The BIM to Smart Journey: Insights from Digital Construction Week

6 June 2025

Digital Construction Week 2025 was abuzz with critical conversations, and the Digital Buildings Council (DBC) was thrilled to be a partner for the new Digital Operations Stand, sponsored by Glider Technology. This initiative directly addresses one of our core missions: plugging the persistent “projects-operations gap” that so often hinders the true potential of digital transformation in the built environment.

One of the standout panel sessions we helped facilitate delved deep into the crucial topic of “BIM to Smart.” This discussion is at the heart of one of our key project initiatives, aiming to create a seamless flow of information from the design and construction phases right through to the operational life of a building.

We extend our sincere gratitude to all the insightful participants who contributed their expertise to this vital conversation. Their perspectives were invaluable in illuminating the challenges and opportunities within the BIM to Smart journey:

We also want to give a special thank you to the excellent moderation by Rachel Heaton at GS1 UK, who expertly guided the discussion and ensured a truly engaging and productive session.

For those who couldn’t make it, or if you’d like to revisit some of the key takeaways, our Executive Officer, Justin Kirby, has posted an AI-generated podcast discussion over on LinkedIn, providing further insights and reflections on the “BIM to Smart” panel.

We’ll be sharing a summary of another impactful session from Digital Construction Week very soon. In the meantime, there’s no need to wait for more valuable content and discussions!

Stay connected by following the Digital Buildings Council on LinkedIn for the latest updates, events, and insights from our founding members.

Reach out there to learn how to join our community and contribute to our mission of bridging the projects-operations gap and shaping the future of digital operations in the built environment!

Unlocking Smart Buildings: Bridging the Digital Divide Between Construction and Operations

The burgeoning smart buildings industry is grappling with a significant challenge: a persistent “project-operations gap” that hinders the seamless transition from design and construction to efficient, intelligent operation. This critical disconnect was a central theme at Digital Construction Week, where the Digital Buildings Council (DBC) partnered on the new Digital Operations Stage, sponsored by Gilder Technology. The DBC, whose mission is to enhance professional understanding and drive demand for digital buildings, facilitated a crucial panel discussion on “Aligning BIM with Smart Technologies”. This session, part of the DBC’s initiative to digitally bridge the project-operations gap, revealed that while technology advances, a unified approach, clear standards, and enhanced collaboration are still urgently needed to unlock the true potential of smart buildings.

The panel, featuring experts from Kier Group, One Sightsolutions LTD, LMG, and Turner & Townsend, dissected the core challenges. A glaring issue highlighted was the inconsistency of standards and naming conventions across different trades and systems. As John Clarke, Operations Director at One Sightsolutions, pointed out, “They’ve all generally got their own kind of standard way of doing things… within the smart building world, actually, we’re often kind of mandated and specified to follow a different naming convention, different standards”. This often means that precise naming conventions from smart enablement plans don’t even make it into the BIM model, creating immediate data disconnects. Veronica Friuli, Principal Consultant at Turner & Townsend, added that poor naming at the outset leads to “outdated BIM models with poor data quality”.

Another critical problem is the underutilisation of BIM expertise. Sam Norledge, Head of Smart Buildings at LMG, lamented that while BIM engineers are “data experts,” they are “being underutilised on these smart building projects because these guys are… not seeing the points register, the IP registers, they don’t get to see any of that data”. This untapped resource could be vital in managing the complex data streams required for smart operations.

Communication breakdowns and siloed working were also identified as major culprits. Clarke noted a consistent “disconnect between all of those documents” – specifications, execution plans, and employer requirements – across projects. Friuli further explained that teams working in silos inevitably create “scope gaps and unclear communication during information exchange”. Franklin noted that “overinflated BIM requirements which don’t focus on what’s… absolutely essential” often break the link between design/build information and operational needs. This means vast amounts of data produced during construction are simply “going in the bin” when handed over to clients.

The challenges extend to the very lifecycle of a building. The panel expressed concern that projects often lack a “joined up, secular kind of life cycle of a building”. This absence of a holistic view means that models rapidly become “out of date” soon after handover. Norledge cited a case where a fully modelled asset information model from 2015 was still being maintained using spreadsheets because it lacked a simple unique identifier to connect with the CAFM system. Compounding these issues are “unrealistic schedules” and “constant changes” during projects, which leave insufficient time for crucial data validation and alignment of naming conventions, especially during the commissioning and handover phases.

Despite these hurdles, the panel explored promising solutions, particularly the potential of AI in enhancing BIM workflows. John Clarke noted AI’s ability to “trace relationships between certain assets” in BIM models, such as linking air handling units to fan coil units, a task that would otherwise require significant manual effort. Friuli suggested AI could “help us to reduce the manual work in the sense that we need to verify data” and assist with automatic correction. Franklin expressed optimism that consistent naming standards would enable AI to “really bring those data… static BIM data, live building data” together.

The panel coalesced around the idea that standardisation is paramount. Norledge echoed the sentiment that a “similar sort of push” to the 2011 BIM mandate could “bridge the gap between BIM to smart” by mandating information exchange milestones and supply chain assessments for smart capabilities. The panellists broadly agreed that standardisation would “reduce commissioning time and improve building operation”.

Ultimately, overcoming the project-operations gap requires a fundamental shift in approach, driven by collaboration, education, and strategic implementation of technology. The DBC’s ongoing initiatives and partnerships with events like Digital Construction Week are crucial in driving this change, fostering shared understanding, and developing the actionable insights needed to unlock truly smart and efficient buildings.

Action Points for Bridging the Project-Operations Gap:

  • Establish Unified Naming Conventions Early:
    • Action: Project stakeholders, including clients, designers, and contractors, must agree upon and enforce a consistent, standardised naming convention for all assets and data points from the project’s inception.
    • Benefit: Prevents data disconnects, ensures accurate information flow, and facilitates seamless integration with smart systems and operational platforms.
  • Integrate Master Systems Integrators (MSIs) from Project Inception:
    • Action: MSIs should be involved in the initial design and planning phases to advise on smart building requirements, data exchange protocols, and integration strategies.
    • Benefit: Ensures that smart building needs are embedded into the project from day one, avoiding costly rework and misalignments later in the lifecycle.
  • Educate BIM Engineers on Smart Building Requirements:
    • Action: Provide specific training for BIM engineers on smart building technologies, data points, and operational needs.
    • Benefit: Leverages existing data expertise within BIM teams to improve the quality and utility of information for smart operations, making them valuable assets in closing the project-operations gap.
  • Simplify and Prioritise BIM Information for Operations:
    • Action: Reassess BIM requirements to focus on the essential data truly needed for effective building operation and maintenance, rather than collecting excessive, unused information.
    • Benefit: Creates leaner, more purposeful BIM models that are easier to manage, maintain, and integrate with operational systems, reducing wasted effort.
  • Implement Data Validation Milestones in Project Schedules:
    • Action: Incorporate explicit milestones within project programmes for data validation, quality checks, and alignment of information between BIM and smart systems, especially during commissioning and handover.
    • Benefit: Ensures sufficient time is allocated for critical data checks, improving data quality, reducing post-handover issues, and preventing models from quickly becoming obsolete.
  • Leverage AI for Automation and Data Linking:
    • Action: Explore and implement AI tools that can automate data verification, trace asset relationships within BIM models, and link static BIM data with live building data.
    • Benefit: Reduces manual effort in data management, enhances the accuracy of asset information, and enables more sophisticated operational control and insights.

Briefing Document: Bridging BIM and Smart Building Technologies for Enhanced Digital Operations

Date: June 7, 2025

Source: Digital Construction Week, Digital Operations Stage Panel Discussion, sponsored by Gilder Technology

1. Executive Summary

This briefing document summarises key insights from the “Aligning BIM with Smart Technologies” panel at Digital Construction Week, moderated by Rachel Heaton from GS1 UK. The Digital Buildings Council (DBC) partnered with Digital Construction Week on their new Digital Operations Stage, which was sponsored by Gilder Technology.

The panel, featuring experts from Kier Group, One Sightsolutions LTD, LMG, and Turner & Townsend, focused on the critical challenges and potential solutions in integrating Building Information Modelling (BIM) with Smart Building technologies. The overarching gap that still exists between construction and operations, resulting from their increasing digitalisation, drives many of the DBC’s planned working group initiatives. This gap, often referred to as the “project-operations gap,” was a central theme. The DBC helped facilitate a number of sessions at Digital Construction Week that discussed how this gap might be plugged, including this one on BIM to Smart enablement, which is linked to one of their same-named project initiatives.

The core issues identified in the panel discussion include inconsistent standards, data storage, integration difficulties, and significant communication breakdowns between various project stakeholders. The panel emphasised the need for a unified approach, enhanced collaboration, cross-industry education, and a lifecycle perspective to optimise data for operational efficiency and foster a more unified approach to smart building development. The discussions surrounding digitally bridging the project-operations gap are also behind the DBC’s aim to enhance professional understanding through knowledge sharing and are likely to drive several additional interrelated initiatives. They also drive the DBC actively seeking partnerships with other relevant trade bodies and initiatives, and events like Digital Construction Week. The potential of AI in enhancing BIM workflows and the importance of standardisation were also key themes.

2. Key Challenges in BIM and Smart Building Integration

The panel identified several significant challenges hindering effective integration:

  • Inconsistent Standards and Naming Conventions: Different trades and systems often use disparate naming conventions, which typically do not make it into the BIM model, leading to immediate data disconnects. Poor naming from the outset results in outdated BIM models and poor data quality. This includes discrepancies between specified smart building naming conventions and what is actually implemented. James Franklin highlighted the need for a cohesive ‘system of systems’ with consistent naming conventions across platforms.
  • Data Storage and Integration Issues: Challenges arise in effectively storing and integrating data from diverse sources, including BIM models, smart systems, and operational platforms like CAFM (Computer-Aided Facilities Management).
  • Underutilisation of BIM Expertise: Sam Norledge emphasised that BIM engineers, who are data experts, are often underutilised on smart building projects, not being involved in crucial data aspects like points registers or IP registers.
  • Communication Breakdowns and Siloed Work: Significant disconnects exist between BIM teams, consultants, and clients. John Clarke identified a disconnect between documentation (specifications, execution plans, employer requirements) that doesn’t align. Veronica Friuli emphasised that teams working in silos create scope gaps and unclear communication during information exchange. All panellists agreed on the need for unified documentation and approaches.
  • Overinflated and Misaligned BIM Requirements: James Franklin noted that overinflated BIM requirements don’t focus on essential elements, breaking the link between design/build information and operations. This leads to vast amounts of data getting handed over at project completion that often goes unused or into the “bin”.
  • Lack of Lifecycle Approach: Projects often lack a joined-up, circular kind of lifecycle of a building. This results in data degradation and models becoming outdated rapidly post-handover. Sam Norledge shared an experience where a data-rich BIM model from 2015 was still not being utilised by FM personnel, who continued using spreadsheets, due to a lack of connection with the CAFM platform via unique identifiers.
  • Programme and Schedule Pressures: Veronica Friuli identified constant changes and unrealistic schedules as barriers to maintaining consistent naming conventions and ensuring proper data validation, especially during commissioning. Commissioning periods are often compressed due to design delays, reducing the time for data validation.

3. Proposed Solutions and Path Forward

The panel proposed several solutions to bridge the gap between BIM and smart building technologies:

  • Standardisation and Unified Documentation:
    • Implement a standardised naming convention that works across BIM and smart systems from the project’s outset, ensuring consistency from day one.
    • Utilise existing BIM documentation (e.g., Exchange Information Requirements (EIR), Asset Information Requirements (AIR)) to incorporate smart building requirements, rather than creating new, separate systems.
    • Ensure cohesive “system of systems” where asset data, CAFM, and analytics platforms have commonality. Sam Norledge demonstrated how unique IDs (e.g., GS1 tags) could link BIM information to CAFM systems, enabling real-time access to asset data.
  • Enhanced Collaboration and Stakeholder Management:
    • Promote greater collaboration across disciplines, involving BIM teams, building services, and Master Systems Integrators (MSIs) from the beginning of projects.
    • MSI contractors should be brought into projects at the initial stages to ensure early alignment on data and naming conventions.
    • Clients need to be more informed and proactive in pushing for clear, aligned requirements upfront.
  • Education and Upskilling:
    • Educate BIM engineers about smart building requirements to leverage their data expertise for better integration. They already understand data, but need knowledge of point data and BMS communication.
    • Provide education on the real value of BIM to clients to ensure they understand its full potential beyond 3D models and coordination.
    • Invest in AI training for FM and building operations teams to help them understand and benefit from AI-integrated platforms.
  • Leveraging AI for Workflow Enhancement:
    • AI has the potential to automate data verification, reduce manual work, and connect static BIM data with live building data once naming standards are consistent.
    • AI can trace relationships between assets in BIM models (e.g., linking air handling units to fan coil units), significantly reducing manual investigation time.
    • Implement automated validation procedures in smart buildings, similar to ISO 19650 standards, to validate commissioning registers against BIM models and point schedules.
  • Lifecycle Approach and Data Prioritisation:
    • Adopt a joined-up lifecycle approach in project management that prioritises essential data for operational efficiency, ensuring information created during design and build remains relevant and usable throughout the building’s life.
    • Simplify BIM requirements to focus on the essential data needed for operations.
    • Incorporates data validation milestones into project schedules to ensure realistic timeframes for data quality checks.
  • Mandates and Industry Push:
    • Government mandates, similar to those that drove BIM adoption, could help bridge the gap to smart buildings. This could include mandating supply chain capability assessments for smart capabilities and information exchange milestones.

4. Conclusion

The panel’s consensus highlights a critical need for the construction and operations industries to move beyond siloed practices and embrace a truly collaborative, lifecycle-oriented approach to smart buildings. Standardisation, particularly in naming conventions, is foundational to leveraging advanced technologies like AI effectively. By educating BIM professionals on smart requirements, simplifying data delivery, and integrating MSIs early, the industry can overcome current challenges, reduce waste, and unlock the full potential of digital twins and smart operations, ultimately leading to more valuable and efficiently managed assets. The discussions surrounding digitally bridging the project-operations gap are also behind the Digital Buildings Council’s aim to enhance professional understanding through knowledge sharing and are likely to drive several additional interrelated initiatives, and the DBC actively seeks partnerships with other relevant trade bodies and initiatives, and events like Digital Construction Week.

 Newer

Older