Design Firms Unite for Better Technology

Chicago, IL. - April 3, 2000 -- After years of implementing computer-aided design (CAD) systems, architectural firms are finding that technology has not improved the design process or significantly increased productivity, reports a group of leading U.S. architects. The CAD for Principals Council announced today the publication of its report, AEC Principals Speak Out on CAD: A Call to Action. Citing inadequate technologies and incomplete implementation strategies, the report urges other design principals and architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) professionals to join an active campaign to require that computer-aided design and related software tools meet their professional and business needs.

Principals from ten prominent U.S. design firms launched the CAD for Principals Council late in 1999 to examine work processes and CAD use in the AEC professions.

"This group is unique. It's about time that corporate leaders in an industry convened to define their creative and business goals and then demand the technology they need from software suppliers. This group understands that today's process must change and that, design and engineering software technologies must work together," said Brad Holtz editor and publisher of The CAD Rating Guide® and managing director of COFES2000: The Congress on the Future of Engineering Software. "Architects have spent way too long using technology to emulate the 200-year-old manual process. The CAD for Principals group is pushing to get the tools we need to change the process so that we can create massive bottom-line improvements."

Led by Kristine K. Fallon, FAIA, whose consulting practice focuses on the use of CAD and other technologies in the AEC industry, the council compiled the results of interviews with principals and CAD users.

"It is extraordinary in our industry for principals to focus on technology in such a detailed way. We approached this from the point of view of the business of the firms as only principals can do. In some segments of the industry, like process plant design, CAD tools meet critical needs throughout the design and construction processes. Yet, in our profession firms are relying on CAD primarily for drafting and very limited 3D modeling and visualization. We wanted to know if the average firm just didn't take full advantage of the tools available, or if the tools themselves were inadequate. We found that both were true," said Fallon.

Principals and CAD users credited CAD technology for accelerating the production of drawings and documentation and for supporting the exchange of design information among groups using the same CAD tools. At the same time, council members reported that CAD had not made a positive difference in the design process or the practice of architecture. Representing a wide spectrum of successful practice, council members called CAD inadequate and expressed concern that current tools might have a negative impact on the profession. Concluding that CAD users often "are solving computer problems about how to draw, not architectural problems," principals observed a gap between "people who know how to put a building together and CAD technicians" that tends to "isolate people rather than support a communicative team environment."

The research found widespread agreement among principals that the costs of using CAD systems often outweigh the benefits. Many questioned the "ease of use" claims from suppliers, reporting that the benefits of CAD have not compensated for the costs of the learning and relearning curves with software releases. "In terms of ease-of-use CAD is like learning hieroglyphics," the research reported, adding that "training time has to come down or the value has to go way, way up."

The council studied technology issues including: support for architecture and construction from design through operations and maintenance; budget and schedule feedback; ease-of-use; quality; team support; and interoperability. Council members identified a critical need for AEC professionals to move beyond today's limited 3D modeling to the development of "live" parametric models that would allow faster and easier establishment of design intent and support all phases of project development.

"To date computers have eased the cumbersome task of preparing complex documents that contain enormous amounts of data. Computer tools have improved our ability to envision a three dimensional object. The next step is to seamlessly link the architects' efforts to the industry that procures, assembles, constructs, delivers, operates and occupies the buildings," said Steve Saunders, AIA, CAD for Principals Council member and award-winning principal at Eckenhoff Saunders Architects, Inc. in Chicago.

The council is enlisting reviewers for its report and adding members worldwide. To focus its research and develop processes for recommending change, the council is setting up three technology action committees to examine: business requirements, best practices, and technical requirements. The Council's Web site, www.cadforprincipals.org, offers the opportunity to review the report and join the research effort.