The Development Of Project Management

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

An nD model is an extension of the building information model that incorporates additional design information required along the project life cycle (Li, Aouad, McDermott, Liu, & Abbott, 2008). Fox and Hietanen (2007) explained that any BIM that supports analysis from the perspective of a number of different domains, such as space management, cost management, and construction management can be described as nD BIM. The nD modeling concept aims to develop technology and tools to incorporate numerous design perspectives in order to systematically access and compare the strengths and weaknesses of different design scenarios (Aouad et al., 2005). It aims to add onto the 4D and 5D concepts to include an nth number of design dimensions into a holistic model that would enable users to portray and visually project the building over its complete life cycle. For example, at the University of Salford, a holistic nD modeling tool was developed to help improve the decision making process and construction performance (Figure 2-2).

3330070305001.png

Figure : Data Model of nD (Aouad et al., 2005).

The nD model was used for a variety of analysis including: predicting and planning process, analyzing cost options, maximizing sustainability, investigating energy requirements, analyzing accessibility, analyzing maintenance costs, crime deterrent features, and building acoustics (Aouad et al., 2005). Modeling nD reduces the fragmentation of the design and construction process enabling the balance between aesthetics, ecology, and economy thereby providing design solutions that incorporate social, environmental, and economic roles (Aouad et al., 2005).

BIM Levels

The AIA Attachment E-202 "Building Information Modeling Protocol Exhibit", which was developed by the American Institute of Architects in 2008, establishes a framework for managing BIM requirements for different phases of a project using a "model element table" that is filled out by each designer. Levels of the Model development are as the following (AIA 2008):

Level of Development 100 – This level may be considered as a Schematic Design level that provides primarily volumetric and massing information. With only the most basic information available the practical uses of this type of model are limited to review of basic space layouts, volume and area calculations and orientation of the spaces

Level of Development 200 – This model level is a more developed and is almost similar to Design Development phase. Some of the model elements may include information that can be used to assist with cost estimating.

Level of Development 300 – This level of the model has sufficient information to allow preparing the traditional construction documents. However, by the very nature of BIM, the elements include additional non-geometric information that may be used by the design/construction team

Level of Development 400 – In this level, the model includes more details and all elements. It includes all assembly, fabrication and detailing information that can be used for fabrication. Detailed cost estimates based on the specific elements in the Model are possible. Detailed scheduling can be achieved by showing time scaled appearance of detailed specific elements.

Level of Development 500 – All elements and systems are modeled as specific constructed assemblies and are accurate in every detail. This Model can be used for much the same purposes as the LOD 400 in addition to altering, maintaining or adding to the project, or building.

Levels of Development must be determined with the project team early in the project schedule (preferably before design begins), and should match with the overall project goals. The AIA E-202 Levels of Development generally follow a model that was developed for Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) methods. In this approach, more modeling is often done in early project phases (such as conceptualization) than in a traditional project. This approach recognizes the potential leverage of early design involvement by subcontractors, who can collaborate in the BIM development to potentially arrive at more cost effective and constructible solutions without requiring costly redesign in later phases of the project. Furthermore, the IPD method blurs the lines of traditional structural engineering design services, given the more direct collaboration with contractors throughout design and construction (Ashcraft, et al., 2006).

When applying the AIA E-202 Levels of Development to more traditional (non-IPD) design projects, the engineer should take care while identifying the scope of work to be clear in each design phase of the project. The AIA E-202 Levels of Development do not clearly related to the phases of the traditional project that had been defined in the AIA Contract Documents (Conceptual Design, Schematic Design, Design Development, Construction Documents). For example, in a traditional project, the engineer of record will not produce any model related to Level of Development 100 (just a narrative). On the other hand, some engineers may create intermediate Levels of Development in order to create more specific deliverables for their clients. For example, the engineer may create a level "350" model that includes more of the miscellaneous steel framing and connection details than a level "300" model (which may represent the construction documents) in order to improve coordination and clash detection for the contractor. These additional Levels of Development may fall outside the scope of basic services (see discussion below on additional services) (Ashcraft, et al., 2006).

Project Management

Development of Project Management

Projects from ancient times have left impressive legacies on our architectural and industrial culture. One wonders how some of those early masters managed without the technology that is cheaply available today. However, with the exception of a few notable philanthropic employers, concern for the welfare and safety of workers was generally lacking and many early project workers actually lost their lives through injuries, disease and unbearable physical exhaustion. People were often regarded as a cheap and expendable resource (Morris, 1994).

Formal management organizational structures have existed from early times, but these flourished in military, church and civil administrations rather than in industry. Industrial organization came much later. Rapid industrialization and the demands of munitions production in World War One saw the emergence of management scientists and industrial engineers such as Elton Mayo and Frederick Winslow Taylor, who studied people and productivity in factories (Kanigel, 1997).

The early 1950s showed little progress in the formalization of project management, but by the end of the decade, this situation had been significantly changed by two major developments: the development of the network project planning and monitoring techniques of PERT (Project Evaluation Review Technique), CPM (Critical Path Method), and PDM (Precedence Diagramming Method) ; and systems engineering (Morris, 1994).

Critical Path Method (CPM), and Project Evaluation Review Technique (PERT) were developed in the USA independently in the late 1950s. (Kelley & Walker, 1989). On the other hand, the networking method which later came to be called PDM was initiated with the award of a research contract by the US bureau of Yard and Docks of Stanford University, Civil Engineering Department (Fondahl, 1987).

The 1960s witnessed an intellectual push to apply general management theories to project management, particularly in terms of the "system approach" and organizational factors such as differentiation, integration, and interdependence. The late years of 1960s witnessed a shift form focus upon organizational and scheduling aspects to more comprehensive texts on project management (Morris, 1994).

The 1960s also witnessed the establishment of the two major professional project management bodies independently in Europe and North America:

IPMA (International Project Management Association): IPMA was formed in 1965 originally as a forum for European network planning practitioners to exchange knowledge and experience. IPMA's focus is in the development and promotion of the project management profession and provides standards and establishes guidelines for the work of project management professionals through the IPMA Competence Baseline.

PMI (Project Management Institute): North America's PMI was formed in 1969, PMI is a professional organization for the project management profession with the purpose of advancing project management.

Snyder (1987) noted that in the 1970's, the writings on project management took two significant new directions; applications and professional recognition. Many of the distinctive project management techniques which were developed or refined during the1970s appear to owe much to the rational problem-solving approaches which were characteristic of the systems concepts of the time. These include WBS (Work Breakdown Structure), OBS (Organization Breakdown Structure), responsibility assignment matrices (e.g. Linear Responsibility Charts) and earned value methods (Stretton, 2007)

Although project management software became more widely available, processing continued to be carried out on big expensive mainframe computers in batch mode. Graphics were primitive compared with modern equipment. Data input was still accomplished by copying data from network diagrams on to coding sheets from which cards had to be punched and verified, sometimes needing two cards for every network activity. After sorting, these punched cards had to be taken to trained computer operators, who worked in clean air-conditioned rooms where entry was usually forbidden to project managers. The first process results always seemed to produce a large pile of print-out listing a crop of errors that needed considerable detective work before the faults could be identified, and then corrected by punching several new cards before the computer could produce its practical working schedules (Morris, 1994).

During 1980s, project management began to become a mature management discipline "The eighties was a period of integration of the many different areas of emerging experience into accepted principles and practices common to most application areas" (Stretton, 1994).

Before the 1980s, the emphasis in project management tools and techniques had tended to be on the execution or implementation phases of projects. But that situation was changing, and in the 80s increasing emphasis was being placed on the "front end" of projects. So, during the 1980s, increasing attention was directed towards needs determination, feasibility studies, value analysis, risk management and project startup. In 1980s a certification program was developed and approved by the PMI Board. Barnes & Wearne (1993) expressed that the evolution of techniques of project management has moved progressively from downstream to upstream. The emphasis for project management now is to start with attention to a project's needs and risks as a whole so as to anticipate the potential problems and shrink the risks.