Mar 09 2011

Vaulting your documents

Writing last week about the London launch of the RICS report on cloud computing and commercial property, I mentioned secure offsite file storage provider Vaultium, and – surely no coincidence – I have since been emailed about another UK-based “vault” vendor: BackUpVault.

Neither cloud-based business specifically targets the construction collaboration sector, though Vaultium does offer “file sharing, collaboration and large file handling” which may appeal to some businesses in the architecture, engineering, construction (AEC) and property or facilities management sectors (and the website does show a man in a site hard-hat). However, in my view, this is not the kind of tool to be used routinely for project delivery (a folders-based system, it lacks the functionality finesse of drawing mark-up and commenting tools or AEC process management), but for post-project archives it may be relevant.

Vaultium certainly takes its security very seriously, talking about encryption and military grade security with its servers located in “Europe’s most secure data centre”, ‘The Bunker’, which is apparently capable of withstanding a nuclear bomb! Its customers include several large government departments, local authorities and professional service businesses, though it does have an SME offer (for £15 per month, up to three users can share 3GB of secure space in ‘The Bunker’).

BackUpVault does what it says: provides back-up services – secure, automatic, off-site back-up, on a software-as-a-service basis, and mainly targets SMEs (of which, of course, there are many in the AEC market). “There are no setup costs, no hardware to buy and the service is completely scalable should your storage requirements increase,” it says. For a few GB, its starter online backup pricing is similar to Vaultium’s.

More pertinently perhaps, for legal jurisdiction reasons, both vendors operate in the UK (ie: within the EU). The RICS report advises potential cloud computing users to be careful of operators hosting in the US where different data protection standards apply. Other back-up services are available – I’ve blogged about box.net (post) and drop.io (post), for example – but as these are US-based businesses, there may be UK customer hesitation about where their data may be hosted.

Permanent link to this article: http://extranetevolution.com/2011/03/vaulting-your-documents/

Mar 08 2011

Virtual worlds and the built environment

Virtual worlds and the built environment (PDF) is a white paper just published by Birmingham, UK-based Daden Ltd, about whom I’ve written before (post). Having explored Second Life very superficially a couple of years ago when Be2camp was in its infancy, I have watched with interest as Dave Burden and Soulla Stylianou have developed strong arguments for using immersive virtual environments for architecture, engineering and construction projects, and on through to occupation, facilities management, re-purposing, and eventual dismantling. This white paper collates a considerable amount of learning and lots of practical ideas about virtual worlds into a succinct 20 pages.

Foremost, to me, is the very obvious point that conventional 3D environments tend to be almost anti-social – certainly ‘unsocial’. While 3D design walk-throughs and fly-throughs often display the presence of occupants or pedestrians, and they might portray a building or a streetscape as seen from the eyes of someone walking (or flying!) through the building or along the street, there is rarely any opportunity to interact with the building, or to pause the ‘guided tour’ and go off and explore alone (or in groups). Similarly, there is usually no way to share thoughts or ideas about the building in real time with the designer or with other users. As Daden argue, virtual reality is not a replacement for existing technologies, but it can do things that these tools can’t currently achieve: to explore the human and social dimensions of a build:

“Virtual worlds can do this because they are all about putting one or more human-controlled avatars into a shared, real-time environment – something none of these existing tools do.” (p.5)

The list of advantages of virtual worlds for AEC activity (p.7) is impressive. Daden lists various abilities including:

  • support for multiple users in the same space – not just twos or threes, but typically 50-100
  • to make things interactive – even linking computers to real computer applications, and signs to real signage systems (Daden has shown street scenes in Second Life where Birmingham bus-stops display real-time information about the next bus service to, say, Edgbaston)
  • integrating building environmental and performance data, and visualising more effectively
  • allow users to peel-back layers of a building to see structural and service components
  • let users annotate the space, feeding back comments which can be automatically collated
  • track users through the building, and their interactions with its systems
  • let users choose between configurations and vote on them
  • support ‘live use’ of the building, eg: for entertainment or training
  • clone the building to create multiple copies to explore what-ifs
  • use the same platform to support virtual meetings, conferences, training, collaboration etc
  • dynamic rendering which enables instant changes and multi-user deployment

The main drawbacks, interestingly, are more to do with the hardware and telecommunications technology, not the approach; Daden lists the need for a reasonably powerful PC (though “a £40 graphics card suffices”), a dedicated downloadable client application and reasonable bandwidth, plus user interfaces that are attuned to AEC use, and avatars that are easier to manage.

Daden lists several ways in which virtual worlds could be used to model different aspects of a built environment project (pp.11-16): in planning, in consultation, for project collaboration, for building user feedback, to model use by wheelchair users, to model services for future maintenance needs, to show different environmental conditions, to test security strategies, to identify building navigation issues, for simulation and training purposes, etc. And many of these scenarios are not just hypothetical; Daden has tested many of these approaches out on real projects – last year’s Be2camp Brum, for example, heard how Second Life was being used to support design activities relating to the new Library of Birmingham, and Soulla has also presented on Daden’s PIVOTE learning environment.

Daden acknowledge the rise of building information modelling (BIM) and other technologies, but suggest that, alongside these tools, we can add considerably to our understanding of the effectiveness of a building or urban design by testing ideas out on users and allowing them to interact as avatars, both singly and with others, within that built environment. This white paper should be required reading for anyone looking for design tools that could help them identify potential end-users’ issues early enough so that they can then optimise user experience in their design of the finished built asset.

Update (08 March 2011): Coincidentally, I have just been emailed about two special issues of the Journal of Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), including one on Use of virtual world technology in architecture, engineering and construction, edited by Pathmeswaran Raju and Vian Ahmed of University of Salford, plus Chimay Anumba of Penn State University (formerly at Loughborough University). The special issue includes eight peer-reviewed academic papers on virtual technologies.

 

Permanent link to this article: http://extranetevolution.com/2011/03/virtual-worlds-and-the-built-environment/

Mar 07 2011

Who sits at the Sword CTSpace table?

The latest Sword-CTSpace news release concerns an integration between the company’s on-premise FusionEnterprise platform and ECM systems EMC Documentum and Microsoft SharePoint 10 (somewhat confusingly, Sword-CTSpace talks about Engineering Content Management, as opposed to Enterprise Content Management, a term much used by other firms and industry analysts).

I only mention this as the news release mentions Mark Cappell, now listed as Sword CTSpace’s CEO, having previously been operations director in Sword’s AML (anti-money laundering) division. It also quotes Tim Fleet, Sword CTSpace’s Vice President of Product Management, who is one of the few survivors from CTSpace predecessor BuildOnline Cimage’s days. But if you search the Sword-CTSpace website for details of who else runs the business, there are few clues as to who might be involved. A Sword-CTSpace website search gave no results for “Cappell” (despite the publication of last week’s news release); a Google search of the site delivered only that one news release.

Contrast this state of affairs with the profiles given of the key people at various rival collaboration vendors:

In my view, it’s crucial to know exactly who you are doing business with, and to get some idea of their previous experience.

[PS: Almost six months ago, I mentioned an unconfirmed rumour that Sword-CTSpace operations director and former MD EMEA Gert-Jan de Kieviet had left the construction collaboration technology vendor. I did seek clarification about Mr de Kieviet, but heard no more…. Anyone able to confirm anything?]

Update (10 March 2011): I spoke to Lydie Francart, Sword CTSpace’s marketing director this afternoon. She confirmed that Mark Cappell had taken over as the business’s CEO in June 2010, and that Gert-Jan de Kieviet left the company in late 2010. She explained how the company had been recruiting experienced executives with a strong track record in selling ECM solutions – and profiles of these individuals would be added to the Sword CTSpace website shortly.

Permanent link to this article: http://extranetevolution.com/2011/03/who-sits-at-the-sword-ctspace-table/

Mar 04 2011

Not just NEC3, JCT needs to be managed too

The web-based RICS Contract Administrator automates and speeds up the production of JCT contract forms, but why do some of its users still print them out and send them?

Amid the recent burst of marketing activity by UK construction SaaS vendors promoting their NEC management capabilities (see links to previous posts below), it is easy to forget that there are other standard forms of construction contract that may need to be managed online. The JCT forms are perhaps the most notable, and I have been looking at a web-based solution from the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors that can be used to administer processes from a selection of JCT standard contracts.

Online form production

The RICS Contract Administrator application is one of four WorkSmart tools delivered via the RICS isurv online service (the others are a forms service, ProForms; an online environmental system for fit-out projects, SKA rating online assessment; and Survey Writer, used to produce RICS HomeBuyer Reports). Described as “an enlightened approach to contract administration”, the web-based service lets users set up a project in minutes.

Having been given a log-in to the system, I was able to create a project running a particular form of contract (eg: JCT Agreement for Minor Building Works 1998, JCT Design & Build Contract 2005, etc; the drop-down menu listed 16 JCT variants), create user accounts for supply chain members (eg: employer, contractor, architect), brand the forms, complete the standard Contract Data project details (used to pre-populate many of the contract forms), and then start creating, approving and issuing forms under that contract. I did notice, though, that fields for users’ email addresses weren’t mandatory, which I thought was a bit strange for an online system that might be used to issue documents electronically and notify recipients accordingly.

Once a type of JCT contract is chosen, the system automatically selects the correct standard contract administration forms from over 200 templates so you don’t have to decide which is the appropriate form. When a form is selected (eg: an Employer’s Instruction), pre-populated details already entered are indicated in green, while sections that need to be completed are highlighted in red, helping make the system easier for junior or less experienced staff to complete forms accurately.

Take-up

I asked the RICS how widely the system had been used and was told:

“Take-up of the tool has been mostly by small and medium-sized firms as the larger firms tend to have either integrated systems or applications are being built to specification for certain jobs (eg: for the Olympics). Typical customers for our application are Building Surveyors or BS in local authorities, loss adjusters and RSLs, architects, construction consultants and QSs.”

Electronic communication or paper issue?

I also asked about email issue:

“With regard to issuing contract administration forms once they’ve been completed the system offers the possibility to email forms to contractors, clients, etc. However most of the time people still chose to print hard copies and send them in the post as professionals are still not so sure how legally binding a certificate would be that’s been sent via email. People are traditional in the industry and we only had a few requests to include electronic signatures in our list of features for the software.” [emphasis added]

I am stunned that some professionals seem to retain this preference for paper-based communications and snail-mail. More than ten years ago, when construction collaboration technologies were still relatively new, such attitudes were perhaps understandable, and I (and my marketing counterparts in other vendors) spent considerable time researching the legal issues and seeking expert guidance. In my book, I quoted (pp.108-110) the expert advice of Masons solicitor Ed White (which included specific reference to a JCT contract clause) and of Hammond Suddards Edge, both provided in 2001, regarding contract provisions on electronic communications and their legal admissibility. I can understand professionals’ hesitation about email (indeed RICS’ own 2005 guidance on e-tendering (post), for example, says on p.3 that email “is not recommended at all”), but if all members of a project team have access to a secure, RICS-approved system which retains a full audit trail detailing issue and receipt of contract forms then paper issue should be unnecessary.

This suggests there is still a significant awareness-raising and education process required to inform users, particularly in SMEs, about electronic communication (I expect many of these professionals will quite happily enter into online contracts when they book flights or hotel accommodation or buy other goods or services!).

Recent related articles

Permanent link to this article: http://extranetevolution.com/2011/03/not-just-nec3-jct-needs-to-be-managed-too/

Mar 03 2011

A role for resellers?

Some construction businesses already function effectively as value-added resellers of SaaS-based collaboration tools, filling a gap left open by traditional software VARs.

I have discussed routes to market for SaaS construction collaboration vendors a few times – for example, last September, I contrasted Woobius’s aspirations to sell direct via the web with vendors who have deployed sales teams to engage with potential customers. And in December I wrote about Asite‘s tie-up with US-based reprographics firm ReproMAX creating local partners to market its services in north America (a similar move to BIW’s partnership with Sage CRE; post).

The value of VARs?

I am undecided about the role of resellers when it comes to software-as-a-service, particularly advanced applications for mission-critical capital projects. Of course, the IT industry has a long history of dealing through value-added resellers (VARs), but the advent of cloud computing has already started to have an impact on traditional software VARs. Hunter Richards wrote about this in a January blog post, Fear Not, Resellers: Every Cloud Has a Silver Lining, on SoftwareAdvice.com.

With SaaS-based applications now being sold direct online, the VARs’ role as software sellers is being eroded. Remotely hosted SaaS also means no hardware sales to the end-users, and no installation work. Growing adoption of common web standards, sharing of application programming interfaces (APIs), and increasingly sophisticated configuration options mean decreasing volumes of integration and customisation work. And as SaaS applications tend to be easier to use, less training is required – and what help is needed can often be supplied online.

Hunter suggests that VARs need to adapt to survive, creating partnerships with vendors and then making “five bold moves to gain a sturdy foothold in the market”:

  1. Specialise.
  2. Develop competency on a leading Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS).
  3. Make the cloud’s efficiency work for you.
  4. Offer technology-enabled services.
  5. Promote the cloud to your existing customer base.

How construction businesses work as VARs

When we look at these as they apply to the main SaaS construction collaboration technology vendors, it appears that the place of software VARs may have been taken by mainstream construction firms. In the UK at least, such services have rarely been sold through IT-based VARs. Instead, the leading providers often have long-established partnerships with construction businesses (contractors, project managers, etc) who deploy the chosen SaaS application on their client’s projects and provide first line support and training (for example, unless the client has an alternative preference, Gleeds and Mace will tend to implement BIW’s platform).

1. Specialise. Hunter urges VARs to narrow their focus to a vertical market or application category. Arguably, this has already happened, with contractors and project managers adding value to their core construction services by delivering collaboration platforms that are pre-configured to suit their company branding and project processes, thus accelerating mobilisation and familiarisation by their employees and regular supply chain members.

As mentioned above, Asite and BIW have also sought to build on existing networks’ previous familiarity with the north American construction sector (gained from partners providing reprographics services and financial/accounting solutions respectively), but it remains to be seen whether these VARs can extend their market specialism to include provision of collaboration systems. However, I believe Asite expects its e-procurement engine to increase the efficiency of ReproMAX’s service delivery by automating transactions.

2. Develop competency on a leading Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS). “Build your own applications and customisations, and then market them”, suggests Hunter. Some of Asite’s users, for example, have been using its Appbuilder system (post) to create libraries of usable applications for company or project-specific processes such as expenses management, snagging, and cost control, including mobile tools.

3. Make the cloud’s efficiency work for you. This was quickly discovered by experienced construction collaboration users: a centralised, web-based repository of information and process management tools means that team members don’t always have to be on-site to manage their workload. Indeed, some can manage multiple projects simultaneously, making better use of time and costs associated with travel to site.

4. Offer technology-enabled services. Traditionally, a contractor or project manager’s involvement with a project often ended after hand-over of the built asset to the client, but asset-related services enabled by cloud-based systems might now be offered to clients. For instance, as-built data derived from the design and construction delivery process might be used to support facilities management, operation and maintenance, and for governance, regulatory and compliance purposes. Information from across multiple projects might also be analysed for business intelligence (BI) purposes so that the client gets insights into the efficiency of its assets and/or the supply chain members that have delivered them.

5. Promote the cloud to your existing customer base. As already mentioned (1 above), some construction firms are helping their clients learn about cloud-based systems and to make informed choices about which system(s) to use. And this trend is likely to grow; as I wrote yesterday, commercial property firms are already beginning to use cloud computing services, and as property owners and managers begin to embrace BIM and whole-life cost thinking (something urged in UK chief construction adviser Paul Morrell’s IGT report published in November last year) seamless re-use of data extracted from the initial build processes should become the norm rather then the exception.

Permanent link to this article: http://extranetevolution.com/2011/03/a-role-for-resellers/

Mar 02 2011

The Role of Cloud Computing in Commercial Property

Last Thursday I went to the London HQ of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors for the breakfast-time launch of a new RICS report on cloud computing (download; see also RICS news release) written by Andrew Waller and Bob Thompson of Remit Consulting.

Having been working in and writing about Software-as-a-Service for more than a decade, there was little about the concept that was new to me, but it was interesting nonetheless to hear some of the commercial property case studies discussed, and the RICS perspective on what cloud computing might mean for property professionals (eg: impacts on space requirements, IT costs and increased flexibility through remote working). Andrew Waller said:

“Organisations that choose to adopt these virtual IT systems will be able to reduce their running costs and smaller businesses will be able to access systems which would, otherwise, have been beyond their financial means. Furthermore, by using virtual IT systems businesses will require less floor space, as large servers are dispensed with and the smooth, reliable remote access allows a greater number of employees to work away from the office on a more regular basis.”

To explain the concept of cloud computing, Andrew used examples including Tungle, Google Docs, Expensify and Vaultium, and then mentioned some property-specific applications: Yardi, Salesforce (used by CBRE, we heard), Qube, Aperio, and Propsnap. While the industry forecasts of cloud adoption from people like Gartner were impressive (“the global market for Cloud products and services is expected to more than triple from £30 billion in 2009 to £100 billion in 2013”),* Bob sounded a note of caution, particularly in respect of bandwidth availability – this, for example, made Microsoft Office Live a disappointing experience, he said. The report also underlines the need for clarity with service level agreements with cloud service providers (something that collaboration providers in the architecture, engineering and construction space have been doing for 10 years and more, of course), and care regarding the legal jurisdictions within which data is held.

The main industry case study came from Broadgate Estates who have been using cloud computing to reduce their IT overheads and to offer a cloud-based property management service, Vicinitee.com, to its customers. There was also a contribution from the floor from The Local Data Company who use cloud services to capture, analyse, visualise and publish data on retail and leisure outlets across thousands of UK towns.

Other attendees at the event included Annie Lennox-Martin who has since written about the event for FM World‘s blog (see The dying days of IT?), suggesting the experience of facilities managers in managing outsourced services might be useful.

[* I recently read of a report from analysts TechMarketReview that suggested that Cloud computing in the UK will be worth £2.4bn this year, and is projected to be worth £10.4bn in 2014. There are also forecasts that emphasise the ‘green’ aspect, eg Pike Research’s prediction: “the adoption of Cloud computing could lead to a 38 percent reduction in energy usage in the world’s data centers by 2020”.]

Permanent link to this article: http://extranetevolution.com/2011/03/the-role-of-cloud-computing-in-commercial-property/

Feb 28 2011

Another NEC3 SaaS application: CMToolkit

Online management of NEC contract processes features prominently on the agenda of next month’s document and knowledge management conference in London (which I am chairing – post), with SaaS vendors 4Projects and Sypro both listed as talking about contract administration. The event is timely too, insofar as it comes just weeks after NEC publisher Thomas Telford announced that full-on collaboration vendors 4Projects and BIW Technologies had been appointed NEC licensed content providers (post), but, as I’ve noted before, the field is very competitive, with vendors such as MPS and Sypro focused just on NEC compliance and management. In this field, the latest provider brought to my attention* is a Gloucestershire, UK-based SaaS vendor, CMToolkit.

Incorporated in 2005 and managed by directors Ben and Andy Walker, Client Managers Toolkit Ltd markets Contract Event Management And Reporting system (CEMAR), which its website describes as “a fully hosted web application for use with projects and service contracts under NEC3 ECC & TSC” (Engineering and Construction Contract, Term Service Contract). The website also provides a business case document (October 2010) that calculates the potential time and consumables savings arising on a major ECC project from using the CEMAR application. This suggests an estimated tangible saving of £97,538, but of course it doesn’t detail how much would be spent on CEMAR in order to achieve that saving. And the so-called “Savings Calculator” also doesn’t count the cost of the CEMAR system (the given example suggests a £118,000 gross saving).

The CMToolkit website lists and quotes comments from various customer organisations – including Halcrow, Volker Stevin and Belfast Community Housing Association – which have used CEMAR. Some of these organisations also feature in the three case studies.

Online, there is also a YouTube video which is presented by a blue and white robot (sadly, soundless and not animated). While MPS’s system will be familiar to anyone who likes using Excel spreadsheets, the CMToolkit menu interface is described as similar to Microsoft Outlook, with reminders treated like emails and colour-coded based on the amount of time left for resolution of the process concerned. Relevant drawings, photographs and other documents can be managed alongside NEC processes, and the reporting tools allow export to Excel and creation of PDF reports.

[* Thanks to Dr Glyn Jones for the link.]

Permanent link to this article: http://extranetevolution.com/2011/02/another-nec3-saas-application-cmtoolkit/

Feb 27 2011

Immersive design collaboration, with IdentityMine

I have returned from time to time to the perceived shortcomings of online design collaboration insofar as some architects and other designers prefer the intuitive, paper-based processes of marking-up, commenting and sketching on design drawings by hand. Such ‘collaboration’ they say is less easy when they are faced by conventional computer interfaces as opposed to, say, a pen and an A1 sheet of paper surrounded by other information that helps give the design some context. These processes are also often asynchronous whereas designers sometime want to collaborate in real-time, synchronously.

Nearly two years ago, for example, I looked at Cereno‘s NuVa Collaborative Working Environment (CWE) technology that enables people to share a design by putting information items such as drawings in the middle of a shared electronic space, and then allowing designers to use pen-type devices, keyboards, and built-in audio and video to capture, transmit, share and record conversations and outputs in real-time with colleagues using CWEs elsewhere. However, I was doubtful, particularly in today’s straitened economic circumstances whether this high-tech approach to design collaboration would every achieve widespread adoption in the architecture, engineering and construction sector.

I was reminded of this recently when I was invited to talk recently to Jonah Sterling, creative director of IdentityMine about “the Executive Dashboard of the Future“.

OK, the all-embracing, integrated service doesn’t actually exist yet – but the elements of touch-sensitive wall screens, tablet and similar portable devices, voice and facial recognition tools, status and presence detection, Web 2.0, gesture-driven navigation (think XBox Kinect, for example), content sharing, business intelligence, and video-streaming are already available. Jonah and I talked about how this collaborative space (the words “collaboratory” and “collaboratorium” cropped up) might incorporate walls, tablets, mobiles, and tabletop devices such as Microsoft’s Surface, as well as approaches such as building information modelling (BIM) and immersive environments like Second Life. Conceivably, collaborative decision-making might take place inside a responsive environment in which the computer was effectively invisible but enabling intuitive, synchronous communication by whatever means the participants felt comfortable employing. And a record of the meeting and its outcomes could be stored in a records capsule that participants could take away (more likely, store online).

Since our conversation, IdentityMine has posted a new video on Youtube that combines snippets from several different demos to tell one comprehensive story about its work with cross-platform device integration, data visualisation, NUI, Surface, and remote collaboration:

Some of this may look completely alien to how current professionals work, but sophisticated devices are becoming increasingly commonplace in homes and offices, even in our pockets and rucksacks, and Jonah was enthusiastic about the prospect of “Millennials” (future Gen Y professionals) bringing their easy acceptance of, and demand for, such tools into the workplace. For the built environment, this, clearly, would have repercussions for both office or studio design and for how architects and other designers go about their collaborative design tasks. Still at a very conceptual stage, but very intriguing stuff, I think.

Permanent link to this article: http://extranetevolution.com/2011/02/immersive-design-collaboration-with-identitymine/

Permanent link to this article: http://extranetevolution.com/2011/02/4projects-revenues-down-but-profits-up/

Feb 24 2011

“Aconex Knickers in a Knot”

Following up my previous post (Aconex director under scrutiny), the latest (25 February) FirmSpy post, AAR Victoria’s Secret: Aconex Knickers in a Knot, paints an uncomfortable picture of Aconex‘s management of its relationship with its main legal advisor, Allens Arthur Robinson (AAR). It may all be, as it says, “scurulous rumour and gossip”, but FirmSpy wonders about:

  • the significant sums expended with AAR on legal fees since Mr Robinson joined Aconex’s board
  • his continued use of an AAR email address
  • the apparent reluctance of major Australian business news publications to report on the allegations
  • the advice to Aconex of another AAR partner Wendy Rae, apparently now also under investigation
  • the 2007-2008 Hawthorn Glen share purchase dispute, and
  • the possible financial repercussions if a derivative legal action commenced.

Update (4 March 2011): A further FirmSpy post includes, in the final paragraph, some speculation about information barriers (eg: could Mr Robinson have stored all his Aconex director correspondence on AAR email servers?). That’s kind of an ironic twist, given that Aconex’s core business is all about information management, aiding efficient decision-making and keeping a clear audit trail of all exchanges.

Permanent link to this article: http://extranetevolution.com/2011/02/aconex-knickers-in-a-knot/

Load more