Why is it that public infrastructure projects so often seem to end up astronomically over budget and enormously delayed? Danish economic geographer Bent Flyvbjerg coined the phrase “megaprojects paradox” to describe how large-scale infrastructure projects continue to increase in number despite costing too much money, taking too long to complete and routinely under-performing.

Flyvbjerg — who cited famous examples such as Denver International Airport in the U.S., which opened in 1995, came in 200 percent over the initial budget, and welcomed only half of the passenger traffic initially expected — blamed a lack of accountability, inappropriate risk sharing between stakeholders and a lack of direction during the project or building life cycle.

A common issue is that the building life cycle is fragmented. The lack of data, transparency and communication between the different stakeholders — from design and build all the way through to operations — means agreements are broken, service delivery suffers and partners fall out. For facility managers, whose role is to steward the ongoing maintenance and service-delivery requirements in the operational phase of these projects, it is an all-too-familiar story.

The good news for FM and other stakeholders is that existing and emerging technologies can help create a more data-rich and joined-up building life cycle. By integrating integrated workplace management systems (IWMS) with building information modeling (BIM) and performance management software, long-term infrastructure projects can run on time and in budget while achieving their primary objectives.

The rise of P3s

The U.S. public sector is turning to the public-private partnership (P3) to deliver new infrastructure and public services. Although the P3 model is more mature in countries such as Canada, the U.K. and Australia, U.S. decision-makers increasingly see its value. Indeed, a 2016 Syracuse University study concluded that there is a significantly higher likelihood of meeting cost and schedule objectives under P3 models compared with traditional public sector project delivery for which projects are owned, managed and financed by government.

Despite their advantages, however, P3s are not without their challenges. They tend to be highly complex, including many different stakeholders, systems, locations, requirements and targeted end users. And these factors often result in different organizational goals between partners; inadequate monitoring and evaluation of the PPP processes; inconsistency between resources inputs and quality; unreliable mechanisms for sharing risk and responsibility; and a lack of transparency around ongoing performance.

The role of BIM & the digital twin

The key to a successful P3 project is effective building life cycle management, an unbroken chain of information from the design of a building to operation and maintenance, but this is an almost impossible task through conventional methods.

That is where BIM comes in. Although BIM is by no means a new concept in FM, the process has struggled to gain a foothold in the sector like it has in engineering and construction. Its slow adoption is down to ongoing confusion around what it is and how it can benefit FM.

A common misconception is that BIM is another word for 3D CAD drawing. That is wrong. BIM is a process for creating and managing a comprehensive digital record of a building’s physical and functional components, both for new builds and retrofitted projects well into the operational stage of the life cycle.

Another misconception is that implementing BIM requires specialist knowledge and software. That too, is misguided. By digitizing building life cycle data, BIM helps capture well-structured, essential information which can be used by FMs to optimize building assets. A two-way integration with IWMS software allows FM to access all the required information through a familiar IWMS interface, thereby forming the basis for effective operation and maintenance of a facility within the IWMS software.

It enables FM teams to view an asset’s location, including access or permit requirements, and retrieve information about the asset itself, such as service history, manuals, warranty details, minimum/maxi-mum temperatures, types of materials and more. 3D BIM viewing technology provides operatives with insight into assets and components that may normally be out of view — for example, behind a wall or in a ceiling void.

This granular detail guarantees more efficient information sharing between the numerous stakeholders that collaborate to build and operate facilities. It reduces the number of errors, improves first-rate fix times, minimizes maintenance and energy costs. It also allows FM service providers to leave behind a fully up-to-date BIM model once the contract comes to an end and the building is handed back to the public sector client.

Digital twins for P3 projects

Once BIM has gained access to continuous operational data, such as through building sensors, it can become what is called a digital twin — a spatially aware, fully digital 3D replica of the building and its performance. This includes four layers of information: the physical layer (the as built data); the building system layer (a BMS to deliver real-time data from systems and components); the people layer (delivering behavioral data); and the enterprise layer (IWMS software relating to processes across facility and property management).

Importantly, the digital twin compiles this data to form the virtual replica in real time. Whereas a P3 project would historically produce data from various sources on multiple reports, the digital twin of a P3 project allows stakeholders to model future performance, identify trends and predict future performance against service level agreements.

Gaining financial transparency

Another key element of BIM for P3 projects is the integration of performance management capabilities within an IWMS used to manage FM service delivery. This feature allows users to keep track of the contract’s legal requirements, including a detailed payment mechanism (paymech) that deter-mines when and how a service provider is penalized for underperformance, thus creating an incentive for better service delivery. The paymech ensures that the risks associated with maintenance and services are the responsibility of the service provider(s). In a P3 project, the public sector organization can impose deductions if the availability of the physical assets or the quality of the services fall below agreed standards, so the paymech provides the much-needed transparency around the provider’s performance against the contract.

Often, P3 projects will have numerous locations with very different operational needs and key performance indicators. The nature of a facility can have a significant impact on service delivery from site to site, meaning the IWMS needs to allocate jobs and calculate when they are due in a dynamic way. One building might have offices with standard business hours, whereas a hospital requires 24/7 uptime. Here, inadequate response time could trig-ger a significant financial penalty.

With P3 contracts lasting as long as 25 years, IWMS software with integrated paymech capabilities can also be retrofit-ted into buildings with great effect. This allows stakeholders to review the latest technology, create operational efficiencies, increase flexibility, identify and address issues within existing contracts, minimize penalty deductions and improve the overall quality of asset and service delivery data.

The public sector organization also benefits from paymech software, by gaining significant insight into how efficiently the P3 project is being operated, using the data which the system provides, through integrated reporting, to assess their confidence in the service provider. Meanwhile, the service provider can use the retrofit to formalize local practices outside of the contract and leverage the IWMS functionality to deliver improvements to operational efficiency. Ultimately, the retrofitting process is an ideal opportunity to take a step back, examine the range of activities being delivered and incorporate this properly into the paymech, ensuring that everything works in support of the public sector organization’s objectives while protecting the service provider from penalties which can be avoided through efficient management. Over the course of a P3 contract there may also be occasions in which the public sector organization benchmarks the existing provision with alternatives or even invites other suppliers to compete with the incumbent.

This happens when the current supplier falls into default for a specific service they are contracted to deliver, and the public sector body undertakes what is referred to as a market testing exercise. Having accurate performance reporting from the integrated paymech and IWMS software clearly helps to support any decisions regarding potential changes to FM service provision.

In either case, whether the paymech is in place from the outset, or retrofitted to a P3 contract, it is in the best interests of both parties to have a clear, transparent and objective record of the level of performance, scope of services delivered and value generated.

The last word

BIM has the potential to revolutionize P3 projects by providing unprecedented cohesion, transparency and intelligence to public infrastructure projects. More importantly for FM, it has the potential to strengthen its role in the building life cycle and maximize its value for customers and end users alike. In recent years, the industry has made substantial progress in the provision and delivery of technology, responding the growing demand for more and better data around asset, real estate and business strategy. But FM cannot afford to stand still. The world is changing again. After COVID-19, there is increasing scrutiny on organizations, especially those in the public sector, to deliver economic value, provide social good and prevent environmental catastrophe. A digital strategy in building life cycle management will be fundamental to that happening.