Friday, November 30, 2012

(SMART)X Light Bulbs, Dim Light Bulbs, Eating the Rich and Funding BIM



And no I don't mean those over-priced mercury laden things either.  This is an honest to goodness (SMART)X - as in (SMART)X Game Changer - light bulb under development at MIT.  The article excerpted and linked below tells you more.  But before we go there I'd like to tie this back to the "1% for art" budget requirement in so many public projects.

While presenting in Ireland I learned that the giant flag pole with no flag erected in the center of Dublin, which apparently cost several million Euros, was funded to satisfy such a requirement.  In the US we have similar "allocations" or "set-asides" intended to fund "public art".  The movement benefits fools like Shepard Fairey who famously brought us this image:  


By which he apparently meant "Hope we can Eat the Rich" as his latest piece of "art" contends.


While cleaver and great agitprop for the masses "Eat the Rich" hardly qualifies as a solution to our current fiscal woes, regardless of how badly President Obama and Mr. Fairey want it to work.  For a sobering analysis of how little good it will do to eat the rich check out Bill Whittle's piece below.  The piece discusses the kind of money you would have to take from the rich to fund the federal government.


With that rabbit trail behind us let's return to the issue of "allocations" for "art" on public projects and the (SMART)X light bulb.  I'd like to see the (SMART)X light bulb's discussed below merged with existing hologram technologies to bring us interactive holograms of major public facilities and infrastructure.  And the FUNDING for the (BIM)X required to drive data to those (SMART)X Holograms ought to come out of the  "allocations" for "public art" that is currently used to fund the Fairey's of the world and to bring us the Piss Christ and similarly worthless and offensive pieces.

Art should be funded by the market place, private donations or the artists themselves.  Of course the irony of Fairey is the fact that he stole the source image for his now famous Obama Hope poster from the AP and the two fought a long court battle over the EVIL money Fairey's poster of Obama generated.  I wonder if he's now a cannibal?

Ok, ok, here's the (SMART)X Light Bulb article.  Be sure to read the whole thing!

Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!

James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













Thursday, November 29, 2012

Cultural Change v. Change Management





Historically advocates of change chafe under cultural restraints. In the built industry practitioners who understand the benefits of building information modeling (BIM) experience significant frustration when key decision makers block adoption and deployment of BIM. Advocates of integrated project delivery (IPD), and other innovative delivery  tools and processes experience similar disappointment.

Too often advocates of change fixate on the change and ignore the culture within which change must occur. Some change champions recognize culture must be addressed but fail address culture effectively. At Collaborative Construction we tackle cultural change right alongside the change wrought by the innovative tools and processes we help our clients deploy.

We come at both issues from a very different perspective than most in the industry.

First, with respect to traditional change management we have zero interest in change for changes sake and the idea of managing change for the sake of managing change is equally repugnant. From the beginning we've been willing to put skin in the game, agreeing to tie significant portions of our profit to project success and that attitude is antithetical to the concept of “managing change.”  When we help an integrated (BIM)X enabled team craft, negotiate and implement an integrated agreement we eagerly participate in the the pain share pain share compensation protocols our clients create. We accept a base fee that covers time and expenses and we tie our profits to the success of the project. In short we prefer to manage success, not change.

We bring that same long term view to bear on cultural change management. We believe in what we do and how we do it. We routinely tell clients we are here to teach you to fish, not to spoon feed you solutions. Adoption and deployment of (BUILT)X Solutions that support and enable BIM, IPD and lean business processes drives success. But that happens only when the culture supports those efforts. Often that means the culture must change. We support that.

At Collaborative Construction we seek to accelerate adoption and deployment of these innovative tools and processes and to accelerate associated cultural change. But cultural change is much harder than so-called “change management.” More often than not cultural change requires that an organization stop stupid. There are a lot of big time consulting firms that provide change management services, but many of the folks who provide those change management services are, to put it bluntly, stuck on stupid themselves. Thus the question arises, “Why on earth would you hire someone who is stuck on stupid to help you stop stupid?” You wouldn't, unless you are.... well you know.

So what we are really talking about is stopping stupid. And stupid, too often, is baked into the cake.... that is the culture.

When we first launched Collaborative Construction - and we were providing integrated project delivery facilitation services - we said we were "herding cats." But that's just a euphemism for "stopping stupid." And Stopping Stupid is absolutely necessary if you want to see innovative tools and processes like BIM and IPD broadly adopted in the built industry.

Many thought leaders in the built industry lament the fact that key decision makers inside and outside their organizations fail or refuse to adopt BIM, even though BIM makes complete economic sense. From the perspective of BIM Kool Aid Drinkers - including yours truly – logical broadsides destroyed specious arguments deployed against BIM. But it's not the BIM Kool Aid Drinkers that need to be convinced. It's the skeptics. The bean counters. Those decision makers who seem to be stuck on stupid.


So how do we stop stupid?


You hire Collaborative Construction and work with us to implement real change.




Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!

James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













Wednesday, November 28, 2012

What is (CM)X?





The term (CM)X refers to Collaborative Construction's cultural, construction and change management models (CM)X in 3DTM. We've taken (BUILT)X Solutions – and its component parts IPP in 3DTM, IPD in 3DTM and IOM in 3DTM – and rolled them into the (CM)X in 3DTM Program. The constant ear splitting lament in the built industry is that these innovative tools cannot be deployed until we “change” the culture.

OK. Bluff called. Let's change the CULTURE OF THE BUILT INDUSTRY!

You want to “Stop Stupid” in the built industry? Change the culture of the built industry.

You address cultural and construction change management from project to project as you deploy (BUILT)XSolutions from project to project and you deploy (SMART)XGame Changers to change the culture of (STUPID)X that permeates the built industry.

The image below contains a summary definition of  (CM)X as defined by Collaborative Construction.


The concept, as applied, is far broader than the summary definition above, but this gives readers a short hand take on the term.

To learn more join us for the (Smart)X Game Changer Series of webinars in 2013!


Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!

James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













Makers v Takers - Corporate & Private Welfare Bankrupting the US



Something that cannot go on forever won't.  Promises that cannot be kept won't be kept.  Debts that cannot be repaid won't be repaid.  And you eventually run out of other people's money.

Corporations are making the conscious decision NOT to invest in new facilities and infrastructure in this country.  Why?

Because they get a better return if they invest in lobbyists who can steer them to an exposed federal teat.  That state state of affairs was highlighted this week in an article by Professor Glenn Harlan Reynolds that ran in the USA Today.  There Professor Reynolds argued:

Washington is rich not because it makes valuable things, but because it is powerful. With virtually everything subject to regulation, it pays to spend money influencing the regulators. As P.J. O'Rourke famously observed: "When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators." But it's not just bags-of-cash style corruption. Most of the D.C. boom is from lobbyists and PR people, and others who are retained to influence what the government does. It's a cold calculation: You're likely to get a much better return from an investment of $1 million on lobbying than on a similar investment in, say, a new factory or better worker training.
Sadly, I've heard clients and colleagues articulate that precise rational in recent years.  The "Green Energy" boondogles that wasted $29 Billion in stimulus funds on "green" business that could not find private funding are prime examples.  Of some 30+ green companies that received money from the federal government over 25 have filed for bankruptcy.  But in many instances, Solyndra being the most well known example, the original investors / campaign contributors got their money and the tax payers were left holding the bag.
 

Today I read the individual version of that story.  The article, from ZeroHedge, speaks for itself:

Exactly two years ago, some of the more politically biased progressive media outlets (who are quite adept at creating and taking down their own strawmen arguments, if not quite as adept at using an abacus, let alone a calculator) took offense at our article "In Entitlement America, The Head Of A Household Of Four Making Minimum Wage Has More Disposable Income Than A Family Making $60,000 A Year." In it we merely explained what has become the painful reality in America: for increasingly more it is now more lucrative - in the form of actual disposable income - to sit, do nothing, and collect various welfare entitlements, than to work. This is graphically, and very painfully confirmed, in the below chart from Gary Alexander, Secretary of Public Welfare, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (a state best known for its broke capital Harrisburg). As quantitied, and explained by Alexander, "the single mom is better off earnings gross income of $29,000 with $57,327 in net income & benefits than to earn gross income of $69,000 with net income and benefits of $57,045."


We realize that this is a painful topic in a country in which the issue of welfare benefits, and cutting (or not) the spending side of the fiscal cliff, have become the two most sensitive social topics. Alas, none of that changes the matrix of incentives for most Americans who find themselves in a comparable situation: either being on the left side of minimum US wage, and relying on benefits, or move to the right side at far greater personal investment of work, and energy, and... have the same disposable income at the end of the day.


My wife and I made similar calculations as a young couple when I was making $22K per year as a clerk on the Wyoming Supreme Court.  We managed a low income housing complex and everyone in the complex was making WAY MORE than us.  We, of course, buckled down and made ends meet, but it was hard to fault the low-income tenants who made the conscious choice to remain on the government dole.  

If single mother of one child in Pennsylvania has to make $69K to net more than the government dole pays why on earth would she work?  And where would most single mothers find a job that paid $70K anyway?  If we insist, as we have in recent years, on extending that model into the corporate world, we a truly and royally screwed. 

The two articles lined above demonstrate how our policy choices as a nation encourage dependency.  This is a feature not a bug in the big government formula foisted on us by the politicians.  There's a reason the founders restricted the scope and power of the federal government.  We should pay attention before it's too late.


Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!

James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













Tuesday, November 27, 2012

(SMART)X Game Changer Series in 2013





In 2010 Collaborative Construction launched the innovative IPD Round Table Series.  Sponsored primarily by the Construction IT Alliance out of Ireland (CITA), MySmartPlans out of Kansas City and Symphony, LLC out of Saint Louis, the IPD Round Table Series was a great success.

Building on the success of the original series Collaborative Construction plans to launch a new series in 2013 called the (SMART)X Game Changers Series. The cost of sponsorship varies from sponsor to sponsor depending on the number of offices the sponsor has regionally, nationally or internationally, and other factors.  Entities interested in sponsoring the series should contact us.   

Modeled after the original IPD Round Table Series sponsors are encouraged to invite clients, collaborative partners, financial stakeholders and other key team members to their offices to participate in the web based presentation.

Webinars in the series - 12 in all at the same time each month - will be presented by James L. Salmon of Collaborative Construction.  Typically, the presentations last 45 minutes to an hour and James remains on the line to answer questions for an additional hour.

Following the Webinar, sponsors, their clients and other participants from their offices, are encouraged to explore possible of uses the tools and processes discussed in the presentation on their on projects.

During the course of the series James will explain what  (BUILT)X stands for, what a (SMART)X Game Changer is, why Design-Bid-Build and the existing culture of the built industry is so (STUPID)X and why Collaborative Construction has taken (BUILT)X Solutions – and its component parts IPP in 3DTM, IPD in 3DTM and IOM in 3DTM – and rolled them into the new (CM)X in 3DTM Program.   

Again, if your company is interested in sponsoring the series, or if you just have a general question, please contact us.

Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!

James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













Monday, November 26, 2012

11 Indicators of Corporate Culture



The article excerpted and linked below provides a thumbnail sketch of 11 indicators that reveal insights into corporate culture.  I read the article with interest as it bears on Collaborative Construction's on going efforts to both understand and modify the cultures we encounter in the built industry.

The article is geared to individual job seekers, but the lessons apply with equal force in the B2B environment where potential collaborative partners are contemplating joining forces.  For that reason the built industry should pay particular attention to research and advances in this arena.  If the built industry is to modify its own culture, and encourage the formation of integrated teams made of many different companies, those involved need to be aware issues similar to those discussed.


  1. Does your next employer focus on getting the big stuff right, or the small stuff? If it’s the first, you’re heading into a culture of creativity. Breakthroughs are crucial. Someone else can take care of the details. If it’s the second, you’re in a culture of craft. Precision is what pulls you ahead of the competition. End up on the wrong side of this divide, and you’ll be seen as the person who is “too detail-oriented,” or “too sloppy” to succeed.
  1. Which discipline calls the shots in an internal tug-of-war? Google operates as anengineer’s paradise; Oracle, by contrast, regards sales as the driver that makes everything go. For that matter, think of Steve Jobs fixating on Apple’s product design and then telling engineers to make that vision come true, instead of telling designers to accommodate whatever the engineers wanted. When you switch jobs within an industry, your fate depends on getting this new rhythm right. Be ready to realign your priorities if some department that you didn’t expect – such as finance or legal – turns out to be in command.
  1. What gets you fired? What mistakes are tolerable? Companies never advertise these grim truths, but they play a huge role in defining culture. At some places you safely can talk back to the boss, miss a deadline or overshoot your budget, as long as you do great work. At other organizations (just ask David Petraeus!) it’s a different story. Rules are rules, and people who don’t understand that are sent packing.
  1. What powers do your new leaders hold? Founder-run companies are famous for bosses who weigh in on everything from entry-level hiring to your desk decor. Your success depends on accepting this hands-on presence. Not so at many public corporations, where senior management can be surprisingly distant. Once you’ve settled into a particular system, it can be quite jarring to switch.
  1. How does your new company work through disagreements? Many top hedge funds treat confrontation as a way of life, on the belief that stress-testing helps the best ideas prevail. In other areas of finance, keeping everyone working together harmoniously is the ultimate goal. Try to find employers whose conflict-resolution strategies aren’t violently at odds with the way you handle strife.
I may post a built industry centric parody of the list all 11 indicators in the future.  Meanwhile read the whole thing and give some thought to what the indicators say about your company and your companies ability and willingness to adapt, adopt and deploy the innovative new tools and processes required to advance in a knowledge based economy in the information age.



While the The eleven items listed below provide interesting insights.  

  
Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!

James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV


Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













CSI Presentation on Wednesday





This Wednesday, November 28, I will be discussing the use of building information modeling (BIM) throughout the life cycle of BIM enabled infrastructure and facilities.  The presentation provides a big picture view of the benefits of BIM.  Specifically how BIM improves the delivery of services by built industry professionals during planning, design, construction, operations and maintenance.

Cincinnati area readers can follow the link below if you wish to attend.  

The discussion will entail a short explanation of (CM)X, Collaborative Construction's cultural, construction and change management models which we refer to as (CM)X in 3DTM. Those concepts - culture, change, change management and management of cultural change will all be discussed in further detail in separate blog posts this week.

To learn more about the program and to register follow the link below.

  


Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!

James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













Tuesday, November 20, 2012

Cultural Change in the Built Industry



A Brief History of (CM)X

In Collaborative Construction's world (CM)X refers to our cultural, construction and change management models. Our (CM)X in 3DTM Program helps clients master the cultural changes triggered by adoption and deployment of disruptive technologies like BIM, and innovative new delivery models like IPD. This post briefly explains how Collaborative Construction came to offer (CM)X services.

IPD Facilitation

Our initial business model focused on integrated project delivery (IPD) facilitation. We helped owners, designers and contractors craft, negotiate and implement integrated agreements related to specific projects. That program is called IPD in 3DTM. We still do this and do it well. You should call if you plan to operate in an IPD environment any time soon.

In the context of delivering IPD Facilitation services we found ourselves forming, training and deploying integrated teams on small projects and crafting, negotiating and implementing strategic alliance agreements for cluster groups on large projects.

The integrated teams we formed and nurtured learned to utilize building information modeling (BIM) in an IPD environment. However, instilling BIM and IPD enabled mind sets beyond the “A Team” proved difficult.

IPP and IOM Facilitation

As IPD in 3DTM proved successful owners began asking for help with procurement in the pre-con phase and sought more useful BIM in the operations and maintenance phase. Those demands led Collaborative Construction to develop its integrated procurement program (IPP in 3DTM) and its integrated operations and maintenance system (IOM in 3DTM). Those efforts led to Collaborative Construction's efforts to coordinate and facilitate delivery of fully functional integrated building information models (BIM)X for use in operations and maintenance.

The (STUPID)X Problem

Early on we described the processes outlined above as “herding cats.” That's a euphemism for “stopping stupid.” Today we embrace the truth and we bluntly tell clients “We stop stupid.” Specifically, “We stop stupid in the built industry.”

Note, we don't “cure” stupid. (STUPID)X is a long term, sometimes fatal condition that requires continuous treatment. As a disease of addiction it can be managed, but never cured. Industries, companies and individuals suffering from (STUPID)X must admit they have problem to solve the problem.

Thus, overcoming denial is the first step.

The (CM)X Solution

For clients who bravely face (STUPID)X in the built industry, and intend to overcome it, Collaborative Construction now offers relevant and effective services – our (CM)X in 3DTM Program – that help change cultural norms. These services are offered as part of our IPP, IPD and IOM in 3DTM Facilitation workshops. Entities that adopt and deploy disruptive technologies, delivery models, and business processes encounter serious cultural challenges and require assistance changing the cultures in which those disruptive innovate practices are deployed. Collaborative Construction's (CM)X in 3DTM Program addresses the issue of cultural change and change management.

Conclusion

Deploying real (BUILT)X Solutions requires cultural change. And cultural change takes significant time and energy to achieve. A lot of entities offer "change management" services, but few offer mechanisms that actually change the culture. If you want to “Stop Stupid” you have to change the “Stupid Culture.” That's what we do and that's what sets us apart.

Most entities that offer change management consulting services are "Stuck on Stupid" themselves. That is, they deploy antiquated process based tool sets that "manage change" rather than changing the culture. Those who provide such change management services fail over 70% of the time.

Why on earth would anybody interested in deploying (BUILT)X Solutions, e.g. (BIM)X, IPP, IPD and IOM in 3DTM – tectonic cultural changes all – invest in processes that FAIL 70% of the time? Why would you hire somebody who is "Stuck on Stupid" to help you "Stop Stupid"? It makes no sense.  Wouldn't you rather work with someone who understands (SMART)X GameChangers?

There's your “short” history of (CM)X and how Collaborative Construction came to offer these new services. If your organization is adopting and deploying BIM or considering IPD give us a call. We can help.

Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!


James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













Sunday, November 18, 2012

A Warm Pot of Change!



"Come on in," said the frog swimming lazily in the warm pot, "the water's fine!"

The other frogs jumped into the pot.  They were all slowly boiled and became part of a tasty frog soup.

Andrew Abernathy, over at My Strings Blog, compares the stakeholders at Hostess, Inc. to the Frogs.  In the blog post linked above he says:

"[A] perfectly good company will go out of existence, throwing 18,500 folks out of jobs, all because, a few knuckle-headed owners, managers and labor leaders were blissful frogs in a warm pot of change."

Many major stakeholders in the built industry act like the frogs when it comes to their continued use of antiquated business models, procurement methods, design tools and processes, delivery methods and the management, operation and maintenance of facilities and infrastructure over time.

Is your company acting like a frog?

Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!


James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom



Collaborative Construction Website













Saturday, November 17, 2012

Nano Tech Absorption & Artificial Muscle





Below are exerpts from a couple of very interesting nanotechnology stories.  The first describes a nano form of glass that shows great potential as an absorption agent and as a lifting mechanism.  It looks as if it is already being commercialized.

The second describes a carbon fiber nano yarn saturated with paraffin that shows great promise in several areas.  Once material scientists get a handle on the use of commercialized versions of these things they will prove very useful in the construction industry.

Leveraging revolutionary materials like these are the key to sustainability from my perspective.  Land is the key asset in the built industry not the facility.  Facilities must evolve and be replaced but the land remains.  Advanced nano tech based materials will facilitate that.

Here's a link the the blurb on the the nano absorption product.  Very interesting.


Below is an article with an embedded video of a professor explaining the nano carbon muscle yarn.  Be sure to watch the video.  Very cools stuff. 


Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!


James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













Friday, November 16, 2012

More STUPID that needs Fixing!



I apologize in advance to any of my green friends that take undue offense at this post but, PLEASE PEOPLE can we get past the propaganda when it comes to Fracking!  Geez.  

The link below takes you to an excellent post summarizing and excellent presentation by an excellent lawyer that addresses, via most excellent analysis, the pros & cons of "fracking" and determines, not surprisingly, that we need to get on with it.  Can you say give me an Army o Alexanders NOW please!  The image below is used by Collaborative Construction to convey the importance of recruiting an Army of Alexanders who can - and WILL - cut through the red tape and get on with the task of adopting, adapting, implementing and otherwise depploying (BUILT)X Solutions, IPP, IPD, & IOM in 3D and other (SMART)X Game Changers today instead of 30 or 40 years from now.

In the article it is noted:

Whatever its ultimate ecological impact, the combination of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling promises to dramatically increase domestic oil and gas reserves, drive down energy prices and fundamentally transform the energy sector. North Dakota now produces more oil than any state but Texas and the oil and gas boom in this state is enriching landowners tremendously. Every president since President Nixon has called for energy independence. Fracking’s rise could make this possible within the next few decades. Beyond that, fracking and the proliferation of cheap gas, Merrill suggested, likely means the end of the nuclear power industry in the United States and has thrown the coal industry into a tailspin. Cheap gas is a bigger threat to coal than any alleged “war on coal” waged by the Environmental Protection Agency. It also threatens the future of alternative energy technologies dependent upon government subsidies for their economic viability.


The bottom line is clean natural gas is a great energy source.  And give me "dirty" tar sands oil form our friends in Canda versus HEAD CHOPPERS in the Middle East and TWICE on Sunday.  Good Lord, why are we so STUPID when it comes to developing and exploiting ENERGY resources in our own backyard?

If you want to "save" manufacturing jobs in the U.S. make it cheaper to manufacture in the U.S.  If you want to make it cheaper to manufacture in the U.S. give me some $3.00 LNG!

Come on now.  This isn't THAT hard!

Sorry for yelling but the greenie weanies get on my ever last nerve.

P.S.

Here's another excerpt that deserves attention.


A more likely factor is the way U.S. law treats subsurface rights. The U.S. is something of an outlier in that subsurface minerals are the property of the landowner, and not the government. This results in decentralized ownership and control over subsurface rights facilitates experimentation and innovation in figuring out how to exploit and manage subsurface resources.
Further decentralization, and experimentation, results from the federalist regulatory structure. Different states have different regulatory approaches than others, creating opportunities for further innovation and the opportunity for jurisdictions to learn from one another. The existence of a few jurisdictions that will allow a new technology to be tried provides a laboratory from which others may learn, whereas under a more centralized regulatory structure such innovation is unlikely to get off the ground.
The existence of a relatively open infrastructure network – a pipeline system that is subject to common-carrier rules – also plays a role in facilitating entry into the market. These factors have a common theme: decentralization. Taken together, Merrill suggests, they are the most likely source of fracking’s rise in the Unites

When INDIVIDUALS own their own land these kinds of things happen.

Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!

James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













How the Free Market Works



The short video below summarizes the market forces that drive the production of a pencil.  The video is based on the classic essay by Leonard Read, "I Pencil."  That essay - and by extension the video below - clarify and simplify Hayek's message regarding the futility of attempting to command an economy from the top down.

Advocates of IPD and BIM must resist the urge to think the tools we deploy can provide that level of command and control.  Truly collaborative efforts and creative thinking occur when individuals, and the firms with which they are affiliated, remain free to pursue their own dreams and find their own motivation.  Ultimately, the market is the best arbiter of ideas and innovation.



Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!

James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













Tuesday, November 13, 2012

Katy's Castle aka The Owner's BIM Dilemma




Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!

Clients often ask me why owners are not willing to invest in BIM. The unfortunate answer is they don't get much from BIM right now.

The image below depicts the classic "Federated BIM" that many project teams utilize to identify clashes, improve logistics and, from time to time, to analyze constructability or to project energy usage. As the story below highlights, BIM in this format is not very useful to owners.  What owners want, and what owners need, is (BIM)X, not an old federated BIM they cannot access or leverage in any substantive way.

Ultimately, owners find value embedded in the As-BUILT-BIM, but it needs to be delivered in a useful form. Accordingly, owners won't appreciate or invest in BIM until As-BUILT-BIM represents flexible digital assets that support facilities / infrastructure and grows with the facilities / infrastructure over the life of the facility / infrastructure.  IPD and BIM represent (SMART)X Game Changers that empower owners to make better, more timely decisions regarding a wide range of issues related to the procurement, planning, design, construction operations and maintenance of BIM enabled facilities and infrastructure.

When I meet with clients I tell the story of "Katy's Birthday" to help the team understand the limited value of a federated BIM to an owner if the team - especially the BIM Consultant - fails to remain engaged with the owner over time and the owner receives a stunted or ineffective digital asset.  Of course, this conversation presumes you are not delivering Humpty Dumpty BIM - depicted below - which is a natural consequence of our favorite antiquated procurement model, Design-Bid-Build.



Back to the story of Katy's Castle.

Katy is Daddy's little princess and she wanted a Castle for her birthday. Daddy told her, "Honey, you cannot have a real Castle," and she cried. So Daddy rented an inflatable Castle, which was better than nothing. And Mommy invited Katy's friends to bring their wooden toy blocks to the party and build her a real Castle.

Johnny brought BIM blocks by Revit, Sally brought Bentley BIM blocks, little Susie brought BIM blocks produced by Tekla, and half a dozen other children brought special BIM blocks built with their favorite software application. The children built a beautiful Castle and Katy loved it.


As the party was winding down Johnny's Mom said, "Grab your blocks Johnny, and let's go." Johnny ran to the table and began grabbing his blocks, causing Katy's Castle to collapse! Katy began to cry, upset at the sight of the collapsed Castle. The parents gathered in the corner whispering, and the decision was made to leave all the blocks with Katy.

All the blocks were placed in a single box, Revit Blocks, Bentley Blocks, Tekla Blocks and half a dozen other brightly colored blocks. Smiling, Johnny handed Katy the box, saying, "Here's your Castle Katy!" Katy stared sourly at the box and mumbled, "Thanks" in a rather ungrateful tone of voice.

Katy retreated to her room and sat staring at the box of blocks, trying to remember how the beautiful Castle fit together, but she was unable to rebuild by herself. Her departed friends were the only ones who knew the secret of how the Revit, Bentley and Tekla blocks fit together. Almost none of her friends knew how the special notches in the remaining half dozen blocks fit together. Katy could never rebuild the Castle.



Owners face Katy's dilemma at the end of every project. They are handed a "box" of BIM blocks that don't fit together and the owner has now idea how to put the Castle together again. Of course, those are the sophisticated owners who know enough to demand BIM in the first place. Most owners allow the Castle builders to walk away with the BIM blocks and are left with nothing.

Ultimately, owners need an As-BUILT-BIM with flexible mechanisms for managing the vast amount of information contained therein, connecting that information to and leveraging it over the Web and treating the information like the valuable digital asset it is. New entrepreneurial business processes will emerge as owners and others leverage these new digital assets to add value to the underlying business purposes the facilities / infrastructure were constructed to fulfill. When owners learn to leverage these new digital assets real demand for true As-BUILT-BIM will skyrocket.

Meanwhile, we continue to struggle with the burn of stupid in the built industry, or, as we put it, the Return on Failure for (STUPID)X.  Collaborative Construction offers a number of programs that relieve (STUPID)X but if you want to stop (STUPID)X, or at least inoculate your organization, significant effort is required. Adopting and implementing a program whereby (BIM)X enabled facilities and infrastructure are (BUILT)X Virtually First is a good step for owners.


Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!


James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













Monday, November 12, 2012

Frack it! Let's save the planet.



I chuckled - more than once -as I read the article linked below.  Watching a green advocate like Bjorn Lmoborg realize Fracking is as a (SMART)X Game Changer is exciting.  Glad to see a few synapses still firing in few heads in that arena.

The Copenhagen Consensus is a think tank that ranks the economically smartest approaches to a variety of issues. In 2009, we asked 27 of the world's top climate economists to identify the costs and benefits of the top climate solutions. A group of eminent economists, including three Nobel laureates, ranked the smartest ways to fix the climate. Their answer was: Don't continue to expand current policies. Trying to make fossil fuels so costly that no one wants them is bad economics, in addition to being bad politics.

Well DUH!

Glad to hear they are abandoning their manically death wish for our entire economy.  The question in my mind is whether President #StandDown is on board.  Or is this another 3:00 a.m. phone call he's not ready to answer?

Here's one of Bjorn's suggestions:

A good example is the innovation of fracked gas, which has made the price of natural gas drop dramatically -- allowing a switch in electricity production away from coal. This in turn has singlehandedly caused the United States to reduce its annual CO2 emissions by about 500Mt, or about twice as much as the entire global reductions from the last 20 years of international climate negotiations. Moreover, it has not cost the United States anything -- in fact, U.S. consumers are saving about $100 billion per year in cheaper prices. That's a policy that is easy to sell around the world.

Well... I agree.



Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!

James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV


Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













What does (BIM)X mean?



Regular readers know that BIM stands for building information modeling.  At Collaborative Construction we refer to BIM as (BIM)X rather than simply BIM.  We do this because the B relates to far more than just buildings, the i represents, inter alia, information, innovation and integration and the m stands for more than just modeling and management.  Accordingly, the algebraic style summary, (BIM)X, captures more of what we mean when we say BIM.

The image below comes from a Collaborative Construction presentation in which we drill down through the various potential meanings / uses of the formula (BIM)X.

  
The summary above fails to touch on INTEGRATION, a critical component of (BIM)X but there's only so much room on a PPT slide!  Anyone interested in learning more - and teaching your staff and collaborative partners in the built industry more - should reach out to us.

UPDATE:  Below is a shorter definition.



Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!

James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













What's a (SMART)X Game Changer?



Many in the built industry refer to BIM and IPD as game changers.  In fact, at the 2012 ABA Conference Joe Cleves and Lisa Dal Gallo presented a paper titled "Integrated Project Delivery:  The Game Changer".  Similar works, praising BIM abound in the literature, both academic and industry specific.  

Too often, in much of the published work praising BIM and IPD as "game changers" advocates fail to define the term.  Accordingly, Collaborative Construction has created a simple definition that resonates with most audiences.  In keeping with our tradition of leveraging key concepts to the x power we refer to smart game changers as (SMART)X rather than simply smart.  That definition, which is not set in stone, is captured in the image below.



When the key features of IPD and BIM are read in light of the foregoing definition of a (SMART)X Game Changer it becomes clear those innovative new processes are, indeed, game changers.

Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!

James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













BIM for Mining, Energy & Heavy Infrastructure



The Aussies continue to lead the way, with an assist from China.

The Australasian Joint Research Centre for Building Information Modelling is a collaboration between Curtin University and Huazhong University of Science and Technology (HUST) in Wuhan, China.
It will focus on developing the capability of Building Information Modelling (BIM), an advanced approach that enables the physical and functional characteristics of a building to be digitally generated and assessed. 
President of China’s Northeastern University Professor Lieyun Ding visited Curtin last month with a five-person senior delegation to open the Joint Research Centre for BIM, which will enable the latest BIM knowledge to be shared among researchers, engineers and innovators in the energy, mineral, infrastructure and construction industries across Australia and China.
Who would have ever guessed BIM would matter in mining, energy production and heave infrastructure?  I mean mistakes in those industries don't cost anything right?


Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!

James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website













Friday, November 9, 2012

What the hell does (BUILT)X Mean?





One my colleagues asked the prescient question found in the title of this blog post.  Here's my current answer.

When Collaborative Construction uses the term (BUILT)X it refers to buildings built by BIM builders utilizing integrated procurement programs (IPP in 3D), integrated project delivery (IPD in 3D) and delivering those buildings to owners utilizing integrated operations and maintenance systems (IOM in 3D) where all the stakeholders utilize integrated lean processes and technologies today and tomorrow.

The image below summarizes the definition.



(BUILT)X Solutions, (SMART)X Game Changers, (STUPID)X, (BIM)X and (CM)X will all be defined in separate posts.  Eventually, I will put up a post that has all the defined terms in one place.

Meanwhile, if your firm or your clients are interested in implementing the (BUILT)X Solutions program or if you just want to learn more generally give us a call.


Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!


James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom
Collaborative Construction Website













Stopping (STUPID)X aka Avoiding the Classic Pitfalls



Ralph Montague, a principal with ArcDox out of Ireland posted a link on the CITA BIM Group's Linked in page today citing a white paper by Oracle that identifies six common project pitfalls.

Ralph summarized the paper as follows:

In summary, they outline six key factors, highlighting the biggest and most common failure culprits, and the pitfalls to avoid:

1 - Alignment (of leadership, objectives, assigned resources etc).
2 - Proactive Risk Management (as opposed to reactive risk management, identifying and mitigating risks before the fact).
3 - Performance Measurement (standardized methods of tracking performance, with appropriate and timely corrective/remedial action).
4 - Project Scope Definition and Management (getting a clear understanding of the scope and sign-off upfront, with managed change control).
5 - Critical Project Communication (to all stakeholders, particularly regarding critical issues, before these impact costs, timelines and scope, or become significant or irreversible).
6 - Methodology Usage (project execution and processes).

Here's a link to the Oracle White Paper for those interested in reading it.

The paper struck me as another example of the clarity with which we see the problems we face in the built industry.  It's not like these issues sneak up on us.  But we continue to use the same old failed procurement and delivery models that utterly fail to address these issues.

Below is a slightly revised version of the comment I posted in response to Ralph's lament that we seem to expect failure on projects.

The expectation of failure Ralph laments takes root LONG before the "project team" arrives on the scene. In the built industry our antiquated procurement laws, regulations and processes bake expectations of failure into the the cake at the outset. At Collaborative Construction we subject those EPIC FAILS to an integrated procurement program known as IPP in 3D.

Arming integrated teams with a rational BIM enabled procurement process is, thus, the first best step.

Next, in the project phase, its important to utilize integrated project delivery (IPD in 3D) another BIM enabled tool box. In this phase Collaboratively negotiated legal agreements positively and significantly impact the six common pitfalls listed in the Oracle White Paper.

Specifically, an IPD Facilitation:

1) Seeks to align the interests of the members of the integrated team;
2) Actively and aggressively tackles risk management issues;
3) Ties team compensation to agreed performance metrics;
4) Clearly defines the rights duties and responsibilities of the various stakeholders vis-a-vi project scope and project management;
5) Includes a communications protocol that addresses every mode of communication on the project; and
6) Binds the stakeholders to a common and effective project delivery methodology known as IPD.

It's almost as integrated agreements were created with these pitfalls in mind heh?

When IPP and IPD are executed properly in the procurement and delivery stages owners receive a fully functional integrated (BIM)X that empowers the owner to make intelligent, effective and timely decisions in operations and maintenance. In Collaborative Construction's world we call this integrated operations and maintenance, or IOM in 3D.

In short, when (BIM)x enabled teams deliver IPP, IPD and IOM the pitfalls identified in the Oracle White Paper become a series of opportunities whereby those teams distinguish themselves from the competition, win more work and have more success.

Somebody really ought to start a company that helps make that happen in the built industry heh?

Welcome to the Collaborative Revolution!

James L. Salmon, Esq.
Collaborative Construction
300 Pike Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Summary of Services and James L. Salmon's CV



Office 513-721-5672
Fax 513-562-4388
Cell 512-630-4446
JamesLSalmon@gmailcom


Collaborative Construction Website