The digital transformation of the built environment requires a profound shift in thinking—from viewing buildings as static structures to understanding them as living, data-rich assets. As a specialist in market engagement and business transformation, my focus is on facilitating the deep and meaningful conversations necessary to bridge this complexity and ensure digital change is truly valuable.
This commitment to collaborative transformation was exemplified during a pivotal panel discussion I moderated at Digital Construction Week (DCW) on 4 June, which served as the official soft launch of the RIBA Smart Buildings Overlay 2.0 review. This collaborative initiative, driven by the Digital Buildings Council (DBC) and the original co-authors, aims to evolve the foundational framework for intelligent built environments.
The Genesis of the Overlay: Addressing Late Adoption
The original RIBA Smart Buildings Overlay, developed between 2016 and 2017, was born out of a shared frustration within the industry. As co-author James Franklin (Kier) recounted, the impetus came from the prevalent issue of smart building ideas being introduced too late in projects, often hindering effective implementation. The overlay’s initial purpose was to guide earlier conversations and involve the right people sooner in the project timeline, serving as an accessible gateway to the subject, as noted by John Adams (Glider).
However, the rapid pace of technological advancement demands a swift and continuous review process. As James Franklin pointed out, this is a “fast-moving world,” and the overlay needs to adapt more quickly than many other Plan of Work overlays. The shift toward Version 2.0 is driven by a desire to understand how the original has been implemented and to address areas for improvement.
A Dynamic Tool for the Entire Lifecycle
A significant ambition for the revised overlay is to move beyond a static PDF document, transforming it into a more interactive and dynamic tool that can be personalized to individual client journeys.
The discussion highlighted the importance of addressing gaps at both the beginning and the end of the RIBA Plan of Works. Early stages require clearer success criteria and metrics beyond just use cases. While use cases are valuable for planning, the panel stressed the importance of defining what “success” truly looks like and how it can be measured.
A compelling example shared by John Adams and James Franklin illustrated this: for the Ministry of Justice and prisons, the ultimate success metric is prisoner rehabilitation, not merely the presence of smart technology. This underscores the crucial need to align smart building design with the overarching operational goals of an asset.
Conversely, the latter stages of the plan, particularly those concerning handover and operational implementation, require more comprehensive fleshing out.
Bridging the Project-Operations Gap: The Core Focus
The panel highlighted the prevalent ‘project-operations gap’, where the focus traditionally ends at practical completion. However, as John Adams succinctly put it, “a smart building isn’t build it and step away.” A smart building is a constantly evolving entity. The revised overlay aims to incorporate voices from procurement, operations, demolition, and disposal to ensure a more inclusive representation of the asset’s entire lifecycle.
Aleksandra Dasala (Nu Xform) further emphasized the need for continuous feedback loops between disciplines at every stage, acknowledging that in smart building delivery, traditional RIBA stages often extend beyond their defined boundaries.
The discussion also touched upon the inherent tension between RIBA’s traditional waterfall methodology and the agile, iterative nature of technology development. While construction contracts often rely on RIBA milestones, limiting flexibility, the panel expressed a desire for the overlay to foster a more fluid approach to smart building design and delivery. The aspiration is not to replace the RIBA framework but to extend its thinking, particularly concerning the post-handover operational phase.
Driving Collaboration and Industry Engagement
A crucial aspect of the Version 2.0 review is comprehensive industry engagement. My role as moderator and facilitator in this collaboration is central to ensuring a truly representative and robust Version 2.0. The DBC has opened a channel for feedback via their website, inviting all stakeholders to contribute their expertise.
The review process will involve semi-structured research, including interviews, roundtables, and surveys. This structured approach aims to gather input at scale, leveraging partnerships with RIBA and various trade bodies. The panel acknowledged the challenge of reaching those unaware of the existing overlay, a problem of “preaching to the converted.” However, the DBC’s extensive network is expected to facilitate access to a broader range of “personas” and stakeholders.
The ultimate goal is to move the overlay beyond its “cottage industry” beginnings to become a widely adopted and governmentally supported initiative, akin to the 2011 BIM mandate. The panellists expressed optimism, citing examples of government departments like HMRC already demonstrating the benefits of smart buildings, creating a pull for modernisation across the public estate.
In essence, the RIBA Smart Buildings Overlay 2.0 is poised to be more than just an updated document; it represents a concerted effort to integrate smart building principles seamlessly into the entire construction and operational lifecycle. By fostering strategic collaboration and embracing a more dynamic approach, the revised overlay will be a valuable tool for creating truly intelligent and sustainable built environments.
Panel Participants
We are grateful to the following panellists for their contributions:
- James Franklin: Digital Twin Project Director, Kier Construction
- John Adams: Head of Product, Glider Technology
- Aleksandra Dasala: Smart Buildings Consultant, Nu Xform
- Daniel Watson: UK Director, Hereworks
