BIM has gradually gained recognition and demonstrated significant value since its introduction to the engineering construction field in China. In recent years, it has shown a thriving development trend. However, as BIM applications deepen, confusion and challenges have also increased. So, how can these issues encountered during BIM implementation be overcome?
Confusion 1: The Dilemma Between Input and Output
Many enterprises and projects considering BIM wonder: how much profit can be generated by investing manpower, materials, and financial resources into BIM? Unfortunately, the current experience of some domestic enterprises shows unsatisfactory returns, with some even incurring losses. This difficulty in realizing profits has led some companies to enthusiastically attempt BIM implementation but ultimately revert to traditional design tools and methods.
According to Professor Gu Ming, head of the BIM research group at Tsinghua University, surveys indicate that if the BIM application rate exceeds 30% in design or construction enterprises, the investment return rate is positive. Conversely, if the application rate is below 15%, investors face a higher risk of losses.
However, how many projects actually achieve more than 30% BIM application? Currently, domestic enterprises mainly apply BIM in areas like “Collision Checking,” “Comprehensive Optimization,” and “Virtual Construction.” Rarely does the BIM application surpass 30% throughout the entire project lifecycle. Furthermore, due to inconsistent standards, there is no unified delivery standard in China’s engineering construction industry. The portion of BIM models usable across lifecycle stages, completed by design institutes or construction enterprises, remains very limited, which hinders the full realization of BIM’s value.
Experts emphasize that BIM should not be confined to design or construction stages but integrated into every phase of the project lifecycle, especially post-completion building operation and management, to fully leverage its benefits. Gu Ming notes, “From our research and experience over the past two years, for BIM to deepen in China and generate profits, processes must be restructured. Without rebuilding processes, increased investment often leads to greater disappointment.”
Confusion 2: How to Initiate Process Reengineering
Considering BIM from the full project lifecycle perspective, process reengineering becomes critical. But how should this be approached?
BIM should start at the design stage by establishing a model, which is then handed over to guide construction. Construction information is incorporated during this phase, and finally, a completed model guides operation and maintenance. However, questions arise: Can a BIM model created by the design institute truly guide construction? If not, does this model hold value for future applications? If it holds little or no value, how can design institutes continue their BIM work?
BIM provides visualization technology to designers, but this is just one facet of its advantages. The essence of BIM lies in integrating information across the entire project lifecycle, enabling comprehensive coordination of construction and later operation management. Despite BIM’s lifecycle concept, effective management integration at each stage is currently lacking. In China, BIM application largely depends on complex individual projects or specific owner requirements, posing challenges to fully leveraging BIM’s lifecycle information integration.
Industry insiders suggest that BIM process reengineering should start from the operations and maintenance phase. The fundamental driver of BIM implementation should be solving specific problems in operation and maintenance. Based on this goal, a complete implementation plan is developed, which then guides the design stage. Design and construction stages must embed targeted parameters or information interfaces required for operation and maintenance. This avoids receiving BIM models that lack necessary data or sufficient detail to support future building maintenance applications.
Confusion 3: Project Collaboration Challenges
Integrating BIM into the construction industry inevitably breaks down traditional barriers between project stages. All parties—owners, designers, contractors, and operation managers—must extend their work into areas previously outside their scope. BIM models are passive carriers of information, but BIM transforms all participants into interconnected entities. The core of BIM practice lies in communication, re-communication, coordination, and re-coordination—forming a team that selflessly collaborates to address challenges. However, current BIM practices reveal that such coordinated collaboration is difficult to achieve smoothly.
Typically, construction project participants fall into teams: design (architects, engineers, consultants), supply (material manufacturers, suppliers), construction (general contractors, subcontractors, labor providers), and operation (owners, operators, property managers). While collaboration exists within teams through feedback loops and task management, vague information, lack of data integration, and disconnected documents between teams increase the difficulty of cross-team collaboration.
Experts point out that domestic BIM projects face significant collaboration challenges. The absence of collaborative design and coordinated information management across stages, disciplines, and stakeholders limits BIM’s value. This “collaboration” dilemma stems from an immature BIM market in China, lacking guiding standards, systemic qualified talent, clear responsibility delineation, and mature market mechanisms. Notably, unclear legal liability boundaries for BIM exacerbate collaboration difficulties. Zhang Jianping, an expert involved in drafting the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development’s “Guiding Opinions on Promoting BIM Application,” stresses that BIM’s value cannot be realized through isolated applications. Only integrated collaboration across all parties and disciplines throughout all stages will unlock BIM’s full potential.
Confusion 4: Design-Driven or Owner-Driven BIM?
For large-scale BIM adoption in construction, who should lead the comprehensive application: designers or owners?
The design-driven model represents early BIM application in engineering projects and remains popular in China. To better express design intentions and improve bidding success, design units often use BIM technology for 3D design, showcasing concepts and final renderings to owners. Once the owner accepts the design, if no further BIM requirements are made, the design unit may not continue BIM development. This approach focuses on early-stage design rather than the full project lifecycle. Industry insiders note that design-driven BIM often creates fragmented information silos due to the involvement of multiple disciplines.
Conversely, the owner-driven model, emerging with BIM’s development, aligns better with the lifecycle concept. Led by the owner, BIM is used throughout the entire project lifecycle for management purposes. This model enhances owner control over the project, compensates for owners’ limited engineering expertise, and provides a collaborative platform for all parties involved.
Pan Shiyi, Chairman of SOHO China Limited, publicly stated, “The main driving force behind BIM development should be developers and homeowners.” He believes BIM achieves maximum effectiveness when applied throughout the lifecycle. Since developers oversee supervision, design, budgeting, engineering, energy management, and property management, every process needs attention. If BIM can bring significant cost savings and timeline control, why not promote its adoption?
Confusion 5: Market Perceptions—What Is Right and What Is Wrong?
Various views have circulated regarding BIM application in China: some say BIM is merely for modeling, others claim BIM is omnipotent, while some see it as just software or a single technology. Which perspective is correct?
Industry experts agree these views are biased. Equating BIM solely with modeling or software is a narrow understanding, while considering BIM omnipotent is an exaggeration. In reality, BIM encompasses more than 3D data; it includes comprehensive information resources such as 2D source documents, spreadsheets, and other content. When appropriate workflows and processes are implemented, BIM helps improve building design quality, reduce costs, and enable innovative collaborative workflows across the building lifecycle.
However, building one BIM model shared seamlessly across design, construction, operation, and maintenance remains a challenging goal. Consequently, some advocate “light” BIM applications—incremental, stage-focused implementations that deliver value during specific design or construction phases. Such approaches let users experience benefits in cost, schedule, personnel, and construction planning management. Currently, many domestic enterprises pursue “light” BIM applications, limited to single stages or points in design or construction. Although operable, this approach diminishes BIM’s potential and contradicts the lifecycle-wide BIM concept, causing confusion.
With BIM enthusiasm surging and applications entering more advanced phases, incorrect ideas, rushed methods, and superficial implementations risk causing setbacks—“choking” or even “drowning” BIM’s development and dampening enthusiasm. Yuan Zhenggang, Vice President of Guanglianda Software Co., Ltd., advises that when BIM development slows, it is crucial to encourage understanding and application. When everyone talks about BIM and wants to use it, it becomes even more important to proceed thoughtfully. He stated, “Running a marathon doesn’t mean starting first; you need to decide when and how fast to run based on your own condition and capabilities.”
Must log in before commenting!
Sign Up