TL;DR (with special thanks to ChatGPT for summarising!): A key part of improving construction performance is to improve the way we interact and collaborate. Interoperability is the ability to use information between different systems, processes and organizations. It can help make the exchange of data easier and more efficient which can help construction projects run better. There are standards and tools that can help with interoperability, but it is important to consider security and data privacy when using them.
Interoperability - the ‘golden ticket’ for the exchange of data between systems, processes and organisations. It allows products and systems to work together seamlessly, enabling the exchange of information with little or no extra effort.
Constuction is facing global and industry challenges. Improving our ability to work together and integrate our systems is a major part of the solution.
The lack of interoperability is a longstanding problem. It is frustrating that data created in one platform cannot be used in another, but this is a common issue.
Can you open your Facebook Messenger messages in WhatsApp?
Can you transfer apps and other content between Android and Apple phones?
Are you easily able to open Trimble Tekla Structures structural design work in Autodesk Revit?
The key to interoperability is open standards. If platform vendors setup their software to work with a standard schema then the work produced from those platforms would be viewable and editable within other platforms using the same standards. The best example of an open standard in construction is Industry Foundation Classes (IFC).
Why aren’t we working this way?
So, the schema exists in construction to support interoperability, why don’t we see it between the vendors?
There are drawbacks to the IFC schema:
It’s buildings heavy and is less usable for Civil Engineering schemes like roads and rail.
The schema itself is hard to read for someone without a background in coding or computer science. Therefore there is a barrier to understanding
Reliance on vendors:
Vendor Lock-in. Competition is not on a level playing field. Most vendors prefer that once you start working in their platform then you must stay in that platform or their own ecosystem.
Vendors with proprietary data standards can find interoperable data hard to manage and deal with the risk of data loss or inaccuracies.
Interoperable data can also be subject to security and privacy risk. Vendors seek to provide users with integrated platforms for their data which is safe and secure.
Lack of industry buy-in and understanding. Due to points 1 & 2 there has been a lack of drive within the UK to implement openBIM. Lot’s of companies have bought in to proprietary software very deeply and projects are forced to work around the issues. The mere mention of ‘openBIM’ or ‘IFC’ can illicit some gasps and worried looks😧.
Why should we work this way?
Why is this so important? I believe that interoperability is a key to unlock huge amounts of value in Constuction. In my opinion these are:
Ease and consistency of information production and exchange
Better competition between vendors, resulting better software options
An increase in the use of and value from Constuction data
Ease of information production and exchange
This is reason ‘numero uno’1️⃣. If we could all agree that we can work to set standards, we can provide the support and training around those standards, and then produce information more effectively, efficiently, and consistently. Further, because we’ve all agreed to the standard of information the exchange of information can be reasonably frictionless - just a little validation to do.
Better competition, improved solutions
If information is easily transferable between different software then the competition isn’t a vote of popularity and lock-in but moves to a place where software is used because it is the best solution for the task. I mean, it’s so obvious - right?
As an industry we could have better tools at our disposal, which should translate into better outcomes.
Increased use and value of data
To make improvements the industry needs to make better use of it’s data. In an article in New Civil Engineer Nicholas Cumins, COO of Bentely Systems, states:
“At the moment, most data is siloed and 70% of data generated on infrastructure projects is never used,” he explained. “This means that decision makers are not as well informed as they could be. WE want to make that data accessible and useable by more people.”
There is real value for construction in making better use of the mountains of data we generate to make better decisions, faster. A move toward data-driven construction is likely to be a positive one.
By standardising data production then the data collected can be used effectively. Consider this scenario:
You really want to help project managers understand the likelihood of project success (commercial, time, carbon, etc…). You think that a way of doing this is to take historical records from delivery (issues, NCRs, commercial notifications, reporting, change) and train a model to predict the eventual outcome. Helping to understand key triggers to poor and positive results.
Now, think about your current organisation. How much effort do you think it would take to reach back for the past 20 projects and gather the training and testing data? Speaking for my experience, this would be ‘hella hard🥵.
Now imagine all of this data is collected to agreed upon, consistent, standards. Much easier right? Then consider that we could do such an exercise across industry to look for patterns of how we fail and succeed.
A way forward
Where there’s a will there’s a way. And it seems like there is a growing movement within construction to push on towards openBIM and open stadards, driven by frustrated practitioners, and increasing costs and contract concerns with respect to large software vendors.
The mere mention of a Digital Twin in a construction meeting can cause pulses to race and cash to drop💰 - but in reality, creation of twins needs to be based on a deeper level of standardisation and structure than even plain old BIM delivery (😜).
Organisations like OSArch are pushing this movement, doing an amazing job of creating a community and centralising knowledge on how construction can be more interoperable and open.
It doesn’t all have to be IFC!
IFC is not the only horse in the race for openBIM. There are other ways of facilitating interoperability. Speckle is a great example.
Speckle is an open-source digital infrastructure which handles interoperability between software silos - supporting collaboration, data management, versioning, and automation.
So, whether you want to connect your GIS map in QGIS to make contours in Revit or connect your 3D model to a PowerBI dashboard for reporting - Speckle has a connector for you.
This article by Speckle highlights where the Speckle solution and IFC differ:
Speckle transfers data, whereby IFC transfers files. The benefit is that only the data you need is transferred, not whole models/files.
Speckle doesn’t rely on vendor’s to make it possible to share. By creating it’s own connectors and standards Speckle and it’s community can be responsible.
IFC evolves slowly, Speckle moves fast.
Paths to interoperability
So, if your new to the concept of openBIM or interoperability in construction then you’re probably asking yourself what you can do next? Well, it couldn’t hurt to do the following:
Find OSArch, scour their Wiki page and get involved in the community
Start (or continue) learning about the IFC schema - head to buildingSMART Standards (and maybe watch some YouTube tutorials 😜)
Look at alternative, open source, software:
Modelling - Blender (and BlenderBIM add-on), FreeCAD
Document production - Libre Office
Field Data Capture - QField
Data - Speckle, ifcOpenShell
Visual programming - Sverchok
Bonus points - for development of your own BIM software - IFC.js!
A word of warning
Try Subtracting rather than adding.
Whilst the improvement of how we build our projects is critical, and interoperability is at the heart of this, care must be taken not to:
Overcomplicate to the point that those delivering find it overly difficult.
Duplicate existing processes, generating wasted effort.
Deviate from the desired business outcomes just to seek further digitisation.
Construction already lives in a world of shadow processes and systems. Though interoperability and collaboration are a sound strategy all improvements should be viewed with a “Lean” lens and consideration given to wider effects of change to projects and organisations.
Also, as mentioned earlier, interoperable data is subject to security and privacy risks because it can be shared between multiple systems and could accessed by third parties. Additionally, the data can be vulnerable to accidental or intentional manipulation. Data security protocols must be in place to ensure the safety and privacy of project information.
Final Thoughts
Interoperable data is beneficial for the construction industry. It offers improved information production and exchange, can result in software improvements, and help us make more and better use of our data for decision-making, resulting cost savings.
However, it is also important to note that interoperable data can be difficult to manage and can lead to data loss or inaccuracies and is subject to security and privacy risks.
Therefore, it is important to carefully assess the pros and cons of using interoperable data, and to have the necessary protocols in place to ensure the safety and privacy of project information.
What do you think about openBIM and interoperability? Have I missed, misconstrued or confused something? How can I improve my thinking? Please reach out in the comments 👇 on Twitter, or on
If you enjoyed this, please consider subscribing…
…and share this post and blog with a colleague or friend who may also find it interesting 👍