classified as essential and nice to know property professionals in the Stage 1 workshops, a
by participants were used as the basis for identifying questionnaire was designed to allow the researchers
challenges to the sourcing, organisation and reusing of to determine whether the workshop data types and
information throughout the building lifecycle. Participants needs identified by the participants matched those of
were asked to identify challenges on the basis of their the profession more broadly. This part of the research
cards so as to pinpoint individually problems in relation embodied the characteristics of quantitative research
to a BIM-enabled approach to information management, (Silverman, 2013) whereby a statistical analysis of data
before then discussing their findings within each group. reveals the characteristics and needs of a larger group
Participants were then asked to rank challenges deemed of practitioners.
most to least significant. As a result of the second An online survey was designed adopting best practice
workshop a timeline for managing data through the in survey design (Silverman, 2013) comprising four parts
property lifecycle was produced for each participant to and launched in April 2015. Part one asked respondents
explore in the final workshop (see Appendix 2 and 3 for about their area of practice across the RICS regions,
typical examples). their area of expertise, the stage of the property lifecycle
during which their expertise was required, their level
The objective of workshop three was to: of expertise, knowledge and usage of BIM in their
a) Analyse upstream and downstream data requirements professional services. Part two focussed on the value
relative to data characteristics, such as format, source, of data contained in BIM, and asked respondents about
quality, accessibility. the importance of different types of BIM data to their
professional services. The next section of the survey
In this workshop, participants reviewed their timeline chart
asked questions about non BIM enabled data and
for managing data through the property lifecycle and
respondents data needs in order to prioritise the data
commented on any changes that were required. In some
type property professionals would find most useful to
cases property practitioners required identical data at
access in a BIM. Part three focussed on the status of
various points in the property lifecycle for a task and had
information technologies in professional property tasks
complex data needs (see figure 5 and 6 and Appendices
and which land use types had the most requirements for
2 and 3), whereas others had data needs at a single point
BIM enabled data according to respondents. Finally part
only during the life cycle.
four examined the value of data sources and potential BIM
enabled information. Having identified the key challenges
from Workshops 2 and 3 in respect of data, respondents
were asked to rank the significance of different challenges
be they technical challenges or data quality and fidelity
challenges and so on. The survey was designed for
completion within a 10-minute period, and remained open
for a four-week period. The survey was distributed through
RICS channels and reminder emails were sent weekly to
encourage as good a response rate as possible.

RICS Research 2015 21


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

4.0 Workshop Data Analysis and Discussion


4.1 Workshop 1 Identifying Data Examining the ranking of the importance of information
sub-types according to the four stakeholder groups,
Types and Needs as anticipated variation was identified. For example the
Development and Asset Management group returned
Participants used workbooks and Post- it notepads to Payments Out and Surrounding Characteristics as the
record responses. Group discussions were recorded and two most important information types, whereas the AEC
facilitators and scribes took notes. All data captured from group selected Site Features, Land Features, Surrounding
the workshop was analysed using thematic analysis. To Characteristics, Building Description, Technical Quality,
confirm agreement between workshop participants on the Functional Quality and Micro-Location as being of
significance of the information types identified according most and equal importance. A summary of the variation
to each professional group, a three-point Likert scale was in importance between stakeholder groups is shown
used, where 1 equals least important (irrelevant) and 3 in Table 3.
equals most important (essential) and were analysed by
calculating the Relative Importance Index: The most consistent information types were those
belonging to the Building Descriptors category, with six
RII = W of the nine information sub-types being important across
A N all stakeholder groups. The importance of these building
descriptors to all stakeholders confirms the potential of
where W = weight given to response, A = highest weight,
BIMs application within the property profession.
and N = number of respondents.
The mapping in Figure 3 reveals those significant
The relative importance index (RII) for all 22 information
information types relative to their stakeholder activities
types were calculated for all participants, and then
and involvement throughout CPDM and Project timelines.
calculated according to each professional group. The
Using these insights together with a specification of BIM
22 information types were arranged in descending order
deliverables (Succar et al. 2013) a framework is proposed
of relative importance according to all participants and
of the way in which client-side stakeholders can leverage
ranked. The highest RII indicates the most important
data to support the CPDM lifecycle and start to identify the
information types with rank 1, the next indicating the next
gaps relative to when and what information can be derived
most important with rank 2 and so on. The rankings of
from the project lifecycle. The importance of the five main
each professional group were compared to the overall RII
information categories was then compared according to
rankings shown in Table 2.
where each stakeholder groups activities occurred within
The highest ranked attributes that fall within the top 5 the CPDM and Project lifecycles as shown in Figure 3.
information types according to All Responses (in Table
2), i.e., calculated across four groups: Development and
Asset Managers, AEC Professionals, Valuation and Cost
Managers, and Transaction Managers and are discussed
below. The All Response column (in Table 2) shows the
five most important information types were;
1. Building Description (RII 0.92),
2. Functional Quality (RII 0.87),
3. Land Features (RII 0.85),
4. Technical Quality (RII 0.85), and
5. Payments Out (RII 0.85).

22 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

Table 2 Descending relative importance of data types for Stakeholder Groups (highest to lowest)

Development
AEC & Asset Value & Cost Transaction
All Responses Professionals Managers Managers Managers

Information Types RII Rank RII Rank RII Rank RII Rank RII Rank
1 Building Description 0.92 1 1.00 1 0.92 3 1.00 1 1.00 1
2 Functional Quality 0.87 1 1.00 2 0.83 8 0.92 3 1.00 1
3 Land Features 0.85 1 1.00 3 0.83 8 0.92 3 0.75 20
4 Technical Quality 0.85 1 1.00 3 0.92 3 0.83 12 0.75 20
5 Payments Out 0.85 21 0.44 3 1.00 1 0.92 3 1.00 1
6 Site Features 0.82 1 1.00 6 0.83 8 0.92 3 1.00 1
7 Environmental Quality 0.82 8 0.89 6 0.83 8 0.83 12 1.00 1
8 Operational Quality 0.79 8 0.89 8 0.83 8 0.75 17 1.00 1
9 Health & User Comfort 0.79 8 0.89 8 0.83 8 0.83 12 0.75 20
10 Payments In 0.79 22 0.33 8 0.92 3 0.92 3 1.00 1
11 FM Quality 0.77 19 0.67 11 0.83 8 0.88 8 1.00 1
12 National Market 0.74 19 0.67 12 0.83 8 0.75 17 1.00 1
13 Market & Letting Vacancy Situation 0.74 22 0.33 12 0.83 8 0.83 12 1.00 1
14 Planning Quality 0.74 14 0.78 12 0.75 18 0.75 17 1.00 1
15 Micro-Location 0.72 1 1.00 15 0.75 18 0.75 17 1.00 1
16 Environmental Context 0.72 14 0.78 15 0.88 7 0.83 12 1.00 1
17 Tenant & occupier Situation 0.72 22 0.33 15 0.92 3 0.67 23 1.00 1
18 Construction Quality 0.72 8 0.89 15 0.75 18 0.88 8 1.00 1
19 Surrounding Characteristics 0.67 1 1.00 19 1.00 1 0.88 8 1.00 1
20 Design/Aesthetic Quality 0.67 8 0.89 19 0.75 18 0.75 17 0.75 20
21 Design Process Quality 0.67 14 0.78 19 0.83 8 0.75 17 0.75 20
22 Macro-Location 0.62 14 0.78 22 0.75 18 1.00 1 0.83 19
23 Cultural/Image Value 0.59 8 0.89 23 0.63 23 0.88 8 0.75 20
24 Urban Design Quality 0.51 14 0.78 24 0.63 23 0.63 24 0.75 20

Table 3 Relative Importance of Five Main Information Types & Stakeholder Groups

RII According to Building


Stakeholder Groups Location Plot of Land Descriptors Process Quality Economic Quality

Development & Med. to High Med. to High Med. to High


Low Significance High Significance
Asset Managers Significance Significance Significance

Med. to High Med. to High


AEC Stakeholders Low Significance High Significance Low Significance
Significance Significance

Valuation & Cost Medium Med. to High Med. to High


High Significance Low Significance
Managers Significance Significance Significance

Transaction Medium Medium


High Significance Low Significance High Significance
Managers Significance Significance

RICS Research 2015 23


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Importance of Main Information Types according to Stakeholders and Activities across


Figure 3 CPDM/Project Lifecycle Phases

Single Facility Project


Lifecycle Phases (PD) (SD) (DD) (CD&CO) (OM)

Commercial Property
Development Conception Planning & Preparation Execution Operation Recommissioning
& Management (C) Feasibility (P) (E) Maintenance (R)
Lifecycle Phases (SD) (OM)

Location
Descriptors
Plot of land
Descriptors

Building
Descriptors
Process Quality
Descriptors
Economic Quality
Descriptors

Development Valuation AEC Transaction Mgmt.


& Asset Mgmt. & Cost Mgmt. Stakeholders Stakeholders
Stakeholders Stakeholders

Low significance

Low-Medium significance

Medium significance

Medium-High significance

High significance

Scope of professional practices

24 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

4.2 Workshop 2 Identifying Post workshop analysis further classified these five
categories in terms of Technology based Challenges
the Challenges (category 1) and Socio-technical Challenges (categories
2-5). Far more socio-technical challenges (20 in total)
Participants brainstormed the challenges relating to through were identified as being significant by participants.
life information management and then ranked them in Participants were then asked to rank the importance of
the same way as exercise 1. A total of 23 challenges each of the 23 challenges. Figure 4 illustrates the results
were identified, that are divided in technology based and of RII analysis.
socio-technology challenges as shown in Table 4.
A number of issues will need addressing if the vast
The challenges identified by each group were then amounts of property data are to be a useful resource
discussed. Five categories (Table 4) identified by the over a building lifecycle. Whilst three technology-based
facilitators and reported back to participants include challenges identified by workshop participants as having
issues surrounding: a high level of agreed significance, the number and
1) Inter-operability and data standards, significance of socio-technical challenges identified were
greater overall.
2) Data quality and fidelity,
3) Context,
4) Security and privacy, and;
5) Digital skills and knowledge competencies.

Table 4 Challenges to through-life information management and corresponding RII

Type Sub Type Challenges Identified


1. Ensuring data to be compatible and interoperable over long timescales (RII 0.90)
Technology Inter-
based operability & 2. Ensuring data can be sustained and updated over long timescales (RII 0.85)
Challenges Data Standards
3. Ensuring data can be organised such that it can be discovered and exploited (RII 0.92)
4. Human error, information overload and cognitive limitations (RII 0.77)
Data Quality 5. Data consistency, accuracy and reliability (RII 0.92)
& Fidelity 6. Data granularity and its consistent specification (RII 0.81)
7. Data verification and validation (GIGO Garbage in, Garbage out) (RII 0.85)
8. Degree of interpretation and human manipulation (RII 0.85)
9. Communication differences and difficulties between domain specific languages (RII 0.74)
Context-based
10. Number of disparate data sources and disjointed nature of information flow (RII 0.87)
Issues
11. Differences in levels of availability of data between stakeholders through-life (RII 0.54)
12. Compressed timeframes for data generation, sourcing and analysis (RII 0.56)
Socio- 13. Conflict in interests relative to data transparency and business interests (RII 0.74)
Technical
Challenges 14. Confidence in IT infrastructure security in distributed networks & data stores (RII 0.81)

Security & 15. Privacy preserving analytics and granular access control (RII 0.82)
Privacy 16. Secure data storage and data provenance (RII 0.81)
17. Intellectual property and information ownership (RII 0.90)
18. End-point validation and filtering (RII 0.82)
19. Lack of digital skill sets and domain knowledge (RII 0.85)
20. Complexity of incorporating operational simulations (RII 0.62)
Digital Skills
& Knowledge 21. Perceived black box and risk in loss of knowledge due to dynamic workforce (RII 0.54)
Competencies
22. Need for cultural change amid feelings of fear & loss of control (RII 0.73)
23. Continual reporting and justification of business case for on-going data collection (RII 0.72)

RICS Research 2015 25


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Figure 4 Relative Importance of Challenges to Through-life Information Management

Importance
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Ensuring data to be compatible and


interoperable over long timescales

Interoperability
Ensuring data can be sustained and
and Data updated over long timescales
Standards
Ensuring data can be organised such
that it can be discovered and exploited

Human error, information overload


and cognitive limitations

Data consistency, accuracy and


reliability
Data quality
and fidelity
Data granularity and its consistent
specification

Data verification and validation


(GIGO Garbage in, Garbage out)

Degree of interpretation and human


manipulation

Communication differences and


difficulties between domain specific
languages
Number of disparate data sources
Impact of
and disjointed nature of current
context information flow
Differences in levels of availability
of data between stakeholders
through-life

Compressed timeframes for data


generation, sourcing and analysis

Conflict in interests relative to data


transparency and business interests

Confidence in IT infrastructure security


in distributed networks and data stores

Privacy preserving analytics and


granular access control
Privacy and
Security
Secure data storage and data
provenance

Intellectual property and information


ownership

End-point validation and filtering

Lack of domain knowledge and digital


skill sets, lack of education and training
programs

Complexity of incorporating
operational simulations

Digital Skills Perceived black box systems and loss


and Knowledge of corporate knowledge due to dynamic
Competencies workforce

Need for cultural change amid feelings


of fear & loss of control

Continual reporting and justification


of business case for ongoing data
collection

26 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

4.2.1 Technology-based Challenges Context based issues


Workshop attendees identified three key technology- Key challenges identified included the degree of
based challenges. These are: interpretation and human manipulation of data, the
number of disparate data sources and the disjointed
1. Information generated over a propertys lifecycle
nature of information flow. Managing property related data
potentially needs to be accessed over many
is a challenge due to its diversity in terms of the number
generations of computer hardware and software.
of different aspects of the building, its development,
2. Multiple changes to the building and the local operations, surrounding environment and market. It is a
environment occurs over the lifecycle, and strategies challenge because to understand and exploit the data;
are needed for updating, reporting and merging these the context in which it has been generated, and the
changes at different levels. relationships between data types and lifecycle phases
3. Information needs to be organised so that it can need to be known and understood. In research aimed
be discovered and used by different property at supporting data re-use, Ball et al. (2012) proposed
professionals. that, in addition to primary data records, the information
generated or collected should include data describing the
4.2.2 Socio-technical Challenges context in which it was generated or collected.
Participants noted that, no matter how good their IT
systems are; if the socio-technical challenges are not
Security and privacy
addressed then the benefits of BIM for information Six challenges were identified that relate to security and
management for property professionals may not be privacy. Of these, five were ranked highly, including:
delivered. These issues surround change management 1) Confidence in IT infrastructure security,
and compliance in the implementation of information
systems. Such barriers are documented in the literature, 2) Privacy preserving analytics,
and numerous AEC based case studies on the barriers 3) Secure data storage and data provenance,
to BIM adoption have discussed their impact. During
4) Intellectual property and information ownership, and;
discussions, workshop participants mostly focused their
attention on these people issues. 5) End-point validation.
Limited attention has been paid in the BIM literature
Data quality and fidelity to these issues; security in data access and issues
Participants felt there were many opportunities for the surrounding privacy of project data are most commonly
accidental or deliberate entry of erroneous data with a discussed (Redman et al. 2012, Singh et al. 2011).
challenge to make data consistent, accurate and reliable. However this is changing; a British Standard, in PAS
An appropriate level of detail and consistent specification form, is up for consultation at the moment on this area
was important, as were problems with data verification (PAS 1192-5: Specification for security-minded building
and validation. Previous studies observed accidental information modelling, digital built environments and
misspelling of words in service records, the use of slang smart asset management) (BS 2015). Less attention is
and abbreviations (Ball et al, 2011). Modern information paid to issues of information ownership and intellectual
systems can overcome these issues to some extent, property in situations of dynamic relationships between
but it is more difficult to address the deliberate falsification AECO companies involved in the lifecycle of a property
of data/records. (for example, where one company constructs a high-rise
commercial office, another owns it, another maintains it
and others lease it). Concerns about intellectual property
rights were seen as limiting the possibilities to learn from
the aggregation of property data.

RICS Research 2015 27


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Need for New Digital Skill Sets and their concern as to whether BIM, as an information
Knowledge Competencies management tool could replicate this level of real-life
experience, and what training would be required to use
There is a need for education and training in new BIM effectively for this purpose.
information systems and to develop new knowledge
competencies. Five challenges were identified and, of A similar process was undertaken in respect of the
these, the lack of digital skill sets combined with an London workshop and table 5 shows the similarities
inadequate level of domain knowledge was identified as and differences in perceptions of participants about the
the most significant. Participants highlighted the difficulty drivers and challenges faced with information needs and
in making sense of large amounts of data without a data management through the property lifecycle. Overall
good deal of intelligent processing and the knowledge/ Australia based practitioners perceived a greater range of
experience to interpret and drive this processing. For issues than their UK counterparts and this may reflect the
example, participants stated that an experienced different cultures predominating within the two markets,
property professional currently aggregates and interprets as well as the different areas of property represented in
many sources of data when making an assessment of both groups of workshops.
the state or value of an asset. Participants expressed

Comparison between Australian and UK participants perspectives regarding the key


Table 5 drivers and challenges when sourcing, integrating and generating data through-life

Data Quality and Process and


Aus

Aus

Aus

Aus
UK

UK

UK

UK
Fidelity Workflow Human Error Security and Privacy
Data consistency, Disjointed nature of Lack of combined Conflicts in interest
accuracy & reliability information flow domain-specific relative to data
across all lifecycle knowledge & digital transparency &
phases skill sets business interest
Data format and Differences in level of Lack of education IT infrastructure
interoperability availability of data to and training- both security in distributed
all users through-life institutional & networks & data stores
organisational
Data granularity & level Lack of automation & Black box systems Privacy preserving
of details (LoD) integration between & loss of corporate analytic & granular
information systems knowledge due to access control
dynamic workforce
Data quantity Vs Compressed Need for cultural Secure data storage &
quality timeframes for data change admit feelings data provenance
generation & analysis for fear & loss of
control
Objective Vs. subjective Uncertainty Communication End-point validation
data, information surrounding value of difficulties & and filtering
&knowledge data & its ongoing use differences in domain
through-life specific language
Data verification Lack of standards & Human error, Security of property
and validation: protocols for data use, cognitive limitations & and building metadata
GIGO (Garbage in entry, verification and information overload tags through-life
Garbage out) validation
Complexity of Continual reporting/
incorporating justification of
operational business case for
simulation data collection and
upgrading

28 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

4.3 Workshop 2 and 3 Identifying Figure 5


Data needs for a Building Surveyor
Technical Due Diligence survey
Timelines & Mapping Data Needs
MAJOR COSTS MINOR COSTS
Through Life.
Having identified the extensive range of data types in
Workshop 1, the second part of workshop 2 asked Visual Health
Inspections and User
participants to plot a timeline for managing data through Comfort
the property lifecycle. Each participant focussed on
a particular task they executed in their professional
Basic
capacity. Figures 5 and 6 show two typical examples Building
of the property data needs through life. It is clear that description

some tasks are far more detailed and complex than


others. In figure 5, a Chartered Building Surveyors data Discussion
Environmental
needs, when undertaking a Technical Due Diligence with F.M.
Quality
(TDD) survey are shown. This task takes place during the
lifecycle and typically requires relatively few data types.
In comparison the Portfolio Management surveyor (figure Site
6) has requirements to access a far greater range of data features

types over a much greater range of the building lifecycle


from planning and feasibility through to the end of life cycle Access to Report
Maintenance Functional
when redevelopment or demolition is a consideration. Data quality
to Client

Two further examples of the mapping of data needs and


types over the property lifecycle is shown for a Transaction
Manager and a Portfolio Management Surveyor in appendix Land
features
2 and 3. Although the data needs occur at different phases,
and involve different type of data, it is apparent that some
Discussion
of their data needs are to be found within BIM. Equally it is with Semas
Operational
apparent that other data needs / types are not yet included /Structural
Quality
Engineers
within BIM, but are in other digital databases, such as BMS.
Note that due to time restrictions for the London workshop,
these participants did not complete the tasks for workshop Environmental
Context
2 and 3.
Workshop 3 involved a review of the timelines plotted in
workshop 2 and a review of the data types and needs. Technical
In some cases amendments were made. Discussions Quality
between participants revealed the diverse nature of
data types and needs required by the various property
professionals for specific tasks. Use,
Redevelopment, Redevelopment/ strategic
maintenance
Technically, there is potential to link these databases, and repairs
sale, demolition optioneering
however different sectors of the property and construction
industry own and manage some of these databases and
some negotiation is required to make these databases talk
to each other for property professionals.

RICS Research 2015 29


30
Managing Property Data Through Life
Mapping Property Professional Tasks with Information Inputs and Outputs

MINOR COSTS MAJOR COSTS MINOR COSTS


Figure 6

Planning Design Asset management Asset planning/Repositioning/H&BU

RICS Research 2015


Titles and Planning Design Building Tenancy Tenancy Maintenance
Easements Report Report Audits Schedule Schedule Reports
Environmental
Quality
Hazmat Land Concept Design
Report Features Diagram Report

GEO Indicative Tenancy Tenant and Tenant and Tenant and Basic
Technical
Occupier Occupier Occupier Building
Report Costs Schedule Quality
Situation Situation Situation Description

Flooding Health
Maps Design
and User SSPECS
Report Investment Maintenance Asset Building
Comfort
Model Schedule Documents
Topography
Facilities General
Brief Management FM Score Ledger
Quality Payments Agreements
Site Plan Out
Asset Plan
Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Titles and Conceptual


Easements ESD Report Facilities
Investment
Management
Model Quality
Conceptual
Report Accountant
Environmental Receivable
Quality Payments
BIM
In
Costs
Asset Plan

SPESC Technical Tenant


Quality Survey Health
and User
Comfort
Design
OH&S
Data needs for Portfolio Management Surveyors through the lifecycle

Reports
Audits
Operational
Quality Asset
ESD
Plans
Modelling

Conceptual Detailed Pre-construction Handover and Use,


Planning and Feasibility and site Construction operations maintenance Redevelopment, Redevelopment/ strategic
Design Design and defects sale, demolition optioneering
establishment start-up and repairs
rics.org/research

5.0 Survey Data Figure 7 RICS region respondents work in

Analysis and Which region are you currently working in?

Discussion Middle East and Africa


5
Latin
America
0

5.1 Part 1 Respondent Profiles,


Current Awareness and Usage Europe
of BIM 19
The respondents profile information, including region,
property discipline and sector, involvement in stages of
the property lifecycle, years of experience and size of
organisation, were collected in the first part of the survey
Asia Pacific
to provide context for the answers. The survey had a total
of 59 respondents, each of which completed the survey 21 North America
to varying degrees. Given the low response rate of the 14
membership base of RICS, care must be taken when
drawing conclusions from the results.
Overall, most respondents (88%) are very experienced
with 11 or more years working in the built environment
sector. The respondents are employed by either very large
organisations of more than 1000 employees (37%) or very
small ones with less than 51 employees (42%). Those
working in large organisations are likely to have access to
latest innovations in technology including BIM.
Figure 7 shows the distribution of respondents by RICS Figure 9 shows that most worked in the commercial office
regions. Survey comparisons by region were not possible sector, where larger new buildings are most likely to have
due to under or over-representation of construction and some elements of BIM adopted in the construction phase.
design professionals within each region. The retail sector was also well represented though it is
not clear the type of retail buildings covered, with newer
When the responses from the regions were analysed
larger retail centres being likely to use BIM technology
all North American responses were from property
compared to smaller scale retail. Many worked in the
professionals, the Europe responses were slightly biased
residential sector, which again is less likely to use BIM
to construction, whilst the Asia Pacific respondents were
unless the projects are large scale or high-rise. The Health
slightly biased to property professionals. The small group
sector is reasonably well covered but again can range
of respondents from the Middle East and Africa region were
from small and simple buildings to very complex large-
mostly construction professionals
scale stock again with varying levels of BIM adoption.
Figure 8 shows that respondents areas of current Similar comments apply in respect of education buildings.
professional practice was primarily valuation and Less well represented are those working on industrial
property development, which is the group we wanted to buildings, transport and infrastructure.
target in respect of knowledge and awareness of BIM.
Respondents working in construction and design were
also well represented in the sample. Areas of practice less
represented were property portfolio management, property
investment and FM. Respondents were also asked to
identify which sectors and land use types they worked on.

RICS Research 2015 31


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Figure 8 Respondents area of current practice

Which area(s) of property do you currently practice in?


(Select all that apply) Percentage (%)
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0

Property Valuation

Property Development

Construction

Design (AEC)

Real Estate & Transactions

Property and/or Portfolio Management

Property Investment

Other

FM

Figure 9 Land use types and sectors of property respondents work on

What sectors of property do your work activities surround?


(Select all that apply) Percentage (%)
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0

Commercial Offices

Retail buildings

Residential buildings

Health buildings

Other commercial

Education buildings

Industrial

Transport

Infrastructure

Other

32 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

5.2 Part 2 Experience Working be partly a result of the seniority and years of experience
of the respondents. Figure 10 summarises responses
with Information Technologies in respect of use of technologies in the workplace.

Not surprisingly, high usage of intranets was reported When asked about their understanding of BIM, 12.1%
in the survey. Also, given the high numbers working have no understanding and 48.3% report having limited
in the property sector there is a high use of online understanding, which shows a need to educate and up-
property databases, such as RP data in Australia. skill over 60% of respondents (see Figure 11). Conversely
Likewise, valuation systems and extranets have fair levels just under a quarter (24.1%) felt that they have a good
of usage. Less well used are 3D modelling systems, understanding whilst just 15.5% felt they have excellent
finance systems and 2D CAD systems. The lowest used understanding of BIM.
technologies by the respondents were building simulation Having said this when asked about experience of BIM
and analysis, 4D and 5D modelling, virtual data room (Figure 12) 67% record no experience which confirms
and BMS. Overall, the group is reasonably used to using the need to educate and up-skill RICS members. Only
IT, however the advanced and newest iterations of BIM 12% have experience of BIM exceeding 5 years. Nine of
technologies are less familiar to the sample. This may the 19 that had experience in BIM reported using it on a
daily basis in their current work activities.

Figure 10 Use of information technologies in the workplace

Of the following information technologies, which do you use in your current work activities?
Percentage (%)
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0

Intranets

Online Property Databases

Extranets

Valuation Systems

3D Modelling Systems

Finance Systems

2D CAD Systems

Building Management Systems

Virtual Data Rooms

4D or 5D Modelling Systems

Building Simulation and Analysis

Other

RICS Research 2015 33


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Figure 11 Understanding of BIM Figure 12 Experience of BIM

What is your level of understanding of Do you have any practical hands-on


Building Information Modelling (BIM)? experience with BIM?

No
understanding
12.1%
Less than
1 year
Excellent
understanding 9%
12.1%
13 years

No experience 9%
Limited understanding
48.3% 67%
Good
understanding
5+ years
12.1%
12%

45 years
3%

Of the 19 respondents that have had hands-on This approach is understandable where there is a need to
experience, Figure 13 shows where they received their up-skill existing members of a workforce. However, there
training. Most received training on the job, followed by is a greater potential in the education system for people,
industry training courses, in-house training programmes future RICS members, to be exposed to the theories
and finally tertiary education. Clearly where training is underlying the technologies and to be exposed to a greater
delivered on the job, in house and via training courses range of systems. On this basis we strongly encourage
individuals are exposed to a limited range of systems and RICS to promote the adoption of BIM education into its
technologies already selected or adopted by their employers. accredited global property education provision.

Figure 13 Source of BIM training

Where did you receive your training in BIM? (select all that apply)
Percentage (%)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Tertiary institution 3
Industry training courses 8
In-house training programs 7
On the job 11

34 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

5.3 Part 3 Information Frequency of Information Use


Frequency and Need of Use For each information type, an average score was calculated
for the respondents. Given the low participation rate, we
Part 3 of the survey, entitled Understanding Information will not look at individual information types, but rather the
Value, asked respondents to rank different types categories of information and their relative scores.
of information on the frequency of use and why the In Table 6, the items within Real Estate Data are very highly
information is needed in the context of their current work rated, indicating survey respondents use this category of
activities. The answers were scored, with higher scores information frequently. Conversely the 3D model objects
given to higher frequency of use and to more urgent need and properties rated lowest in the frequency of use of
of use. data types. Documentation (specifications) and images
The options and scoring for frequency of use were: (drawings) also rated highly and are used frequently by
respondents. Other data types used most frequently were
Frequently used in daily business, Spatial (area data) and Project data (construction and
SCORE = 3 planning/feasibility attributes). The most frequently used
Cyclically used at regular intervals, Market Data is state, regional and neighbourhood market
SCORE = 2 data. This is closely followed by the most frequently used
Property Location Data which is micro-location information
Infrequently one or only in certain scenarios, such as transport connections or reputation/image of the
SCORE = 1 area, quality of local facilities/amenities such as shops,
Never schools and so on.
SCORE = 0
Information Need
The options and scoring for need of use were:
When looking at information or data need a different range
Required by law of attributes score highly. The highest need for data falls
SCORE = 3 in the area of maintenance where information needs are
Necessary to carry out my business processes space management, asset monitoring and tracking and
SCORE = 2 information about alterations and repairs to buildings.
This data is of use to Facilities Management, Property
Not needed by me
Management and Building Surveyors. The next highest
SCORE = 1
ranked need is for project data regarding feasibility and
planning attributes, which has a high frequency use in
Table 6. Similarly needs with regards to Documentation
and Images (specifications and 2D drawings) ranked highly.
This is a long served traditional method of representing
data in specifications and 2D drawings in the property and
construction industry and this confirms the limited take-up
and usage of BIM amongst many RICS members to date.

RICS Research 2015 35


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Table 6 Frequency of use of data types

Information Category

Property Site Data

Maintenance Data
Property Location

Spatial Attributes

Documentation &
3D Model Objects
Real Estate Data

Financial Data

& Properties

Project Data
Market Data

Operation &
Frequency

Images
of Use

Data
Average
Survey item Score
Property Insurance Claims 3.61
Variables Affecting Property Insurance Rates 3.52
Property Imagery 2.74
Property Activity 2.67
Property Value Attributes 2.55
Specifications 1.90
2D Documentation (plans, elevations, sections, etc.) 1.90
Area 1.88
Construction Attributes 1.87
Planning & Feasibility Attributes 1.75
State, Regional and Neighbourhood Market 1.73
Micro-location 1.63
Property development 1.59
Design management attributes 1.59
Certifications (Permits, Ratings, etc.) 1.55
2D geometry 1.54
National Market 1.53
Maintenance, Alteration and Repair 1.51
Macro-location 1.46
Property Lot Attributes 1.46
Tenant and Occupier Situation 1.45
Listings, Recent Sales and Auction 1.45
Vacancy and Letting Situation 1.44
Environmental Attributes 1.42
Surrounding Building Context 1.40
Marketing Statistics 1.38
Property transfers 1.36
3D rendered perspectives 1.36
Utilities 1.36
Asset Monitoring & Tracking 1.34
Volume 1.32
Orientation 1.27
Operations and Maintenance Manuals 1.23
Architectural Components 1.23
3D geometry 1.21
Space management 1.21
Structural components 1.20
Heating, ventilation & air conditioning components 1.03
Electrical and lighting components 1.00
Mechanical & plant components 0.98
Internal fittings, furnishings and fixtures 0.95
External fittings, furnishings & fixtures 0.95
Hard & soft landscaping components 0.92
Payments Out 0.88
Payments In 0.87

36 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

Table 7 Data need score by data type / area of practice

Information Category

Property Site Data

Maintenance Data
Property Location

Spatial Attributes

Documentation &
3D Model Objects
Real Estate Data

Financial Data

& Properties

Project Data
Market Data

Operation &

Images
Need

Data
Average
Survey item Score
Space Management 2.38
Asset Monitoring & Tracking 2.32
Maintenance, alteration & repair 2.26
Planning & feasibility attributes 1.97
Specifications 1.90
2D Documentation (plans, elevations, sections, etc.) 1.85
Environmental Attributes 1.84
National Market 1.83
Area 1.83
Design management attributes 1.83
Utilities 1.78
Certifications (Permits, Ratings, etc.) 1.78
Property Lot Attributes 1.76
Property development 1.76
Micro-location 1.76
State, regional and neighbourhood market 1.74
Surrounding Building Context 1.73
2D geometry 1.70
Architectural Components 1.70
Operation and Maintenance Manuals 1.69
Macro-Location 1.69
Property Value Attributes 1.69
3D Rendered Perspectives 1.68
Orientation 1.66
Tenant and Occupier Situation 1.64
Volume 1.63
Structural Components 1.63
Property Activity 1.60
Listings, Recent Sales and Auction 1.60
Vacancy and Letting Situation 1.58
Property Transfers 1.57
Property Imagery 1.57
Marketing Statistics 1.56
3D geometry 1.55
Mechanical & Plant Components 1.55
External Fittings, Furnishings & FIxtures 1.55
Hard & Soft Landscaping Components 1.55
Internal Fittings, Furnishings & Fixtures 1.54
Electrical and lighting components 1.54
Heating, ventilation & air conditioning components 1.53
Payments In 1.43
Payments Out 1.40
Variables Affecting Property Insurance Rates 1.22
Property Insurance Claims 1.22
Construction Attributes 1.93

RICS Research 2015 37


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Figure 14 shows information types plotted by their ranking Specifications Documentation & Images
on need and frequency of use. Of particular note, is the Property Marketing Statistics Market Data
disparity between the frequency and need rankings of the
real estate data. Although the real estate information types Maintenance, Alteration & Repair Operations
were amongst the highest in ranking for frequency, they & Maintenance Data
have relatively low rankings for need. This suggests that Construction Attributes Project Data
these are used with great frequency by a small proportion
Design Management Attributes Project Data
of the respondents for non-legal reasons, but that a large
proportion of the respondents do not use them. The Planning & Feasibility Attributes Project Data
specific information types that rank as highest in terms of Micro-Location Property location Data
frequency and need (top right quadrant) are:
Property Development Property Site Data
2D Documentation (plans, elevations, sections, etc.)
Property Lot Attributes Property Site Data
Documentation & Images
2D geometry Spatial Attributes
Certifications (Permits, Ratings, etc.) Documentation
& Images Area Spatial Attributes.

Figure 14 Information Type Need Ranking versus Frequency Ranking


Information Need Ranking

Information Frequency Ranking

3D Model Objects & Properties Documentation & Images Market Data Operations & Maintenance Data Project Data
Property Location Data Property Site Data Real Estate Data Spatial Attributes Financial Data

38 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

Although the response rate to the survey was not professionals than to property professionals. Building
high enough to make a lot of cross-tabs or subgroup descriptors were found to be more important to AEC
comparisons, the responses of the property professionals stakeholders (construction and design professionals) in
were compared to those of the construction professionals. both the workshops and survey. Financial data is of more
A number of statistically significant differences were importance to property professionals.
found between the two groups when it came to ranking
Several of the information types that were identified as
information types. Table 8 shows the information types for
being more important to property professionals also
which there was a statistically significant difference in the
ranked in the highest quadrant of information types (Figure
median scores between the two professional groups.
14), including micro-location, property development,
These survey results are consistent with the differences property lot attributes and property marketing statistics.
found in the workshops. The workshop Location These items might be indicative of a gap for property
category was found to be less important to AEC professionals where these items have been relatively less
stakeholders (refer to Table 3), which is equivalent important to AEC stakeholders but are of high frequency
to the above result that Market and Property and need for work activities.
Location categories are less important to construction

Table 8 Tests of Professional Differences in Information Importance

Independent-Samples Median Test


Frequency Statistical Property Construction
Category of Data Information Type or Need Significance Professionals Professionals
State, Regional and Neighbourhood
Frequency 0.002
Market
Listings, Recent Sales
Market Data Frequency 0.002
and Auction
Property Transfers Frequency 0.003
Property Marketing Statistics Frequency 0.004
Property Location Data Micro-Location Frequency 0.011
More Less
Tenant and Occupier Situation Frequency 0.001 Important Important
Financial Data
Vacancy and Letting Situation Frequency 0.001
Property Lot Attributes Frequency 0.001
Utilities Frequency 0.004
Property Site Data Environmental Attributes Frequency 0.001
Surrounding Building Context Frequency 0.004
Property Development Frequency 0.004
Property Value Attributes Frequency 0.000
Real Estate Data Property Imagery Frequency 0.002
Property Activity Frequency 0.000
Building Data Spatial
3D geometry Frequency 0.046
Attributes
Electrical & Lighting Components Frequency 0.011
Less More
Heating, Ventilation & Air Important Important
Frequency 0.027
Building Data 3D Model Conditioning Components
Objects & Properties Mechanical & Plant Components Frequency 0.011
Heating, Ventilation & Air
Need 0.043
Conditioning Components
Building Data
Operations and Maintenance Manuals Frequency 0.029
Documentation & Images

RICS Research 2015 39


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

5.4 Part 4 Challenges are the industry benefits of potential for performance
improvements and increased transparency and open data
& Benefits of BIM sharing across sectors. Of equal highest significance
is the benefit of having data that can be re-used and
In this part of the survey, respondents were asked to re-purposed, which again can save time and costs and
rank how significant they saw challenges and benefits enable good design and construction to be replicated.
of an integrated approach to information management Other notable significant benefits are improvements
throughout the life of the property. Options were: to the assessment of building performance which is
Not significant potentially very significant in terms of buildings rated under
sustainability rating tools, which aim to measure in-use
Slightly significant
performance. Respondents also ranked new abilities to
Moderately significant provide value added services which reflects members
Significant desires to maintain the highest standards possible in highly
competitive markets. However when we examine the
Very significant lowest ranked benefits, there appear to be contradictions
Figure 15 shows the percentage of respondents that evident as improvements to information availability and
ranked each challenge as Very significant. The top completeness ranked the lowest of all whereas earlier
three challenges, indicated by dark bars, are (1) Data in the survey respondents had said data accuracy and
accuracy, consistency and reliability issues (36%) (2) reliability was a concern. There seems to be little point in
Lack of protocols to verify and validate data (33%) having an increased availability of data available to industry,
and (3) Secure data authorship and storage (32%). which may be incomplete and thus unreliable and out of
These responses echo the concerns of the workshop date. Second lowest ranked benefit is the potential for
participants, particularly with respect to data accuracy, greater levels of innovation in industry practice and third
consistency and reliability, which was the top challenge in lowest ranked item was improvements to the assessment
both the workshop and the survey. Of note is that the top of property value. It appears that members currently
two challenges fall within the category of Data Quality and do not perceive a great level of benefit to valuers and
Protocols. Human Factors seem to be less of a concern, the valuation process from data contained in BIM. More
with several items of the lowest concern falling in this benefit may lie in the benefits to portfolio managers and
category, including lack of training at an organisational investment management surveyors to assess the ongoing
level and communication difficulties. value of properties within their portfolios based on building
performance and property maintenance costs over time.
Finally the significance of the perceived key benefits of an Building Surveyors and Facilities Managers will benefit from
integrated approach to information management through access to data related to building performance in delivering
the life of property are considered. Of highest significance some of their professional services.

40 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

Figure 15 Key challenges in information management through life

Percentage (%)
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0

Lack of protocols to verify and validate data

Trade offs between data quality and


Data data quantity
Quality &
Protocols Data granularity

Data accuracy, consistency and reliability


issues

Scale and complexity issues surrounding


large datasets

Lack of industry standards to control


Technical consistent data reuse

Interoperability issues in structuring


disparate data sources

Security of property and building metadata

Secure data authorship and storage


Security
Need for privacy preserving analytics and
& Privacy granular access control
Concerns
Increased IT infrastructure security across
distributed networks and data stores

Conflicts in interest relative to data


transparency & business interests

Cost surrounding new information


management infrastructures

Justification of business case for sourcing,


organising and maintaining data

Increased and continued reporting

Process & Uncertainty surrounding value of data and


Workflow its ongoing relevance

Compressed timeframes for sourcing,


organising and reusing data

Differences in level of availability of data to


all users

Disjointed nature of information flow


between organisations / sectors

Human error

Communication difficulties and differences


in domain specific language

Need for cultural change amidst feelings of


fear and loss of control

Ineffective implementation due high staff


Human turnover
Factors Lack of education and training at
organisational level

Lack of education and training at


institutional level

Lack of interdisciplinary knowledge

Lack of digital skill sets

RICS Research 2015 41


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Figure 16 Key benefits of digital information through life

Percentage (%)
0.0 5 .0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0

Improvements to industry performance

Industry Increased transparency and open data


Benefits sharing across industry sectors

Potential for greater levels of


innovation in industry practice

Improvements to data quality and


accuracy

Potential for greater levels of


innovation

Faster assessment and reporting


processes

Organisational Reduction in data sourcing and


Benefits co-ordination efforts

New abilities to provide value added


services

Provision of a centralised point of


control

Improvements to organisational
performance and operational efficiency

Improvements to personal productivity

Improvements to levels of acceptable


risk

Improvements to information
availability & completeness

Practice- Increased levels of transparency


Based
Benefits Increased decision support

Greater accuracy and efficiency in


property evaluations and assessments

More effective control of resources


and costs

Improvements to the assessment of


property value

Improvements to the assessment of


building performance

Information Information can be checked and


Quality validated

Information, once captured, can be


reused and repurposed

42 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

6.0 Overall conclusions


The research question posed was: what is the role of The experience of property professionals using BIM was
the value dimension in BIM? Through a comprehensive found in the workshops and the survey to be minimal.
review and analysis of data types and needs in respect Furthermore understanding of BIM within the property group
of professional property tasks and services, this research is also limited in breadth and depth. We should bear in
finds that there is potentially a significant role for the mind that currently BIM is largely restricted to larger newer
adoption of property data into BIM and, also other buildings and that the majority of RICS members will be
digitised building systems not initially considered within performing professional services on existing stock where
the remit of this research, such as BMS. This potential role information is not available in BIM format. This is likely to
can be classified into those areas where data relevant to change over time, however currently there is a need to raise
property professionals exists and can be used, providing awareness, increase the knowledge base and to develop
access to data is provided. Other areas are identified skills within the profession.
where data, is not within the BIM and further consideration
of whether to incorporate such data is required, as well as
the mechanisms for incorporating such data. Who would,
6.2 Challenges & Benefits of BIM
and should, provide that data; as well as the steps to As with all data needs, it is critical that the data is reliable
ensure such data is accurate and updated as necessary, and accurate and as up to date as possible. The workshops
used in context, tackles issues of security and privacy also revealed 23 challenges, which were largely endorsed in the
require addressing. survey. Technology based challenges were ensuring data
can be;
6.1 Data through-life 1. Compatible and interoperable over long timescales.
Property professionals were found to have a very broad 2. Sustained and updated over long timescales, and:
range of data needs and used 24 different types of data 3. Organised such that it can be discovered and used.
in their professional services. These needs were identified
in the literature, ratified in the workshops and confirmed Not surprisingly the socio-technical challenges identified
in the survey. Currently sources are often separate and often reflect those of professions whether using technology
distinct and are at times unchecked with issues around systems or not and include aspects such as reliability,
accuracy of some data. The five main categories of fidelity and quality. Socio-technical challenges summarised
property information were; in Table 4, were grouped as;

1. Market and location data. 1. Data Quality & Fidelity.

2. Property data (describing the plot of land) 2. Context-based Issues.

3. Property data (describing economic information) 3. Security & Privacy.

4. Building information; and, 4. Digital Skills & Knowledge Competencies.

5. Process qualities (planning information, construction Largely, the survey responses echoed concerns raised by
information and FM information). the workshop participants. There is a danger that in some
cases there will be Building Information Models which are
Data needs were also found to vary from relatively not well maintained and have inaccurate data entry that will,
simple at a single point in time, for example the Building if relied upon by those unable to interrogate and understand
Surveyors Technical Due Diligence report (figure 5) to the data, lead to poor decision making and professional
very complex needs of Portfolio Management Surveyors judgements. This is a major challenge and the property
over a whole of life timeframe (figure 6). The workshops profession need reassurance that the data they do access
and survey revealed good potential to use some of the and use to base their professional judgements on is sound
data already in BIM for property professional practices and reliable. Protocols needs to established as the range of
for example, FM and Property Management tasks, professionals accessing BIM data widens, as the key benefit
Building Surveyors Technical Due Diligence reporting, perceived by survey respondents of improved performance
and property portfolio management. The opportunities may not be realised in practice. Furthermore the opportunity
lie largely in respect of the data on building performance to provide clients with value added services may not be
in use. However, such data is typically found in the BMS realised if data is not perceived to be reliable, up to date and
as much as the BIM. Therefore RICS should investigate sound. Overall the survey respondents felt there would be
the opportunities within BMS technology to inform some little benefit at this point in time to valuers in using BIM data,
property tasks, as many buildings may not have BIM but however it is considered that more benefit lies in the area
may have a BMS. of property portfolio managers who will seek to rationalise
properties within the portfolio based on performance
amongst other variables.

RICS Research 2015 43


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

6.3 BIM in Property Education would identify those data needs and types that are
outside of BIM that could be digitised and incorporated
Given the low levels of understanding and practical due to the extent of potential usage within the property
experience of using BIM, there is considerable scope for profession. In all cases issues identified in section 5.4
incorporating some understanding of BIM technology into data quality and fidelity, context, security and privacy
RICS accredited property courses at undergraduate and should be considered. In particular details on data format
post graduate level. Clearly the obvious place to introduce and source are needed. The full list should be categorised
student to the concept would in construction technology and prioritised, and where necessary negotiations with
subjects, however it should also be referenced in property third parties should be initiated.
management, property investment, valuation, building
surveying and facility management subjects as a potential 2. Introduce BIM professional competency
source of information. In this way property students will in RICS APC for property professionals
start to see the potential for the use of BIM data across
The RICS APC group should develop appropriate property
a range of their professional tasks. Macdonald (2012)
discipline BIM competencies with the APC structure so
has proposed a framework to assist AEC academics in
that property professionals can obtain recognition for
implementing collaborative education programs with the
knowledge, skill and competency with the application of
aid of BIM tools and processes, and this could be adapted
this knowledge in their professional practice. Given the
to incorporate property education.
innovation in the RICS BIM Certified Manager qualification,
Clearly property education is not restricted to the tertiary there may be some aspects which are transferable to the
sector and this research concludes that a broad program property disciplines.
across all RICS disciplines at all levels of membership is
desirable. Such a program should encompass provision 3. Develop a set of CPD events to raise
of CPD for existing members, training short courses and awareness among property professionals
provision of Information Papers and Best Practice Guidance
Notes. A comprehensive strategy should be established
of BIM
to deliver a roll out of resources to members, under the As a priority RICS should develop some online education
leadership of an Education Task Force. This could build resources for members to raise awareness and knowledge
on the work already carried out to develop the RICS BIM in respect of BIM and how property professionals could
Manager certification. There are various initiatives in this use data within the models.
area being undertaken by professional bodies and other
groups, and a unified, industry-wide approach may be 4. Develop RICS training courses for existing
worth considering, rather than separate task forces being members of the property disciplines in BIM
set up that essentially have the same aims.
Concurrent with the roll out of CPD courses for members
and the development of online education resources, RICS
6.4 Recommendations and should develop a series of training courses for existing
further research members globally to realise the potential of BIM data in
their professional practices.
From this research, it is apparent that great potential exists
to enhance the quality and accuracy of many aspects of 5. RICS BIM & Property Education Task Force
property professional practice with the adoption and use With regards to the integration of BIM into property
of BIM in some tasks. There are five key recommendations education, RICS could consider updating accreditation
that arise out of this research. criteria for universities to include requirement for
collaborative working with other disciplines/using BIM
1. Mapping of data needs and types across data effectively. Furthermore RICS could form an
all RICS disciplines Education Task Force to champion the roll out of BIM
across property courses globally to ensure new members
One of the key priorities is to undertake a comprehensive
have the requisite awareness, knowledge and skills with
mapping of data needs and types across all RICS
respect to BIM and property; or the value dimension.
disciplines to identify (a) what is currently within BIM
that could be used by property professionals, (b) data
needs and types currently in a digital format but found
in databases outside of BIM that could be easily made
compatible to BIM. At this point an assessment of the
demand for the data would determine whether it is
desirable to implement such a change. Thirdly this review

44 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

7.0 References
Australian Construction Industry Forum (ACIF), 2015. A Framework for the The European Group of Valuers Associations (TEGoVA). (2003), European
Adoption of Project Team Integration and Building information Modelling. Property and Market Rating. TEGoVA. Brussels.
Retrieved on 31st May 2015 from; http://www.apcc.gov.au/ALLAPCC/
Framework_WEB.pdf Fillman, S.A., Wilde, K. L., Kochert, J.F., Homan, S.R., & Tomovic, C.L.
(2010). Entry-level engineering professionals and product lifecycle
Australian Institute of Architects. 2015. BIM & IPD working Groups. management: a competency model, Int. J. of Manufacturing Technology
Retrieved on 31sy May 2015 from http://wp.architecture.com.au/bim/ and Management, 13(3/4), 306-311.
groups/
Ford, G, Bartley, T, Igba, J, Turner, A, & McMahon, C (2013), Product Life
Azhar, S. (2011). Building information modeling (BIM): Trends, benefits, Cycle Data Management: A Cross-Sectoral Review, in B. Alain, R. Louis,
risks, and challenges for the AEC industry. Leadership and Management D. Debasish, (eds.) Product Lifecycle Management for Society, FIP Adv in
in Engineering., 11(3), 241-252. Inf. and Comm. Tech., Vol. 409, pp. 58-67.

BAF 2013. Embedding Building Infomration Modelling (BIM) within the Fuerst, F. & McAllister, P. 2012. Green Noise or Green Value? Measuring
taught curriculum. The Higher Education Academy. Retrieved on 31st May the effects of environmental certification in commercial office values. Real
2015 from http://codebim.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Embed_ Estate Economics. 39 (1) pp45-69.
BIM_in_curriculum_UK.pdf
Green Property Alliance (2010). Establishing the Ground Rules for
Ball A, Darlington M, Howard T, McMahon C, & Culley S. (2012). Visualizing Property: Industry-wide Sustainability Metrics, GPA, London.
research data records for their better management. Journal of Digital
Information, 13. Hewett, A, (2009) Product Lifecycle Management (PLM): Critical Issues
and Challenges in Implementation, Inf. Tech. and Product Dev., Annals
Becerik-Gerber, B. and Kensek K. 2010. Building Information Modeling of Inf. Sys., Vol. 5, No. 1, pp.81-105.
in Architecture, Engineering, and Construction: Emerging Research
Directions and Trends, Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Hutchins, G. (2004). SME Speaks: Manufacturing Engineers Must
Education and Practice 136(3): 139-147. Reduce Competency Gaps. Manufacturing Engineering magazine
132(2). Retrieved (Feb. 2014) from www.sme.org/MEMagazine/
Becerik-Gerber, B., Jazizadeh, F., Li, N., & Calis, G. (2011), Application Article.aspx?id=31088&taxid=1427
areas and data requirements for BIM-enabled facilities management.
Journal of construction engineering and management, 138(3), 431-442. Holness, G. V.R.: 2008. BIM Gaining Momentum. ASHRAE Journal,
June 28-29
Bryde, D., Broquetas, M., & Volm, J. M. (2013), The project benefits
of building information modelling (BIM). Intl. Journal of Project Mgmt., Jupp, J., & Awad, R. (2013). Developing digital literacy in construction
31(7), 971-980. management education: a design thinking led approach. Journal of
pedagogic development.
BSI (2010), Constructing the business case for BIM, BSi, London, 2010.
Jupp, J. R. (2013), Incomplete BIM implementation: Challenges and
BSI (2014), BS 1192-4:2014, the Collaborative production of information role of product lifecycle management functions, in B. Alain, R. Louis,
Part 4: Fulfilling employers information exchange requirements using D. Debasish, (eds.) Product Lifecycle Management for Society, IFIP
COBie, URL: http://shop.bsigroup.com/forms/BS-1192-4/ (accessed 14 Advances in Information and Communications Technologies. Vol. 409,
Jan. 2015). pp. 630-640, Springer Berlin Heidelberg

BSI (2015), PAS 1192-5: Specification for security-minded building Jupp, J. R., & Nepal, M. (2014). BIM and PLM: Comparing and Learning
information modelling, digital built environments and smart asset from Changes to Professional Practice Across Sectors. In Product
management: Retrieved on 31st May 2015 from http://shop.bsigroup.com/ Lifecycle Management for a Global Market (pp. 41-50). Springer
upload/271469/PAS1192-5-BSI.pdf Berlin Heidelberg.

BuildingSMART, (2012). MVD Process. Retrieved on 14th January 2015 Jupp, J. R. & Singh, V. 2014, Similar Concepts, Distinct Solutions,
from: http://buildingsmart.com/ standards/mvd/mvd-process. Common Problems: Learning from PLM and BIM, Intl. Conf. on Product
Lifecycle Management, 9-11 July, Japan
Cambridge Semantics. 2015. Introduction to the Semantic Web. Retrieved
on May 24th 2015 from http://www.cambridgesemantics.com/semantic- Jupp, J., & Wilkinson, S. 2015. Challenges of Through-Life Property Data
university/introduction-semantic-web Management. In the proceedings of the RICS COBRA Conference UTS
Sydney July 8-10th 2015. ISBN 978-1-78321-071-8. To appear.
Carroll, S. (2009). A well-kept secret: BIM in preconstruction wins clients.
Constructor the magazine of the Association of General Contractors of Linstone, H. A., & Turoff, M. (Eds.). (1975). The Delphi method: Techniques
America. Retrieved on 14th January 2015 from http://constructor.agc.org and applications (Vol. 29). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Corry, E., ODonnell, J., Curry, E., Coakley, D., Pauwels, P., & Keane, Ltzkendorf, T., & Lorenz, D. (2011). Capturing sustainability-related
M. (2014). Using semantic web technologies to access soft AEC data. information for property valuation. Building Research & Information, 39(3),
Advanced Engineering Informatics, 28 (4), 370-380. 256-273.

Dalkey, N., & Helmer, O. (1963). An experimental application of the Delphi Macdonald, J.A. and Mills, J.E. (2013) An IPD approach to construction
method to the use of experts. Management Science, 9(3), 458-467. education, Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building,
13 (2) 93-103
de Souza, L.L.A., de Amorim, S.R.L., & de Magalhes Lyrio Filho,
A (2009). Impact from the use of BIM in Architectural Design Offices: Macdonald, J.A. and Granroth, M. (2013), Multidisciplinary AEC
Real Estate Market Opportunities, Gesto & Tecnologia de Projetos, Education Utilising BIM / PLIM Tools and Processes, in Product
Vol. 4, N 2, Nov, pp 26-53. Lifecycle Management for Society IFIP Advances in Information and
Communication Technology (Proc. of 10th IFIP WG 5.1 International
East, W.E (2007), Construction Operation Building Information Exchange. Conference, PLM 2013, Nantes, France, July 6-10, 2013), Vol. 409, 2013,
USACE ERDC. pp 663-674.
Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R & Liston, K, (2008). BIM Handbook: Macdonald, J.A. (2012), A Framework for collaborative BIM education
A Guide to Building Information Modeling for Owners, Managers, across the AEC disciplines, in Proc. of the 37th Annual Conference of
Designers, Engineers and Contractors. Wiley & Sons Inc, New Jersey. the Australasian Universities Building Educators Association (AUBEA),
4-6 July, Melbourne, pp223-230.

RICS Research 2015 45


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Mason H. ISO 10303 STEP, A key standard for the global market, ISO Singh, V., Gu, N., & Wang, X. (2011). A theoretical framework of a BIM-
Bulletin 2002 4:9-13. based multi-disciplinary collaboration platform. Automation in Const.,
20(2), 134-144.
McGraw Hill. (2008). Smart Market Report, Building information modeling:
Transforming design and construction to achieve greater industry Stark, J. (2011). Product lifecycle management: 21st century paradigm for
productivity. McGraw Hill, NY. product realisation, 2nd ed., Decision engineering, Springer.

McGraw Hill. (2009). Smart Market Report: The business value of building Succar, B., Sher, W., & Williams, A. (2013). An integrated approach to
information modeling: Getting building information modeling to the bottom BIM competency assessment, acquisition and application. Automation in
line, McGraw Hill, NY. Construction, 35, 174-189.

McGraw Hill. (2010). Smart Market Report, The Business Value of BIM in Teicholz, P. (Ed.). (2013). BIM for facility managers. John Wiley & Sons.
Europe. McGraw Hill, NY.
Trm, S. & Granholm, L., 2011. Managing building information as a set of
McGraw Hill. (2014). Smart Market Report: Business value of BIM for interrelated partial models, Espoo: Working paper
construction in major global markets: How contractors around the world
are driving innovation with building information modelling. McGraw Hill United Nations Environment Programme (2009) UNEPFI/SBCIS Financial
Construction. & Sustainability Metrics Report, UNEP. Retrieved on 15th January 2-15
from: www.unepfi.org/fileadmin/documents/metrics_ report_01.pdf
Millington, A. F., 2014. 5th ed. An Introduction to Property Valuation.
Routledge, Oxon, UK. Vanlande, R., Nicolle, C., & Cruz, C. (2008), IFC and building lifecycle
management. Automation in Construction, 18(1), 7078.
Newell, G., MacFarlane, J., & Kok, N. (2011) Buildings Better Returns.
API, Australia. Retrieved on May 23rd 2015 from http://www.api.org.au/ Wilkinson, S.J., 2015. Building approval data and the quantification of the
assets/media_library/000/000/219/original.pdf uptake of sustainability measures: A case study of Australia and England.
Structural Survey. Vol. 33, issue 2. ISBN 0263-080X.
NIBS (2007), US National BIM Standard: Version 1 Part 1: Overview,
Principles and Methodologies, National Institute of Building Sciences, Wilkinson, S., & Jupp, J. 2015. Managing property data through life: BIM
URL: www.wbdg.org/bim/nbims.php (accessed 14 Jan. 2015). and the value dimension. In proceedings of RICS COBRA Conference
UTS Sydney July 8-10th 2015. ISBN 978-1-78321-071-8. (to appear).
Redmond, A., Hore, A., Alshawi, M., & West, R. (2012). Exploring
how information exchanges can be enhanced through Cloud BIM. Young, N., Jones, S., Bernstein, H. M., & Gudgel, J. E.: 2009. The
Automation in Const. 24, 175-183. Business Value of BIM: Getting Building Information Modeling to the
Bottom Line, Smart Market Report: McGraw Hill Construction
RICS, 2015. BIM Manager Certification. Retrieved on 31st May 2015
from http://www.rics.org/uk/join/member-accreditations-list/bim- Yu, K., Froese, T., & Grobler, F. (2000). A development framework for data
manager-certification/ models for computer-integrated facilities management. Automation in
construction, 9(2), 145-167.
Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (2009) 6th Ed. RICS Valuation
Standards. RICS, London.
Useful web sites
Rowlinson, S., Collins, R., Tuuli, M. M., & Jia, Y. 2010. Implementation
HM Government BIM Task Group main website
of building information modeling (BIM) in construction: a comparative
http://www.bimtaskgroup.org/
case study. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1233 (PART 1), pp. 572 577
AEC UK CAD and BIM Standards Site
Sebastian, R. & Berlo, L. van 2010. Tool for Benchmarking BIM
http://aecuk.wordpress.com/
Performance of Design, Engineering and Construction Firms
in The Netherlands. Architectural engineering and design Construction Industry Council website
management 6: 254263. http://cic.org.uk/
Silverman, D. 2013. Doing Qualitative Research. A Practical
Handbook. Sage Publications. London.

46 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

8.0 Appendices
Appendix 1 Property professionals data types and needs.............................48
Appendix 2 Key to symbols used in figures 5 and 6 and Appendix 3.............49
Appendix 3 Managing data through the property lifecycle
(Workshop 2 output)..........................................................................50

RICS Research 2015 47


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Appendix 1 Property professionals data types and needs

Market Data
National Market E.g. Overall national economic situation, political, legal and administrative conditions
State, Regional and E.g. Economic situation, political, legal and administrative conditions, investment data (annual
Neighbourhood Market growth, median price, median rent, rental yield and rent demand)

Listings, Recent Sales and E.g. Property listings, sale transactions and records, national auction results and clearance
Auction rates, rental listings and applications
E.g. Property sales & transfers from Valuer General, real estate industry data on annual
Property Transfers transfers
Property Marketing Statistics E.g. Online, print and phone marketing data

Property Location Data


E.g. Regional transportation infrastructure & transport connections, socio-demographic
Macro-Location development, population structure & development, regional image, economic structure and
situation, purchasing power
E.g. Local-context data, suitability of location for property type, image of district, local
Micro-Location transport connections, quality of public spaces and facilities (shopping, services, social &
medical facilities), distance to amenities.

Real Estate Data


E.g. Property attributes such as property type, land use, zoning, lot/plan number, existing
Property Value Attributes owner, number of bedrooms, bathrooms, car spaces, previous sales information
Property Imagery E.g. Aerial, internal and external property images, mapping images
Property Activity E.g. Activity / interest in a property, evaluation of a property
Property Insurance Claims data E.g. Insurance claims data such as residential property claims
Variables affecting Property E.g. Value and risk data surrounding absolute property value, location, zoning, security & crime
Insurance Rate rates, mean area property price, environmental conditions

Property Site Data


E.g. Orientation, layout, size/area, inclination, topography, soil characteristics, rainwater
Property Lot Attributes drainage, easements, groundwater, degree of hard surface sealing
Utilities E.g. Energy supplies, water supplies, waste water supplies, communications services
E.g. Environmental situation, green areas & plantation, contribution to maintaining biodiversity,
Environmental Attributes greenfield & brownfield conditions, climate & geo data, air, noise & soil pollution
E.g. Distance to surrounding buildings, views & visual context, sunlight & shading levels, street
Surrounding Building Context layout, design & usage of open spaces, internal/external accessibility, neighbourhood safety,
traffic conditions
E.g. Data surrounding development applications, site selection/acquisition, details of the
Property Development development, development certificates, building permission and planning regulations

Financial Data
Tenant and Occupier Situation E.g. Number of tenants, tenants image and solvency, duration and structure of rental contracts
E.g. Vacancy rate, tenant retention, tenant fluctuation, duration of letting process, general
Vacancy and Letting Situation letting prospects, investment volume, expected rates of return
E.g. Rental payments, advance payments for utilities, rental growth potential, and inflation
Payments-In expectations, other payments-in (e.g. facade advertising, energy-feed-in)
E.g. Payments for construction, acquisition, disposal, payments for operating costs, payments
Payments Out attributable/non-attributable to tenants,marketing/letting (e.g. estate agents fee), payments
for modernisation, payments for operations

48 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

Appendix 2 Key to symbols used in figures 5 and 6 and Appendix 3

Node types Dependency


The four types of node can be connected using two
Deliverables types of dependency (line with arrows

Represent packages of information or


materials that are considered, created Flow dependencies
or modified by tasks.
The dependency contributes to
the timing of the downstream task
Simple tasks (eg. the upstream deliverable must
Represent tasks which take account be available to start the task)
of inputs to create outputs. All the
outputs of a simple task are created Data dependencies
(or updated) at the same time, when
The dependency indicates that the
the task is complete.
upstream information is used while
executing the downstream task, but
Compound tasks doesnt determine when the task can
Similar to a simple task, but can have be attempted.
one or more output scenarios. Each
scenario can represent a different Milestone
forward branch and contain one or
Decision or stage gate, typically
more deliverables.
occurring between main project
phases.
Iteration constructs
Similar to a compound task, but
represent the possibility of generating
a backward branch (iteration).

RICS Research 2015 49


50
Managing Property Data Through Life
Mapping Property Professional Tasks with Information Inputs and Outputs

MINOR COSTS MAJOR COSTS MINOR COSTS

Appendix 3A
Asset
Planning Design management Asset planning/Repositioning/H&BU

RICS Research 2015


Extra inputs Real Estate Micro
National
Agents Market location

National Committee
Programming Market Research Investment
(Workshop 2 output)

Reports Paper

GEO Report Sales


property lifecycle

Micro Analysis Market


location Rates

Inspections Growth
Rates
Tenant and
Occupier
Situation Lefting up
assumptions

Marketing
and Letting Capex
Vacancy Tenant and Marketing Forecast
Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Situation Occupier and Letting


Situation Vacancy
Situation

Payments Development
Out manager
Tenancy Project
DFC manager
Schedule
Assets
Payments manager
In Fund
Payments Payments Concept manager
out in forecast/
Tech.due
diligence
report

Outgoings Other
Appendix 3 Managing data through the property lifecycle

Income
Settlement
Adjustments

Handover
Conceptual Pre-construction Construction and Use,
Planning and Feasibility Design and site maintenance Redevelopment, sale, demolition Redevelopment/ strategic optioneering
Design and defects operations
Example of a Transactions Managers participants data needs at various stages of the

establishment and repairs


start-up
Managing Property Data Through Life
Example of a Transactions Managers participants data needs at various stages of the property lifecycle.

MINOR COSTS MAJOR COSTS MINOR COSTS

Planning Design Asset management Asset planning/Repositioning/H&BU


Appendix 3B
Titles and Planning Design Building Tenancy Tenancy Maintenance
Easements Report Report Audits Schedule Schedule Reports
Environmental
Quality
Hazmat Land Concept Design
Report Features Diagram Report
(Workshop 2 output)

GEO Indicative Tenancy Tenant and Tenant and Tenant and Basic
Technical
Occupier Occupier Occupier Building
Report Costs Schedule Quality
property lifecycle

Situation Situation Situation Description

Flooding Health
Maps Design
and User SSPECS
Report Investment Maintenance Asset Building
Comfort
Model Schedule Documents
Topography
Facilities General
Brief Management FM Score Ledger
Quality Payments Agreements
Site Plan Out
Asset Plan
Titles and Conceptual
Easements ESD Report Facilities
Investment
Management
Model Quality
Conceptual
Report Accountant
Environmental Receivable
Quality Payments
BIM
In
Costs
Asset Plan

SPESC Technical Tenant


Quality Survey Health
and User
Comfort
Design
OH&S
Reports
Appendix 3 Managing data through the property lifecycle

Audits
Operational
Quality Asset
ESD
Plans
Modelling
rics.org/research

RICS Research 2015


Example of a Portfolio Management Surveyors data needs at various stages of the

Pre-construction Handover and Use,


Planning and Feasibility Conceptual Detailed and site Construction Redevelopment, Redevelopment/ strategic
Design Design operations maintenance sale, demolition
establishment and defects optioneering
start-up and repairs

51
Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

Special Thanks
Special thanks to the following people:
Andrew Hannel
Opus, Sydney, Australia
Andrew Partridge
Eureka Funds Management, Sydney
Ben Elder
RICS, London, UK
Christopher Stokes
ESurv, Mid Anglia, UK
Clinton Ostwald
Urbis, Sydney, Australia
David Wagstaff
Pembroke, London, UK
Doug Rayment
AECOM, Sydney, Australia
Hernan Jerrez Guerrero
Ridley and Co Sydney Australia
Jack Moseley
Civic Valuations, Sydney
Jennifer Macdonald
University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
John Kavanagh
RICS, London, UK
Kath Fontana
BAM FM, Hemel Hempstead, UK
Leon Carroll
AMP, Sydney, Australia
Paul Zahara
Cranleigh, Sydney, Australia
Phil Boyne
Lend Lease, London, UK
Richard Quartermaine
Hammerson Plc, London, UK
Richard Stacey
Calibre Capital, Sydney, Australia
Sarah Sayce
University of Kingston, London, UK

52 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

RICS Research 2015 53


Building Information Modelling and the Value Dimension

54 RICS Research 2015


rics.org/research

RICS Research 2015 55


Confidence through professional standards
RICS promotes and enforces the highest professional We believe that standards underpin effective markets. With
qualifications and standards in the development and up to seventy per cent of the worlds wealth bound up in land
management of land, real estate, construction and and real estate, our sector is vital to economic development,
infrastructure. Our name promises the consistent helping to support stable, sustainable investment and growth
delivery of standards bringing confidence to the around the globe.
markets we serve. With offices covering the major political and financial centres
We accredit 118,000 professionals and any individual or firm of the world, our market presence means we are ideally placed
registered with RICS is subject to our quality assurance. Their to influence policy and embed professional standards. We
expertise covers property, asset valuation and real estate work at a cross-governmental level, delivering international
management; the costing and leadership of construction standards that will support a safe and vibrant marketplace
projects; the development of infrastructure; and the in land, real estate, construction and infrastructure, for the
management of natural resources, such as mining, farms and benefit of all.
woodland. From environmental assessments and building We are proud of our reputation and we guard it fiercely, so
controls to negotiating land rights in an emerging economy; clients who work with an RICS professional can have confidence
if our members are involved the same professional standards in the quality and ethics of the services they receive.
and ethics apply.

United Kingdom RICS HQ Ireland Europe Middle East


Parliament Square, London 38 Merrion Square, Dublin 2, (excluding UK and Ireland) Office G14, Block 3,
SW1P 3AD United Kingdom Ireland Rue Ducale 67, Knowledge Village,
t +44 (0)24 7686 8555 t +353 1 644 5500 1000 Brussels, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
f +44 (0)20 7334 3811 f +353 1 661 1797 Belgium t +971 4 446 2808
contactrics@rics.org ricsireland@rics.org t +32 2 733 10 19 f +971 4 427 2498
Media enquiries f +32 2 742 97 48 ricsmenea@rics.org
pressoffice@rics.org ricseurope@rics.org

Africa Americas South America Oceania


POBox 3400, One Grand Central Place, Rua Maranho, 584 cj 104, Suite 1, Level 9,
Witkoppen 2068, 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2810, So Paulo SP, Brasil 1 Castlereagh Street,
South Africa New York 10165 2811, USA t +55 11 2925 0068 Sydney NSW 2000. Australia
t +27 11 467 2857 t +1 212 847 7400 ricsbrasil@rics.org t +61 2 9216 2333
f +27 86 514 0655 f +1 212 847 7401 f +61 2 9232 5591
ricsafrica@rics.org ricsamericas@rics.org info@rics.org

North Asia ASEAN Japan South Asia


3707 Hopewell Centre, 10 Anson Road, Level 14 Hibiya Central Building, 48 & 49 Centrum Plaza,
183 Queens Road East #06-22 International Plaza, 1-2-9 Nishi Shimbashi Minato-Ku, Sector Road, Sector 53,
Wanchai, Hong Kong Singapore 079903 Tokyo 105-0003, Japan Gurgaon 122002, India
t +852 2537 7117 t +65 6635 4242 t +81 3 5532 8813 t +91 124 459 5400
f +852 2537 2756 f +65 6635 4244 f +81 3 5532 8814 f +91 124 459 5402
ricsasia@rics.org ricssingapore@rics.org ricsjapan@rics.org ricsindia@rics.org

GLOBAL/JUNE 2015/DML/20568/RESEARCH rics.org