BIM for FM Performance Tools

Park et al., (2013) suggested a number of KPIs to help quantify the benefits of BIM and validation methods. This involved:

 A BSC target of construction firms was established through analysis of strategies and goals of construction firms.

Ph.D Thesis 64 Barry McAuley

 BIM-used functions were analysed at each construction stage of planning, designing, construction, and maintenance, in order to produce a relevant KPI, based on the established performance areas.

The authors detail in regards to BIM for FM the following key measurement areas for BIM utilisation effects levels;

 for review of test operation,

 for establishment of operating manual;

 for establishment of maintenance system; and

 for repairs.

There was no evidence of early FM involvement in this paper and the KPIs detailed above offer no guidance for FM in the design stage.

Chen et al., (2014) highlights that though attempts to measure BIM implementation have been put forward, they only focus mainly on the final BIM Model, other than the process used to create it. These lack substantial theoretical and empirical justifications, with the reliability and validity of the models remaining questionable. The authors have proposed a BIM maturity matrix based on previous efforts through performing an empirical investigation of key factors for measuring BIM. The authors suggested four dimensions of technology, process, people and information. It was found that factors related to process and information were more important than factors of technology and people

When it comes to quantifying the BIM for FM there was very little active research. Sarkar et al., (2015) aimed to identify the KPIs that affect the usage of BIM as a FM tool. Through the use of a questionnaire aimed at the Indian AEC/FM sector they established 15 KPIs from 69 responses that were further grouped into five different components. These components are detailed in table 2.3

Ph.D Thesis 65 Barry McAuley

Table 2.3: BIM for FM KPIs – Source Sarkar et al (2015, pp 373)

This table details some areas were using a BIM model for FM purposes was of most benefit and the potential KPIs to measure these areas. The framework as intended was generic in nature and does not address the author’s research topic, as these KPIs were intended to offer guidance in how to use model. These KPIs do not offer any guidance of how the Facility Manager can play a role in the BIM process and focuses more on the technical aspects of FM than the strategic relevance.

Zadeh et al. (2015) detailed a BIM quality assessment approach for FM, where they described three critical areas that must be represented in the model, from a FM perspective, in order to avoid significant quality issues, including inaccurate, incomplete, or unnecessary information. The three detailed areas of FM include asset information, MEP systems and spaces. These three areas were assessed from the elimination of errors in the following areas:

Ph.D Thesis 66 Barry McAuley

 Entity level: Incomplete information was commonly found in the model from miss representation of elements. Assets in the model that require precise values i.e.

information about the space they occupy in the building may be inputted inaccurately.

This may lead to difficulties in sharing information with other trade discipline models as these assets through occupying the same spatial properties in the building were modelled differently in the architectural and mechanical models. This will make it difficult to merge models due to the same assets having different spatial properties within each model.

 Model Incompatibility: This was about model compliance with BIM standards and was an important quality issue i.e. whether or not the information within the model was compatible with specific data structures.

The authors advocate the use of this research to be deployed by owners to create suitable BIM-quality strategies and assure the quality of required information for operation in the early phases of the project. These areas could be possible categories in which early deployment of the Facility Manager could assist.

The UK GSL, as detailed previously, has made some strides within this area, where earlier stakeholder involvement has been utilised in a number of projects. The GSL will be measured through the following key areas from the early stage of design into post occupancy, as they pass through the whole BIM process:

 Environmental: The measurement of energy usage pre and post occupancy.

 Financial Management: The operational expenditure.

 FM and Commissioning, Training and Handover: Establishing a process and making sure the right people were employed at the right time.

 Functionality and Effectiveness: What was achieved at the end of the whole process and for what purpose?

There have been some positive results in recent pilots, as detailed by the UK BIM Task Group (2015) which includes:

1. Shonks Mill: The Environmental Agency engaged with the stakeholders on the project team through a half a day workshop. The workshop focussed on asking the groups to clarify their needs, targets and constraints which helped bring forward engagement on issues that otherwise would have been left until later in the project,

Ph.D Thesis 67 Barry McAuley such as design constraints. Other areas included maintenance targets and data needed by the end user. The workshop reported a saving of at least 7 days and an understanding of the risks and constraints for the project.

2. Liverpool Prison: The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) decided to review their kitchen design standards, which involved a Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE) by the Technical Standards department on a kitchen refurbishment that had been completed 18 months before. This identified through structured questions with key staff from the operations, estate and technical standards team actions to achieve capital and significant operational improvements for future designs and specifications. Using the lessons learnt from the Liverpool POE and the GSL approach of engagement with end users, maintainers, designers and constructors and the 3D capabilities of BIM, a radical review of kitchen design commenced. This review of all kitchen design identified further significant changes to the MoJ standards that led to significant savings in the space required for kitchens, e.g., between 4% and 31% for a pastry prep area.

3. National Measurement Office – Advanced Metrology Laboratory: The users and operators determined the criteria for the plant operation and seven key science criteria. The FM team were treated, as integral to the process, and not just a support service through regular face-to-face meetings with the operators, scientists and client allowing pre-conceptions to be dispelled and a clear understanding to be established.

These user groups reported to a Project Steering Group that advised the design team and Project Board of science and operator recommendations. It was estimated that the measure of ‘laboratory time in use’ could be increased by 10% through intelligent design and close involvement of all parties and time lost due to maintenance and lab catering modifications could also be reduced by the region of 25%.

The majority of the case studies above involve post occupancy evaluation and show little involvement of the Facility Manager in the actual BIM design process. They do not address early Facility Manager involvement and, therefore, lack sufficient guidance in addressing key areas. As a result, it was decided to establish a new terminology to hep demonstrate the benefit of early Facility Manager involvement in the BIM design process.

Ph.D Thesis 68 Barry McAuley 2.4.3.2 Establishment of Key Performance Task Terminology

The BIM for FM performance tools and KPIs detailed in the literature review were extremely generic and do not provide a focus or any particular guidance of where the Facility Manager’s expertise can be best realised. While KPIs seek to measure a change in performance, the authors research aim was to provide guidance and demonstrate where the Facility Manager can have the greatest impact within the BIM design process. The purpose was not to measure this contribution but to establish areas based on the core competencies of the Facility Managers role, which they can offer a specific contribution. For the purpose of this research the author established a new terminology to achieve this research goal, which was KPT. The rationale for this new term was to avoid confusion and differentiate from similar terminologies as KPI were a quantifiable measurement is required. As KPT was a new term there was no existing literature at the time that could be reviewed.