Technology in Architectural Practice

 View Only

  • 1.  Standardized or Customized?

    Posted 23 days ago

    Should firms adopt national standards or build their own?

    When it comes to BIM execution plans, templates, and protocols, do you prefer industry-wide standards or firm-specific ones?

    Share your preference and why.



    ------------------------------
    Thesla Collier
    HNTB
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: Standardized or Customized?

    Posted 20 days ago

    I've been heavily involved in this aspect of the business for many years and it's a great question.

    I always build upon and refer to industry standards before writing or creating anything custom for my firm. I've found that most industry standards are not robust enough to deal with complexities we see on large projects that are being handled by very large collaborative teams. That said, if you start with industry standards and expand or extrapolate them to meet your needs - you'll be in much better shape to comply with the industry standards if a client requires you to.

    For BIM Execution Planning - the Penn State template was always the gold standard, and was eventually rolled into NBIMS-US. AIA has since developed a good BEP template as part of their Digital Practice contract documents in 2022. Our internal template has evolved from both of these inspirations, but adds a few things they don't address. Plus, we sometimes have clients requiring us to use their BEP template format.

    Did your question mean to explore other things beyond BIM execution planning?



    ------------------------------
    James Vandezande AIA
    HOK, Inc.
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 3.  RE: Standardized or Customized?

    Posted 16 days ago

    Very interesting point of view. I completely agree with you. It is a complex question, and the solution is even more complex. There is never a one-size-fits-all approach, which adds to the challenge of creating a system that meets the specific needs of a project while remaining compliant with a broader set of standards.

    To answer your question, yes, it is worth exploring areas beyond BIM execution planning, especially for complex project deliveries.



    ------------------------------
    Thesla Collier
    HNTB
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 4.  RE: Standardized or Customized?

    Posted 15 days ago

    I agree that multidisciplinary coordination becomes the critical factor in large and complex project delivery.

    Beyond AI tools themselves, what matters most is maintaining information consistency across teams. In practice, we rely on shared working platforms, coordination meetings, and collaborative review sessions to ensure that all disciplines can see design updates in real time.

    At the governance level, we typically maintain alignment on major milestones and Level-1 decision nodes, while allowing Level-2 and Level-3 design components to evolve dynamically as coordination progresses.

    BIM plays an important role in early-stage interdisciplinary simulation, especially for identifying conflicts between architectural, structural, and MEP systems before construction documentation.

    In complex developments, weekly multidisciplinary coordination meetings remain essential - technology supports the process, but structured communication is what keeps projects aligned.

    In my experience, AI and BIM are most effective when integrated into an established project coordination framework rather than treated as standalone solutions.

    YAN CHEN

    Architect | Urban Development & Cultural Planning

    Member, International Society of City and Regional Planners (ISOCARP) | AIA | APA

    Email: yanchen19742023@gmail.com；

    Mobile & WhatsApp: +30 697 558 1872 | WeChat: 18601888999；

    LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/yanchen8676




    Original Message


  • 5.  RE: Standardized or Customized?

    Posted 15 days ago

    Yan, Thank you for your insights



    ------------------------------
    Thesla Collier
    HNTB
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 6.  RE: Standardized or Customized?

    Posted 7 days ago

    I see this as a balance rather than an either/or choice. National standards provide a common baseline that improves coordination across teams and projects, while firm-specific standards make BIM practical and efficient by reflecting real workflows. The most effective approach is to adopt industry standards as a foundation and then customize them based on a firm's experience and project needs.

    Agree totally with James.


    Ar. Dilawar Hussain

    Intl. Assoc. AIA



    ------------------------------
    Dilawar Hussain
    studio65
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 7.  RE: Standardized or Customized?

    Posted 5 days ago

    I completely agree on the balance. I am curious  about, Do you trust external standards to represent your firm's quality, or do you believe your differentiation requires customization?



    ------------------------------
    Thesla Collier
    HNTB
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 8.  RE: Standardized or Customized?

    Posted 5 days ago

    Great question, Thesla.

    I trust industry standards to set a reliable baseline-they help with consistency, coordination, and speaking a common language across teams. But they're not where a firm's quality truly shows.

    Our differentiation comes from how we adapt those standards to our own workflows: the way we structure models, manage information, and use BIM to support decisions rather than just deliverables. That customization reflects experience and is what actually improves outcomes on projects.

    So for me, external standards build trust and alignment, while firm-specific customization is where quality and identity really live. Both are essential.



    ------------------------------
    Dilawar Hussain
    studio65
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


Related Content