High Performance Teams Design High Performance Buildings

This piece is mirrored from where it was originally posted on Medium.com.

A connection of mine on Linkedin last month posed this question on her feed: “How did you become a REVIT expert?”

This struck me as a particularly good question to ask because I think many firms at the moment are trying to improve their performance on BIM projects. To answer is with enough substance to affect change, however, requires a non-trivial effort. A challenge I am up for. Furthermore, I find leaving long replies in those little comment boxes in poor taste. So while they might not have been the right venue for substantive change, I still think a full answer has value. Therefore, though it has taken me a while to circle back around to the topic, what follows is my best attempt at answering her question honestly and thoroughly. We begin by describing some of the answer’s characteristics before turning to the ideas alluded to in the title of this piece.

The first step any organization can take to start increasing its expertise in BIM is to separate the issue from graphic design. This point is often missed in discussions about BIM. I advocate making a hard break between the topics because they’re two different skills sets in my opinion. To understand how they’re different it’s best to use an analogy; they essentially require different types of exercise to improve. The cause of this oversimplification is understandable when comparing senior drafters with three decades of CAD experience to recent graduates using REVIT. Thinking critically about these differences reveals new solutions.

Once the separation is made, one suggestion to improve drawing quality is to consider implementing more Information Design in the production phase. I love construction drawings; draft for fun in my free time; and would happily hang good examples on my walls. But I’ve always adopted the approach clients are better served by looking at the output of a complex physical building in 2D linework as essentially an exercise in information design, of which graphic design is a branch.

Having thus established reasonable limits on our discussion, I wanted to take a moment to deconstruct the system we are trying to develop expertise in to make potential solutions clearer. The formal subject of Systems Theory has a lot to say about how we should approach complex software because it immediately excludes certain problem solving strategies one often sees employed in the field which can lead to frustration on the part of the user. My six years of experience as a systems analyst at a telecommunications company has many parallels with my expertise in REVIT now because of similarities in the nature of the complex software we trying to use to solve non-trivial problems. Taking moment to quickly outline my background, my previous department of 140 people provided technical support to 3000 frontline agents. Our department was their technical helpdesk (among other duties such as analyzing order fallout). As it turns out, telecommunications systems are pretty complicated, and sometimes even helpdesks need helpdesks. That’s where I came in. A core group of 12 of us had advanced system access and training to support our team members, with the additional responsibility we try to pass on this knowledge to other team members when possible. The point to remember is that everyone in the department would have described themselves as an excellent problem solver, but how was I able to distinguish myself to join that core group of 12? I really loved the challenges of that position. It basically assured all the hardest technical problems across the country found their way to my desk; which is exactly where I wanted to be. The nature of the system meant many problems were totally one-offs––never to be repeated––mysteriously disappearing after being fixed. These are the sorts of unique non-trivial problems Systems Theory tells us to expect in a complex software platform like REVIT as well. I observed through my interactions with team members, however, many sought explicit rules to solve them, and this creates a direct obstacle to engaging the creative problem solving needed to tackle unique and uncertain problems. Experience is of limited use when faced with totally new problems like these. To start making headway on them draws upon skills that fall outside direct experience of building, such as critical and analytical thinking. Now we are truly ready to turn to what I saw in these problems which allowed me to help many team members and clients for my time there, and what makes me a REVIT expert and BIM champion now.

The Rocket Fuel of Creativity & Curiosity.
Returning to my colleague’s question, my first answer by reflex was “Creativity!” but I paused just long enough to overcomplicate it, remembering that curiosity, as the twin characteristic of creativity, was also worth mentioning. Considering another, and then another point that would support my expertise, I finally thought better of leaving a long reply. One needs to turn to the strategic decision-making literature or the cognitive neurosciences for the rigorous proof that such a connection exists between curiosity and creativity––that they are indeed opposite sides of the same coin––but a story from my problem solving experiences is probably more appropriate: When I sit with a colleague and try to help them through a difficult problem, one that I might initially be stuck on too, either in REVIT or telecommunications, what becomes apparent is that I’m magnitudes more curious about how these systems work, and how to use them effectively. I’d describe it as a burning and all-consuming desire to know how these systems work. And this approach, after a period of time, indeed bears quite a body of knowledge that can be helpful to the team if shared. Creative problem solving methodologies suggest one should be able to come up with as many alternatives as possible as a way of finding a solution. As a dimension of intelligence I’ve heard this quality be called analogical thinking. Working through a problem this skill is represented by the ability to ask many questions of a it––more than anyone else. Curiosity is the engine of this approach. Where some people can think of two or three good questions, I can fill pages. And as the problems become more complex, and more ambiguous, with more uncertainty, this curiosity in fact creates structure to the problem from which a solution can be found.

There’s actually quite a lot of further details that can be added to the model, mostly found in the two above mentioned topics in addition to the self-directed learning literature; a subject that for a long time was science’s only guide into unknown fields. The source of this creativity and curiosity in my character is a mystery to me, but I know as an adult it is not without conscious intent that I aim my creativity, which now offers us the requisite point to pivot toward how attitude plays a role in becoming a REVIT expert.

One of the best hints for problem solving at a high level is to quickly and easily admit what you don’t know about the problem, and to be able to make very fine distinctions in that regard––and again it’s curiosity that discovers ways to get that unknown information afterward. “I don’t know” are very easy words for me to say. I came into the world, and will exit it, knowing far less than all there is to know. Standing at the edge of my ignorance is like standing beside a vast and dark ocean. I don’t often get credit for this attitude because another characteristic overshadows it; I approach problem solving with great confidence and positivity. I learn exceptionally quickly; love architecture; and am so thankful that with practice I’ve gained an understanding of how things are designed and built. This positive attitude nourishes the problem solver as they encounter false starts, failures, red herrings, and more yet failure. If readers are looking for a more rigious description of how a positive attitude supports professional expertise, researchers Andreas Fink and Mathias Benedek’s in the 2013 book Neuroscience of Creativity (MIT Press) comes to the same conclusion: Positive affect, and even humour, are very relevant to creative problem solving. Now we finally have the background to consciously deploy these attributes on a team to more effectively use REVIT, or any software.

Cultivating a positive attitude in the office.

Working under the assumption that the main goal of a design or engineering firm is to build a lot of valuable architecture, and accepting my suggestion that attitude is a key characteristic defining BIM expertise, then how can one get a whole team going that direction?

Identifying obstacles that come up in the office which inhibit a positive attitude quickly show how to cultivate its opposite. In a stressful environment with a micromanaging boss, it will be hard to look upon a difficult task in a relaxed and positive manner. I’ve mentioned elsewhere in my writing I take a very ancient view of leadership, believing the human condition just too complicated to ever order someone to have a better attitude, and then have that directly translate into an increase of expertise. Our aim here is to try to unleash people’s motivation. The shocking view that leadership by listening is an effective way of creating a positive atmosphere in the office will come as a surprise to some. But UK business writer Jo Owen’s research in this direction concludes many leaders who others describe as a great leader have this trait. Helping so many people work through complicated ambiguous problems, I’ve observed they will often tell you what obstacles they are facing to completing the task successfully. Ask a few more questions to understand their motivation and then that can be engaged as well. As Jo Owen notes, the vast majority of people come to work and want to do their best. But how often do we let them? Part of my success on my previous company’s helpdesk was that I was effective at passing on my knowledge (and cheerfully fixing their problem). And this hinged on my ability to listen. I was sensitive to how my teammate was thinking about the problem regardless of how I was zooming toward its resolution in my own quirky way.

Design studios and engineering firms are not well served by assuming courses or experience alone bring expertise. It’s much more about preparing the ground to be fertile to positive ideas. No farmer knows how to––or would seek––to direct the growth every stalk. Instead they work to make the field itself healthy to better their chances at a fruitful harvest. This is the best frame of mind in which to try to affect positive change. Hiring for experience is a double-edged sword. Though certified expertise and length of service is an easier metric to compare across individuals, it doesn’t guarantee a hire has any inclination of giving their best effort toward the team’s shared goals, nor holds a positive attitude towards passing their expertise on to others. I leave the role of formal teaching to others who really have a passion for the subject. But I absolutely recognize that an important characteristic of good leadership is the ability to teach and pass on one’s sometimes unique and valuable knowledge in just the sort of cases discussed above. One can’t expect everyone to be at the same level initially, but it’s clear that sharing one’s knowledge is a winning strategy as it has the power to raise the expertise of an entire team over time. And if one’s goal is to build a lot of valuable architecture, the only thing better than one BIM champion, is being able to field a team of them.

Facilities Management in Digital Design

Constantly promoting a building design management perspective, in this article we start by taking a 30,000 foot view of the BIM process and then focus in on how digital design is changing facilities management. Bringing this type of information forward into the design stage is an important step to understanding the requirements of modern owners in all their specifics. Facility operations is ultimately a characteristic of a building's function. With that in mind, I wanted to introduce a publication from ARUP which contained some insights which will be of interest to anyone responsible for increasing the value of architecture through digital design.

It's true designers could ignore these insights, but then specifications helpful to creating a valuable building would go untapped. The target one is aiming for would stay blurry and be much harder to hit. On the other hand, the ARUP document is long and therefore not so easily digestible. The goal of this piece is to communicate good ideas which represent low-hanging fruit designers can start implementing right away. To date, the field has been characterized by many individual strategies, and there is much to be gained from promoting the unified approach suggested by ARUP. 

The two main reason to consider digital facilities management and big data:

• More end user control and flexibility, leading to better health and wellbeing.
• Tracking methods to ensure the high performance building stays high performance.

ARUP outlines six categories of digital benefits across an asset's lifecycle which I've summarized below for convenience. These categories should be checked on every project going forward. 

• A digital Portfolio strategy embraces a data-driven investment strategy. It helps improve the decision making process and creates a framework under which to analyze operational performance across an investment portfolio. Both of which can lead to higher returns and operational cost savings. 
• Faster, safer, and more accurate project delivery during the fit-out stage is supported by process virtualization, enabling a smoother transition between design/engineering and construction. 
• Project planning can be supported digitally with new forms of stakeholder engagement. The data can also be applied during the planning stage to facilities optimal site selection. Ultimately, using digital for project planning can differentiate oneself in the marketplace. 
• Asset operations is shifting to rely on digital infrastructure and processes. It helps to understand the occupant's experience and increases flexibility through integration. All sorts of other digital services can be spun off at this stage which can increase building value. 
• When architects and engineers approach an existing building, digital design allows faster, cheaper and more accurate existing conditions modelling. Furthermore, simulations can be done to help understand and improve the experiences of future users. 
• Lastly, when it comes time to renew assets, portfolio-wide intelligence means a smarter and better informed plan. A digital platform promotes the streamlining of whole renewal process. 

A short but interesting case study included in the report is from Microsoft's I.T. and real estate department who makes the claim that even though only about 70% of their global campuses currently leverage digital dashboards, they've definitely come to rely on the technology to make better decisions. 

Lastly, introducing one last layer of depth, hopefully without adding too much more detail, I wanted to connect this shift in facilities management to where some of the best research on the topic is going on. This gives us insight into where the technology is expected to go so that architecture and engineering firms can try to get there first. Here we extend our thanks to the work of Stanford University's Center for Integrated Facility Engineering. This is where the most complex custom approaches are currently being studied but also where the topic of digital facilities management is being discussed almost philosophically. Reading about the center's research and accomplishments, one thing I appreciate about their approach is their steadfast dedication to integration. This follows other industry trends toward more focus on collaborative and interdisciplinary skills. 

Designing Super Complicated Buildings

Not wanting to waste anyone's time with a how-to post about gable roofs, we jump right into the deep end to consider three factors which influence the design of complex buildings. This subject does not get addressed enough compared to the importance these buildings play in our economy. One thing that needs to be set aside before proceeding are the details of the final fit out. Finishes can represent a significant amount of the final budget but rarely multiplies the complexity of the design or design process. Taking the 30,000 ft. view, we are much better off focusing on the coordination of the interior design team than if the carpet in conference room 8A should be fire engine red or poppy red. The following three fields represent three sources of complexity in designing structures:

• Constructibility
• Building Codes
• Project Management

Constructibility. One of the main characteristics of the adoption of BIM in the design studio has been that construction phase can now be addressed earlier in the design process through the use of prefabrication, modularity and 3D. It's up for debate how much a design should be modified to make construction easier, what isn't up for debate are the efficiency gains that result from constructibility being explicitly addressed earlier in the design phase. Financially, the focus needs to be on the structure of the building. Firstly, because the superstructure interacts in complicated ways with the function of a building. And secondly, the superstructure tends to take up an average of about 40-50% of the total budget of a building. This means getting the structure of a building right can have a significant impact on the value of a building and the success of its architectural programme.

Building codes. No doubt many human lives have been saved because of the safety regulations placed on buildings. Building codes have been successful in protecting these expensive investments, the assets contained within, and their neighbours' investment. Beyond fire safety, structural and HVAC codes are in the mix to be considered and these fields require specific expertise to sign off on which contributes to the complexity of the project. Simple solutions to ease the burden of complex building code requirements beyond sheer human effort are rare, but two points do address this subject for our built environment: Hiring specialists to review the design at a couple crucial way-points in the process, while a luxury in some firms, can also save money in other situations by keeping the building design and construction schedule on track. Secondly, automated build code inspection systems are on the horizon through building information modelling which aim to complement the human effort. 

Project Management. This is one of my favourite topics in building design management because it so clearly captures the multidisciplinary nature of the modern practice of architecture. Everyone and their dog says they're good at project management. I take such care to elaborate on the topic for my readers because when the field is this flooded, it's an advantage for firms to be able to distinguish between the finest of PM characteristics. I try to set the bar super high but respect that readers can judge for themselves on what makes a good PM. Some subject matter expertise is required. There's a language to many subjects that needs to be respected. Hiring the producer of the Oscars to raise your skyscraper will only bring heartbreak (though you'll probably get a fantastic grand opening). In highlighting the importance of the social sphere in project management, I've mentioned author Stephen Emmitt before and his suggestion architects, engineers and industry professionals need "cross-cultural leadership intelligence" to fully support a building project at a high level. Briefly, two other sources of complexity in project management are, firstly, the way subdomains interconnect in the project as a whole, much like how juggling is complicated, and secondly, that within each domain lays another complex object, itself with many moving and interconnected parts. We should welcome here the application of good executive cognitive skills. The project manager might say "I don't know" often; collapsing dimensions of complexity within the project so they can be inspected and addressed one-by-one by the team.  

BIM: The Mechanical Pencil

Sparked by a conversation months ago on Linkedin, a recent ARUP article on building information modelling was the final piece allowing me to write this piece. Last year it was a suggested by many in an epic Linkedin BIM comment thread that hand sketching was fundamentally superior to CAD/BIM. A bit of an echo chamber developed reinforcing hand sketching's supremacy. It was not lost on critical thinking readers, however, that many expounding the supremacy of hand sketching admitted to having little experience, skill, or inclination to practice digital design.

Offering a defence first, I hasten to add as I write this my sketching materials, fine-tipped felt pens and a sketchbook of good heavy paper, sit in the chair next to me. In the Linkedin comment thread, I raised the idea some might want to explore forms not reproducible by hand. Met by silence was my question of whether architectural designs should be limited to only those which can be generated by hand since hand sketching is so superior. Furthermore, the gains in efficiency computational architecture can bring to design or building performance can not be so lightly dismissed for those who love architecture and building. On the other hand, one of their criticisms is worth expanding on – in fact it's a position I've been advocating for years since I attack the subject from a building design management perspective – the benefits of BIM need to be quantified. 

One of the main drivers of building is economic. At every stage and scale, the economics of building needs to be understood, absorbed, and reapplied forward. While the criticisms of BIM in business are mostly anecdotal, it's also not so easy to dismiss them, or at least it would be unwise to so quickly dismiss the points-of-view of respected industry members. It's completely reasonable people are sceptical about the overall benefits of BIM when within their own firms they've witnessed BIM projects go awry. The tools of business analysis are here to help bring the larger picture into focus. From concept to production to facilities management, there are benefits to be gleaned from BIM, and an important step in capturing these benefits is recognizing there is a direction to the flow of information in BIM projects. The major benefits of BIM in the construction and occupancy stage can only be realized if implemented in the design stage. The fact building operators, and the list seems to be growing everyday, are paying for 3D models of their existing buildings for facilities management purposes should put a giant exclamation mark behind the value of creating a high-quality digital model at the design stage. 

Arup's suggestion of a BIM Maturity Measure is another good approach giving structure to the BIM feedback process. It's aim is to track key metrics for comparison across projects. Before letting Arup's director Michael Stych describe the program himself, it's worth pointing out the main value of such a system in regards to building design management is that it facilitates portfolio management across a firm's stable of BIM projects. 

"To date, BIM assessment has been complex, providing only a high level overview of its implementation and has been limited to high-achieving projects. Our BIM Maturity Measure tool aims to democratise assessment, enabling comparisons to be made across all projects quickly and easily. This will allow us to recognise where BIM has been used effectively, creating a code of best practise and helping to identify trends and training needs.  We have stopped counting the projects that are doing “BIM” and have started to measure the maturity of BIM application on every project."

The measure is a mix of passive data collection and structured feedback from participants. The program is obviously finding some success internally, with one conclusion worth sharing here and easily implemented in any design shop: BIM projects that have a BIM champion attached, an intense and passionate digital designer, do measurably better. Amazing!

No doubt myself and some of my Linkedin connections easily fit the description of BIM champions. The world is filled with designers and technologists just going through the motions. In fact, I would go so far as to say some managers, despite fancy HR websites stating the opposite, give the impression they would much prefer employees that just sit at their computer in a catatonic state. That's never a good foundation from to which start building a lot of valuable architecture. I've had the pleasure of being the office helpdesk and supporting teammates through their struggles with BIM. I completely empathize with their intimidation of sitting behind multiple monitors running a complex REVIT project. It looks overwhelmingly complicated. It can't be that dissimilar from sitting in a jet fighter cockpit. But not one that sends wayward missiles into hospitals. We get to master the tools which build hospitals; and warehouses, and skyscrapers and fire stations! Everytime we can reflect on the economics of our design process it opens the doors to building more. Being able to quantify our effort and track rates of change greatly helps in strategically distributing skills, monetary, and leadership resources across a firm's portfolio of projects. I'm not particularly good at gardening, cooking or line dancing, but sitting at my desk with REVIT open in front of me, I can build anything; and I'm so grateful for that opportunity.  

REVIT Safe Mode

As complex a tool Revit is to build with, sometimes the problems encountered are even more complex. Throwing Revit power users a bone, design firm Stantec created a great problem solving tool that allows one to basically start Revit in Safe Mode. Third party add-ons and extensions are popular for increasing productivity but also have a history of creating discrepancies and conflicts which might freeze or otherwise corrupt your model. Stantec’s utility allows for the precise control of what’s on when Revit starts up. This can greatly decrease the number of possible conflicts when trying to troubleshoot a model. I posted it here because I thought the tool might come in helpful for some of our readers in the future and as a way to thank Stantec for sharing their work with the community. 

How Geometry Can Establish Architectural Form

Today’s post includes a small piece rejected from a larger research project which represents - much like how the best science is driven by curiosity - that even unexpected results can be valuable. The small exercise in Dynamo was initially supposed to 1) show the connection between geometry and algebra, with geometry, of course, being central to architecture, and 2) highlight how in the real world geometry and algebra often diverge from each other.

Fig.1

The starting point was to replicate the Three Square Puzzle  - as featured on Numberphile’s YouTube channel and the Trigonography blog - in REVIT using Dynamo. The puzzle asks what the sum of angles A,B,& C are (Figure 1). Intuitively, if one looks at the puzzle, it can be deduced the sum of the three angles should be 90 degrees. And indeed this is the case with over 80 such solutions cataloged in the literature (one of which is illustrated in Figure 2). However, a very curious thing happens when trying to measure the angles and sum them in the real world. Because trigonometry often includes irrational numbers, it becomes impossible to ever achieve a perfect right angle when measuring. That’s what makes it a puzzle; the solutions only exists in an idealized mathematical world.

Fig. 2

After establishing the geometry and scaling it up to apply steel framing in REVIT, I measured the angles assuming Dynamo would miss generating a perfect right angle by an arbitrarily small amount. To my great surprise, Dynamo nailed the geometry to four decimal places, the maximum precision allowed in Dynamo at this time. It’s possible that with more precision the expected results could be generated and we’d see the sum of the angles drift away from the theoretically perfect right angle. Another alternative is that Dynamo overcomes imprecision by discretizing/quantizing the output leading to nice integer solutions, kind of like Minecraft’s logical 1m x 1m x 1m block universe.

At the end of the day, these are the sorts of curious behaviours one can expect to find when experimenting with computational architecture.

Moving The Use of Building Information Modelling in the Construction Industry Forward

Writer Jeffrey Pinheirol’s has an interesting post up about what contractors are looking for in the BIM models they receive. I’m actually already sold on the benefits of looking forward in the building process for how best to structure the building data but his post contains some good practical advice about how to best approach this goal. The first take away for myself was that we should all be using REVIT’s build-in assembly code parameters in our models. Having each model element associated with its matching UNICODE format data greatly facilitates the estimating process (and by extension the tendering process). For myself, I think tagging model elements with assembly code data represents easy low hanging fruit which any firm can take implement of with very little investment.

Secondly, the writer touches on an issue central to the development of BIM. The coordination of the required level of detail in any given project has been a difficult goal to achieve for the BIM community. While the consequences of either over-modelling or under-modelling a structure are clear. Less well understood is agreed upon definitions of differing levels of development and detail within a project. Fundamentally this is a communications issue which manifests itself with inconsistences in the deliverables. This issue is an obstacle especially for distributed teams and integrated building design workflows which require a shared language to continually move the design forward. AIA’s Level of Development package is a good starting point for establishing agreed upon levels of development but certainly project partners have also stepped in to define the model’s level of completeness on a case-by-case basis.   

Data Mining Application for Architecture and Engineering Design

An unusual place to find innovative architecture, engineering, and construction industry news, Techcrunch.com introduced me toBerkeley, CA based Vernox Labs, a Y-Combinator backed company which recently released an interesting data mining product for the industry. The tool shows great promise to uncover, predict, and streamline design and construction issues for complex projects. I have no connection to the company but have great interest in all technologies which help me build.

Vernox Labs product is, essentially, a private searchable AEC industry database. One can see parallels here with the recent emergence of private medical databases for doctors. The article reports the company has spent resources collecting and cataloging all sorts of reports and emails from the AEC industry and thereafter analyzes it for trends. Perhaps the value of such a database to the AEC industry is best shown with an example: While a project is in the design phase one could query the database about a specific product or material. The system would then return information about the product's performance and installation, including any issues which might cause delays.

The application of big data and data mining to the AEC industry is complex, probably worth its own seminar or university degree. But needless to say I can already identify a couple variables which could affect the usefulness of Vernox Labs' tool which are unknown to me as of this writing. For one, the size of the database is of paramount importance. A large comprehensive database could actually be quite useful. But a skimpy database would be next to useless, returning only shallow results for any one query. Traditionally the AEC industry has been very protective of their internal communications and data because it can have such a large impact on construction pricing, fee structures, real estate and future projects so it will be interesting to see where Vernox Labs got their data from. The other dominating factor is the analysis and searchability of the data. Well structured, one could always hope to find what they are looking for and uncover trends which are not readily available without using mathematics. On the other hand, unstructured data might as well be a spreadsheet full of random numbers for how useful it is.

A final overriding factor, which dips into the realm of subjectivity, is one's ability to ask pertinent questions of the data. Good data analysis and getting good results from the data really is more art than science and if one can look at their data and ask really creative questions of it sometimes very valuable conclusions come tumbling out. The AEC industry has long been waiting for the application of big data to construction and Vernox Lab's seems to be worth watching for further details.

Reinforcing Concrete in BIM for Structural Engineering

The excellent BIM and Beam REVIT Structure blog put me onto the a great "Autodesk Customer Success story" PDF. Though promotional in nature readers will be interested in the following trends identified in the story:

Firstly, the article highlights the different levels of granularly now available in comparable REVIT add-ons. Compare, for instance, the native automated rebar placement tool and German Software company SOFiSTiK's concrete reinforcement tool. Each does the job but SOFiSTiK's rebar placement tool does it with a higher degree of flexibility and functionality. This difference might only become apparent, and in fact becomes an advantage, depending on how much one details concrete reinforcement in REVIT. An example from the article is given by BIM specialist Sandra Hombergen of ABT Netherlands. Reinforcing concrete is her wheelhouse. So to have a tool which is both powerful in automatically detailing concrete reinforcement to EU code specifications and is flexible enough to overcome all the unique conditions found in complex projects is no doubt a relief to her and those in her position. Myself, on the other hand, who need only periodically detail reinforcement can get away with applying the native add-on and then post-processing to get the same final effect. Where a shop lay on this continuum will depend on the firm's disposition toward using software to glean operational efficiencies in proportion to the scale of their practice.

Secondly, ABT's altitude toward the collaborative nature of their work is worthy of note. The article is testament to the growing demand within the industry for one centralized model which can be distributively accessed. To quote Sandra Hombergen from the article, "It’s clear to me that 3D rebar will be a standardized deliverable in five years’ time." With the demand and functionally of such features clearly articulated, left to business is the problem of execution. Glossed over in the article is how clunky this can be in real life and any honest review of the software must admit the collaborative elements of the program can be unpredictable. And unpredictableness in a business setting can be both wasteful and stressful.