1st BIM Think Tank by AMO Aquitaine
I was fortunate to be able to participate in this first think tank organized by the association Architecture et Maîtres d'Ouvrages of the Aquitaine region.
Were present project owners, design offices, economists, architects, among others.
After an inventory and an assessment of current government actions presented by Bertrand DELCAMBRE (president of the digital transition plan in the building), various speakers were able to present projects in progress, developments in gestation, tools and resources to work with digital and BIM.
This difficult exercise, which consists in being general enough so that each listener can find his way around without being too vague on the ins and outs, made it possible to highlight several aspects of the transition underway during the discussions that followed. follow-ups:
- First of all, like any change, it induces anxiety on the part of the actors who have to adapt. In question and out of order: the question of the monetization (or return on investment) of the implementation of BIM, the question of the distribution of project management fees in the production process (BIM often induces a anticipation of the phases of the MOP law model), the question of the legal aspect (intellectual property and legal responsibility). Without going into these subjects here, it is clear that the uncertainties induced by the lack of perspective and collective experience are a brake on investment, even if many nevertheless show interest in this change of method.
- Concerning the situation of players likely to apply BIM methodologies, it has been observed that many players in the sector are very small businesses or SMEs, that the teams presiding over the implementation of new projects are recomposed each time, that everyone's methods vary from one project to another and that the tools are constantly evolving. In this situation, how to ensure that the relevance of BIM is renewed every time? Is open BIM a way to ensure this? Will actions such as those carried out by Domolandes make it possible to bring the players together by giving them the means that they do not have individually?
- On a more theoretical aspect, when the notion of BIM is approached, there is still confusion between the tools and the method. Apart from the bell towers that take place between the evangelists of the different software, it is obvious that the editors seek to ensure a maximum of users of their solutions. And this seems to be confusing for many players who sometimes think that doing BIM is just using a software suite. It is clear that the interoperability carried by many is still wishful thinking, even if signs of will can be observed.
- Finally, training seems to remain an area yet to be organized, both for professionals and for students, even if the first feedback from technical and professional sectors seems interesting to say the least. Once again, this is a project that will waste time before seeing the concrete effects in the professional world and may lead to the creation of new professions.
- By way of conclusion, it was recalled by speakers who have led BIM projects, that architectural production is a story of people and that even with constantly evolving tools and means, cooperation between people is the glue of this ongoing mutation.
Hoping that I have not betrayed the nature of the debates, I will let you react to these aspects which are surely discussed everywhere in France and well beyond ...