# Building Information Modelling Facility Management (BIM-FM)
## 4 Current State of BIM-FM  
Currently, the most utilised approach to BIM-FM involves the BIM model being used to generate information about an asset and then the information being transferred to another format or system [11,33]. Generally, this occurs at the handover stage of a construction project using a pre-existing BIM model. Currently, the only officially recognised method for this is the COBie data exchange format [30], which results in a spreadsheet output, meaning the visualisation benefits of BIM are lost [18]. The use of spreadsheets may be due to the apparent skills gap between the people in charge of managing and inspecting assets and BIM practitioners [34,35]. Even when COBie is used, information and models are typically manually updated and input into FM systems from BIM, a time-consuming process prone to human error. To overcome this, an increasingly common approach to BIM-FM is the use of a visual programming software, such as Autodesk's Dynamo [36], which creates a link between the software [37]. The program produced is usually bespoke for a project and is often only unidirectional, so works similarly to COBie. [PERSON] et al. [38] were able to create an automatic data validation and exchange process using Dynamo but stated that \"automatic BIM data retrieval, verification, and transfer to FM requires systematic and robust identification, clarification, and conveyance of the model requirements including syntax, semantics, and geometrics in early stages of the project lifecycle\" [38]. This sentiment is also echoed by [PERSON] et al. and the Global Forum on Maintenance and Asset Management [33,39]. Visual programming was also employed by [PERSON] et al. [40]; however, there does not seem to be any validation of their proposed method by the end users, a common occurrence  
Figure 3: Keyword co-occurrence network visualisation. Created using VOSviewwer [32]. in the existing BIM-FM integration work. This is perhaps due to a current lack of defined 'best practice', meaning consistent quality control is not possible. Furthermore, the validity of just passing on a BIM from the construction stage to FM is questioned by [PERSON] and [PERSON] [7], who found that \"simply 'passing on a model' does not necessarily mean that the model was used or even usable\". Whilst it is true that some works have attempted to use BIM as a live tool for FM [41] or have created new, bespoke BIM-FM platforms [42], these are minimal [43]. [PERSON] et al. [23] likewise identified a critical focus towards activities common to construction with limited investigation of activities unique to FM. Failing to use the BIM itself for FM arguably makes the creation of a new BIM model obsolete for an existing asset. However, the apparent research focus on BIM-FM integration from the construction phase may be attributed to the fact that if a BIM is already being created at the construction stage, the investigation of its transferal to the FM stage requires much less investment both in terms of time and cost than a building with no pre-existing BIM. Figure 4 summarises the two most common instances of BIM-FM outlined in this section. As discussed, the most utilised (current) approach to BIM-FM consists of the information contained in the BIM being transferred to other FM systems in a uni-directional transfer. For the purposes of this paper, a BIM created according to the specifications of ISO 19650 and incorporating information up to the handover stage of an asset lifecycle will be referred to as an AEC-BIM. Whilst this transfer of information from the AEC-BIM helps populate the FM systems with relevant asset information, the visual benefits of BIM are usually lost, and there is rarely a single FM system capable of completing all FM functions, resulting in siloed information. The developing approach (developing) is BIM as a live tool, where there is a bi-directional information transfer between the AEC-BIM and the FM systems.