Bilal Succar's Profile

Hi Deke. Good to hear from you and thank you for this. Yes please send me the graphic and Dianne Davis' publication so I can read it and reference it as well. True, this new graphic is a maturation of the first version but includes an important new concept - the sliding Systems Scale. As Schilling (2000, p. 314) puts it, "at any unit of analysis, the entity is a system of components and each of those components is, in turn, a system of finer components”. Using this sliding scale, the main purpose of this update is really to say that, in contrast to the focus on Building Components (scale 60) by current industry standards and protocols, the BIM Framework advocates for the adoption of Systems in general, and Building Systems (scale 55) in particular, as a primary Asset Scale for assigning, verifying, and exchanging structured information across the information lifecycle. Also, but maybe slightly different to what you've mentioned, the attributes of a parent Asset Scale (e.g. Built Facility scale 40) can be – depending on the Degree of Integration - inherited by child asset scales (e.g. Systems and Components within that Built Facility) (bSI, 2018) (bSDD, 2018) (ISO, 2007).

Commented Aug 13, 2019 on 30. Asset Hierarchy (updated) at BIM Framework

1 reply

Hello, The full-size image cab be found here: https://www.bimframework.info/Full-size-images/Competency-Flow-Framework.png If you need an even higher resolution image, please email me (see side column) so I understand your requirements and how it will be used. Regards, Bilal

Commented Aug 8, 2019 on 16. Competency Flow at BIM Framework

1 reply

A typo no doubt! It should be 'interoperability'. Good catch, thank you Motasem :)

Commented Aug 16, 2018 on Episode 8: Understanding BIM Stages at BIM ThinkSpace

1 reply

Hello Alexander, Thank you for your message. The results from the journal paper are from 2015 and do not reflect the current situation in the 20 countries analysed. Macro adoption research is a collation of snapshots that need to be repeated every couple of years, so they reveal the degree of improvement (or lack of) in a market, and to allow a comparison between markets in areas where comparison is possible/useful. Starting late 2017, we started collecting a more detailed set of data from a smaller number of countries (please have a look here: http://bimexcellence.org/projects/macro-adoption/). We are hopeful that the new set will include Hong Kong, but we are still negotiating with research partners there. If you’d like to learn more or to assist us with this, please email me at bsuccar [at] changeagents [dot] com [dot] au. Looking forward to meeting you in HK next month! Bilal

Commented Mar 25, 2018 on The BIMe Initiative at BIM ThinkSpace

1 reply

Hello Mansur. Thank you for your comments. It is true that the UK's Wedge model does not cover capability sets, but I also argue that it does not convey maturity levels either (using the English language connotation of maturity). Also, based on how BIM levels are increasingly discussed in the UK - especially since the April 2016 mandate - the most accurate description of the Wedge model is that it sets 'standardisation milestones' for industry to comply with. In a sense, it is more accurate to refer to the Wedge’s multiple levels - at least Level 1 and Level 2 - as Standardisation Levels rather than Capability, Maturity or even Policy milestones.

Commented Nov 28, 2017 on Episode 22: The Wedge and the S-Curve at BIM ThinkSpace

1 reply

Hi Dene, Thank you for comment and for doing the follow-up research. It seems the I-CMM matrix have been moved and I can't find it online in its original form. However, you'll be able to access it and additional information by registering and downloading the United States National BIM Standards (NBIMS-US v3). To save you time, you can download section 5.2 from here: https://www.nationalbimstandard.org/files/NBIMS-US_V3_5.2_Minimum_BIM.pdf (1.3MB). Let me know what you think below or during next week's lecture. Best Wishes!

Commented Oct 15, 2017 on Episode 12: BIM performance measurement at BIM ThinkSpace

1 reply

44. Information Cycle

The Information Cycles employs the three Project Lifecycle Phases – Design, Construction, and Operation (Succar, 2009) – to identify Information Actors and their high-level Information Actions connecting several Information Milestones within the Lifecycle Information Transformation and Exchange (LITE) framework (Succar and Poirier, 2020). Continue reading

Posted Jul 25, 2017 at BIM Framework

Comment

0

43. Product Development Diagram

The Product Development Diagram illustrates how to deliver a BIMe Initiative Product - a published guide or a software application. Continue reading

Posted Jul 17, 2017 at BIM Framework

Comment

0

42. BIMe Initiative Knowledge Structure

The Knowledge Structure is composed of five Knowledge Sets forming the bases for all BIMe Initiative projects, activities and deliverables. Continue reading

Posted Apr 14, 2017 at BIM Framework

Comment

0

The BIMe Initiative

This post introduces the BIMe Initiative, a community-based effort to improve the performance of the construction industry through high-impact research and open knowledge sharing. The BIMe Initiative is supported by clear knowledge structures, a network of international subject matter experts, and an expanding modular language. Continue reading

Posted Mar 17, 2017 at BIM ThinkSpace

Comment

4

Hi Fernando, Thank you for your kind words and interest in the BIM Ontology. I'm happy to share the descriptions with you. Please send me your email address to bsuccar[@]changeagents[.]com[.]au Regards, Bilal

Commented Feb 24, 2017 on 36. BIM Ontology at BIM Framework

1 reply

Hello Hamza, Yes, you are right... A number of policy players in Ireland, Brazil and elsewhere have adopted parts of the BIM Framework. However, for the sake of accuracy, these policy players didn't adopt the parts discussed in this post. Thank you all the same!

Commented Feb 10, 2017 on Episode 22: The Wedge and the S-Curve at BIM ThinkSpace

1 reply

Hello Vincent, Thank you for your question. The Policy Actions model is applicable at a number of Organisational Scales (1-7, 9 and 10 - http://www.bimframework.info/2013/12/organizational-hierarchy.html). So yes, the above model can be used to assess Industry Association's role in BIM diffusion. You can also apply other macro adoption models if you wish. For example, the Diffusion-Role Matrix (Fig. 2 of Episode 23 - http://bit.ly/BIMepisode23) may prove useful. Please let me know if you need any clarifications. Best wishes on your research; maybe you can share some of your research findings through a Guest Post? Bilal

Commented Oct 13, 2016 on Episode 20: The role policy makers (can) play in BIM adoption at BIM ThinkSpace

1 reply

Global Trends in BIM Research

This post provides an overview of Global BIM research trends by analyzing a large number of BIM-focused publications. The simple methodology adopted, shear extent of review effort and visual nature of analysis provide an excellent overview of BIM research coverage. The approach taken represents a solid basis for researchers to expand this study by analyzing more publications and identify the knowledge gaps to be addressed in the BIM domain. Continue reading

Posted Sep 28, 2016 at BIM ThinkSpace

Comment

0

Thank you Haider for your comment. Best Wishes, Bilal

Commented Sep 21, 2016 on Episode 16: Understanding BIM Wash at BIM ThinkSpace

1 reply

Data Aggregation and Information Search in AEC/FM Industry

In this guest post, Mehmet Yalcinkaya and Vishal Singh summarise the information management challenge faced by the construction industry. Based on their quality academic research, they introduce a number of principles and a digital solution to visually address this challenge. Continue reading

Posted Sep 7, 2016 at BIM ThinkSpace

Comment

1

41. Macro Diffusion Responsibilities

This conceptual model (Figure 1) identifies nine BIM player groups (industry stakeholders) distributed across three BIM Fields (technology, process and policy) as defined within the BIM Framework. The nine player groups are: policy makers, educational institutions, construction organisations, individual practitioners, technology developers, technology service providers, industry associations, communities of practice, and technology advocates. Continue reading

Posted Aug 5, 2016 at BIM Framework

Comment

0

Thank you David. Your feedback is appreciated!

Commented Jul 20, 2016 on The Many Faces of ‘LOD’ at BIM ThinkSpace

1 reply

The Many Faces of ‘LOD’

This guest post by Marzia Bolpagni provides a comprehensive review of the 'LOD' term and its many nuances from across the world. It includes comparative tables and detailed charts. Continue reading

Posted Jul 19, 2016 at BIM ThinkSpace

Comment

32

Thank you Daniel, I'm glad you like it!

Commented Jul 8, 2016 on Episode 6: A systematic understanding of BIM at BIM ThinkSpace

1 reply

40. Information Taxonomy

Updated Feb 20, 2020, to align with Paper A11 - original June 20, 2016 (download), modified Nov 29 and Jun 20, 2019. The Information Taxonomy (previously Project Information Taxonomy) extends the Modular Requirements Clarification Language first introduced in Paper A10. The taxonomy currently includes concepts/terms to be used in defining... Continue reading

Posted Jun 19, 2016 at BIM Framework

Comment

0

Thank you Carl. I'm quite familiar with the good work done by Penn State and the excel adaptation by Arup and Atkins. There are many other similar efforts as well, each with its own strengths and limitations. Of course, it is not possible to compare these here...Imho, the more measurement tools there are, the better. One note: the BIM Maturity Matrix is intentionally kept as a static template. Believe or not, this is the best format for such a tool. There's actually published research about Excel-based tools and how they reduce usability, not increase it. Regards, Bilal

Commented Jun 9, 2016 on BIM Maturity Matrix at BIM Framework

1 reply

39. Model Uses Taxonomy

Figure 1. Model Uses Taxonomy (Full Size) The Model Uses Taxonomy organises Model Uses into a tiered structure that allows: (a) collation of Model Uses from across different industries; (b) close alignment with the Competency Taxonomy (Succar et al., 2013 - http://bit.ly/BIMpaperA6); (c) custom use-cases for unique projects; and (d)... Continue reading

Posted Mar 23, 2016 at BIM Framework

Comment

2

El rol que (pueden) juegan los Responsables de Formular la Política en la adopción de BIM

Raramente pasa una o dos semanas sin que oigamos hablar de una nueva iniciativa BIM en un país u otro. Está claro que el ritmo de adopción de BIM se ha acelerado considerablemente en los dos últimos años y la nueva oleada de implementación tiene por objetivo la Europa continental. Se detectan continuos esfuerzos en Alemania, Francia y España y entre los profesionales y asociaciones industriales empiezan a sonar los mismos gritos de guerra que oíamos anteriormente en US, UK, Australia, Singapur, Malasia, y más recientemente en Corea y Brasil. This episode is also available in the following Languages: English (original version): Episode 20: The role policy makers (can) play in BIM adoption (Jan 16,, 2015) Italian (external link): Lezione 20: Il ruolo che i politici giocano (o potrebbero giocare) nell’adozione del BIM (Dec 16, 2015) The Spanish version continues below: Ya que los responsables de formular políticas [i] desean copiar a otros responsables o bien desarrollan sus propias guías BIM, protocolos y mandatos, creemos que puede ser beneficioso compartir la investigación de visión global que estamos llevando a cabo, con todos aquellos que estén interesados. En base a la colaboración vigente con el Dr Mohamad Kassem (Teesside University, UK),... Continue reading

Posted Dec 17, 2015 at BIM ThinkSpace

Comment

1

Thank you Shawn for your supportive comments and for participating in our ongoing macro BIM adoption research. You’ve raised an important point here: the differences between local, regional and country-wide policies is an important dynamic to understand. Currently, the approach we’ve taken is to assess similar jurisdictions (e.g. a State) separately and compare them (to other States). When there’s a variance between a State-level and the Federal-level, then another macro model need to be applied to establish whether the ‘diffusion dynamic’ within a country is Top-down (Federal Gov. mandate), Middle-out (State Gov. mandate) or Bottom-up (Local Authority mandate) is in play [ please refer to http://bit.ly/BIMEpisode19 ]. In other words, although this model need to be understood independently, it can be applied more accurately when other variables are neutralised using other macro models.

Commented Dec 17, 2015 on Episode 20: The role policy makers (can) play in BIM adoption at BIM ThinkSpace

1 reply