Collaboration Websites
a user perspective....
By Betsy Hardinger
Article reprinted from a-Solutions for Today's Autodesk User
On a construction project, small blunders in communication among the players can lead to big problems. Suppose that on Tuesday morning, an architect specifies recessed ceilings for each of 200 rooms in a large public building he's designing. Accordingly, on Thursday, the consulting engineer specifies recessed light fixtures. Then the architect changes his mind about the ceilings; on Friday, he e-mails the engineer requesting that she specify surface-mount fixtures. But unknown to the architect, the engineer has left for vacation, and the e-mail sits unread in her in-box. Meanwhile, the general contractor orders 200 recessed fixtures, which are promptly shipped to a local warehouse. By the time the error is discovered two weeks later, the project suffers frustrating delays, the cost of shipping, storing, and restocking the unused fixtures will have to be litigated, and everyone is pointing fingers at everyone else.
This kind of miscommunication has long been the bane of construction projects large and small. Such errors tend to magnify over time, and they represent significant costs, not only in dollars but also in the quality of the finished product, customer good will, and legal exposure-not to mention general frustration for all the players. It's little wonder that everyone in the communication chain is looking for tools to manage the process. One highly touted new approach is the use of web-based collaboration sites, also called extranets. At these sites, an organization -the site host-provides an online workspace that lets architects, contractors, and clients share documents in a browser-like environment. Gaining access by a password or similar mechanism, participants view and mark up drawings, modify specifications, comment on the minutes of design meetings, and so on-all of it managed via a software solution. In addition to the workspace, hosting services may offer tools such as online bid management, materials, catalogs and procurement, research tools, and the like.
The leader of the fledgling industry is Buzzsaw.com, an Autodesk spin-off launched in 1999. According to company officials, San Francisco-based Buzzsaw hosts one of every fie online projects, with 20,000 projects hosted as of October 2000 and 600 new projects being added each week. Buzzsaw clients set up their projects in an environment called Project Folders and manage the process using ProjectPoint software. Fees are based on the amount of storage required by the project. The service is free for projects requiring 100 megabytes or less, and charges vary for larger projects and other services. Typically, they run $200 to $2000 per month. Buzzsaw, and host of similar web-based collaboration sites, claim that this is useful in cases of litigation. So collaboration sites-to borrow an expression rapidly becoming obsolete-look good on paper. But how do they work in practice? To find out, we talked to representatives of three architectural firms, each of whom brings a unique perspective to the arena.
Goals for Collaboration
For Robert Wrublowsky, principal, MMP Architects, the chief reason for moving to web-based collaboration technology was the need to manage "the vast amount of information that was hanging out there that never seems to be coordinated well on a project." MMP< based in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, works on projects ranging from single-family residences to a school being built for the Sapotoweyak Cree Nation in Manitoba. So far, the firm has 13 projects online at Buzzsaw.
For MMP, geographic dispersal of the key players was a motivating force. MMP's first Buzzsaw project was the Sapotoweyak school, a K-12 facility located on a remote reserve. "For me to get to their site, I have to charter a plane," Wrublowsky says. "It's a two-day trip for, often, a one-hour meeting." For this project, each of the teachers on the design committee was assigned a password to access drawings and other documents posted at Buzzsaw. "I still make a formal presentation once a moth, but most of the drawing evolution occurred through daily dialogs back and forth across the website," Wrublowsky explains.
For Chicago-based Harry Weese Associates (HWA), the initial reason for signing up for Buzzsaw workspace was the need to manage rapidly changing requirements on a large multiuse downtown building that was to include retail shops, a health club, a parking garage, and, on the top floor, a hotel component. Over time, the plans for the top floor evolved form a hotel to a theater to an office complex. According to Chief Information Officer Randall Dolph, "to try to keep the clients as well as our consultants abreast of all these changes as frequently as they were occurring, it made sense to try to put as much information as possible online on a project website and software program." He adds, "In a typical project, the amount of information decay over time contributes to a lot of extra cost."
The need to "enable the mobile worker and the mobile client to achieve a higher level of communication during design and construction" is cited by Jeffrey Terrell, principal at Robertson Miller Terrell Architects in Vail, Colorado. The firm has four projects online, including a $15 million mixed-use resort structure in Telluride, Colorado. Engineers are located in Denver, some two and a half hours away, and drafting is supplied from San Diego to London. The client is headquartered in Texas. Buzzsaw's collaboration site lets Robertson Miller Terrell Architects "achieve projects that are distinct from geographic restraints," Terrell says. In the Buzzsaw workspace, the firm posts drawings, photographs, sketches, letters, spreadsheets, and the like for viewing and comment by clients, contractors, and drafters.
What these architects hoped to gain, in other words, was greater control over what Terrell calculates are "hundreds of millions" of decisions that go into a typical construction project. The question is, how well does it work? Has it resulted in improved communications, and, if so, have these architects seen real benefits? Are there any drawbacks?
Pluses and Minuses
The three architects are unanimous in praising the Buzzsaw system for improving communications on the projects they've put online. HWA's Dolph notes that "overall, this system has met our goals, and we plan to use it on other projects." He cites what he calls "the things Buzzsaw does best" such as handling graphics, drawings, pictures, words, and specifications. Wrublowsky says, "It's been very much a test for us, and form the standpoint of sharing drawings, it's worked absolutely fabulously."
The three men also report that the system has benefits beyond improved coordination. "The easiest way to justify it would be to take a look at our Federal Express bill or messenger bill compared to what it otherwise would have been," HWA's Dolph says. "I would say it's a significant reduction." The savings are magnified, he says, by giving access even to potential tenants, whose architects are scattered across the country, rather than sending hardcopy drawings. Terrell agrees that having an online worksite saves time and money in printing and distribution of paper documents.
Wrublowsky is less optimistic about these kinds of cost reductions: "To date, I'd have to be honest and say I haven't realized a great savings." But he doesn't see cost-cutting as his goal in using the technology. "Even if it costs me money but allows me to do a much better job, I would still move forward with it, " he says. "There's a million decisions we make on a $12 million school, and a few things fall between the cracks. I'm hoping this technology will help us to stay on top of those loose ends a little better. It's a benefit to the client-it lets us do a better job." He adds that better communication leads to "fewer change orders, better cost control during construction, better clarification of detailing, better coordination between the mechanical, structural, electrical, and architectural disciplines, and less headaches during the construction phase."
Doesn't greater access to the drawings and documents invite more question and comment on the project than other wise would be the case-requiring more time to respond? Terrell acknowledges that it does, but he says that's a benefit of the technology. "The earlier an issue is identified, the easier it is to resolve," he says. "If the client is unhappy with the roofline, it's much easier to change that during the design phase than it is when the steel is being erected on the site-not only much easier but much less costly." He concludes, "Increasing transparency in the design process is a good thing."
The three architects agree that the greatest obstacle in using the system is the difficulty of bringing consultants and clients up to speed in equipment and know-how. Wrublowsky is perhaps the most blunt. "Trying to get my consultants to use the technology has been like pulling teeth," he says. "It's brand new to them." But, like Terrell, he thinks the benefits are important enough that he has declined to work with consultants who refuse to participate in the process. Clients are another matter. The architects are willing to bear the cost of trouble-shooting and training clients. "Typically, our clientele is very receptive to it," Terrell says. "Usually we find that if the architect leads the horse to water, the horse will drink."
In fact, Terrell sees the service as a marketing advantage. "We just, for instance, won a commission for an $8 million home, and one of the three reasons the client selected us was our ability to communicate with them using both our pre-established e-mail and three-dimensional modeling techniques but also through processes like Buzzsaw," he says. "We promote the use of Buzzsaw to all of our clients."
"Even if the client refuses, it's still an excellent tool for consultants and ourselves," Wrublowsky adds. "There's no more e-mailing drawings back and forth. All the consultants are very well trained now that every Friday they're responsible for posting the most current drawings. It helps them do their job a little better."
Two of the architects would like to see Buzzsaw continue to improve its software solution. Dolph notes that users can't run the system totally within a browser and must download the Buzzsaw software, a process that can be time-consuming and difficult for inexperienced users. "The least amount of input that it takes on the client side, the better," he says. "All in all, if I were to give it a rating of how user-friendly it is, it would be a 'B' at this point." For Wrublowsky, Buzzsaw "falls short in the areas of project discussions, but we're working on that with Buzzsaw." He adds, "The folks at Buzzsaw have been tremendous to work with. The support has been fabulous, the 1-800 support is terrific, and the product is outstanding given it's only a year old."
Buzzsaw's Anne Boneparte, senior vice president of business development and sales, notes that Buzzsaw.com is indeed evolving, and input from customers is key. "We rely on continued feedback of our customers to develop technology and services that are truly relevant to the building design and construction industry." Buzzsaw has formed a Customer Advisory Council that, says Boneparte, "meets frequently to bring us ideas from the field so we can match our technology to their specific needs."
Terrell sums it up by saying, "The only drawbacks are those associated with being on the cutting edge. Not every plumber, not every framer, not every concrete mason has a computer, let alone comprehends or has been introduced to the notion that they can increase their profitability and their value. In essence, not everybody is in the game yet. It's getting better, but penetration into the subcontractor market is still a challenge."
On the Horizon
Terrell's experience leads him to conclude that web-based collaboration is the wave of the future-a technology that dramatically increases the level of communication between the triad of architect, builder, and owner. "Not only is the architect judged by the beauty of his buildings and his creativity but also by the success of the plumbing system in the restrooms," he muses. "Buzzsaw allows the internal workings of the architect's mind-during the creative process and then, later in the process, his orchestration and organizational skills and communication skills-to be revealed to all. In the end, it will accentuate the good architects and force the poor architects to improve. What they are doing for the client, as well as the builder and all the different parties involved, is made transparent by processes like Buzzsaw."
As for the other two architects, they, too, will sign up for web-based collaboration in new projects. "I plan to continue using the service," Wrublowsky says. Then, perhaps mindful of lessons learned about technological change in the construction industry, he adds, laughing softly, "Until something better comes along."
< Back to top of Page
