use of bim in building operations and maintenance
TRANSCRIPT
DEGREE PROJECT
Real Estate and Construction Management
Building and Real Estate Economics, and Architectural Design and Construction Project
Management
MASTER OF SCIENCE, 30 CREDITS, SECOND LEVEL
STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN 2020
Use of BIM in Building
Operations and Maintenance:
An Approach to Identifying Sustainable Value
Jenny Du
Madeleine Hoeft
ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
ii
TECHNOLOGY
TMENT OF REAL ESTATE AND CONSTRACTION MANAGEMENT
iii
Master of Science Thesis
Title:
Authors:
Department:
Master Thesis Number:
Supervisor:
Keywords:
Use of BIM in Building Operations and Maintenance:
An Approach to Identifying Sustainable Value
Jenny Du and Madeleine Hoeft
Real Estate and Construction Management
TRITA-ABE-MBT-20506Henry Muyingo and Tina Karrbom Gustavsson
Building Information Modeling, Facility Management,
Real Estate Management, Social Sustainability, Economic
Sustainability, Environmental Sustainability, Business
Value
Abstract
While the use of BIM (Building Information Modelling) has been increasing over the last
decade and enabled a more integrated collaboration of different disciplines in the construction
industry, its implementation in the operation phase of a building is still in its infancy in Sweden.
Studies have been conducted to identify barriers and opportunities associated with the use of
BIM in building operations and maintenance. There is a lack of research proposing a holistic
approach to the evaluation of the value of BIM in operation and maintenance from the
perspective of economic, ecological, and social sustainability. Therefore, this paper aims to
follow up on the identified research gap by investigating: How sustainable value is created
using BIM in operation and maintenance from an owner’s perspective?
A sustainable value framework is applied to the findings of an extensive literature review and
compared to the reflections of Swedish industry professionals in semi-structured interviews.
Based on the value destroyed or missed for key stakeholders by current O&M practices, the
opportunities created with the use of BIM are highlighted. It was found that the most added
value is expected from an economic and social perspective, reducing current inefficiencies in
the integration of databases and documents, process structures, and knowledge management.
More efficient information management and improved data accuracy is expected to enable
better services, increase employee motivation, and optimize space management. Major
struggles highlighted by the industry representatives are costs and a very fragmented work
towards the implementation, often limited to internal efforts or small national initiatives. Based
on the findings, further research will be needed to test and validate quantitative metrics in case
studies, assess to what extent standards can promote the faster and more predictable
implementation of BIM in O&M. In addition, the social value implications of using BIM in
O&M should be evaluated more in detail.
iv
v
Acknowledgement
After two years of studies in the master programme Real Estate and Construction Management
at KTH Royal Institute of Technology we are ending this chapter with a master thesis that
comprises 30 hp. During these 20 weeks we have been facing ups and downs and have gained
a lot of insights and knowledge about the use of BIM for Building Operations and Maintenance.
First of all, we would like to thank our supervisors at KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Tina
Karrbom Gustavsson and Henry Muyingo, for supporting us and being there for us not only
during this period, but also during the entire two years of master studies.
We would also like to thank the professionals who dedicated their time to an interview, showed
interest in our research topic and shared their knowledge, which was essential for writing this
paper.
Last but not least, we thank everyone who supported us during our master studies. Without you
we would not have come to where we are today.
Stockholm, 2020
Jenny Du and Madeleine Hoeft
vi
vii
Examensarbete
Titel:
Författare:
Institution:
Examensarbete Master Nivå:
Handledare:
Användningen av BIM under Drift och Förvaltning
Jenny Du and Madeleine Hoeft
Fastigheter och Byggande
TRITA-ABE-MBT-20506
Henry Mutingo and Tina Karrbom Gustavsson
Nyckelord: Byggnadsinformationsmodeller, Facility Management,
Fastighetsförvaltning, Social Hållbarhet, Ekonomisk
Hållbarhet, Ekologisk Hållbarhet, Affärsvärde
Sammanfattning
Medan användningen av BIM (Byggnadsinformationsmodeller) under projekteringen och
produktionen av byggnader har ökat under de senaste årtionde och möjliggjorde ett mer
integrerat samarbete mellan olika discipliner inom byggindustrin, är implementeringen i
driftsfasen fortfarande ovanligt i Sverige. Studier har genomförts för att identifiera hinder och
möjligheter som är förknippade med användningen av BIM inom förvaltningen. Det är brist på
forskning som föreslår en helhetssyn på utvärderingen av BIM:s värde i drift och underhåll ur
perspektivet av ekonomisk, ekologisk och social hållbarhet. Syftet med detta arbete är att
identifiera forskningsluckan genom att undersöka frågan: Hur skapas hållbart värde med hjälp
av BIM i drift och underhåll ur en ägarens perspektiv?
En modell för hållbart värde appliceras på resultaten som omfattas av litteraturöversikt och som
jämförs med reflektionerna från svenskt branschrepresentanter i semistrukturerade intervjuer.
Baserat på värdet som förstörs eller saknas för de viktiga intressenterna i nuvarande praxis i
förvaltningen, diskuteras möjligheter som skapas med användning av BIM. Mest mervärde
förväntas utifrån ett ekonomiskt och socialt perspektiv, vilket minskar den nuvarande
ineffektivitet i integrationen av databaser och dokument, process strukturer och
kunskapshantering. Mer effektiv informationshantering och förbättrad datasäkerhet förväntas
möjliggöra bättre tjänster, öka medarbetarnas motivation och optimera utrymmeshantering.
Stora frågetecken som branschrepresentanterna framhäver är kostnader och ett mycket
fragmenterat arbete mot implementering, ofta begränsat till interna ansträngningar eller små
nationella initiativ. Baserat på resultaten kommer ytterligare undersökningar behövas för att
testa och validera kvantitativa mätvärden i fallstudier, för att bedöma i vilken utsträckning
standarder kan främja en snabbare och mer förutsägbar implementering av BIM i drift och
underhåll. Dessutom bör det sociala värdet av att använda BIM i förvaltning utvärderas mer
detaljerat.
viii
ix
Förord
Efter två år på mastersprogrammet Fastigheter och Byggande på Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan
avslutar vi detta kapitlet med ett examensarbete som omfattar 30 hp. Under dessa 20 veckor har
vi stött på både upp- och nedgångar med glädje och tårar samt lärt oss mycket om användningen
av BIM inom förvaltning.
Först skulle vi vilja tacka vår handledare på Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan, Tina Karrbom
Gustavsson och Henry Muyingo, för att de har stöttat och funnits där för oss under denna period,
men också funnits med oss under hela studietiden.
Sen skulle vi även vilja tacka de personer som har ställt upp på en intervju, visat intresse och
delat sina kunskaper, utan dem hade vi inte kunnat slutföra detta arbete.
Sist men inte minst vill vi tacka alla personer som har stöttat oss under denna period. Utan er
hade vi inte kommit dit vi är idag.
Stockholm, 2020
Jenny Du and Madeleine Hoeft
x
xi
List of Abbreviations
3D Model Three-Dimensional Model
AEC Architecture, Engineering and Construction
AECO Architecture, Engineering, Construction and Operations
BIM Building Information Modelling
CAD Computer-Aided Design
CIFM Computer Integrated Facility Management
DT Digital Twin
ICT Information and Communication Technology
IoT Internet of Things
IPD Integrated Project Delivery
KPA Key Performance Area
KPI Key Performance Indicator
LCC Life Cycle Costs
LOD Level Of Detail
O&M Operation and Maintenance
PDCD Plan, Do, Check, Act
PEST Political, Economic, Social, and Technological
PLC Project Life Cycle
ROI Return on Investment
SFM Sustainable Facility Management
SLA Service Level Agreement
SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats
TPP Technology, Process, and Policy
VDC Virtual Design and Construction
xii
xiii
List of Figures
Figure 4-1: BIM Framework (based on Succar, 2009) ............................................................ 14
Figure 4-2: Stages of Sustainable Value Creation (adapted from Bocken et al., 2013) ........... 22
Figure 4-3: PDCA-Cycle (adapted from Garza-Reyes et al., 2018) ........................................ 24
Figure 5-1: SWOT Analysis ..................................................................................................... 26
xiv
xv
List of Tables
Table 2-1: Interview Responses ................................................................................................. 5
Table 2-2: Interview Participants ............................................................................................... 5
Table 4-1: Key Performance Areas in the Production Life Cycle of Facilities ....................... 17
Table 4-2: Management Levels and Processes in Building Operations & Maintenance ......... 19
Table 4-3: Factors of Social Sustainability (adapted from Ajmal et al., 2017) ........................ 21
Table 4-4: Value Types (adapted from Bocken et al., 2013) ................................................... 23
Table 5-1: Value Missed and Destroyed in Current O&M Practices ....................................... 28
Table 5-2: New Value Opportunities Through Using BIM in O&M Practices ....................... 30
Table 6-1: Suggestions for Evaluation Metrics ........................................................................ 45
xvi
xvii
Table of Content
1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Background .................................................................................................................. 1
1.2. Research Question ....................................................................................................... 2
1.3. Structure ...................................................................................................................... 3
1.4. Limitations ................................................................................................................... 3
2. Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 4
2.1. Choice of Research Method ........................................................................................ 4
2.2. Research Design .......................................................................................................... 4
3. Literature Review................................................................................................................ 6
3.1. Building Operations and Maintenance ........................................................................ 6
3.2. Use of BIM in Operations and Maintenance ............................................................... 7
3.3. Creation of Business Value with BIM ......................................................................... 9
3.4. Evaluation of the Business Value of BIM ................................................................. 11
4. Theoretical Framework ..................................................................................................... 13
4.1. Building Information Modeling (BIM) ..................................................................... 13
4.1.1. Definition ........................................................................................................... 13
4.1.2. BIM Stages and Evolution ................................................................................. 14
4.1.3. Digital Twin ....................................................................................................... 15
4.2. Building Operation and Maintenance (O&M)........................................................... 16
4.2.1. Definition ........................................................................................................... 16
4.2.2. Key Processes ..................................................................................................... 17
4.3. Sustainable Business Value ....................................................................................... 20
4.3.1. Pillars of Sustainability ...................................................................................... 20
4.3.2. Creation of Sustainable Value ............................................................................ 22
4.3.3. Evaluation of Sustainable Value ........................................................................ 23
5. Findings............................................................................................................................. 25
5.1. Model Application ..................................................................................................... 25
5.1.1. Purpose of O&M and Value Captured ............................................................... 26
5.1.2. Value Missed or Value Destroyed ..................................................................... 27
5.1.3. New Value Opportunities ................................................................................... 29
xviii
5.2. Industry Reflections ................................................................................................... 31
5.2.1. Purpose of O&M and Value Captured ............................................................... 31
5.2.2. Value Missed or Value Destroyed ..................................................................... 32
5.2.3. New Value Opportunities ................................................................................... 35
5.2.4. Value Evaluation ................................................................................................ 37
6. Analysis and Discussion ................................................................................................... 39
6.1. Creation of Sustainable Value ................................................................................... 39
6.1.1. Purpose of O&M and Value Captured ............................................................... 39
6.1.2. Value Missed or Value Destroyed ..................................................................... 40
6.1.3. Value Opportunities ........................................................................................... 41
6.2. Evaluation of Sustainable Value................................................................................ 44
7. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 46
7.1. Findings ..................................................................................................................... 46
7.2. Implications ............................................................................................................... 47
7.3. Limitations ................................................................................................................. 48
7.4. Suggestions for Future Research ............................................................................... 48
Reference List .......................................................................................................................... 49
Appendix .................................................................................................................................. 55
1
1. Introduction
This chapter gives a general overview of the research topic based on identified gaps in existing
research. It also outlines the report structure and highlights limitations of the study.
1.1. Background
Despite often being regarded as one of the slow adopters of new technologies, the construction
industry has started exploring new ways of designing and building to exploit the possibilities
that come with a shift in mindset and technological opportunities (Lindblad & Guerrero, 2020).
A lot of stakeholders with different needs and specializations are part of the projects and want
their demands for information and integration to be fulfilled as the construction of buildings
becomes more difficult and complex to manage (Lindblad & Guerrero, 2020).
The concept of Building Information Modeling (BIM) has been adopted into the design,
planning, and construction of buildings and the interest in BIM has been growing continuously
(Brooks & Lucas, 2014). Through this development, the collaboration with models from
different disciplines in architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) is constantly
improving and shifts towards the integration into a digital environment including data about
e.g. floor spaces, building systems, material details and consumption characteristics (Matarneh
et al., 2019; Skripac, 2013). Even if there are still challenges, it allowed to reduce schedule and
budget overruns, enabled the exploration of design options before starting construction and
increased safety on site (Brooks & Lucas, 2014).
Research also suggests that implementing BIM in the operation phase supports the creation of
value and is beneficial for building maintenance (Cavka et al., 2017). Yet the integration is
lagging here and the needs of owners and facility managers are often neglected in the creation
of the model during the design and construction phase (Matarneh et al., 2019). This leads to the
potential of BIM being nowhere near fully exploited even though in a facility life-cycle the
major expenses are occurring during the operation phase, accumulating about 60 percent of the
total cost of a project (Akcamete, Akinci & Garrett, 2010). In this context, the idea of a “Digital
Twin”, an exact digital representation of the physical property that can ultimately exchange
information with its real world gemini, gives rise to several opportunities for more efficient
building operations (Brooks & Lucas, 2014).
2
From a management perspective in research, business support functions like facility
management (FM) are often seen as cost centers only. However, by aligning the operation and
maintenance solutions with the needs of the owner’s or tenant’s core business needs, the value
can be contributed beyond the sheer reduction of costs, and entirely new value propositions can
be created to support an optimal organizational performance (Katchamart, 2013).
Often, owners are however not aware of the whole set of FM information needed and managed
in operations and how to determine the amount of information that could be exchanged and
managed with BIM. They do not have experience in how to leverage the models for FM and
hence do not request specific information (Cavka et al., 2017). Moreover, they lack measurable
indicators to assess the business value of BIM (Vass & Gustavsson, 2014).
Previous papers have either looked into ways to assess the value of BIM in design and
construction and or into sustainable facility management (SFM) (Alfalah & Zayed, 2020), but
there is a lack of research proposing a holistic approach to evaluating the value of BIM in
operation and maintenance from the perspective of economic, ecological and social
sustainability.
1.2. Research Question
This paper aims to follow up on the research gap identified above by answering the main
question: How is sustainable value created using BIM in operation and maintenance from an
owner’s perspective? It will be evaluated by addressing the following sub-questions:
A. How can the concept of sustainable value be applied to the use of BIM in operation
and management?
B. Where could sustainable value be created from an owner’s perspective by using
BIM in operation and maintenance?
C. How does the industry perceive the value propositions of using BIM in operation
and management?
Sub-questions A and B will be answered based on literature, sub-question C will use additional
material such as interviews with industry representatives and reports of BIM working
initiatives.
3
1.3. Structure
To find answers, this paper will first discuss the methodology in order to motivate the choice
of research methods. Afterwards, an in-depth review of previous research is conducted, which
focuses on the added value for operation and maintenance (O&M) tasks that is created by
implementing BIM. Based on this, existing theoretical concepts applicable to the research topic
are presented and discussed. A conceptual framework is applied to provide a theoretical
guideline for the sustainable value assessment of using BIM in O&M. Reflections of industry
actors are taken into consideration to discuss the practical relevance of the identified value
propositions. The paper concludes with an outline of future research possibilities.
1.4. Limitations
There are limitations to the presented findings due to the scope of this study and the lack of
widespread implementation of BIM in operation practices. The proposed mapping is based on
literature and needs to be validated in case studies. By comparing the theoretical findings with
the feedback from industry stakeholders, areas for improvement are highlighted. They are,
however, representing individual opinions and focus on the owner’s perspective. Only five
interviews were conducted for this study, which do not allow for generalizations.
4
2. Methodology
This chapter will motivate the choice of research methods to answer the proposed questions
and thereafter outlines the research design more in detail describing the single steps of the
investigation.
2.1. Choice of Research Method
In scientific research, a distinction is made between quantitative and qualitative methods. In
contrast to quantitative approaches that employ statistical analysis of random samples from a
population to investigate a topic, qualitative research uses purposive sampling and semi-
structured, open-ended interviews to explore meanings in a given situation and generate new
concepts and theories (Mohajan, 2018). For doing so, researchers are using reduction to
condense the key abstract aspects of events or phenomena, that are characteristic or causal to
all of them (Perri, 2012).
For this paper, a general business value framework is selected and applied to the assessment of
the sustainable value of BIM in O&M based on an extensive literature review. Statements are
inferred from different sources in a structured way to be applied to the research topic at hand
(Perri, 2012). As common for such frameworks, the proposed structure shall provide guidance
to decision-makers in the industry. They “make explicit the theories on which practical
decisions are based, partly so these theories can be clearly stated and tested, but also to capture
more systematically the tacit knowledge on which these decisions are based” (Perri, 2012, page
11).
2.2. Research Design
The research process starts with an extensive literature review to identify earlier research on
the topic. Different perspectives will be adopted looking into 1) the use of BIM in O&M to
show costs and benefits associated with the implementation and application, 2) the creation and
evaluation of value using BIM to identify processes, and 3) the notion of sustainable value and
its use in other industries.
In addition, existing frameworks are presented to clearly define the scope of this work and avoid
ambiguity or vagueness of the key concepts used, namely 1) Building Information Modeling,
2) Building Operation and Maintenance as well as, 3) Sustainable Value. These frameworks
will serve as a starting point for the assessment of the sustainable value of using BIM in O&M.
5
By combining the key processes in O&M and the perspective of value creation based on the
benefits and barriers pointed out in the literature review, it shall be highlighted, where value is
already created and where opportunities are currently missed or not accessible without the use
of BIM. In interviews with real estate professionals in Sweden, the theoretical perception is
compared to the industry perspective. Table 2-1 structures the responses of companies
contacted for an interview.
Table 2-1: Interview Responses
Type of
Company
Contacted Interviewed Using
BIM in
O&M
Starting to
Use BIM in
O&M (Pilot)
Not Using
BIM in
O&M
No
Response
Owner 18 4 0 5 4 9
Consultant
/ Start-Up
5 1 1 0 1 3
Total 23 5 1 5 5 12
As indicated, five interviews were conducted for this thesis with both start-ups and property
owners in different asset classes.
Table 2-2: Interview Participants
Company Participant Position Interview Details
A Technology Start-Up CEO April 22; 30 minutes; Zoom
B Owner Commercial Real Estate Manager April 27; 45 minutes; Teams
C Owner Residential Property Developer April 29; 1 hour; Zoom
D Owner Commercial IT-Chef & Developer May 11; 45 minutes; Teams
E Owner Commercial
and Special
BIM/CAD-Responsible May 12; 1 hour; Teams
As shown in Table 2-2, the five companies that were interviewed will be called Company A,
Company B, Company C, Company D and Company E to ensure anonymity.
In addition, a suggestion for the evaluation of value is made based on a theoretical framework
and interview findings.
6
3. Literature Review
The literature review presents the current research status in (1) BIM usage in building
operations and management, (2) the creation of business value with BIM, and (3) potential
ways to evaluate the business value of BIM from a sustainability perspective. It gives an
understanding of the existing findings and discussions on the topic and serves as a knowledge
basis for the later selection of feasible concepts to answer the proposed research question.
3.1. Building Operations and Maintenance
Upon completion of building constructions, properties are entering the operations and
maintenance phase with the aim of guaranteeing a safe and functioning building for its
occupants by coordinating the physical space with the people and processes of an organization
(Parsanezhad, 2019). However, beyond that purpose, there is no single, clear definition of the
detailed services included in this phase (Parsanezhad, 2019). Previous literature reviews found
the value of facility management to mainly include the provision of a high-quality workspace,
reduction of life cycle costs, support of the organization’s core functions and development
strategy as well as to ensure business continuity in emergencies (Li et al., 2019).
Nevertheless, factors like lack of communication, inadequate information tools, reliance on
manual steps and information silos have an impact on the efficient delivery of such services.
Out of 68 tasks evaluated by industry experts in the UK, Carbonari et al. (2018) find the
perceived inefficiencies to be the highest in the following processes: Asset records, Post-
occupancy evaluation, Satisfaction surveys, Analysis of maintenance data, Whole life costs,
Space management, Information management, Evaluation of business performance, Evaluation
of maintenance strategy and Market intelligence. In contrast, tasks with a lot of regulatory
backgrounds such as building certifications, emergency procedures, and risk management were
ranked as rather efficient in the same survey (Carbonari, 2018). In an attempt to tackle the
challenges listed above in the context of increasing globalization, environmental changes, the
amount of data generated in buildings, and a higher demand for occupant-well-being, the
management of properties has received more attention in the last years. The industry practices
are changing in the face of an “increased use of outsourcing, moving from operational to
strategic level, early involvement of FM in design and the culture of innovation” (Li et al.,
2019, page 360). The intentions to improve operational efficiency and to meet social needs are
two drivers of recent developments in this sector (Li et al., 2019).
7
Those developments can be observed in several trends (Li et al., 2019), namely
a) Enhancing IT: efficiency and value added
b) All-round facility manager: excellent ability and life cycle participation
c) Strategic performance management: user-centric and benchmarking
d) Sustainable FM: strategy and tactics
e) Innovative FM practice: research-practice transformation and standardization.
3.2. Use of BIM in Operations and Maintenance
From the technological perspective of developments in building operation and maintenance,
BIM is one of the key technologies expected to impact the sector (Li et al., 2019). In contrast
to the design and construction phase, where the use of BIM has become more and more
common, using BIM for FM has been found to happen a lot less up to date (Oti et al., 2016).
That leaves a lot of potentials to exploit in the owners’ business models as the operation and
maintenance phase is one of the “key stages where all the outputs of the concerted efforts of
planning, design and construction of the building [are] put to test by use.” (Oti et al., 2016, page
208).
To optimize the O&M processes, a detailed overview of existing structures and the status of
already built buildings (Faltejsek & Chudikova, 2019). Well-arranged O&M processes, that are
using effective and efficient methods, can extend the life of a building and slow down the
degradation. Using BIM is one method to have a well-set up O&M process (Faltejsek &
Chudikova, 2019). In the AEC industry, information is created throughout the whole life cycle
of a building. To use the information that is created during the design and construction phase
computer integrated facility management (CIFM) can be used. It can be integrated into various
FM applications where different disciplines can share and exchange information in the project
(Yu, Froesea, & Grobler, 2000).
BIM can be applied in two different ways, either in an already constructed project or in new
constructions. It is easier to implement BIM in new projects due to the higher control of
information and documentation. For existing buildings, the implementation of BIM can be
difficult due to the lack of documentation, information and level of details (Faltejsek &
Chudikova, 2019). Faltejsek and Chudikova (2019) state that “most of the companies that have
launched BIM are still focused on implementing this concept in designing and constructing new
buildings” (Faltejsek & Chudikova, 2019; page 2).
8
There are several studies exploring the chances and barriers to the implementation of BIM in
the phase of operations and maintenance (Munir et al., 2019a; Oti et al., 2016; Kivits &
Furneaux, 2013). One of the main barriers to adopting BIM in management turns out to be a
misconception of the concept, which is often seen as a 3D-model instead of an information
management tool. Additionally, it is broadly assumed that all asset data needs to be in one single
model in order to work. In reality the information can however exist in several systems that are
connected to each other (Munir et al., 2019b). Here, research results are emphasizing the need
for asset owners to understand the BIM process and are in a second step aiming to realize
business value from the implementation of the model data in O&M processes (Munir et al.,
2019a).
Terreno et al. (2019) state that the use of BIM in FM can increase the efficiency of facility
management processes. As examples, existing research in this area has focused a lot on the use
of BIM for energy management and more recently researchers have been studying the potential
for emergency management as well as maintenance and repair tasks. In contrast, linking a
model to FM systems for security management or the optimization of relocation projects is less
common and has not been focused on yet. Other research fields as scarcely investigated are the
exploration of BIM integration into hazardous waste management, and information and
communication technology (ICT) asset management (Gao & Pishdad-Bozorgi, 2019). The
benefits of using BIM beyond construction are seen for instance in faster and more effective
processes enabled by easier sharing of information, more predictable building performances,
and a better understanding of life cycle costs (LCC). Additionally, the scheduling and historic
tracking of maintenance works are improved to allow proactive rather than reactive facilities
management and more accurate prevention of equipment failure (Kivits & Furneaux, 2013).
Nevertheless, using BIM in the operation and maintenance phase has also shown to come with
a number of disadvantages that need to be minimized through research or mitigated with a well-
designed corporate strategy. Those include e.g. the size and complexity of BIM demanding a
respective IT infrastructure, limits to the interoperability of different software solutions and
lack of mandated BIM use in several countries by public authorities. Next to these
disadvantages of BIM, reasons for the lagging implementation of BIM in the management and
operation of a building are often stated to be considerations of intellectual property, liability for
model errors and associated risks as well as the contractual management and legal status of the
models.
9
Moreover, developing and updating BIM models is a cost- and time-intensive task, which is
not necessarily performed by those benefiting from later savings: while most of the work is
done upfront by architects and engineers, it is usually the owner who saves time and money in
the long run during the operation phase (Kivits & Furneaux, 2013). According to (Terreno et
al., 2019) using BIM can increase the quality of processes and products, and save time and cost.
Additionally, sociotechnical issues like organizational changes and lack of adequate skill sets
to handle model information in combination with FM systems are named to prevent the use of
BIM in operations and maintenance (Kivits & Furneaux, 2013).
3.3. Creation of Business Value with BIM
Research about the business value of BIM in operations and maintenance has for now mostly
focused on a descriptive and rather qualitative approach, since case studies are rare given the
slow implementation in practice even though results both in terms of savings and improved
quality due to more precise outputs can be expected (Cecconi et al., 2017). Companies consider
the implementation of BIM for creating value by becoming one of the leading companies on
the market in digitalization, but are often unsure about the impact the implementation will have
on the company’s existing processes and structures. The construction and the design industry
has started to harvest the value of BIM, while the O&M phase is still lagging behind (Hoffer,
2016) even though from a life cycle perspective, there is evidence that the most value for owners
from using BIM is derived during the management of the building (Cavka et al., 2017). It has
further been indicated that sustainable facility management (SFM) has a positive effect on the
economic, environmental and social benefits and hence creates value for companies and
operations following this vision (Alfalah & Zayed, 2020). An evaluation of existing research
in this field (Matarneh et al., 2019) shows that several factors are needed to achieve a successful
implementation and hence create value using BIM beyond the construction phase, which
amongst others include:
a) Seamless information exchange processes between BIM and FM systems as well
as guidance to include all information required in FM for efficient operations
across different asset classes and IT systems
b) Information quality process to ensure the consideration of owner/ FM needs in
models as well as constant feedback loops between design and operation teams for
a more efficient building design
10
c) Integration of different information sources related to maintenance tasks as well
as health & safety tasks to provide a rich semantic database supporting FM
systems.
It is however important to note that the value of BIM is not inherent from the beginning, but
needs supportive processes and a well-planned strategy to deliver value to an owner
organization (Munir et al., 2019b). In this context, it is seldomly the lack of information, but
rather the abundance of it together with an absence of established processes and protocols for
data management, that put a barrier to the effective use of building data from BIM in
combination with Building Management Systems (BMS) (Munir et al., 2019). In order to create
business value, the organizational prerequisites and surrounding conditions must not be
neglected (Vass & Gustavsson, 2014).
To categorize where the implementation of BIM could be the most helpful to reduce
inefficiencies, Carbonari et al. (2018) have assessed the number of data entities potentially
available in digital building models for the performance of operation and maintenance tasks.
This has later allowed them to cluster the tasks and recommend priorities to structure the
particular BIM implementation.
According to Carbonari et al. (2018), satisfaction surveys, post-occupancy evaluation and
business performance evaluation should be addressed first as they are highly inefficient, but
only require a limited amount of information from the BIM model. In contrast, tasks like
information management, space management and maintenance strategy evaluation are
perceived as more efficient and at the same time need to be connected to a lot of information in
the models. They are hence recommended to be addressed at a later stage. Tasks like asset
records, analysis of maintenance data, whole life costs (high inefficiency and large amount of
model information required) as well as market intelligence (low inefficiency and little amount
of model information required) are ranked as medium priorities (Carbonari et al., 2018).
Irrespective of the task it is crucial for asset owners to thoroughly identify their organization’s
information requirements in order to incorporate relevant data in the model from an early stage,
which later facilitates data management and hence value generation in the phase of O&M. For
all these tasks to turn out valuable, the organization first needs to understand their
organizational business objectives and assess their processes to define and clearly communicate
BIM requirements.
11
For each organization, the data requirements will therefore differ and need to be assessed up-
front. From there, data and information repositories can be created with the help of BIM data
and managed throughout the building lifetime. It is the link between business objectives and
the quality of the management of data that ultimately creates value for businesses from several
perspectives (Munir et al., 2019a).
3.4. Evaluation of the Business Value of BIM
When it comes to measuring the value contribution of BIM, earlier research has primarily dealt
with business value in the design and construction phase. Whereas many companies see a
desirable effect of BIM in the future, few are found to measure e.g. the economic effects of
BIM (Vass & Gustavsson, 2014). Value parameters of facility management that are positively
impacted by the use of BIM have been identified to be culture, satisfaction, image, productivity,
innovation, flexibility, quality, collaboration, cost reduction, risk control and asset value
(Terreno et al., 2016). It has been found that value can be realized on different levels in an
organization: for individuals, systems and the entire business (Munir et al., 2018).
For the design and construction phase, a project-based VDC Scorecard has been developed to
assess the maturity of VDC implementation with a total of 57 quantitative measures in four
areas (planning, adoption, technology and performance) summarizing ten divisions (objective,
standard, preparation - organization, process - maturity, coverage, integration - quantity,
quality) (Kam et al., 2017). The prime objectives of this framework were to create a holistic,
practical, quantifiable and adaptive tool. It should remain relevant and useful, irrespective of
the project nature and asset class in times of rapid technological changes (Kam et al., 2017).
In order to realize value from employing BIM in O&M, a similar strategy has been suggested:
Identifying intangible value expectations (e.g. better decision-making, streamlined processes
or better asset information) and translating these into semi-tangible (e.g. fewer errors, reduced
budget/schedule overrunning or improved accuracy on forecasts) and then tangible factors (e.g.
reduced effort, cost and time of operations), which can be measured in various ways depending
on the organizational capabilities and needs (e.g. as ROI, savings to investment ratio, KPIs or
with process mapping). However, for an ROI analysis it is hard to take into account intangible
factors that are equally crucial for a firm or a project as tangible metrics. Another problem is
that it might be costly and time-consuming and there is no model or standard for calculating
ROI for BIM (Hoffer, 2016).
12
In an iterative process, the measured values should then be compared to the initially defined
business goals to identify benefits and determine areas of future action (Munir et al., 2018). The
appropriate choice of metrics in this process is heavily influenced by the level of operation, i.e.
strategic, tactical and operational building management (Parsanezhad & Song, 2018).
13
4. Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework intends to achieve a better understanding of the research topic by
clearly defining the key concepts used in the thesis to avoid ambiguity or vagueness. It will
provide a basis for the analysis, discussion and conclusion later in the report to show how the
concept of sustainable value can be applied to the use of BIM in Maintenance and Operations.
For this reason, the following chapter focuses on introducing the theoretical concepts of (1)
BIM, (2) building operations and maintenance and (3) sustainable business value.
4.1. Building Information Modeling (BIM)
The following chapter will point out how the concept of BIM has evolved and which
perspectives it includes until today to give an understanding of where potential use cases in
building maintenance and operations exist.
4.1.1. Definition
An example of researchers that have been defining BIM are Singh et al. (2011) who state that
“BIM is an advanced approach object-oriented CAD (Computer-Aided Design), which extends
the capability of traditional CAD approach by defining and applying intelligent relationships
between the elements in the building model”. Another statement is that BIM is a ”methodology
to manage the essential building design and project data in digital format throughout the
building’s life-cycle” (Penttilä 2007, page 403). Other definitions or names for BIM are “new
CAD paradigm” (Ibrahim, Krawczyk, & Schipporeit, 2004; page 1), “Building Product
Models” (Eastman, 1999), and “Building data modelling” (Penttilä, 2007). Tchana et al., (2019)
state that “BIM is the expression of the digital model” (page 547).
As stated earlier there are many definitions of BIM and with the examples above prove that the
definition of BIM varies and that the term has a different definition to different people. The
term BIM has been investigated by researchers before it emerged as a new term (Succar, 2009).
14
4.1.2. BIM Stages and Evolution
The BIM framework proposed by Succar (2009) is tri-axial (xyz-axial) with the different
dimensions of BIM fields (x-axis), BIM stages (y-axis) and BIM lenses (z-axis). Figure 4-1
shows the different dimensions of BIM.
Figure 4-1: BIM Framework (based on Succar, 2009)
BIM fields are divided into three activities (Technology, Process, and Policy (TPP)) with two
subfields deliverables and players. The technology field is a group of players that are
developing equipment, hardware, software and networking systems to increase productivity,
profitability and efficiency in the AECO industry. The process field includes players that
design, procure, construct, maintain, structure, manufacture and manage buildings. Examples
are e.g. architects, engineers, facility owners and other stakeholders that involve delivery,
ownership and operations of structures or buildings. Players in the policy field (e.g. insurance
companies and educational institutions) focus on allocating risks, distributing benefits,
preparing practitioners and decreasing conflicts within the AECO sector (Succar, 2009).
15
BIM stages are divided into three stages: object-based modelling (stage 1), model-based
collaboration (stage 2), and network-based integration (stage 3). Before BIM was developed,
the AEC industry used computer-aided design (CAD). The use of CAD started in the 1970s
(Eastman et al., 2010) and became an acceptable tool for design in the 1980s (Penttilä, 2007).
However, a common problem of using CAD was the limited interoperability between different
software systems (Eastman et al., 2010). Initially, a fixed starting point needs to be identified
to indicate where the AEC industry is before implementing BIM. In the starting point the
collaboration between stakeholders and the investment in technology are low and there is a lack
of interoperability. In the first stage each discipline generates a single-disciplinary model and
the collaboration in this stage between the stakeholders are not prioritized. Therefore the data
exchange is unidirectional and the communication is asynchronous. In stage 2, the collaboration
between the stakeholders increases, for example through the exchange of models between the
architecture and structural engineering planning. Even if the collaboration has been increasing,
the communication does not change in the second stage. In stage three, integrated models are
generated and shared in an integrated project delivery (IPD) approach. The collaboration is
spanning the whole project life cycle (design, construction and operations phase) and can be
supported by model server technologies (Succar, 2009).
BIM lenses are divided into three levels: disciplinary lenses, scoping lenses, and conceptual
lenses (Succar, 2009). BIM lenses are “distinctive layers of analysis applied to BIM fields and
stages to generate a “knowledge view” (Succar, 2009, page 367). When the domain researcher
uses the lenses, they can focus on any aspect of the AECO market and create a knowledge view
that can either match the researcher criteria or not fit in the criteria. Disciplinary lenses create
BIM views by application of fields of knowledge. Scoping lenses variate vertical and horizontal
abstraction of the intended view. To abstract the knowledge view in scoping lenses can be
achieved by changing the granularity and filter out unwanted information. Conceptual lenses
create knowledge views by using conceptual filters from BIM ontology (Succar, 2009).
4.1.3. Digital Twin
Closely linked to the discussions about using BIM in O&M is the notion of a digital twin. The
first time the word Digital Twin was used was in 2002 by Michael Grieves (Grieves, 2014).
The implementation of Digital Twins started around 2010 (Rubén et al., 2019). Like BIM, the
concept of a Digital Twin (DT) has many definitions varying between different industries but
also between academic and industry (Tchana, Ducellier, & Remy, 2019; Tao et al., 2019).
16
Grieves (2014) created a concept model for the implementation of a Digital Twin, which
consists of three parts. The first part is to have a physical product. The second part is to have a
virtual product and the third part is to connect both parts to exchange data and information
(Grieves, 2014). According to Tchana, Ducellier, & Remy (2019), the Digital Twin gives the
user the opportunity to test new ideas and concepts in simulations. The user or owner and
building designer can communicate (Tao et al., 2019) to give feedback straight away and
evaluate options before they are implemented in real life. Performance monitoring and
simulations are other key fields for using the Digital Twin with a major impact on maintenance
(Tchana, Ducellier & Remy, 2019).
A Digital Twin is not only a tool, but it is also a process, according to Kaewunruen and Xu
(2018) and the Digital Twin is not only used in the built environment industry (Tchana,
Ducellier, & Remy, 2019). It is also used in the aeronautics and defense sector for example.
However, there are some challenges to implement the Digital Twin, e.g. the need for new
technologies (Tchana, Ducellier, & Remy, 2019).
4.2. Building Operation and Maintenance (O&M)
Following the design and construction phase, Building Operation and Maintenance is the
longest and most capital-intensive phase of the building life cycle. The following section
provides a definition of the associated tasks and draws a line to the other services and between
management levels.
4.2.1. Definition
Based on a literature review in the fields of portfolio, program and project standards and IT
management standards, Ebinger and Madritsch (2012) developed a holistic, industry-neutral
Facility and Real Estate Management framework spanning across all phases from planning and
construction to the maintenance of a building. They distinguish between three management
levels as well as four key performance areas (KPA). The framework is deemed suitable for this
thesis as literature has found the creation of value to happen on all three levels, especially the
strategic one (Vass & Gustavsson, 2014). In addition, it provides an overview of relevant
processes that can be used irrespective of the ownership and service structures of individual
firms. As indicated in Table 4-1, this thesis will focus on all management levels of KPA 4 since
this area covers the operational phase of the building life cycle.
17
Table 4-1: Key Performance Areas in the Production Life Cycle of Facilities
KPA 1:
Strategic
Planning
KPA 2:
Portfolio
Management
KPA 3:
Project &
Transaction
Management
KPA 4:
Operation &
Maintenance
Management
> > > > Production Life Cycle of Facilities > > > >
Strategic
Level
Strategic
Planning
Optimized
Investment
Decisions
Optimal Capital
Project Results
Optimal Enterprise
Performance
Portfolio
Level
Facilities
Planning
Project Portfolio
Management
Facilities Portfolio
Management
Operational
Level
Project
Transaction
Management
Operations,
Maintenance &
Service Management
While KPA 1 (Strategic Planning) rarely involves building management staff when determining
the organizational goals and objectives, it does however have a direct impact on the assessment
of value in operation and maintenance (Ebinger & Madritsch, 2012). As research has suggested,
value creation happens where the building maintenance and operation practices support the
overall organizational strategy for the core businesses in the most efficient way possible (Vass
& Gustavsson, 2014).
According to Ebinger and Madritsch (2012, page 190), all business processes “generate
strategic value even if they are implemented in an operational environment”. KPA 1 is therefore
regarded as “top of the value stream” (Ebinger & Madritsch, 2012, page 190), where strategic
objectives are derived from the organization’s mission, vision and business strategy (Madritsch
& Ebinger, 2011). KPA 2 and 3 provide the link between these two areas by translating the
organizational strategy into real estate options, the selection and financing of the preferred
option (KPA 2) and the actual acquisition or construction of physical facilities (KPA 3).
4.2.2. Key Processes
Starting from the three different management levels of KPA 4 presented in Table 4-1, several
fields of operations and key processes are identified by Ebinger and Madritsch (2012). KPA 4
is dominated by operational functions, which are linked to a tactical function.
18
Those manage the work to ensure consistent and efficient operations to enable the optimal
performance of the organization in an attractive physical environment (Ebinger & Madritsch,
2012). The list of processes in Table 4-2 is chosen to provide a cohesive perspective in line
with the general definition of the KPAs in the previous chapter.
It is referred to and built upon in other research papers such as Parsanezhad (2015) and
resonates with other process structures like the one suggested in the common national BIM
requirements (COBIM) in Finland (Finne, 2012), that divides facility management processes
into the areas of operative property management (Management, Finance, Maintenance,
Repairs) and end-user services. At the same time, it does however provide a more holistic view
and helps to stress the link between organizational strategy and building performance and
services (Parsanezhad, 2015).
19
Table 4-2: Management Levels and Processes in Building Operations & Maintenance
Function Processes Description
Strategic
Level
(Steering)
Optimized enterprise
performance in an
environment for opt.
organizational
functioning
Performance
Analysis and
Evaluation
Steering function to align
tactical and operational
performance with
organizational goals in iterative
process
Tactical
Level (Co-
ordination)
Optimized operational
performance at low
cost through
establishment of
service level
agreements (SLA)
with users to ensure
the provision of right
services at agreed
level of costs
Facilities
Resource Mgmt.
Ensure adequate staffing of all
facilities functions
Facilities Risk/
Regulatory
Management
Monitor and mitigate risks
associated with existing
facilities portfolio; ensure
meeting of regulatory
requirements
Facilities Client
Management
Maintain close relationship
with clients to ensure
operational functions meet their
expectations/ needs
Facilities
Performance
Management
Monitor operational level to
ensure meeting of performance
goals in SLAs
Facilities Audit Monitor condition of facility
portfolio; identify needs for
renewals/ replacements →
feedback to KPA 1 & 2
Operational
Level
(Execution)
Run and preserve
existing facilities and
provide facility-
related services
Services
Management
Property Management, Lease
Administration, Space
Management, Food/ Security/
Fleet Services, Office Support,
Cleaning
Maintenance
Management
Preventive and reactive
maintenance of existing asset
portfolio, repair work if needed
Operations
Management
Operation of facilities systems
(HVAC, electrical, plumbing)
to provide optimal work
environment for core business
functions; sub-processes for
utility and energy management
20
The maintenance management can be split in preventive and corrective maintenance as
suggested by Mangano and De Marco (2014). Downtime costs during corrective maintenance
are often high due to damages to other components and a drop in the revenue stream. Therefore,
preventive maintenance policies are adopted by a growing number of organizations in an
attempt to minimize repair work. Preventive maintenance can be performed both in scheduled
time intervals and based on the condition of a component. The latter one is the more resource-
efficient strategy as it closely monitors the state of facility equipment (Parsanezhad, 2014).
4.3. Sustainable Business Value
“Value” as a term is not precisely defined or validated empirically (Windsor, 2017). Originally
it focused on the perspective of economic shareholder value as a “surplus or gain in someone’s
welfare relative to previous conditions”, occurring in any voluntary two-party exchange
transaction as a Pareto improvement (Windsor, 2017, page 74). In the early 1990s, companies
began to extend this view to environmental and social metrics.
4.3.1. Pillars of Sustainability
Considering a range of economic, environmental and social indicators in business value
propositions is commonly known as the “triple bottom line” of economic well-being,
environmental quality, and social justice (Arora et al., 2016). All three pillars are linked closely
and interdependently. Social sustainability is studied least, but can drive the incorporation of
economic and ecological sustainability (Ajmal et al., 2017). There is also a growing awareness
of the existing social and environmental consequences of economic decisions (Arora et al.,
2016). A holistic business strategy needs to address benefits and costs not only for customers,
investors and shareholders, but also for employees, suppliers and partners, the society and the
environment (Bocken et al., 2013). Sustainability balances the interests of all these stakeholders
in a way that an increase in value for one party does not harm another.
4.3.1.1. Economic Sustainability
To incorporate sustainability into the pursuit of economic value creation beyond the increase
of consumer and producer surplus (Windsor, 2017), the thought of life cycle costs is prevailing
in sustainable facility operations and project conceptions. Traditional economic cost accounting
is still employed for monitoring KPIs like the return on investment (ROI) or internal rate of
return (IRR) of an investment, but left alone they lead to decisions that negatively impact
environmental costs (Zhong & Wu, 2015).
21
Instead of an emphasis on initial costs of e.g. material and components, life cycle costs consider
the costs of waste, emissions and pollution in construction costs, maintenance costs, operational
costs, occupancy costs, end-of-life costs and non-construction costs (Zhong & Wu, 2015).
4.3.1.2. Environmental Sustainability
The perspective of environmental sustainability has received growing attention and is reflected
and assessed in various ratings such as LEED or BREEAM (Zhong & Wu, 2015). Factors such
as water efficiency, energy consumption and efficiency, indoor atmosphere and air quality,
environmental protection, material and resource consumption are taken into account. The life
cycle assessment is a method that can be used to estimate the environmental impact processes
and products can have (Mukherjee et al., 2013).
4.3.1.3. Social Sustainability
Social sustainability from a company perspective looks at three different areas: Learning and
Growth, Community Development and Safety & Security (Ajmal et al., 2017).
Table 4-3: Factors of Social Sustainability (adapted from Ajmal et al., 2017)
Category Factors
Learning and Growth Education and training, job security, employment
Community Development Indigenous rights, good governance, cultural
heritage, social involvement, human rights,
consumer/ product responsibility
Safety and Security Labor practices, fair practices, health and safety
The factors explained in Table 4-3 might vary in their contribution to value creation using BIM
strategies, but provide a starting point for the evaluation of sustainable value in Chapter 5.
More recent rations like WELL (International WELL Building Institute, 2020) account for the
health and well-being factors in buildings by employing criteria such as thermal and acoustical
comfort, corporate strategies for the promotion of mental and cognitive health as well as
physical activity, social inclusion, corporate health innovation projects and an natural light
exposure (International WELL Building Institute, 2020).
22
4.3.2. Creation of Sustainable Value
Drawing from the aforementioned sustainability dimensions, sustainable value creation can be
defined as “the behaviors and actions of an organization across multiple financial and non-
financial dimensions in order to manage the risks and opportunities associated with economic,
environmental and social developments.” (Banerjee, 2012, p. 4)
Bocken et al. (2013) propose a framework to explore different opportunities for sustainable
value innovation, namely the current value proposition, value missed, value destroyed, and
opportunities for new value creation. The value mapping tool combining these fields aims to
help companies develop sustainable business models on a level that wants to stimulate idea
generation and discussion in the first place rather than providing a quantitative analysis tool.
By doing so, it serves for understanding benefits and drawbacks of the current value
proposition, highlighting conflicting values, and identifying how the business models could be
redesigned or realigned to reduce negative outcomes and/or improve the overall outcome for
the stakeholders, especially from the perspective of social and ecological sustainability (Bocken
et al., 2013). Taking into consideration the perspectives of all key stakeholders in this
framework ensures a balanced view of a company’s value propositions and helps to establish a
sustainable business model.
Even though value destroyed and missed cover two different aspects of value, assigning
challenges to one or another category may sometimes result in blurriness and overlapping.
Therefore, the value destroyed (negative social impacts and environmental damage) and value
missed (failure to capture value, underutilized assets, resources or capabilities and waste
streams) are summarized in Figure 4-2.
Figure 4-2: Stages of Sustainable Value Creation (adapted from Bocken et al., 2013)
23
Being all linked to each other with the current value proposition as the starting point and
working outwards from there building upon the preceding steps, their characteristics are
outlined in Table 4-4.
Table 4-4: Value Types (adapted from Bocken et al., 2013)
Value Type Definition Business Model Implications
Current Value
Proposition
Benefits delivered to the stakeholders by
a transaction
Basis for any future value
creation
Value Missed
(VM)
Failure to capitalize on assets, resources
& capabilities, operate below industry
benchmark, failure to receive sought
benefits & capture value, waste streams
Capture currently missed value
through new activities,
relationships and network
reconfiguration
Value
Destroyed
(VD)
Environmental/ social damage caused by
a transaction (negative externalities),
depletion of non-renewables
Generate solutions to capture
new value by reducing VD; re-
conceptualize as VM
New Value
Creation
Opportunities
Help businesses expand into new
markets, introduce new product/service
with greater benefits for stakeholders
(customers, employee well-being,
positive climate contribution)
To extend the value analysis, Bocken et al. (2013) suggest to consider “potential changes in
technology, legislation, social change, environmental pressures and competition that affect the
business environment” (Bocken et al., 2013, page 493) by using tools such as a SWOT analysis
(for strengths, weaknesses, threats and opportunities), PEST analysis (for macro-level political,
economic, social, and technical factors) or competitor analysis. Life cycle analyses can further
promote a deeper understanding of the impact of services or products on the social, economic,
and environmental perspectives.
4.3.3. Evaluation of Sustainable Value
Since value evaluation is seen as an ongoing process in this paper, it is suggested that the whole
approach should follow a PDCA (plan, do, check, act) cycle (Garza-Reyes et al., 2018). This
allows a continuous assessment of the internal and external factors driving a company’s
performance and timely reaction to changes as well as a proactive pursuit of new value
opportunities. Garza-Reyes et al. (2018) apply the framework to the evaluation of
environmental value streams, but the general steps can be summarized in Figure 4-3.
24
Figure 4-3: PDCA-Cycle (adapted from Garza-Reyes et al., 2018)
To look at the current value proposition and the maturity of different processes, an evaluation
survey can be performed among staff members by translating the KPAs strategic goals into
precise statements about an organization’s activities. Those can be agreed or disagreed on. This
helps to both get an overview of the organization’s status quo as well as to benchmark against
specific competitors or industry standards and determine areas for future focus and unexploited
value potential (Madritsch & Ebinger, 2011).
25
5. Findings
Based on the literature review and theoretical frameworks presented in the previous chapters,
the value mapping tool for sustainable business models proposed by Bocken et al. (2013) will
be applied to the BIM-related processes in O&M in this chapter. In the second part, the industry
reflections on the value of BIM for O&M is presented and key findings are highlighted. While
the model application will be performed on a generic, not company-specific level based on
literature, the industry interviews aim at adding individual stakeholder perspectives on the key
value propositions.
5.1. Model Application
The application of the proposed framework of a value mapping tool to the use of BIM in O&M
will identify the following aspects (adapted from Bocken et al. (2013)):
1) Purpose and value captured by current O&M practices (based on literature review).
a) What is the unit of analysis?
b) Which are the main stakeholders from an owner’s perspective?
c) What (in-)tangible value is created for the stakeholders by the owner?
2) Value missed or destroyed (mapping the shortcomings in current O&M practices and
existing barriers of using BIM to the key O&M processes).
a) What are the negative outcomes of the service for any of the stakeholders?
b) Where is the owner missing an opportunity to capture value?
c) Are assets, capacities, and capabilities underutilized?
3) New value opportunities (assessing where the benefits and opportunities of using BIM
in O&M can turn value missed or destroyed into value captured).
a) How can the existing value be enhanced further by using BIM?
b) Where can negative value be eliminated by using BIM?
c) Where could missed value be converted into new value by using BIM?
d) What new positive value can an owner add for its stakeholders by using BIM?
To get a structured overview, a SWOT analysis based on the literature findings has been
performed.
26
Figure 5-1: SWOT Analysis
As shown in Figure 5-1, the SWOT analysis highlights strengths and weaknesses of current
O&M practices as well as potential opportunities and threats that result from implementing
BIM. The following chapters will elaborate and build on those findings.
5.1.1. Purpose of O&M and Value Captured
As described earlier, the unit of analysis will be a general industry perspective based on the
literature review without focusing on the case of an individual company. Starting from the
owner’s point of view, the key stakeholders are assumed to be the building users (either
department within the owner company or tenants), the O&M staff (internal or external service
providers), suppliers (of e.g. building system components), financial and environmental
authorities and optionally on a project basis consultants for renovation or relocation projects.
The purpose of building operations and maintenance services has been defined as “guaranteeing
a safe and functioning building for its occupants by coordinating the physical space with the
people and processes of an organization” (Parsanezhad, 2019, page 20) to enable an optimal
organizational performance in line with corporate goals (Parsanezed, 2019).
27
As identified in the literature (Li et al., 2019), the current value captured can be seen as the
strengths of O&M practices, namely:
- Provision of a high-quality workspace,
- Reduction of life cycle costs,
- Support of the organization’s core functions and strategy,
- Business continuity in emergencies.
In relation to the three pillars of sustainability, the general O&M value caters to all three of
them: providing a high-quality workspace focuses on social sustainability in terms of safety
and employee well-being (e.g. through considerations of physical activity, social inclusion,
corporate health innovation projects, and natural light exposure), reduced life cycle costs
increase a business’ long-term economic resilience. The third factor addresses all three aspects
depending on the organizational strategy’s focus. Ensured business continuity in emergencies
(fourth factor) can be seen to create economic and social value.
5.1.2. Value Missed or Value Destroyed
In the SWOT analysis, the value missed is derived from the identified weaknesses of current
O&M practices. The identified threats refer to potential barriers of using BIM in O&M and are
hence translated into value destroyed.
There are other weaknesses and threats to be taken into account for a full SWOT analysis (e.g.
competitor behavior or market changes), but since this thesis focuses on the value creation by
using BIM, they will not be assessed here.
A more detailed mapping is performed in Table 5-1 to show how the identified value missed or
destroyed is affecting specific key processes in O&M and on which stakeholders this has an
impact as derived from the value framework by Bocken et al. (2013).
28
Table 5-1: Value Missed and Destroyed in Current O&M Practices1
Business Process C E I Su Env S
Several Management Level
Processes on All
Management Levels
Large amount of unused building data X X X X X X
“Silos” - limited information sharing X X X X
Processes on Tactical
and Operational Levels
User resistance to new technology X X
Lack of adequate skills to use BIM X X
Strategic Management Level
Performance Analysis
and Evaluation
Misunderstanding of BIM Concept X
Lack of Organizational Support X X
Training, IT & Maintenance Costs X X X
Tactical Management Level
Risk/Regulatory
Management
No Regulations: Model Error Liability X X
No Regulations: Handling IP X X
Resource Management Limited Interoperability of Softwares X X X
Performance
Management
High Downtime Costs;
Revenue Drop X X
Client Management Unmet Demand for User Well-Being X X
Operational Management Level
Processes on
Operational Level
Time-consuming updating of models X X
Reliance on manual steps X X X
Inadequate information tools X X X
Maintenance
Management Reactive Maintenance Practices X X X X X
Operations
Management Risk of Damage to Other Components X X X X X X
The overview shows that especially the interaction between owners and their network sees a
lot of inefficiencies with the prevailing O&M practices. This concerns both the strategic
planning and tactical steering of real estate portfolios as well as daily operational tasks.
1 C = Customer (Tenant), E = Employee, I = Investors, Su = Suppliers, Env = Environment, S = Society
29
Next to that, several inefficiencies are also affecting the tenant relations and the conditions for
own employees. In contrast, existing research papers do not highlight a lot of environmental
and societal value that is lost due to existing inefficiencies in O&M practices.
5.1.3. New Value Opportunities
New value opportunities are suggested based on the shortcomings identified as value missed
and value destroyed as well as developments in O&M practices and the potentials of Digital
Twins highlighted in the literature review and theoretical frameworks. New value can be
created both for existing stakeholders as well as for new stakeholders (Bocken et al., 2013).
For value missed, new activities, relationships, and network reconfigurations help to generate
new value. This is closely connected to the need for rethinking business processes and
structures when implementing BIM in O&M as suggested in the literature (Vass and
Gustavsson, 2015). For value destroyed, the aim should be to reduce or eliminate this destroyed
value and hence improve the value proposition in the future (Bocken et al., 2013).
Like for value destroyed and missed, a more detailed mapping is performed in Table 5-2 to
show how new value opportunities are affecting specific key processes in O&M and on which
stakeholders this has an impact as derived from the value framework by Bocken et al. (2013).
30
Table 5-2: New Value Opportunities Through Using BIM in O&M Practices2
Business Process C E I Su Env S
Several Management Levels
Processes on All
Management Levels
Easier sharing of information X X X X
Optimized relocation projects X X X
Processes on Strategic
and Tactical Levels
Better understanding of LCC X
Processes on Tactical and
Operational Levels
More predictable building performance X
Automated report management X X X
Tactical Management Level
Resource Management Optimized Occupancy Tracking X X
Risk/ Regulatory
Management
Optimized Emergency Management X X X X
Facilities Performance
Management
Maintenance/repairment task tracking X X X
Operational Management Level
Services Management More efficient space management X X X
Optimized occupancy tracking X X
Improved security management X X X
Maintenance
Management
Prevention of equipment failure X X X X X
Proactive maintenance tasks
scheduling
X X X
Maintenance/repairment task tracking X X X
Optimized work order tracking X X
Operations Management Optimized emergency management X X X X X
Better health conditions for users/ staff X X
More efficient energy management X X X
Hazardous waste management X X X X X
2 C = Customer (Tenant), E = Employee, I = Investors, Su = Suppliers, Env = Environment, S = Society
31
Overall, the most opportunities for creating value with the use of BIM are seen in operational
management tasks. The parties benefiting from these proposals are both the tenant and external
service providers as well as the facility management employees. Societal and environmental
benefits are considered, but not prioritized in research based on what was found in literature.
5.2. Industry Reflections
Since BIM is not widely linked yet to applications and practices in the industry, case studies
are rare. The industry reflections therefore include interviews conducted in the course of this
thesis work as described in Chapter 2.2. The analysis of the interviews follows the same
structure as the concept application based on literature using the questions defined in Chapter
5.1. The main findings related to the value framework are summarized in the following.
5.2.1. Purpose of O&M and Value Captured
Overall, the purpose of O&M is repeatedly seen in delivering a good product or service at a
low cost to the tenant. The total value for the owner should be increased by either reducing
costs or increasing rents (Company A). Lower costs can for instance be achieved through higher
efficiency of task performances in O&M (Company E) and ultimately lower overall O&M staff
costs through a reduction of repetitive, time-consuming human work and in consequence
smaller teams (Company A). This requires an efficient sharing of information (Company C). It
is also seen as important to know the exact details of the company’s real estate portfolio and
have models and documents reflecting the as-built reality in order to make well-informed,
accurate decisions (Company B).
From the owner’s perspective, the emphasis is put on the long-term focus and the need for
sustainable, high-quality facilities, especially in markets where tenants may have several
properties to choose between (Company B). None of the companies interviewed describes its
strategy as focused on short-term holding aiming at frequent transactions. The asset classes
under management differ, but do not affect the overall perspective on the O&M purpose -
whether the focus is on retail, residential, office, or special assets like gyms, airports, and
schools. Differences exist in terms of the granularity and potential for standardization between
commercial and residential properties, where the later ones are perceived as more similar hence
leading to more repetitive O&M tasks. Finding standardized solutions for commercial real
estate maintenance is seen as more difficult among the interview participants (Company E).
32
Collaboration in O&M happens primarily between the owners, facility managers, and tenants,
particularly when new commercial tenants move in and individual refurbishments are made.
Beyond that, there is also a lot of collaboration with municipalities, e.g. for environmental
certificates, and with external service providers like building technicians.
5.2.2. Value Missed or Value Destroyed
The interviewees’ reflections about current O&M practices point out three major areas of
inefficiencies: data consistency across systems, performance efficiency, and knowledge
management, all of them being interlinked to a certain degree.
5.2.2.1. Data Inconsistency across Systems
Company A highlights that a lack of interoperability prevents existing plans and documents
from being synchronized. A large number of people work on the maintenance of buildings, yet
their blueprints are not always having the same version of the information. The results are high
costs of updating existing files and the need to validate the information in person before making
decisions. All too often, models are not updated at all since it is unrealistic to keep track of data
spread across systems (Company B) and a very time-consuming process a single person can
hardly accomplish (Company A). As a consequence of known insufficiencies and inaccuracies,
the maintenance staff may lose trust in the building data (Company B).
In addition, often praised AI-based solutions for building management cannot be implemented
if the required data is scattered too much, unstructured, or not tangible (Company A). Whereas
simple, attractive interfaces of new software may help to attract a lot of employees, it is
important to create an understanding of the system’s requirements since the high quality of the
input data is needed to ensure reliable, meaningful output results (Company D). More accurate
data, e.g. the exact area of rental spaces, would also have a positive impact on the economic
value as rental and service contracts can be negotiated more precisely (Company B).
The building data created during planning and construction is seen as valuable, but all too often
property companies struggle to define clear demands for the Level of Detail (LOD) to be
represented in the model so they can use it in the O&M phase (Company C). This results in
double expenses if different standards are used (Company E) or data is not migrated and has to
be set up by the owner or tenant, e.g. for the use in room booking systems (Company B).
33
Instead of following corporate standards, construction project managers can often decide for
each project which data to ask for and how to structure it. This “work in silos” makes a
standardized take-over process after a project completion impossible (Company D).
5.2.2.2. Performance Inefficiency
As a result of missing historic building data (Company B), proactive maintenance (e.g. the
improvement of energy efficiency in buildings) is impeded by focusing on reactive fixes like
leaks or fires (Company A). The daily work in building operation and maintenance is also
significantly affected by the data flaws mentioned previously. O&M-employees need to spend
a long time looking for the right data in different systems or have to perform physical check-
ups where validated data could instead have been available digitally (Company A). This lowers
work motivation and employees have less time and motivation to focus on client relations
(Company D).
In addition, the interaction with the tenant is seen as inefficient, given that issue reports are not
submitted correctly or specifically, and require additional investigation, communication loops
and potentially avoidable site visits by the O&M staff to clarify the problem (Company E).
Both examples indicate that higher efficiency or more automation would in consequence allow
for significantly lower overall salary costs, since the same number of employees would get done
more or the tasks could be completed by a much smaller team (Company A). This is particularly
important considering that many processes could be standardized and occur on a frequent basis,
e.g. maintenance tasks (Company D).
5.2.2.3. Lack of Knowledge Management
The daily performance inefficiencies are further increased by knowledge being intangibly
linked to single persons in the organization (Company A). Only a few people know which
information is the most recent one or where to find it. This dependency reduces productivity
additionally if those employees retire or get sick because new employees have to go through a
long on-boarding process and solutions need to be improvised or set-up in a time-consuming
process.
Many organizations are not built around the management of information, neither from the
process perspective, nor in terms of the official structures. Responsibilities are scattered instead
of being clearly allocated to dedicated persons, who from a technical perspective ensure that
the right employees have access to the right data at any time (Company D).
34
5.2.2.4. Source of Inefficiencies
The main reasons why the inefficiencies persist up today are seen in the lack of knowledge and
understanding of the operational respectively strategic drivers across management levels as
well a very little collaboration between different industry stakeholders.
Company A highlights that property investors and C-level executives are seldomly aware of
the inefficiencies that arise from insufficient data in daily practices. Instead of focusing on the
users of new solutions (e.g. tenant or O&M staff), they are driven by the wish to be perceived
as “frontrunners” in the industry adopting new technology first. On the other hand, facility
managers often lack the holistic view to grasp the implications of changes for the organizational
strategy, both financially and process-oriented. A second gap is identified between digital
natives in a company and employees who are rather skeptical towards changing their way of
working and trusting new technologies (Company E). There is also a knowledge gap existing
between the professionals in the construction industry and in the real estate management
industry. While the construction industry has been using modelling tools and digital planning
for 10 to 15 years already, many employees in the O&M phase have no knowledge in the use
and possibilities of the data created in such an environment (Company D). Due to this lack of
knowledge, it is unclear how to use the data from construction projects later on (Company B).
As a general problem, the lack of standards and cooperation in the industry is emphasized
several times in the interviews. Single companies may develop digital solutions to their
inefficiencies, but commercial products that fit several companies’ needs are perceived to be
rare or not profitable to date. The major players in the Swedish real estate market often have
relevant knowledge in this field but are seldomly collaborating with start-ups or other
companies, as they expect to get more tailored solutions with their own developments
(Company C). Different standards existing across the industry are existing or being developed,
but they seldomly match each other (Company D). The need for significant financial
investments is further keeping several building management companies from implementing
technologies and new ways of working in their daily practices. On the one hand, accurate
building data and models are seldomly reflected in the transaction value of a property hence
not displaying immediate monetary value (Company E). On the other hand, purchases of new
software’s and standards, as well as memberships in organizations are costly, leading to
hesitation in the upper management to support proposed changes, especially if the considered
solutions are rather new on the market as it is the case for a lot of start-ups (Company E).
35
5.2.3. New Value Opportunities
Based on current inefficiencies in the O&M sector, it was also discussed where and how value
can be created by implementing BIM. They mostly refer to benefits on the tactical and
operational level, but also enable better informed decision-making for the long-term facility
strategies.
Early pilot projects see applications for e.g. renovation and refurbishment, use cases linked to
the Internet of Things (IoT) sensors, and issue reporting. There are valuable opportunities for
pretty much all the stakeholders involved in or affected by an owner’s building operation and
maintenance work: tenants, network members like external service partners, employees, and to
a smaller extent the environment and society.
5.2.3.1. Value Opportunities towards Tenants
Regarding the relationship between the owner and the tenants or facility users, opportunities
for increased value are seen in the reporting of failures and issues in facilities. By submitting
notifications directly in a model, the accuracy is improved, and the O&M staff knows the
location directly and unambiguously. Images can be attached, and previous failures revised at
an instance. The issue handling also becomes more transparent as tenants get immediate
feedback on the status of the issue.
Eliminating the need to call the landlord and waiting for responses increases the efficiency on
both sides and makes the interaction more pleasant. Ultimately, tenants are more satisfied with
the owner's communication, and quicker hazard management is ensured to provide a safe, well-
maintained working environment for both tenants and O&M staff. Positive feedback from pilot
projects confirms this (Company B).
A second case for value opportunities in the interaction of owner and tenant is the negotiation
of new leases. More accurate building data enables better informed decision-making and the
elimination of risk premia on both sides as a consequence of insecurity about the true rental
area. Services can be agreed upon based on exact square meter data and scaled up as needed
instead of being defined roughly per contract or space type (Company E). This increases the
property’s economic value and enables more accurate financial calculations in the long run.
36
5.2.3.2. Value Opportunities towards Network
Just as for the tenant interaction, more accurate data is also beneficial when contracting external
services such as cleaning from third parties (Company E). The need for services and on-going
maintenance can be predicted and prioritized more precisely based on digital building
information, hence reducing the probability of too frequently or too seldomly scheduled
maintenance (Company D). Services can also be awarded by the exact area instead of a lump
sum for an entire building (Company B). This enables better steering of external service parties,
as demands can be formulated clearer and adjusted quicker. In consequence, the skills of
external parties can be matched to the owner’s needs in a better way. In the long run, life cycle
costs are reduced, and contracts can be formulated more precisely to avoid disputes about the
scope of services (Company D).
5.2.3.3. Value Opportunities towards Environment
Overall, using BIM in O&M enables more efficient space management (Company B).
Scenarios can be evaluated quicker, e.g. in lease negotiations or renovation planning, by playing
with model parameters, supported by immediate visualizations that facilitate communication
among all stakeholders. This improves both the economic output as well as the environmental
footprint since spatial needs are matched better and long-term consequences can be evaluated
already in an early stage (Company C). Other than that, environmental benefits are not
particularly emphasized by the interview participants.
5.2.3.4. Value Opportunities towards Employees
In contrast, major emphasis is put on the benefits for employees working in O&M.
Incorporating the use of BIM data into their practices allows them to have control over the
building data and perform tasks more efficiently. It also reduces the stress that comes with the
expectation to be able to control a complex building portfolio without having the information
or tools at hand to make data-driven, informed decisions (Company A). Having a digital
representation of the building makes the visualization of sensors or defective items much easier
(Company A) and having a digital replica during inspections increases the efficiency of the
daily work of O&M employees (Company D). Seeing on their phone where different meters,
sensors, and access points are in the building reduces frustration over time-consuming searches,
increases safety, and cuts the time needed for inspections significantly (Company D).
37
Ultimately the work also becomes more attractive and fun than with basic paper drawings and
excel tables (Company C). Making employees enthusiastic about using the technology is seen
as the most important step towards the successful implementation and is the prerequisite to any
economic or environmental value that will come from the use of BIM. To reduce the time effort
and rework that comes with updating models and documents through a single instance, it is
suggested to include input from multiple parties on an on-going basis. This can be the O&M
staff, but if desired also the tenants or third-party service providers, enabled by the design of
attractive, user-friendly interfaces and flexible access rights (Company A).
One advantage emphasized here is that these parties have a far better understanding of the data
relevancy based on their experience in daily work practices. Instead of hiring consultants to
design a static plan, the inclusion of operative workers ensures practicability, lower costs of
model maintenance (Company A), and a dynamic model that reflects actual information needs
and centers (Company E). An intuitive interface will also ease the transition from existing ways
of working to the new ones, especially for older co-workers or those who are not used to the
technology (Company E). Linking and saving data to the model is further beneficial for
knowledge management, both on a daily basis and especially when employees are leaving the
company. It allows to cut cost and time in on-boarding of new staff and ensures availability of
knowledge (Company A).
5.2.3.5. Value Opportunities towards Society
Last but not least, societal value is mentioned. In countries, with more advanced BIM use and
government-driven initiatives, at times including mandated BIM policies for public projects,
more progress is made. The development of software like Solibri and Magicad in Finland or
StreamBIM in Norway are examples of value opportunities turned into products. Encouraging
and promoting the use of BIM, e.g. in collaboration with start-ups will allow for the creation of
jobs and attract talent to the industry (Company C).
5.2.4. Value Evaluation
None of the interviewed owners has defined specific metrics up to date to evaluate the value of
using BIM in O&M. Instead, they focus on defining and testing the implementation first. Rather
than being driven by performance indicators, the motivation to use BIM in the operation phase
originates from e.g. the intention to exploit already existing construction data (Company C and
D) or the investigation of industry trends (Company E).
38
Internal initiatives are often driven by the IT-department, project development department or a
dedicated BIM-responsible. Some of the models are intended to be taken over from the
construction phase, whereas others build upon new scans of existing properties. This is heavily
dependent on how successfully the O&M department can connect construction model data with
their databases and processes, filter the relevant parameters and create useful information from
it (Company C).
Not only the approach but also the definition of using BIM in O&M varies. Company C states
that many companies claim to use BIM, but at a closer look, their level of implementation
differs. While some see using BIM as having a static BIM model that can be included in
renovation planning, others define using BIM as daily interaction with the virtual building
replica (Company A).
This makes it hard to define common metrics. Mentioned are the time spent on tasks with or
without the availability of a digital model on the phone (Company D and E) and the number of
people using and contributing to the model (Company A). Company A sees the ultimate value
in the end-user - the facility manager - who gets work done quicker, can make better decisions
and is less stressed. As a consequence, the use of BIM is expected to have an impact on the
level, and quality of service that can be provided in the interaction with the tenants as employees
are more motivated and dedicated to their work (Company D). Another goal can also be to
operate the same building portfolio with half the number of people, enabled by more efficient
task performances (Company A).
It is suggested to adopt a strategic perspective on the implementation of BIM instead of moving
too quickly too soon. “Low-hanging fruits” should be captured first in small steps (Company
D). Company B expects that the biggest challenge coming with this change are new ways of
working that require good management to keep the team behind the implementation of new
technologies (Company E). In the longer run, whole new business models will need to be
created (Company C).
39
6. Analysis and Discussion
This chapter will reflect on the presented findings in the context of the chosen theoretical
framework and relate them to previous research.
6.1. Creation of Sustainable Value
To assess the creation of sustainable value from a holistic perspective, the value framework
from Bocken et al. (2013) was applied to findings from existing literature. In a second step, five
interviews were conducted to get a deeper understanding of the inefficiencies in current O&M
practices and the potential value that could be created by implementing BIM.
6.1.1. Purpose of O&M and Value Captured
The purpose of O&M has initially been defined in research as the provision of a high-quality
workspace, reduction of life cycle costs, support of the organization’s core functions, and
business continuity in emergencies. Out of these factors, the interviews showed a focus on
providing a high-quality property and on costs, both as a goal to reduce them through efficient
operations over the life cycle as well as a metric to evaluate the implementation of new
technologies. In terms of cost, increasing the property value was not emphasized, presumably
because all interviewed owners pursue a long-term investment strategy and are not intending
to sell their properties quickly. Here it can be seen how the overall corporate strategy has a
strong impact on the focus of operations.
Looking back at the identified future developments in the O&M sector by Li et al. (2019), the
interviews confirmed a trend towards increased use of technology and the ambition of better
informed long-term decision making. Environmental sustainability as a trend was not
particularly highlighted as a goal, but the frequently mentioned use of IoT sensors as well as
the collaboration with certification instances show the increasing presence of this area. Next to
that, the increasing complexity of managing building portfolios and in consequence more
demanding jobs for O&M staff were mentioned in both research and practice. It can be expected
that good academic education and the willingness to learn new software tools are more and
more required. Enabled by technology, the focus is shifting from purely reactive building
maintenance towards user-centric services for high occupant well-being and satisfaction.
40
Regarding the status quo of BIM use in O&M, it was found in research and the interviews that
the implementation in Sweden is not very advanced yet. Difficulties were experienced to find
companies with knowledge in this field. The majority of the companies that replied do not use
BIM in O&M but expressed an interest in the subject. Other companies are planning or have
started the implementation and only a few companies claimed to be using BIM in O&M.
However, the level and scope in which they do so differed from daily to weekly to occasionally,
e.g. for renovations. It has to be defined what it means that a company is using BIM because
the proclamation of being on the way to adapting BIM into O&M can be driven more by
marketing and communication goals rather than by actual needs and actions.
6.1.2. Value Missed or Value Destroyed
The research analysis in Chapter 5.1 has unveiled inefficiencies across all management levels.
Strategic decisions are not always backed by a solid database and have to be based on best
guesses and experiences of individuals. Operative tasks are time-consuming and repetitive,
which can lead to frustration among employees. Those inefficiencies are mostly affecting the
employees in terms of motivation as well as the investors/corporate performance in terms of
monetary losses or failure to capture higher revenue. Additionally, the relation to tenants and
partners is affected negatively by information bottlenecks and unclear responsibilities. In
contrast, the environment and society are mentioned less often, either because they are not as
affected by the identified inefficiencies or are not in the focus of the research performed up to
date as most companies are concerned with the economic consequences of their actions at first.
This is confirmed by the interviews. Inefficiencies are primarily seen due to data inconsistency
and limited interoperability, poor knowledge management, and inefficient O&M processes.
When taking over data from the construction phase, the owner seldomly knows what data, and
information to request and therefore the design and construction phase data are not passed to
the owner. Existing data is migrated in a long process, or the models become entirely obsolete
and new scans are created during O&M. In research and practice, the definition of BIM is also
not clear and has different meanings. Some people see BIM as a communication tool, others
highlight its use as a design tool, depending on the level on which the person uses BIM and for
what. The majority of the companies that were interviewed said that BIM represents data and
information. However, many students and professionals see BIM more as a software or tool to
create a 3D-models and generate drawings. A shared understanding of BIM in academia and
the industry will be a prerequisite for standards and visions for use cases of BIM in O&M.
41
Overall, the findings indicate that current O&M practices and the low level of BIM
implementation lead to missed or destroyed economic and social value. Much of the
environmental value of a property is determined by choices made in the construction phase,
such as material, spatial layout, or energy consumption. It may also be neglected as it does not
necessarily translate into immediate economic consequences. However, reactive O&M
practices can lead to severe environmental consequences of equipment failures, excessive
resource consumption, and sub-optimal equipment efficiency rates. They need to be mitigated
through precise planning and continuous performance evaluation based on accurate building
data and historic repairment tracking.
6.1.3. Value Opportunities
Both the literature review and the interviews indicate that many companies are interested in the
topic, see potential opportunities with BIM and are positive towards implementing it into O&M.
However, even if several companies have started to look into it, a broader adoption will
continue to take time since the market responds slowly to changes. Literature findings and the
industry representatives' responses overlapped for instance in easier sharing of information, a
better understanding of LCC, historic tracking of maintenance and repairment tasks, work order
tracking and the prevention of equipment failure.
The opportunities are mostly seen in terms of higher efficiency, e.g. by having an overview of
the property and the access to information on the phone. Owners also expect more satisfied
tenants due to an improved service to the tenants. As an example, the tenant gets to know exact
square meters information of their rental spaces and can therefore easily ask for service quotes
instead of making assumptions. Transparency and flexibility are increased here and decisions
on both the owner and tenant side can be based on accurate data. In addition, the space
management can be optimized due to a better control of the rental area characteristics and
improved logistics.
Implementing BIM into O&M also affects the employees in the daily operations. Since they
will use the digital replica the most, it is important that the employees are positive to the
changes. Here it is important that the manager supports the employees, gives the employees
time to adapt to the changes and shows that she/he also needs to adapt to the changes. Despite
existing difficulties, the employees need to see the benefits of the change and the opportunity
to learn. Clear guidance and training increase the accuracy of data entries and ensures high
motivation.
42
This in return leads to less errors. With less errors and more accurate performance predictions,
the LCC and the environmental impact can decrease by making more appropriate material and
equipment choices and reducing the overall consumption. By reducing the cost in O&M, the
life cycle costs of a building will decrease, and resources can be allocated to other activities
that increase the revenue (Carbonari et al. (2018)).
Since implementing BIM is costly in the beginning, many companies are hesitant here before
taking both financial risks and the risk of losing employees because of changed business models
and work processes. Benefits may not become apparent in the short-term, only in the longer
run. Therefore, a clear alignment with the overall corporate strategy is important, to ensure
strong and continuous management support for the BIM-implementation efforts. Based on the
mission and vision of a company, the “why” behind the use of BIM has to be clear and differs
for each company depending on the stakeholder focus. Motivations could be to implement
paperless operations, to have a competitive advantage over other owners when leasing spaces,
to promote circularity over the building lifespan or to establish a closer collaboration with other
market actors. This helps with the allocation of resources, the determination of KPIs and the
strategy communication.
In addition, a more long-term focus and shift in mindset of investors as well as a growing
awareness of data value may be beneficial for implementation of BIM. The value needs to be
reflected in transactions as well to balance the high costs and risks that come with implementing
BIM.
To be able to implement BIM, the owner has to formulate clear data requirements. Efforts are
made in the industry to establish standards, but until today many companies are driving the
development internally rather than in collaborations. However, as suggested in the BIM
definition by Succar (2009), collaborative effort between parties from the design, construction
and maintenance phase is needed.
It allows to take the end-user into consideration when setting up the model, benefit from the
BIM knowledge of the designers and avoid time-consuming, unfocused guesses to get the right
data. In addition, the technology and policy field introduced by Succar (2009) need to join these
initiatives. In the finalized outcome, different management disciplines and management levels
should be enabled to use different “lenses” through well-designed APIs in order to retrieve the
information they need for their systems and tasks.
43
One of the interviewees mentions the need for a free standard in the industry as it is expected
to attract more users. However, it remains to be clarified, who develops and updates this
standard if it is not going to generate any revenues. One solution for it could be that the
government needs to support the industry more as seen in Finland, Norway, Singapore or the
UK. In these countries, new industry segments are growing to provide BIM-related services for
building operations and in return create social value in the form of jobs and employment. In
general, investigating international efforts has great learning potential.
Aspects that were found in literature, but not emphasized by the industry representatives include
the potential for improved health conditions in the facility, automated report management, more
accurate occupancy tracking, energy management, waste management and better emergency
management. The character of the tasks can be seen as tactical or operational tasks, many of
them focusing on potential environmental value. Most of them go beyond addressing current
inefficiencies of O&M practices and show new value opportunities. Taking three examples for
discussion here, value potential could for instance be realized through 1) improved indoor
climate conditions, 2) waste management, and 3) emergency management.
For the first scenario, connecting spatial data from BIM models with time-series temperature
data and user feedback could provide a more accurate understanding of thermal comfort based
on exact occupant locations in the building. Not only can the room be registered, but attributes
can be linked to spatial points indicating e.g. proximity to biophilia, daylight levels in specific
locations or the proximity to ventilation diffusers and air conditioning. As mentioned in the
definition of social value, the emergence of certificates such as WELL proves the growing
awareness and demand for occupant well-being.
Scenario 2 can have environmental value potential to support efforts of more circular building
design and operations. Having material data and component supplier information saved in the
model as a kind of building passport provides information about the component lifespan as well
as end-of-life scenarios. As much as accurate models can help to assemble building components
during construction, they can be helpful to detect potential for disassembly and allow a safe and
faster deconstruction or replacement of building systems. Contamination risks are also
minimized by having accurate information about potentially hazardous materials in the
building.
44
Last but not least, from a social value perspective the building information model can be used
for scenario analyses in relation to emergency situations such as fire or terror attacks to evaluate
optimal evacuation routes and ensure the safety of building occupants and the society. Flows
of people can be simulated and bottlenecks identified, e.g. around building components for
vertical circulation such as elevators, escalators and staircases. In the face of pandemics like
Covid-19, building models can also assist in simulations for optimal space planning to comply
with distancing regulations as well as the simulations of partial building closure options to save
energy during lower occupancy periods.
6.2. Evaluation of Sustainable Value
The interviews showed that the evaluation of sustainable value is seldomly performed in a
quantitative way up to date. However, both literature and the industry reflections suggest that
the implementation of BIM in O&M practices will have an impact on existing business models
and ways of working. On the other hand, only efforts supporting the overall business strategy
will ultimately add value through efficient resource allocation. It is therefore important that the
BIM goals are aligned with the overall business strategy. A clear understanding of the
objectives can ensure the different management levels work towards the same goals and all
employees understand the purpose of their actions.
Since the - qualitatively oriented - value framework by Bocken et al. (2013) does not provide
guidance here, the PDCA concept introduced in Chapter 4.3.3 can be considered. The plan stage
(P) focuses on the definition of the strategic goals and the data collection method. In the
interviews, value expectations included better decision-making, better asset information,
streamlined processes as well as higher service level and increased employee satisfaction.
As described in Chapter 3.4, previous research suggested that they have to be made tangible in
order to be measured. Table 6-1 shows suggestions for selected factors, taking into
consideration the different stakeholders to ensure a holistic, sustainable approach. Except for
societal value, all of these measures can ultimately be translated into monetary value (i.e. cost
savings due to fewer man hours and less equipment downtime or increased revenue due to
higher occupancy rates and lower tenant turnover rates), allowing for the calculation of ROI
values. These can be used to evaluate potential investments in new technologies in an objective
way across management levels. Transparency is increased and an objective dialogue is possible.
45
Table 6-1: Suggestions for Evaluation Metrics
Stakeholder Expectation Definition Measurement
Employee More informed
decision making
Improved economic
forecast accuracy
Budget/ target
comparison
Employee Better building data Frequent use and update
of model/documents
Number of users and
model entries
Customer Provision of high
quality workspace
Tenant satisfaction Survey results,
tenant retention rates
Environment Better building
performance
Fewer equipment
failures
Tracking count and cost
savings (LCC)
Network Streamlined
processes
Fewer steps and loops,
quicker issue resolution
Process-mapping, task
time
Society Growing BIM sector Initiative contribution R&D output
The goals can then guide the team in assessment of the “Do” Stage (D), when looking at how
processes are currently performed. Afterwards, these processes can be “Check[ed]” (C) with
the objective to eliminate inefficiencies through prioritization and specific analysis of solutions
in the market or own initiatives, based on a company’s capabilities. At the end of the cycle, this
plan can be rolled out (“Act” [A]) before reassessing the goals and evaluating the processes all
over again.
46
7. Conclusion
The last chapter will summarize the findings in response to the initial research question,
highlights the thesis’s contribution to the existing research body as well as its limitations and
gives an outlook for future research topics.
7.1. Findings
In the literature review, a lack of research proposing a holistic approach to evaluating the value
of BIM in operation and maintenance from the perspective of economic, ecological and social
sustainability was found. This paper therefore aimed to answer the question: How is sustainable
value created using BIM in operation and maintenance from an owner’s perspective? The
answers will be summarized by addressing the three derived sub-questions.
How can the concept of sustainable value be applied to the use of BIM in O&M?
The framework for sustainable value creation by Bocken et al. (2013) was chosen to reflect on
the potential of implementing BIM into O&M practices from a holistic perspective.
Considering the interests of all major stakeholders and making sure to minimize the negative
impact of decisions while maximizing the positive output is seen as a suitable way to assess the
potential of BIM for improved building management. It allows for reflections on both the
economic, environmental and social sustainability consequences of BIM usage.
Where could sustainable value be created from an owner’s perspective by using BIM in
maintenance and operation?
The findings from an extensive literature review were used to identify both values missed and
value destroyed in current O&M practices as well as potential value opportunities that come
with the use of BIM. It was found that today, shortcomings exist across all management levels
such that spatial, financial and human resources are not used optimally. Research has mostly
focused on the value potential from an economic perspective. In addition, environmental value
opportunities are investigated, such as better energy management, optimized occupancy
tracking and improved predictability of building performances.
Ultimately, when seen as the “single source of truth”, the use of BIM can leverage all three
value proposition pillars by providing a reliable, transparent source of information that all
stakeholders can extract resources from according to their needs. How much value will be
created therefore depends on the commitment to create and maintain a high-quality data source.
47
This requires both continuous support from the strategic management as well as willingness of
employees to use new software tools and adjust to changed processes. The time and cost savings
expected from the implementation of BIM in the longer run can for instance be allocated to
improve the tenant services as well as to support the research and analysis of spatial and sensor
building and occupant data. This will further enhance the sustainability and resilience of the
real estate portfolio and the work processes in O&M.
How does the industry perceive the value propositions of using BIM in O&M?
Overall, the industry representatives in Sweden were positive towards the use of BIM in O&M
and even those who were not interviewed responded primarily positively and showed interest
in the topic. Among those who have already started to implement BIM or are currently assessing
ways to do so, the most value was seen in faster processes due to better data availability and
structure connected to a digital twin as well as higher motivation among employees due to less
repetitive tasks, more transparency and fewer communication loops.
If implemented with a clear focus, BIM can be a way to reduce the commonly mentioned
inefficiencies of limited interoperability, inefficient processes and poor knowledge
management. From the perspective of sustainability, this can be primarily translated into the
expectation of higher economic and social value, mostly in the interaction with employees,
tenants and external service providers. Beyond the suggestions in previous research, the
industry also sees value potential for the overall market as new jobs are created in collaboration
with and through the use of services provided by new market participants as seen in other
countries.
7.2. Implications
Adopting a broader perspective on the value of using BIM in building operation and
maintenance will help to promote a more holistic view on the topic as many companies
investigate strategies for the implementation of BIM in their practices. As the implementation
is pursued, it has to be clear how BIM data should support the overall organizational strategy
and how Defining clear goals to work towards will enable a more streamlined collaboration
across management levels and facilitate the communication with internal and external
stakeholders.
48
7.3. Limitations
This study is a starting point for further, potentially more qualitative, investigations of the topic
and cannot serve for generalizations. In addition to the limitations mentioned in Chapter 1.4, it
has to be taken into account that the use of BIM in operation and maintenance is still on a low
maturity level and market actors are in the process of figuring out best practices and solutions
feasible for their organization. Hence, the feedback from the industry as described in the
interviews is mostly based on value expectations and early pilot projects rather than years of
experience using BIM in O&M. Therefore, the perspectives should be evaluated iteratively as
the implementation of BIM evolves.
7.4. Suggestions for Future Research
With the implementation of BIM in O&M practices being just at the beginning in Sweden and
many other countries, it is suggested to perform case studies in the future to verify the value of
BIM and compare the actually generated value to initial expectations and hopes, in particular
to test the suggested quantitative metrics for evaluation. Since much emphasis was put on the
benefits for employees, it would be interesting to investigate the perception of the O&M staff
and their opinion on how the use of BIM affects their work. Further research can also be done
on the development of standards for BIM and their impact on the implementation process. Here
it is assumed to be beneficial to look more into practices of other countries and compare
learnings or strategies chosen there. Last but not least, it remains to be clarified how the
efficiency of collaborations between industry actors can be improved and risks and rewards of
joint developments can be shared to allow for value creation through the use of BIM.
49
Reference List
Ajmal, M., M., Khan, M., Hussain, M., & Helo, P. (2017). Conceptualizing and incorporating
social sustainability in the business world. International Journal of Sustainable
Development & World Ecology, (pp.1-13).
http://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2017.1408714
Akcamete, A., Akinci, B., & Garrett, J., H. (2010). Potential utilization of building information
models for planning maintenance activities. Proc., Proceedings of the International
Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering.
Alfalah, G., & Zayed, T. (2020). A review of sustainable facility management research. In
Sustainable Cities and Society (Vol. 55, p. 102073).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102073
Arora, P., Boyer, R., Peterson, N., & Caldwell, K. (2016). Five Approaches to Social
Sustainability and an Integrated Way Forward. Sustainability, (Vol.8(9), p.878).
https://doi.org/10.3390/su8090878
Banerjee, J. (2012). Sustainable Value Creation. IFB Research Foundation. ISBN 978-0-
9570327-0-5
Bocken, N., Short, S., Rana, P., & Evans, S. (2013). A value mapping tool for sustainable
business modelling. Corporate Governance, (Vol.13(5), pp.482-497).
https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-06-2013-0078
Brooks, T. J., & Lucas, J. D. (2014). A Study to Support BIM Turnover to Facility Managers
for Use after Construction. In Computing in Civil and Building Engineering (2014).
https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784413616.031
Bryde, D., Broquetas, M., & Volm, J., M. (2013). The project benefits of Building Information
Modelling (BIM). International Journal of Project Management, (Vol.31(7), pp.971-980).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.12.001
Carbonari, G., Stravoravdis, S., & Gausden, C. (2018). Improving FM task efficiency through
BIM: a proposal for BIM implementation. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, (Vol.20(1),
pp.4-15). https://doi-org/10.1108/JCRE-01-2017-0001
50
Cavka, H. B., Staub-French, S., & Poirier, E. A. (2017). Developing owner information
requirements for BIM-enabled project delivery and asset management. In Automation in
Construction (Vol. 83, pp. 169–183). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2017.08.006
Cecconi, F. R., Maltese, S., & Dejaco, M. C. (2017). Leveraging BIM for digital built
environment asset management. In Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (Vol. 2, Issue 1).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-017-0061-z
Eastman, C. M., Jeong, Y. S., Sacks, R., & Kaner, I. (2010). Exchange Model and Exchange
Object Concepts for Implementation of National BIM Standards. Journal of Computing in
Civil Engineering, (Vol.24(1), pp.25-34). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0887-
3801(2010)24:1(25)
Eastman, C., M. (1999). Building Product Models: Computer Environments, Supporting
Design and Construction. Taylor & Francis.
Ebinger, M., & Madritsch, T. (2012). A classification framework for facilities and real estate
management: The Built Environment Management Model (BEM2). Facilities,
(Vol.30(5/6), pp.185-198). DOI: 10.1108/02632771211208477
Faltejsek, M., & Chudikova, B. (2019). Facility management and building information
modeling during operation and maintenance. MATEC Web of Conferences, (Vol.277).
https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201927702022
Finne, C. (2012). The COBIM Project [PowerPoint-presentation].Retrieved 2020-05-18 from
ICIS https://icis.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/2012-03-Finne-2012-060-04.pdf
Garza-Reyes, J. A., Torres Romero, J., Govindan, K., Cherrafi, A., & Ramanathan, U. (2018).
A PDCA-based approach to Environmental Value Stream Mapping (E-VSM). Journal of
Cleaner Production, (Vol.180, pp.335-348). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.121
Gao, X., & Pishdad-Bozorgi, P. (2019). BIM-enabled facilities operation and maintenance: A
review. In Advanced Engineering Informatics (Vol. 39, pp. 227–247).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2019.01.005
Grieves, M. (2014). Digital Twin: Manufacturing Excellence through Virtual Factory
Replication. (p. 4-7). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1493930
51
He, Q., Wang, G., Luo, L., Shi, Q., Xie, J., & Meng, X. (2017). Mapping the managerial areas
of Building Information Modeling (BIM) using scientometric analysis. International
Journal of Project Management (Vol.35(4), pp.670-685)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.08.001
Hoffer, E. R. (2016). Achieving Strategic Roi – Measuring the value of BIM. Retrieved on May
19, 2020 from Autodesk
https://damassets.autodesk.net/content/dam/autodesk/www/solutions/pdf/Is-it-Time-for-
BIM-Achieving-Strategic-ROI-in-Your-Firm%20_ebook_BIM_final_200.pdf.
Ibrahim, M., Krawczyk, R., & Schipporeit, G. (2004). A web-based approach to transferring
architectural information to the construction site based on the BIM object concept.
CAADRIA Conference, (pp. 1-10).
Kaewunruen, S., & Xu, N. (2018). Digital Twin for Sustainability Evaluation of Railway
Station Buildings. Frontiers in Built Environment.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2018.00077
Kam, C., Song, M. H., & Senaratna, D. (2017). VDC Scorecard : Formulation, Application,
and Validation. In Journal of Construction Engineering and Management (Vol. 143, Issue
3, p. 04016100). https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0001233
Katchamart, A., (2013). Mapping value added positions in facilities management by using a
product-process matrix. Journal of Facilities Management, (Vol.11(3), pp.226-252).
https://doi-org/10.1108/JFM-10-2012-0045
Kivits, R. A., & Furneaux, C. (2013). BIM: enabling sustainability and asset management
through knowledge management. The Scientific World Journal, 983721.
Li, Y., Zhang, Y., Wei, J., & Han, Y. (2019). Status quo and future directions of facility
management: a bibliometric – qualitative analysis. International Journal of Strategic
Property Management, (Vol.23(5), pp.354-365). https://doi.org/10.3846/ijspm.2019.9943
Lindblad, H. & Guerrero, J. (2020). Client’s role in promoting BIM implementation and
innovation in construction. Construction Management and Economics, (Vol.38(5),
pp.468-482). https://doi-org.focus.lib.kth.se/10.1080/01446193.2020.1716989
52
Luo, L., He, Q., Jaselskis, E., & Xie, J. (2017). Construction Project Complexity: Research
Trends and Implications. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,
(Vol.143(7)). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001306
Madritsch, T., & Ebinger, M. (2011). A management framework for the built environment:
BEM2/BEM3. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, (Vol.1(2), pp.111-121).
Doi: 10.1108/20441241111180389
Mangano, G. & De Marco, A. (2014). The role of maintenance and facility management in
logistics: a literature review. Facilities, (Vol.32(5/6), pp.241-255). DOI: 10.1108/F-08-
2012-0065
Matarneh, S. T., Danso-Amoako, M., Al-Bizri, S., Gaterell, M., & Matarneh, R. (2019).
Building information modeling for facilities management: A literature review and future
research directions. In Journal of Building Engineering (Vol. 24, p. 100755).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.100755
Mirarchi, C., Pavan, A., De Marco, F., Wang, X., & Song, Y. (2018). Supporting Facility
Management Processes through End-Users’ Integration and Coordinated BIM-GIS
Technologies. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, (Vol.7(5), p.191).
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7050191
Mohajan H. K. (2018). Qualitative Research Methodology In Social Sciences And Related
Subjects. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, (Vol.7(1), pp.23-
48). https://doi.org/10.26458/jedep.v7i1.571
Mukherjee, A., Clevenger, C., M., Mollaoglu-Korkmaz, S., Lewis, P. (2013). Special Issue on
Considerations of Sustainability in ConstructionEngineering and Management Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, (Vol.139(12)).
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000777
Munir, M., Kiviniemi, A., Jones., S., W., & Finnegan, S. (2019ª). BIM business value
generation theory: a grounded theory approach. Itcon, (Vol. 24, pg. 406-423).
http://www.itcon.org/2019/21
Munir, M., Kiviniemi, A., Finnegan, S., & Jones, S. W. (2019b). BIM business value for asset
owners through effective asset information management. In Facilities (Vol. 38, Issue ¾,
pp. 181–200). https://doi.org/10.1108/f-03-2019-0036
53
Munir, M., Kiviniemi, A., & Jones, S. (2018). Building Information Modelling (BIM) value
realisation framework for asset owners. In eWork and eBusiness in Architecture,
Engineering and Construction (pp. 313–320). https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429506215-39
Oti, A. H., Kurul, E., Cheung, F., & Tah, J. H. M. (2016). A framework for the utilization of
Building Management System data in building information models for building design
and operation. In Automation in Construction (Vol. 72, pp. 195–210).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.08.043
Parsanezhad, P. (2015). An overview of information logistics for FM&O business processes.
eWork and eBusiness in Architecture, Engineering and Construction – Proceedings of the
10th European Conference on Product and Process Modelling, ECPPM 2014, (pp.719-
725).
Parsanezhad, P., (2019). Towards a BIM-enabled Facility Management: Promises, Obstacles
and Requirements. Unpublished manuscript. (KTH Royal Institute of Technology). ISBN:
978-91-7873-186-2
Parsanezhad P., Song H.-S. (2016). A conceptual framework embracing benefit and cost
indicators of BIM in the FM sector (manuscript).
Penttilä, H. (2006). Describing the changes in architectural information technology to
understand design complexity and free-form architectural expression. Special Issue The
Effects of CAD on Building Form and Design Quality, (ITCON Vol. 11, pp. 395–408.)
Perri & Bellamy, C. (2012). Principles of methodology: Research design in social science.
London, : SAGE Publications Ltd. Doi: 10.4135/9781446288047
Rubén, A., Mikel, B., Rembrandt, H. E. M. K., Alessandro L., Eduard L., Emre Y. (2019).
SPHERE: BIM Digital Twin. Platform Proceedings, (Vol.20(1), p.9).
Singh, V., Gu, N., & Wang, X. (2011). A theoretical framework of a BIM-based multi-
disciplinary collaboration platform. Automation in Construction, (Vol.20(2), pp.134-
144). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.011
Skripac, B. P. (2013). The next step. BIM’s role expands as facility managers take ownership.
Health Facilities Management, 26(8), 21–25.
Succar, B. (2009). Building information modelling framework: A research and delivery
54
foundation for industry stakeholders. Automation in Construction, (Vol.18(3), pp.357-
375). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2008.10.003
Tao, F., Sui, F., Liu, A., Qi, Q., Zhang, M., Song, B., … Nee, A., Y., C. (2019). Digital twin-
driven product design framework. International Journal of Production Research,
(Vol.57(12), pp.3935-3953).
Tchana, Y., Ducellier, G., & Remy, S, (2019). Designing a unique Digital Twin for linear
infrastructures life cycle management. Procedia CIRP, ( Vol.84, pp.545-549).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2019.04.176
Terreno, S., Asadi, S., & Anumba, C. (2019). An exploration of synergies between lean
concepts and BIM in FM: A review and directions for future research. Buildings,
(Vol.9(6)). https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings9060147
Vass, S., & Gustavsson, T. (2014). The perceived business value of BIM. In eWork and
eBusiness in Architecture, Engineering and Construction (pp. 21–25).
https://doi.org/10.1201/b17396-7
Wang. W., Chen, Y., Zhang, S., & Wang, Y. (2018). Contractual Complexity in Construction
Projects: Conceptualization, Operationalization, and Validation. Project Management
Journal, Vol.49(3), pp.46-61
Windsor, D. (2017). Value Creation Theory: Literature Review and Theory Assessment.
Stakeholder Management, (pp.75-100). Doi: 10.1108/S2514-175920170000004
Yu, K., Froese, T., & Grobler, F. (2000). A development framework for data models for
computer-integrated facilities management. Automation in Construction, (Vol.9(2),
pp.145-167). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-5805(99)00002-3
Zhong, Y. & Wu, P. (2015). Economic sustainability, environmental sustainability and
constructability indicators related to concrete- and steel-projects. Journal of Cleaner
Production, (Vol.108, pp.748-756). Doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.095
55
Appendix
Appendix 1: SWOT Analysis
Literature Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats
Li et al.
(2019)
Provision of
high- quality
workspace
Reduction of
LCC
Support core
functions/
strategy of
organization
Business
continuity in
emergencies
Carbonari
et al. (2018)
Poor communication
& information silos
Inadequate
information tools
Reliance on manual
steps
Munir et al.
(2019)
Misunderstanding of BIM
concept (seen as single 3D
model, not as linked
systems)
Kivits &
Furneaux
(2013)
Easier sharing of
information
More predictable
building performance/
sustainability
Better life cycle costs
(LCC) understanding
Scheduling of
maintenance/
repairment
Historic tracking of
maintenance/
repairment tasks
Accurate prevention of
equipment failure
Lack of publicly
mandated BIM use
Lack of regulations for
model error liabilities
Lack of regulations for
intellectual property
Limited interoperability
of software solutions
Time-consuming model
development/ updating
Imbalanced cost-benefit
allocation between
stakeholders
Parsanezha
d & Song
(2018)
Large amount of data
generated remains
unused
Unmet higher demand
for occupant-well-
being
High downtime costs,
damages to other
components and drop
in revenue stream
More efficient space
utilization
Improved health
conditions of occupants
and FM staff
User resistance to new
technology
Lack of adequate skill sets
to use BIM in O&M
Costs of Training and
Learning Curve
Cost of Hardware and
Software
Cost of Services for
Energy/IT Maintenance
56
Terreno et
al. (2019)
Optimized security
management
Optimized relocation
projects
Optimized emergency
management
Optimized energy
management
Lack of organizational
support
Pishdad-
Bozorgi &
Gao (2019)
Optimized hazardous
waste management
Optimized ICT asset
management
Optimized report
management
Optimized occupancy
tracking
Optimized work order
tracking
57
Appendix 2: Questionnaire - Sustainable Value of Using BIM in O&M
1. Can you describe in a few sentences what BIM means to you?
2. What would you say is the key goal of your O&M work?
3. Which people and organizations outside of your department do you interact with the
most for building operations and maintenance (O&M)?
a. Do you help them mostly with long-term strategies, monthly planning and
reporting or daily operation tasks?
b. Is there a scenario where using BIM can help to improve these services?
c. What drives you on a strategic level to implement BIM?
d. How do you measure the value of BIM?
4. In which processes do you see the most inefficiencies in current practices given that
information is not available as desired?
a. Are the inefficiencies only affecting operational tasks or do you also see
inefficiencies in e.g. interaction with the client or reporting to higher
management levels?
b. Is there a scenario where using BIM would help to make this work more
efficient?
c. In which cases do technological barriers prevent better results? How hard is it
to integrate different data sources like BMS, BIM and sensor data?
5. Please think about the potential of using BIM.
a. For the near future, where do you see additional potential using BIM data in
O&M that has not been implemented or investigated yet?
b. Will it mostly improve long-term strategizing, monthly planning and reporting
or daily operation tasks?
