implementation of bimbim.is/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/implementation_of_bim_eij1.pdf · elvar ingi...

Elvar Ingi Jóhannesson

Implementation of BIM

Danish Experience from Icelandic Perspective

M.Sc. Thesis, 28th July 2009

Elvar Ingi Jóhannesson Implementation of BIM

DTU Management Engineering 3

Author: Elvar Ingi Jóhannesson

M.Sc. Student ‐ student number: s061016

[email protected]

Supervisor: Per Anker Jensen

Professor, M.Sc., PhD, MBA – Head of Centre for Facilities Management –

Realdania Research, DTU Management Engineering

[email protected]

Main Title: Implementation of BIM

Subtitle: Danish Experience from Icelandic Perspective

Language: English. Abstract also available in Icelandic.

Points: 30 ECTS

Pages: 143 incl. Appendixes

Department: DTU Management Engineering

Written in: 1st of February to 28th of July 2009

Rights: © Elvar Ingi Jóhannesson, 2009

Department of Management Engineering Technical University of Denmark Produktiontorvet – Bygning 424 DK‐2800 Kgs. Lyngby Denmark www.man.dtu.dk/ E‐mail: [email protected]


4 DTU Management Engineering



Abstract This thesis explores the implementation of BIM in the Danish building industry with the aim of

making use of its experience for the Icelandic building industry.

The project is based on a research consisting of two separated analyses. In the former part, the

deployment of ICT in the Icelandic building industry is investigated. In the latter part the experience

in Denmark from implementing and working with BIM is studied. Based on findings from both parts,

ideas and recommendations are put forward for the Icelandic building industry about feasible ways

of implementing BIM.

The data collection for the former part was performed through an e‐survey among Icelandic

companies working in the building industry. The second part of the analysis was based on interviews

with representatives from several Danish companies working in the building industry.

Among the results was that Icelandic companies operating in the building industry see themselves as

very well computerized. However, their knowledge and use of BIM is little. The Danish companies

participating in the research explained some of the barriers and benefits of BIM and how the

implementation of BIM has been carried out in Denmark. It became clear that the implementation of

BIM has taken longer time than anticipated by some ‐partly due to technical issues but also to issues

related to cultural practices in companies.

It is recommended to the Icelandic building authorities to get into cooperation with their Nordic

counterparts for making standards and guidelines related to BIM. Public building clients are also

encouraged to consider initiating projects based on making simple building models of existing

buildings in order to introduce the BIM technology to the industry. Icelandic companies are

recommended to start implementing BIM immediately although in small steps. Cooperation with

Nordic companies that already have gained some experience with BIM should also be a desirable

option for them in order to widen their horizon.

Even though Danish companies do still have some way to go towards full implementation of BIM, it

is clear that in these matters, Icelandic companies can learn a lot from their Danish counterparts.

The Danish experience and perception of the features of BIM should be helpful and encouraging for

Icelandic companies willing to implement BIM.



Útdráttur Ný aðferðafræði er að ryðja sér til rúms í mannvirkjagerð sem byggir á notkun upplýsingalíkana við

undirbúning, hönnun, byggingu og rekstur mannvirkja. Á ensku er aðferðafræðin nefnd Building

Information Modelling, BIM. Markmiðið með BIM er að ná fram bættum gæðum og aukinni

framleiðni í byggingariðnaði og stuðla þannig að sparnaði í rekstri mannvirkja. Meðal annarra eru

Danir komnir nokkuð á skrið í innleiðingu á BIM og standa Íslendingar þeim talsvert að baki í þeim

efnum.

Verkefnið er byggt á tvískiptri rannsókn, annars vegar á núverandi stöðu notkunar og þekkingar á

upplýsingatækni og BIM í íslenskum byggingariðnaði og hins vegar á því hver reynsla danska

byggingariðnaðarins er af innleiðingu og notkun BIM. Í ljósi af niðurstöðum rannsóknarinnar eru

ræddar hugmyndir og settar fram tillögur fyrir íslensk fyrirtæki og íslenskan byggingariðnað í heild

sinni um hvernig standa mætti að innleiðingu BIM.

Gagnaöflun fyrir íslenska hluta rannsóknarinnar var þannig háttað að spurningalisti var sendur til

fyrirtækja starfandi í íslenskum byggingariðnaði. Seinni hluti rannsóknarinanr, þar sem reynsla Dana

af innleiðingu BIM var skoðuð, fór fram með viðtölum við nokkur fyrirtæki og stofnanir starfandi í

dönskum byggingariðnaði.

Helstu niðurstöður rannsóknarinnar voru að íslensk fyrirtæki starfandi í byggingariðnaði telja sig nota

upplýsingatækni töluvert mikið. Þó kom í ljós að þekking þeirra og notkun á BIM er lítil. Hin dönsku

fyrirtæki sem tóku þátt í rannsókninni lýstu hvernig innleiðingu BIM hefur verið háttað ásamt helstu

kostum og göllum sem henni hefur fylgt. Í ljós kom að innleiðing BIM hefur gengið hægar en sumir

höfðu búist við ‐ stundum vegna tæknilegra vandamála en oft vegna þeirra siðvenja sem viðgangast

innan fyrirtækja.

Mælt er með því að íslensk byggingaryfirvöld komi á samstarfi við aðila á Norðurlöndum um gerð

staðla og leiðbeininga varðandi BIM. Opinberir verkkaupar eru einnig hvattir til að íhuga verkefni er

snúa að gerð einfaldra byggingaupplýsingalíkana af byggingum sem fyrir eru og kynna með þeim

hætti íslenskum fyrirtækjum aðferðafræði BIM. Mælst er til þess að íslensk fyrirtæki snúi sér nú

þegar að innleiðingu BIM en geri það þó í smáum skrefum. Samvinna við fyrirtæki á Norðurlöndum

sem þegar hafa öðlast nokkra reynslu af notkun BIM, ætti sömuleiðis að vera áhugaverður valkostur

fyrir íslensk fyrirtæki.

Þrátt fyrir að dönsk fyrirtæki eigi enn nokkuð í land með að innleiða BIM að fullu þá er ljóst að íslensk

fyrirtæki geta lært mikið af þeim dönsku í þessum efnum. Reynsla þeirra af innleiðingu BIM og

kostum þess og göllum ætti að geta verið íslenskum fyrirtækjum bæði til gagns og hvatningar.



Table of Contents

Abstract ............................................................................................................................................ 5

Útdráttur ........................................................................................................................................... 7

Preface ............................................................................................................................................ 11

List of Terms .................................................................................................................................... 13

1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 15

2 Theory ..................................................................................................................................... 17

2.1 Building Information Modelling, BIM ................................................................................ 17

2.2 Definition of BIM .............................................................................................................. 17

2.3 Digital Construction in Denmark ....................................................................................... 26

2.4 BIM in Iceland .................................................................................................................. 29

3 Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 31

3.1 Research Design ............................................................................................................... 31

3.2 Research Tactics ............................................................................................................... 32

4 Use of BIM and ICT in the Icelandic Building Industry ............................................................... 37

4.1 Distribution of Invitations and Response Rate .................................................................. 37

4.2 Use of Drafting Techniques .............................................................................................. 39

4.3 Level of Computerization ................................................................................................. 41

4.4 Utilization of ICT in Collaboration ..................................................................................... 43

4.5 Utilization of BIM and IFC Format ..................................................................................... 45

4.6 Role of ICT and Plans for Next Years ................................................................................. 50

4.7 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 56

5 The Danish Experience ............................................................................................................. 59

5.1 Presentation of Companies .............................................................................................. 59

5.2 Motives and Methods of Implementation ........................................................................ 61

5.3 Barriers with the Implementation of BIM ......................................................................... 69

5.4 Benefits from working with BIM ....................................................................................... 76

5.5 Changes in the Industry and Future Development ............................................................ 79

5.6 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 81

6 Discussions .............................................................................................................................. 83



6.1 Implementation of BIM on National Level ........................................................................ 83

6.2 Implementation on Organizational Level .......................................................................... 87

7 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 91

8 Bibliography ............................................................................................................................ 95

8.1 List of Interviews .............................................................................................................. 95

8.2 List of References ............................................................................................................. 96

A. Appendixes .............................................................................................................................. 99



Preface This report is the product of a M.Sc. research carried out at the Technical University of Denmark. The

research is carried out at the Department of Management Engineering under the supervision of

professor Per Anker Jensen. The project is also made in collaboration with BIM Iceland.

The research project is equivalent to 30 ECTS points and it was carried out in the period of February

to July 2009.

I wish to thank Haraldur Ingvarsson at BIM Iceland and Óskar Valdimarsson at FSR in Iceland for their

support and express my gratitude to all of my interviewees: Clars Danvold, Jan Karlshøj, Mette

Carstad, Mikkel Hansen, Rasmus Klausen, Susanne Piil Asklund, Stefan Johansen and Thomas

Graabæk. I would also like to thank Gunnar Þór Jóhannesson, for proofreading the manuscript of this

thesis.

Finally, I want to bring special thanks to my supervisor, professor Per Anker Jensen at DTU

Management Engineering.

Iceland, 28th July 2009

_____________________________

Elvar Ingi Jóhannesson, s061016



List of Terms

Term Definition / Description

3D Model, Building

Model, Building

Information Model

A digital, machine‐readable record of a building, its performance, its

planning, its construction and later its operation. (Eastman et al., 2008).

The three terms are used interchangeably in this paper.

AEC Architectural, Engineering and Construction.

AIA The American Institute for Architects

BIM Building Information Modelling. Describes tools, processes and

technologies that are facilitated by digital, machine‐readable

documentation about a building, its performance, its planning, its

construction and later its operation (Eastman et al., 2008).

BIM Iceland A project in Iceland intended to initiate and encourage the implementation

of BIM technology in the Icelandic building industry.

bips A Danish organization within the building industry. (Danish: Byggeri –

Informationsteknologi – Produktivitet – Samarbejde)

buildingSMART Is about improving the processes of the construction industry by using

open standards. The organisation behind buildingSMART is IAI.

CAD Computer Aided Design

DB Design‐Build

DBB Design‐Bid‐Build

DDB Digital Construction (Danish: Det Digitale Byggeri).

EBST Danish Enterprise and Construction Authority (Danish: Erhvervs‐ og

Byggestyrelsen).

Erabuild European Research Area on Sustainable Construction and Operation of

Buildings



FM Facilities Management

FRV The Icelandic Association of Consulting Engineers (Icelandic: Félag

ráðgjafaverkfræðinga)

FSR The Government Construction Contracting Agency (Icelandic:

Framkvæmdasýsla Ríkisins). FSR administers government construction

projects in Iceland and consults on technical matters, procurement and

preparation of projects.

FSSA The Association of Architecture Firms in Iceland (Icelandic: Félag sjálfstætt

starfandi arkitekta)

IAI International Alliance for Interoperability

ICT Information and Communication Technology

ICTP Icelandic Construction Technology Platform

IFC Industry Foundation Classes specification is a neutral data format to

describe, exchange and share information typically used within the building

and facility management industry sector. (IAI Tech International, n.d.).

NBIMS The National Building Information Model Standard Project Committee in

the United States.

NKS Nordic Contact Concerning State Building Activities (Danish: Nordisk

Kontakt om Statsbyggeri) is a partnership of Nordic organizations

responsible for each country's public buildings and environments (Statens

Fastighetsverk, 2005).

SI Federation of Icelandic Industries (Icelandic: Samtök iðnaðarins)



1 Introduction For a long time, it has been widely accepted that the building industry has suffered from a lack of

productivity and occasionally lack of quality. It is a conservative and diversified line of business which

makes it especially difficult to introduce new concepts. Its inherent nature does also limit the

possibilities to make benefit of the development in the manufacturing industries towards

standardization and mass production, because building projects are in fact dealing with prototypes –

conditions are hardly ever the same in two projects.

With the fairly new trend of Building Information Modelling, or BIM, it is anticipated that some of

the building industry’s troubles can be diminished. But the implementation of such a technology

cannot be expected to be carried out over a night. It implies a paradigm shift of the way the whole

industry works; the way how buildings are designed, of collaboration between companies, the way

of construction of building projects and so on.

The Icelandic building industry is no exception from these discussions ‐ nor is the Danish building

industry for that sake. The Danish industry has though started implementing BIM technology as a

part of increased use of information and communication technology in a hope that it will lead to

better quality buildings and increased productivity in the industry.

This thesis will explore the implementation of BIM in the Danish building industry. The aim is to

make use of the experiences of the Danish industry in the implementation of BIM in Iceland. The

problem formulation for the thesis consists of three main research questions:

I. What is the current state of implementation of BIM and deployment of ICT in

the Icelandic building industry?

II. How is the Danish experience from working with BIM? How is it being

implemented and how is the perception in the industry of the barriers and

benefits of BIM?

III. What lesson can the Icelandic building industry learn from the Danish

experience?

The thesis is divided into a number of chapters. It begins with a theoretical discussion in Chapter 2

where the concept of building information modelling will be investigated to see what it is and, not

less importantly, what it is not. Afterwards, the Danish initiative Digital Construction will be

described and the chapter ends with a short discussion of the development of BIM in Iceland so far.

The research methods used in the thesis are described in Chapter 3. The chapter takes on the design

of the research and describes which research methods were used and how they were handled.

Chapters 4 and 5 include the main analysis of the research. In the former, the deployment of ICT in

the Icelandic building industry is investigated and measured up to comparable data collected in the



Scandinavian countries in 2007. In the latter analysis chapter, the experience in Denmark from

working with BIM tools is studied. Emphasis is put on how and to what extent different companies

have implemented BIM, what they see as the main barriers and benefits of the new work processes

and how they vision the future development of BIM in the industry.

After analysing the collected data, a discussion will take place in Chapter 6, where the findings from

the two analyses will be put into context with the theory previously discussed. The aim is to put

forward recommendations for Icelandic companies and the Icelandic building industry as a whole

about feasible ways of implementing BIM. Finally, the findings from the research are put together in

Chapter 7, along with short notes about limitations and possible further work in the field.

A number of terms and abbreviations are used throughout the thesis, which might at first sight seem

to be hard to interpret. For the reader’s convenience, a list of terms is on page 13.

The thesis does also depend on a large amount of data. When appropriate, the data exclusively

collected for the purpose of this research is available in the Appendixes.

This paper is mainly directed towards Icelandic companies and individuals participating in the

building market. The contents of the thesis should though be relevant to all those who are

interested in ways to improve the production quality in the building industry by means of utilizing

information and communication technology. It is anticipated that this thesis will prove to be a useful

addition to the knowledge in the field of implementing BIM and ICT in the building industry.



2 Theory This chapter introduces the main concepts the thesis relies on. It is divided into three sections. First

the concept of Building Information Modelling will be investigated; second, the Danish Digital

Construction initiative will be explained; and third the current status of implementation of BIM in

Iceland will be described.

2.1 Building Information Modelling, BIM In this chapter the definition of BIM will be investigated and it will be discussed what BIM features,

how it differs from traditional design methods and what benefits and barriers can be expected from

working with it.

2.2 Definition of BIM There is probably no ultimate definition of BIM available, but there are many definition proposals

around. Some of those describe BIM solely as a Building Information Model, i.e. an object, into

which a variety of information is imported, while other chooses to describe it as Building Information

Modelling, i.e. a process or an activity.

An example of the former instance is formularised by The National Building Information Model

Standard Project Committee, NBIMS, in the United States, which defines BIM as:

A digital representation of physical and functional characteristics of a facility. A BIM

is a shared knowledge resource for information about a facility forming a reliable

basis for decisions during its life‐cycle; defined as existing from earliest conception to

demolition. (BuildingSMART Alliance, 2009).

This clearly indicates that BIM is an object where information can be extracted from. But NBIMS

continues with some practical discussions about how BIM can be seen from different perspectives.

Accordingly, when BIM is being applied to a project, it represents information management, while to

the project participants, BIM stands for interoperable process which defines how individual teams

work and how many teams work together to make a facility real. Finally, to the design team, BIM

represents integrated design, encouraging creativity and providing more feedback (BuildingSMART

Alliance, 2009).

On the other hand, in the SmartMarket Report on Building Information Modeling: Transforming

Design and Construction to Achieve Greater Industry Productivity (Young, et al., 2008), BIM is defined

as:

The process of creating and using digital models for design, construction and/or

operations of projects. (Young, et al., 2008).

An even more general definition is put forward by Eastman et al. where BIM is said to be used to:



Describe tools, processes and technologies that are facilitated by digital, machine‐

readable documentation about a building, its performance, its planning, its

construction and later its operation. (Eastman et al., 2008).

This again implies that BIM is not an object, but rather a term to describe an activity ‐ in syntactic

terms, BIM is a verb or an adjective but not a noun like NIMBS’s definition suggests. The result of a

modelling activity is further described by Eastman et al. (2008) with the term building information

model, or more simply, a building model.

It is evident that the abbreviation BIM is in general equally used to describe an object and a process.

This paper will not present its own definition of BIM, but will instead lean on the definition put

forward by Eastman et al. (2008). In other words, BIM will be perceived as the process of Building

Information Modelling and the models produced with the aforementioned processes will be referred

to as Building Information Models, Building Models or 3D models.

2.2.1 Why BIM?

BIM technology can facilitate improvements in many business practices related to the building

industry. One of these is how the information flow between actors in a building project can be

enhanced and made more effective. Looking at Figure 1, the information flow diagram describes the

traditional means of collaboration. This system is in many ways flawed, even though it has been the

de facto in the building industry for a long time. Information is sent individually to and from each

and every discipline which for example poses a threat of different editions of documents being in

circulation at the same time. The ongoing risk of mismatching documents is compensated to some

degree by non‐designing parties, such as insurance companies and construction managers.

Figure 1: Communication between project actors. Current situation. Based on Valdimarsson (2008). Own expression.

Figure 2: Communication between project actors. Crossing communication lines have been replaced with a central database that serves all project actors. Based on Valdimarsson (2008). Own expression.



Looking at Figure 2, the situation is considerably simpler. Here, the relationship between the

disciplines is coupled together by a centralized BIM server, i.e. a place where all parties have their

own access to all the information they need when they need it. With the database‐thinking inherent

in the BIM technology, i.e. each and every piece of information is kept in one place and one place

only, coordination and quality of the whole project should be improved. For example, the risk of

mismatching drawings and lists of quantities should be eliminated because both are based on the

same pieces of information that are being stored in the same place. Looking at Figure 2, one might

say that the graphics could as well be describing a project web – a concept which many companies in

the building industry may already be familiar of. The largest difference is however that while project

webs are generally document based, i.e. project information is stored in separated files or

documents, BIM technology deals with database solutions, as previously described.

The flow of information and the knowledge sharing is visualized in another way in Figure 3. The

knowledge gained in a specific project is pictured as a function of the lifetime of the product – more

specifically, the building. At the end of each phase transition, a certain knowledge loss does occur.

Say, in the end of the design phase, consultants have accumulated a large amount of information

related to the specific project. Then, when the information is transferred to next step via the call for

tendering, some data is inevitably lost e.g. because those who worked on the design can never hand

over all their knowledge and experience they have gained for that specific project. This process has

been defined by the “wall” of deliverables, where at the end of each phase, the deliverables are

handed “over the wall” (Eastman at al., 2008). The red line in the figure suggests a more consistent

flow of information through the whole lifetime of the building. This flow can be attained with better

coordination and reuse of information. Application of BIM technology can facilitate the

transformation towards that approach.

Figure 3: Knowledge accumulation as a function of time. The blue path represents the knowledge accumulation when traditional procurements are applied, while the red path shows the ideal accumulation of knowledge, facilitated with BIM. The figure is based on Valdimarsson (2008). Own expression.



As Finith Jernigan discusses, the problem for most architects is that they make too many decisions at

the wrong time with too little information on hand (2007). This dilemma is also represented in Figure

4. The figure shows how effort or effect is a function of the lifetime of a building. The time axis is

divided into a number of design phases, ranging from pre‐designing phase to the operational phase.

As we move along the time‐axis to right, the possibilities for stakeholders to affect the cost or alter

the functional capabilities decrease. Similarly, the cost of design changes increases as more time

elapses. The effort made in the traditional design process is shown with a black curve. Most of the

design effort is made in a considerably short time period – traditionally when construction

documentations are being made. Obviously, by moving as much of the design process to the left on

the graph, as the blue curve suggests, it becomes easier and more cost efficient to make design

changes. This approach can be facilitated with the application of BIM thinking, as further described

in Chapter 2.2.3.

Figure 4: (Strong, 2006). It would be beneficial to move the design process to the left, as the blue curve suggests.

2.2.2 BIM Compared to Traditional Methods

The term BIM has become a buzzword in the building industry, but as such, its definition and

meaning is often quite confusing. It is therefore useful to take a look at some modelling solutions

that do not support the BIM technology. This discussion is for the most part based on Eastman et al.

(2008).

One of the fundamental parts of BIM is that the processes rely on object oriented design. That

means for instance that a digital representation of a building or a structure is assembled using digital



predefined building components which have relevant attributes attached to it. These attributes can

describe some of the object’s features, such as its material characteristics or its producers. Models

that do only contain geometrical data but no object attributes do not utilize the BIM technology.

These models do not have any intelligence at the object level and can only be used for graphical

visualisation. As such, they are fine, but they do not offer any support for design analysis or data

integration.

Another important feature of models produced with BIM technology is that objects must be defined

with parametrical intelligence. It means that objects can be altered by means of proportion, size or

position with a simple change of parametrical values. Objects that are not defined with this kind of

intelligence are more difficult to update and provide no assurance of consistency in the model.

Models that allow altering dimensions of objects in one view without automatically updating other

views are not made with BIM technology. Among other things, BIM is about information

management – every piece of information must be stored in one place and one place only.

Therefore, if some data is changed, it does only need to be changed in one place. It should however

be kept in mind that the BIM ideology does not necessarily require all information to be stored in

the same place or in the same database. Their main premise is rather that it should facilitate an

access to all information from one place, no matter where it is stored – thus acting as sort of an

access point.

The difference between models

produced with BIM technology

and traditional drawings can be

summarized in a small example,

shown in Figure 5. The first

picture shows a traditional 2D

sketch, made in a CAD program, of

a cross‐section of a wall with a

door in it. Even for a person not

familiar of reading drawings, it is

obvious what the drawing

represents. But what the

computer or the software sees is

merely a meaningless compilation

of lines. The second picture shows

a 3D sketch, made in a CAD

program. We can even more clearly see what the sketch represents, but the software does still at

the most only see this as a box with a hole in it and one more box. The last picture represents the

same part of the wall modelled with a BIM tool. Once again, we see just a wall with a door in it, but

Figure 5: A simple comparison of different design techniques. Sketches from Graabæk (2009b).



what is new here is that the software sees the same thing – a wall with a door. The reason for the

appearance of the 2D drawing to the left is to represent that the 2D view is automatically generated

by the software when the building model is being built.

2.2.3 Benefits of BIM

Now, the benefits of BIM will be discussed in relation to the phases of a building project as they are

conventionally perceived. This subchapter is based on Eastman et al. (2008), unless otherwise cited.

2.2.3.1 PreConstruction Benefits

By allowing for macro designing, questions, such as whether a building of a given size, layout and

quality level can be built for a given cost and timeframe can be answered before extensive

commitment has been put in the project. Macro building models, connected to cost database, can

therefore be of a huge value for building owners, because they allow them to evaluate whether a

given project is within their timeframe and budget of cost.

Another aspect relevant in the pre‐construction phase is that BIM allows preparing of a coarse

schematic model of a proposed building, which can be used to make evaluations of the building’s

performance and its quality. By evaluating various design proposals early in the project phase the

overall quality of the building should be increased.

2.2.3.2 Design Benefits

Visualization is one of the most important benefits of BIM. The 3D model is produced directly rather

than being generated from a number of 2D drawings representing different views. This results in

that the client has a better opportunity to familiarize himself with the building earlier in the design

phase, thus making it easier to make any changes – not to mention that it is cheaper to tear down a

wall in a computer model than in real life.

Another important factor is consistency of 2D drawings. Even though a building is being modelled

with BIM technology, it is, and it will be a persistent need for 2D drawings. The keystone here is that

the 2D drawings are all extracted from one model, thus ensuring a perfect consistency at all times

during the design phase. Since each piece of information is stored in a unique place, every change of

the building model will be represented synchronically in all 2D views.

BIM technology does also facilitate multiple design disciplines to be working on the same project at

the same time. It is of course also possible with 2D drawing based procedures, but it is much more

error prone and time consuming than working in one central building model. By getting various

disciplines to work simultaneously on the project, it is possible to shorten the design time and

reduce errors. It does also give opportunities to continuously improve the design, which is obviously

more cost effective than making late improvements when all the main design decisions have been

made.



Checking against the design objectives is also made much easier in a building model than in 2D

drawing environment. The building model can be used to automatically check for various

requirements, both qualitative, such as width of doors or the number of offices presented, and

quantitative, such as relative position of facilities within a building.

With BIM it becomes possible to do energy analysis earlier in the design phase than before. It is

possible to link a building model to tools intended for energy analysis, thus allowing the designers to

evaluate the sustainability of the building in parallel with the general design. In paper‐based system

this is not possible, because a separated energy analysis is then required in the end of the design

phase, causing that any alterations to the design become more expensive.

2.2.3.3 Construction and Production Benefits

The BIM technology gives a possibility to link together the design and the construction planning of a

building. This is sometimes referred to as 4D, where the 4th dimension represents the time. This

opens a chance to simulate the construction process and thus visualize what the building will look

like at any time. This graphic simulation can reveal sources of potential problems and opportunities

for possible improvements.

Clash detection is another relevant aspect. Because the building model generated is the source for

all drawings, the risk of inconsistent design drawings is eliminated. It is also possible to link building

systems models from different disciplines (structural, building services, etc.) into one building model

and thus check for inconsistency, such as missing pipe‐holes in walls, before the procurement takes

place.

Lean construction techniques can also be facilitated with BIM technology. BIM can provide an

accurate model of the design and the material resources needed for each segment for the work and

as earlier described, it provides a basis for improved planning and scheduling. This helps ensuring

just‐in‐time allocation of resources and thus helps reducing cost and allowing for better

collaboration at the site.

2.2.3.4 PostConstruction Benefits

The information produced in the building model during the design and construction phase becomes

useful in the operational phase of the building because it can be a good starting point for managing

and operating the building. It might also be possible to evaluate the performance of the building by

comparing performance analyses of building systems with real operational data. This would be

helpful in order to determine whether all systems of the building are working properly.

2.2.4 Barriers related to BIM

While reducing the risk of design‐related errors and improving the overall quality of building

projects, new challenges and problems may be expected to emerge – especially during the



transformation phase towards new working procedures. This section is, unless otherwise cited,

based on Eastman et al. (2008).

One of the challenges presented with BIM technology is related to the formation of effective project

teams. As Eastman et al. (2008) discuss, determining the methods that will be used to allow for

sufficient sharing of model information by members of the project team is a large issue. If, for

example, the architect bases his work on paper‐based drawings, then it will be necessary for the

contractor to create the building model so that various calculations, estimations and construction

planning can be performed. The problem is that creating the building model after the design has

been completed does require extra time and adds extra cost to the project. It can however be

justified by the advantages of using it for various application, such as detailed design of mechanical‐

and plumbing systems, construction planning and procurement.

Other problems do also emerge if members of a project team use different modelling tools. Moving

data between different tools can cause errors, e.g. due to incomplete data transfer, but the risk of

such problems can be reduced by using open, shared standards, such as the IFC. This matter will be

further discussed in Chapter 2.2.5.

Legal issues are also presenting some challenges. Concerns, such as who owns the building model,

who owns the data sets related to various analyses, who is responsible for the model’s accuracy and

who pays for various parts of the model, are examples of that. Guidelines to cover issues raised by

the use of BIM technology are currently being developed.

When discussing the barriers for implementing BIM, it is useful to have a quick look at the business

models employed in the building industry. The two main contracting methods used are Design‐Bid‐

Build, DBB, and Design‐Build, DB. A schematic diagram of the two methods is shown in Figure 6. The

main advantages of the DBB model is that there is a possibility of more competitive bidding to reach

the lowest possible price for the client, and there is less political pressure to select a given

contractor, which is especially important for public clients (Eastman et al., 2008). The DB business

model was on the other hand developed in order to form a single point responsibility for the whole

design and construction process. It allows the owner to focus more on needs and scope definitions

instead of administrating the communications between designers and contractors (Beard et al.,

2001).



Figure 6: Schematic diagram of Design‐Bid‐Build and Design‐Build processes. Based on Eastman et al. (2008).

In order to exploit the benefits of BIM technology, earlier collaboration between the disciplines

working on building projects will be needed. This requirement is not consistent with the current DBB

business model. This does however not say that BIM cannot be used in parallel with the DBB model,

but its application is then often limited to single phase BIM application, such as energy analysis. The

DB approach does, on the other hand, give good possibilities to exploit BIM technology, because a

single entity is responsible both for the design and the construction, and all disciplines participate in

the project as early as in the design phase.

2.2.5 BIM and Interoperability

One of the most important aspects of BIM is its feature of exchanging information between

collaboration partners. This naturally involves exchanging of information between different systems

or platforms. The problem is that the systems used are of course not developed by one single party –

a large number of software solutions, developed by different producers need to be able to “speak”

the same language. Traditionally, software producers have developed their own native file formats,

more or less without caring about the possibility of utilizing it in other software systems. Some file‐

based exchange formats have however been developed, such as the DXF‐format (Eastman et al.,

2008).

The currently best bet on interoperable exchange format that is capable of exchanging data models

are the Industry Foundation Classes (IFC), which is intended for exchanging data relevant for building

planning, design, construction and management, and CIMsteel Integration Standard Version 2

(CIS/2) for structural steel engineering and fabrication. Both of these formats are capable of

representing various properties relevant for design and production. While the CIS/2 is solely

intended for a limited scope of design it is considered to be likely that the IFC data model will



become the international standard for data exchange and integration within the building

construction industries (Eastman et al., 2008).

The IFC is defined by IAI Tech International in the following terms:

The Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) specification is a neutral data format to

describe, exchange and share information typically used within the building and

facility management industry sector. (IAI Tech International, n.d.).

Various efforts are being made internationally in order to promote and apply the IFC format. In

Singapore, a mission is ongoing, called The Integrated Plan Checking Systems. With these systems,

the aim is to be able to check design proposals for conformity with building regulations, so that any

non‐compliance can be detected and altered during the design phase rather than during the

approval phase (CORENET, 2009). The Norwegian authorities are also working on initiating changes

to their construction industry where IFC plays a key role, and the General Services Administration of

the US government has undertaken a number of BIM projects where exchange of information

between applications relies on IFC (Eastman et al., 2008). The Danish authorities do also promote

the IFC, as further discussed in Chapter 5.

The IFC specification is under continuous evolution, with the current version called IFC2x3. The IFC is

in fact the only public, non‐proprietary and well‐developed data model for buildings available today.

It is being promoted and used in a growing number of functions, both by the public and private

sectors (Eastman et al., 2008).

The structure and functionality of the IFC will not be discussed here, but all information about its

technical specifications is available at www.iai‐tech.org.

2.3 Digital Construction in Denmark In this chapter the state initiative Digital Construction (Danish: Det Digitale Byggeri, DDB) will be

described. The background of the initiative will be briefly expressed, and the requirements and the

purpose of DDB are to be portrayed. The chapter is, unless otherwise cited, based on information

and texts from DDB’s web portal, www.detdigitalebyggeri.dk, and an article about DDB by Jespersen

(2008).

2.3.1 Background of Digital Construction

In the early 2000’s, the Danish building industry had for many years not developed on the same pace

as other industries, at least not by means of productivity. At the same time, it was clear that the use

of ICT in the building industry was very low. These facts lead to the thoughts whether increased use

of ICT could lead to better quality buildings, by means of fewer flaws and thus increased the

productivity and the effectiveness in the building industry (Lerche, 2007).



The Danish government launched a so‐called competitiveness package in 2002, called “Will to grow”.

One of the objectives of this package was to increase productivity and competitiveness in the Danish

construction industry by means of improved utilization of ICT (EBST, 2005, p. 3). The Digital

Construction initiative is a part of this package, executed in cooperation with public clients, the bips

organization and a number of consortiums.

The vision of digital construction appeared as soon as when the first CAD drawings were introduced

to the market. The digital work process is characterized by that data can be accumulated, processed,

copied, re‐used and retrieved on the basis of any criterion chosen or defined. Therefore, it is

possible to imagine a process where all participants in a building project; architects, engineers,

contractors and suppliers, contribute to the overall amount of data that represents the construction

project. This has to be done in a way so that relevant data can be retrieved in the form needed for

further use.

The strategy with Digital Construction was to form a basis of IT standards and shared guidelines for

the industry, to implement these standards and guidelines by putting them up as requirements in

public building projects, and to generate “best practice” examples from the reality in order to gain

experience and document the benefits.

2.3.2 What is Digital Construction?

Digital Construction is a governmental initiative which involves that from the 1st of January 2007,

state clients are required to make a number of demands related to ICT. These demands are

supposed to ensure increased productivity by means of improved knowledge‐sharing between

different actors in the construction industry. ICT tools should support a smooth process without

breaks and loss of information through the whole lifetime of the construction project – from the

initial design phase to the operation and maintenance phase of a building.

As for now, the demands apply to new state construction projects totalling 3 million DKK or more.

However, demands requiring electronic hand‐over do first take effect for projects totalling 15 million

DKK or more. 3D models are required for projects totalling more than 20 million DKK (was 40 million

DKK until 2008 (Karlshøj, 2008)). These requirements are also in effect in renovation projects as from

1st of January 2008.

The demands can roughly be divided into four main sections: electronic call for tender, project web,

3D models and electronic hand‐over. Further description about these demands is shown in the box

on next page, directly cited from www.detdigitalebyggeri.dk.



Call for tender and bid

• Tender documents should be available electronically and contain a specified bill of quantities, where the consultant has specified the quantities that contractors should base their bid on. The specified bill of quantities becomes mandatory from 2009.

• The specified bill of quantities should be based on the new Danish construction classification system, DBK. Works and project specifications should be based on the bips B 100 standard.

• At the actual bid, the bidding contractors upload their bid via a portal on the Internet. The tender takes via this portal as the client makes the submitted bids public simultaneously.

Project web

• Parties participating in a public construction project should share project data and exchange documents, drawings and specifications via a project web on the Internet.

• All the construction project's most important actors should have access to the project web – and they should act in conformity with a common code of conduct concerning data discipline and cooperation.

• Contractors and workmen should have access to the project web on site via a ‘digital on‐site hut' and should be able to print drawings in A3 format. Designers should adapt their drawing formats accordingly.

3D models

• Architects and consulting engineers should make 3D visualisations and simulations for idea and project competitions when it is considered that this will contribute significantly to a demonstration of the architectural and technical qualities of the proposals. This is a mandatory requirement for construction projects exceeding DKK 20 million.

• Architects and consulting engineers should use 3D models for design when an overall assessment of economy and utility value calls for it. This is a mandatory requirement for construction projects exceeding DKK 20 million.

• 3D models used in design should comply with a number of requirements to content, levels of information etc. in the different phases, which the client should specify for each individual project. The models should be interchangeable in IFC format, unless otherwise agreed.

• 3D models facilitate the re‐use of geometrical data and data on properties in subsequent phases. Models and CAD files should be made available for the contractor.

Electronic handover

• Participants in construction projects totalling DKK 15 million or more should electronically hand over the data relevant for operation as demanded by the client.

• The client determines which of the project participants should be included in the electronic hand‐over and appoints the Party responsible for the transfer in connection with the hand‐over.

• The client chooses whether electronic hand‐over should take place in the form of XML files and their matching documents, as a 3D model or by entering the data directly in the property manager’s FM and operational systems.

Source: (Det Digitale Byggeri)



2.4 BIM in Iceland Moving to the development of BIM in Iceland, in August 2007, the Icelandic Construction Technology

Platform, ICTP, was founded. This initiative is a part of comparable projects in Europe, called

European Construction Technology Platform (ECTP), which was initiated by the European Union to

encourage different actors in the construction industry to agree on their main goals in terms of

research and development in their line of work. The implementation of BIM is one of the projects

that are anticipated to be carried out on this platform.

The Government Construction Contracting Agency in Iceland, hereafter called FSR in accordance

with its Icelandic acronym, has been an initiating player in preparing a project taking on the

implementation of BIM in Iceland. FSR is an organization which administers government

construction projects as well as consulting on technical matters, procurement and preparation of

projects. The purpose of FSR is to develop in one place within the public sector, specialist knowledge

in construction, since it is considered to be highly important for the state as a large client in

construction, that it has an in house knowledge of this type (FSR, n.d.).

FSR has had an eye on the development in the field of BIM in the Nordic countries, attended

conferences and encouraged a number of parties to cooperation in the field. It is one of few foreign

members of the Danish bips organization and it is also a member of a platform called Nordic Contact

Concerning State Building Activities, NKS. It is a formal platform of cooperation between FSR and its

equivalent agencies in the Nordic countries were issues e.g. related to the use of BIM are discussed.

In December 2008 a project was started called BIM Iceland. It was initiated by FSR, but other public

organizations have also taken part in the project from the beginning. They are: Innovation Center

Iceland, the City of Reykjavík, Reykjavík Energy, Iceland Fire Authority, Landsnet, Landsvirkjun, the

Federation of Icelandic Industries and the Housing Financing Fund. The purpose of BIM Iceland is to

form and work with an implementation strategy for BIM that will be carried out during the next

three years. In relation with that, BIM Iceland will conduct some information meetings, organize

seminars and workshops, work with the authorities on forming guidelines and standards about BIM

and assist building clients, designers and contractors with implementing BIM into their

organizations.



3 Methodology This chapter’s objective is to present the research methods used in the thesis. The chapter is divided

into two sections, Research Design and Research Tactics. The former presents the structure of the

research and the latter describes which research methods were used and how they were handled.

3.1 Research Design The problem formulation discussed in Chapter 1, suggests two independent researches to be carried

out; one in Iceland and one in Denmark. The research carried out in Iceland involves evaluation of

the current status of ICT usage in the Icelandic building industry but the one in Denmark is about the

experience gained in the Danish building industry from the use of BIM technology. Finally, the two

analyses will be jointly discussed and suggestions concerning implementation of BIM in Iceland put

forward. The findings will further be supported and put into context with other existing literatures.

The process is visualized in Figure 7.

Figure 7: A visualization of the research design. The two boxes above represent the analyzing parts while the oval box represents the discussion to be made afterwards.

3.1.1 Research in the Icelandic Building Industry

As earlier described, one part of this research is to evaluate the current status of ICT usage in the

Icelandic building industry. It was also the intention to compare the data collected in the research

with comparable data collected in the Nordic countries by Erabuild. Since the data available from the

Nordic countries was gathered by means of an e‐survey, it was considered straightforward to use the

same methodology for the present project.

What defines a survey as a specific research method is the way how data is collected – by asking

questions. The main advantage of a survey as a research method is that it makes possible to

accumulate diverse data in a short time (Karlsson, 2003). Traditionally, surveys are carried out in

various ways; by interviewing, by sending questions by conventional mail and, with the emergence

of the internet, by conducting e‐surveys.

How should the Icelandic building industry act in

relation with the implementation of BIM?

What is the current status of ICT usage in the Icelandic building industry?

How is the Danish experience from working with BIM?



E‐surveys are a questionnaire investigation, carried out with the use of electronic media, typically

the internet. In comparison with traditional surveys, e‐surveys are faster, cheaper and easier to use

(Madsen & Grønbæk, 2007). All these properties, along with the fact that this research is based on a

previous e‐survey, facilitated that this particular type of survey investigation was chosen.

3.1.2 Research in the Danish Building Industry

The Danish part of the research involves getting familiar with the experience that company and

organizations have had of BIM so far. One way of collecting data could have been to conduct a

survey. However, it became clear after a preliminary investigation that a number of surveys and

questionnaires had already been made in Denmark in relation with DDB. Carrying out one more

survey taking on matters in the same field might therefore be considered wearisome by the

potential respondents. Consequently, interviews with few concerning actors were concluded to be a

better way to acquire information for the research.

3.2 Research Tactics This subchapter gives an overview over the research tactics used in the two researches carried out.

The chapter is divided into two parts, each dealing with the researches in Iceland and Denmark

respectively.

3.2.1 Esurvey in Iceland

As a result from last chapter, it was showed that an e‐survey would best serve the purpose of this

part of the research.

There are a number of possibilities available to carry out an e‐survey. These include both software

solutions and web‐based services. Within the web‐based services there is a great selection of

programs available, where the variation is mainly represented by price and quality. The survey

carried out in this research was facilitated with a web service called QuestionPro,

www.questionpro.com. The reason for that this particular service was chosen rather than other

service providers is that its appearance gave a professional impression, it was relatively inexpensive,

the user interface appeared to be simple and it gave possibilities to employ a wide range of question

types.

3.2.1.1 Sampling Method

The sampling technique used in this research is called purposive sampling. Schutt (2006) describes

this sampling technique with following words:

In purposive sampling, each sample element is selected for a purpose, usually

because of the unique position of the sample elements. (Schutt, 2006, p. 155).

He continues, discussing that the sampling may involve investigating the whole population of some

limited group or a subset of a population. The sample may even be what he calls “key informant



survey”, meaning that the sampling targets individuals who are particularly knowledgeable about

the issues under investigation (Schutt, 2006).

Another reflection on purposive sampling has been made by Denzin and Lincoln (2005, p.378):

Many ... qualitative researchers employ ... purposive, and not random, sampling

models. They seek out groups, setting, and individuals where ... the processes being

studied are most likely to occur.

The two citations above support the decision to use purposive sampling because this research had a

specific target group consisting of firms operating in architecture, consulting engineering,

construction and building material production in Iceland. Without paraphrasing, the processes being

studied in this research, i.e. processes taking on utilization of ICT in the building industry, are most

likely to occur in companies working in this specific target group.

The aim of the sampling was simply to reach as many relevant actors as possible. The Icelandic

building industry is a relatively small market and the total number of operating firms in the industry

is rather low. It was actually easy for the researcher, due to the smallness of the market, to identify

most of the notable companies in the market, thus including them in the sample. However, some

concrete starting points had to be taken.

The architectural firms and the consulting engineering companies in Iceland do have their own

associations, The Association of Architecture Firms in Iceland, and The Icelandic Association of

Consulting Engineers, respectively. Therefore, lists over members of these associations were easily

obtained. Contractors do on the other hand not have comparable association, but a majority of

them are a member of the Federation of Icelandic Industries. Some material producers are also

members of the same federation.

When the member’s lists of these associations were examined, it became clear that they were not

completely ideal for the purpose of the research. The list of contractors did include many firms that

would clearly not be relevant in the study – e.g. typical sub‐contractors specialized in painting or

floor‐setting. Furthermore, none of the associations provided a complete list of companies operating

in the market.

The sampling performed can be described in the following steps:

1. First, all companies who were members of The Association of Architecture Firms in Iceland,

FSSA, and The Icelandic Association of Consulting Engineers, FRV, were selected into the

sample. The total numbers of companies from these associations were 35 and 24,

respectively.

2. The list of contractors derived from the Federation of Icelandic Industries was examined and

filtered. All companies exclusively working in the field of demolition, floor‐setting,



gardening, groundwork, masonry and painting were left out. Minor firms, with very low

number of employees, were also excluded. A total of 31 companies were selected into the

sample from the remaining list.

3. Since it was obvious to the researcher that many notable companies were not presented in

the three lists applied, the fourth source of companies was used: the Public Register of

Businesses in Iceland. Based on the researcher’s knowledge of the market, and number of

employees in companies presented in the register (leaving out the very smallest firms), a

total number of 67 companies were selected into the sample.

A total of 157 companies were selected into the sample. It was estimated that this sample

represented a fair amount of companies relevant for this research.

It should be noticed that as with all surveys like this one, it is not possible to make any

generalizations for the whole population. The sample should however give a good indication of the

current situation in the market.

3.2.1.2 Structure of the Survey

The structuring of the survey took a starting point in the survey conducted by Erabuild (2008). This

was done so that it would be possible to use the results from Erabuild as a comparison to this

research. Since the survey was solely directed towards Icelandic companies, it was considered

appropriate to carry it out in Icelandic. It did however put forth a small dilemma, since it can be

problematic to translate questions between two languages without altering the meaning of

particular questions.

The survey consisted of a few main themes. After obtaining some basic information about the

participating company, its field of business and the number of employees, some questions followed

handling about ICT usage in the company, use of BIM software and use of project webs.

Subsequently, the participants were asked about the current status and the role of ICT in their

company. Finally, participants were asked to provide their names, the name of their company and

their email address, but this data was separated from the other data obtained during the analysis of

data. The whole survey form is available in the Appendix.

From social science’s point of view, it may be argued that some of the survey’s questions were not

ideally constructed. Some questions were not balanced, i.e. when there are not an equal number of

positive and negative answering possibilities to a question and some multiple choice questions seem

to offer a number of almost identical choices. It may also be argued that the text in some questions

is relatively long, which is not considered to be optimal. However, since the intention was to

compare the outcome of the survey with the data collected in the previous survey conducted by

Erabuild, it was considered to be necessary to keep the questions as comparable as possible.



3.2.2 Interviews in Denmark

In previous chapter, it was concluded that interviews would best serve the purpose of this part of

the research. Next question to consider was how the interviews should be structured. Interviews are

frequently divided into three types, commonly known as structured interviews, semi‐structured

interviews and unstructured interviews (Saunders et al., 2007). Further discussion of these various

types is available in Table 1.

Table 1: A list of different types of interviews – divided by structure type. Based on Saunders et al. (2007).

Structured interviews: Standardized interview with a pre‐defined set of questions. Often

used to collect quantifiable data, therefore often referred to as

quantitative research interviews.

Semi‐structured interviews: Non‐standardized interview ‐ often referred to as qualitative

research interviews. The researcher does typically have a list of

themes and questions to be covered, but the list can vary from

interview to interview. Consequently, some questions can be

omitted in particular interviews, e.g. with regards to interviewees’

varying approach to the research topics. This type of interviews

opens a possibility of discussions around the research topics.

Unstructured interviews: Similarly to semi‐structured interviews, non‐standardized interview ‐

often referred to as qualitative research interviews. This type of

interviews does not involve a predefined list of questions. The

researcher does however need to have a clear idea of the aspects

needed to explore. The interviewee gets an opportunity to talk

freely about the research topic’s area.

Out of these structuring possibilities, the semi‐structured interview was considered the best

alternative. It was reckoned a beneficial option to be able to allow the interviewees to give

qualitative opinions on various topics that would still be interrelated in a few themes.

3.2.2.1 Selection of Interviewees

The restrictions for choosing interviewees where rather loosely defined. It was considered necessary

to talk to actors in the fields of architecture, consulting engineering, contracting and building clients.

As a rule of thumb, it was decided that talking to at least two actors from each of the four fields

would be desirable. When selecting companies and organizations to be interviewed, their

involvement in the implementation of BIM was taken as a prerequisite.

It proved to take longer time than expected to arrange the interviews. Consequently, eight persons

from seven companies and organizations were interviewed. List of interviewees is shown in Table 2.



Table 2: List of interviewees in the research.

Interviewee: Organization: Field of work:

Clars Danvold Slots‐ og Ejendomsstyrelsen, SES Building client

Jan Karlshøj Rambøll A.S Consulting engineers

Mette Carstad Universitets‐ og Bygningsstyrelsen, UBST Building client

Mikkel Hansen Niras A/S Consulting engineers

Rasmus Klausen Hou + Partnere Arkitekter A/S Architects

Susanne Piil Asklund E. Pihl & Søn A.S. Building contractors

Stefan Johansen E. Pihl & Søn A.S. Building contractors

Thomas Graabæk Juul|Frost Arkitekter Architects

The two persons from E. Phil & Søn were interviewed jointly. Moreover, the interview with Clars

Danvold at SES was, for the sake of the interviewee’s convenience, carried out together with a fellow

student at DTU, who also had requested to talk to him about similar matters.

3.2.2.2 Interview Guide

In order to be prepared for the interviews a written interview guide was made. It consisted of three

main themes, each with a number of questions and keywords. The first theme involved questions

about the implementation in the interviewee’s organization, the second theme took on the

organization’s experience from working with BIM. The last theme involved a few short background

questions. The whole interview guide is available in the Appendix.

The interviews were recorded using a PC voice recorder. A summary with the most relevant topics

was produced from each interview. The summaries generated the main basis for the researches

analysis chapter.

All the interviews started with a short introduction to the research project. The interviewees were

also asked for permission to record the interviews and they were informed about how the data

collected would be handled. The interviews were conducted in English but all interviewees were

given the possibility to answer in Danish if preferred. This possibility was in the researcher’s belief

considered essential since by demanding the interviewees not to use their native language might

have resulted in more limited answers and a risk of missing relevant nuances from the interviews. As

a result three of the persons interviewed chose to speak in Danish.

The interviews were brought to a closure with a debriefing, where the interviewees were given the

possibility to bring their own comments or ask in more details questions about the interview, the

research or the data handling. Finally, they were invited to review the summary from their

interviews and given possibility to add comments or correct possible misinterpretation.



4 Use of BIM and ICT in the Icelandic Building Industry In the following chapters, results from the survey carried out in Iceland will be presented. The results

are, when possible, compared to a similar data collected from all of the other Nordic countries by

Erabuild (2008). It shall be noted that the terms Scandinavia or the Scandinavian countries are used

to refer to Denmark, Norway, Sweden and, though conceivably not geographically and/or historically

correct, Finland. This is done for sake of convenience to differentiate between Iceland and the rest

of the Nordic countries.

Finally, it is emphasized that the whole survey was carried out in Icelandic. All citations in the

following chapter will however be translated to English. The original questionnaire form along with

the cover letter sent with it is available in the Appendix.

4.1 Distribution of Invitations and Response Rate Invitations to the survey were sent out in the form of email acting as a cover letter which contained

a direct link to the survey. The cover letter included a short description of the survey and its purpose

along with an estimation of completion time, 10 – 15 minutes. The collaboration with FSR (later

redefined to be collaboration with BIM Iceland, as mentioned in the Preface) was also made

acknowledged. Only one invitation was sent to each company.

The invitations were sent on Wednesday the 11th of March 2009. As recommended by Madsen &

Grønbæk (2007) the invitations were sent in the afternoon, because it is known that employees are

often more busy in the mornings dealing with their assignments. Out of 157 invitations sent out,

eight of them did not reach to its receivers. The most probable explanation is that these eight email

addresses were outdated.

Two separate reminders were sent to those who had not completed the survey after a certain period

of time, 18th of March and 25th of March, respectively. As shown in Figure 8 this had significant

effect on the response rate. It is also clearly visible that most people tend to give their response

immediately after receiving an invitation or a reminder. This fact should be kept in mind if the survey

is to be repeated later on.



Figure 8: Response rate as a function of time.

Out of 157 invitations sent, 149 invitations reached its receiver. A total of 60 usable responses were

collected, whereas 40 respondents completed the survey. According to Bryman (2004), the response

rate is the percentage of usable responses. However, those who could not be contacted should not

be calculated as a part of the sample. Therefore, the response rate turned out to be 60/149 ≈ 40%.

As seen in Table 3, the response rate varied considerably with respect to different disciplines. While

almost half of the architectural firms answered the survey, only 30% of the engineering companies

did. This limits to some extent the possibilities to analyse various aspects with respect to different

disciplines.

Table 3. Response rate divided by disciplines.

Discipline Sent Bounced Replies Response rate

Architects 59 1 27 47%Consulting engineers 40 3 11 30%Contractors 53 4 20 41%Material producers 5 0 2 40%

It was noted that some respondents started the survey a number of times without finishing it. These

uncompleted answers were filtered out such that it was certain that only one response was valid

from each respondent. The filtering was performed so that the most inadequate responses, i.e.

those with the lowest number of questions answered, were filtered out. This measure has already

been taken into account when calculating the response rate.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60Num

ber o

f respo

nden

ts

<‐‐ 1st reminder

<‐‐ 2nd reminder

<‐‐ Initial invitation



4.2 Use of Drafting Techniques The first part of the survey dealt with the drafting techniques used in the building industry.

Participants were asked to estimate the ratio of each drafting method as a percentage of the total

drafting work performed in their company. In precise terms, the question was:

Which of the following techniques do you use in your design work?

Respondents were able to choose from a number of possibilities; manual drafting, CAD, BIM and IFC

compliant BIM. They were also given the possibility to choose not relevant in case if design work

were not performed in their company. The results are presented in Figure 9, but answers from the

category “not relevant” have been subtracted.

It is clear that the level of computerization in the Icelandic building industry is in general very high,

but the use of BIM is at the same time surprisingly low. It is also noteworthy that consulting

engineers seem to have adjusted to BIM to a greater extent than architects, which have been

considered to be the first to adjust to BIM (Young et al., 2008). The difference is however not big and

the smallness of the sample might also have an impact on the results.

Figure 9 – Distribution over drafting technique usage, broken up by company’s disciplines.

When the same data is analysed with regards to number of employees in companies, it is notable

that the larger companies appear to be more computerized than the smaller ones (Figure 10). These

results should however be taken with care, since there are not that many responses behind the data

for companies with more than 100 employees.

10%

83%

5% 3%6%

84%

9%2%

9%

89%

1% 1%

Manual drafting CAD BIM IFC compliant BIM

Architects Consulting engineers Contractors



Figure 10 – Distribution of drafting techniques, sorted according to number of employees in company.

It is also interesting to compare the situation in Iceland with a comparable data collected in the

Scandinavian countries (Figure 11). Here, it becomes more evident that the Icelandic building

industry is well computerized compared to its neighbours in the north. The BIM development in

Iceland is however far behind.

Figure 11: Distribution of drafting techniques in the Nordic countries.

This question was formed in such a way that respondents were required to assign a percentage

value to each of the five answering options (the not relevant option included), so that the total

would add up to 100%. It may be debated if this setup was ideal since the answering option IFC

compliant BIM is really also inherent in the BIM option – i.e. if a building is being projected in IFC

10%

83%

4% 3%7%

90%

4% 0%2%

73%

17%8%


Less than 10 employees 10‐99 employees 100 and more employees

8%

85%

5% 2%8%

70%

10% 12%

4%

63%

14%19%17%

70%

10%4%

7%

57%

34%

1%


Iceland Denmark Finland Norway Sweden



compliant BIM, it is inevitably also being projected in BIM. This point should be taken into

consideration when interpreting the results.

Participants were also asked to estimate how the usage of each of the four drafting techniques has

developed in the last couple of years (Figure 12). It is obvious that manual drafting is in a recession

while companies are emphasizing to greater extent on CAD and BIM drafting methods. This is also in

a good harmony with the development in the Scandinavian countries (Erabuild, 2008).

The “No change” answering option in this question turned out to be misinterpreted to some extent

since some participants, who previously had answered that they were not employing BIM as a

drafting method, used it instead of the “Not relevant” answering option. This causes that Figure 12

might imply that the usage of BIM is more widespread than it actually is.

Figure 12: The development in usage of each of the four drafting techniques.

4.3 Level of Computerization It is useful to look at the level of computerization of the market in order to assess how it will react to

working with more digitalized processes. In next question, participants were asked about these

matters. The question (or instructions in this case) was:

Estimate the level of computerization of the following activities in your company.

The results suggest once again that the Icelandic building industry is highly computerized (Figure 13).

In 5 out of 9 activities, more than 50% of participants use computers in more than 90% of the time.

In activities with high response in the not relevant category (such as rental administration and facility

maintenance) it is also evident that the level of computerization is very high.

33%

2%

29%

43%

21%

24%

4%

43%

23%

13%

35%

13%

56%

63%

0% 100%

Manual drafting

CAD

BIM

IFC compliant BIM

Decrease

No change

Increase

Not relevant



Figure 13: Estimation of the level of computerization in different activities.

These results become more obvious when the not relevant answers are cleared out (Figure 14).

Here, the results are put side by side with data from the Scandinavian countries, identified with grey

colour. The answers are scaled so that only one percentage value represents each category.

Icelandic companies seem to use ICT in all of the activities to greater extent than its Nordic

neighbours even though the difference is not always large.

2%

2%

7%

3%

3%

5%

4%

6%

10%

9%

4%

11%

7%

7%

6%

2%

2%

7%

11%

18%

15%

14%

5%

9%

4%

6%

23%

16%

18%

14%

17%

11%

9%

4%

2%

54%

56%

44%

58%

53%

70%

33%

17%

17%

5%

11%

4%

3%

7%

9%

39%

67%

63%

Technical Specifications

Technical Calculations

Quantity Take‐off

Cost Estimations

Scheduling

Tendering

Marketing

Rental Administration

Facility Maintenance

100% Man 1‐39% 40‐59% 60‐89% 90‐100% Not Relevant



Figure 14: The level of computerization in different activities. Results from Iceland compared to data from Scandinavia.

4.4 Utilization of ICT in Collaboration Next question dealt with utilization of ICT in collaboration with other parties. The question was:

Has your company used web‐based services in exchanging, distributing and storing

project information, files, and other documents with other companies?

As shown in Figure 15, almost half of the Icelandic companies have not used such methods and a

majority of those have not seen any need for such arrangements. Icelandic companies do in this

correlation differ greatly from the Scandinavian countries, where the comparable values are in range

of 7% to 26%. Only 12% of the Icelandic companies seem to use such methods frequently or always,

while the comparable data from Scandinavia lies between 23% and 48%.

78% 81%

68%76% 76%

84%

72%66%

58%

74% 72%

49%

59% 59% 59% 57% 60%

49%

Technical

Specificatio

ns

Technical Calculatio

ns

Quantity

Take‐off

Cost Estim

ations

Sche

duling

Tend

ering

Marketin

g

Rental Adm

inistration

Facility Mainten

ance

Iceland Scandinavia



Figure 15: “Has your company used web‐based services in exchanging, distributing and storing project information, files and documents with other companies?” Results from Iceland compared to data from Scandinavia.

The situation is similar when the question is narrowed down to whether companies have

participated in projects where they were able to exchange and utilize BIM1 produced by other

participants (Figure 16). It becomes clear that almost 90% of the Icelandic companies have not done

so, while the comparable data from Scandinavia suggests percentage between 28% and 68%. It is

also notable to see that a relatively little part of the Icelandic companies who have not used such

methods seems to recognize the potentials of doing so, since only 11% of the respondents said that

they should have. This is somewhat lower percentage than realized in Scandinavia.

1 Here, in accordance with the context, BIM stands for building information models.

42%

10%

5%

16%

8%

7%

6%

2%

10%

3%

8%

22%

15%

19%

9%

25%

20%

20%

24%

19%

5%

13%

9%

7%

14%

10%

13%

22%

13%

24%

2%

15%

26%

10%

24%

0% 100%

Iceland

Denmark

Finland

Norway

Sweden

No, there has been no need

No, but we should have

Seldom, less than 10%

Sometimes, 10‐39%

About half, 40‐59%

Frequently, 60‐89%

Almost always, at least 90%



Figure 16: “Has your company participated in projects where you have been able to exchange and utilize BIM produced by other participants?” Results from Iceland compared to data from Scandinavia.

4.5 Utilization of BIM and IFC Format When, and to what extent do Icelandic companies use BIM? As stated in the report published by

Erabuild (2008), it would be of great interest to repeat this part of the survey in a few years in order

to see the development of working techniques in the industry. The question was:

In which tasks does your company utilize BIM?

It shall first be noted that there is apparently a flaw in this question’s design. One answering option

should have been Never or 0%. By doing that it would have been possible to differentiate better

between those who are using BIM to a small extent and those who do not use it at all. With the

current question design, it is no way of knowing whether companies choosing the answering option

0‐9% are using BIM or not. This should be taken into consideration if or when the survey will be

repeated.

77%

33%

14%

39%

27%

11%

20%

14%

29%

25%

5%

26%

36%

16%

26%

14%

32%

13%

16%

7%

7%

2%

1%

5%

2%

1%

0% 100%

Iceland

Denmark

Finland

Norway

Sweden

No, there has been no need

No, but we should have

Seldom, less than 10%

Sometimes, 10‐39%

About half, 40‐59%

Frequently, 60‐89%

Almost always, at least 90%



Figure 17: When, in which tasks and how extensively do companies use BIM?

The current BIM utilization in Iceland, presented in Figure 17, shows similar tendencies as in

Scandinavia, by means of in which activities BIM is used, but the total utilization is much less in

Iceland. The Icelandic data and the Scandinavian data are compared in Figure 18. Answers from the

category “not relevant” were included and represented with 0%. Icelandic companies do on average

not reach 10% utilization of BIM in any activity, while the average from the Scandinavian countries

rarely drops below 10%, as illustrated in Figure 18. This outcome is in harmony with the results

presented in Figure 9, where participants were asked to determine the percentage of individual

drafting techniques used in their companies.

41%

33%

47%

41%

45%

41%

43%

42%

37%

30%

30%

27%

30%

32%

50%

51%

49%

52%

52%

45%

50%

53%

56%

64%

66%

64%

68%

66%

0% 100%

When client has asked for BIM

When your company has requested BIM

Utilization of another designers' BIM as the basis for own work

Design coordination / clash detection

Code checking

Quantity take‐off

Cost estimation

Scheduling

Tendering

Procurement

Logistic planning

Marketing

Spatial management

Facility maintenance

0‐9% 10‐39% 40‐59% 60‐89% 90‐100% Not relevant



Figure 18: When, in which tasks and how extensively do companies use BIM? Results from Iceland compared to data from Scandinavia.

Next question is actually a more confined version of last question:

In which tasks has your company utilized IFC compliant BIM?

The purpose was to see whether and to what extent companies have used BIM and the IFC format.

The results are presented in Figure 19. Needless to say, there is apparently the same flaw in this

question’s design as in the previous question, regarding that one answering option should have been

Never or 0%.

6%

9%

4% 5%3%

7%5% 5% 5%

4%3%

7%

3% 3%

11%

13% 13%

19%

15%

18%

12%14%

9%

5%6%

8%10%

5%

Whe

n client has asked

for

BIM

Whe

n your com

pany

has

requ

ested BIM

Utilization of ano

ther

designers' …

Design coordinatio

n /

clash de

tection

Code

che

cking

Quantity

take‐off

Cost estim

ation

Sche

duling

Tend

ering

Procurem

ent

Logistic plann

ing

Marketin

g

Spatial m

anagem

ent

Facility mainten

ance

Iceland Scandinavia



Figure 19: When, in which tasks and how extensively do companies use IFC compliant BIM?

Similarly to the previous question the answers show that the utilization of BIM and IFC is very low.

The tendencies are also similar to those in Scandinavia, but strangely enough the usage seems to be

higher in Iceland. The Icelandic data and the Scandinavian data are compared in Figure 20. Answers

from the category “not relevant” were included and represented with 0%. One would have expected

the usage of IFC compliant BIM in Iceland to be lower than the usage of BIM alone, as was the case

in Scandinavia.

44%

43%

49%

50%

48%

43%

45%

45%

45%

39%

36%

36%

36%

39%

47%

48%

49%

43%

48%

45%

45%

48%

48%

57%

61%

57%

61%

59%

0% 100%

When client has asked for BIM

When your company has requested BIM

Utilization of another designers' BIM as the basis for own work

Design coordination / clash detection

Code checking

Quantity take‐off

Cost estimation

Scheduling

Tendering

Procurement

Logistic planning

Marketing

Spatial management

Facility maintenance

0‐9% 10‐39% 40‐59% 60‐89% 90‐100% Not relevant



Figure 20: When, in which tasks and how extensively do companies use IFC compliant BIM? Results from Iceland compared to data from Scandinavia.

It is a reason to stay here for a bit and analyse the two last questions quite further. The results are

very surprising, because the answers suggest that Icelandic companies use BIM and IFC more than

BIM alone. It is interesting to compare the results of the two questions (Figure 21). The blue columns

represent the usage of BIM alone while the grey columns represent the usage of BIM and IFC. In 12

out of 14 activities considered the usage rate of BIM and IFC appears to be higher than for BIM

alone. This is a clear contradiction because the latter question was actually a more confined version

of the former one. Thus, it would have been natural to expect lower results from the latter question,

as was the case in the Scandinavian research.

Figure 21: A comparison from two questions. The results suggest that Icelandic companies use IFC compliant BIM more than BIM alone. This is a clear contradiction.

7%8%

4%

6% 5%

9%

7%6%

7%

5%4%

7%

4% 3%

6%7%

8%7% 7%

6%

4%6%

4%

1% 2%

3% 3% 3%

Whe

n client has

asked for B

IM

Whe

n your

company

has …

Utilization of

anothe

r …

Design

coordinatio

n / …

Code

che

cking

Quantity

take‐off

Cost estim

ation

Sche

duling

Tend

ering

Procurem

ent

Logistic plann

ing

Marketin

g

Spatial

managem

ent

Facility

mainten

ance

Iceland Scandinavia

6%

9%

4% 5%

3%

7%

5%5% 5%

4%3%

7%

3% 3%

7%8%

4%

6% 5%

9%

7%6%

7%

5%

4%

7%

4% 3%

Whe

n client has

asked for B

IM

Whe

n your com

pany

has requ

ested BIM

Utilization of

anothe

r designe

rs' …

Design coordinatio

n / clash de

tection

Code

che

cking

Quantity

take‐off

Cost estim

ation

Sche

duling

Tend

ering

Procurem

ent

Logistic plann

ing

Marketin

g

Spatial m

anagem

ent

Facility mainten

ance

Iceland: BIM Iceland: BIM and IFC



It is not simple to point out why such a contradiction emerges. One reason might be that

participants did not have knowledge of what BIM and IFC actually involves or how the two questions

should differ at all. Besides, it is by no means possible to rule out the option of a misconception of

the question due to its translation from English to Icelandic. These possibilities should be taken into

consideration before repeating the questionnaire.

4.6 Role of ICT and Plans for Next Years Next question phase covers issues regarding the role of information and communication technology

within the companies. The first question was:

How important are the following motives in decision about new ICT investments in

your organization?

Participants were asked to give a qualitative rating on a number of motives. They were also given the

option to mention other relevant motives not presented in the question design.

The results from the first question are presented in Figure 22. Many of the motives scored high here

but desire to boost administrative and technical work along with maintenance of competitiveness

seem to be considered the most relevant ones. Demands from customers do on the other hand not

seem to have great influence on ICT investments of companies.

Figure 22: How important are the following motives in decision about new ICT investments in organizations?

23%

17%

4%

6%

4%

6%

6%

26%

13%

4%

4%

4%

13%

15%

13%

15%

18%

8%

10%

17%

27%

26%

39%

38%

47%

42%

26%

17%

4%

11%

32%

27%

35%

26%

19%

9%

4%

4%

8%

4%

13%

17%

0% 100%

Demands from customers

Demands from employees

Maintenance or improving competitiveness

Desire to boost technical work

Desire to boost administrative work

Desire to be a technical forerunner

Desire to develop new products /businesses

Not at all Only a little Moderately Much Heavily No opinion



One respondent additionally mentioned that improvement in quality management were of a heavy

significance for his organization.

These results are in general in a good accordance with the results from Scandinavia (Figure 23). The

parameters have been transformed to values on the interval 0 to 4, with the “no opinion” option

excluded and compared to analogous data from Scandinavia. The only notable difference is that in

the Scandinavian countries, demands from customers seem to have considerably more influence on

ICT investments than in Iceland. On the other hand, Icelandic companies give higher rate to the

desire of boosting administrative work.

Figure 23: How important are the following motives in decision about new ICT investments in organizations? Results from Iceland compared to data from Scandinavia.

Next question focused on the problems and obstacles companies are facing with increased use of

ICT. The question was:

What problems do you estimate that the increased use of ICT has caused in your

organization or which have been the greatest obstacles to increase the use of ICT?

Participants were additionally asked to mark only three possible items, so that it would be possible

to get a clear comparison between the predefined problem areas. Unfortunately, not all participants

followed these instructions and selected more than three areas. In order to keep consistency,

answers from these participants were filtered out.

The results are presented and compared to analogous data from Scandinavia in Figure 24. According

to the results, the four most notable problems or obstacles perceived in the Icelandic building

industry are:

Not at all Heavily

Demands from customers

Demands from employees

Maintenance or improving competitiveness

Desire to boost technical work

Desire to boost administrative work

Desire to be a technical forerunner

Desire to develop new products /businesses

Iceland Scandinavia

Only a little Moderately Much



1. High investment cost

2. Constant demand to upgrade software and hardware

3. Lack of interoperability

4. Increasing need to educate employees

Other fields receive somewhat lower rating but the pattern is more or less the same as in the

Scandinavian countries where the same four problems or obstacles rated in the top four places.

Figure 24: Problems and/or obstacles perceived with increased use of ICT. Results from Iceland compared to data from Scandinavia.

Participants were also asked about the benefits or advantages they perceive with increased use of

ICT. The question was:

What advantages or benefits do you estimate the increased use of ICT has given in

your organization?

Participants were additionally asked to mark only three possible items, so that it would be possible

to get a clear comparison between the predefined benefit areas. Unfortunately, not all participants

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

High investment costs

Constant demand to upgrade software and hardware

Lack of interoperatiliby

Lack of clear legal responsibilities

Overburdance of information

Risk that ICT leads to inefficiency

Increasing need to educate employees

Reduced security

Preference to work in traditional way due to lack of standards

Unsufficient interest and commitment of top management

Difficulties in measuring benefits

Management does not have time to develop ICT because of other tasks

General attitude of traditional methods working well

Iceland Scandinavia



followed these instructions and selected more than three areas. In order to keep consistency,

answers from these participants were filtered out.

The results are presented and compared to analogous data from Scandinavia in Figure 25. According

to the results, the four most notable advantages or benefits were:

1. Improved quality of the work

2. Faster access and utilization of information

3. Improved information management and communication

4. Work can be done faster

Figure 25: Benefits or advantages that participants perceive with increased use of ICT. Results from Iceland compared to Scandinavian data.

The outcome is similar to the results from Scandinavia. Like in Iceland, the largest benefit perceived

by the companies in Scandinavia is related to improved quality of work. Other benefits and

advantages are in a reasonable harmony.

In retrospect it might have been difficult for the participants to choose between some of the

predefined options. There are for example three predefined fields covering improvements in

information management (#1: Improved information management and communication; #2:

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Improved financial control

Improved information management and communication

Improved quality of the work

Work can be done faster

Improved possibilities to share information

Faster access and utilization of information

Possibilities to develop new products or business

Possibilities to reduce staff

Greater flexibility for satisfying customer needs

Easier to handle large amounts of data

Possibility of teleworking / telecommuting

Makes the company more attractive when recruiting new staff

Iceland Scandinavia



Improved possibilities to share information; #3: Faster access and utilization of information). It could

be reasonable to state that alternatives #2 and #3 are sub‐alternatives of number #1. All in all, it

should be an agreement on that improved information management is realized as a fundamental

benefit for the industry.

In the final question of the survey, participants were asked about in which fields they were planning

to invest in ICT in the next two years. The question was:

In which areas do you plan to increase the use of ICT the next two years in your

company?

Like in other multi‐choice questions, participants were additionally asked to mark only three possible

items, so that it would be possible to get a clear comparison between the predefined benefit areas.

Unfortunately, not all participants followed these instructions and selected more than three areas.

After some thoughts on whether the answers from these participants should be filtered out, it was

concluded that by doing so, too large part of the available data would be excluded. The answers

from these participants were therefore included in the analysis of this question.

The results are divided by disciplines and they are presented in Figure 26. It is noticeable that the

distribution is considerably large. Architects seem to put large emphasis on investments in BIM, cost

estimation and virtual reality. Contractors do on the other hand seem to put more weight on

investments in the fields of cost estimation and management, document management and project

management. The response rate for this question from engineers was not high, but according to

their responses, investments in BIM, CAD and project extranets seem to be of most importance.



Figure 26: The figure shows in which fields of ICT Icelandic companies are planning to invest in the next two years.

The discipline‐divided emphases on investments in Iceland are for some part similar as in

Scandinavia. Scandinavian architects and engineers gave top score to IFC compliant BIM, BIM and

CAD to produce traditional drawings, while the contractors gave top score to same fields as the

Icelandic contractors, i.e. project management, document management and cost estimation /

management.

The comparison between the Icelandic answers and those collected in Scandinavia are shown in

Figure 27. The emphasis is generally similar. The Scandinavian companies did however put twice as

much weight on IFC compliant BIM than the Icelandic companies. At the same time, the Icelandic

companies seem to be much more concerned about investments in the field of cost estimation /

management.

0% 20% 40% 60%

Document management

CAD ‐ to produce traditional drawings

BIM

IFC compliant BIM

Model servers or other collaboration platforms

Cost estimation / management

Technical calculations

Management of facility information

New business models and activities

Project management

Project extranets and other Internet‐based project services

eCommerce / procurement

Information search via Internet

Virtual reality

Mobile equipment and wireless systems

Arkitects Engineers Contractors



It is remarkable to note that Icelandic companies are willing to invest to some extent in virtual

reality, especially architects. This interest is much more than in Scandinavia where only 8% of

companies see it as a likely investment in the next two years. A likely explanation for this might be

that the term “virtual reality” was not directly translated from English to Icelandic. In the author’s

opinion, there is not tradition of using the Icelandic term for “virtual reality” in relation with

visualization of building projects, like is commonly done in English‐speaking countries. The term used

was therefore “3D graphics” since it was considered that it would represent the meaning to a

greater extent.

Figure 27: The fields of ICT that companies are planning to invest in the next two years. Results from Iceland compared to data from Scandinavia.

4.7 Conclusion To conclude, it is evident that even though Icelandic companies in the building industry see

themselves as highly computerized, they are not using ICT in the same way as companies in the

0% 20% 40% 60%

Document management

CAD ‐ to produce traditional drawings

BIM

IFC compliant BIM

Model servers or other collaboration platforms

Cost estimation / management

Technical calculations

Management of facility information

New business models and activities

Project management

Project extranets and other Internet‐based project services

eCommerce / procurement

Information search via Internet

Virtual reality

Mobile equipment and wireless systems

Iceland Scandinavia



Scandinavian countries. The use of project webs is much less in Iceland and the knowledge of BIM

and in particular IFC compliant BIM seems to be rather little.

The structure of the survey was not flawless but it should however give quite good overview of the

current status of use of ICT in the Icelandic building industry. It would be interesting to repeat the

survey within a few years in order to follow the development of the market. Some answers clearly

indicated that the discussion of BIM in Iceland has just started and it is probable that not everyone

have made their minds about the matter.

The results of the survey will be interpreted and put into context of the whole research in Chapter 6.



5 The Danish Experience This chapter discusses the experience of BIM in the Danish building industry. As stated before, a

series of interviews were conducted where seven different organizations working in the construction

market were asked questions about their experience of BIM, about the barriers and benefits of BIM

and about how and to what extent BIM technology has been implemented into their organizations.

The analysis will be divided into a number of sections, each representing one of the main themes of

the interview guide, available for a review in the Appendix. First, it will be investigated why, how and

to what extent companies and organizations in the Danish building industry have implemented BIM

technology in their processes. Then, focus will be put on the barriers and the benefits of the BIM

technology both on company level and on industry level. Finally, there will be some considerations

about the changes and the future development in the building industry due to its transformation

towards BIM technology.

5.1 Presentation of Companies Before going further, the companies and their representatives that took part in the interviews will be

presented. A summary from the interviews conducted is available in the Appendix.

5.1.1 Juul | Frost Arkitekter

Juul|Frost Arkiteker was founded in 1983. It is an architectural company with approximately 30

employees. The company’s expertise is within architecture, urban planning and landscape

architecture (Juul|Frost Arkitekter, n.d.).

The company participated in its first BIM project in 2006. Since then the company has participated in

a number of BIM projects though only one of their BIM projects has been completed so far. On the

whole about 50% of the projects carried out at Juul|Frost are performed with BIM technology

(Graabæk, 2009).

The company’s representative in the interview was Thomas Graabæk, Architect MAA. He has

responsibility for the visualisation department and is a leader of BIM implementation in the

company.

5.1.2 Hou + Partnere Arkitekter A/S

Hou + Partnere Arkitekter A/S were founded in 1986. It is a relatively small company with around 25

employees. Its primary clients are larger companies, professional building clients, pension funds,

state clients and municipalities (Hou + Partnere Arkitekter A/S, n.d.).

The company first participated in a BIM project in 2004. Overall, it has participated in approximately

ten BIM projects (Klausen, 2009).

The company’s representative in the interview was Rasmus Klausen, building constructor. He is a co‐

owner of Hou + Partnere and is responsible for its IT department.



5.1.3 Niras A/S

Niras is a multidivisional consulting engineering company with approximately 1270 employees. The

company was founded in 1956 and it has since then expanded both with a natural growth but also

through company acquisitions (Niras A/S, n.d.).

Niras has been working with BIM thinking for approximately 10 years. But extensive use of BIM and

its possibilities has been going on for about two years (Hansen, 2009).

The company’s representative in the interview was Mikkel Hansen, CAD manager. His responsibility

within the company is to make BIM and CAD more common and easier for the users within the

company to adopt.

5.1.4 Rambøll Danmark A/S

Rambøll Danmark is a part of Rambøll Gruppen, which is an organization with activities within

engineering, management and information technology. Rambøll Gruppen has about 8000 employees

working on a number of offices in 24 countries (Rambøll Danmark A/S, n.d.).

The first project where all the disciplines of Rambøll were using 3D model based tools was in 2006.

The steel structural department of Rambøll has however been using BIM tools for about 10 years.

Globally, Rambøll has used BIM tools in several hundreds of projects (Karlshøj, 2009).

The company’s representative in the interview was Jan Karlshøj, chief consultant. He is responsible

for the use of CAD on national level at Rambøll. He has also worked as a chief consultant in some

design projects.

5.1.5 E. Pihl & Søn A.S.

E. Pihl & Søn A.S., or simply Pihl, as conventionally named, is a limited liability company established

in 1887. The company is one of leading Danish civil engineering contractors but it also has an

extensive operation abroad (E. Pihl & Søn A.S., n.d.).

The company has been using 3D models for about 4 years. But in the last year or so the company has

been putting more emphasis on utilizing the possibilities of building models. There are currently

three projects being designed with BIM technology at the company. Building models are also being

used in a few construction projects which are currently being executed (Asklund & Johansen, 2009).

The company’s representatives in the interview were Susanne Piil Asklund, project manager in Pihl’s

development department, and Stefan Johansen, project manager, who works on the

implementation of BIM within the company.

5.1.6 Slots og Ejendomsstyrelsen (SES)

Slots‐ og Ejendomsstyrelsen, SES, is one of three major national property agencies in Denmark. Its

purpose is to provide the state with offices and maintain them, administer and rent the state’s office



properties to ministries and agencies all over Denmark and rent appropriate office properties from

individuals for the central administration. It does also have a supervision of the majority of

Denmark’s best known castles, palaces and gardens (Slots‐ og Ejendomsstyrelsen , 2009).

The organizations’ representative in the interview was Clars Danvold, IT consultant. He has

responsibility for all building relevant information technology at SES and he is also a project manager

for implementation of Digital Construction, DDB, at the organization.

5.1.7 Universitets og Bygningsstyrelsen (UBST)

Universitets‐ og Bygningsstyrelsen, UBST, is similarly to SES one of the three major national property

agencies in Denmark (with the third one being FBE, which manages the building facilities for the

Danish Defence (Forsvarets Bygnings‐ & Etablissementstjeneste). UBST leases, manages and

maintains buildings for government research and education. The agency is in charge of buildings

under construction or alteration for government research and education purposes and is also

authorized to decide issues related to buildings (Universitets‐ og Bygningsstyrelsen, 2008).

The organizations’ representative in the interview was Mette Carstad, architect and a project

manager at UBST.

5.2 Motives and Methods of Implementation This chapter answers questions about why, how and to what extent companies and organizations in

the Danish building industry have decided to implement BIM technology into their processes.

5.2.1 Motives of Implementation – Influence from Digital Construction

As discussed in Chapter 2.3 the Danish government put into law that all state building projects above

certain size should be performed in accordance with the requirements defined with DDB.

At Juul|Frost, BIM was implemented relatively early, in relation with DDB. 3D visualisation had been

one of the company’s core competences for some time when a client came and required that a

certain building project should be modelled in a technical 3D model, e.g. with the possibility to

extract information about various aspects at all time. The company found out that in order to meet

the client’s wishes it would be most effective to utilize BIM technology – the company’s current 3D

methods would not be able to support the anticipated collaboration with other consultants. Thus,

Juul|Frost did implement BIM as a result from a client’s requirements. DDB was still not in effect and

the top management of the company had not had any initiatives earlier to implement BIM

(Graabæk, 2009).

Some employees at Juul|Frost had also been pointing out for some years that a certain discrepancy

was presented because building design was executed in 2D environment and then a 3D model was

produced from 2D drawings – things should rather be carried out the other way around. The top

management of the company did however not show interest in changing the procedures, until the



requirements from the previously mentioned client were put forward. When the results of working

with BIM became visible, the management soon realized that it was the right way to go (Graabæk,

2009).

Similarly to Juul|Frost, the implementation of BIM at Hou + Partnere was not directly caused by

DDB. But while Juul|Frost experienced a requirement coming from a client, Hou + Partnere found it

by them self that BIM technology could help the company to get a better overview over its building

projects. The company had for some time experienced some problems with the procurement phase

of building projects, for example due to building‐related errors. It was also perceived by the

company that it would become easier to fulfil client’s wishes by making the work processes revolve

around BIM technology. Therefore, it can be said that the company implemented BIM due to its own

initiative – due to its own desire to improve the quality of their service (Klausen, 2009).

At Niras, the implementation of BIM is being carried out due to the company’s own initiative. The

company sees the BIM technology as a good way to improve coordination in projects and thus

provide better service to its customers. It also supports the company’s desire to deliver information

that can be used throughout the lifetime of the building (Hansen, 2009). What is interesting with the

implementation of BIM at Niras is that the decision of implementing is not derived from the top

management of the company. The company has a workgroup which supervises matters related to IT

and process development internally in the company. This group decided to implement BIM tools

gradually in the company’s processes by looking into each project individually and assessing which

design disciplines would benefit the most each time (Hansen, 2009). It is however necessary to make

the development and implement of BIM visible to the top management in order to keep its support.

Niras sees itself though affected of the DDB initiative by some means, but it is Mikkel Hansen’s belief

that DDB is not pushing the limits – the standards and the requirements not being too hard to reach

(Hansen, 2009).

At Rambøll, the implementation of BIM began purely due to business perspective – it was seen as a

way to increase the revenues of projects (Karlshøj, 2009). So the implementation of BIM had already

begun before DDB was initiated.

The contracting company Pihl has a quite unique situation, since its activities can be divided into two

main fields: drafting and executing building projects. BIM is currently being implemented in both of

these fields and this process has been on for roughly a year now. A part of the motivation for Pihl to

implement BIM came from one of its collaboration partners, Rambøll. Pihl does however see itself as

a leading actor in the development towards BIM (Asklund & Johansen, 2009). Regarding whether

DDB had anything to do with the implementation of BIM at the company, Asklund feels that the

initiative is mainly directed towards the consulting branches ‐ engineers and architects. It is not so

greatly directed towards those working on‐site. She does however admit that the initiative also has

an influence on the company and its implementation (Asklund & Johansen, 2009). To sum up the



situation at Pihl, it is evident that the implementation of BIM is being carried out due to the

company’s own desire. It may be debated how much influence DDB has had on the implementation

process – in this case it has apparently not been the main driver for the process at the company, but

stating that it did not have any influence at all would clearly be conceived as a delusion.

The state clients interviewed in this research do have a quite different position towards DDB in

contrast to the other companies interviewed here. They are the only organizations in the research

that by law have to comply with the client demands presented in all of their building projects

(though subjected to various restrictions, as discussed in Chapter 2.3). Both UBST and SES are

therefore quite clear about why BIM is being implemented at their organization – they simply have

to do so (Carstad, 2009; Danvold, 2009). Mette Carstad at UBST does though add that the

organization has probably taken part in BIM projects before the client demands came into effect, but

then it was due to the consultants’ own initiative (Carstad, 2009). As for now, the client demands are

of various extents, in accordance with project size. However, Carstad says that UBST does not look

so much at the price tag of projects when deciding when to use BIM or not. The aim is simply to use

BIM in every building project independently of its size (Carstad, 2009).

Clars Danvold at SES mentioned another driver for the organizations desire to promote BIM. He

points out that in all projects that SES runs and stipulates the use of BIM they also stipulate the use

of the open IFC format. Partly, they do so because it is mentioned in the client demands but it is also

due to SES own ambition to support IFC, or any other open standard. This is because the

organization assumes that in a few years it will be possible to utilize the IFC‐format in the FM‐

systems it uses (Danvold, 2009).

From the discussion above, it is clear that the DDB initiative has not been a decisive factor for these

organizations (except the state clients) to implement BIM technology. Its effect can though not be

underestimated, because it has initiated a great deal of debates and discussions in the construction

industry so that the knowledge of digital working methods has significantly increased – even to a

surprisingly large extent (Danvold, 2009).

It should be highlighted that the digital client demands consisting in DDB are only demanded in

building projects for state clients. In the recent years the state clients have been rather passive with

regards to new building projects, in order to work against too much expansion in the industry. The

demands have therefore only had direct influence on a very little share of the total building market.

Now, on the other hand, when the private sector is experiencing significant contraction it may be

anticipated that the state clients will step in and increase their share of the total constructions in the

country thus increasing the building volume which the building client demands do affect.

5.2.2 Motivation and the Implementation Process

It can be challenging to implement radical changes in organizations in the way people work. The

implementation of BIM technology and BIM thinking is no different. Therefore, it is interesting to



have a look at how Danish companies have dealt with the transformation, what measures they have

made and how far the transformation has reached so far.

The key thing in the implementation process seems to be to carry the transformation out in small

steps. At Hou + Partnere, the first step of the implementation was that there were some employees

at the company that had interest in trying out these new modelling techniques. As a result, an

internal group was formed where these employees were able to share their experience and learning.

The knowledge gained in the group was then spread around in the company. This process revolved

entirely around certain software, AutoCAD ADT to be precise. The company has however taken

decision about moving to database‐oriented software and for that purpose it has chosen to work

with Revit. The implementation of the new system will be carried out in a somewhat different way,

since the company has chosen a certain building project to serve as a pilot project. The company got

into cooperation with a sort of a taskforce group consisting of external consultants, which provides

feedback and consultancy to the project team within the company in this particular pilot project. Not

everyone in the company is though going to be involved in the implementation process in the first

phase. The experience from the pilot project will be evaluated and then spread out to more projects.

In this relationship, i.e. when deciding who will be on the pilot project team, it is necessary to

recognize the different types of employees because not everyone is as receptive with regards to new

working techniques (Klausen, 2009).

Typically, the workforce can be divided into three groups; super‐users, users and non‐users. The

super‐users are those who show great interest in trying to find ways to do things more effectively by

means of employing new and sometimes radical methods. The users may be classified as a more

passive version of the super‐users, showing some interest but not as enthusiastic as the former

ones. Finally, non‐users are those who are not directly using the software as a design tool but do

nevertheless need to have some basic knowledge of the possibilities of the new systems – this type

of users is typically project leaders. If BIM is to be implemented, each of these groups need to have a

considerable knowledge of BIM – even the non‐users have to know at least about what is possible to

do with it and what is not (Klausen, 2009).

It is natural that some employees feel that they are being threatened by the changes. Rasmus

Klausen points out that it is necessary to keep in mind that an architectural company, like Hou +

Partnere, has a large group of employees that are very skilled in using AutoCAD and have great

experience in carrying out project in traditional manner. By switching suddenly to BIM thinking, this

group of people does have a large amount of skills and experience which becomes basically obsolete

when dealing with database‐oriented design programs (Klausen, 2009). This alone can be seen as a

good reason for companies to implement BIM in small steps.

Klausen puts emphasize on that the benefits for the company from working with BIM are not

necessarily measurable in terms of revenues. The company’s experience is rather that their



collaboration partners, such as consulting engineers, contractors and the clients, are more satisfied

with their work and are therefore more likely to be willing to make business with them again

(Klausen, 2009).

The implementation at Juul|Frost was carried out, similarly to Hou + Partnere, in gradual steps. The

employees who were supposed to start working with the company’s first BIM project were picked by

the management with regards to their knowledge and capabilities of 3D modelling. It was not

something that they signed up for. A small group of seven people were sent to a three day course in

working with BIM prior to starting on the project (Graabæk, 2009). Soon, it became clear though

that things were not going as well as expected:

Some of them [the employees] were just not good enough for this. Some of them had

15 years of experience to AutoCAD and then it is very difficult to change software, no

matter whether it is 2D or 3D or whatever it is. It is not AutoCAD and it is very

difficult to change. And some people were not comfortable in leading position when

they had to try out new frontiers and had to help other people with something they

did not quite understand the whole concept of. So we have to take some employees

off and put them back on 2D projects because they were actually working against

the whole process. (Graabæk, 2009).

This underlines that the human resource part of the transformation towards BIM thinking can be a

very difficult part. In general the transition at Juul|Frost has been painful for some but not for others

(Graabæk, 2009). Actually, it was experienced that some employees that were not put on BIM

projects had great interest in working in one:

And then we found out that some people that was not actually put on BIM projects,

they would like to be on one, and then they got their education by them self, just

testing. So, some learn very fast and do not want to go back to 2D and some people

have very difficult to change and then when they have a hard deadline pushing them,

they fall back to 2D. So even though they were on a 3D project, they said „oh, I don‘t

have time to do this facade so I have to draw it in 2D“. And that hurts the process so

much. (Graabæk, 2009).

When the company started performing BIM projects it had a vision of a year and a half of transition

time until all design would be performed in BIM. It has however taken longer time, for example

because some employees needed longer time to become acquainted with BIM (Graabæk, 2009).

It has not been tried to evaluate the benefits of BIM for Juul|Frost. But in the first BIM project made

in the company, it was monitored how much extra time employees used for “struggling” with the

new software. The results from that project were that the extra effort put into the project was

equivalent to the work contribution of one employee for two weeks. Today, the company thinks that



using BIM technology in projects is not less efficient than using traditional methods (Graabæk,

2009).

The two architectural companies seem to have a different perspective on how detail‐modelling

should be carried out. Thomas Graabæk, at Juul|Frost, puts great emphasis on the importance of no

one working in 2D in a 3D project:

We chosen that the architect [should be] in charge of the project – it is his

responsibility that nobody does 2D in a 3D project, no matter what, because

otherwise we‘re going to use a lot of time. (Graabæk, 2009).

In its first BIM project it was decided to do the detailing in scale 1:10 or 1:20 in traditional manner,

i.e. with 2D drafting, but now, after the first project has been carried out, the company does actually

perform all the detailing within the BIM software. Graabæk described the reason:

Everything we do down to ... 1:50, we do in BIM and the detailing in 1:10 or 1:20 we

do in AutoCAD. ... And then we found out that it is actually easier also to do the

detailing within the BIM software. (Graabæk, 2009).

On the other hand, Klausen, at Hou + Partnere, sees opportunities to use the company’s existing

competences to detail in 2D environment, at least during the transformation phase in the company.

In the pilot project currently being carried out, some part of the detailing will be made in Revit, but

the larger part will be done in AutoCAD, partly due to this reason (Klausen, 2009). Companies,

working in other fields of building projects, such as Niras, maintain a balance between 2D detailing

and modelling in BIM. Currently, details are generally handled with traditional methods and the

model is kept stripped of details. Hansen, at Niras, says though that the company is clearly heading

towards detailing in BIM to a greater extent (Hansen, 2009). At Rambøll, Jan Karlshøj says that the

extent to which details are being modelled within the BIM software depends on the character of the

project. In some projects, structures are modelled down to a very high detail level – all down to

individual precast elements or even nuts and bolts. But sometimes, only the major components are

modelled within the BIM software (Karlshøj, 2009).

Like at the architectural firms, the key idea to implement BIM at Niras, was to do so in small steps.

Instead of rushing in the implementation process, emphasis is put on doing things in a slow, well

defined manner, so that the users can really benefit from it right from the start (Hansen, 2009).

When getting the employees at the company to accept the new work procedures, emphasis is put

on a simple phrase:

BIM is supposed to be fun. (Hansen, 2009).



The BIM lab at Niras has a responsibility to motivate staff at the company to use BIM and that does

often include that they have to „sell“ the BIM ideology to the company‘s own project leaders. In

each building project where BIM is to be used, the project team in cooperation with the BIM lab puts

down a number of fields of interest, in order to find out in which disciplines utilization of BIM can

bring most value to the project. All project team members are then required to agree on working

with BIM in these predefined fields of interest, which can for example be climate calculations,

visualisation or collision control. The purpose with the BIM lab is not necessarily to carry out the BIM

work in projects, but rather to encourage and guide the employees at the company how to work

with BIM (Hansen, 2009).

5.2.3 Practical Matters

The choice of BIM software does obviously affect the companies and have an influence on its

collaboration with other actors. At Juul|Frost, the main criterion put forward by the company was

that the software needed to support the IFC format. However, a number of other factors did also

influence the choice. Some employees had more experience from Archicad than Revit, and Archicad

had also the benefit of working both on Mac’s and PC’s. Finally, it proved also to be cheaper and to

the company’s perception, it was more of an architectural tool than engineering tool, thus of a

greater relevance for the company (Graabæk, 2009). At Hou + Partnere, AutoCAD had been a

fundamental tool at the company for a long time. The first step toward BIM was taken by choosing

to move to AutoCAD ADT, since it was seen as an easy way to go back to AutoCAD if ADT would not

work out as expected. The next step in the development at the company was moving to database‐

oriented design software. Revit and Archicad were considered, but in the end, Revit was chosen. It

was partly because of economical reasons and partly because it had a very strong market position in

Denmark (Klausen, 2009).

At Pihl, the choice of systems has partly been influenced by the company’s collaborators. As earlier

described, the company consists of two fundamental parts, a drafting department and a

construction department. The construction part of the company has chosen Tekla Structures as its

main BIM system and the drafting department has chosen Revit. Obviously, these two departments

work closely together, and it was therefore crucial for the company that these two systems can

easily exchange data (Asklund & Johansen, 2009).

In order to stimulate the transition, some companies have sought for consultancy from external

sources. As mentioned before, Hou + Partnere got into cooperation with a taskforce in their pilot

project and Juul|Frost received help from consultants with two major things; choosing the BIM

software and forming their first CAD contract (Danish: IKT aftale). The company identifies the

contract as a very effective tool and it therefore strives to get the responsibility of making it in all of

their projects:

It is a very powerful position to be in. (Graabæk, 2009).



At the BIM lab at Niras, it is generally avoided to buy any external consultancy to assist on the

implementation. It is the belief that the company has all the competences needed, but if they

happen to get into troubles with their software, they try to contact the software retailer. Hansen, at

Niras, points though out that the support functions at the retailers are not always of a great help,

because there is a great difference between working in the field and working on selling some

products (Hansen, 2009). This problem corresponds also to one argument made by Birx (2005) that

professional trainers are novices them self, so that super‐users quickly outperform them by means

of experience and knowledge of the BIM systems.

UBST tried to specially hire an expert to the organization when the implementation of BIM was to be

undertaken. His responsibility was to help with integrating BIM in the organization. Unfortunately, it

did not go too well. The problem was not that the individual lacked expertise with the systems – the

problem was that he was not able to convince all the staff members to use the BIM techniques.

Finally, it became clear that the expert was not making good enough progress, so he resigned

(Carstad, 2009). In a retrospect, Carstad thinks that:

It was very naive way. (Carstad, 2009).

Continuing, she said that it was not a good way of doing this. In her opinion, the implementation of

BIM cannot be carried out by hiring one person to take care of it. Today, all project leaders at UBST

need to be involved – they cannot longer tell someone else to take care of the problems related to

DDB. They do not necessarily have to know exactly how to use BIM models, but they have to know

what using them involves (Carstad, 2009).

5.2.4 Comprehensiveness of Implementation

How extensive has the implementation of BIM internally in organizations been so far? We will start

looking at the two architectural firms presented in the research.

The firm Hou + Partnere does not use BIM in every project they perform. Sometimes, the company is

required by a client to use BIM but that still happens only on a few occasions. When it is only up to

the company itself, the decision about utilizing BIM does always involve the question whether and

how BIM can increase the project’s value. Factors, such as size and geometrical complexity are for

example of interest. If the geometry of the proposed building is complex, then the company

estimates it to be more likely that the project can benefit from BIM utilization. Klausen puts an

emphasis on how the work structure is different when designing with BIM tools. More time and

efforts are put into the initial phases of a building project, and on the contrary, not as much time is

needed for preparing the project for tendering. However, he estimates that BIM projects carried out

at the company are more time consuming than projects based on traditional methods. But if the

company believes that BIM can contribute to the project, it is ready to sacrifice this extra amount of

time in order to obtain a more valuable product (Klausen, 2009).



At Juul|Frost, Graabæk estimates that up to 50% of the projects carried out at the company are

done with BIM tools. The company aims however on a total BIM implementation but Graabæk is not

sure when the company will be able to stop doing 2D projects. For example, he says that landscaping

projects are still sometimes made in 2D, since it is very resource demanding to do such projects with

BIM technology. When working on BIM projects, the company strives to do as much in BIM software

as possible (Graabæk, 2009).

When looking at the implementation of BIM at the state clients, a different picture emerges. As

earlier described, the state clients must demand their projects to be carried out with BIM tools. But

would it be realistic or appealing to create BIM models of the state client’s current building

portfolios?

At this point, at least,[due to] the cost of making even simple BIM models for entire

portfolio, [it] is not a real option at this point. (Danvold, 2009).

SES has however been considering a sort of simple BIM solution, or what Danvold calls slim BIM,

where they have all of their estates as very simple building models only with space objects. It could

be a good starting point for SES as a building owner. Every time some activities are going to be

performed in a certain facility, SES could hand in the building model to the consultant which would

then enrich the building model with new information. The simple building model would therefore be

used as a basis for further work. But from a maintenance point of view, the 3D is not so interesting.

It is rather the data within the model which is interesting. It is therefore very important that this

data is stored in a way so it can be transferred to a maintenance system (Danvold, 2009).

5.3 Barriers with the Implementation of BIM

5.3.1 Cultural Barriers

One of the barriers the companies’ representatives often mentioned was that the market is still

much diversified with regards to utilization of digital working techniques. There are many actors in

the market that have simply not started working with the BIM technology yet and are thus still only

working with 2D drawings (Hansen, 2009). Some even see this topic as the main barrier for

implementing BIM in the industry:

I would say the biggest problem is that so few companies are doing BIM right now

and the companies that are doing BIM are perhaps doing 50% BIM. So when we

choose an engineer [company], and often we do not choose them, the client chooses

[it] for us, but when we choose, it is very often that the collaboration will be 2D. And

there are almost no clients that ask us for new BIM project. (Graabæk, 2009).

As Graabæk puts it, his company can try to highlight to the clients the benefits of BIM processes, but

often they do not really care about the technique used – their only concern is to get a product, in



this case a building, that works. For this sake, his company does often deliver 2D projects to the

clients, even though it uses BIM tools to design them. The potentials for collaboration between

project actors are thus not employed to any extent, which must be interpreted as a barrier

(Graabæk, 2009). This is also realised by Pihl. The fact that many of Pihl’s smaller collaborative

partners, such as sub‐contractors, are following the development towards BIM on a considerably

slower pace decreases the company’s possibilities to exchange BIM data (Asklund & Johansen,

2009).

The possibly most straightforward way to articulate this barrier was captured by Karlshøj at Rambøll,

where he expresses the main barrier of implementing BIM in the construction industry to be:

… [the] lack of knowledge of the benefits. (Karlshøj, 2009).

That is, while the industry does not recognize the benefits, it will be difficult to transform it towards

more digitalized working methods. It is therefore necessary to inform the building industry about the

possibilities, and that is exactly what DDB has been doing – but maybe under wrong premises, as

Danvold at SES explains. He says that according to how DDB has been presented, the whole idea has

been to move the work processes from paper to a digital media, without changing the work

processes. Especially with BIM, this is not the case. If a company wants to implement BIM in the

design and decision process, it means that fundamental changes are needed to take place. This has

not been communicated well enough (Danvold, 2009).

The lack of knowledge of the benefits does also have an impact on the company‐level. It is necessary

to be able to see the advantages of the new systems, in a wide perspective. It may be expected that

employees who have been using traditional working techniques for a long time will not be

enthusiastic to change the way they work. Comments like “we have always been doing our things in

certain way, why change?” are frequently presented by employees (Hansen, 2009).

Employees and managers should not exclusively evaluate the benefits of doing things differently

with regards to own interests. They should rather look around and try to see how other participants

in the value chain can benefit from their changed way of doing the work (Asklund & Johansen, 2009).

It might take some time for the benefits to become apparent to all, but if everybody shows

commitment to the new way of thinking, the advantages should sooner or later become visible

through better quality of work.

It can for example be hard to convince project managers in construction projects, who are used to

do their work in a certain way, to do things differently ‐ unavoidably causing a need for extra

resources and thus extra cost at the early phase of the transformation (Asklund & Johansen, 2009).

What they are most interested in is whether the project will be profitable or not. They are therefore

less interested in implementing relatively new, unknown techniques to their projects which

increases the uncertainty in their projects. This is however crucial, because the company’s



employees must first be convinced about implementing BIM, before the customers of the company

can be convinced about the benefits of these new working techniques (Hansen, 2009).

Getting the top management involved must also be considered an essential factor. The leadership

must be convinced of the benefits of BIM and it must be looked at as a core business element

(Danvold, 2009), not just as another software system. Else, it will be difficult to get enough resources

assigned to the transformation process. This was the case at Juul|Frost:

Before the client asked us to do it, the management did not care at all [about BIM].

They could see that we were solving potential problems in 2D and they did not see

any reason to do anything else. (Graabæk, 2009).

When the company had acquired the BIM software and the top management could see its

capabilities, it became clear to the management that BIM was the way to go. The same story is

actually told at Hou + Partnere, where the top management has been involved in the transformation

process the whole time (Klausen, 2009).

The transition period when moving from traditional working methods to BIM‐based processes is a

critical time for every company and it has to be carried out with regards to each company’s own

interests. It must be a focus on not choosing technology only for the technology´s sake. But it is

necessary to spread knowledge to the employees of the company in order to make them aware of

the potentials of these new processes and activities. Full acceptance, participation and exploitation

of the possibilities will not take place until this occurs (Asklund & Johansen, 2009).

It is difficult for busy employees to find time to gain competences with new working methods. But if

they do, it is also difficult for them to use the new tools, because they are more efficient when

working with the experienced methods. It is therefore essential to give the employees time to get

used to the new tools, but it can of course be difficult when the employees are working on a tight

time schedule (Graabæk, 2007). Even though many new things, processes and methods are being

tried out in a project, the project time must be more or less the same. It is difficult to educate

employees in using new methods at the same time as the project is being carried out. This leads to

the conclusion that combining quality improvements and experiments with new procedures is

difficult (Asklund & Johansen, 2009).

However, the transition towards BIM technology must somehow take place. In small companies,

which do not have the resources to train and become BIM masters, the transformation and the

development towards BIM must take place in the projects themselves. Larger companies might have

the resources to support internal development of knowledge and standards related to BIM, like

Niras has been doing (Hansen, 2009). This way, the company tries to improve its product and service

without the risk of lacking quality in pilot BIM projects. Smaller companies, like Hou + Partnere, do

not have the resources to afford such internal development and must therefore rely on



development of BIM in the projects themselves (Klausen, 2009). With all things considered, the

transformation towards new working techniques will always have to take place in the actual building

projects. If the companies have the resources available to develop the techniques internally, it will

not hurt the process, but the general mass of employees will not get familiar with the techniques

until they have to work with them on real projects. The process is actually analogous with when

people learn how to ride a bike – it is possible to read and receive instructions about how to do it,

but the real skills are not acquired until one sits on the saddle and sets out.

5.3.2 Technical Barriers

One of the large technical barriers in some opinion is that the software available does not support

BIM sufficiently. The BIM applications are dependent on geometrical representation and there is no

non‐geometrical based BIM software currently available (Danvold, 2009). Actually:

All the hype about BIM has been about geometry and rendering and visualization.

And actually, the only place BIM really works is geometry and rendering and

visualization – at least in my experience. (Danvold, 2009).

Due to this reason, there are mainly people that have high confident in this technology that try to

use it. The next group of users, which wait until they can see the clear benefits of using the

technology in their every day work, are not convinced yet, and are therefore not very accepting

towards the new technology. It is possible to have all kinds of workshops and so on, but the software

needs to support the process (Danvold, 2009).

One of the anticipated features of BIM is that different actors are supposed to have the possibility to

exchange data between each other without any hurdles. Naturally, software producers do their

uttermost to promote their own format in order to gain larger market share, but if the BIM ideology

is to function in general the industry has to come up with a shared data exchange format. The

currently best bet seems to be the IFC format. They decided some while ago to issue IFC‐certificates

to software solutions, but the requirements had to be very limitedly defined. Therefore, even

though given software has an IFC certification on it, it cannot exchange the full list of elements in IFC

format (Danvold, 2009). This problem has been experienced by a number of the interviewees:

The IFC format is the only BIM format that is cross‐platform and IFC format is very

limited – it is a great format but it is very limited. (Graabæk, 2009).

Juul|Frost have exactly experienced what Danvold mentioned – that some software companies do

put IFC‐certification stamps on their products but when these IFC features are being utilized they do

not always work properly. For example when an architect’s building model in IFC‐format is imported

to different software, some parts of the model happen to disappear, some dimensions change and

individual objects have moved around (Graabæk, 2007). Also, when exchanging in IFC‐format, the

more or less only thing that is being exchanged is the geometrical model. Underlying 2D sheets, line



types, and text labels are not included. The company believes however that it is a good thing that

data transfer with the IFC format is one of the demands in state building projects in Denmark

(Graabæk, 2009).

When discussed with Pihl’s representatives, they have a similar story to tell. The company does use a

lot of different software systems, but it does not transfer models between programs to great extent.

Internally in the company, they have however made some experiments with data exchange between

Revit and Tekla Structures. It has almost been a flawless process, but there are some points that the

users have to be aware of. In their experience, the geometry of the models does transfer easily

between systems, but some of the data that is attached to some of the objects in the model does

occasionally not follow. The company is also investigating how some calculation and scheduling

programs can work together with Revit and Tekla, and the IFC format is being used in these testing.

So far, these experiments have been promising (Asklund & Johansen, 2009).

Rambøll has also experienced some technical issues related to data transfer. The company has for

example experienced problems when collaborating companies are using non‐compatible software.

The potentials of implementing BIM are great, but the lack of information exchange between project

partners is hindering some of the benefits (Karlshøj, 2009).

All in all, the IFC format is a good idea, but it has to be decently supported. It costs a lot of time and

money to test each BIM‐software on the market whether it is IFC compliant or not. While the

buildingSmart community keeps being as loosely funded network as it has been in the recent years

(Danvold, 2009), the development of the IFC format might take longer time than desired.

Standards are a very large issue in relation with BIM. In order to get the whole industry to “talk”

together, certain sets of ground rules and standards have to be agreed upon, e.g. concerning how

and which data should be transferred, how models should be structured and so on. While still under

development, the constant flow of new standards can easily be frustrating for the employees at

companies to follow and adapt to. Employees at an architectural firm are in general very creative

and have a desire to work on creative work. They may not necessarily have a comprehensive

knowledge of databases and standards and it can therefore seem to be complicated from their

viewpoint (Klausen, 2009). This is nevertheless a crucial matter because without standards BIM will

never become a basis for mutual collaboration. Not less importantly, all interest parties must agree

on working along the proposed standards. A good way to work towards that goal is of course to

involve stakeholders in the development of standards, as has been done in the development of the

BIPS standards and guidelines in Denmark (bips, n.d.).



One of the problems inherently comprised with the development of standards, is that how different

aspects should be defined. For example, defining what data should be available to a building owner

when construction is completed is more difficult than one might think:

80% of the total cost of a building is in the maintenance phase. We need

maintenance data. (Danvold, 2009).

While it is easy to say in broad terms like here what is needed, it is more difficult to define exactly

what information is needed for each building component. This dilemma is also related to the type of

the building owner and the way they run their building portfolio. For example, SES runs a

maintenance strategy in a way so it is only responsible for maintaining the technical installations and

the outer shell of buildings. Other building owners might have different maintenance strategy and

thus need a different type of data to some extent (Danvold, 2009).

5.3.3 Business Related Aspects

When a company has taken decision to implement new systems to its organization, a difficult

process starts when evaluating to what extent the transformation should be carried out. The

software and the hardware needed to facilitate the implementation of BIM is very expensive and

therefore it was interesting to hear from the companies’ representatives how they looked at the

initial investment cost – whether it deserved to be considered a barrier or not. The answers

suggested that these matters are considered in very different ways. At Juul|Frost the initial

investment cost is not necessarily seen as a great barrier. The company did not have any BIM

software beforehand but when choosing the software it was decided to look at the functionality

rather than the price. They key idea was to start small:

Only few licences were bought – only 3 licences at first. And that is actually a lot for

one project, even though up to 6 people are working on the project, there is always

someone at meetings, writing emails, being sick and so on. Now, the company has 8

licences and there are often up to 20 people working on BIM projects. (Graabæk,

2009).

By manipulating the investment in such a way the cost did not become a burden.

The other architectural firm interviewed, Hou + Partnere, reflects another perspective on this

concept. Admitting that the initial investment cost can be a barrier it should also be kept in mind

that the software is the designer’s instrument to create value (Klausen, 2009) – it has the same role

to the designer as the hammer has to the carpenter. The software therefore needs to be up to date

so that the company can keep developing itself and sustain its competitiveness.

But the initial investment cost is not solely related to the cost of software and hardware. There is

also a considerable cost related to training of employees and to the decreased productivity



associated with implementing new work processes. In a large company such as Rambøll, the

investment cost is not a huge barrier, because the transformation is taken in small steps and the lost

productivity has only an effect in small scale compared to the total work done in the company

(Karlshøj, 2009). One might on the other hand expect this matter to be of a greater relevance for

smaller companies, but the experience gained with the new working techniques should counteract

to some extent the cost affected by the lost productivity.

All things considered, the question whether the initial investment cost is a barrier or not depends on

the implementation strategy. If the strategy involves a radical shift towards new working techniques,

one would anticipate high initial investment cost, both due to acquiring new tools and competences

and also due to a certain transition time with considerably decreased productivity.

With new ways of working new problems emerge or old problems become more visible. The

allocation of responsibilities is one of the latter ones. Danvold takes an example of when tendering

documents are being prepared. By traditional methods, the architect would have drawn the building

and made the list of quantities manually. This is a proven method with a small margin of errors. With

the BIM tools the feeling for the quantities has disappeared into the computer and no one is quite

sure about what is going on:

We as a building owner have experienced a sort of a vacuum of responsibilities.

(Danvold, 2009).

Actually, as soon as the architect has handed in a BIM model with attached list of quantities to the

building owner, which will use it in the tendering process, the responsibility of the list being correct

lies with the building owner (Danvold, 2009).

But is utilization of BIM technology always beneficial independently of the project’s characteristics?

The interviewees had different views on that but most of them agreed on that it rather depends of

the type of the project than the size. Karlshøj at Rambøll said that in renovation projects, where no

3D model of the existing building is available, it is still too time consuming to employ BIM technology

(Karlshøj, 2009). Danvold at SES agrees, but if the project on hand is a design of a small, new

building, it would probably be a good idea to use BIM, because only a small extra effort is needed

(Danvold, 2009). The designers would this way acquire valuable experience with using BIM tools. But

not only would the designers benefit from their utilization of BIM tools in small projects, so would

the building client also. Hansen at Niras thinks that the visualisation possibilities inherent with

modelling with BIM technology are of great interest in any project, stating:

Nothing tells the story better than visualization. (Hansen, 2009).



Therefore, he believes that utilization of BIM techniques can be relevant to all projects, no matter

what size it is. Graabæk, at Juul|Frost, takes this viewpoint even further, stating:

Actually, I think that the smaller the size of the project is the benefits become bigger.

(Graabæk, 2009).

He thinks that small projects can benefit from BIM, but he adds that it is also easier to use BIM on

small projects because big projects demand many people using the same models, and they have

often more complex geometry and solutions (Graabæk, 2009).

This viewpoint is interesting because the demands put forward in the DDB initiative imply exactly the

opposite, by putting a lower limit, by means of value, on the projects that the demands apply for.

Graabæk thinks that this is because DDB is afraid of pushing small companies out of work, but on the

other hand he believes that the small companies are often in a better position to change its working

methods ‐ small companies performing small projects are having the possibility to benefit the most

(Graabæk, 2009).

Beforehand, one might have thought that certain risks of small companies being excluded were

presented with the implementation of BIM in the industry. Probable reasons could be that small

companies might lack the resources needed to drive the implementation through. Also, small, much

specialized contractors, not having interest or need to use complicated IT systems, could get into

problems if extensive requirements would be put forward. Most of the company’s representatives

admitted that this risk is presented, but many of them did also remark that many of the fast movers

towards implementation are actually small companies – often small architectural studios (Danvold,

2009; Karlshøj, 2009). However, it is such that while the large companies have the resources to drive

the implementation forward, small companies might have advantages by means of its flexibility to

change its working methods (Asklund & Johansen, 2009; Hansen, 2009).

5.4 Benefits from working with BIM In this section, a focus will be put on the main benefits for the building industry and for individual

organizations, with regards to BIM technology and its implementation, perceived by actors in the

Danish building industry.

Starting by looking at the benefits in general terms, one of the motivating comments received in the

interviews was that:

It can actually be fun to do the work we do today. (Hansen, 2009).

With this Hansen suggests that BIM has the potential of people going down the same track not just

internally in companies but also on a cross‐company basis in the whole building industry (Hansen,

2009). The fact that everyone in the building industry would be sort of speaking the same language

would thus turn out to be a big benefit for the whole.



The utilization of BIM can aid consultants delivering the service they have agreed to provide. It can

help consultants interpreting proposed building designs to the client and thus increase the

possibilities of ensuring that the building will be of good standard. In particular, BIM touches with

many of the fields where the building industry is experiencing problems. However, it should not be

expected that all of the problems will disappear but it will probably be possible to deliver projects of

a higher quality (Klausen, 2009).

Moving from general considerations, a focus will now be put on concrete examples of benefits.

5.4.1 Visualization

The new ways of visualizing projects is probably one of the first things that those who are getting

introduced to the BIM technology notice. The ability to navigate around in a building model as soon

as the first drafts of it have been made is a radical shift from previous design methods. This gives the

building client and the end users a great opportunity to imagine how their facility is going to look like

so that they will be better prepared for what they may expect. This is reflected by Danvold:

Using BIM as visualization tool gives you probably added value because ... you are

sure of your decisions earlier in the design process. You can show ... the end users

something that they can understand and therefore they can commit to the solution

at an earlier phase. Because, we often experience that the end users ... have hard

time understanding plans and sections and so on. And they say “That looks fine” until

it is started building it. (Danvold, 2009).

He continued, saying that when this happens, then, a lot of resources must be put into satisfying the

end users, and it can cost a lot of money and it can take a lot of time. Especially if some design

changes must be made during the construction phase. By using BIM tools to visualize early in the

project phase, this problem can probably be avoided (Danvold, 2009).

The other interviewees did also agree on the importance of visualization. For building client that

puts forward functional based requirements in relation to building projects, BIM could help with

visualizing different kinds of building service components such as air ventilation channels and shafts,

placement of water pipes and so on (Carstad, 2009). The building client can this way make a better

assessment of various design proposals.

An interesting application of visualization was described in HVAC Magasinet by Halkjær et al. (2009).

It showed how contractors used a building model during construction of an office building in

Copenhagen. The model was not only used to perform collision controls and coordinate the

procurement, it was also sometimes used directly at the construction site, as an alternative to

traditional 2D drawings. An example of its application is shown in Figure 28, where a welder, working

on installing cooling pipes in that particular building, uses the building model directly instead of 2D

drawings. By navigating in the building model, he can get any desired viewing angle of the particular



detail he is currently dealing with, giving him better sense

about how it is supposed to look than if he only had 2D

drawings (Halkjær et al., 2009). This shows that building

models can be used in various applications, not the least at

the site of construction.

5.4.2 Coordination

There are opportunities in improving coordination in designing

buildings by employing BIM technology. According to Graabæk

at Juul|Frost, an example of that is when creating 3D models

from 2D drawings in traditional manner, it often happens that

plan drawings and section drawings do not match. It is really

not surprising because there is no direct link between the

drawings. By utilizing BIM tools at the design of buildings this

source of errors is eliminated (Graabæk, 2009).

Designing in BIM tools does also give the possibility of

performing collision controls on building models before the

actual construction of the building. This helps eliminating design errors and thus leads to improved

cost efficiency in the actual building process (Danvold, 2009) – fewer design flaws result in less extra

work needed.

Contrary to the researches’ previous belief, Graabæk, at Juul|Frost, states that making quick

conceptual sketches in BIM is very beneficial. This is because as soon as a sketch has been made the

designer has a relatively good overview over areas and volumes of the proposed building. However,

he points out that if dealing with very complex geometry, for example with many round shapes and

arbitrary surfaces, specialized sketching software would probably be the choice number one

(Graabæk, 2009).

5.4.3 Reuse of Information

One of the benefits of BIM considered in Chapter 2 was related to the possibility of reusing

information or data created by other disciplines. This aspect is in particular fundamental for building

owners because the operation and maintenance of buildings is very much related to the information

available about the building’s current condition. Danvold, at SES, phrased it such that he was hoping

that BIM could be a vehicle for moving relevant building data through the building process up to

delivery (Danvold, 2009). However, as earlier described by Danvold, the current software does not

support this interaction well enough; the IFC‐format is for example not applicable in any FM‐systems

yet. In the designing disciplines, the software‐dilemma is also presented – the possibilities of being

able to reuse information from other disciplines are very much dependent on the software available.

According to Hansen at Niras, the architectural business is today the most progressive discipline in

Figure 28: Welding of a cooling pipe in a building in central Copenhagen. Instead of using traditional 2D drawings, the building model is used directly (visible on the laptop screen behind). Image from Halkjær et al. (2009).



using the BIM technology and from software perspective, highlighting the Revit software suite, the

architectural part is the most developed one. The structural part of Revit is considerably less

developed and finally the MEP2 part, which takes on installations and building services, is the least

developed one (Hansen, 2009). With Hansen’s words, it becomes apparent how the software

companies reflect the evolution of the market – naturally they do not spend resources on

developing software solutions that no demand is presented for but on the other hand, with its

inbuilt conservative thinking, the building industry possibly does not put forward the demand unless

it sees the tools supporting it. This is really a dilemma of the type “which came first, the chicken or

the egg”. Nevertheless, Hansen at Niras sees the migration of the different disciplines of the building

market as a very positive thing (Hansen, 2009).

5.5 Changes in the Industry and Future Development When this research had started, it became clear that asking about changes due to the

implementation of BIM might be a bit too early. The spread of BIM in the industry is not that

extensive, as pointed out earlier when discussing the barriers of BIM. The industry was very

optimistic in the year 2008, when asked about how long time it would take to implement model‐

based work processes – 78% of respondents supposed that it would happen within 5 years.

Additionally, 39% claimed it would be doable in 1 – 3 years and 23% said that less than a year would

be feasible (bips, 2008). In the light of these results, it might be argued that the answers were a bit

too optimistic – at least now, a year later, many of the companies interviewed commented on that

the lack of a general commitment to the development towards BIM is one of the main barriers.

However there are evidences that the building industry is waking up to that BIM is the way to go:

I think the biggest change is that everybody has realized that this is the way they are

going. ... I haven‘t heard anybody saying „We don‘t think that we are going to do 3D

– we are sticking to 2D”. And that‘s what it is all about. (Graabæk, 2009).

This is though not necessarily a change solely due to the implementation of BIM, as Danvold says:

If we are talking about changes because of BIM, then we are a bit early. (Danvold,

2009).

As previously discussed, the BIM technology is still not being effectively used as a collaboration tool

or a core business element – its utilization is for the most part related to geometrical representation.

On the other hand, Danvold believes that the increased awareness of the need to migrate from 2D

to 3D modelling tools can be perceived as a result of the DDB initiative – just looking at the fact that

more and more studios are changing their way of working towards BIM methods (Danvold, 2009).

2 MEP = Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing.



Karlshøj does agree that the awareness of the digital modelling techniques is increasing, still though

mainly among architects and engineers. Contractors are also jumping on the cart but he reckons that

the clients are the slow‐runners. But regarding changes in the industry in general, Karlshøj says:

Being a part of making these requirements and so forth, I might be biased by that,

but I certainly see a change compared to some years ago. (Karlshøj, 2009).

He highlights though that it is difficult to tell whether this change is due to the DDB initiative,

because this is also probably due to the worldwide trend towards digital working methods (Karlshøj,

2009). In a dialogue with a person involved in BIM technology, it was pointed out that in Sweden, no

initiative similar to DDB exists. Indeed, Sweden has been a passive player in the development

towards BIM and the industry has rather followed the development of BIM in its neighbouring

countries. For example some private companies have taken BIM tools in their use but there is

however no requirements demanded by the government or the state clients for them to follow.

Regarding the future development of BIM in the Danish building industry, Hansen at Niras sees BIM

as a great tool to create a synergy in the industry towards a better production:

We have the chance with BIM to go down the same track, to gather around

something. And I think that creating a commitment across a business in the industry

can be one of the best things that happened to the building industry for centuries...

(Hansen, 2009).

In Hansen’s opinion, by employing BIM thinking it will be possible to become more effective and

productive. He continues, saying that it is necessary to get away from thinking about the initial

building cost all the time – the whole life time of the building must be taken into consideration as

early as in the design phase. By using BIM technology right from the start of a project it can

contribute significantly to that goal (Hansen, 2009). The fields of employment do for example

include energy and climate calculation at early stages which gives the benefits of choosing among a

number of design alternatives during the conceptual design. This would of course give better

possibilities to increase the proposed buildings’ energy efficiency, which will probably be of an

increasing interest for building owners.

But there are more fields that BIM will be applied in. Graabæk visions that the building models

produced will be used directly to check whether facilities are meeting building regulation

requirements (Graabæk, 2009). Such application has actually already started in Singapore, previously

discussed in Chapter 2.2.5. From a business perspective, there will be a development in aspects

taking on contractual matters and payments for different activities. Some measures have to be taken

so that the ones who add value to a project get paid in accordance with their input (Karlshøj, 2008).

Therefore, the payment structure has to be redesigned so that it harmonizes with the work

structure.



New formation of project teams might also emerge. By now, Klausen at Hou + Partnere, has not yet

experienced great interest from the contractors’ side in utilizing BIM. But he thinks that it will

change in the near future. As an example he points out that by tradition it is always the consultants

that make the tendering documents for building projects. With the BIM technology, there is a

potential to change this by involving the contractors more in this action (Klausen, 2009). A fully

integrated project team, consisting of consultants, contractors and building operators might become

a more feasible alternative in building projects.

More on the non‐design level, it may be anticipated that BIM will become not only a design tool but

also a strategic data tool but for that to happen the technology and the software has to support it.

As earlier described in this chapter, the BIM tools available are very design oriented – there is for

example no non‐geometrical BIM software available right now. The reason is probably that the

demand has not been presented, and the demand will not be presented unless the building industry

on the whole sees the opportunities with the BIM technology. Danvold at SES describes this:

Lifting BIM from the enthusiasm level to the real level where even the suits believe it

is a big issue. (Danvold, 2009).

5.6 Conclusion To summarize, there are great opportunities to develop and utilize BIM further. Companies seem to

be heading towards an increased and more intelligent usage of BIM, both internally and also

externally, focusing on increased data sharing and collaboration with other companies. The

implementation of BIM will be a continuous development and it must be expected to take a long

time before all of its benefits can be effectively exploited. The process of transforming well

established working methods does always take time, and with the building industry as a much

diversified and conservative field, the transformation cannot be expected to be carried out instantly.



6 Discussions In this chapter, the findings from the two analyses will be discussed and put into context with the

theory reviewed in Chapter 2. The chapter consists of two sections. The former one takes on matters

that can be related to the implementation of BIM on national level and the latter one studies the

implementation of BIM on organizational level.

6.1 Implementation of BIM on National Level The survey conducted in Iceland revealed that the level of computerization in the Icelandic building

market is very high. This result became especially apparent in Figure 14, where the Icelandic

companies seem to use ICT to significantly greater extent than companies in the Scandinavian

countries. The use of ICT does on the other hand appear to be less advanced in Iceland than in

Scandinavia. Thus, only about half of the Icelandic companies stated that they had used web‐based

services to deal with and share project information with other companies (see Figure 15) and even

fewer companies had exchanged and utilized building information models (see Figure 16).

Furthermore, only a little share of the Icelandic companies that participated use BIM technology

today (Figure 9) and IFC compliant BIM only seems to wake moderate interest among them (Figure

27).

According Young et al. (2008), architects are the industry’s early adopters of BIM and hence they are

BIM’s heavy users. This assertion is also supported in the Erabuild report from 2008, where it

became evident that architects do have a head start on the other disciplines. This study showed that

Icelandic architects do not distinguish themselves from the other disciplines in the same way ‐ the

study actually showed that they use manual drafting as a design technique more than both

engineers and contractors. Actually, engineering companies turn out to be the front runners in

Iceland. Compared to the situation in Denmark, the interviews revealed that the architectural firms

have often been the fast movers – especially the small ones (Danvold, 2009; Karlshøj, 2009).

The Icelandic analysis showed that even though the level of computerization in companies working

in the building industry is high, they have only remotely implemented the BIM technology. In fact, it

appeared that even BIM‐related concepts, such as IFC, were misinterpreted or misunderstood, even

though they were specially defined within the survey. A clear example of that was presented in

Figure 21, where answers from two questions were compared. The former question was planned to

show in which tasks BIM was used in the company, while the latter question was intended to reveal

in which tasks IFC compliant BIM was used. The main lesson learnt from these two questions was

that the respondents in general were not sure about the difference of BIM alone and IFC compliant

BIM.

This indicates that there is a great lack of awareness in the industry with regards to BIM‐related

aspects. This is to some extent also reflected when Icelandic companies were asked about in which

fields they would potentially invest in the next years – where only the responses from architects



indicated a genuine interest in investing in BIM technology. The answers from the engineering firms

were more diversified and the contractors barely showed any interest in spending resources in BIM

technology, as can be seen in Figure 26.

The aspect of a lack of awareness was also captured in the Danish research, where Karlshøj at

Rambøll described the lack of knowledge of the benefits of BIM as one of the main barriers for the

implementation of BIM.

6.1.1 Adoption of BIM – Public Initiatives

The question is then, how is it possible to increase the knowledge of BIM in the industry? It is often

said that the building industry is in general conservative and resistant to change (Smith & Tardif,

2009). Therefore, it must be acknowledged that radical changes in the way people work, like

suggested with the implementation of BIM, need their time to become functional. The first step is of

course to make the industry aware of the concept and its inherent features. One can say that in this

aspect the DDB initiative has done very well. Its effect on the Danish building industry is well

recognized by the companies interviewed in the research where they point out that it has stimulated

a lot of debates and discussions in the industry, causing the knowledge of digital working methods to

significantly increase. This has happened even though not so many companies have been directly

subjective to the requirements (by working on state building projects). This related, according to a

dialogue with a person involved in BIM technology, not so long time ago, no one talked about

concepts like element properties, which is a fundamental part of BIM design. Today, more and more

people are talking about these things, which probably indicate that the awareness of these matters

is increasing in the industry. Such an increase might be interpreted as a measure of success.

But the activities of DDB may not have been completely ideal, as Danvold explained. In his opinion,

DDB has presented the transformation as a mere change of working media, i.e. moving the work

processes from paper to a digital format, without changing the work processes, but with BIM in

particular, this is not the case – fundamental changes need to be made. In Danvold’s belief, the need

for making these changes has not been communicated well enough to the industry. The reason for

this simplification on behalf of DDB might have been to make the changes seem to be less

overwhelming for the market. This is however probably changing, at least with recent seminars in

Denmark (Neumann, 2009), where increased emphasis is put on the transformation with regards to

the cultural values of organizations. The Icelandic building industry should pay attention to this

aspect.

One other criticism on DDB perceived in the interviews was that it has mainly been directed towards

the consulting branches; architects and engineers. This has in fact been reflected with the small

number of contracting firms participating in the bips‐conferences (formerly known as it/cad‐



conferences) in Denmark3. However, bips has taken some measures to get the contractors to

become more involved, for example by establishing a special committee with members from the

contracting industry (in Danish, this committee has been called Produktionsudvalget) (bips, 2008).

As reflected in the Danish interviews, both small and big companies can be successful with

implementing BIM but the success is based on different premises. Small companies can make use of

their flexibility and short communication channels and can thus attain success very quickly. On the

other hand, big companies can use their size and resources to develop and implement BIM, maybe

on a slower pace but possibly more comprehensively.

In the author’s opinion, this principle can also be applied on national level, when looking at how BIM

can be implemented in Iceland. The size of the building market in Iceland is naturally reflected by the

size of the nation and that companies working in the Icelandic building industry execute very few

building projects abroad. Compared to other nations, such as Norway or Denmark, with more than

fifteen times the population of Iceland each, it is obvious that the Icelandic building industry is in fact

a tiny market.

The Danish experience has shown that the resources to drive the implementation forward are

readily available to the industry. The DDB initiative is a good example, but other industry‐driven

organizations, such as bips and Byggeriets Match4, have also shown its indispensability with regards

to development of standards, guidelines and knowledge sharing. Just as with small companies that

do not have the resources needed to push the development of BIM forward, it is hard to imagine

that the Icelandic building industry will be able to maintain such a wide variety of supporting

networks and organizations as the Danish one does. Therefore it might be a desirable choice for the

Icelandic building authorities to get into cooperation with the Nordic countries on developing

standards and guidelines regarding BIM. Shared and coordinated standards for all the Nordic

countries could be beneficial but of course some obstacles can be expected when coordinating

predefined national standards. Shared standards would though help contributing to a more open

construction industry – it would be easier for companies to execute building projects outside their

domestic markets. One could also imagine that the Icelandic building market could serve as a sort of

a BIM‐laboratory for the Nordic countries, where new sets of standards could be tested. Whether

Icelandic companies would be ready to serve as guinea‐pigs in this matter is hard to say but it might

be one way for them to get acquainted with the BIM technology and thus increase their

competitiveness on the international market.

Correspondingly due to its smallness, the Icelandic building market can be seen as a very flexible

one. As a result of the low number of companies presented in the Icelandic building market, it is very

3 The bips‐conference in Denmark is a sounding board for people working with ICT in the building industry. 4 Byggeriets Match is a project intended to develop cooperation between students and organizations in the Danish building industry.



easy to catch the attention of the majority of the companies with a relatively short notice. This fact

was experienced in this research when the sampling for the e‐survey was carried out. Since the

companies are rather few, the transformation should be possible to carry out on a relatively fast

pace. The obvious analogy are the small companies that often have short communication channels,

low hierarchy and do therefore have better possibilities to respond quickly to changes.

But the smallness of the building market does also have its disadvantages. Because the companies

are so few and the building projects are not that many either it might take longer time for the

market to discover some of the problems or barriers that do unavoidably emerge during the

implementation. To counteract that, Icelandic companies should possibly consider establishing

cooperation with companies, networks or organizations working with BIM in the other Nordic

countries to learn about their experience and widen the horizon.

By taking the measures discussed above, it might be possible for the Icelandic building industry to

convert its weakness of being small into the advantage of being flexible.

6.1.2 Simple Building Models

It was mentioned in Chapter 5.2.4 that SES has been considering a sort of slim BIM solution, where

they would have all of their estates represented as very simple building models, only with space

objects. This might be something for Icelandic building owners to consider, especially for the state

owners to encourage the market to use BIM technology.

Normally when promoting BIM the emphasis has been put on how BIM replaces traditional design

techniques and creates a knowledge base on which all activities in the value chain are built up on.

This involves a rather steep learning curve because all project participants have to replace proven

working techniques with BIM. With slim BIM, one could say that this process is reversed by putting

an emphasis on how the facilities management can benefit from it right from the beginning. The

simple building model could later on serve as a basis for a proper building model.

The making of simple building models with BIM involves relatively undemanding procedures and

such projects would therefore serve as a good introduction to the technology and the mindset

necessary to adapt to.

It is clear that there will be very few new building projects to work on in Iceland in the next few years

due to the current economic situation which has hit the country and its construction industry very

hard. Under such conditions it is important that public players step forward and supply the market

with projects in order to counteract a total stagnation of the market. Renovation projects can be

seen as a good alternative but preparation for such projects, by making simple building models of

existing buildings, could also be a feasible option. Hence, the building owner would acquire valuable

information about its building portfolio and prepare for upcoming renovation or maintenance

projects.



To begin with, one might imagine that an owner’s building portfolio would be prioritized with

regards to individual building’s need for renovation. In consequence, those buildings that are in the

most need for renovation could be modelled first. A thought must also be given to the amount of

information to include in the building model. A suggestion could be to make a light version of a

building model ‐ a geometrical model of a building so that it would be possible to generate an

overview of size and usage of individual rooms or individual building sections. Doors and windows

could be standardized without regards to their actual features, but other possibilities of inputting

information would be left intact. This way it would be possible to get hold of a considerable amount

of information with relatively little work but the companies working on the projects would at the

same time benefit from getting used to work in BIM environment and would thus be better

prepared for future work with BIM.

6.1.3 Education

The key for BIM to become a standard in the Icelandic building industry is to inform the whole

market about its possibilities and about which problems can be expected to follow. One of the

barriers for implementing BIM is that actors in the building market have different view on the

development. While some see the development of BIM only as a matter of technology, other might

look more into the cultural changes in companies following the implementation. In order to attain a

successful implementation in the building market companies and organizations will need to establish

a shared vision of the way to go. BIM Iceland has already started the process of introducing the

methodology to the building industry by conducting a series of briefing presentations. It is a good

initial step in getting the market to become familiar with the concept, but it will also become

necessary to introduce the methodology to students at the technical schools and universities. Very

little effort has been made in that direction so far.

Workshops and seminars are in the author’s opinion not necessarily the ultimate way to promote

BIM, even though they may serve as good complementary source of knowledge. First and foremost,

people working in the construction industry will need to have the longing themselves to seek

information about BIM. First, when the interest is in place, people will start to benefit from the

workshops.

6.2 Implementation on Organizational Level But how should Icelandic companies arrange the process of implementing BIM? According to the

survey, Icelandic companies rate the desire to boost administrative and technical work along with

maintenance of competitiveness as the most relevant motives when taking decisions about new ICT

investments (Figure 22). Demands from customers do on the other hand not appear to be a strong

motivator and in that aspect the Icelandic building industry differs from the Scandinavian one, see

Figure 23. This underlines that if the implementation in Iceland is to become successful, it has to be

driven by company’s own interests.



The investment cost is also a source of great concerns for Icelandic companies as it appears to be the

main obstacle for increased use of ICT (Figure 24). It is clear that buying new software and upgrading

hardware involves considerable expenditures. However, as Klausen pointed out, the software is the

designer’s instrument to create value (Klausen, 2009). Therefore it needs to be up to date so that

the company can keep developing itself. The transition period will probably be the most difficult one

in this regard, when work must be carried out on many different platforms that are required to be

up to date.

While the investment cost may traditionally be seen as the cost of buying new tools, software and

hardware, it can also be interpreted as the cost related to training of employees and the decreased

productivity associated with implementing new work processes. The experience of working with the

new working techniques should however counter that to some extent because by the end, the

company should have improved its competitiveness on the market. That should appeal to the

Icelandic companies, at least according to the survey. Examining Figure 25, where the companies

were asked about what advantages they see with increased use of ICT, it is clear that improved

quality of the work scores high. Same figure does also show that benefits related to information

management also appear to be of great interest for the Icelandic companies, but many of the Danish

interviewees did also make a point about that. For instance, since all 2D drawings are extracted from

one model, and all the information is stored in one place, every change of the building model is

synchronically represented in all 2D views. Juul|Frost did recognize in the interviews that the risk of

inconsistent 2D drawings is eliminated by using BIM technology. The possibility of making collision

control on building models was also discussed in the interviews, but that facilitates elimination of

design errors and should lead to improved cost efficiency in the actual building project.

6.2.1 Dealing with Cultural Barriers

As it appeared in the Danish interviews, one of the most important aspects when implementing BIM

is management of human resources. Graabæk at Juul|Frost, explained how BIM was being

implemented in the company for the first time. As described in Chapter 5.2.2, the company’s

management selected a number of employees based on their knowledge and capabilities of 3D

modelling. However, it became clear that some of the chosen employees were not as suitable to

work with BIM as expected, basically because they were not as receptive enough to make radical

changes in the way they work. It was also experienced by the company that some employees who

were not chosen to work with BIM had very much interest in doing so (Graabæk, 2009).

The experience from Juul|Frost tells us that it is essential to find the super‐users (as defined in

Chapter 5.2.2) within the company to work on the first BIM project. In this correlation it is

advantageous to seek out employees who show interest in the technology behind the software and

in finding new, more efficient ways of doing things. Previous experience with traditional drafting

tools, such as AutoCAD, may be an advantage too but it could also turn out to be a disadvantage for

the reason that old working habits can often be hard to change. This way, the risk of falling back to



2D drafting methods could be minimized and the possibilities of the remaining staff to approve the

new working techniques is increased when they see that the new processes are actually conceivable.

Juul|Frost might have done better with regards to this matter, for example by asking directly for

volunteers to work on their first BIM project instead of hand‐picking some staff member to perform

the job. Full commitment is necessary on behalf of those initiating BIM at the company because in

order to get the everyday‐users (or the users and non‐users¸ as defined in Chapter 5.2.2) to believe

in the new working procedures, the super‐users must be convincing. Like Hansen, at Niras,

explained, the biggest challenge is to convince the company itself about implementing BIM – and it

must happen before the customers of the company can be convinced about these new working

techniques (Hansen, 2009).

6.2.2 Choosing the right BIM Projects

The interviews gave some impression of how companies decide which building projects are carried

out with BIM technology and which are still proceeded with traditional methods. As Klausen at Hou

+ Partnere revealed, the decision is largely based on the company’s vision of whether and how BIM

can be of benefit for the project on hand. Factors, such as geometrical complexity are of interest, i.e.

if a proposed project involves a building with complex geometry, it is more likely that the company

would carry it out with BIM technology (Klausen, 2009). While this may be seen as a reasonable way

to pair BIM technology with building projects, various literatures suggest a more conservative

approach when companies are still getting acquainted with the new way of working. It has for

example been suggested that companies choose simple projects to serve as pilot projects so that the

transition becomes less overwhelming (Eastman et al., 2008). It could also be beneficial to choose

only few restricted focus subjects related to BIM to work on in each new building project, similarly to

what Niras has emphasized (Hansen, 2009). This way there would probably become less risk of

employees loosing motivation due to the new working procedures because the project on hand

would be better controllable and the company would establish a basis on which further

implementation could be built on.

Naturally, there is no single formula to implement BIM universally applicable for all companies.

Different approaches may be convenient for various organizations. A company’s current culture is an

important variable in this aspect. A company with a relatively old heritage, well established working

techniques and well experienced workforce may be expected to be more resistant to changes while

a company with young energetic, but possibly less experienced employees could more likely take the

jump straight to the deep end of the pool. These thoughts should be kept in mind when taking

decision on how the implementation of BIM should be carried out within individual companies.

6.2.3 CrossDisciplinary Cooperation

As mentioned in Chapter 2.2.4, the business model used in companies does affect how or to what

extent BIM technology can be utilized. It was concluded that the DB approach does give good

possibilities to exploit BIM technology because then a single entity is responsible both for the design



and the construction and all disciplines participate in the project as early as in the design phase. The

early cooperation between disciplines gives possibilities to take advantage of more of the benefits

inherent to BIM technology.

As seen from the interviews in Denmark some of the barriers experienced were associated with the

small number of companies actually using BIM. As Graabæk at Juul|Frost points out, this has limited

the potentials for collaboration between different disciplines (Graabæk, 2009). The same fact has

also been experienced by Pihl where many of the company’s collaborative partners are following the

development towards BIM on a slow pace, thus decreasing the company’s possibilities to exchange

BIM data (Asklund & Johansen, 2009).

The results presented in Figure 16 do also suggest that Icelandic companies are only using these

possibilities to a very limited extent. In order to be fully able to use the benefits of BIM by sharing

knowledge and reuse information, companies should perhaps consider forming sort of Design‐Build

alliances with other interested partners. That way the participating companies would have greater

possibilities to exploit the possibilities inherent with BIM technology.

6.2.4 Is now the right time?

In the author’s opinion, the short answer is yes.

The more detailed answer is to say that first now, it is the right time to implement changes in the

Icelandic building industry. The construction market has been in a great expansion the last few years

and there was a general requirement in the market that design and construction of building should

take as short time as possible. The time pressure was high and there was a large demand for new

buildings. Maybe therefore, companies did not show any interest in developing new working

procedures – they were doing fine by the time and there was no reason for them to risk falling

behind by means of productivity by making some experiments with new techniques. Now, when the

demand for new buildings has plummeted, companies might rather have time or will to make some

changes that could prepare them for next period of high demand of new building projects. Then

again, the problem may perhaps be that the lack of new building projects will delay the

implementation, because as previously discussed the implementation really has to be carried out

through real projects. Input from public clients with projects like the previously mentioned slim BIM,

should though give companies a good jump start. When companies have obtained enough

confidence with working with BIM, they might also be in a good position to bid on projects outside

Iceland.



7 Conclusion This research has gone some way towards understanding how the Icelandic building industry can act

in relation with the implementation of BIM technology – based on the experience acquired by the

Danish building industry. Two separated analyses were conducted – one in Iceland and one in

Denmark.

The aim of the Icelandic part of the research was to find out about the current state of ICT usage in

the Icelandic building industry and in particular to find out about the current state of utilization of

BIM technology. To the author’s knowledge, this is the first examination of these matters to be

carried out in Iceland. The Danish part of the research involved a collection of interviews where

representatives from Danish companies and organizations were asked about which challenges they

have had to cope with during their implementation and deployment of BIM technology and about

their view on BIM in general.

Based on the outcome of the two analyses, it was attempted to draw up some lessons for the

Icelandic building industry to learn from, so that the implementation of BIM could be carried out in

Iceland as smoothly as possible.

It became apparent that even though Icelandic companies see themselves to be very well

computerized, the knowledge and the use of BIM and in particular IFC compliant BIM is very little.

The extent of which they use ICT does though indicate that the market is receptive towards

implementing new technologies. In particular, architectural‐ and engineering firms showed interest

in investing in BIM technology.

The implementation of BIM is though not only a matter of implementing new sets of tools or

computer systems, as reflected on in the interviews conducted in Denmark. It really involves a

paradigm shift in the way the building industry works and in the way individual companies work.

Companies will face big challenges in getting their employees to accept new working procedures,

and problems related to collaboration between companies are likely to emerge. The technical part

will of course also be an issue, but as reflected in the analysis, the most difficult part will be related

to the cultural changes within companies and to inform the whole industry about the methodology

of BIM technology.

Companies and authorities in Iceland will need to assign a lot of resources to the project of

implementing BIM technology in order to carry out the transformation in an efficient way. In that

relationship, it must be clear that the benefits will not appear right away and companies will

probably have to accept a temporary decrease in productivity during the period of transformation.

Once BIM thinking has been successfully implemented into company’s culture, and the building

industry has accepted the new way of thinking, one can expect the benefits for the whole industry to

emerge.



As discussed in Chapter 6.1.1, the smallness of the Icelandic market can both be seen as an

advantage and a disadvantage, with regards to implementing BIM on a national level. The drawback

of having such a small market is that it may not have access to the resources needed to drive the

implementation forward, develop the standards needed and to support individual companies in

their own implementation process. This disadvantage could be equilibrated to some point by

establishing cooperation with foreign building authorities, networks and associations, both to work

jointly on developing standards and guidelines, and to establish relationships with companies and

organizations that could share their own experience and knowledge. The advantage of dealing with a

small market is that it is much more flexible than if it were a large one. It should be beneficial

because it means that the industry can react relatively quickly to changes and should therefore need

less time in the transformation phase. It is therefore essential for the implementation process in the

industry to get the key players, the large companies, involved. If that happens, the small players will

most likely follow since it is likely that the large companies will choose cooperating companies based

on their BIM competences.

The Icelandic building industry is currently facing very challenging times due to the economic

situation in the country, and it is actually difficult to tell exactly when it will improve again.

Implementation of BIM technology can be seen as a good way to use the time while the demand for

new building projects is low. Even though the demand is low there will always be some projects to

work on and compared to the last few years when the demand for new buildings was in very high,

this is a good time to make changes and redevelop working processes in a well deliberated way.

As with all such studies, there are limitations that offer opportunities for further research. First of all,

it was necessary to limit the number of interviews conducted in Denmark, due to time pressure.

Secondly, the individuals interviewed are all rather involved in the implementation of BIM, either

within their companies or even on a national level in Denmark. This can result in their answers being

biased to some degree – at least judging from the interviews it is clear that they truly believe that

BIM is the way to go. In order to get a counterbalance in the research it might have been advisable

to get opinions from more employees working on different levels in the organizations. This

imperfection must also be credited to time pressure. As discussed in the end of Chapter 4, the

survey conducted in Iceland was not flawless either but in the author’s opinion it serves its purpose

sufficiently. It would be interesting to repeat the survey within a few years in order to follow the

development of the market.

In accordance with the project formulation, a short list of recommendations for the Icelandic

building industry is presented on next page.



Recommendations for the Icelandic building authorities:

• Increase the general knowledge of BIM through public initiatives. Inform the

building industry about BIM, its features, its advantages and disadvantages. This

must also happen through the educational system. Emphasis must also be put

on the cultural changes followed by BIM – not only the technical matters.

• Consider making of simple building models of existing buildings. Such projects

could serve as a good introduction of BIM technology to the building industry.

• Enter cooperation with the Nordic countries regarding the assembling of

standards and guidelines. Due to its smallness, the Icelandic market has limited

resources to provide all the support needed to facilitate an effective

implementation.

Recommendations for individual organizations:

• Start the implementation of BIM now – but start slowly. Implementing BIM is

much more than just implementing a new software system. A paradigm change

will occur in the way people work and it will take a long time for everyone to

become comfortable with that. Icelandic companies should try to use the time

during an economic recession to rethink their work processes.

• Choose the right pilot projects. Start with simple projects and define a few

subjects at a time to work with. It is easy to get lost by including too many

details at the early levels of the implementation.

• Find the super‐users. They are not necessarily those who are the most

experienced AutoCAD users since old working habits can turn out to be a

barrier. Seek for those who show interest in finding new, more efficient ways of

doing things.

• Seek out cooperation with companies from the Nordic countries. Many

companies in Scandinavia have already acquired experience with using BIM

technology. Establish connections and widen the horizon.

With all things considered, there is a general consensus in the global building market that BIM is the

way towards the future. Whether the Icelandic building industry will take the leap and follow the

development is not disputed ‐ it is only a matter of time.



8 Bibliography

8.1 List of Interviews Asklund, S. P., & Johansen, S. (2009, April 30). (E. I. Jóhannesson, Interviewer) Lyngby, Denmark.

Carstad, M. (2009, May 6). (E. I. Jóhannesson, Interviewer) Copenhagen, Denmark.

Danvold, C. (2009, May 5). (E. I. Jóhannesson, & H. J. Bak, Interviewers) Copenhagen, Denmark.

Graabæk, T. (2009, April 20). (E. I. Jóhannesson, Interviewer) Copenhagen, Denmark.

Hansen, M. (2009, May 4). (E. I. Jóhannesson, Interviewer) Allerød, Denmark.

Karlshøj, J. (2009, May 1). (E. I. Jóhannesson, Interviewer) Lyngby, Denmark.

Klausen, R. (2009, April 30). (E. I. Jóhannesson, Interviewer) Copenhagen, Denmark.



8.2 List of References Beard, J. L., Loulakis, M. C., & Wundram, E. C. (2001). Design‐build: planning through development.

McGraw‐Hill Professional.

bips. (n.d.). bips. Retrieved June 4, 2009, from http://www.bips.dk

bips. (2008). Årets model er en BIMMER!. bips nyt (3), 4.

Birx, G. W. (2005, December). BIM Evokes Revolutionary Changes to Architecture Practice at

Ayers/Saint/Gross. Retrieved June 10, 2009, from AIArchitect:

http://info.aia.org/aiarchitect/thisweek05/tw1209/tw1209changeisnow.cfm

Bryman, A. (2004). Social Research Methods, Second Edition. New York, USA: Oxford University

Press.

BuildingSMART Alliance. (2009). About the National BIM Standard™. Retrieved 05 16, 2009, from

BuildingSMART Alliance: http://www.buildingsmartalliance.org/nbims/about.php

CORENET (2009). Intergrated Plan Checking Systems. Retrieved June 5, 2009, from Corenet:

http://www.corenet.gov.sg

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3, illustrated ed.).

SAGE.

Det Digitale Byggeri. (n.d.). Digital client demands scheme. Retrieved 05 29, 2009, from Digital

Construction: http://digitalconstruction.dk/digital‐client‐demands‐scheme

E. Pihl & Søn A.S. (n.d.). General Information. Retrieved June 15, 2009, from E. Pihl & Søn A.S. :

http://www.pihl‐as.dk/en/presentation/generalinformation.aspx

Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., & Liston, K. (2008). Bim Handbook: A Guide to Building

Information Modeling for Owners, Managers Designers, Engineers, and Contractors. Hoboken, New

Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

EBST. (2005). Digital Construction. Copenhagen: National Agency for Enterprise and Construction.

Erabuild. (2008). Review of the Development and Implementation of IFC compatible BIM. Erabuild.

Forsvarets Bygnings‐ & Etablissementstjeneste. (n.d.). Om os. Retrieved June 15, 2009, from

Forsvarets Bygnings‐ & Etablissementstjeneste:

http://forsvaret.dk/FBE/Om%20FBE/Pages/default.aspx

FSR. (n.d.). Retrieved May 1, 2009, from Framkvæmdasýsla Ríkisins: http://www.fsr.is



Graabæk, T. (2009b). digitaleprodukter.dk på DI Byggematerialers inspirationsdag. (T. Hvidegaard,

Ed.) Retrieved June 15, 2009, from Digitalt Produktkatalog:

http://www.digitaleprodukter.dk/blog/2009/02/digitaleprodukterdk‐pa‐di‐byggemateialers‐

inspirationsdag

Graabæk, T. (2007). Fremtiden er her allerede. bips nyt (3), 8.

Halkjær, L. S., Treldal, N., Jørgensen, M., & Schriver, S. (2009, April). 3D‐modeller på byggepladsen.

HVAC Magasinet .

Hardin, B. (2009). BIM and Construction Management: Proven Tools, Methods, and Workflows. John

Wiley and Sons.

Hou + Partnere Arkitekter A/S. (n.d.). Tegnestuen: Profil. Retrieved July 8, 2009, from Hou + Partnere

Arkitekter A/S: http://www.hou‐partnere.dk/page.asp?sideid=67&zcs=3

IAI Tech International. (n.d.). The IFC Specification . Retrieved July 10, 2009, from IAI Tech

International: http://www.iai‐tech.org/products/ifc_specification

Jernigan, F. (2007). BIG BIM little bim. 4Site Press.

Jespersen, J. M. (2008). Det Digitale Byggeri. In H. B. 2008, Håndbog For Bygningsindustrien 2:2

Opslag. Ballerup, Denmark: HFB Byggecentrum.

Juul|Frost Arkitekter. (n.d.). Information in English. Retrieved June 15, 2009, from Juul|Frost

Arkitekter: http://www.juulfrost.dk/dk/nyhedsarkiv/juulfrostarkitekter.infoenglish.php

Karlshøj, J. (2008). BIM og IFC er vejen frem. bips nyt (2), 6.

Karlsson, Þ. (2003). Spurningakannanir: Uppbygging, orðalag og hættur. In S. Halldórsdóttir, & K.

Kristjánsson, Handbók í aðferðafræði og rannsóknum í heilbrigðisvísindum. Akureyri, Iceland:

Háskólinn á Akureyri.

Lerche, C. (2007, January 16). Formålet med Det Digitale Byggeri. From a speech at Statens

Byggeforskningsinstitut 30. November 2006 . Det Digitale Byggeri.

Madsen, M. L., & Grønbæk, M. (2007). E‐surveys. In P. B. Olsen, P. Hagedorn‐Rasmussen, & L.

Fuglsang, Teknikker i samfundsvidenskaberne. Frederiksberg, Denmark: Roskilde Universitetsforlag.

Neumann, S. (2009). Digitalt byggeri og de bløde værdier. Retrieved June 2, 2009, from Det Digitale

Byggeri: http://detdigitalebyggeri.dk/content/view/469/494/

Niras A/S. (n.d.). Hvem er vi. Retrieved June 15, 2009, from Niras:

http://www.niras.dk/About_NIRAS/Hvem_er_vi.aspx



Rambøll Danmark A/S. (n.d.). Om os. Retrieved June 15, 2009, from Rambøll Danmark :

http://www.ramboll.dk/about%20us.aspx

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2007). Research methods for business students. Pearson

Education.

Schutt, R. K. (2006). Investigating the social world: the process and practice of research. Pine Forge

Press.

Slots‐ og Ejendomsstyrelsen. (2009, February 13). About us: The Agency's Tasks. Retrieved June 15,

2009, from Slots‐ og Ejendomsstyrelsen : http://www.ses.dk/en/OmOs/styrelsensopgaver.aspx

Smith, D. K., & Tardif, M. (2009). Building Information Modeling: A Strategic Implementation Guide

for Architects, Engineers, Constructors, and Real Estate Asset Managers. John Wiley and Sons.

Statens Fastighetsverk. (2005). NKS Konferens 2005. Retrieved June 20, 2009, from Statens

Fastighetsverk: http://www.sfv.se/cms/sfv/english/accessibility/NKS_Konferens_2005.html

Strong, N. (2006). changeisnow. Retrieved June 15, 2009, from AIArchitect:

http://info.aia.org/aiarchitect/thisweek05/tw0909/tw0909bp_bim.cfm

Universitets‐ og Bygningsstyrelsen. (2008, September 16). About the Danish University and Property

Agency. Retrieved June 15, 2009, from Universitets‐ og Bygningsstyrelsen: http://www.ubst.dk/en

Valdimarsson, Ó. (2008). Upplýsingalíkön í mannvirkjagerð ‐ Kynning á hugmyndafræði og stöðu

innleiðingar í nokkrum löndum. Reykjavík, Iceland: Framkvæmdasýsla Ríkisins.

Young, N., Jones, S., & Bernstein, H. M. (2008). Building Information Modeling (BIM): Transforming

Design and Construction to Achieve Greater Industry Productivity. New York, USA: McGraw Hill

Construction.



A. Appendixes A.1. Survey: Cover Letter........................................................................................................... 100

A.2. Survey: List of Questions .................................................................................................... 101

A.3. Interview Guide ................................................................................................................. 109

A.4. Interview Summaries ......................................................................................................... 111

A.4.1. Juul | Frost Arkitekter................................................................................................. 112

A.4.2. Hou + Partnere Arkitekter .......................................................................................... 118

A.4.3. Niras A/S .................................................................................................................... 123

A.4.4. Rambøll Danmark A/S ................................................................................................ 128

A.4.5. E. Pihl & Søn A.S. ........................................................................................................ 132

A.4.6. Slots‐ og Ejendomsstyrelsen, SES ................................................................................ 137

A.4.7. Universitets‐ og bygningsstyrelsen, UBST ................................................................... 141



A.1. Survey: Cover Letter



A.2. Survey: List of Questions



A.3. Interview Guide

Questions about the implementation of BIM in your company

Why did your company implement BIM in the first place? Keywords:

Requirements from client Own initiative Influence from DDB

How extensive has your BIM implementation been so far? Keywords:

Are there any fields that BIM has not been usable? Pilot project / total implementation – evolution?

Can you describe for me the implementation process? Keywords:

How were staff motivated / educated New form of project teams? Strategy Top level management involved Hiring of consultants Restructuring of contractual agreements (IKT Aftale) Choice of software and systems All staff members involved? Education Competences

The company‘s experience from working with BIM

What do you recon as the main barriers for the implementation of BIM in the industry? Keywords:

Interoperability Legal issues Lack of standards Collaboration Exclusion of smaller companies Model components Not everyone is involved Pro‐trainers are novices Speed of development

What types of barriers has your company encountered while implementing BIM? Keywords:

Initial fear of the new technology Software learning curves / education Support from company leadership Support from operational staff: The old methods are still working Initial investment cost Change in the organisational culture



Software/hardware issues Time pressure hinders changes Time consuming transformation

Benefits for the industry / company/organisation: Keywords:

Analyses Reuse of information Collaboration Evaluation of benefits

Changes in the industry followed by the implementation of BIM Keywords:

Collaboration Communication with the building authorities /code checking Anything surprising

Future development in the industry / company / organisation

Background questions

When did your company first participate in a BIM project?

How many BIM projects has your company participated in?

About the interviewee

Short questions intended to locate the interviewee within the company / organization.

Name:

Current position:

Time at the company:

Time in current position:

Experience from other companies:



A.4. Interview Summaries Summaries from the interviews conducted in Denmark are available in next pages.



A.4.1. Juul | Frost Arkitekter

Company: Juul|Frost Arkitekter

Company Branch Architecture

Interview conducted: Monday 20th of April 2009 at 10:00 – 11:00

Interview location: At Juul|Frost Arkitekter ‐ Refshalevej 147, 1432 Copenhagen

Interviewer: Elvar Ingi Jóhannesson

Interviewee: Thomas Graabæk

Personal Information Name: Thomas Graabæk, Architect MAA.

Current position: Architect. Has responsibility for visualisation department and is a leader of BIM

implementation in the company.

Time at the company: 6 years.

Experience from other companies: None – started at J|F right after study.

Company Background with regards to BIM Juul | Frost Arkiteker was founded in 1983. It is an architectural company with approximately 30

employees. The company’s expertise is within architecture, urban planning and landscape

architecture.

The company participated in its first BIM project in 2006. Since then, the company has participated

in a number of BIM projects, though only one of their BIM projects has been completed so far. On

the whole, about 50% of the projects carried out at Juul | Frost are performed in BIM.

Summary

Why did your company implement BIM in the first place? The company implemented BIM relatively early, in relation with DDB. 3D visualisation had been a

fundamental part of the company for some time when a client came and required that a certain

building project should be modelled in a technical 3D model. It was a big project with many different

consultants, and it had to be possible all the project time to take measures of various things such as

area, size of door holes etc. The company had to try to find out how to do this, and it found out quite

soon that BIM would be the solution. Current 3D methods would not be able to support the needed

collaboration with other consultants.



Thus, the implementation was basically caused by requirements from a client, rather than anything

else. „Det Digitale Byggeri“ was not in effect yet and the top management had not had any initiatives

earlier to implement BIM.

Some employees had been pointing out for some years that the current working methods were such

that everything was done in 2D and then a 3D model was produced from that. It should rather be

done the other way around. But the top management didn‘t show interest until the requirements

came from the client.

How extensive has the implementation been so far? When asked about how extensive the BIM implementation has been so far, it is a bit hard to say. Up

to 50% of projects are performed in BIM, but 2D projects are still carried out. The company is

however heading towards a total BIM implementation but it is still not known when the company

will be able to stop doing 2D projects. Landscaping projects are for example sometimes still made in

2D, since it is very extensive to do such projects with BIM technology.

The company strives to do as much in BIM software as possible. In its first BIM project it was decided

to do the detailing in scale 1:10 or 1:20 in traditional manner, i.e. with 2D drafting, but now, after

the first project, the company does actually perform all the detailing within the BIM software.

Everything we do down to ... 1:50, we do in BIM and the detailing in 1:10 or 1:20 we

do in AutoCAD. ... And then we found out that it is actually easier also to do the

detailing within the BIM software.

The implementation process Moving to the implementation process, how were employees motivated? Were all staff members

involved?

The employees who were supposed to start working with BIM they were picked by

the management. It was not something they signed up by themselves to do. It was

tried to find somebody who was technical on a high level and seemed to know

something about 3D. So we picked out 7 people and gave them 3 day course in BIM.

Then they started working finally. And very fast we found out that some of them

were just not good enough for this. Some of them had 15 years of experience to

AutoCAD and then it is very difficult to change software, no matter whether it is 2D

or 3D or whatever it is. It is not AutoCAD and it is very difficult to change. And some

people were not comfortable in leading position when they had to try out new

frontiers and had to help other people with something they did not quite understand

the whole concept of. So we have to take some employees of and put them back on

2D projects because they were actually working against the whole process. ... The



technical side of change into BIM is actually pretty easy but the human resource part

is very difficult.

For some people the transition has been painful, but for other it has been very easy. It has also been

experienced that some employees that were not put on BIM projects would very much like to be

working on one:

…and then we found out that some people that was not actually put on BIM projects,

they would like to be on one, and then they got their education by them self, just

testing. So, some learn very fast and do not want to go back to 2D and some people

have very difficult to change and then when they have a hard deadline pushing them,

they fall back to 2D. So even though they were on a 3D project, they said „oh, I don‘t

have time to do this facade so I have to draw it in 2D“. And that hurts the process so

much.

It is important that no one works in 2D in a 3D project:

We chosen that the architect [should be] in charge of the project – it is his

responsibility that nobody does 2D in a 3D project, no matter what, because

otherwise we‘re going to use a lot of time.

Choice of software: It took about a half year to choose BIM software. IFC was the main criteria when

choosing software. Some employees had more experience from Archicad than Revit. Archicad

proved also to be cheaper and it works both on Mac‘s and PC‘s. Seemed to be more of an

architectural tool than engineering tool, thus of more relevance for the company.

The company hired consultants to help them with two things. Choosing BIM software and forming

their first CAD contract (d. IKT aftale). The company sees the contract as very powerful tool and it

therefore strives to get the responsibility of making it in all projects.

...it is a very powerful position to be in.

Involvement of top management:

Before the client asked us to do it, the management did not care at all [about BIM].

They could see that we were solving potential problems in 2D and they did not see

any reason to do anything else.

When the company had acquired the BIM software and the top management could see what it was

capable of, it became clear to the management that BIM was the way to go.



When the company started doing BIM it had a vision of a year and a half of transition time until all

design would be performed in BIM. It has however taken longer time, e.g. because some employees

needed longer time to become acquainted with BIM.

The main barriers for the implementation of BIM for the industry I would say the biggest problem is that so few companies are doing BIM right now

and the companies that are doing BIM are perhaps doing 50% BIM. So when we

choose an engineer [company], and often we do not choose them, the client chooses

[it] for us, but when we choose it is very often that the collaboration will be 2D. And

there are almost no clients that ask us for new BIM project. We can try to highlight

the great things about the BIM process but they just want a house that works, the

clients do not really care about the technique. So often we are exchanging in 2D and

we are delivering 2D projects to the client even though we use our BIM software to

get that.

The company is therefore mainly doing BIM for themselves but the potentials for collaboration

between project actors are not employed to any extent. And that is clearly a barrier.

What about interoperability issues?

The IFC format is the only BIM format that is cross‐platform and IFC format is very

limited – it is a great format but it is very limited.

When exchanging in IFC format, the more or less only thing that is being exchanged is the 3D model.

Underlying 2D sheets, line types, texts are not included.

Some software companies do put IFC‐stamps on their products, but when these IFC features are

being utilized they do not always work properly. And that can cause serious problems when

exchanging data between collaboration partners.

It is however a good thing that the Danish building authorities have made a requirement to use the

IFC format in public building projects.

The main barriers of implementing BIM within the company The main barrier is related to human resources. It is difficult for busy employees to find time to gain

competences with new working methods. If they do, it is also difficult for them to use the new tools,

because they are more efficient when working with the old working methods. It is therefore

necessary to give the employees time to get used to the new tools, but it can of course be difficult

when the employees are working on a tight time schedule.

The transition period, when both 2D and 3D working methods are being used in different projects, is

also a critical factor.



It is therefore very difficult to match the projects with the employees and the client‘s

wishes and the economy – that whole thing is the big problem. Using the software is

easy.

The initial investment cost does not necessarily have to be a great barrier. The company did not have

any BIM software beforehand, but it was decided not to look at the price of the software.

Only few licences were bought – only 3 licences at first. And that is actually a lot for

one project, even though up to 6 people are working on the project, there is always

someone at meetings, writing emails, being sick and so on. Now, the company has 8

licences and there are often up to 20 people working on BIM projects.

By manipulating the investment in such a way, the investment cost does not become a burden.

The main benefits of using BIM for the industry There are opportunities in improving coordination in designing buildings. An example of that is when

creating 3D models from 2D drawings in traditional manners, it happens many times that plan

drawings and section drawings do not match. With BIM procedures, this source of errors is

eliminated.

What about size of projects? Do projects have to be of a certain size so that using BIM becomes

beneficial?

Actually, I think that the smaller the size of the project is the benefits become bigger.

TG thinks that small projects benefit from BIM, but it is also easier to use BIM on small projects. Big

projects demand many people using the same models, and they have often more complex geometry

and solutions.

This is interesting because the requirements of DDB imply exactly the opposite. TG believes that DDB

is afraid of pushing small companies out of work, and he thinks that the small companies are often in

a better position to change its working methods ‐ small companies with small projects will benefit

the most.

The main benefits of using BIM for the company Making quick sketching in BIM is very beneficial. But it is necessary to know the BIM tools to do so.

Complex architecture, e.g. with many round shapes, might though rather be done in specific

sketching programs.

It has not been tried to evaluate the benefits of BIM for the company. But in the first BIM project

made in the company, it was monitored how much extra time employees used for “struggling” with

the new software. The results from that project were that the extra effort put into the project was



equivalent to the work contribution of one employee for two weeks. Today, the company thinks that

using BIM technology in projects is not less efficient than using traditional methods.

But the company does not always use all the benefits available from BIM projects.

The changes in the industry, followed by BIM I think the biggest change is that everybody have realized that this is the way they

are going.“ „I haven‘t heard anybody saying „We don‘t think that we are going to do

3D – we are sticking to 2D.“ And that‘s what it is all about.

There is much more awareness in the industry about that BIM is the way to go.

It is surprising that designers are doing 2D projects in 3D software.

Future development of BIM The building models will be used to a greater extent. They will for example be used more to check

whether buildings are meeting regulation requirements, and to do all kinds of energy and climate

calculations. Based on such analyses, models can be altered to increase the proposed building’s

efficiency.



A.4.2. Hou + Partnere Arkitekter

Company: Hou + Partnere Arkitekter

Company Branch Architecture

Interview conducted: Thursday 30th of April 2008 at 9:00 – 10:00

Interview location: At Hou + Partnere – Adelgade 15, 1304 Copenhagen


Interviewee: Rasmus Klausen (RK)

Personal Information Name: Rasmus Klausen

Current position: Co‐owner, building constructor, responsible for IT department.

Time at the company: 8 years

Experience from other companies: None.

Company Background Hou + Partnere Arkitekter A/S was founded in 1986. It is a relatively small company with around 25

employees. Its primary clients are larger companies, professional building clients, pension funds,

state clients and municipalities.

The company first participated in a BIM project in 2004. Overall, it has participated in approximately

ten BIM projects.

Summary

Why did your company implement BIM in the first place? The company had experienced some problems with the procurement of building projects, e.g.

because of building‐related errors. The company did also want to get a better overview over its

building projects. It saw the implementation of BIM as the best way to reach this objective.

The use of BIM models does also include other benefits, such as it becomes easier to fulfil the

client‘s wishes and making various economical analyses.

Therefore, it can be said that the company implemented BIM based on own initiative, i.e. it was the

company‘s own desire to improve their quality of work and improve the quality of their service. The

Digital Construction initiative was therefore not a defining factor for the company.



The company was a participant in an initiative called Digital Projektplanlægning. It was an initiative

planned to run in parallel with DDB.

How extensive has your BIM implementation been so far? Hou+Partnere do not use BIM in all of their projects. When the firm takes decision about whether to

use BIM or not, it is looked at how BIM can increase the project’s value. Utilization of BIM can

sometimes be a requirement from the client, even though it is still rare. But if no requirement of BIM

utilization is presented from external sources it is up to the company to determine whether BIM

does increase the value of the project. Factors, such as geometrical complexity and size, are for

example of interest – if the geometry of the proposed building is complex, then it is more likely that

the project can benefit from BIM utilization.

RK is confident of that the size of building projects is a defining factor for a beneficial usage of BIM. It

is maybe difficult to use the price tag of projects to determine whether to use BIM or not. He does

not believe that his company would utilize BIM in small maintenance projects.

The work structure in BIM is different. More time and efforts are put into the initial phases of a

building project and on the contrary, not as much time is needed for preparing the project for

tendering. However, RK estimates that his company uses more time in BIM projects that in

traditional projects – but if they believe BIM can contribute to the project, they are ready to sacrifice

this extra amount of time to obtain a more valuable product.

RK puts emphasize on that the benefits for the company from working with BIM are not necessarily

measurable in terms of revenues. The company’s experience is rather that their collaboration

partners, such as consulting engineers, contractors and the clients, are more satisfied with their

work and are therefore more likely to be willing to make business with them again.

The implementation process The first step of the implementation of BIM in the company was that there were some employees at

the company that had interest in trying out these new modelling techniques. An internal group was

formed where these employees shared their experience and learning. The knowledge gained in the

group was then spread around in the company. This work revolved around ADT (AutoCad

Architectural Desktop).

Now, the company is facing a new transformation phase, where employees need to get acquainted

with database‐oriented software (Revit). For that purpose, the company has chosen a certain project

of a school building to serve as a pilot project.

Three groups of employees: Super‐users, users and non‐users (they still have to have the knowledge

about what is possible to do with BIM and what is not. This type of users is typically project leaders).



Not everyone in the company is involved in the implementation process in its first phase. The

experience from the pilot project will be evaluated and then spread out to more projects.

In relation to the pilot project, the company has got into cooperation with a “Task force” group,

which involves consultants from Teknologisk Institut and members from an external architectural

firm and an engineering firm. This group provides feedback and consultancy to the project team

within the company in this particular pilot project.

The top management has been involved in this process the whole time. The management has

decided that BIM is the way to go.

It is also necessary to keep in mind that a company like this has a large group of employees that are

very skilled in AutoCad and traditional design. By switching suddenly to BIM, this group of people

does have a large amount of skills and experience which is basically obsolete when dealing with

database‐oriented design programs.

Choice of software: Autocad has been fundamental at the company for a long time. ADT was taken

naturally – it was seen as an easy way to go back to AutoCad if ADT would not work out as expected.

When the company started to look into database‐oriented design software, it looked into Revit and

Archicad. Revit was chosen, partly because it was very spread in Denmark, partly because of

economical reasons, partly because the dwg‐format has been the de facto standard in Denmark.

Detail level: It has not been decided yet how the detail level will be handled in the company. In the

school project (currently being working on), some part of the detailing will be made in Revit, but the

larger part will be done in AutoCad, partly because the company does still have very good

competences to detail in 2D‐environment.

The main barriers for the implementation of BIM for the industry It is always the question: “What is in it for me?” By looking at the matter in short terms, the benefits

are maybe not clear. Not all will benefit. The industry must therefore look further into the future.

It is a constant flow of new standards and guidelines. It is complex material and it can be frustrating

for the employees to follow it. Employees at an architectural firm are in general very creative and

have a desire to work on creative projects. They may not necessarily have a comprehensive

knowledge of databases and standards, and to their perception it can therefore seem to be

complicated.

It is also a problem if a group of consultants sits down and only a minority of them has a desire to

use BIM.

The main barriers of implementing BIM within the company There are problems for example with employees which are not content about working with the new

technology. The workforce can be divided into three groups. First, there is a group that have great



enthusiasm in BIM, then there is a group of people who are interested in the new technique and

finally there is a group that does not have any interests in this development.

This is a small company and it does not have resources to train to become BIM‐masters. The

transformation and the development towards BIM must therefore take place in the projects

themselves. It would of course be optimal to create a task group within the company with the aim to

develop BIM knowledge and standards within the company, but a small company like this does not

have the resources to support such a group.

Initial investment cost is clearly a barrier. On the other hand one should keep in mind that the

software is the designer’s tool to create value. It is of course a big investment, but it has not been a

big barrier for the company. The company needs these tools anyway to develop itself and keep its

competitiveness.

Getting inspirations from external sources is also a vital part in the implementation. Current

employees attend network meetings where experience of BIM is shared among companies.

The main benefits of using BIM for the industry BIM helps consultants to deliver the service they have agreed to provide. It is a tool that can make it

easier to interpret how the proposed building will look like. Will the building be of the certain quality

that the client has wished for? Will the project be carried out within the proposed time frame or

within the proposed economical frame? BIM touches with many of the fields where the building

industry is experiencing problems. However, it shall not be expected that all the problems will

disappear but it will probably be possible to deliver projects of a higher quality.

BIM makes it easier for the client to visualize what he may expect.

The main benefits of using BIM for the company A happy client is more likely to do a business again. BIM technology can help the company to deliver

a higher quality projects. Thus, the client is more likely to get a positive image of the consultants

and is therefore more likely to be willing to do business with him again.

The company has experienced that BIM‐oriented projects have proved to go well.

The company has tried to evaluate the benefits in a quantitative way. They have a software that

keeps track of how much time individual phases of a project use.

The changes in the industry, followed by BIM BIM is not particularly spread in the industry yet. There are many companies that are not following

this development. One of the things that will change is in the field of digital products. There are very

few material providers that provide BIM‐objects. There will be great changes in the material

fabricant’s market.



The company has not yet experienced great interest from the contractors’ side in utilizing BIM. But

this will change in the near future. It is always the consultants that make the tendering documents.

There is a potential with the BIM technology to change this by involving the contractors more in this

action.



A.4.3. Niras A/S

Company: Niras A/S

Company Branch: Consulting Engineers

Interview conducted: Monday 4th of May at 10:00 – 11:30

Interview location: At Niras – Sortemosevej 2, 3450 Allerød


Interviewee: Mikkel Hansen (MH)

Personal Information Name: Mikkel Hansen

Current position: BIM Manager. Has responsibility of making BIM and CAD more common and easier

for the users within the company to adopt.

Time at the company: 2,5 years.

Experience from other companies: Has experience from carpeting practice.

Company Background Niras is a consulting engineering company, founded in 1956 with approximately 1200 employees.

Niras has been working with BIM thinking for approximately 10 years. But extensive use of BIM and

its possibilities has been going on for about two years.

Summary

Why did your company implement BIM in the first place? The company does not see BIM as a concept that can be implemented all at once in the whole

company. It is tried to evaluate for each project the potentials and the possible benefits of

implementing various aspects of BIM.

BIM is the future and the company wants to deliver better buildings, e.g. by means of improved

coordination, thus providing a better service. The company wants to deliver information for the

whole lifetime of the building.

The implementation of BIM is being carried out due to own initiative. The company is affected of Det

Digitale Byggeri by some means, but MH thinks that they are not pushing the limits. The standards

and requirements from DDB are not so hard to reach and the company wants to go further. In this



relation, BIPS are on the right track, but it might take some time to get all the relevant actors to

agree on the standards. DBK is for example not very developed yet.

How extensive has the implementation been so far? The company has established a workgroup called the “BIM Lab”. From there it is tried to look at each

project and see which disciplines could benefit of using BIM – see how BIM can add value to the

project. So BIM is not being implemented in the whole organisation at once.

The BIM Lab has also a responsibility to educate the employees of Niras and tell them how they can

move the processes on.

There is a balance between 2D detailing and modelling in BIM. Right now, details are generally made

with traditional methods and the model is kept stripped of details, but it is clear that the company is

heading to detailing in BIM.

The implementation process They key idea is to implement BIM in small steps. The company wants to integrate BIM on site but it

wants to do in a manner so the users can really benefit from it right from the start. There is no rush

in the implementation process.

Motivation of employees:

BIM is supposed to be fun.

The BIM lab at Niras has a responsibility to motivate staff at the company to use BIM. This includes

to “sell” the idea of BIM to the company’s own project leaders. All participants of a project must

agree on working with BIM in certain disciplines (such as climate calculations, visualisation and

collision control). The whole project must revolve around the BIM and the building model, but the

main goals must be defined beforehand. The goals are chosen with regards to how BIM can

contribute most value to the project, e.g. climate calculations, visualisation or collision control.

The BIM lab tries to avoid buying external consultants to help them with BIM. MH believes that the

company has all the competences needed but if they happen to get into troubles with their

software, they try to contact the software retailer. But their support functions are not always of a

great help, because there is a great difference between working in the field and working on selling

some products.

But the BIM Lab does more than only motivating and teaching employees about BIM. They call them

self IT and process developing and they are managing many areas which are not so related to BIM,

e.g. CAD support and implementation of various kinds of software.

The formation of the implementation strategy lies largely on the shoulders of the BIM Lab. So the

decision of implementing BIM is not derived from the top management. The BIM Lab has the



responsibility to develop and implement BIM within the company – make it visible to the top

management.

The main barriers for the implementation of BIM Niras is a company with about 1200 employees. Of those employees, only 5 (those working at the

BIM lab) do really want the implementation of BIM to happen. The rest is a bit sceptical. The biggest

challenge is to convince the company itself about implementing BIM. It must happen before the

customers of the company can be convinced about these new working techniques.

When talking about collaboration with other companies: There are many actors on the market that

are not ready yet – they have simply not started working with the BIM technology and are still only

working with 2D drawings. But those who have started are willing to share their work and share

their models. And that is what BIM is about – it is about communicating better.

When Niras was about to start using BIM and was asking how they should do it, they were told not

to think too much about the methods, rather just start doing it, since it is a whole new way of

thinking.

BIM can be relevant to all projects, no matter what size the project is. MH thinks that the

visualisation possibilities inherent with modelling with BIM technology are of great interest in any

project:

Nothing tells the story better than visualization.

Niras has put great efforts into visualisation and developing new ways of presenting information.

The company’s product is knowledge, and visualisation is a powerful tool to share information – a

picture says more than thousand words.

When asked about whether small or big companies are in a better position to implement BIM, MH

says that small companies are naturally more flexible and are therefore maybe in a good position to

transform faster than large companies. The problem is on the other hand that small companies do

often not have the resources (time and money) they need. Therefore, it might be a risk of small

companies being excluded from building projects – it will be hard to avoid that.

The cultural shift is a large barrier within the company. Comments like “we have always been doing

our things in certain way, why change?” are frequent. It is therefore necessary to think in longer

terms and get all employees to do so.

The project leaders are also a barrier, because it is still difficult to convince them to use BIM in their

projects – what they are most interested in is whether the project will be profitable or not. They are

therefore less interested in implementing relatively new, unknown techniques to their projects

which increases the uncertainty in their projects.



The initial investment cost followed by the implementation is also definitely a barrier for the

company.

It is very important to be able to tell the employees of the company and the company’s clients that

no project with BIM thinking being utilized has gone wrong, in terms of cost, quality etc.

When the building market is in a recession Niras tries to use the time to transform its work

processes, thus using its own resources to pay. That way, Niras tries to make its product more

attractive and gain extra competitiveness that will become of use when the building market will start

rolling again.

The main benefits of using BIM One of the most interesting things is that:

It can actually be fun to do the work we do today.

BIM has the potential of people going down the same track, not just internally but also generally in

the building industry. Thus, everyone is speaking the same language.

Visualisation is the most basic thing in BIM. Niras’ experience is that their users can actually see what

Niras are producing – not only flat 2D drawings. It is a great tool to present the work to the client.

The possibilities of being able to reuse information from other disciplines are very much dependent

on the software available. Architects are, in MH opinion, the most progressive business in using the

BIM technology, and looking at the software, e.g. Revit, the architectural part is the most developed

one. The structural part of Revit is considerably less developed and finally, the MEP part, which takes

on installations and building services, is the least developed one. But the migration of these different

disciplines is a very positive thing.

The changes in the industry, followed by BIM Regarding this, MH says:

We have the chance with BIM to go down the same track, to gather around

something. And I think that creating a commitment across a business in the industry

can be one of the best things that happened to the building industry for centuries...

There is a change to be more effective and productive with the BIM thinking. It is necessary to get

away from thinking about the initial building cost all the time – the whole life time of the building

must be taken into consideration as early as in the design phase. BIM thinking can contribute

significantly to that goal.

The government does not always look for the lowest construction price anymore. It looks rather into

the most effective solution with regards to the whole life cycle of the building.



Future development of BIM There are great opportunities to develop BIM further – it will be a continuous development for a

long time. The development will probably not be very fast, as has been the experience from the

development of CAD systems – they are more or less the same as they were decades ago.



A.4.4. Rambøll Danmark A/S

Company: Rambøll Danmark A/S

Company Branch Consulting Engineers

Interview conducted: Friday 1st of May at 10:00 – 11:00

Interview location: At DTU, Building 118, 2800 Lyngby


Interviewee: Jan Karlshøj (JK)

Personal Information Name: Jan Karlshøj

Current position: Responsible for the use of CAD on national level. He has also worked as a chief

consultant in some design projects.

Time at the company: Since 2002.

Experience from other companies: Worked for almost 10 years at Carl Bro before joining Rambøll.

First starting as a structural designer but later becoming responsible for CAD use in the company.

Company Background The first project where all the disciplines of Rambøll were using 3D model based tools was in 2006.

The steel structural department of Rambøll has however been using BIM tools for about 10 years.

Globally, Rambøll has used BIM tools in several hundreds of projects.

Summary

Why did your company implement BIM in the first place? The background goes back to 1998. The company was using 2D drafting systems, e.g. AutoCAD and

some company specific systems.

The implementation of BIM began purely from a business perspective. BIM was implemented in

order to improve the revenues. The implementation started because people saw business

opportunities in it. So the implementation of BIM had already begun before DDB was initiated.

How extensive has the implementation been so far? A several hundred employees have been trained to work with BIM tools. All major projects are now

done in BIM tools. The structural systems and some of the building servicing systems of buildings are

made with BIM tools.



In some projects structures are modelled down to a very high detail level – individual precast

elements or even nuts and bolts. But sometimes only the major components are modelled. This

depends.

The implementation process The top management has supported the implementation of BIM, which is very necessary. Generally,

it has not been necessary to force people to use BIM, at least not on a group level. Some people

have been trained by software providers. Then, internal courses have been conducted. When people

need to use certain software they haven’t used before they have been for example been put on a 2

day course in how to use that particular software. Most of this training has taken place at the head

office of Rambøll, because it has the critical mass of employees and resources to support such

training. If employees from some of the smaller offices around the country needed BIM training,

they would be transferred to the head office or regional offices (such as Odense, Aarhus and

Aalborg) for a short period of time to work on such a project. The implementation of BIM has been a

part of the company’s strategy for some years.

The main barriers for the implementation of BIM for the industry The biggest problem is:

Lack of knowledge of the benefits.

There are also problems on different levels, e.g. people are not trained, software is not perfect and

exchange of data between different software can be problematic.

On cross‐company basis there are business problems related to risk management and the

consideration of who shall take responsibility of coordinating a project.

There is also risk of small companies being excluded from the market. On the other hand, there are

also success stories from small companies around. Some of the smaller architectural companies in

Denmark have been able to implement this technology.

Asked about whether projects need to be of a certain size so that utilization of BIM will become

beneficial, JK thinks that it depends on the skills and the toolset of the designer. At Rambøll, BIM has

not been used in some of its smallest projects. In renovation projects, where no 3D model is

available of the existing building, it is still too time consuming to employ the BIM technology.

The main barriers of implementing BIM within the company There have been some technical issues (e.g. related to data transfer). Often it is difficult to work with

other companies, which e.g. do not use compatible software. It has also been a challenge getting

the contractors to use the information from the model.

The total cost of tools and training and lack of productivity (you have to accept a certain time span of

lower productivity) can be a barrier. What JK is really saying is, that for a large company, like



Rambøll, the investment cost is not a huge barrier, because the transformation is taken in little steps

and the lost productivity has only an effect in small scale, compared to the total work done in the

company. The gained experiences with the new systems counter that effect of the lost productivity

to some extent. Thus, whether the initial investment cost is a barrier or not, it depends on the

implementation strategy.

The main benefits of using BIM for the industry There are great potentials, but lack of information exchange between project partners is hindering

some of the benefits.

In JK opinion, working with BIM can lead to fewer mistakes and better quality buildings.

The client can better understand how the building looks, due to good visualisation possibilities.

But the benefits of BIM are today still very much related to geometry.

The main benefits of using BIM for the company At Rambøll, it is an understanding that projects made with BIM are more time consuming during the

early stages and less time consuming in the latter stages. But the overall design period is more or

less the same.

The main benefits are during the construction phase, that there are fewer problems. With BIM it is

easier to communicate to the contractors how the proposed building shall look like or how the

project should be executed. This means that the consultant does not have to use as much time

during the construction to explain and/or overlook the processes being carried out on the site:

The construction on site is more smooth than without the use of these kinds of tools.

Rambøll has not really tried to evaluate the benefits followed by the implementation of BIM. But the

company is actually running some initiatives to do that, e.g. to evaluate by means of time

consumption. One problem is that some people make too detailed model on too early stage which

makes it difficult to make changes. But this is also related to the tools – the tools are made for

detailed design. Rambøll has made some internal guidelines about how models should be

constructed.

The changes in the industry, followed by BIM There is higher awareness in the industry, still mainly among architects and engineers. It has become

much more common that companies are using BIM tools. But contractors are also jumping in. On the

client side we have to wait to see some more process. JK says:

Being a part of making these requirements and so forth, I might be biased by that,

but I certainly see a change compared to some years ago.



It is however difficult to tell whether this change is due to “Det Digitale Byggeri” initiative because

this is also probably due to a worldwide trend towards digital working methods.

Future development of BIM The future development of BIM will be at least in two areas. First, BIM will be integrated to a greater

extent internally in companies. Secondly, sharing of data between companies will increase.

From a business perspective, there will for example be a development in aspects taking on

contractual matters and payments for different activities. It must be taken care of that those who

add value to a building project do get paid in accordance with their input.

Looking at the organizational level, the aim will be to increase the usage of BIM and use it in more

intelligent way.

It might not be so good idea to have too country‐specific rules because most of the software is

produced outside Denmark and it is difficult for actors in the Danish market to have an impact on

the development of that.



A.4.5. E. Pihl & Søn A.S.

Company: E. Pihl & Søn A.S.

Company Branch General Contractor

Interview conducted: Thursday 30th of April at 14:00 – 15:00

Interview location: At Pihl & Son’s – Nybrovej 116, 2800 Lyngby


Interviewee: Susanne Piil Asklund (SPA) and Stefan Johansen (SJ)

Personal Information Name: Susanne Piil Asklund

Current position: Project lead in the department of development. Works mainly with development

projects internally in the company.

Time at the company: Since 1999.

Time in the current position: 1,5 years.

Name: Stefan Johansen

Current position: Project leader, working on the implementation of BIM.


Company Background The company has been using 3D models for about 4 years. But in the last year or so, the company

has been putting more emphasis on utilizing the possibilities of building information models. There

are currently three projects being designed with BIM technology at the company. Building models

are also being used in a few construction projects which are currently being executed.

Summary

Why did your company implement BIM in the first place? Pihl´s activities can be divided into two main fields: drafting and executing building projects. BIM is

being implemented into both of these fields at the moment. It has been worked extensively on it for

about a year now. Pihl has started its first BIM projects, partly because of one of its collaboration

partners, Rambøll, which has been an inspiration for the company, but the company does still see

itself as a leading actor in the development towards BIM.



Choice of systems has partly been influenced by the company’s collaborators. The construction part

of the company has chosen Tekla Structures as its main BIM system and the drafting department has

chosen Revit. It is of course crucial for the company that these two systems can easily exchange

data.

To sum up, the implementation is basically being done due to the company’s own initiative.

When asked about “Det Digitale Byggeri” initiative, SPA feels that it is mainly directed towards the

consulting engineers and architects. It is not pointed so much towards those working on‐site. DDB

did though also have an influence on Pihl and its implementation.

The implementation process The first step was to look at the market in order to see what kind of software and systems the

company could choose. Pihl did also ask some others who had already started its implementation.

The transformation towards BIM based methods is taken in small steps.

The company chose to start its implementation process at the drafting department but the plan is, in

the long terms, to implement BIM in the work procedures out on‐site, because it is actually there

where the company makes most of its revenues.

It has to be accepted that changing working procedures costs extra time and resources, especially in

the start. On the other hand, it should be possible to see the benefits in a short while.

Motivation of employees can sometimes be a barrier. It is a different understanding from the

younger employees than from the ones who are a bit older. It takes sometimes longer time to

explain what BIM is all about is the employees are a bit older. The motivation of employees is very

much about informing them about the development of these new procedures.

What about education? All employees in SJ’s department have been to a course learning how to use

the structural program Tekla. SJ has additionally been to courses with people from Tekla in Denmark.

He has subsequently taught the rest of the employees at the department about the possibilities of

Tekla. SJ is therefore a kind of a key player in getting his department to know Tekla and know how to

use it. The aim is to get hold of some super‐users which will be able to spread their knowledge

around the company. But the company has also two persons who are working with “staff

development”. It is therefore also a possibility to get them to organise some internal courses about

specific subjects.

But it also costs to change the working procedures from 2D and 3D to BIM. The time needed to

design gets longer, employees need to go to courses and so on. But it is necessary to make an initial

investment in order to be able to exploit the benefits.



However, it is still too early to say whether the transformation towards BIM methods has been a

success. The company has still not completed any project which has been designed with BIM

technology.

The main barriers for the implementation of BIM for the industry One of the barriers is the lack of will to assign the resources needed to drive the transformation

forward. It is a general resistance to changes. It is challenging to convince project leaders on site to

put extra resources on projects, because it costs money.

Time pressure is also a barrier. Even though many new things, processes and methods are being

tried out in a project, the project time must be the same. It is difficult to educate employees in new

methods at the same time as the project is being carried out.

It is difficult to combine experimenting with new procedures and improved quality. It is inherently

adverse.

Another barrier is that many of Phil’s collaboration partners, such as some smaller companies (sub‐

contractors) have not come as far in the development as Pihl. They may possibly catch up in 2 years,

5 years or maybe not at all.

It is necessary to have some shared standards to work with. Pihl uses the BIPS standards as much as

possible, but Pihl does also actively participate in the development of the BIPS standards. Thus, Pihl

tries to influence the development of BIPS standards.

Pihl has experience a bit of problems with interoperability issues. The company uses a lot of

different software systems, but does not transfer models a lot between programs. But Pihl has

internally made some experiments with data exchange between Revit and Tekla. It has almost been

a flawless process, but there are some points that the user has to be aware of. The geometry of the

models does transfer easily between, but some of the data that is attached to some of the objects in

the model does occasionally not follow – it comes even sometimes in wrong places. But this is of

course a problem when different software producers are making programs that need to be able to

talk together.

Pihl works also with some calculation and scheduling programs and is investigating how these

programs can exchange data with Revit and Tekla. IFC format is being used for this purpose – so far,

it looks promising.

Pihl does also make some data exchange tests with its collaborators.

The size of projects is a factor of great importance. SJ thinks that it would not be beneficial to use

BIM in very small projects – an experienced engineer would be able to do the work much faster with



his traditional methods than using BIM. It is a question of size and complexity – however it is hard to

put some price stamp on it.

It is more complicated to say whether the size of companies is a determining factor. The large

companies have the resources to carry the implementation forward, but small companies have on

the other hand greater flexibility to change its working methods.

The main barriers of implementing BIM within the company There are many employees that need to be informed about the transformation and the process. This

is however maybe not a barrier, but rather a big assignment.

It must also be a focus on not choosing technology only for the technology’s sake. But it is necessary

to spread knowledge to the employees of the company in order to make them know about the

possibilities of these new processes and activities. Full acceptance, participation and exploitation of

the possibilities will not take place until this has become the case.

It is also necessary to be able to see the advantages of the new systems, in a wide perspective. It is

crucial to look around and be able to see how others participants in the value chain can benefit of

one’s activities.

Pihl has started its third BIM project now. It takes longer time to design the building, time which the

company does not have, partly because it has never been done in the company before. But SJ is

confident that the product will be of higher quality, better coordination, collision controlled and with

fewer flaws. Not everyone are however as confident.

Initial investment cost. Pihl is a big company, but the software is very expensive. It is also a company

policy that at least one employee should be on each building site which has adequate knowledge or

skills in the 3D software used (such as Tekla). He must be able to go into the model and find and

extract relevant data.

The main benefits of using BIM One of the big benefits is that all the disciplines in the process can gain on each other work. More

reuse of information is made possible. Also when the building is ready, the information can be given

to the client or to the operator of the building.

Another benefit is that by constructing the building first in a computer model, it is possible to avoid

many flaws by investigating the model thoroughly before constructing it.

One of the focus areas of Pihl is automation of recurrent processes. BIM tools can contribute to that

focus area.



The changes in the industry, followed by BIM Pihl sees itself as a forerunner in the implementation of BIM. It is necessary for Pihl to take other

partners into consideration when taking part in projects. Therefore, some projects need to be

carried out in traditional ways, simply because some companies do not have any resources or

determination to use BIM. The industry is much diversified in these matters.

Future development of BIM One of the important things will be to develop more shared standards – what BIPS is actually

working on.



A.4.6. Slots og Ejendomsstyrelsen, SES

Company: Slots‐ og Ejendomsstyrelsen (SES)

Company Branch Building client

Interview conducted: Tuesday, 5th of May 2009 at 9 – 10:30

Interview location: At SES. Vandkunsten 5, 1467 Copenhagen

Interviewer: Elvar Ingi Jóhannesson and Helle Juul Bak

Interviewee: Clars Danvold (CD)

Personal Information Name: Clars Danvold

Current position: Architect, IT consultant. Has responsibility for all building relevant IT. Is a project

leader for implementation of Digital Construction (d. Det Digitale Byggeri). He has also a project

leader responsibility for implementation of a new facility management IT system which is made by

Granlund in Finland.


Experience from other companies: Has experience from working with web multimedia and working

with facility management software, called CoreFM.

Summary

BIM at the organization One of the reasons that SES is doing “Digital Construction” is that the EBST says that they have to. In

all projects that SES runs and stipulates use of BIM, they also stipulate the use of IFC. It is partly

because it is mentioned in DDB but it is also due to SES own will to support IFC or any other open

standard. SES has a strategic alliance with Granlund in Finland about delivering FM systems, which is

taking IFC seriously. So SES sees an opportunity in being able to utilize IFC format in a few years in

their FM systems.

At this point, it is not realistic to make BIM models of SES whole portfolio:

At this point, at least,[due to] the cost of making even simple BIM models for entire

portfolio, [it] is not a real option at this point.

SES has however been considering sort of simple building model solutions, or slim BIM solution,

where they have all of their estates as very simple building model only with space objects. It could



be a good starting point for SES as a building owner. Every time some activities are going to be

performed in a certain facility, SES could hand in the building model to the consultant which would

then enrich the model with new information. The simple building model would therefore be used as

a basis for further work.

From a maintenance point of view, the 3D is not so interesting. It is rather the data within the model

which is interesting. It is therefore very important that this data is stored in a way so it can be

transferred to a maintenance system.

The main barriers for the implementation of BIM One of the large barriers is that the software that is available does not support BIM. The BIM

applications are dependent on geometrical representation – there is no non‐geometrical based BIM

software available.

All the hype about BIM has been about geometry and rendering and visualization.

And actually, the only place BIM really works is geometry and rendering and

visualization – at least in my experience.

It is hard to move data from one type of software to another. There are no systems other than CAD

systems that can process the BIM data.

Thus, there are mainly people that have high confident in this technology that try to use it. The next

group of users, which wait until they can see the clear benefits of using the technology in their every

day work, they are not convinced yet. Therefore, they are not very accepting. It is possible to have all

kinds of workshops and so on, but the software needs to support the process.

Leadership needs to be convinced. It is necessary to look at BIM in very big perspective. BIM has to

be viewed as a core element in the business. The FM, economy and payroll systems need to be

linked to BIM.

One of the problems is that no one knows for sure what information is needed.

80% of the total cost of a building is in the maintenance phase. We need

maintenance data.

It is easy to say in broad terms what is needed, but it is more difficult to define exactly what is

needed for each building component. This is also related to the type of the building owner and the

way they run their building portfolio. SES runs a maintenance strategy in a way so it is only

responsible for maintaining the technical installations and the outer shell of buildings. Other building

owners might have different maintenance strategy and thus need a different type of data to some

extent.



Standards are very large issue. Without standards it will not be possible to implement BIM and get it

to talk with the FM, economy and payroll systems.

Data exchange: buildingSmart is developing the IFC data exchange format. It is a very loosely funded

network which has been struggling in the recent years developing the IFC format. They decided

some while ago to issue IFC‐certificates to software solutions. But they had to make very limited

demands. Even though given software is IFC‐certified, they cannot exchange the full list of elements

in IFC format. The IFC format is a good idea but it has to be supported. It costs a lot of time and

money to test software whether it is IFC compliant or not.

At this point, projects need to be of certain size so that utilization of BIM is beneficial. It may not be

the size, maybe rather the type. If it is a new building it is probably a good idea to use BIM, because

only a small extra effort is needed. The idea of using BIM in small renovation projects may not be so

good idea.

Asked about whether there is potential risk of small companies being excluded from the market, CD

replies that it could be. For example small specified contractors who do not have interest, or need to

use complicated IT systems. On the other hand, there are some small architectural studios, which

have proven to be the fast movers. They have a small amount of workers so there are few people

that need to change its working methods.

When looking at the DDB initiative: As it has been presented, the whole idea has been to move the

work processes from paper to the digital world, without changing the work processes. But especially

with BIM, this is not the case. If you want to implement BIM in the design and decision making and

in the maintenance process, it means that fundamental changes are needed to take place. And this

has not been communicated well enough. It is only the management that can make decisions about

changing the way we work. When designing with BIM, more detailed decisions need to be taken

earlier in the process. And the money flow is moved from the end to the beginning of the process.

This has a great value if the communication lines with the other parties of the project reflect that

fact.

CD takes an example of when tendering documents are being prepared. By traditional methods, the

architect would have drawn the building and made the list of quantities manually. This is a proven

method with a small margin of errors. With the BIM tools, the feeling for the quantities has

disappeared into the computer and no one is quite sure about what is going on:

We as a building owner have experienced a sort of a vacuum of responsibilities.

Actually, as soon as the architect has handed in a building model with attached list of quantities to

the building owner, which will use it in the tendering process, the responsibility of the list being

correct lies with the building owner.



The main benefits of using BIM Improved cost efficiency in the actual building process – in the design and construction process. It is

easier to inform the end users of the design at earlier stages. Doing building models before the

actual construction takes place eliminates a lot of design errors prior to construction. Collision

control is for example an important tool on that aspect.

From building owners point of view, SES is hoping that BIM can be a vehicle for moving relevant

building data through the building process up to delivery.

Some of the real values of BIM lie in geometry:

Using BIM as visualization tool gives you probably added value because ... you are

sure of your decisions earlier in the design process. You can show ... the end users

something that they can understand and therefore they can commit to the solution

at an earlier phase. Because, we often experience that the end users ... have hard

time understanding plans and sections and so on. And they say “That looks fine” until

it is started building it.

Then, a lot of resources must be put into satisfying the end users. It can cost a lot of money and it

can take a lot of time. Especially if some design changes must be made during the construction

phase. By using BIM tools to visualize early in the project phase, this problem can probably be

avoided.

Changes in the industry followed by BIM If we are talking about changes because of BIM, then we are a bit early.

But if we look at DDB then a great increase of awareness of doing things digitally has emerged. At

least there is increasing awareness and sort of an understanding of a need to migrate from 2D to 3D

modelling tools. There are more and more studios that are changing their way to work towards BIM

methods.

DDB has had a surprising impact on the awareness factor in the industry.

Finland started some public initiative about 15 years ago which concentrated more money into the

IT industry. Some examples of the results are software products like Solibri and Tekla which support

the building industry. These products have now become global products.

Future development of BIM The future development of BIM will be that BIM will become not only a design tool but also a

strategic data tool:

Lifting BIM from the enthusiasm level to the real level where even the suits believe it

is a big issue.



A.4.7. Universitets og bygningsstyrelsen, UBST

Company: Universitets‐ og bygningsstyrelsen

Company Branch Client

Interview conducted: Wednesday, 6th of May 2009 at 10 – 10:45

Interview location: At UBST. Bredgade 43 1260 Copenhagen


Interviewee: Mette Carstad (MC)

Personal Information Name: Mette Carstad

Current position: Project leader, architect. She is responsible for 4‐5 building projects at a time.

Time at the organization: 3 years.

Experience from other companies: Has experience from working architecture practice.

Summary

BIM at the Organization UBST are required to implement BIM as one of the three state clients in Denmark. It is not a wish

from UBST to do so. But UBST has probably taken part in BIM projects before, but then it was by the

consultant’s own initiative.

UBST does not so much look at the price tag of projects when deciding when to use BIM or not. The

aim is to use BIM in every building project now.

It is a great discussion in‐house which activities UBST should take on in relation with BIM. Should

they self do all kinds of analyses, visualisations and cost efficiency calculations or should they

outsource some of those activities to partners outside the organization? It is a question whether it is

their job to do it.

Implementation process: When the law came into effect, an expert was hired to the organization

who was supposed to help with integrating BIM in the organization. The problem was that this

individual was not able to convince all the staff to use the BIM techniques.

It was very naive way.



It was not a good way of doing this. The implementation of BIM cannot be carried out by hiring one

person to carry it out. It is necessary to spread it out to all the people working with BIM. Therefore,

the organization has now not only one person carrying out the implementation. Now, all project

leaders need to be involved – they cannot longer tell someone else to take care of the problems

related to Det Digitale Byggeri. This process is ongoing right now. The project leaders of UBST do not

have to know exactly how to use BIM models, but they have to know what they involve.

One thing UBST has done is creating a contract which is used when new consultants are hired to a

project. In this contract, some requirements are put forward – demands related to the DBK

classification system and building information models. The project leaders at UBST do not

necessarily have to know how to live up to these demands or how the consultants perform the work

– they only have to know what the requirements mean. They have to know a little bit about

everything, but they do not need to draw anything.

UBST has not tried to evaluate the benefits of BIM or DDB. But in MC’s opinion, they should.

The main barriers for the implementation of BIM It is hard to implement the DBK classification (Danish: Dansk Bygge Klassifikation) because it is not

implemented in the software used in the market.

It is very difficult to put forward the “correct” requirements for the building model. It must be

possible to put forward exactly what UBST wants.

It is also very challenging for UBST to find out how they can use the building model in their systems

and processes. They somehow have to find out what information they want or need.

The main problem with importing a whole building model to the organization’s FM system is that too

much information is put in the system. The FM functions do not need all those information.

One problem is to get some processes to be more automatic. An example of that is to get the

software systems to accept DBK. It should be an automatic process to implement the DBK into the

software.

Looking at barriers within the organization, then it is hard to change the way people work.

The main benefits of using BIM Utilization of BIM technology will result in higher quality buildings with fewer flaws.

Many projects at UBST are tendered using function based requirements. BIM could help with

visualizing all kinds of building service components. UBST would like to “see” it all. MC sees

visualisation as a great benefit, both for the organization, but also for the users of the building,

because they will be able to see how the building will look like.



Changes in the industry followed by BIM Asked whether there is a risk of small companies being excluded, MC does not think so. The big

companies will be leading player and the transformation might though take longer time with the

small companies. There will always be a market for good workers (niche market).

Regarding collaboration between different disciplines, MC thinks that the way buildings are designed

should change. Traditionally, an architect almost finishes making drawings of a building, before the

engineers start making their drawings. Increased teamwork between different disciplines would be

of a benefit.

Future development of BIM BIM will become more and more common and it will become easier to use BIM. It will take a long

time to integrate FM and BIM software.

implementation of bimbim.is/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/implementation_of_bim_eij1.pdf · elvar ingi...

Documents