Given the increasing evidence that BIM provides overall savings of cost and time and given the pressures for public sector employers to use it, it is not surprising that there is a current trend for BIM to be introduced late into projects. But it’s not a step to be taken lightly.
As a general premise, procurement and contractual negotiations should ensure that the contracting parties have openly exchanged information so that they are entering into relationships with their eyes open. The greatest part of dispute avoidance is in the timeliness, openness, and fullness of those initial exchanges.
This is not a paywall. Registration allows us to enhance your experience across Construction Management and ensure we deliver you quality editorial content.
Registering also means you can manage your own CPDs, comments, newsletter sign-ups and privacy settings.
The late introduction of new obligations is bound to cause some tension. The contractor and professional team may have put forward proposals with the expectation of a particular method of working and may not be comfortable with the risks associated with such a change.
The employer also has concerns: is the project team incentivised to provide value for money proposals in relation to the change and is this project team the best-suited to provide these services?
For public sector bodies, those concerns are reflected in the legislative restraint from substantially modifying public contracts post-award. The contracting authority will need to consider whether additional tenderers would have been attracted or different offers would have been accepted, had BIM been introduced at tender stage.
A further consequence of the late introduction of BIM is the shift in the design process. The initial design may have been carried out without the use of BIM and it may then be expected that the design team shifts to a different method of working. Indeed, some projects are planned at the outset for BIM to be introduced at a later stage.
This is understandable if the initial designs are created prior to the procurement of a collaborative team or without the certainty of funding that might justify an initial expenditure on BIM but, even so, this seems to lose some of the functionality of BIM software to easily produce variations in inception design and lose the chance to use the initial stages of design to embed the intended methods of working.
Ultimately, if these risks and concerns are properly considered and addressed and if the project team is willing, the benefits of introducing BIM late to a project may prove too attractive to resist.
By Assad Maqbool, a partner at Trowers & Hamlins specialising in projects and construction
