Architectural Engineering and Design Management

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/taem20

Impact of BIM implementation on architectural

practice

Artur Jasiński

To cite this article: Artur Jasiński (2020): Impact of BIM implementation on architectural practice,
Architectural Engineering and Design Management, DOI: 10.1080/17452007.2020.1854651

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2020.1854651

Published online: 22 Dec 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 364

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=taem20
ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT
https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2020.1854651

Impact of BIM implementation on architectural practice

Artur Jasiński
Faculty of Architecture and Fine Arts, Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Kraków University, Krakow, Poland

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

This paper discuss problems and results of BIM implementation in Received 11 February 2020
medium-size architectural practice upon 10-year time frame. The author Accepted 19 November 2020
analyses the process of BIM implementation from the practical and the
KEYWORDS
theoretical point of view. The case study observations have been Practice management;
confronted with literature of the subject. Findings proved that practical building information
benefits of using BIM technology in architectural practice are modelling; BIM
undisputed but many clients do not yet recognise the benefits of using implementation; culture of
BIM in the design/construction/operation process, and so refuse to bear profession
the related costs. Therefore, BIM developmental and operational costs
are not equally distributed among interested parties: architectural
practices must bear the majority of the costs and risks related to
implementing BIM technology. Moreover, architectural practice must
overcome three basic BIM barriers: human, infrastructural and business.

Introduction
Contemporary architectural practice is under market pressure to provide value for money: fast and
efficient services in the form of reliable, sustainable and budget-oriented design. This has propelled
the worldwide adoption of Building Information Modelling (BIM) technology, which is transforming
the paradigm of the architectural profession from 2D drawing-based information systems to 3D
object-based information systems (Arayici et al., 2011; Klaschka, 2014). It is believed that ‘under-
standing the technology of computing is just as important as understanding the technology of con-
struction in allowing architects to design and manage complex projects’ (Holden, Pasquarelli,
Sharples, Sharples, & Sharples, 2012, p. 387). BIM seems to be the perfect tool to achieve this
goal. However, implementing BIM technology is a complicated and challenging process, due to
human, infrastructural and business drivers and barriers (Deutsch, 2011).

The goal and objectives of the study

The purpose of this paper is to define the impact of BIM introduction on architectural practice. Many
authors list various benefits of BIM implementation, particularly for architectural practice; however
some also notice serious challenges, legal pitfalls and related risks (see Celanto, 2007; Deutsch,
2011). Miettinen and Paavola (2014, p. 84) defined the rhetorical-promotional dimension of BIM
implementation as a ‘BIM utopia’ and called for a more realistic view of the conditions related to
its implementation. The goal of the study is to show the impact of BIM implementation from practical
point of view, based upon real-life results, observations and statistical data. The case study – the
seven year long process of BIM implementation in medium sized architectural practice based in
Poland was evaluated over a longer, ten year period in order to provide a broader picture of the

CONTACT Artur Jasiński a.jasinski@ajbiuro.pl Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Krakow University, Faculty of Architecture and
Fine Arts, ul. Gustawa Herlinga Grudzińskiego 1, Krakow 30-705, Poland
© 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 A. JASIŃSKI

practice before and after BIM introduction. Human, technology and business factors were considered
and evaluated, as well as financial factors: costs of software and hardware, annual income and profits
in period 2010–2020. Visualisations of data was produced. The case study observations have been
confronted with literature of the subject. Findings show that the practical benefits of using BIM tech-
nology in architectural practice are undisputed. The introduction of BIM improve the quality of the
design, clash control functions and coordination, but did not result in sudden growth of turnover or
profit. On the contrary, it raised the running costs, reduced profits and increased liability.

The process of BIM implementation: challenges, opportunities and benefits

The first revolution in computer-aided design (CAD) in Poland took place at the beginning of the 90-
ties, simultaneously with the change of economy system form socialist to market-oriented. Young
and progressive architects invested in software, hardware and training of employees. The gambit
paid off quickly, and within a few years a generational shift occurred in Poland: older architects
who failed to modernise in time their workshop and change their mindset perished (Jasiński,
2012, p. 244). Numerous private firms were established in Poland in the 1990s, primarily founded
by relatively young architects, who since then dominated the design service market and are now
the largest and most well-regarded in the country. Since several years we observe the second revo-
lution in CAD: fast development of BIM technology Figure 1.
In the source literature a whole array of benefits for BIM implementation is presented (see
Deutsch, 2011, pp. 13–16; Sacks et al., 2018, pp. 20–27). Most of these benefits are of a business,
market-oriented nature, including decreased project costs, increased productivity and quality, and
reduced project delivery time (Azhar, 2011, pp. 244–249). According to Przybyłowicz (2019, p. 67),
ArchiCAD BIM manager from Poland, the implementation of BIM brings the following advantages:

(a) Well organised and fully coordinated design documents, due to a properly prepared BIM model
– a basic argument for architectural practices using 2D software.
(b) Improved quality of design due to interference checking and clash control detection.
(c) BIM models may be used for communication with clients and for the preparation of marketing
materials.
(d) Quantity surveys based on BIM models are faster and more precise, cost estimations more accu-
rate and achieved earlier.
(e) Construction processes supported by the BIM model can be much more effectively planned,
organised and visualised.

Figure 1. CAD versus BIM adoption chart. BIM has been adopted twice as quickly as CAD. After (Deutsch, 2011, p. 4).
 ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT 3

(f) As-built documents can be obtained easier.

(g) BIM models can be also used for facility management.

However, from the practical point of view of the architectural office management the process of
BIM implementation is difficult and complicated. Here are the observations made during seven years
long process of BIM introduction. In 2013 the case-study architectural practice won a competition to
design a huge office building in Krakow, one being developed by Skanska, a leading commercial
property developer in Poland. According to the brief the design had to be done using BIM technol-
ogy, and a special communication platform (Conject) was provided by the Client to monitor project
development and exchange data. This forced the practice to modernise the office and implement
BIM software. In terms of workflow and cashflow continuity, it was decided to implement BIM in
stages, and to begin by applying it to a Skanska project on which several of architects were
working. However, the training applied to everybody, as the long-term goal was to completely
change the working style and implement BIM software as the practice baseline tool. It was
decided to hire ARUP as a subcontractor (MEP consultant), despite the relatively high (much
higher than local companies) fees. Fortunately one of the practice architects was a BIM technology
enthusiast and, despite young age, possessed in-depth knowledge of the BIM Revit software, which
enabled to nominate him for the position of BIM Manager, and entrusting him with supervising role
over the BIM implementation process and helping other employees to learn the software over the
course of the project.
Under those circumstances implementing BIM offered the practice a range of benefits: a solid
budget, long-term projects involvement (including architect’s supervision and fit-out projects)
and securing of the financial side of the operation; secondly, the process took place in a robust
business environment where both the client and the main consultant were proficient in using
BIM, ensuring the effective transfer of standards and know-how; thirdly, no doubts as to which soft-
ware to choose (ArchiCAD, Revit or Allplan) as BIM Revit was required by the client and the one used
by ARUP, while the practice had already used the 2D software provided by Autodesk for many years.
In this case, the practice skipped the first phase of BIM implementation, which occurs when an archi-
tectural firm implements BIM software on its own, without working with consultants – Level 1, also
called ‘Alone BIM’. The practice incorporated the Integrated Design (Deutsch, 2011, p. xviii) and Inte-
grated Project Delivery processes (Sacks et al., pp. 7–9). This enables to quickly overcome the two
fundamental hindrances which prevent BIM from being implemented in architectural firms: the tech-
nological and the business barriers Figure 2.

Figure 2. Triangle of BIM implementation drivers and barriers, based on (Deutsch p. xvi).
4 A. JASIŃSKI

From the practice perspective, the most difficult barrier to overcome in the process of implement-
ing BIM was the human one. Two negative factors have been expected: the inevitable drop in pro-
ductivity caused by the use of new tools and new methods, as well as the reactions of our most
valuable architects, project leaders, who would have to move away from well-known AutoCAD soft-
ware, learn a new programme and adapt to a new working environment. There have been concerns
whether the change would be permanent or – in line with Le Chatelier’s principle ‘the System always
kicks back’ – project leaders would return to their old habits and tools after the Skanska project was
complete. The beginnings were difficult – especially as the courses taught by the BIM Revit vendor
were ineffective. The most efficient method of learning, during the implementation process, proved
to be ‘learning by doing’ under the supervision of a BIM Manager.
The decision to pursue a top-down strategy of BIM adoption on a project-by-project basis proved
to be effective. Since 2016, all projects which move past the conceptual phase have been carried out
using BIM software, some still as BIM Alone (BIM Level 1), some in an informal partnership with MEP
consultants (BIM Level 2) and some using Integrated Project Delivery, as defined in their respective
contracts (BIM Level 3). For definition of BIM Levels: see (Holzer, 2016, p. 15).
The staffing policy has also changed. Since 2013, it has been a requirement for potential new hires
to have a good knowledge of BIM software. Fortunately, most of key senior, licensed architects suc-
cessfully adopted BIM, thus enabling the practice to avoid replacing the entire staff, with over 50% of
pre-BIM employees still remaining on board. Out of twelve pre-BIM staff seven are still with the prac-
tice. Apart from typical higher rotation of younger staff only two senior designers left the office since
BIM introduction (Figure 3).
In addition to continuous staff learning, software, hardware and communication infrastructure
have been modernised and the number of BIM seats (Figure 4) increased. Also, the storage capacity
of central server and the speed of our Internet connections have been improved. In 2019, dedicated
BIM server and a high speed optical fibre telecommunication network (200/200 Mbit/sec) was
launched. Evaluation of software and hardware expenses shows sudden peak in 2013, when the
practice introduced BIM and bought first four BIM Revit seats, and indicates continuous increase
of computer related costs after 2013. The second peak was in 2019, when extra BIM Revit Server
and more seats were bought. The average annual pre-BIM hardware and software costs were
49,012 PLN net, while average annual post-BIM hardware and software costs were 79,026 PLN
net. Increase of pre- and post-BIM costs was around 60% (Figure 5).
The market tendency indicates that an increasing number of large projects carried out by com-
mercial developers in Poland are required to utilise BIM technology. Moreover, some public sector
clients are starting to demand the implementation of BIM in their projects. Work is currently under-
way at the government level to implement provisions requiring all public contract designs to utilise
BIM, though part of the ACO sector is still resisting their adoption (Agner, Lisowski, Piwkowski, &

Figure 3. Number and rotation of staff since 2010.

 ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT 5

Figure 4. Number of AutoCAD and BIM Revit seats since 2010.

Wierzowiecki, 2015; Miecznikowski, 2016). In addition, not all owners are convinced of the usefulness
of BIM or accept the additional design costs.
The diagram of the practice annual income show fluctuations from 2.1 mill. do 5.20 mill. PLN
(Figure 6). The 10-years average annual income was about 3.4 mill. PLN. Two doldrums can be
observed: the first one in 2013 could be caused by the drop in speed and efficiency of workflow
after BIM introduction. Next drop in 2017/2018 was more of business nature, caused by unexpected
decisions of clients who decided to put on hold two major projects. Since the practice is doing only
large projects and only few of them at the given time, those decisions caused lack of workload, pro-
blems with the cashflow, and substantial drop in annual income. However, on the diagram can be
also seen continuous rising value of BIM supported projects. Since 2016 most of income has been
generated by BIM supported projects.
Concurrently the significant drop in profit can be observed since BIM introduction (Figure 7). The
average Pre-BIM annual profit was 42,842 PLN, while post-BIM annual profit went down to 13,582
PLN, which is 68% drop (!). However it has to be admitted that the main reason of loses in the
period 2017-2018 was caused by the business conditions (drop of workflow and income), factor irre-
spective of BIM implementation. 2019 was very good, and profit jumped to over 340,000 PLN (!),
lifting post-BIM average profit to the level of 55,000 PLN.

Figure 5. Annual cost of software and hardware since 2010.

6 A. JASIŃSKI

Figure 6. Annual income since 2010 divided into CAD and BIM supported projects.

Between 2013 and 2019 the practice began working on 13 major projects for new office, public
administration and housing buildings (Table 1). Out of these, only three projects required by the con-
tract to use BIM at the design stage, and only in one case the client agreed to increase the project fee
for using BIM. For the other projects, the clients were either uninterested or refused to bear the
additional costs. In such cases, the decision whether to utilise BIM in a given project was the prero-
gative of the project leader. Those architects who had become proficient in using BIM Revit did not
return to AutoCAD, while those less advanced continued to use it. This was a transitional phase, that
lasted several years, but now all projects are carried out using BIM technology. So now, from time to
time, the practice has to compete at the project procurement stage with architects who do not use
BIM, and who’s services therefore are cheaper. For example: in 2016 the Polish Air Force Academy
announced a tender to design a dormitory for 500 students. The design was to be based on BIM tech-
nology and the BEP specifications included in the brief were quite high. The bid, prepared together
with ARUP, was calculated at 1,361,000 PLN. This was the only one bid placed in tender (!), unfortu-
nately, the tender was invalidated, because the practice BIM-based offer exceeded the design fee
budget provided by the client. Soon a new tender was announced, this time without BIM. All five
offers were much lower: ranging from 637,000 PLN to 947,000 PLN. The difference between the

Figure 7. Annual profit since 2010.

Table 1. Breakdown of major projects begun in years 2013-2019, after implementation of BIM.
Project Project Size Technology type and Delivery Client position toward
NO. symbol Project type year (NLA) level metod * BIM Certificate Status
1 RMG OFFICE 2013– 20 BIM LEVEL 3 IPD contract demanded LEED PLATINIUM COMPLETED
2014 000 m²
2 AKR OFFICE 2014– 9 700 m² CAD PM none LEED GOLD
2016
3 NSS PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 2015– 8 500 m² CAD D&B none
2016
4 ALF RESIDENTIAL 2014– 28 BIM LEVEL 1 PM none
2017 000 m²
5 COM OFFICE 2014– 15 CAD DBB refused to pay for BIM BREEAM VERY GOOD
2015 200 m²
6 WDW OFFICE 2015– 5 400 m² CAD DBB none
2016
7 CIE RETROFIT: INDUSTRIAL INTO 2015– 5 000 m² CAD DBB none
OFFICE 2017
8 LUB OFFICE 2016– 600 m² BIM LEVEL 1 PM none
2018
9 AFI OFFICE 2017– 24 BIM LEVEL 1 D&B contract demanded BREEAM OUTSTANDING
2019 700 m²
10 RZZ OFFICE 2018 14 BIM LEVEL 1 PM refused to pay for BIM IN
000 m² PROGRESS
11 WOT OFFICE 2018 11 BIM LEVEL 2 DBB contract demanded BREEAM EXCELLENT
400 m²
12 CYS OFFICE 2018 13 BIM LEVEL 3 DBB agreed to pay more for
750 m² BIM
13 APO OFFICE 2019 45 000 BIM LEVEL 3 IPD contract demanded LEED PLATINIUM
m² WELLGOOD
*Delivery method: D&B - design & build; DBB - design, bid, build; PM - project management; IPD - integrated project delivery.
ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT
7
8 A. JASIŃSKI

lowest non-BIM offer (which was awarded the commission) to the practice previous BIM based offer
was over 100%!

Discussion
Stefan Kuryłowicz, the mentor of several generations of Polish architects, pointed out that ‘the rules
of our practice, the conditions under which it is exercised and the demands that we need to face,
change very quickly in today’s world. […] Probably never in history have these changes been so
dynamic,’ (Kuryłowicz, 2010, p. 25). Thom Mayne, leader of the US architectural firm, Morphosis, at
the AIA Convention on Building Information Modelling held in 2005 went further and boldly
declared ‘if you want to survive, you are going to have to change. If you don’t change, you are
going to perish. Simple as that’ (Mayne, 2005).
The case study findings shows that implementing BIM changes the way the practice operate and
necessitates the hiring highly qualified architects, designers and consultants. The professional
environment changes and a staff rotation occurs – though not as large as it had been feared. Improv-
ing staff qualifications results in their better market position, thus necessitating an increase in their
remuneration, while some employees in whom the practice have invested time and money to train
BIM decided to leave the company, either in search of better pay or less demanding working con-
ditions. The need to invest in training, hardware and software leads to much higher operating costs.
The productivity and cost benefits of BIM in the design process are hard to quantify, depending to
a great extent on business factors and the proficiency of the operators, but generally speaking a BIM
based projects are more skill-demanding and time-consuming. This argument is supported by Lu
et al. on the case study of two public rental housing projects in Hong Kong, one with BIM
implemented, and one without. The effort input at the design stage for the BIM project was
45.93% higher than for the non-BIM project. At the construction stage, however, the cost of the
BIM project was lower, contributing to substantial cost savings for the total project (13 Lu, Fung,
Peng, Liang, & Rowlinson, 2014, p. 326).
In Poland evolving construction-market conditions are observed. While BIM technology gives
access to large-scale projects, higher rates for the architects using BIM are not yet commonly
accepted. Moreover, the owners, developers and contractors remain rarely involved in BIM model
development and data implementation, instead they are typically using the BIM model produced
by the designers in a passive way. Updating of the model – still done by architects – continues
through – and sometimes even after – the construction phase, often to produce as-built documen-
tation. However, the promise of using BIM throughout the whole building lifecycle is still a dream,
one far from being realised [noted also by Miettinen & Paavola, 2014, p. 85]
According to the case study experience, implementing BIM technology at the design stage gives
stakeholders different and diverse benefits:

(a) Implementing BIM in an architectural firm offers a number of major and measurable benefits for
clients and contractors, helping to:
. achieve precise, optimal design valuations;
. ensure a smooth and clash-free construction phase;
. reduce and optimise construction costs.
(b) Implementing BIM in an architectural firm also offers benefits for architect-employees by:
. improving their skill level, hence strengthening their position on the job market;
. increasing their rates.

However, it should be noted that BIM technology implementation places senior architects in a
difficult position: in order to compete with the younger generation of architects they have to
change their habits, replacing their 2D mindset with new 3D skills and abilities.
 ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT 9

(a) Implementing BIM in a large or medium-sized architectural firm offers concrete benefits as well
as measurable problems and risks:
. strengthens the company’s market position and gives access to large-scale projects, poten-
tially more prestigious or profitable ones;
. simplifies project control and cross-trade coordination, increases documentation quality and
drives down the number of errors;
. requires the hiring of more highly qualified employees, increasing labour costs;
. generates higher investment and operating costs.

Higher investments and operating costs result in drop of profit and reduced liquid assets, which in
turn increases the risk of losing solvency if there are no projects to work on or if work on them has
been halted. This risk is of particular importance to a large and medium-sized architectural firms,
which cannot transform its activities overnight, stop paying fees or taxes, or hold operations – some-
thing which is significantly easier for microenterprises and sole practitioners.
BIM implementation breaks the traditional rules and changes the culture of architectural practice.
The linear, sequential model of project development is replaced by a simultaneous, concurrent
model (Deutsch, 2011, pp. 129–135). The traditional hierarchy within the profession, where a
senior architect is a patron to a junior one, is disrupted. Expertise in current developments related
to computer programmes, held by the graduates of schools of architecture, is unravelling the
relationship between experience and wisdom (Cuff, 2000, p. 347). Traditional up-down mentoring
programmes are replaced by mutual reverse mentoring, with mid-career architects needing to rein-
vent themselves to become 3D BIM operators, by replacing their 2D CAD mindset, skills and habits
(Deutsch, 2011, pp. 206–207).
It must be also noted that the by BIM introduction disrupts the traditional, adversarial relationship
between the participants in the investment process, i.e. the architect, contractor and client (Azhar,
2011, p. 242). As Ove Arup once observed:
The construction industry is more like a battleground for sectional interest than a meeting place for combined
effort to find the best solution […], one cannot but help indulge in Utopian dreams of all the creative forces in
the industry combining in a single unselfish effort to build a better environment. But they must be given more
power, and we must make up our minds about what we want. This technology cannot do it. (Arup, 2012, pp.
131–132)

In the BIM supported Integrated Project Delivery process, all parties should cooperate, guided by
mutual trust and information sharing, together forming a new culture of partnership (Deutsch,
2011, p. 128) (Figure 8). However, in this process, the position of the architect is constrained in
favour of other stakeholders, who can effectively influence the project, starting from the earlier

Figure 8. Successful BIM implementation: three drivers of change overlap, and traditional adversarial relationship between main
stakeholders is changed into close cooperation. After (Deutsch, 2011, p.xvii).
10 A. JASIŃSKI

stages. Moreover, the immeasurable, ideal and aesthetic foundations of the projects, the values tra-
ditionally professed by architects, give way to measurable, economy-related, market-oriented values
professed by other parties involved.
Clients working on the largest projects in Poland usually demand that their design documen-
tation be created using BIM technology, and sometimes require Integrated Project Delivery. This
is why BIM implementation is necessary for large and medium sized architectural firms in order to
operate in Poland. The required level of accuracy of a BIM model varies, and sometimes clients
who do not use BIM themselves demand that the model be created with maximum accuracy in
all its aspects. This increases the workload designers have to deal with. Requests for BIM over-mod-
elling, complicated indemnities, taking responsibility for continuous updating the model and ensur-
ing its accuracy, entails a great deal of labour and risk for the architect (Azhar, 2011, p. 250). However,
the distribution of the benefits resulting from adopting BIM varies for clients, architects-employees
and architects-principals. This phenomenon has already been described:
The power of BIM is well documented, and its software will continue to improve. However, full BIM modelling for
singular enterprises is ultimately not beneficial for architects, since the time (and thus cost) required for such a
complex endeavour is much higher than normal one-off design services. The development of a full BIM model is
almost as complex as physically creating the actual object and one that makes economic sense only in mass-
production/customization contexts. It is possible that one could be paid very handsomely for singular full
BIM modelling – but this seems unlikely. (Celanto, 2007)

Conclusions
For large and medium-sized architectural firms operating in Poland, implementing BIM is now a
necessity forced by the market. The practical benefits of using BIM technology in architectural prac-
tice are undisputed, as is the higher level of the control and cross-trade project coordination. The
clash control function decreases – although it does not fully eliminate – the risk of clashes occurring
during the construction process and the related conflicts and costs. BIM implementation breaks the
traditional rules and changes the culture of architectural practice. Traditional up-down mentoring
programmes are replaced by mutual reverse mentoring. However, BIM implementation raises
human and operating costs, and as a result reduce profitability. The necessary additional costs
related to training, hardware and software also reduce the liquid assets, which has a negative
effect on a company’s resilience to crisis situations.
The construction industry in Poland is currently undergoing a digital transformation, however,
apart from the main stakeholders, many clients do not yet recognise the benefits of using BIM tech-
nology in the design/construction/operation process, and so refuse to bear the related additional
costs. Therefore, BIM developmental and operational costs are not equally distributed. On the
other hand clients/owners do not want to share the profits with designers. As of yet, the market
does not adequately reward architectural firms that use BIM software, so those practices using
BIM must compete on the design market with companies still utilising less expensive CAD software.
This is why architectural practices must now bear the majority of the costs and risks related to imple-
menting BIM.
The outbreak of corona-virus Covid-19 and necessity of introduction personal distancing
measures brought additional and unexpected virtue of BIM technology, which proved to be very
effective tool in the new, on-line working environment. The possibility of remote use of BIM technol-
ogy seems to significantly reduce the hazard of contamination and helps to manage architectural
practice in pandemic situation. Those subjects therefore will be area of further studies.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
 ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN MANAGEMENT 11

ORCID
Artur Jasiński http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5285-8143

References
Agner, A., Lisowski, B., Piwkowski, W., & Wierzowiecki, P. (2015). ‘Ogólne założenia procesu wdrażania BIM w realizacji
zamówień publicznych na roboty w Polsce’ (General assumptions of the BIM implementation process in the procure-
ment of public building works in Poland). Przegląd Budowlany, 10, 6–9.
Arayici, Y., Coates, P., Koskela, L. J., Kagioglu, M., Usher, C., & O’Reilly, K. (2011). BIM implementation and adoption process
for Architectural Practice. Manchester: University of Salford. Retrieved June 30, 2019, from https://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/
eprint/20928/2/BIM_implementation_for_architectural_practice_FIATECH.pdf
Arup, O. (2012). Philosophy of Design. Munich: Prestel.
Azhar, S. (2011). Building Information Modeling (BIM): Trends, benefits, risks, and challenges for the AEC industry.
Leadership and Management in Engineering, 11(3), 241–252. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/full/10.1061/%28ASCE%
29LM.1943-5630.0000127.
Celanto, D. (2007). Innovate or Perish: new technologies and architecture’s future. Harvard Design Magazine, 26.
Retrieved July 13, 2019, from http://www.harvarddesignmagazine.org/issues/26/innovate-or-perish-new-
technologies-and-architectures-future.
Cuff, D. (2000). Epilogue. In S. Kostof (Ed.), Architect chapters in the history of the profession (pp. 347–358). Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Deutsch, R. (2011). BIM and integrated design strategies for architectural practice. N J: Hoboken: AIA & John Wiley & Sons.
Holden, K. J., Pasquarelli, G., Sharples, C., Sharples, C., & Sharples, W. (2012). SHoP out of practice. Monacelli Press.
Holzer, D. (2016). The BIM manager handbook. guidance for professionals in architecture, engineering, and construction.
Chichester: Wiley & Sons.
Jasiński, A. (2012). Akademicka Pracownia Architektury SSP “Żaczek” w Krakowie: Business incubator of architectural
practices in Kraków. Space and Form, 17, 227–246. ISSN 1895-3247.
Klaschka, R. (2014). BIM in small practices illustrated case studies. Newcastle upon Tyne: NBS.
Kuryłowicz, S. (2010). Designer in Poland in the year 2000 duties and possibilities. In E. Czyżewska, & A. Czyżewski (Eds.),
Passion & pragmatism man-architecture-freedom (pp. 23–27). Trygon Publisher.
Lu, W., Fung, A., Peng, Y., Liang, C., & Rowlinson, S. (2014). Cost-benefit analysis of building information modeling
implementation in building projects through demystification of time-effort distribution curves. Building and
Environment, 82, 317–327. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2014.08.030.
Mayne, T. (2005). Change or perish. Report on integrated practice, Remarks on building information modelling at the 2005
AIA Convention, Las Vegas. Retrieved July 12, 2019, from http://www.arch.ttu.edu/people/faculty/Neiman_B/files/
Mayneonpractice.pdf.
Miecznikowski, P. (2016). ‘Stosowania BIM w przygotowaniu i realizacji inwestycji publicznych’ (Application of BIM in the
preparation and implementation of public investments). Materiały Budowlane, 1(521), 63–64. ISSN 0137-2971.
Miettinen, R., & Paavola, S. (2014). Beyond the BIM Utopia: Approaches to the development and implementation of
building information modelling. Automation in Construction, 43, 84–91. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2014.03.009.
Przybyłowicz, P. (2019). ‘BIM w pracowni architektonicznej’ (BIM in the architectural practice). Zawód Architekt, 5-6(67),
62–64.
Sacks, R., Eastman, C., Lee, G., & Teicholz, P. (2018). BIM handbook a guide to building information modelling for owners,
designers, engineers, contractors, and facility managers. John Wiley & Sons.