In many projects, BIM implementation is still focused on producing BIM models aimed at graphical representation and on meeting the requirement of delivering them to the client once the assignment is completed. This represents only a fraction of BIM’s true potential and can also lead to an inappropriate use of this methodology.
The value of BIM does not lie in the BIM models themselves, but in how we use the ecosystem around them to support more robust, faster, and better-informed decisions throughout the entire life cycle of a building or infrastructure.
This article summarizes how to move from a deliverable-driven BIM approach to a decision-driven BIM approach, and why this shift is essential to generate real value.
When Does BIM Stop Being Useful?
Many implementations fail to deliver added value for the following reasons:
Contractual specifications focused on deliverables
Most specifications define formats, levels of detail, and technical standards, but do not identify which decisions the information is meant to support or which criteria should be used to validate them. For example, “BIM uses” are defined, but not the purpose that gives them meaning or the perspective of those requesting them.
KPIs focused on model quality
It is common to assess whether “the model is correct,” but far less common to measure whether BIM has contributed to better decision-making at the right time. “Model audits” tend to focus on verifying the container and its content, rather than what that content actually represents.
Tools and workflows based on checklists
Standards validation and ISO compliance are necessary, but not sufficient. The risk is turning BIM into a set of protocols at the expense of value-oriented working methodologies. Striking a balance between the required standardization and protocolization and maintaining agility (understood as the optimal effort-to-value ratio) in project development can be challenging, but it is something that must not be avoided.
Fragmented governance
When those who generate the content of information models—especially BIM models—and those who make decisions are not part of the same workflow, a disconnect arises between the information produced and the decisions that need to be made.
A Necessary Shift: Questions First, Solutions Second
The starting point should be the decision-making questions that the project needs to answer. This approach underpins the concept of MVIM (Minimal Viable Information Model).
Only the information strictly necessary to support the project’s key decisions should be generated.
Instead of asking “What do we need to deliver?”, we ask “What do we need to decide, and why?”. This simplifies workflows, reduces information overload, and improves traceability.
How to Implement Decision-Oriented BIM
1) Identify critical decisions
Identify the key decisions that must be made at each stage (e.g., “Do we proceed with the investment?”, “Which supplier should we choose?”, “Is there a risk of delay?”).
2) Define KPIs
Applying Key Performance Indicators to BIM may sound highly technical, but in this context it simply means identifying, for each decision, the parameters that support it.
If they are quantitative, they will become data that must be incorporated into the appropriate information containers (BIM models, GIS, or other databases). If they are qualitative, it will be necessary to determine how and by whom they should be assessed.
3) Define the minimum information required
In decision-making, excess information is just as harmful as a lack of it. The key question should always be:
“If I did not have this information, would the final decision be different?”
If the answer is no, then that information is unnecessary.
This idea is fully aligned with the LOIN (Level of Information Needed) concept in ISO 19650, which establishes that each information package must be linked to a specific need.
It is important to note that this principle applies to all types of information, not only that embedded in BIM or GIS models, but also information stored in other formats such as documents or images.
It also applies to both quantitative and qualitative KPIs. In the case of quantitative KPIs, applying the principle of utility is straightforward: only the data required to perform analyses that support decision-making should be shared.
For qualitative KPIs, the mechanism is more complex, as the methods used to assess each indicator often depend on multiple factors. For example, to assess the maintainability of building services, it may be necessary to model the access and maintenance space around equipment for visual and metric analysis, while also introducing properties to elements that allow the generation of appropriate views (classification systems, element naming conventions, materials, etc.).
4) Define the source of information
To avoid duplicated or contradictory information, it is essential to define who is responsible for providing each piece of information. This is where what ISO refers to as the Master Information Delivery Plan comes into play.
However, the MIDP coordinates which information containers each stakeholder shares, not what information each container must include or how it should be presented. For this reason, it is useful to use the minimum possible number of information containers (with BIM and GIS models being particularly valuable allies) and to develop effective systems to define the information each container must hold.
At C+A, we have developed strategies to simplify deliverable specifications, such as the Scope Matrix (which brings together geometric, non-geometric, and documentary levels of detail in a single table) or the Information Production Plan (which links the purposes and objectives of BIM use with deliverables and milestones, information containers, and the processes required to produce them).
5) Define delivery frequency
BIM aligns much better with agile development methodologies (such as SCRUM) than with traditional waterfall approaches, as it seeks continuous interaction with clients and users.
ISO 19650 establishes a concurrent, iterative, and incremental process for reviewing deliverables and recommends partial acceptance of information containers. For this reason, at C+A we recommend that clients and users regularly participate in reviews with the development team, as if they were part of the team themselves, providing feedback that helps ensure final acceptance of the deliverables.
6) Ensure accessibility
To make decisions, all stakeholders must be able to access the necessary information in an unambiguous way. To ensure this, it is not enough to deliver information containers in open formats; they must also be stored in accessible Common Data Environments.
Accessibility is not limited to the container itself, but also to the information it contains. Therefore, appropriate views must be configured to allow recipients to interpret the information correctly, such as dashboards, 3D model views, and similar tools.
In this regard, the use of Issue Management Systems (formerly known as issue or incident managers) integrated into CDEs is extremely useful, especially when they allow issues to be linked both to geometric model views and to documents or images.
BIM is neither a model nor a process. It is a system of evidence that can help designers, contractors, subcontractors, developers, and operators make more informed, more traceable decisions aligned with the overall objectives of the project.
When the focus shifts toward the principle of utility in decision-making, BIM ceases to be an obligation and becomes a strategic tool for improving outcomes, reducing risks, and increasing efficiency throughout the entire life cycle of the asset.