Mejlænder-Larsen, Ø (2017) Using a change control system and building information modelling to manage change in design. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 13(1), pp. 39-51. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
Today, there are few satisfying change management systems to handle changes in design, both internal changes initiated by the engineering team and external changes initiated by the client. How can changes in design be managed using a change control system (CCS), and how can building information modelling (BIM) be utilized to optimize evaluation of changes? This paper introduces a change management process and a corresponding CCS for managing changes in detailed design, and assesses how BIM can be used to identify consequences of changes. Findings are based on experiences from execution of major oil and gas projects. Data are gathered from projects, primarily through a Norwegian engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contractor, using case study research. The research portrays how changes can be handled using the CCS. When a design change request is created, it is presented to a Change Board, where it is processed, categorized, evaluated and either approved or rejected. BIM is used to consider impact and consequences for affected disciplines. The client will be added in the decision process and presented for cost and schedule impact. Results indicate that the dynamics of the CCS combined with the utilization of BIM can keep control of changes in detailed design and reduce overall impacts of changes.Today, there are few satisfying change management systems to handle changes in design, both internal changes initiated by the engineering team and external changes initiated by the client. How can changes in design be managed using a change control system (CCS), and how can building information modelling (BIM) be utilized to optimize evaluation of changes? This paper introduces a change management process and a corresponding CCS for managing changes in detailed design, and assesses how BIM can be used to identify consequences of changes. Findings are based on experiences from execution of major oil and gas projects. Data are gathered from projects, primarily through a Norwegian engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contractor, using case study research. The research portrays how changes can be handled using the CCS. When a design change request is created, it is presented to a Change Board, where it is processed, categorized, evaluated and either approved or rejected. BIM is used to consider impact and consequences for affected disciplines. The client will be added in the decision process and presented for cost and schedule impact. Results indicate that the dynamics of the CCS combined with the utilization of BIM can keep control of changes in detailed design and reduce overall impacts of changes.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | change management process; design change; project execution model; building information modelling; change control system; case studies; control systems; building information modeling |
| Index terms: | decision process, change management, design change, case study, change control, building information modelling, oil and gas, control system, project execution model, dynamics |
| Subjects: | control systems, data collection methods, project delivery, contractual arrangements, monitoring and control, management, systems engineering, information systems, industry analysis, decision analysis |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Organizational Design, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Procurement, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here