I was just watching a webinar on collaboration. It's good to see modern day emphasis on collaboration, working together, sharing risk, joint problem solving and so on. Tools like NEC3 contracts, BIM and the incredible pace of technology can only help reach whatever goal we have in mind. But when did we decide not to be collaborative? Does this trace back to our outdated social class system? Are we still dogged by professional snobbery?
From my observations of the UK construction industry in particular, it has been incredibly painful to watch people be as non-collaborative as they can possibly get away with. This must have had a huge negative implication on people. But how long will it actually take to re-shape such a fragmented industry to allow a huge and genuine cultural change? Any thoughts?
Showing posts with label BIM. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BIM. Show all posts
Tuesday, 2 September 2014
Thursday, 4 July 2013
Like the new NEC3 'How to...' guides?
Hopefully most of you have had the chance to look over the new 'How to...' guides that were launched in April. Do you like them, would you like to see more and if so, on what topics? These are intended to be fairly concise but practical guides to help users better understand the particular topic in the guide, which so far concentrates on communications, BIM and writing the Scope/Works Information/Service Information. Do let us have some feedback.
Rob
Rob
Saturday, 23 March 2013
MPL call for papers on BIM
Dear all,
It's snowing, no golf, no football so what better to do than catch up on many emails/Blogs etc that have been hanging around a bit too long.....
The first is a call for papers on best practice and new directions in building information modelling (BIM). This is from Management Procurement and Law (MPL) who publish original research and practice papers on all civil engineering and construction aspects of management, procurement and law as part of the proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers.
Have a look and please contribute if you have a paper in you, maybe from an NEC contractual angle....
Rob
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0zCdliicY9meDF5MkNKbVd3X1E/edit
It's snowing, no golf, no football so what better to do than catch up on many emails/Blogs etc that have been hanging around a bit too long.....
The first is a call for papers on best practice and new directions in building information modelling (BIM). This is from Management Procurement and Law (MPL) who publish original research and practice papers on all civil engineering and construction aspects of management, procurement and law as part of the proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers.
Have a look and please contribute if you have a paper in you, maybe from an NEC contractual angle....
Rob
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0zCdliicY9meDF5MkNKbVd3X1E/edit
Tuesday, 23 August 2011
NEC & BIM
A few people have asked 'is there going to be an NEC compliant BIM contract (or amends) in time'? The answer is at the moment there are no amends being drafted, nor do we see them being required. Of course things may change as BIM develops.
NEC has representation with the UK Governments' BIM implementation group where, amongst other things, the group is discussing liability, negligence, deliverables, copyright, IPR and so on. NEC will input into this group by monitoring/reviewing/advising and looking over the protocol the group is writing.
From my perspective and in simple terms, BIM is a design process based on a common platform. It it appears that BIM is in no way intended to change the current liabilities structure that we have - in time we may have integrated project insurance (IPI) but IPI isn't BIM and vice versa.
From an NEC perspective therefore, if such a process (protocol) is required then the requirements to work to this should rightly be in the Works Information (ECC) or the Scope (PSC). The biggest issue with BIM seems to be data supply and current thinking is that this could comfortably be accommodated through a mixture of key dates and sectional completion.
Rob
NEC has representation with the UK Governments' BIM implementation group where, amongst other things, the group is discussing liability, negligence, deliverables, copyright, IPR and so on. NEC will input into this group by monitoring/reviewing/advising and looking over the protocol the group is writing.
From my perspective and in simple terms, BIM is a design process based on a common platform. It it appears that BIM is in no way intended to change the current liabilities structure that we have - in time we may have integrated project insurance (IPI) but IPI isn't BIM and vice versa.
From an NEC perspective therefore, if such a process (protocol) is required then the requirements to work to this should rightly be in the Works Information (ECC) or the Scope (PSC). The biggest issue with BIM seems to be data supply and current thinking is that this could comfortably be accommodated through a mixture of key dates and sectional completion.
Rob
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)