Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Construction Collaboration 2010

3,570 views

Published on

Describes the development of the UK construction collaboration technology market since the late 1990s, and looks at current and future trends in adoption, including BIM, SaaS, Web 2.0

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

Construction Collaboration 2010

  1. 1. Construction collaboration: from pre-Web to Web 1.0, to Web 2.0 and beyond …. by Paul Wilkinson (pwcom.co.uk)
  2. 2. <ul><li>Who is Paul Wilkinson? </li></ul><ul><li>Introducing construction collaboration technologies </li></ul><ul><li>Development of the UK market </li></ul><ul><li>Benefits of online collaboration – NCCTP research 2006 </li></ul><ul><li>Overcoming resistance </li></ul><ul><li>New directions for collaboration </li></ul><ul><ul><li>beyond file-sharing (eg: process management, financial control, mobile working) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The ‘I’ in BIM </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>the SaaS (Software-as-a-Service) revolution </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 (and 3.0) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Summary </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  3. 3. <ul><li>Who am I? </li></ul><ul><li>worked in construction industry since 1987 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>in-house: Halcrow, Tarmac/Carillion, BIW </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>current/recent clients: BIW, Constructing Excellence, 4Projects, Incite, Slider Studio, tCn, Woobius </li></ul></ul><ul><li>author of book on construction collaboration technologies (2005) </li></ul><ul><li>Wikipedian (2003), blogger (2005), Tweeter (2008) </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  4. 4. <ul><li>Face-to-face </li></ul><ul><li>Written word </li></ul><ul><li>Hand drawings </li></ul><ul><li>Telephone </li></ul><ul><li>Telegram </li></ul><ul><li>Telex </li></ul><ul><li>Fax </li></ul><ul><li>CAD </li></ul><ul><li>Email </li></ul><ul><li>Groupware (eg: Lotus Notes) </li></ul><ul><li>File transfer protocol (FTP) </li></ul><ul><li>Websites </li></ul><ul><li>Intranets, enterprise portals </li></ul><ul><li>Video- and tele-conferencing </li></ul><ul><li>Extranets </li></ul><ul><li>Web-conferencing applications </li></ul><ul><li>File-sharing (P2P) </li></ul><ul><li>Instant messaging </li></ul><ul><li>Discussion forums </li></ul><ul><li>Wikis </li></ul><ul><li>Blogs </li></ul><ul><li>RSS </li></ul><ul><li>Social networking </li></ul><ul><li>Social search, tagging, sharing </li></ul><ul><li>Mashups: Mapping, time-lines, etc </li></ul><ul><li>Virtual worlds </li></ul>Cloud computing PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA Web 2.0 BIM SaaS
  5. 5. PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  6. 6. PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  7. 7. Specs Drawings Minutes Programmes Cost plans correspondence etc Email Fax Courier Post (CD, paper) Traditionally… PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  8. 8. PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  9. 9. PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  10. 10. <ul><li>Traditional AEC collaboration: issues </li></ul><ul><li>Incompatible IT = unreadable data = heavy reliance on paper </li></ul><ul><li>Extensive – and expensive – production of paper </li></ul><ul><li>Email overload </li></ul><ul><li>No single version of ‘the truth’ </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Islands’ of information </li></ul><ul><li>Poor security </li></ul><ul><li>Low transparency of information, opaque processes </li></ul><ul><li>No complete project record, no audit trail, risk of disputes/litigation </li></ul><ul><li>Low quantity/quality of information for FM or O&M purposes </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  11. 11. <ul><li>Fewer interoperability issues </li></ul><ul><li>Less paper </li></ul><ul><li>Latest information available to all </li></ul><ul><li>Complete record of project </li></ul><ul><li>Full information audit trail </li></ul><ul><li>Single central repository of information </li></ul><ul><li>Greater re-use of information (eg: for H&S File, standards, tendering, defects mgmt, O&M, etc) </li></ul>What does it look like…? So collaborate! PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  12. 15. PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  13. 16. <ul><li>Technology issues (1): </li></ul><ul><li>Standards </li></ul><ul><ul><li>a la “Betamax or VHS”? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Interoperability </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Cost </li></ul><ul><ul><li>do we need new hardware/software (eg: CAD)? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>new telecoms links? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>printing costs pushed down supply chain? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>clients might expect lower fees? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Training </li></ul><ul><li>Implementation </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  14. 17. <ul><li>Technology issues (2): </li></ul><ul><li>Industry slow to adopt new technology </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Legal status of electronic communication </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Contractual relationships with technology provider </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ASP service interruption or unforeseen termination </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Preference for paper </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Copyright, archive concerns </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Suspicion/fear re web-based or web-enabled technologies </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Security – hacking, viruses </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reliability – 24/7 access, backup </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Too transparent (threat to old-style attitudes) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>‘ Dot.com doubt’ – re ASP/SaaS/on-demand providers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Too many suppliers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Who will survive? </li></ul></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  15. 18. <ul><li>Mid 1990s first experiments with project websites </li></ul><ul><li>Late 1990s project websites used to host documents and drawings </li></ul><ul><li>2000 Dot.com boom … and bust! </li></ul><ul><li>2000-2002 internet faith low; slow growth for survivors </li></ul><ul><li>2003-2005 increased internet faith; more sustained growth; </li></ul><ul><li>web-based collaboration becoming normal </li></ul><ul><li>2008-2009 Recession and the rise of low-cost solutions </li></ul><ul><li>2010- Collaboration - so what? What next? </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  16. 19. PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  17. 20. UK market UK AEC collaboration market - development PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA Market share Sophistication/functionality 4Projects Aconex BIW Asite Buzzsaw CTSpace Unit4 Cadweb Causeway ePIN ProjectWise Sarcophagus Woobius Union Square iSite Collabor8online CloudsUK StickyWorld
  18. 21. UK AEC collaboration market - development PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  19. 22. UK AEC collaboration market - development PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  20. 23. UK AEC collaboration market - development PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  21. 24. UK AEC collaboration market - development PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  22. 25. <ul><li>What are the benefits? </li></ul><ul><li>Market research conducted April-May 2006 </li></ul><ul><li>User views (not vendor hype) </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  23. 26. Net Average Drawing Approval times Base: 194 # of days 26% time saving on average overall PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  24. 27. Main benefits experienced in project management, communications and team working… Base: 272 PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  25. 28. Main benefits experienced in document management, storage and retrieval Base: 272 PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  26. 29. Main benefits experienced in hand-over, commissioning, operations and maintenance Base: 105 involved with this phase of projects PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  27. 30. <ul><li>96% feel they benefit from using the technology </li></ul><ul><li>Client preference for contractors who are willing to work with or have experience of the technology </li></ul><ul><li>Several benefits are widely accepted/associated with the technology (following seen as substantial by 80%+ of users): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Documents can be accessed 24/7 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Project information available centrally </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Less money spent on couriers/post </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Less chance of losing important documents </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Better audit trail </li></ul></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  28. 31. <ul><li>Strong commitment to a still evolving technology (it took 10+ years for CAD to become commonplace) </li></ul><ul><li>Vendors need to do more to overcome designers’ and sub-contractors’ reservations </li></ul><ul><li>time and cost savings were not ranked as the most important areas of differentiation – the key perceived benefits relate to better control, communication and collaboration </li></ul><ul><li>Perceived obstacles mainly relate to people and processes (eg: implementation, education/training issues), not technology </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  29. 32. <ul><li>Construction collaboration technologies </li></ul><ul><li>People, processes (80%) and technology (20%) </li></ul><ul><li>Barriers to adoption: </li></ul><ul><li>Resistance to principle of collaborative working </li></ul><ul><li>Resistance to adoption of new technology </li></ul>Overcoming resistance
  30. 33. <ul><li>How will we get there? </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  31. 34. internet technologies EDMS, FTP, file-sharing, Web 1.0 BIM, Web 2.0, Web 3.0 PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  32. 35. Construction Collaboration Financial tools Business processes CAD/BIM vendors Generic collaboration tools Project management tools FM tools E-commerce Back office Mobile working Contracts Whole life costing Defects management SaaS UK AEC collaboration market - development PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA Compliance Knowledge management Web 2.0 BIM
  33. 36. Construction Collaboration Financial tools Business processes CAD/BIM vendors Generic collaboration tools Project management tools FM tools E-commerce Back office Mobile working Contracts Whole life costing Defects management SaaS UK AEC collaboration market - development PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA Compliance Knowledge management Web 2.0 BIM
  34. 37. <ul><li>Less about file storage/exchange </li></ul><ul><li>More about key business processes </li></ul><ul><li>Move beyond simple processes (eg: RFIs, change orders, transmittals, etc) </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Collaboration-plus’ </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Corporate standards (eg: standard designs, specs) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Health and safety management (eg: non-conformance reports) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Procurement (ie: e-tendering) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Project financial control </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Quality control (defects/snagging – mobile solutions) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Contract change management </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Facilities management support </li></ul></ul>Development of UK market: ‘collaboration-plus’ PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  35. 38. <ul><li>Shift from CAD to BIM </li></ul><ul><li>“ CAD helps people to draw. BIM helps people to construct.” (Richard Saxon, Ecobuild, February 2009) </li></ul><ul><li>“ BIM is not CAD. BIM was never meant to be CAD. CAD is a replacement for pen and paper, a documentation tool.” ( Pete Zyskowski , Cadalyst ) </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? PEOPLE AGENDA COLLABORATION 1.0 TECHNOLOGIES
  36. 39. PROCESSES NEXT? PEOPLE AGENDA COLLABORATION 1.0 TECHNOLOGIES
  37. 40. PROCESSES NEXT? PEOPLE AGENDA COLLABORATION 1.0 TECHNOLOGIES http://shop.bsigroup.com/Browse-by-Sector/Building--Construction/Building-Information-Modelling/
  38. 41. <ul><li>Collaboration: to manage the ‘I’ in BIM, “the ins and outs of BIM” – the drawings, the workflows </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? PEOPLE AGENDA COLLABORATION 1.0 TECHNOLOGIES
  39. 42. <ul><li>“ We have commissioned a team drawn from BIM users across the industry, both clients and suppliers, and software developers, to prepare a route map that shows how we can make a progressive move to the routine use of BIM. </li></ul><ul><li>“ I am convinced that this is the way to unlock new ways of working that will reduce cost and add long-term value to the development and management of built assets in the public sector.” </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? PEOPLE AGENDA COLLABORATION 1.0 TECHNOLOGIES Paul Morrell: bidders and contractors on future UK public building projects will use BIM.
  40. 43. <ul><li>What is Web 2.0? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>the use of web technologies and web design to enhance creativity, information sharing, and, most notably, collaboration among users. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Not: one-way, a monologue, received-only </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Two-way, conversational, participative, active </li></ul></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? PEOPLE AGENDA COLLABORATION 1.0 TECHNOLOGIES
  41. 44. <ul><li>Discussion forums </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Building </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Constructing Excellence </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Home pages </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Static to configurable </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>iGoogle , Google Alerts </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Wikis </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Open - Wikipedia </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Organisation - RIBApedia </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Internal - Fielden Clegg Bradley </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Blogs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Personal but work-related – eg: ExtranetEvolution.com </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Corporate – eg: SaaStainability.com </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Media tool – eg: Brickonomics </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Micro-blogging – Twitter: personal , corporate , media </li></ul></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? PEOPLE AGENDA COLLABORATION 1.0 TECHNOLOGIES “ Wisdom of crowds”
  42. 45. <ul><li>RSS </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Feed-readers (local or web-based: Newsgator , Google Reader , etc) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>RSS publishing (from bloggers, media, corporate) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Social networking </li></ul><ul><ul><li>From personal (MySpace, Bebo, Facebook) … </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… to professional ( Facebook , LinkedIn , Ning) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Social search ( Wikia ) </li></ul><ul><li>Social tagging and sharing ( Del.icio.us , Digg, etc) </li></ul><ul><li>Sharing: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Voice over IP – Skype </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Calendar – Google Calendar </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Slides – SlideShare; Photos – Flickr ; Video – YouTube </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Stuff – Freecycle </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Mashups: Mapping (Google Maps), time-lines ( Dipity ) </li></ul><ul><li>Virtual worlds – eg: Second Life </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? PEOPLE AGENDA COLLABORATION 1.0 TECHNOLOGIES
  43. 46. internet technologies EDMS, FTP, file-sharing, Web 1.0 Web 2.0, BIM, Web 3.0 hardware & software static, office-based, internal mobile, SaaS, cloud computing PROCESSES NEXT? PEOPLE AGENDA COLLABORATION 1.0 TECHNOLOGIES
  44. 47. PROCESSES NEXT? PEOPLE AGENDA COLLABORATION 1.0 TECHNOLOGIES
  45. 48. PROCESSES NEXT? PEOPLE AGENDA COLLABORATION 1.0 TECHNOLOGIES
  46. 49. <ul><li>For example: </li></ul><ul><li>Woobius Eye – mobile, real-time </li></ul><ul><li>augmented reality, location-specific </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? PEOPLE AGENDA COLLABORATION 1.0 TECHNOLOGIES
  47. 50. internet technologies EDMS, FTP, file-sharing, Web 1.0 Web 2.0, BIM, Web 3.0 hardware & software static, office-based, internal mobile, SaaS PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA industry attitudes contractual, price-driven collaborative, sharing, ‘ best value’ focus
  48. 51. <ul><li>People and processes (1): industry attitudes to collaboration </li></ul><ul><li>Conservative </li></ul><ul><li>Slow to change - inertia </li></ul><ul><li>Very fragmented – danger: preach to the converted only, while majority continue with old approaches </li></ul><ul><li>Focused on delivery , not ‘whole life’ </li></ul><ul><li>People and processes (2): inter-organisation </li></ul><ul><li>Necessary evil or a strategic objective? </li></ul><ul><li>One project at a time or long-term relationships? </li></ul><ul><li>Contractual or collaborative attitude? </li></ul><ul><li>Own agenda or mutual objectives? </li></ul><ul><li>Management approach </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  49. 52. <ul><li>People and processes (3): intra-organisation attitudes to collaboration </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Silo’ dwelling – department, region, profession </li></ul><ul><li>Corporate ladder – different agendas </li></ul><ul><li>Management – do managers … </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Preach collaboration? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Practice collaboration? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reward collaboration? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Intra-organisational collaborators probably better able to collaborate externally … </li></ul><ul><li>People and processes (4): individual </li></ul><ul><li>Age – older professionals more resistant? </li></ul><ul><li>Professional learning – traditional approaches </li></ul><ul><li>Experience – tried, trusted techniques </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Creative isolation’ – develop ideas then share? </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES AGENDA
  50. 53. internet technologies EDMS, FTP, file-sharing, Web 1.0 Web 2.0, BIM, Web 3.0 hardware & software static, office-based, internal mobile, SaaS PROCESSES NEXT? AGENDA industry attitudes contractual, price-driven collaborative, sharing, ‘ best value’ focus industry mindsets silo-based, anti-‘social’ open, ‘social’ COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  51. 54. PROCESSES NEXT? AGENDA COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  52. 55. <ul><li>For example: </li></ul><ul><li>‘ democratic design’ </li></ul><ul><li>open-source </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? AGENDA COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  53. 56. <ul><li>For example: </li></ul><ul><li>Embrace Gen Y </li></ul><ul><li>And start planning for Gen Z </li></ul>PROCESSES NEXT? AGENDA COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  54. 57. PROCESSES NEXT? AGENDA processes & workflows paper-based, impersonal, ‘push’ model-based, personal, rich media, ‘pull’ COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  55. 58. NEXT? AGENDA PROCESSES COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  56. 59. <ul><li>For example: </li></ul><ul><li>video-sharing </li></ul><ul><li>slideshows </li></ul><ul><li>photos </li></ul><ul><li>virtual reality </li></ul>NEXT? AGENDA PROCESSES COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  57. 60. NEXT? AGENDA processes & workflows paper-based, impersonal, ‘push’ model-based, personal, rich media, ‘pull’ supply chain structures fragmented, dis-enfranchised joined-up, integrated inclusive, end-to-end PROCESSES COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  58. 61. <ul><li>Key research agenda (2008) </li></ul><ul><li>Collaborative prototyping to define and deliver client requirements </li></ul><ul><li>Efficient, seamless sharing of information across the built environment stakeholders </li></ul><ul><li>Ability to interact with real-time information regardless of physical location or timezone </li></ul><ul><li>Mass adoption and application of off-site manufacturing, automation and mechanisation processes </li></ul><ul><li>Well trained, well qualified workforce able to use the latest best practice technologies </li></ul>NEXT? AGENDA PROCESSES COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  59. 62. industry time-frames short-term, design and construct long-term, design, build operate, re-use NEXT? AGENDA processes & workflows paper-based, impersonal, ‘push’ model-based, personal, rich media, ‘pull’ supply chain structures fragmented, dis-enfranchised joined-up, integrated inclusive, end-to-end PROCESSES COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  60. 63. feasibility planning design construction handover Occupation, FM, O&M Whole life information Design IT Construction IT Handover IT Planning IT FM IT <ul><li>interoperability </li></ul><ul><li>Re-use of existing information … and processes </li></ul>Information as part of the asset NEXT? AGENDA PROCESSES COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  61. 64. <ul><li>For example: </li></ul><ul><li>1 : 5 : 200 </li></ul><ul><li>Be Valuable </li></ul>NEXT? AGENDA PROCESSES COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  62. 65. industry attitudes contractual, price-driven collaborative, sharing, ‘ best value’ focus industry mindsets industry time-frames industry approaches silo-based, anti-‘social’ short-term, design and construct (new) build if possible open, ‘social’ long-term, design, build operate, re-use build if necessary and sustainable NEXT? AGENDA PROCESSES COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  63. 66. <ul><li>UK Gov to focus on two aims: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>co-ordinate low carbon policy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>improve government’s return on its investment . </li></ul></ul><ul><li>“… enormous potential …lies in more intelligent use of ICT … in improving communications, reducing or removing transaction costs, transforming the way that buildings are designed, creating more direct links between design and fabrication/assembly, removing the coordination errors that too often block productivity etc.” (Paul Morrell, UK chief construction adviser, December 2009) </li></ul>NEXT? AGENDA PROCESSES COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  64. 67. <ul><li>Construction collaboration technologies survived the “dot.com doom” </li></ul><ul><li>Benefits of online collaboration are clear … </li></ul><ul><li>… yet overcoming resistance has more to do with changing culture (people and processes) than technology </li></ul><ul><li>UK market still buoyant, but generic collaborative technologies are spreading, and other vendors could look to expand footprint in AEC market </li></ul><ul><li>Collaboration vendors, customers and users therefore need to look </li></ul><ul><ul><li>look beyond file-sharing (eg: process management, financial control, mobile working) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>understand the SaaS (Software-as-a-Service) or On-Demand revolution </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>embrace BIM, embrace web 2.0 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>New business models will emerge in next 2-3 years </li></ul>Summary NEXT? AGENDA PROCESSES COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  65. 68. <ul><li>Next? </li></ul><ul><li>CADaaS – CAD as a Service </li></ul><ul><li>BIMaaS – BIM as a Service </li></ul><ul><ul><li>But BIM will require changes, eg: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Procurement </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Contracts </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Insurance </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Intellectual property </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Rise of the tech-Nomad </li></ul><ul><li>The internet of things </li></ul>Summary NEXT? AGENDA PROCESSES COLLABORATION 1.0 PEOPLE TECHNOLOGIES
  66. 69. Thank you Contact: Paul Wilkinson Blog: www.extranetevolution.com Email: [email_address] Tel: +44 (0)20 8858 1104 mob: 07788 445920 Twitter: @EEPaul

×