Organizational Divisions in BIM-Enabled Commercial Construction

TLDR

BIM is promoted as a tool for greater efficiency through collaboration, yet scope and company obligations can conflict with overall project goals. This study investigates how BIM technologies used for MEP coordination affect collaboration and communication among project stakeholders. Through 12 months of ethnographic observation and interviews with 65 industry leaders, the authors show that BIM‑enabled projects are technologically tightly coupled but organizationally divided due to competing obligations to scope, project, and company. The results reveal that while BIM exposes inter‑member connections, it does not promote closer cross‑company collaboration; instead, individual leadership, especially of MEP coordinators, substitutes for cohesion, indicating that organizational structures must be considered for successful BIM adoption.

Abstract

Proponents claim that the adoption of building information modeling (BIM) will lead to greater efficiencies through increased collaboration. In this paper, we present research that examines the use of BIM technologies for mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and fire life safety systems (often referred to as MEP) coordination and how the introduction of BIM influences collaboration and communication. Using data from over 12 months of ethnographic observations of the MEP coordination process for two commercial construction projects and interviews with 65 industry leaders across the United States, we find that BIM-enabled projects are often tightly coupled technologically, but divided organizationally. This means that while BIM makes visible the connections among project members, it is not fostering closer collaboration across different companies. We outline the competing obligations to scope, project, and company as one cause for this division. Obligations to an individual scope of work or to a particular company can conflict with project goals. Individual leadership, especially that of the MEP coordinator in the teams we studied, often substitutes for stronger project cohesion and organization. Organizational forces and structures must be accounted for in order for BIM to be implemented successfully.