W3-ABM-Justifying the adoption of BIM processes during project tender stage using Non Compensatory decision making models

  1. Problem Recognition

THE Introduction of BIM process into Design and Constriction work flows provides both Owners and Contractors with many advantages however during the tender stage, an owner must decide between use of traditional design and documentation methods or investment in more detailed modeling (BIM) which requires highly specialized management systems and software.

2. Development of Feasible Alternatives 

An owners tendering strategy is dependent upon a large number of factors. For this exercise we will consider typical Design-Bid-Construct scenario using either of the following methods;

Alternative 1 – Owner developed 2D design format with typical project information including detailed archi, Structure, and MEP drawings, BoQ, material/equipment specifications, site data, etc

Alternative 2-Fully developed 3D design and BIM model including co ordinated structural, architectual, MEP designs inclusive of materials and element specifications plus model generated BoQ, site data, etc

3. Development of the Outcomes

Typical attributes to be used in the comparison of the above alternatives are outlined below.

  1. Simplification of design process
  2. Reduced Cost to prepare Tender documentation
  3. Reduce time to prepare Tender documentation
  4. Accurate representation of Project scope and requirements
  5. Flexibility to evaluate possible design options during tender stage
  6. Reduce risk of variations from Contractor

Within this example, there are no monetary or time figures available for the evaluation the alternatives.The following Non compensatory models will be used as the method of comparison;

  • Dominance
  • Lexicograph

Perceived strengths and weaknesses of each alternative shall be used in the assessment.  Some of the advantages BIM is considered to offer over traditional design and documentation processes include;

4. Selection Criteria

The alternative which is considered dominant will be considered as the preferred alternative however if a dominant alternative cannot be determined, a Lexicograph model based on a ranking of attributes will be used.

The ranking shall be based on the preferences / criteria listed in table 1 (Paired Comparison)

In the above example, the owners priorities are to minimise costs for the development of the Detailed design as well as ensuring that the information provided during tender is accurate and represents the project scope. Based on the rankings, second is the Owners desire to reduce risk of unknowns and variations from the Contractor.

5. Analysis and Comparison of the Alternatives

An Assessment of Dominance among alternatives is outlined in below table based on perceived advantages and disadvantages of BIM process.

A dominant alternative cannot be identified with BIM considered to be superior in only 4 of the 6 attributes.

Under the lexicograph model and the ranking of attributes traditional design processs are determined to

From the ranking of attributes, Cost to develop tender design and Accurate representation of Project scope / Owner requirements are considered priorities to the Owners tender process. This is followed by Owners priority for a reduction in risk of variations (due to poor scope definition).

Whilst tradition tender and 2D design process is considered better in achieving the clients objective of simplifying the design process, BIM can offer a more accurate representation of the project scope and owners requirements through 3D visualization as well as coordinated design process. Given both of these alternatives satisfy each of the top ranked priorities, final selection may be based upon secondary rankings such as  reduction in risk of variation from Contractor due to poor scope definition.

6. Selection of the Preferred alternative

Alternative 2 (BIM Process) is considered the preferred alternative on results above.

Whilst the BIM model development process during tender stages is considered more complicated and costly (Attribute 1 & 2) with a heavy / early reliance upon specialized BIM management skills, BIM will greatly increase the chance of the Owners design and project objectives being satisfied through through better visualization of requirements. The Owners desire to reduce variations though poorly detailed or communication of Work scope is also more likely to be realised with a BIM process.

7. Performance Monitoring and Post evaluation of results

In order to truly evaluate the effectiveness of BIM during the tender stage, the following information would need to be established at the end of the project;

  • Quantity / Value of variations claimed due to scope omission/errors
  • Number NCR’s or rework required by contractor due to non conformance with Specification
  • Compliance with Owners tender design
  • Redesign costs and time lost due to changes
  1. What is Building information Modelling and what are its advantages and Disadvantages (Krigh Bachman) retrieved from www.quora.com
  2. The Benefits Of BIM For Structural Engineers (Venu Gopal) retrieved from www.leevenspark.com/2015/01/the-benefits-of-bim-for-structural.html
  3. 15 advantages of using BIM (Francesc Salla) retrieved from    http://blog.visualarq.com/2014/03/12/15-advantages-of-using-bim/
  4. Sullivan, William G., Wicks, Elin M. & Koelling, C. Patrick. (2014). Engineering Economy 16th edition page 600 -607, England: Pearson Education Limited.

W2_ABM_Follow up Tuckman Survey on SPJ offshore Construction Team

  1. Problem Definition

The Offshore Construction team for McConnell Dowell / SYS Joint venture (SPJ) have been actively working together for the past 8-9 months. Further challenges are now expected with larger and more complex work fronts commencing. We now wish to determine the following;

  1. The groups maturity to further understand its ability to deal with continued adversity and;
  2. leadership skills and styles which the group may benefit from as it enters this next phase of the project.

2. Development of feasible alternatives

As commented in the Blog for Week 1, according to Professor Bruce Tuckman in 1970, there are 4 stages for teamwork development :

  1. Forming
  2. Storming
  3. Norming
  4. Performing

Depending on the groups maturity levels, available alternatives with respect to continued management style may include;

  • Retain a high level of daily interaction to remain relevant to the team
  • Closely follow performance of the team and make decisions for the group to follow, providing specific daily targets and instructions.
  • Provide more general targets and milestones to the team allowing members to develop their own interim targets and pathways.
  • Delegate and oversee group activity from from a high level perspective and act as a guide and motivator as director and instructor.

3. Development of the Outcome for Alternative
As per Week 1 exercise with Emerald team the assessment of the SPJ offshore construction team will be performed through the administration of 32 question survey containing statements about teamwork. Each team Member scores each of the 32 questions using a scale of 1-5 (Almost never to Almost always) to indicate how often their team displays each indicated behavior.

In this survey however, respondents were requested to not record their names or identifies on answer sheets and submit together in 1 lot to assist with the retention of anonymity and therefore the integrity of results.

4. Selection Criteria

Survey results of SPJ Offshore Construction team are as follows;

5. Analysis and Comparison of the Alternative

From the above results, the team is now clearly operating in the Performing phase which is characterized by the following traits;

In this final stage the team becomes more strategically aware, they know what they are doing and why.  With a shared vision they are able to stand on their own feet with little interference or direction from the leader.  The focus becomes one of over-achieving goals, challenging and continuously improving their own working practices.  Disagreements are handled internally with the team members looking after each other as well as the task.

6. Selection of the Preferred Alternative

On reflection of these results, team members are now operating with minimal interference from senior management and more autonomy. Processes and procedures are developed for new work scopes however established work fronts are now observed to “run themselves”

The teams maturity levels (Performing)and current operation style being observed is therefore supported by the results above and can be considered appropriate for a group which has been established for the past 9 months and who have worked through a degree of adversity together.

With respect to actions by its leader and their task to keep the group motivated and focused on the remaining activities. The following actions are to be taken from the alternatives;

  • Provide more general targets and milestones to the team allowing members to develop their own interim targets and pathways.
  • Delegate and oversee group activity from from a high level perspective and act as a guide and motivator as director and instructor.

7. Performance Monitoring and the Post Evaluation of Result

Additionally, further actions to be taken to those nominated above, the leader may consider the following;

  • Keep close to the team to assist the team in the event of personnel or organisational change.
  • Encourage Team members to deepen their knowledge and skills, including working to continuously improving team development.
  • Accomplishments in team process or progress are celebrated.


  1. Judith Stein -Using the stages of Team Development                       Retrieved from  (hhttp://hrweb.mit.edu/learning-development/learning-topics/teams/articles/stages-development)
  2. Scoring the The Tuckman Team Maturity Questionnaire Electronically. retrieved from (http://www.phf.org/resourcestools/Documents/Electronic_Tuckman.pdf)
  3. Alan Chapman (2013) – Tuckman forming, storming performing model –  Retrieved from (http://www.businessballs.com/tuckmanformingstormingnormingperforming.htm)
  4. Stage of team development – the Tuckman Model                           Retrieved from (http://tomorrowsconsultant.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Stage-of-team-devel)

W1-ABM-Tuckman Assessment

1. Problem Definition

Following the completion of the initial 5 day face to face programme and the formation of a working team called Emerald 2017, an assessment of the  group will be performed using the Bruce Tuckman 4 stage model in order to understand what stage the group is currently operating in.

Tuckman’s model explains that as the team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and the leader changes leadership style. Beginning with a directing style, moving through coaching, then participating, finishing delegating and almost detached. At this point the team may produce a successor leader and the previous leader can move on to develop a new team.

2. Identify the Feasible Alternative

The Group will be assessed for the following stages of teamwork development;

  1. Forming
  2. Storming
  3. Norming
  4. Performing

Each Phase is characterized by the following;

3. Development of the Outcome for Alternative
The assessment of the team will be performed through the administration of 32 question survey containing statements about teamwork. Each team Member scores each of the 32 questions using a scale of 1-5 (Almost never to Almost always) to indicate how often their team displays each indicated behavior.

4. Selection Criteria

Following the completion of survey questions from the Emerald 2017 group members and the classification of responses in accordance with Tuckman scoring model, the results are summarized within table 1.0 below;

Analysis and Comparison of the AlternativeFrom the above results, the current maturity of the group is regarded as PERFORMING based on a highest average score of 27.4.

In analysing the above results, the score may be influenced by the factors such as the sharing of scores with other team members, reducing willingness to provide negative feedback or low scores or overstatement of positive scores.

With these factors in mind and on the basis that the group is only 1 week old and is yet to face major challenges with respect to member interaction, work load and leadership, a more appropriate ranking of the group is that of the “Forming” stage (Rank 2).

Furthermore, the lowest score received for the group was for the Stage of “storming”. This is considered appropriate.

A statistical analysis of the teams survey results was not performed as it was not considered relevant to assessing the groups current development or stage of maturity.

6. Selection of the Preferred Alternative

Whilst the survey has produced a result indicating that the group currently operates within the “PERFORMING” stage, based on reasoning stated under section 5 above, the Preferred alternative is considered to be the FORMING stage. 

7. Performance Monitoring and the Post Evaluation of Result

It is recommended that the survey be repeated at week 10 and Week 20. It is also recommended that the survey be undertaken in a manner where respondents score are not disclosed to other team members to ensure that all scores truly reflect the opinions of the respondents.


  1. Team technology – Leadership using the Tuckman Model.                        Retrieved from  (http://http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/tuckman.htmlf)
  2. Scoring the The Tuckman Team Maturity Questionnaire Electronically. retrieved from (http://www.phf.org/resourcestools/Documents/Electronic_Tuckman.pdf)
  3. Alan Chapman (2013) – Tuckman forming, storming performing model –  Retrieved from (http://www.businessballs.com/tuckmanformingstormingnormingperforming.htm)


This weekly Blog showcases the work and effort of team members from the Emerald Group – 2017 who are working towards AACE and Guild of Project Control certifications.

The Blog acts as a public platform allowing its authors and members to achieve the following;

  1. Measure their return on investment (RoTi) by demonstrating and applying their understanding of concepts, tools, techniques and methodologies learned from course study materials to real problems in their day to day working environment.
  2. Assist group members in their preparation for essay questions contained within the EVP, PSP,CEP and DRMP certification exams
  3. Enhance the ability and competency of group members to structure and present technical arguments in support of a “solution” or “idea” to a problem within the work place or even home
  4. Provide blog authors with the opportunity to showcase their works and efforts to a wider and public audience, thereby enhancing their public profile.