The Hidden Cost of Undefined Information Requirements

The information problems discovered during operations often begin long before construction starts.

When a major building or infrastructure project goes wrong, the visible costs are usually easy to identify.

• There may be delays.

  
  

• There may be variations.

  
  

• There may be rework.

  
  

• There may be disputes between project participants.

  
  

• But there is another cost that is rarely included in the original project budget:

  
  

• The cost of information that was never clearly defined in the first place.

When Asset Owners do not clearly specify the information they need, consultants and contractors are left to interpret those requirements for themselves.

The consequences may not become apparent until years later.

By then, the project team has moved on, but the Asset Owner and Facilities Management team are left to deal with the consequences.

The Information Gap Begins with a Simple Question

Before a project begins, an Asset Owner should be able to answer:

What information will we need to operate, maintain and manage this asset throughout its lifecycle?

This sounds straightforward.

Yet many projects focus heavily on defining what must be built, while giving considerably less attention to defining what information must be delivered with it.

The result is a fundamental disconnect.

The project team may successfully deliver the physical asset, while the information needed to manage that asset remains incomplete.

When Requirements Are Undefined, Everyone Makes Assumptions

Consider a new university building.

The Asset Owner may expect the final project information to include everything needed by Facilities Management.

The architect may assume the contractor will provide equipment information.

The engineers may provide information within their design models.

The contractor may submit manufacturers' documentation.

The commissioning team may produce test records.

Each party may believe they have fulfilled their responsibility.

Yet when the information is assembled at handover, critical gaps can remain.

Who is responsible for defining the asset identifier?

What information should be recorded for each maintainable asset?

How should locations be named?

Which equipment requires maintenance records?

What information should be linked to spaces?

What information is required for future replacement?

If these questions were never clearly specified, it is difficult to hold anyone accountable for not delivering the answers.

The Cost Appears Later

Undefined information requirements create a problem that is particularly dangerous because the cost is often deferred.

During construction, the project may appear to be progressing successfully.

At handover, thousands of documents may be submitted.

But once the Facilities Management team begins using the information, deficiencies become apparent.

They may have to:

• Rebuild asset registers.

• Inspect equipment to confirm information.

• Search through drawings and manuals.

• Contact consultants and contractors.

• Re-enter information into CAFM systems.

• Correct inconsistent asset identifiers.

• Locate missing warranties.

• Determine which assets require preventive maintenance.

The organisation is now paying for information that should have been delivered as part of the project.

This is the hidden cost.

The Problem Is Not the Consultant or Contractor

It is important to recognise that this is not necessarily a failure by the people producing the information.

Consultants and contractors can only deliver against requirements that have been clearly communicated.

If an Asset Owner has not specified:

• What information is required

• When it is required

• How it should be structured

• What standards should apply

• How quality will be measured

• How compliance will be verified

then different project participants will naturally make different interpretations.

The problem therefore exists upstream of the information producer.

It is an Owner governance issue.

Information Requirements Create Accountability

This is where structured information requirements become important.

The Asset Owner needs to establish what information the organisation requires to support its objectives and asset operations.

Those requirements can then flow through the project.

Organisational Information Requirements (OIR) establish the organisational need.

Asset Information Requirements (AIR) define the information needed to manage the assets.

Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) communicate what must be exchanged during project delivery.

Together, they establish a much clearer chain between:

Business Need → Information Requirement → Project Deliverable → Validation → Operational Use

This changes the conversation from:

"Please provide the project information."

to:

"Here is exactly what information we require, how it must be delivered, and how we will verify it."

Requirements Must Be Verified - Not Just Written

Even clearly defined requirements do not guarantee compliance.

An Asset Owner also needs a mechanism to determine whether the information delivered actually meets those requirements.

This is where BIM Compliance and Data Validation become important.

Models and information can be checked against predefined requirements before acceptance.

For example:

• Are all required assets present?

• Are asset classifications correct?

• Are identifiers unique?

• Are required parameters populated?

• Are locations correctly assigned?

• Does the information conform to the agreed standard?

• Is the information sufficient for operational use?

The objective is not simply to identify errors.

It is to prevent those errors from becoming someone else's problem after handover.

The Real Cost Is Lifecycle Cost

The cost of undefined information requirements should therefore not be measured only against the construction budget.

It should be considered across the entire asset lifecycle.

Undefined Requirements

↓

Inconsistent Project Information

↓

Poor Data Quality

↓

Difficult Handover

↓

Manual Data Reconstruction

↓

Higher Operational Costs

↓

Poorer Asset Decisions

↓

Reduced Asset Value

What appears to be a small omission during planning can become a recurring operational cost over decades.

Asset Owners Have the Opportunity to Change This

The solution does not require Asset Owners to collect every piece of information themselves.

Their responsibility is to define what information matters.

Consultants and contractors remain responsible for producing the required information.

BIM teams can structure and coordinate it.

Validation processes can verify it.

Facilities Management teams can use it.

Asset Managers can use it to support lifecycle decisions.

The Asset Owner provides the direction that connects all of these activities.

Conclusion

A successful project should not be measured only by whether the building, road, hospital, university or water facility was constructed correctly.

It should also be measured by whether the organisation received the information it needs to manage that asset effectively.

The most expensive information problem is often not incorrect information.

It is information that nobody thought to specify.

By defining information requirements early, communicating them clearly, and validating what is delivered, Asset Owners can prevent information gaps from becoming operational problems.

Request a BIM Compliance Readiness Assessment

Because the information required to manage an asset for the next 30 years should not be discovered after the project is complete.

It should be defined before the project begins.

About Dabisa Consulting

At Dabisa Consulting, we help Asset Owners and Infrastructure Authorities define, govern, validate and assure the information required throughout the asset lifecycle - from Information Requirements and BIM Compliance through to Data Validation and Digital Handover.

Better information. Better decisions. Better outcomes.

Next in the Series

Why Facilities Management Starts Before Design Begins