Episode #2 Moving from reactive to proactive information management

William Baker-Jones, then Deputy Head of BIM and Digital Engineering at Babcock International Group, on the business value of information and the work that depends on it.

Watch the conversation, published 19 June 2024, or read the companion below.

Executive summary

One late drawing can set off a chain of delays. A missed procurement window can hold up site activities, while a late feasibility report can delay the design work that follows. Drawing on Babcock's major infrastructure programme at Devonport, William Baker-Jones connected those consequences to the way information is specified, planned and delivered. Defining requirements early gives teams a basis for agreeing deliverables and dates. Linking those commitments to the programme makes their significance clear to the people producing the information. Access and security are part of the same discussion. Information has value because of what it enables, and that is the business case project managers and senior leaders need to understand.

• Three information categories cover geometry, alphanumerical data and documentation, each specified for the work it supports.
• Four-year procurement windows were an example William raised to explain how one late report can affect a major infrastructure programme.
• Around 200 years old, the Devonport drawings William recalled examining already carried approvals and stamps.

Start with the decision the information supports

A contract has a visible cost. The value of the information attached to it comes from the decisions and activities it supports. Poor information can affect those decisions even when its consequences are harder to put a price on.

At Devonport Royal Dockyard, William worked on the information management, BIM and data aspects of a major infrastructure programme supporting the submarine fleet. Health and safety depend on sound decisions, which makes the way information is procured, delivered, validated and used a business concern. Where underlying information is unstructured or unvalidated, confidence in the resulting decision is misplaced.

William's starting point was to establish what information the project needed before moving into design and construction. Defining that need gives the team a basis for planning how to obtain the information and agreeing when it must arrive. The design or site activity can then be planned alongside the deliverables it depends on.

Work backwards from the programme

Information requirements cover geometry, alphanumerical data and documentation. Specifying the relevant content in each category gives the team a defined set of deliverables to agree with the information producer. It also gives the team something to check against when the information arrives.

William used setting out on site to connect those requirements to the programme. Start with the date the activity needs to happen, work with the planner to locate it, then identify the pack of information needed to make it possible. The delivery milestone now has a purpose that the information producer can understand.

The task information delivery plan records what a team intends to deliver and when. The master information delivery plan brings those commitments together. Checking deliverables in the common data environment against the plan shows whether the information needed for the activity has arrived.

The resulting sequence is repeatable and scalable to make the process efficient:

1. Specify the information needed for the activity.
2. Set its required delivery date.
3. Agree the delivery commitment.
4. Check deliverables against that commitment.
5. Relate any missed date to the work that depends on it.

That final connection gives a report deadline its significance. William raised the example of an overseas procurement window that a designer might not know about. Missing it could mean waiting months for the next opportunity. He also referred to major infrastructure procurement windows of four years. A single late report can therefore affect the critical path, even when the person producing it sees only their own delivery date. Explaining that dependency makes clear which work their commitment supports.

Explain the risk behind a late deliverable

Information is an asset. Its value extends beyond the cost of producing a drawing or report to the work that depends on it.

We've got to think of information as an asset and something that we need to value.

William Baker-Jones

William raised an information delivery risk register as a way to record the risk of late information. The useful connection is between the missing deliverable and the work it puts at risk. Recording that consequence gives project managers and engineers an explanation of why the delivery date matters.

A concept or feasibility report may inform a later scheme or detailed design report. If it slips, subsequent information can be delayed too. The master information delivery plan helps relate the missed date to those dependencies, so the discussion can move from a report being late to the design or procurement work affected.

The financial effect can be difficult to quantify. At Babcock, William spent much of his time explaining information's value to project managers and engineers working to strict deadlines. Making the dependent work visible gives them a practical reason to take the information commitment seriously before it is missed.

Use the language people already work with

William found a useful example in Devonport's historical records. He recalled looking at drawings around 200 years old, with title blocks, approvals and stamps. Information was managed on paper, and losing a hand-drawn plan meant somebody had to recreate it.

There is continuity between those practices and digital information management. The medium has changed, but the information still supports work and still needs to be managed. Those older drawings make the principle tangible: their value was evident in what it took to replace them and the work they enabled.

For people unfamiliar with BIM, that is a useful place to begin. Connect information management to their experience of finding, obtaining and using information. They can then understand what the process does for their work before having to learn its terminology.

People understand information. It's [...] getting them to understand the value of that information and what it can do for them.

William Baker-Jones

Make security part of information value

William connected the value of information with control over access and sharing. His example was a home's floor plans: the owner can care about that information even when the building is not usually considered a sensitive asset. Its value helps explain why the owner would want a say in who receives it.

Passing a physical record from one person to another makes the transfer visible. Digital information can be copied and shared quickly, making it easier to overlook where it goes. William's concern extended to sensitive information in cloud repositories, large language models and smart-city infrastructure.

The practical consideration is who needs access and what sharing could expose. Considering that while information is being procured and produced connects the convenience of sharing with its consequences for the asset and its owner.

Borrow useful processes from systems engineering

Babcock's marine engineering work gave William another place to look for ways of managing complex information. Systems engineering used a structured approach to procuring assets such as warships and managing the information needed to deliver them. That offered established processes to learn from and adapt.

At the time of the conversation, William was beginning to bring that learning into the business's information management processes. He distinguished the process from the technology used to hold and manage its data, identifying Morta as one platform that could support the structure. The value of the systems-engineering comparison was in finding useful practices the business could build on when organising its own information.

Start small enough for people to follow

Make the business case simple. Senior leaders need to understand the objectives and the implications of acting or failing to act. William's advice was to use plain language and recognisable examples of finding, obtaining and using information. That gives leaders a way to assess its value against the work they are responsible for.

Introducing too much at once can overwhelm an organisation. Existing assumptions about BIM can make adoption harder, particularly when a detailed standards presentation loses people before the practical value is clear. Establish a shared understanding of information management and start gradually, so people can understand the change they are being asked to make.

Don't do too much at one time.

William Baker-Jones

Watch the full Episode or explore Babcock's data-assurance story.