With continuing innovation in construction technology and design goals such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) certification, the architecture/engineering/construction (AEC) industry is experiencing rapid increases in design complexity. Firms are grappling not only with how to address traditional concerns of raising productivity in the face of this and worker shortages, but also how to collaborate effectively under a proliferation of project delivery methods.
Those engaged in the AEC industry are finding that the traditional design-bid-build model, though still prevalent, is being joined by innovative new processes. Delivery methods such as design-build and construction manager (CM) at risk have the potential to provide greater profits and value while mitigating owner risk.
Although more of the financial risk is assumed by a design-build firm in such methods, over the long term it remains in an owner’s best interest to ensure that accurate, complete, and accessible records are available as a project is finished.
According to the FMI/CMAA Sixth Annual Survey of Owners, 80 percent of project owners in 2005 agreed “that there should be formal contractual agreements for collaboration on projects.” At the same time, 60 percent of owners admitted they relied on a contractor’s or construction manager’s software to track and report on a project’s progress, and less than 30 percent of owners specified that a single collaboration software application be used by every company working on a project.
These findings are disturbing, considering that a 2004 National Institute of Standards and Technology study, highlighted in a CIO Decisions article, estimated that building maintenance organizations wasted almost $16 billion a year. This waste was attributed to the inability of free data exchange among computer-aided design (CAD), engineering, and business process software systems. By virtually outsourcing project collaboration responsibility, owners place future costs and profits at risk if the collaboration tools are sub-optimal or don’t mesh with an owner’s internal systems for the operation and maintenance of facilities.
By understanding the factors that drive greater need for collaboration as well as the technical options available to improve business efficiency, forward-thinking owners and AEC firms can engage in alternative delivery methods and select the appropriate tools for enhancing cooperation as well as profitability.
Schedule Compression
Specific to the AEC industry, schedule compression is a leading factor in renewed collaboration emphasis. With the design-build method, projects begin construction before the design is complete. Although often considered a scheduling or manpower issue, schedule compression is much more complex.
Compressing a schedule actually increases the total manpower requirement. By simply condensing a timetable, firms will underestimate total project effort and set themselves up for delays in completion. Compensating for a shorter timeframe by adding more workers can also compound problems. More people in the workplace at the same time put physical constraints on existing communication and collaboration processes.
While time and money make the case for collaboration among AEC firms, so do a number of other industry developments. Greater regulation and liability exposure are prompting meticulous record keeping of documents, revisions, and communications — including e-mail. Industry consolidation is also a factor, as companies formed through acquisitions and mergers must be able to share documents and information flawlessly.
Design-build consortia often form around projects, requiring highly integrated collaboration across corporate boundaries. Finally, greater specialty and complexity of designs are also factors, as designations such as LEED gain favor.
Technology Transition
As pressure builds for collaboration, closer examination of the technology used in the AEC industry reveals something of a void. While new tools have periodically improved individual productivity, few have fully addressed collective productivity.
In the construction industry, project managers have been primary beneficiaries of software technology. Using tools to help with estimating, resource planning, scheduling, tracking, and project accounting, project managers have become more efficient in enterprise resource planning. Similarly, architecture and engineering professionals have improved their productivity by using CAD tools, which provide greater use of visualization, higher-level modeling, and computation while eliminating tedious manual tasks.
Though valuable, individual design tools are no longer making significant strides toward greater profitability; rather, the leverage point for additional business improvement has shifted to effective enterprise collaboration tools.
The most basic, or ad hoc, level of collaboration tools includes commonly used and accepted technology. From the telephone and fax machine to e-mail and instant messaging, these technologies foster communication between individuals and sometimes among groups but provide few collaboration benefits with respect to structured sharing of documents and tasks or managing business processes. In addition, much of the information being communicated may be lost to future use by virtue of either not being recorded in the first place or not being accessible when needed.
A higher level of collaborative tools provides team-oriented capabilities. The use of portal sites, document libraries, and shared task and status lists can help open up team or project information to internal and external stakeholders. While such tools enable better sharing of information than ad hoc tools, they often fail to deliver the larger business benefits of capturing and structuring information for use beyond the immediate team or to meet future corporate or legal needs. Although their benefits can be measurable, team tools don’t directly improve the efficiency of business processes, which can be the mechanism for achieving the greatest return on innovation investment.
Finally, the most advanced level of collaboration tools — enterprise-class document management tools — can provide seamless integration across different roles, tasks, departments, organizations, and most of all, business processes. Tools that incorporate features such as business process automation, records management, and automated workflow can help significantly improve efficiency and reduce the cost of doing business. At this level, workers integrate information within their operational practices as well as within supporting business departments, such as finance, human resources, and legal.
For instance, defined business processes that support compliance can become turnkey, contain risk, and increase productivity for all affected parties, inside and outside the corporate firewall. While it is not necessary to start implementing collaboration tools at this level, any evaluation and selection process should consider whether prospective tools can support this level, should the organization’s needs mature to need it.
Static or Active
As more organizations and owners concede they need additional document management tools to enhance collaborative efforts, they must clearly define when and how to use these tools. Their benefits will vary depending on when and how long they are in place.
The first issue is one of timing: Collaboration tools are useful during the design and build stage, during the operation and maintenance phase, or throughout the entire lifecycle of the project.
The second factor to consider is how to view information. “Static” documents are typically archived and retrieved, while “active” documents can be revised and updated while being managed. Addressing these fundamental elements will guide the selection of a tool, based on its capabilities and potential benefit.
A document management tool in place for the entire lifecycle of a project, from design throughout the operational lifetime, is the greatest collaboration benefit. In the design and construction phase, establishing a consistent collaboration process and a central repository of designs, business documents, and e-mails offers numerous advantages.
Such systems and tools can help monitor progress and accelerate communication among project stakeholders. Because this is a time of constant change and information flow, collaboration tools for this project phase must be capable of active information management.
If a document management tool is not mandated or selected during the design and construction phases of a project, operational phase implementation can provide considerable ongoing benefits. Since a facility’s long-term operation costs typically dwarf its construction costs, owners should consider requiring the delivery of operation and maintenance documents in a format capable of importing into a document management tool. At a minimum, the incoming information may be viewed in static form to reflect the as-built state of the delivered project.
Although immediate on-line availability of accurate information for operation and maintenance activities can substantially streamline systems, owners realize the maximum benefit when documents are managed actively throughout the facility’s lifetime.
By maintaining precise records of a facility’s physical and logical state, owners can optimize operations and maintenance and take immediate action to upgrade or change systems and to improve activities. The most capable collaboration systems can automate business processes, allowing designated individuals to receive timely information and take appropriate action.
Tool Box
No matter how many — or how few — entities are involved in a project, the collaboration tool should be extremely easy to use and readily available. Document management tools that are on the PC desktop and integrated into frequently-used applications, such as Microsoft Office, can leverage existing knowledge and experience. If a new tool requires significant training, users simply will not adopt it and its introduction will become counterproductive.
Static tools essentially replace paper files, permitting viewing of scanned document images and electronic documents. Both the logical organization of information (typically through “folders”) and the ability to search for documents should be well supported. Capabilities should include search functions that utilize document metadata, such as dates or project numbers. They should also include the ability to find documents based on their internal content regardless of the document’s origin as paper or digital media. For optimal collaboration, the tool should support access inside and outside the corporate firewall and should be able to present every document type for viewing and printing. Finally, the tool should provide flexible document security, constraining users to viewing only those documents to which they should have access.
Active tools, on the other hand, offer considerably higher functionality and benefits for a collaborative environment. An active tool can provide a number of features alongside static capabilities, offering a more robust document management system. Active tools should support functions such as document versioning and comparison, document markup, various manual and automated methods of importing new documents, and a connection to the e-mail system for capture of new messages. Stronger tools will offer extensive workflow capabilities to automate business processes and records management, ensuring the legal retention and disposition of business records.
At their highest level, collaboration tools create one central source of information to guide a project with many players in many locations, streamlining operations and optimizing efforts both before and after project delivery.
Owners, designers, engineers, and builders can improve their chances for project success and greater profitability by collaborating through tools available to assist in these ventures.
INFO: ColumbiaSoft Inc. (www.documentlocator.com)