Efficient Digital Operating Model—Technology Is Not an Absolute Value

MAUNO LOUNAKOSKI: Hello, and good whatever time of day it is where you are listening to this industry talk. My name is Mauno Lounakoski, and I welcome you to spend the next hour with me. Digital operating model and value of technology. Thought leadership mixed with practicality. We have a lot to cover, so let us begin.

If you read the description, you know that we have four learning objectives. First, specifying five traditional project methods that can be tackled with ACC and improved workflows. Two. Define six key factors, mastering of which can lead to more efficient projects. Three. Describe how ACC modules and functionalities can help you deal with these key factors. And four, integrate at least the three challenges that come along with digital operating model, and how we can possibly overcome them.

Now the objectives were in four parts. Our content is going to be in five parts. First we'll have a short introduction. Who am I, what is the company I work for, and how do we approach development work? Background. Why have we embarked on this journey towards efficient digital operating model? What were the reasons? Now, where are we now? What have we achieved so far? Future. Where are we headed, what is still to come? And lastly, a quick summary.

On to introduction. Who am I? Mauno Lounakoski. XR enthusiasm and practicality. A mixture of those two. Practicality, I think, stems from the fact that I was born and raised on a farm here in Finland. And when you combine that with a natural interest towards technology, I think there's a good balance that resonates with the efficiency of digital operating model. Age, 26 years old. Yes, I'm quite young. But I see that as an advantage in this job of EDC manager. If I just remember to hear out those with more actual project work experience.

Education, master of science, civil engineering. And now leading a two year development project, which actual goal is to create that efficient digital operating model. And where I'm doing that, Suomen Aluerakennuttaja, SARA. Construction project management based here in Tampere, Finland. 13 employees and revenue. That's right. Revenue, not profit. 1.3 million euros last year. A small company on a global scale. David amidst Goliaths, one could say. And still, we try to affect the AEC industry. Our journey towards efficient digital operating model properly started in 2018 with a visit to Singapore.

There we saw top of the line solutions and realized that this digitalization trend is one that we need to hop on as soon as possible. 2019. Two visits to AU. First in London, then to Vegas. Back then we played with the idea of how nice it would be to someday be on the stage ourselves, talk about our experiences, our development work. What are we doing with Autodesk products? Spring 2020, our development project officially starts. Time skip, today. Here I am now talking to you about our development work and our experiences.

A little sooner than expected, but in actuality, there's so much that has happened during this 1 and 1/2 years that it's quite hard to fit it all into this one hour time slot. SARA allows its employees to grow and find their place amidst all the possibilities that the AEC industry has to offer. It gives you freedom, as well as responsibilities. For me, it means the possibility to constantly explore. Question the existing. Be eager to try something new. Would this be possible? Could we do this another way? How can we do this differently?

Quick response cycles, testing in actual projects so that we get good, propper feedback. And those projects are not those mega branch projects. Because if we don't get this model to work in smaller projects, there's no reason to go on to bigger ones. The power of the model is in scalability. Once we've mastered the smaller projects, then we can move on to bigger ones. Goal. Develop our own operations at AEC industry, as well as ensure high quality. And so that this wouldn't just be babble, some concrete examples of our development work.

SARA-app. A reporting application to be used in construction site supervising that we developed with a programming company seven years ago. Simple, easy to use, and ensures immediate reporting to all stakeholders. Perhaps next step, integrating it to ACC. Two, our own architect team. Which, in a construction project management and engineering company of this size, isn't normal. That team is an integral part of project development, building, and renovation projects. And they also have more project management experience than traditional architects here in Finnish construction scheme.

What we have noticed with this development work is that roughly 50% of it is technology, and 50% is adaptation and leading that change. New technology comes along. We learn how to use it. But then comes the implementation. How do we make it so that our employees and all the other stakeholders get the most value out of it, and use it the way we intended to? Not so easy as it sounds. Our development work also covers the whole real estate lifecycle. Every phase of it. We want to be efficient in each one of them. And we also try to remember, technology is a tool, never an absolute value.

Now you know a little bit about us. But what about the background? What were the reasons for this journey? Seven phases of a project. First comes huge excitement, then ungodly obscurity and infernal confusion. And we perhaps come to our senses and start finding the people responsible. Then we punish the innocent and eventually reward those that didn't even take part in the project. OK. These were satire, but I'm sure at least some of you recognize the obscurity and confusion from your everyday project work. They just poof, poof, poof, appear. Even though you tried to avoid them.

The actual traditional practice is email messaging, long chains, commenting on PDF attachments. One could even print out the attachments, do markups to its gannets, and send it back to the chain. And then, in the worst case scenario, one that wasn't even part of the chain gets it sent to him with regard. Could you take a look at this? How nice. Monthly meetings, questions pile up, effective communication. Software options. Countless, they lack integration. Manual file transferring, which leads to data silos. Data might not be up to date, or it's tied to a person or a phase. And lastly, BIM because BIM.

And this is not just referring to BIM. But technology in general seen as an absolute value. This is how we've always done it. And these are the ones we want to get rid of, because they create waste. We lose data, we do double the work, there's interpretations, which are always risky. We lose time, and we lose money. This waste tackling, just like our development work methods, relate to lean principles. By streamlining and creating better flow through the project, we aim to create value for every stakeholder involved. Almost like a pulling effect to the finish line.

Imagine that black arrow on top, pulling us away from those gaps where we lose the data. Imagine the project worker using bigger percentage of his or her job to be actual project work, and not one that creates waste.

Those are the reasons or things we want to get rid of. But what have we achieved in 1 and 1/2 years? Five general steps towards the sixth. Reducing wasteful practices, as well as saving time and money.

Nowadays, pursuing clients or end user involvement is one of everyone's priorities, which is good. But if you truly want to get great at collaborating, you've got to find a way to involve every party the best way possible. This includes motivating stakeholders through, for example, experimentation methods. And giving them a chance to contribute not only to their own parts but also to the project as a whole. For example, professional and experience design engineer has so much more to give than just his design work.

Communication. As synchronous, meaning real time as possible, open and dialectic. In reality, this means moving away from the email world to a communication platform and weekly design meetings. Success of an open and dialecting model is dependent on the project members and their personalities, naturally. But it's a model which we can encourage in order to create a good spirit between the stakeholders. Last thing I've done is this. Next I'm going to. Could you do this, or could this be changed? With manage, we mean tools that allow us and everyone else to stay on top of the situation.

Single source of truth. Phrase that we've been hearing a lot. And incidentally, it works here perfectly. And it's also connected to sharing step. Storing files locally is not the way to go. Because then, the files might not be available to everyone. Or we have to get a confirmation from its uploader that it's up to date. One challenge this file sharing and openness leads to, however, is actually getting people to share their unfinished work. People are insecure when it comes to these kinds of situations, and are afraid that they'd get slack for not doing something. Or other designers start their work based on unfinished portions of yours.

With this, we go back to good communication. Reducing rework. How do we make it so that we notice errors or options, so that we don't have to bear situations where something obviously should or could have been changed sooner, with minor costs. Visuality is one solution. Especially if the person making the final decision is not a construction professional. But we also have to take a look at our workflows to see if there's something there that usually, even with the experience, gets unnoticed.

OK. These are the efficiency steps. But how do we enable them? Unified software portfolio.

You know that we utilize ACC, but why did we choose it? To answer that question plainly, no similar software ecosystem that would enable our efficiency steps was available at the time. And actually still isn't. Sure, there might be a better-- one specific software outside the ecosystem that is better for one job. But our goal is a unified portfolio. An ecosystem. Software inside the portfolio can at the moment be divided into three categories. Or four, depending on how you look at it.

Microsoft Teams, Smartsheet, and Docs. They form the core. Teams works as a coffee room for all the chitchat, as well as a place to hold the meetings. And Smartsheets is a collaborative solution for scheduling the project. And then comes Docs. Document management on steroids. Heard it here at the office. Storing files is a base point, but Docs does much more than that. And simple things, like a built in 3D viewer and issues and markups, affect the project workflows immensely. Gone are the days when a client comes to ask, do I need a separate software to view the BIM? No.

And if you're familiar with Docs features, you also know that issues and markups are the counterpart to commenting in PDF via email. So, check mark there. And this Docs issues and markups was the first significant step forward for us. A commentary from a client. If only I could do, or use these, in other projects as well. It was such a drag to go back to the PDF world after using these. And technologically, these three do almost everything we've managed to think of. If you do finish these of course. But the main problem has been to get people to use these the way we've intended to. 50% leading the change.

An example. When you have the possibility to post to Teams, there's a temptation to take that screenshot in Revit and post it to teams and have the conversation there. But where does that lead to? To data silos. We should use the issues and markups in Docs so that the file data is there. But that is something we just need to instruct the designers with.

For designers. Revit plus Collaborate Pro. Cloud model sharing and linking. By demanding the use of Collaborate Pro from designers, we deliberately choose to disregard offices that don't use them. And that is because we're trying to get rid of the hassle with IFC and local files. And this decision has led to mixed feedback. But ultimately, this is how we change the industry. On the structural side, this brings a few problems since it doesn't yet bode so well we prefer, reinforced concrete element modeling. But we're hoping this will change in the near future.

For class detection, there's Navisworks. And Enscape handles visualizations, usually for both us and the architects. Take off and build. Modules for estimators and contractors alike. To be fair, they haven't seen much use yet. The design is where the early adopters of HCC and BIM 360 pictures Collaborate Pro, earlier BIM 360 design, was such a simple and useful add on for Revit. But for contractors to change their usual platform into something else is a whole new ballgame. Same goes for construction connected, which on an ideal level, is awesome.

But in practicality, how do you convince an industry which still works around, I know a guy principle, of its benefits so people start using it. And then the fourth category. Tandem. Or its local counterpart software from Finland. That is there when we are ready to use it. OK. That is the basis of our portfolio. But, ACC, or BIM 360, has also the integration software. The ones that support the core. There's plenty of them.

We have taken the route where the software that we choose has to have an automatic flow of data. If we create an issue in the integration software, it also has to update to Docs. If our project file or plan updates in Docs, it also has to update in the integration software. And when you choose the software, keep it simple stupid. Don't go overboard.

Integration software also works as a bridge towards peripheral technology. 360 cameras, drones, extended reality. All cool and evolving technologies, as well as plenty of software options for them. I got to use these, most eager one would say. But which of them would create value for you, in what way, and what to consider when purchasing. For us, getting up to date knowledge meant reading a couple of articles and reviews, as well as watching videos. And based on that experience, you shouldn't be too worried if you just aren't too cheap.

Most options produce utilizable material. And vital points come after you've acquired hardware. Operating model and efficiency. We've taken the route where every peripheral technology software has to either have a connection to plan in Docs and/or transforming the raw material can be done with as few software as possible. In reality, this means opening VR model directly from Docs reflect. Issues the 360 photos, Holo builder, or inside the VR model reflects, again, pre-planning drone flight missions and 360 photos without stitching.

If you want to be efficient, especially as a small company like us, no additional modeling or transformation work should be needed when creating experiences like these. Leave programming to bigger companies. And when you think about the use cases, tip. Give the technology to your employees or employee who you know will learn how to use it. They will find the use cases. Example case from the drones. They have those cases that everyone uses. But we had a construction site where excavation work was yet to be started.

We did a filming of it. We did a point cloud, or got a point cloud from that filming. Then, the contractor did the excavation work. And after that, we did a second filming. Now we had two point clouds. We compared the volume of those and then compare that number to the number contractor had given to the client who had ordered the job. That way the client got a confirmation if the contractors number was anywhere near correct.

Visual drafting. I mentioned that we as well use Enscape and have architects. And that is why. Because development of real time rendering and its software has allowed us to move from seeing to experiencing designs. When you present a design to a client who is not necessarily a construction professional, 3D is a step forward. But if you also add visuality to it, even end user with usually the least amount of construction experience has the opportunity to understand it and give proper feedback.

This way, we avoid or reduce the possibility for situations where client or end user realizes modification needs when the structure is already taking shape and changes cost more. Which would you prefer to see when making decisions? 2D, visual 3D, or both?

Real time visual design allows us to move our design effort to earlier phases. Since producing this kind of material doesn't take a toll on us, and the client can make decisions based on it. Few changes can still happen along the way, but the goal is that the end result wouldn't be far off from the original draft. Example. We presented a design to city officials and they were like, whoa, whoa, whoa guys. Don't go any further with your design until we've approved them. But in actuality, we hadn't even spent that much time to them.

But don't be fooled. We still have a few small development factors. One. When we do these kinds of designs in the development phase, the actual architect that gets selected for the project has to model our accomplishments, again, with their companies templates and modeling procedures. Two. When we utilize VR, people are amazed by technology and don't focus on the actual design. And three, which is sort of connected to the two. The user, the end user or client, tends to focus on the little things when the material is this visual.

Like, where is my desk going to be? What is the color of that wall? Even though we are trying to only figure out the space. How big it should be, where are the hallways, the functionalities. This, again, brings us back to the latter 50%. How can we make the material so that a client and end user don't focus on those things?

And in addition to Enscape, there's also generative design. A newest addition to our portfolio, Spacemaker. A cloud based AI software that Autodesk acquired in 2020. Spacemaker generates design options according to boundaries you give to it and then analyzes them. Like in the picture, based on daylight. As well as compares them. Software is at its best in bigger area projects, even though it also does apartment redistribution, which is important for us. And one might ask, does space pacemaker take away architects job? No.

So Spacemaker gives options, but it's still architects responsibility to analyze and sort them out accordingly for the client. You can't give client 500 options and expect them to know what is best for them. Spacemaker does, however, take away role labor. And generates more time for creative thinking. And for us, space maker is a tool to justify solutions to the client. Now we have an extra option besides Enscape produced material, traditional 2D, and plain old texts. With this, we hope to minimize risks that client perceives, get quicker decisions, and ultimately save money for both us and the client.

And that concludes our what portion. And I think a quick recap is in order. Because first, we had the wasteful practices. Email, software options, data silos, and so on. And then came efficiency steps. Collaborate, communicate, manage, share, and reduce rework. What we think can tackle the wasteful practice, but not by themselves. We need tools. Tools that enable those steps. Teams and Smartsheet. Collaboration and communication. Docs helps almost with all of those. We have the 3D viewer, issues and markups, single source of truth. Document management on steroids.

Collaborate Pro for Revit. Better collaboration. Cloud collaboration for the designers. And then there's also integration software, peripheral technology, visual drafting, and generative design. All supporting the core functionalities of the digital operating model. And this happened in just 1 and 1/2 years. So what is still to come?

Digital operating model brings along its own challenges and the first two are related to roles. Clients and project manager. When we produce more data and try to be open with it, the client sees things that traditionally have been happening behind the curtains, but may now give birth to insecurities and seeing risks. We also can't hide or filter everything because that would make us two faced since we ourselves are demanding other stakeholders to be open. Somehow, we have to create feeling of trust.

This is where the collaborative project manager plays a key role. Built trust helps us convince the client to operate according to our model. Not everyone is eager to try something new, especially if you have several ongoing projects that are mainly operating in the same way you have always done. And we have seen situations where the client has agreed that we use ACC or BIM 360. But in the end, for example, markups and issues have seen little to no use. Because there's no time to learn them.

Again, 50% leading the change. It's so simple. And the technical side, we have operational phase and constant development. Operational phase is the one that we have yet to touch upon in our development project. And it's the least-- the one that we have least amount of experience beforehand. Yes, Duterte's old twins. Lastly, we need to find a way to constantly develop. Even when a development projects officially ends. Digitalization isn't stopping or slowing down. And our operating model is far from being refined.

A little more about the future of project manager. Because efficient digital operating model brings more and more collaboration. And project managers competency model changes. Sina Morada presents one possible model in his doctoral thesis. It has different kind of competencies, but the one that we want to focus on is the key competencies. Because according to Morada, we can easily train and improve on certain competencies as project managers. But some are hidden, or related to personality, which makes it harder to find improvement on them.

Still those can have a significant effect on our performance level. In the previous slide, we talked about the importance of trust between us and the client. But in addition to that, Morada mentions stress tolerance, initiative, optimism, and flexibility. If the client gives you headaches, requirements and questions and so on, you need to be able to tolerate it. Have some sort of flexibility, and stay positive. Initiative is also good when we try to implement our way of work to the clients. But the problem comes when we try to find these present or future project managers. Do we prioritize the key competencies, or look for a balance?

The person should also be somewhat handy with technology. Usually technology comes naturally to younger generation. They lack experience. Vise versa with the older generation. In betweeners are harder to find, and in the current situation, they are more expensive. And that is why we have for now chosen a route where we have both the younger and older generation, and made them collaborate and communicate with each other.

Operational phase. We have a digital twin. Owner, and an actual energy consuming building with MEP systems, sensors, assets, and a lifecycle. But how do we manage them? Our digital twins differ a lot. And usually owner doesn't even know what he wants from his as-built model. Which is exactly why the phrase BIM because BIM was born. How do we utilize the data that building produces? For example, with AI, so that we can move from reacting to anticipating and predicting. AI, one of the most essential solutions for getting rid of BIM because BIM.

The software ACC has the recently made available. Tandem, but we don't know how or when it will be suitable for Finnish building owners. Then there is also counterpart software with at least somewhat similar features. What's the use? And lastly, what is our role in all of this? Normally consultation company has little contact to the building and needs operations after it's been finished. But could this change in the digital twin era? You have the building owner who has project managers. But do they have the knowledge about digital twins, or will a smaller company perhaps seek consultation?

Can we be a non-location based coach who handles digital twin and changes made to it? This would also conclude our live cycle of services.

Direction. Our operating model is far from being refined. And it needs constant development and learning. We have to keep questioning our own operations and development, so that we don't end up back on top of mount stupid. In addition to normal development work, we have to continue attending AU. Watch webinars, read articles, and keep in mind the implementation. Gap between development and action project work should be as small as possible. This way we ensure quick response cycles, good feedback, and hopefully find things we can improve on.

And by documenting our project work, unify how we work in projects. Aspiration, sailing mainly between enlightenment and sustainability.

And then, we have come to the summary. In the beginning, I mentioned that we had four quite simple things to learn. First, now you should be able to specify wasteful practices or project methods that you can tackle with ACC and improved workflows. Two. Define key factors that help you with this tackling. Three. Describe how ACC modules and its functionalities enable these key factors. And lastly, indicate challenges that come along with digital operating model and how we can possibly overcome them.

And after going through all these slides, I hope they really were so simple that you can just smile at them like these guys in the photo do. Because, in addition, there's also these three. Be curious. Question the existing. It doesn't matter how big your company is. You can still affect the AEC industry. Lean. We are getting rid of wasteful practices, we constantly develop, have the response cycles, and try to create value by streamlining the project model.

And then, technology is never an absolute value. It needs to support your operating model. Help you be more efficient. And ultimately serve the client so that your business may bloom. These are the things I would like you to get away or take away from this. And they are also the one that conclude our slideshow. I thank you for listening. And now we can move on to the Q&A portion of this industry talk. Thank you.