It's not because of the products. It's because plant design and construction still operates in large measure the way it did twenty years ago. Here is a partial list of obstacles to the implementation of state-of-the-art technology in plant design and construction:

• Few companies actually work in 3D. Looking at CAD vendor demos, it is easy to get the impression that the majority of the leading firms do; this is far from the case. Drawings reign, especially post-design. And the benefits of 4D without 3D are very small, relatively.
• The cost of new software and services—and especially the time it takes to train people—are enormous barriers to the plant design and construction firm. There are cost issues—capital vs. expense, and others. But principally, there is an instantiation of Stephen Covey's "Sharpening the saw" problem, the seventh of his "Seven Habits of Highly Successful People": A woodcutter in the forest explains to an observer who notices that the man's saw is dull that he doesn't have time to sharpen it—there's all this wood he has to cut. Project people are too busy getting current projects done, and working on proposals for new ones, to learn new tools.
• For some of the players, there is a challenge that is seldom mentioned: Increasing productivity costs them money. They are paid by the hour, so there is no financial incentive for them to reduce the number of hours for which they charge. Now, professional ethics and industry culture make it impossible to address this subject in polite company. But as an outside observer, I believe it is a factor in the slow adoption of automation in plant design.
• "It may be good for the company, but it's bad for me." You may not hear this one spoken out loud, either, but it is the toughest of all points of resistance. Middle managers, in particular, feel threatened. They look at what the new technologies offer, and can see that some or all of their duties will be obviated—and what will they do then? Better to resist the new technology, until they figure out how to maintain their status beyond it. The only answer to this problem is good planning, showing everyone they do have a role to play in the technology-empowered world.
• Another aspect of "good for the company, bad for me": Technology like sitecams reduces privacy. Suddenly every aspect of the professional's work is visible. Who has the confidence to live under such constant scrutiny?
• Change itself is distressing. The rhythms of the information technology revolution are so much faster than those of the traditional plant design and construction world. IT rhythms are measured in seconds, or fractions of a second. Even the acceptance of the now-ubiquitous fax machine meant that we had to suddenly begin responding instantly to requests for information—because we could. All the flexibility is gone. Is it any wonder that people are upset and resist technology?

The implementation of technology is still an unnatural act in the world of plant design and construction. These professionals tend to think in terms of stuff—people, building materials, drawings, faxes, rain, roads, and right-of-way. So technology becomes just another burden, just another thing to worry about—not the answer to their prayers.

There is no question that, in the long run, everyone will get there; everyone will implement all the new computer-based technologies. But as someone generally points out at this point, in the long run, we're all dead. If your organization is going to benefit from new technologies before you're dead—or before it is—you and it must act proactively.

I believe that the high-leverage answers lie in new organizational structures, rather than in new methods. "The system has its own agenda," notes Peter Senge in The Fifth Discipline. The phrase I have adopted is "structure is destiny." Ultimately, some organizational structures will support the level of flexibility and dynamism required to assimilate and profit from new technologies; most will not.

About the Author
Dr. Joel Orr is Principal Consultant of Orr Associates International, in Chesapeake, VA, and Chief Visionary of Cyon Research Corporation (http://www.cyonresearch.com). In 1997, Bentley Systems named him, "Engineering Laureate."

Watch for my upcoming book: "Structure is Destiny: Organismic Management and The Excellence Principle."

David Clendenen is the Editor of AECVision and Managing Editor of AECCafe.com

Comments? Feedback? Click here to tell us what you think about this topic or if you have additional information you'd like to share on this subject!