IN
DEGREE PROJECT THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT, SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS
STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 2021,
Information management between project phases:
The value creation process of recognizing digital waste between construction and operational phases
DIANA BERNDT SHIN
KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Master of Science Thesis
Title:
Author(s):
Department:
TRITA Number:
Supervisor:
Keywords:
Information management between project phases: The value creation process of recognizing digital waste between construction and operational phases
Diana Berndt Shin
Real Estate and Construction Management TRITA-ABE-MBT-21379
Anna Broback
Information Management, Digital Waste, Project Phases, Value Creation Process, Lean Thinking
Abstract
Digitalization as a driving force in the AEC industry is no longer a new subject when talking about accelerating innovation and solving environmental challenges. Traditional approaches can limit some of these outcomes and typically imply that many issues that could have been predicted with early involvement of stakeholders, are recognized in much later stages of the project at great expense. In a long run outlook, the operational phase of a building is notably the most demanding if accounting the lifecycle perspective of a building. Still, why is O&M lagging in adopting integrated models? This thesis approaches this subject from the assumption that Information Management plays a strategic role to oversee the different demands, urgencies and use from both sides.
The first theoretical framework used was Lean Management’s main premise that value is created through the identification of waste in a continuous improvement process. The second theoretical framework presented was to analyze the findings with the intention to simulate an optimal context for information flow and understand where the biggest bottlenecks are. The findings show that the perceived value on the information added is low from actors actually feeding the model, a bit higher from project managers but an essential part of information managers responsibility. Main issues related to digitalization were directly linked to the lack of communication between teams, lack of standards across different teams as well as difficulty in finding effective and accurate information. Practical issues with high information models related by the industry also demonstrate a necessity of more roles focused on information management. A model based on the five principles of Lean Management is in equivalence to Information Management is presented and then inserted as enablers for a continuous improvement cycle. Based on the findings, further research can evaluate in more detail the view from operational teams towards information management roles.
Acknowledgement
This thesis constitutes 30 ECTS and represents the final stage of two intensive and happy years in the master programme of Real Estate and Construction Management at KTH Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm, Sweden.
First of all, I would like to thank my supervisor Anna Broback for all the support, guidance and insightful thoughts throughout the process during this period. Also, Tina Karrbom Gustavsson for the workshops, excitement and energy during the entire two years of master studies.
I would also like to thank all the professionals who kindly dedicated their time in the interviews, shared their experiences and contributed to this study. This thesis would not have been possible without that.
Just as importantly, I would like to thank my family, friends and my love for encouraging and supporting me on the good and bad days of this journey.
Stockholm, June 2021 Diana Berndt Shin
Examensarbete
Titel:
Författare:
Institution:
TRITA nummer:
Handledare:
Nyckelord:
Informationshantering mellan projektfaser: Värdeskapandet att känna igen digitalt avfall mellan bygg- och driftsfaser Diana Berndt Shin
Fastigheter och byggande TRITA-ABE-MBT-21379 Anna Broback
Informationshantering, Informationsflöden, Projektfaser, Värdeskapande processer, Lean thinking
Sammanfattning
Digitalisering som en drivande kraft i AEC-industrin är inte längre ett nytt ämne när man talar om att påskynda innovation och lösa miljöutmaningar. Traditionella tillvägagångssätt kan begränsa vissa delar av resultatet och många frågeställningar som kunde ha besvarats genom ett tidigt engagemang av intressenter, blir lösta i mycket senare skeden av projektet, till stora kostnader. På lång sikt är driftsfasen i ett byggprojekt den mest krävande när man tittar på livscykeln av en byggnad. Så varför ingår inte O&M i integrerade modeller? Denna uppsats tar sig an detta ämne utifrån antagandet att informationshantering spelar en strategisk roll för att övervaka de olika kraven, hur brådskande det kan vara och användningen från båda sidor.
Den första teoretiska utgångspunkten som användes var Lean Managements huvudsakliga premiss att värde skapas genom identifiering av avfall i en kontinuerlig förbättringsprocess.
Den andra teoretiska utgångspunkten som användes var för att analysera resultaten med avsikten att simulera ett optimalt sammanhang för informationsflöde och förstå var de största flaskhalsarna låg. Resultaten visar att det upplevda värdet på den tillagda informationen är lågt från aktörer som faktiskt matar modellen, lite högre för projektledare men en viktig del av informationschefernas ansvar. Problemen relaterade till digitalisering var direkt kopplade till bristen på kommunikation mellan team, brist på standarder mellan olika team samt svårigheter att hitta effektiv och korrekt information. Praktiska problem med informationsmodeller relaterade till branschen visar också att det behövs fler roller som fokuserar på informationshantering. En modell baserad på Lean Management fem olika principer är i likhet med Information Management-praxis och presenteras och infogas sedan som möjliggörare för en kontinuerlig förbättringscykel. Baserat på resultaten kan vidare forskning utvärdera mer detaljerat synen från operativa team mot informationshanteringsroller.
Förord
Detta examensarbete utgör 30 hp och representerar det sista steget av två intensiva men också roliga år på masterprogrammet för fastigheter och byggande på KTH Royal Institute of Technology i Stockholm.
Först och främst vill jag tacka min handledare Anna Broback för allt stöd, vägledning och hjälpande insikter under hela processen. Dessutom vill jag tacka Tina Karrbom Gustavsson för hennes workshops, inlevelse och energi under mina två år av masterstudier.
Jag vill också tacka alla de som tog tid ur sin vardag och ställde upp på mina intervjuer, delade med sig av sina erfarenheter och bidrog till denna studie. Mitt examensarbete hade inte varit möjligt utan er.
Till sist vill jag också tacka min familj, mina vänner och min kärlek för uppmuntran och stöd på både de bra och sämre dagarna av denna resa.
Stockholm, juni 2021 Diana Berndt Shin
List of Abbreviations
AEC Architecture, Engineering and Construction
AECO Architecture, Engineering, Construction and Operation AIM Asset Information Management
BIM Building Information Modelling CAD Computer-Aided Design
CRM Customer Relationship Management
DB Design-Built
DBB Design-Bid-Built
EPC Engineering, Procurement and Construction ERP Enterprise Resource Planning
FM Facility Management
FMA Facility Management Application IFC Industry Foundation Class
IoT Internet of Things
IPD Integrated Project Delivery
KM Knowledge Management
O&M Operations and Maintenance ToT Transfer of Technology
List of Figures
Figure 1. Structure of Work – Diagram of Steps ... 4
Figure 2. Main stages and their deliverables (Adapted from: Scottish Future Trust SFT, 2019) ... 15
Figure 3. Seven types of waste and their four equivalents (Adapted from: Hicks (2007) ... 18
Figure 4. Three Imperatives of IDDS (Adapted from: CIB 2013) ... 20
Figure 5. Critical Analysis to Improvements (Adapted from: (CIB, 2013) ... 22
Figure 6. Double Diamond Diagram of Design Thinking (Adapted from Geissdoerfer, 2016) ... 25
Figure 7. Double Diamond Diagram adapted with the steps of the research ... 25
Figure 8. Steps of the Qualitative Interviews ... 27
Figure 9. Project Timeline x Decisions and Risks ... 37
Figure 10. Continuous Improvement Cycle based on IDDS principles ... 49
List of Tables
Table 1. Framework of information value attributes ... 10
Table 2. Scientific Methodology and Paradigms of the Research ... 23
Table 3. Summary of Respondents ... 26
Table 4. Respondents Group ... 29
Table 5. Causes of waste in Information Management. ... 40
Table 6. Information Management, Associated Issues and Affected Dimensions ... 42
Table 7. Five Lean Principles and Proposed Actions for Information Management ... 43
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ... 1
1.1 Background ... 1
1.1.1 Integrated Approach in the Construction Process ... 1
1.2 Problem Formulation ... 2
1.2.1 Interoperability of Information ... 2
1.2.2 Project Documentation and Digital Maturity ... 2
1.3 Aim and Objectives ... 3
1.4 Structure of Work ... 4
1.5 Delimitations ... 5
2 Literature Review ... 6
2.1 Traditional Methods for Project Delivery ... 6
2.2 Digitalization of the AECO Industry ... 7
2.3 The Emergence of Information Efficiency... 8
2.4 Implications of Poorly Managed Information ... 9
2.5 The Potential of Waste Elimination ... 11
2.6 Value Creation and Sustainable Approach ... 12
3 Theoretical Framework ... 14
3.1 Information Management ... 14
3.1.1 Definition ...14
3.1.2 Building Life-Cycle and Information Management Roles ...15
3.2 Lean Thinking ... 16
3.2.1 Definition ...16
3.2.2 Key Principles ...17
3.2.3 Lean Thinking Approach to Information Management ...17
3.2.4 Characterizing Waste ...18
3.3 Integrated Design and Delivery Solutions (IDDS) ... 19
3.3.1 Definition ...19
3.3.2 The Three Dimensions ...20
3.3.3 The Method as a Critical Analysis to Improvements ...22
4 Methodology ... 23
4.1 Scientific Method ... 23
4.1.1 Ontological Position (What is reality?) ...23
4.1.2 Epistemological Position (How can we know about reality?) ...24
4.1.3 Methodology (What procedures can we use to acquire knowledge?) ...24
4.1.4 Methods ...24
4.2 Research Design ... 24
4.3 Data Collection Process ... 26
4.3.1 Interviews...26
4.3.2 Interview Structure ...27
4.3.3 Ethical Considerations and Confidentiality ...28
5 Findings ... 29
5.1 Industry Reflections ... 29
5.1.1 Roles and General Perception of Information Added Value ...29
5.1.2 Digital Maturity Level ...31
5.1.3 Information Management, Closeout and Hand-In ...32
5.1.4 Risks, Difficulties and Errors ...34
5.1.5 Corporate Culture ...38
5.1.6 Measuring Quality of Information ...39
5.2 Theoretical Applications ... 40
5.2.1 Identifying Waste ...40
5.2.2 Enablers of IDDS dimensions ...42
6 Analysis and Discussion ... 43
6.1 Waste Management ... 43
6.1.1 VALUE ...43
6.1.2 VALUE STREAM ...45
6.1.3 FLOW ...46
6.1.4 PULL ...47
6.1.5 PERFECTION ...48
7 Conclusion ... 50
7.1 Findings and Answers ... 50
7.2 From Building to Business ... 51
7.3 Limitations... 52
7.4 Recommendations for Future Research ... 52
8 Bibliography ... 53
9 Appendix ... 58
1 Introduction
This chapter provides an overall background of the subject and market in focus, explains the context of the problem formulation, identifies the gap research and present the aim, purpose and questions that intend to be answered. It also briefly presents the structure and delimitations of the work.
1.1 Background
1.1.1 Integrated Approach in the Construction Process
The construction process starts at the moment one objective or need is recognized and the whole process triggered after that can be considered a living temporary organization in constant improvement. It is true that designing, delivering and maintaining projects are getting more complex over time and one of the big known challenges nowadays is to combine short-term efficiency in individual construction projects and long-term innovation that supports society benefits. Not only governance requirements tend to increase more and more but also client’s expectations on the value for money must be considered when talking about quality, budget and time nowadays. Sustainability, minimization of waste, recycling of materials, reduction of carbon footprint, for example, are no longer options but pre-requisites and indicators of a good project. The time-cost-quality triangle remains in the core of studies, still projects and methods are constantly being improved following the digitalization of the AEC industry.
As the pace of digital changes accelerate, so the importance of an effective and integrated management is becoming increasingly necessary. Meanwhile, as the early stages of the conceptual design and the construction processes are turning more integrated, there is still a gap in bringing facility management and operational aspects of the building in the core of discussions as a way to provide life-cycle accountability in the overall project decisions. There is also strong evidence on the lack of integration, on which the needs of owners and specially facilities managers are often neglected in the creation of the model during early phases of the project (Matarneh & Danso-Amoako, 2018). Previous research motivates the implementation of BIM in the operation phase as an important digital tool that creates value when assessing building maintenance (Cavka, et al., 2017).
1.2 Problem Formulation
1.2.1 Interoperability of Information
As the urgency on creating sustainable business models arise and the amount of building information delivery gets more complex, other issues also become evident, essentially the inefficient use of data that creates “digital waste” (Fewings & Henjewele, 2019). At the time that virtual building modeling grows in popularity and use, it is important to recognize the technology’s full potential for the lifecycle of a building. The possibility to embed data on life expectancy and replacement costs in BIM models for example, can justify an investment on more expensive material that has a better payback over the life of a building. But the benefits of a virtual modeling for facilities management can go beyond that. A significant part of results from past studies are clear on stating and supporting BIM advantages for building maintenance (Cavka, et al., 2017) (Becerik-Gerber, et al., 2012). Considering the life-cycle cost of an asset, previous studies have concluded that the O&M phase of a building can reach on up to 7 times the initial investment costs, and considerably amount of the total costs of ownership are spent on FM (Akcamete, et al., 2010). In fact, much of the time and cost initially involved is related to the incompatibility and fragmented information of the needed data. Digital tools like BIM have a huge potential on filling in this gap of information by addressing, consolidating and organizing information. Digitalization provides interoperability of information, a key concept for efficient design, project and facility management. However, recent studies also expose the lag of O&M and FM teams on fully adopting the integrated models consequently loosing value and potential on their roles and organizations (Jylhä & Suvanto, 2014). This leads to a first question that triggers this research: Afterall, how truly effective is to have all information in one model when the needs, priorities and demands are different between project phases?
1.2.2 Project Documentation and Digital Maturity
The combination of the digitalization process and the necessity for sustainable answers coming from the AEC industry boosted the shift from the traditional fragmentated paper-based information of buildings into a more integrated and modern project model base (Bilge &
Yaman, 2020). The big challenge when addressing project documentation is the information gap between effective data used in the design and construction phases and useful information needed for FM teams, which are complementary but different on its essence (Jylhä & Suvanto,
2014). Furthermore, the progress of digitalization can be in different stages of implementation.
The AEC industry is known to be more conservative than other industries when it comes to digital changes. In a macro level, different culture contexts between countries can determine the average maturity implementation of new digital tools but individually companies also have their own mechanisms of adapting to the new processes (Lawson, 2005).
The empirical evidence that the FM necessities are constantly neglected through early stages on the creation of BIM-models help formulate the aim and objectives of this research. FM industry claims that to enhance full adoption of digital tools in the sector is necessary to have a full collaboration between different parties in the project lifecycle (Bilge & Yaman, 2020). But how actors from design and construction phases perceive and account the building life-cycle perspectives when producing building information? The investigation of this research starts from the perception of actors involved in the design and construction phases towards:
• Their main issues when dealing with an integrated model.
• Their view on the value of information delivered to subsequent teams.
1.3 Aim and Objectives
The aim of this research is endorsing the importance of Information Management roles in the transition of project phases and the necessity to identify digital waste that does not aggregate value to operational teams. The research starts with the following assumptions:
1. Value is created through elimination of waste;
2. BIM might contain excessive information (waste) for operational teams.
By analyzing the perspectives of the actors producing building information in the pre- operational phases, the topic is discussed focusing on answer the following main research question:
“How can Information Management roles identify and manage waste in the transition of project phases?”
The main question will be discussed and analyzed by first addressing the following sub- questions:
1. What are the main issues related to information-intense environments?
2. How does quality of information can measured from a management perspective?
3. How does the industry perceive the integration of all building information in one model through different phases?
Following this, one of the expected answers of this research is to raise and add to the discussion of the necessity to maintain interoperability of information but accordingly to each project phases necessities by reducing non-added value processes as a way to take full advantage of digital tools, enhance quality of information and avoid digital waste.
1.4 Structure of Work
In order to find answers for the proposed questions, this paper starts with a review of previous literature research and past complementary studies. The main focus is to first explore how research were conducted crossing information and digitalization processes in the Facility Management industry to then understand how digital tools are being used to enhance business value. After picturing the current scenario, benefits and challenges, Lean Management and IDDS are presented as theoretical frameworks as analysis of the research and findings, respectively. The following chapter presents the methodology, describing and motivating the choice of research design and how the results will be extracted, analyzed and presented. After that, the findings from the qualitative method research are analyzed and discussed. The conclusion provides a summary of major issues raised, a reflection on the initial expected aims and suggestions for potential areas and unclear topics for future research (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Structure of Work – Diagram of Steps
1.5 Delimitations
This study approaches a topic that has not been largely used in the industry so far. Many papers address the benefits of information integration for the Facility Management industry, yet its use seems to be in its initial stage, so the perception of the effectiveness of it throughout employees’
eyes might not account for the bigger picture of its benefits. As the construction industry shifts to model-based project delivery, there is still a gap on what effectively is required on the model that can be beneficial or not. Data may vary on the context of each company, since progress of digitalization can be in different stages of implementation. Moreover, this study is delimited to the Swedish market, focusing the interviews, investigation and conclusions to Sweden located companies.
2 Literature Review
This chapter present previous studies in this area and how its conclusions are used as a knowledge base for the conduction of this research. It is a story telling that starts with a discussion of common problems of (1) Traditional Methods for Project Delivery, followed by (2) Digitalization of the AECO Industry, (3) Facility Management Practices, (4) Emergence of Information Efficiency, (5) Implications of Poorly Managed Information, (6) The Potential of Waste Elimination and (6) Value Creation and Sustainable Approach.
2.1 Traditional Methods for Project Delivery
It is acknowledged that the construction industry is surrounded by fragilities and points of improvement that can lead to difficulties in order to provide practical value to the final client (Uthman, 2011). Many of these problems can be associated with the fragmented nature of the industry and consequently deficiency of properly coordination and communication between actors in the whole process. Past researches also suggest that such dilemmas and lack of cooperation towards definite solutions are many times aggravated not only by the disruption of information between actors in the supply chain but also by adversarial and pre-stablished contractual relationships (Salim & Mahjoob, 2020).
Traditional methods for project delivery can mostly be seen as linear processes, where the interdependency nature of the processes requires one phase to be finished in order for the subsequent one to start. Design, construction and operation phases are separated phases. This is probably where the information is mainly lost considering the whole project cycle. (Susanto
& Sihombing, 2015). The most common and traditional approaches in the AEC industry to procure are the Design-Bid-Build (DBB), Design-Build (DB) and EPC. According to the DBB contract, equivalent to the Swedish AB04, the client is responsible to deliver the design project for the selected contractor. The engineering works are performed then in accordance with the drawings. In this case, the client assumes more risks but also take over a more central role. The
“explosion”, or in other words, the information disruption peak happens when constructors do not understand the design, intentions and decisions made on early stages (Mossman, et al., 2010). In the DB contract, equivalent to the Swedish AB06, the contractor is responsible for both the design and construction, so the integration of information between these parts increase significantly. The main risks are allocated to the contractor with some inputs from the client,
which on the other side can lead to a significantly and intentionally reduction of costs and therefore innovation can be seen as not priority. The EPC, or mostly known as a Turnkey Contract, has similar contractual agreements with DB but in this case the client has minimal participation or responsibility and consequently less control over the project (Salim & Mahjoob, 2020).
Since digitalization started to spread over the construction industry, some systemic issues around these conventional delivery methods were identified. Not surprisingly, such problems are mostly related to the information-intensive environment that projects are immersed in nowadays. Interruption of good ideas, contractual restrictions that avoid full-cooperation, coordination shortcoming and “pressure for local improvement at project expense as a whole”
(Salim & Mahjoob, 2020, p. 948) are some of the recognized problems of traditional methods for project delivery. As digital tools gain more relevance and the amount of information becomes more intensified, project delivery forms also tend to adapt and modernize, aiming early involvements of actors and a consistent focus on the management of information (Mossman, et al., 2010).
2.2 Digitalization of the AECO Industry
Following the early design and construction phases, Building Operation and Maintenance (O&M) can be considered the most extensive and capital demanding phase of the building life cycle (Classon, 2007). However, the lack of literature on the importance of the building information handover to facility teams reveals how the overall value creation process has been neglected over the time. The great advance is that in recent years there is a clear shift of the discussions from the exclusive real estate cost benefit numbers to what researchers call end- customer-driven mindset (Appel-Meulenbroek & Feijts, 2007). That means many theories in both corporate real estate and facilities management have highlighted the importance of measurement tools for organizational performance and the importance of real estate for the organization essence business, so literature also present concern for end customer’s needs and preferences (Luoma, et al., 2010) (Rothe, et al., 2011). Furthermore, according to some parallel researches, such theories do not properly explain the actual added value of the creation process (Jylhä & Junnila, 2013). The authors justify that by exercising a theory developed by Koskela (2000) called transformation-flow-value generation or TFV theory, where processes are illustrated as input-output boxes. The conclusion is that there is a big challenge in improving
FM service processes simply because the value creation process between input and output is not easily comprehended.
The introduction of BIM in the building sector helped to address the potential to reduce not only the material resource demand but also to improve sustainability through the entire building life cycle. It actually can reduce the effort needed when conducting a Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology for example (Naneva, et al., 2020). Nevertheless, due to its complexity and as argued lack of priority among architects, the LCA methodology is usually late applied and not used to support design decisions but post-reparation strategies (Meex, et al., 2018).
From an architectural perspective for a successful project, the design must be seen as a process not only as the ending product (Lawson, 2005). Creating spaces involves functionality, usability, efficiency, maintenance, logistics and many other factors. All of this must be discussed and clearly established in the brief program: the later the project is changed, the more expensive it gets and the lower is the possibility of implementing it. Also, there is a really important factor that must be addressed when talking about successful projects, which is the good balance between the “rational argument” (that prioritizes cost and time) and the “quality argument” (that raises long last value based in good quality) (Fewings & Henjewele, 2019).
Many BIM-based model studies have been performed from different perspectives, either focused specifically on the design phase (Soust-Verdaguer, et al., 2017), early conceptual phase (Najjar, et al., 2017) or on a post-design phase, considered by the own authors as too late for changes to be performed efficiently (Abanda , et al., 2017). The most valuable results though are regarding the simplification of tools and methods, as a way to give incentives for companies to visualize better the gains on the life cycle assessment combined with advantages through the digitalization of information (Naneva, et al., 2020).
2.3 The Emergence of Information Efficiency
The quality of information to be added on a BIM-model can determine the overall quality of a project. A chaotic BIM model can lead to a chaotic project, caused by the difficulty to execute, coordinate, control. Typical factors that can therefore cause additional cost and time (Suermann, 2009). A diversity of studies assessing BIM performance frameworks are constantly being proposed to increase industry’s awareness of digital tools capacity and other administrative and technical aspects (CIFE, 2013) (Succar, et al., 2012). Still, one can argue that such initiatives
are limited when designed to evaluate instead of benchmark (Du, et al., 2014). The digital performance evaluation can be seen as the process to establish merit, value and implication of outcomes from the evaluated subject (Rossi, et al., 2004). The benchmarking process, differently, is used to compare one’s business and metrics to the industry bests. By comparing organizations, not only one company can learn from others and establish improvements but successful processes from leading companies can be explained, promoting a positive progress for the whole industry (Costa, et al., 2006).
As enhancing environmental sustainability through BIM tools have been extensively stressed through different angles, a discussion is still open with no further research on how to integrate facility operation maintenance manuals for a better use management achieving the initial sustainable goals of the project (Wong & Zhou, 2015). Several articles discuss the necessity for this integration but few of them analyze carefully the facilities management perspective on the effectiveness of design decisions and BIM-based information that is delivered when the construction phase is finished (Akcamete, et al., 2010). In line with this, Love et al. (2008) concluded that almost 70 percent of rework done in the construction industry is directly related to design documentation. This gap on building information papers brings the studies to an important aspect that Jylia & Suvanto (2015) access when exploring the impacts of poor quality of information in the facility management field. According to the authors, insufficiently managed information can be considered a source of waste that can therefore aggravate the overload of work. Inefficiency and ineffective information procedures in a project not only can induce design and construction errors but also extra operational and maintenance costs (Bilge
& Yaman, 2020). The owner, as the one who pays the price of the project errors (Classon, 2007), should be the one interested in guaranteeing the correct and efficient management, either by doing it by itself or appointing a third part for the job of maintaining the correct flow between stakeholders. The strategy should be undertaken by aiming the approximation of phases to ensure that the generated digital information from both design and construction phases creates opportunities and not waste for the operational phase of the building (Liu , 2013).
2.4 Implications of Poorly Managed Information
Data and information have complementary but different meanings. Data alone is simply symbols, images, numbers that with no other context have no interpretation or connotation until processed (Tuomi, 1999). Information is data processed and organized in a specific situation as
a way to achieve a meaning. Information and data combined generate knowledge (Lawrence, 1999). These definitions are important to understand the idea that the process of value creation and competitive advantage of companies necessarily has to do with the process of transforming data into information and information into knowledge (Stewart, 2001). This research focus was not built on the process of knowledge creation, but how data is wasted if not transformed in correct information with the right purpose. In this case, how data generated in design and construction can be both helpful of useless for the operational phase of the building. If information is poor, the outcomes might get wrong and the whole value creation process can be compromised (Jylhä & Suvanto, 2014). That is probably the main reason why evaluating and interpreting the quality of information is crucial to estimate its real added value and which actions can be taken based on that.
The substantial value of the information also depends primarily on what type of issue it is supposed to solve. There is no common understanding of information quality classification in general, but similar studies converge on related aspects. (Herrala, 2007) and (Herrala, et al., 2009) summarized attributes in a framework that helps recognize important components to be evaluated (Table 1). According to these authors, an important observation to have in mind is that poor information can cause a contrary effect on the added value. The same way it is important to access accurate information as a way to facilitate assertive actions, it is also essential to prevent wrong decisions. The conclusion is that insufficient, wrong and/or poor information easily lead to erroneous decisions and consequently decrease the value of the whole process (Herrala, et al., 2009).
Table 1. Framework of information value attributes - Adapted from (Herrala, 2007) and (Herrala, et al., 2009)
Attribute Component Key Concept
Accessibility
Mode and Media Information format Traceability Source / Original data Reliability Identification of data source
Contents
Accuracy Possibility of errors Uniqueness Benefits of exclusivity
Relevance Real necessity
Completeness Sufficiency / Deficits
Coverage Wideness
Volume Update frequency / Access Timeliness Real-Time Relevant time-point
History Past events
Validity
Unambiguity Obscurities / Accuracy Objectivity Lack of impartiality Consistency Coherent / Logical Effectiveness Decision Impact Effect on choices
Benefits Time-savings / Safety / Comfort
Cost Expense Information cost
By crossing this framework with four deep case studies, Jylhä & Suvanto (2014) analyzed direct impacts of poor quality of information in the Facility Management industry and concluded that when information is not managed properly:
a. More than necessary time is spent on searching;
b. Additional work is needed;
c. Potential is lost (Jylhä & Suvanto, 2014, p. 309).
Looking further on the conclusions, the authors also state that the main possible reasons for lost potential can be related to the fact that sometimes information is not produced on time, there is a flood of information where it is difficult to find the relevant one or they are simply ignored or not properly documented (Jylhä & Suvanto, 2014). This conclusion is important for the conduction of this research, especially because the value creation process is negatively influenced by potential that was lost.
2.5 The Potential of Waste Elimination
Recent scholars that investigate the process of value creation in different sectors agree at some point with the lean management idea that everything that does not create value to the client can be deliberated consider as waste (Hicks, 2007). Following this logic, important studies that identified waste drivers in the industry through lean management principles concluded that an important focus of waste is related to ineffective information leading to unsuccessful communication (Graebsch, et al., 2007). Hicks et. al (2006) summarized causes of waste in information management in equivalence to some of the main causes for waste in manufacturing
systems. According to the authors, waste happens when the information consumer does not have prompt access to correct (as appropriate, accurate and updated) information (Hicks, et al., 2006).
2.6 Value Creation and Sustainable Approach
Limited management of information can, therefore, be seen as a main root cause for problems in the construction process. Cost overruns, missed deadlines and final quality still remain in the core of problems when talking about project management and potential consequences of an ineffective communication plan and information management. Accordingly, there is also an urgent need for more strategic approach on such points of improvements focusing on the value and benefits in an organizational level (Cohen & Graham, 2001) (Winter & Szczepanek, 2007).
For this to happen a fundamental shift is needed: from meeting fixed specifications to satisfying customers; from coming in a fixed budget to managing cash flow increasing shareholder value;
from meeting a fixed deadline to selecting the best time to market and time to breakeven from just getting the project done to help implementing organizational strategy (Winter &
Szczepanek, 2007). It is necessary to first focus on the customer of the company as a major stakeholder and to mentally frame oneself as part of the customer’s business (Normann, 2001).
Nonetheless, it is impossible nowadays to talk about value creation and optimization without addressing procedures and behaviors based on achieving sustainability and long-term benefits.
To procure the wrong building cost-effectively is waste of money. This must be encouraged in the early stages and be seen as an opportunity to fulfill core business on the demand side of construction (Ryd, 2014). The commitment to the integration of management is essential to make sure initial sustainable goals are delivered and the operational phase of the building retain the benefits of early decisions. The definition of integration in the Oxford Dictionary is to
“combine one thing with another to form a whole, bring people or groups with particular characteristics into equal parts, to mix with and join society or a group of people, often changing to suit their way of life, habits and costumes”. One of the main responsibilities to both Project Managers and Facility Managers is to integrate fragmented parts with different interests and needs, following up with the evolution of the world in terms of technology, requirements, regulations but most importantly communication (Fewings & Henjewele, 2019). This is fundamental for the project value creation process and can be decisive in achieving desired objectives.
Several research areas approach the value creation process from different perspectives but most of them relate the topic to benefits, performance and success factors observed in both short and long term of projects. Some of the important contributions from past studies include discussions on the concepts of value capture, holistic approach to project, portfolio and strategic management and the use of independent models and frameworks (Laursen & Svejvig, 2016).
A successful project from an architectural perspective can be achieved by understanding the design as a process, balancing rational argument (that prioritizes cost and time) and quality argument (that raises long last value based in good quality) as a way to encourage sustainable decisions and long-term efficiency (Lawson, 2005). From an economical perspective, many papers address the necessity to move towards a value-centric view, in which the primary concern is not the capital asset, system or the facility itself but the understanding that bigger success can be achieved by creating value for multiple stakeholders, indirectly raising value for money for shareholders. From a technological point of view, the impact of new tools and procedures, specially BIM, can help improve creative design, future project clashes but specially the intuitive communication and information flow from the beginning (Laursen &
Svejvig, 2016). The creation of value in this case is more related to the efficient use of digital tools and acknowledgment that management roles must also adapt to new realities. Besides all the digital innovation, the human factor on the management process is still fundamental to make sure the correct information is being delivered with quality and efficiency in appropriate needs (Fewings & Henjewele, 2019).
3 Theoretical Framework
The following chapter intends to deliver a better understanding of the subject of this research by explaining and clearly delineating the key concepts used in this paper in order to prevent ambiguous and unclear interpretation. Accordingly, these concepts will support the constructed argument on how information management has a key role on the value creation process by first expanding the meaning of (1) Information Management, then recognizing the research problem through a (2) Lean Thinking perspective and later framing the outcomes on elements of (3) Integrated Design Delivery Solutions (IDDS).
3.1 Information Management
Architects, constructors, consultants, project and facility managers generate huge amount of information during a project life-cycle. Managing information and providing document evidence is crucial to support reliable communication between teams and wider stakeholders.
The introduction of BIM in the sector assisted the way information was stored, updated and shared, enhanced collaboration but also exposed the necessity of new roles such as information managers for setting up and maintaining information exchange flows (Bilge & Yaman, 2020).
3.1.1 Definition
In traditional project delivery methods, primarily data are usually not structured and standardized (Salim & Mahjoob, 2020). This demands a lot from stakeholders to systematically transform data into information and manage the flow between the different actors and project phases. In order to extract greatest benefits from BIM, it is necessary to have a rigorous control over how professionals organize and exchange information inside and outside their teams. The information manager is responsible to organize and process this mechanism, working closely with the Information Technology (IT) department and Project Management (PM) teams in parallel (Faulkner, 2015). This role is essential through all phases of a project lifecycle. It begins in the early stages of strategic project definition continuously until the use and operation of the building. Among different responsibilities, the initiation and development of an Asset Information Plan is fundamental and extremely important to manage and extract better maintenance practices for the built asset. The Asset Information Model (AIM) compiles necessary and related data and information to support asset management, from original design content, details of ownership, 3D models but focused on the information related to the operation
of the asset (Bilge & Yaman, 2020). The handover process from the construction information to structured operational information is a point of fragility and demands attention and organization and the transition from BIM to AIM will be explored and analyzed in the discussion part of this paper.
3.1.2 Building Life-Cycle and Information Management Roles
The building life-cycle is generally divided in three macro stages (Figure 2):
Figure 2. Main stages and their deliverables (Adapted from: Scottish Future Trust SFT, 2019)
Each phase has its own demands and necessities related to different roles and responsibilities, the deliverables are specific, but the transition of phases also requires specific organization and collaboration from Information Managers. The close out and handover of projects from construction to operational teams is particularly sensitive. In integrated contract approaches, such as IPD, the early involvement of actors promotes a better collaboration and smoother transition as stakeholders are better aligned and integrated. During the construction phase, the information manager is responsible to make sure the virtual model corresponds to the physical construction. Updates happen in a very fast pace. The construction follows the design but the final as-built must represent the reality. The closeout and handover of building to the O&M team is officialized with the approval of submittals from the constructor. The operational team extracts essential data from the model to the AIM in the Facility Management Application (FMA), which must be readable in a common database so both owner and operators have access through their Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) and Customer Relationship Management (CRM) software. The essential flow of this process is that building information like warranty, suppliers, spare parts, maintenance, specifications as well as customer needs and satisfaction
levels can be categorized and accessed with assertiveness and no waste of time on searching or no overflow of unnecessary information (Bilge & Yaman, 2020). This is probably the most ideal flow.
3.2 Lean Thinking
Lean Thinking was used in this study as framework to understand and formulate the research question from a value creation perspective. The starting point is the assumption that value is created through minimization of waste. In the context of Information Management, by using Lean Thinking principles, the focus is to understand how to prevent digital waste in order to create value for both team producing and receiving information. This section will start with a definition of the term, followed by an explanation of the approach with Information Management and the specific use of the framework in this research.
3.2.1 Definition
The term “lean” has its roots on the Toyota Production System and originally was based in a process-oriented flow following a waste reduction nature in a context of mass form of production, scarcity of resources and excessive internal competition in the post-war Japanese market (Aziz & Hafez, 2013). The concept of “lean production” was mainly spread to the western manufacturing community through (Womack, et al., 1990) in their book called “The machine that changed the world” and the idea of banishing waste to enhance benefits for the companies gained a lot of attention for business models. It was seen as a straight relationship with the minimization of non-value adding activities and the improvement of productivity: a successful method that rapidly was incorporated by the construction industry. The exclusive use in primary manufacturing initially settled the efficiency of using lean methodologies by focusing on pursuing perfection and continuous improvement. The favorable outcomes in productivity and quality trigged the expansion of lean towards other directions apart from traditional manufacturing and tangible products and later spread through the construction industry (Aziz & Hafez, 2013). More specifically, the term lean was rapidly used to describe the working philosophy mainly focused on value-creation for the customer by removing as much waste and unnecessary steps as possible from the process. Broadly, the term lean and its main principles can be extended and applied to several contexts where product flows meet customer, user or consumer interests at some point (Hicks, 2007).
3.2.2 Key Principles
The expansion process of the lean term was intensified and accelerated by the notice of successful cases across the industry. In 1996, Womack and Jones identified key principles to help production systems to adapt their production:
1. Definition of value: Clear definition and specification of value from customer’s own perspective and identification of related activities;
2. Identification of value streams: Elimination of every process, task or procedure that does not generate value to the end product;
3. Assurance of value flow: Secure that there is a continuous flow in the process by analyzing the whole supply chain. The focal point must be in the process and not on the end-product only.
4. Facilitation of the “pull” principle: Reduce the production that is not necessary by producing only what the customer wants and when the customer needs. Development of “Just in Time” or JIT idea.
5. Continuous improvement: The constantly pursuit of perfection. Aim for the perfect solution on time schedule and in perfect conditions, with no room for defects and errors.
3.2.3 Lean Thinking Approach to Information Management
As previously stated, lean principles are already largely used in construction management studies, especially because rework/waste/non-value-added activities are extensively present in the industry. The conclusions mostly agree on the idea that general wastes in the construction industry represent a significant amount in the percentage of general costs (Hicks, 2007).
However, it is not exactly easy to measure waste. Value-adding activities can be described as the ones that converge material/information to client’s requirements. Contrarily, the non-value adding activities are the ones considered as time, resource and space consuming with no proportional benefit to the final product – or in other words, waste (Alarcon, 1997). Typical material waste studies in the AECO industry tend to focus and limit the work in the physical
aspect of material waste and consequent environmental impact (Formoso, et al., 1999).
However, the overall principles of lean thinking can generally be enforced in several systems where there is a necessity to remove waste, pursuit perfection and create value. The approach to Information Management using lean as a framework is not a new method. Hicks (2007) in his work “Lean information management: Understanding and eliminating waste” discusses the potential benefits of Lean to overall information systems and his framework conclusion based on the five main principles of lean thinking and comparison to the deadly types of waste in the manufactory industry was borrowed as a framework to explore this research topic.
3.2.4 Characterizing Waste
Following the seven deadly types of waste in manufacturing systems first reported by Womack
& Jones (1964), four of them were characterized and fundamentally described as causes in the context of information management by Hicks (2007) (Figure 3). Overproduction is compared to flow excess, which is related to the issue of excessive information storage and lack of understanding of potential value. Waiting is correlated to flow demand, which is related to the inability of automatically exchange information due to lack of identification, control, documentation. Extra processing is compared to failure demand, an issue of functionality of information. Lastly, defects are correlated to flawed flow, being a matter of poor quality and/or inaccurate information. Besides that, the author argues that there is a general “value” waste category, where there is a clear lack of understanding the value of information and its necessary flow, which causes poor performance and, consequently, waste.
Figure 3. Seven deadly types of waste and the 4 equivalents in Information Management (Adapted from: Hicks (2007)
3.3 Integrated Design and Delivery Solutions (IDDS)
After the visualization of the problem and development of the main research question, a second theoretical framework was chosen to base the analysis of the interviews and discussion. The concept of Integrated Design and Delivery Solutions (IDDS) was first introduced by The International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction (CIB) in 2009 and it is fully aligned with the idea that interconnected digital technology catalyzes significant changes in design, construction and operational process. Previous papers have used this theory as a framework to better explain problems related to the AECO industry as the concept was entirely shaped in this context. In this research, the IDDS concept is borrowed as a way to explain and categorize Information Management practices in three sub-categories defined by CIB as the “three imperatives” of the sector: people, technology and processes.
3.3.1 Definition
The rapid changes in the construction sector are seen not only as a big challenge but also as a great opportunity to maximize gains and influence how the industry develops and adapts to new processes. The focus of the Integrated Design and Delivery Solution methodology is the consolidation of the sector through the embracement and effective adoption of the process by also targeting the necessary skills and improved technology that supports the whole system.
This methodology prioritizes a general view of changes to later focus on specific targets and that is why it differentiates from particular research focused on limited contexts. The methodology used to achieve the IDDS concept was based on workshops and consultations with different stakeholders involved in different project phases during four years of studies. It is not about a single outstanding solution but the necessity of continuous improvement of the AEC industry towards new practices (CIB, 2013).
“Integrated Design and Delivery Solutions use collaborative work processes and enhanced skills, with integrated data, information, and knowledge management to minimize structural and process inefficiencies and to enhance the value delivered during design, build and operation and across projects.” (CIB, 2013, p. 4)
In simpler words, the focus proposed by IDDS is based in the collaboration and integration of three dimensions: people, process and technology, as described on the figure below:
Figure 4. Three Imperatives of IDDS (Adapted from: CIB - International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction 2013)
The “three imperatives”, as named by the IDDS idealizers, represent key aspects and their interactions that help to visualize the obstacles and solutions that prevent a collaborative and integrated flow. A clear example that illustrates this dependency between the concepts is how the introduction of new technology capabilities, specially BIM, changed the explicit necessity of better integrated process and multidisciplinary collaboration between people (Hjelseth &
Mêda, 2016).
3.3.2 The Three Dimensions
Information management, as stated before, is a field that is gaining attention and importance as the digitalization becomes an essential part of the business. In today’s knowledge context, organizations that are not allowed to properly make use and take advantage of their own data/
information/knowledge assume high risks. As a way to analyze the main research question, the optimal context represented by the intersection of these three dimensions are borrowed and embedded on the process of understanding the importance of effective management of information.
3.3.2.1 Interoperable Technology:
The technology capabilities are related to software as tools for fundamental information of buildings. Building Information Modelling (BIM) and associated data formats, like Industry
Foundation Classes (IFC), are already widely used in the AEC industry as the CAD successor and a 3D model-based process that combines not only modelling for architecture, engineering and construction professionals but an efficient management and communication tool for different stakeholders (Salim & Mahjoob, 2020). Interoperable technology is related to this exchange of information between different actors and software solutions with no risk of ambiguity or lack of correct and updated information. In combination with Virtual Design and Construction (VDC) for example, a consistent 3D model with parametric properties provides great added value through clash detection and integrated information. Following the construction, model simulations with high level of data can guide the operational and maintenance decisions but still in the early stage of development for O&M and FM teams.
3.3.2.2 Integrated Processes
The integrated processes aspects are related to the procedures and context in which the information is handled, presented and shared between stakeholders. Technology enables the technical flow but processes give structure, context and standards that support the collaboration and effectiveness of the whole process. The Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) is a model example of formal collaboration that enables efficient information management not only because supports early involvement of key players but also enhance the level of trust between them (Piroozfar, et al., 2019). Nevertheless, IPD is a contractual structure with a clear framework process, it summarizes fundamental principles (AIA, 2007) that are essential for effective collaboration practices and can be used to describe essential aspects of integrated processes and information management:
• Mutual respect and trust;
• Shared risk and rewards;
• Collaborative innovation and decision making;
• Early involvement of key participants;
• Early goal definition;
• Intensified planning;
• Open communication;
• Organization and leadership;
• Multi-party agreement.
3.3.2.3 Collaborative People
This aspect is related to the people working closely with the new technologies and improved processes, a very much urgent aspect that requires training and development. Accordingly, at the time new digital tools and technologies arise and enable updated processes, the complete progress of the whole system is only possible with true collaboration between teams and higher investments on skill enhancement for people working in the building construction sector (CIB, 2013).
3.3.3 The Method as a Critical Analysis to Improvements
The development of the ISSD framework, sustained by the three imperatives described above, is about continuous improvement and not specifically a single optimal solution. Following the constant changes, the industry is facing, the next diagram is used to help identify opportunities from bottlenecks and points of improvement from the previous identified root causes of waste.
Figure 5. Critical Analysis to Improvements (Adapted from: (CIB, 2013)
Drivers for Change Enablers Barriers Opportunities
4 Methodology
This chapter purpose is to describe the scientific method of this research as well as motivate the choice of research design and the methods used to collect data in order to give validity and reliability to the results and conclusions of the proposed question.
4.1 Scientific Method
The use of theory and consequently the first approach to theory development requires some strategic design choices in the research project, either if the theory is being tested or being built.
This research can be considered to have a deductive approach, as the idea that triggers the main question is based on theories and the research is design to test them and collect data for the final conclusion (Saunders, et al., 2015). To briefly describe the scientific paradigms used in this research, five building blocks will be explained and categorized following Grix (2002) interpretation of interrelationship between scientific paradigms of a research.
Table 2. Scientific Methodology and Paradigms of the Research
Ontological Position
Epistemological
Position Methodology Methods Sources
Social
Constructionism Interpretivism Qualitative
Research Interviews
Interview Transcripts/
Summaries
4.1.1 Ontological Position (What is reality?)
The study is conducted from a constructivism perspective, starting from the assumption that there is no single truth to be explored and reality is socially constructed depending on the context, experiences and individual interpretations. The understanding and perception of actors in the AECO industry towards information management is much more valuable to the construction of the narrative of this paper and cannot be numerically measured (Saunders, et al., 2015).
4.1.2 Epistemological Position (How can we know about reality?)
Interpretivism is the epistemological position of this study considering the companies involved in the transition of project phases are made of individuals and individuals are complex and have consciousness to react to external social experiences. This perception is essential to answer the main research question and gain in-depth insight of the actors to understand the motivation of some choices and behaviour (Saunders, et al., 2015). This study seeks to understand main causes of waste and possible value creation from this identification and there is no clear distinguish between right or wrong.
4.1.3 Methodology (What procedures can we use to acquire knowledge?)
Naturally, from a constructivism perspective and interpretivism epistemological position, a qualitative methodology is preferred to achieve reliability and validity in the collected data.
This study does not intend to collect numerical data as the expected outcomes are matter of subject interpretation more than quantifiable material.
4.1.4 Methods
The research method chosen to collect qualitative data was the interviewing technique. This method was the most suitable one considering the purpose of the research to produce knowledge (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009). Different types of interviews were conducted on this research:
semi-structured interviews through video call, in-person over a cup a coffee and through written answers sent by e-mail. The data collection process will be better described in the sub-item 4.2 Data Collection Process.
4.2 Research Design
The research process starts with the definition of main subject and extensive literature review around the topic by initially searching the following key words: information management, facility management, value creation. The next steps will be explained following a really simple diagram first introduced by Design Thinking called Double Diamond. This scheme is a clear and visual description of the design process (Geissdoerfer, et al., 2016) and it was chosen to describe this research progress due to its non-linear characteristic of diverging and converging as a strategy to explore possibilities and define constrains (Figure 6).
Figure 6. Double Diamond Diagram of Design Thinking (Adapted from (Geissdoerfer, et al., 2016)
The starting point, as stated before, was the definition of the main topic. After that, an extensive literature review was made to identify earlier researches, gather knowledge and expand the possibilities of which information management, facilities management and value creation could be explored. That was when the research gap was identified being the lack of studies in the transition part between construction and operational phases. In the next step, following the motion to narrow scope, lean management was presented as the first theoretical framework, defining the perspective from which value creation would be analysed. The second divergent movement was the collection of data, through qualitative semi-structed interviews where various actors from different phases were interviewed. The analysis of the findings was discussed and framed in the second theoretical framework presented, which are the dimensions of Integrated Design and Delivery Solutions. By framing the outcomes, the discussion focused on identifying drivers for change, enablers, barriers and opportunities of improvement, answering the main research question proposed in the beginning.
Figure 7. Double Diamond Diagram adapted with the steps of the research
4.3 Data Collection Process
4.3.1 Interviews
The interview process started with the identification of potential informants and relevant roles that could contribute to the discussion. The main search was in LinkedIn, company’s website and networking. Key words like project and information management were the focus in the beginning but the limitation and lack of answers from initial contacts expanded the research field. This was also an important step for the realization that all actors involved in the process are relevant when talking about information. The first contact and invitation for the interview was majority made by e-mail and/or telephone calls and the acceptance and positive response rate was around 60%. After setting a date and time, the informants were provided another e- mail with a better explanation of the research topic and the topics to be discussed during the interview. The table below presents the summary of respondents:
Table 3. Summary of Respondents
# Type of
Company Size ID Participant
Position
Type of
Interview Duration A
Sub-Contractor Building Automation
Small AE Automation
Engineer Telephone
Call 45
minutes
B Consulting Large
CM Construction
Manager In-person 1 hour RE Rock Engineer In-person 1 hour
C Contractor Large PM Project Manager In-person 30
minutes D
Sub-Contractor Infrastructure
Engineering
Medium PE Project Engineer Written
e-mail -
E Consulting Large IC BIM/CAD
Information Coordinator
Video Call 40 minutes F Real Estate
Developer Large IS Information/BIM
Strategist Video Call 1 hour G Design and
Contractor Large A Architect Video Call 45
minutes
H Design
Manager Medium DM Building
Design Manager Video Call 1 hour
