Truly. I’m not doing an about-face here, the BIM movement at the moment could do with more people saying ‘no’.
For the right reasons, of course, just as the ones saying ‘yes’ should be doing it only because they truly believe in it.
Recreating a non-BIM-PC environment would have two main benefits:
One, it would inject real scrutiny to the system, questions only whispered currently would be asked openly; A simple one, comes to mind: “Why?”
Or extended versions of it: ‘why should we be doing this ...when it is making us do this?’ or ‘failing to allow us to do that’ or whatever...
As long as tools, systems and services providers in-and-out of houses (projects) were requested/allowed to meaningfully argue their case - there would be progress.
Second, practitioners would start separating into more clear-cut ‘types’, the 3 categories being:
Those that practise BIM, know why they’re doing it and can sell the concept to others;
Those that refuse to do BIM but do a splendid service without it by employing traditional (or alternative) methods and those, that are just drifting not quite sure what to do;
I applaud building owners that take the initiative to have their projects delivered in a BIM environment, but those providing the requested tools and services should be able to ask all the ‘why?’ questions they needed to.