-->

segregation

Yesterday afternoon, the BIMForum leadership had a web conference to discuss the expansion of the BIMForum to address more issues relating to the implementation of BIM.

One of the things we discussed was all of the groups the AGC has relating to BIM adoption and standards:
And then there are all the non-AGC organizations that are talking about the same thing:
To me, all of this seems very disconnected and extremely un-BIM-like. Isn't segmentation between the building industries exactly how we got into this litigious mess?

BIM is about more than utilizing new technology; it is about changing the way construction happens. It is about working together with one goal. I'm not sure how all 8 of these groups intend to simultaneously (but independently) implement one solution for the industry.

My vision for industry implement starts with the consolidation of all of the AGC BIM groups (ideally into the BIMForum). The BIM groups within other organizations will do the same.

After each organization has one group focused on the implementation of BIM, those groups will get together to form a large multi-disciplinary group that can work together to figure out one set of standards, one interoperable file format, one flexible best practices plan, etc.

The BIMForum is looking to address this issue, but there is only so much we can do; other organizations need to do the same.

Some characterize my 'vision' as idealistic, but if that is idealistic, so is BIM. Do BIM-proponents really think that once BIM is implemented, all of our problems are going to be solved if we cannot work together?

No comments: