It is widely recognised in the Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry that asset owners do not really understand their information needs for effective BIM-based Asset Management (AM). Hence, they may be unable to develop their operational information requirements to request the right data from the design and construction phases. This paper investigates the operational information requirements of three asset owners through a comparative study. A qualitative multi-case study approach was used to collect and analyse the operational information requirements of three asset owners. A qualitative content analysis was also utilised to identify key asset information requirements and categories. The study revealed that operational information requirements are strongly related to business needs and that it is not possible to develop a rigid list of requirements for asset owners, but rather some templates to help them define their data requirements. Of a total of 172 analysed information requirements, only 7 requirements were common in all cases and 16 were common in 2 cases, which represents 4% and 9% of the total. The research addressed a significant research gap regarding the development of operational information requirements for asset owners. Moreover, the paper provides templates to help guide asset owners when defining their data requirements for asset operations in order to derive BIM business value.

Purpose: There is a need to develop the understanding of asset owners concerning the constraints of building information modelling (BIM) implementation, and its subsequent value realisation activities in asset management (AM) cannot be overstated. This is because the life cycle cost of a built asset is three times more than construction costs and five times more than the initial investment outlays. Hence, this paper investigated and identified the key issues and challenges of realising BIM business value in AM.Design/methodology/approach: The study adopted an explorative and deductive approach. A qualitative four-stage research design strategy was adopted using 10 semi-structured interviews and document analysis to collect data. These were analysed through qualitative thematic analysis.Findings: The study identified 15 key barriers and classified them from the perspective BIM governance dimensions, namely people, process and technology. Furthermore, the study identified that more process-based challenges are experienced than people or technology. Of the identified challenges, three are people-related, eight are process-related and four are technology-related.Practical implications: The analysed results focussed on the development of the understanding of asset owners, policymakers and researchers regarding the complex challenges that hinder BIM utilisation and value realisation in AM. The findings of this paper support progress towards enhanced BIM adoption in the architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) industry by highlighting the significance of the identified challenges, their nature (people-, process- or technology-based) and the resultant effect on BIM business value realisation during asset operations.Originality/value: The original contribution of this study was the exploration and identification of the current challenges experienced by asset owners in implementing BIM during asset operations and how these affect the derivation of BIM business value.

The British government has ambitions to achieve net-zero carbon emissions countrywide by 2050, with their largest challenge being emissions from the construction industry. Approved Document L sets standards for the fabric performance of buildings to regulate their consumption of fuel and power, thereby allowing easier transition to all-renewable grid electricity and the phasing out of fossil fuels. Whilst this approach has shown success in new builds, its effectiveness on retrofits, especially regarding built heritage, is significantly reduced. Responding to this, the paper investigates alternative sustainable design solutions that could feasibly justify revisions to Approved Document L, to improve the sustainable performance of existing buildings and bring them in line the government’s 2050 targets. Trialing solutions on a listed building case study, benchmark figures are used to analyse the energy, carbon, and cost implications of sustainable design approaches relating to passive design, low-carbon technologies, renewable energy, and additional considerations. Using this method, it is reasonable to conclude that the standards of Approved Document L for existing buildings are currently underperforming but can feasibly be revised to encompass the full breadth of contemporary sustainable design solutions.