Just throwing this out there...

[Laura Yanoviak]

Our firm decided to move to ArchiCAD 4 years ago now, and implementation started 3 1/2 years ago. Everyone has been trained (50 or so employees -- due to layoffs over the summer, we are now down to 20 users), and 100% of our current projects are on ArchiCAD.

So, the PAs (Project Architects) of my firm were called into the conference room this morning and asked how to improve the inefficiency we've been experiencing over the past 6 months. One solution was to become a 'hybrid office' and leave it up to the PAs whether to use ArchiCAD or AutoCAD for production.

I said this would be a disaster... what do y'all think?

[Anonymous]

mikem wrote:
BIM and other matters - the 18th November 2008 issue (#581) of Ralph Grabowski's eZine includes an article by Architect Mark Chaney titled
A Few Comments to BIM Developers http://www.upfrontezine.com/current.htm#b

It is a quite cogent and insightful article on the realities of BIM rather than the hype. Well worth a read.

The article makes me have a question in mind "Do we really need BIM? is it too early to have BIM? "

however, I think BIM is not mature yet, but not the fault of salesman.

2D drafting has already developed for 40 years. we are so mature in it. But we have to face the truth that 2D CAD will come to dead end soon. Do you still think there will be improvement in every new version of autocad?
every version seems to be the same, and the functions that you always use may be offset, trim,....... how about the new feature of every new AutoCAD? do anyone know the difference between autocad 2005 to 2008?


In addition, we are all new to BIM, and I think we need time to cooperate and develop in BIM. Surely, BIM have rooms to develop.

We used to use drawing board and then we change to use digital drawing board (CAD), but do this approach really fulfill what we need?

Just like, cars were not a need, there were only a few cars long time ago. people thought walking was enough for all their daily life. when cars were the trend and popular, problems came then. roads were not enough, traffic jam everywhere. However, after the transportation development was ready, the problem was solved. Nowadays, no one would think traveling by cars is strange or inconvenience ( surely, there are environmental problem, but this is not my main point)

You can think about more example, post office to email, the invention of internet, etc. every changes need time for the transition and develop the rules for the game.

I do think BIM will be the future, but with some conditions, for example, there should have some practice notes, laws, faster and faster computers, etc.

there may be fault of the marketing , but not all of the faults are in it.

[Laura Yanoviak]

mikem wrote:
It is a quite cogent and insightful article on the realities of BIM rather than the hype. Well worth a read.

The article makes some good points, although I don't agree with many -- and it's a little off topic, having to do more with managing BIM expectations and how the software is not up to speed with the hype.

We are making it work -- we didn't expect to save money or time with BIM, but did intend to invest more time into design as well as avoid a number of conflicts that arise in the field (and contrary to the article, working in 3D does in fact bring many of the conflicts to light early so that they can be addressed, and is valuable in this respect) -- in this way we have been successful.

The fact of the matter is we haven't been as efficient over the past 6 months because we haven't had enough work. We would have been just as inefficient (if not more so) using AutoCAD.

[Anonymous]

Laura wrote:
The fact of the matter is we haven't been as efficient over the past 6 months because we haven't had enough work. We would have been just as inefficient (if not more so) using AutoCAD.

One way I've seen firms keep up their efficiency (and spirits) during slow times is to enter more competitions. If there is fun work like this to be done people won't drag out the time they spend on the meat and potatoes (eager to get on to the desert of the competition). Of course this also helps to promote the firm and, who knows, you might even win a project or two.

Of course if your practice is all Butler buildings and modular classrooms this might not be an option. In that case maybe a program of how better to "green" these conventional sorts of projects could accomplish a similar goal.

[Anonymous]

Laura, get out of there! Fast! 😉

[Da3dalus]

Been there... for over a decade. I've ridden the wave in and out, and gotten more jaded with each turn. It's been about four times now that I've taken my good ol' dongles out behind the woodshed and put a bullet in 'em, just like Old Yeller.

Then, a few months later, everyone desperately needs to model something, and AutoCAD can't handle our needs. I typically suggest going to AutoCAD Architecture (ADT) or Revit, and hand them a huge bill to invest and retrain everyone. "It's what you want, isn't it? Status Quo?" I say, looking much like Eeyore. They eventually talk me into getting psyched again about ArchiCAD, and we roll on a few projects, and things go well. Then something goes wrong, we lose money, BIM is demonized, I get in a couple screaming matches, and we lay some people off. Then back to the woodshed.

People who have only ever used AutoCAD are so darn happy all the time. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

Not to turn everyone off, but I'm constantly reconsidering my employment. Some day I'll meet some nuts-and-bolts businessman architect that complements my shortcomings, and I'll start a new firm. From the very beginning, there will be no AutoCAD. It will be heaven.

My last lament:
http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?p=120467&highlight=#120467

[Anonymous]

Da3dalus wrote:
Some day I'll meet some nuts-and-bolts businessman architect that complements my shortcomings, and I'll start a new firm.

Wish you luck, Chuck!
I did this 4 years ago and it was the right decission! Then even Autocad doesn't matter!

[Laura Yanoviak]

An update: Just as I started to think "no news is good news", it seems that this issue is still unresolved.

The PA's determined, unanimously, that becoming a hybrid office was not an answer, and that the firm needs to renew their commitment to AC. Apparently, the partners are not convinced and wish to meet with us again to discuss prior to the Partner Retreat at the end of the month.

Meanwhile, no one has bothered to speak to me personally regarding the matter.

More news at it becomes available...

[Erika Epstein]

Laura wrote:
Meanwhile, no one has bothered to speak to me personally regarding the matter..

Just an idea...why don't you take the initiative?
Find out the partners concerns so you can address them; speak to them individually.
-Prepare some data
- organize the PAs,
-etc.
Before their retreat.

[Da3dalus]

Go to them bearing donuts and latte. Complement their avant-garde-yet-classically-professional office decor. They won't be able to resist. If that doesn't do it, sacrifice an intern in their reserved parking spot. That will get their attention.

[Laura Yanoviak]

Erika wrote:
Just an idea...why don't you take the initiative?
Find out the partners concerns so you can address them; speak to them individually.
-Prepare some data
- organize the PAs,
-etc.
Before their retreat.

You're absolutely right, of course. I've been holding off until I can approach them in a rational manner (been a bit emotional lately).