A Theoretical Comparison of Traditional and Integrated Project Delivery Design Processes on International BIM Competitions
The Architectural Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry experiences higher rates of iteration, material wastage and poor cost management in comparison to other design industries. In an attempt to address such inefficiencies and control project budgets, various Governments are insisting that Building Information Modelling (BIM) is used by the appointed design teams on high value public buildings. Such legislation has been introduced in order to encourage a standardised level of collaborative working throughout the design process by enhancing interoperability of project information between design and construction professionals. In this paper, the MacLeamy Curve, a theoretical graphical representation of how integrated project delivery (IPD) processes improve efficiencies and allow for the reduction of costs by resolving issues during the earlier stages of the project, as well as other associated benefits are tested on both traditional and IPD design processes within two 48 hour international openBIM competition projects: Build London Live; and Build Qatar Live. The projects are compared by analysing the planned project programme against the reality, measured through recorded project exchanges, using a graphical representation. The findings of this paper suggest several recommendations, including: a collaborative design process appears to reduce iteration and results in a more comprehensive conceptual design at an early stage in comparison to a traditional process; more information and documentation is produced; and the overall programme is exceeded. Such findings suggest improved time, cost and design quality control.