It's time to consolidate Docs + Design Collaboration + Model Coordination

[Chad-Smith]

Individually as a evolving products, Docs, Design Collaboration, and Model Coordination are fine. While not perfect, they contain numerous features we require to achieve the desired results with authored design models.

But their individuality and UI fragmentation on the platform is also their greatest weakness and cause of confusion to users.

Here are some points for consideration.

• Each module is interfacing with the same model that is stored in Docs.
• Design Collaboration and Model Coordination are UIs that purely facilitate model workflows.
• This is actually no different to Reviews and Issues found in Docs.

Therefore, since Design Collaboration and Model Coordination purely facilitate workflows, like Reviews and Issues, then why are these features not integrated more closely into the Docs UI? Workflows should not be considered additional modules. They are a fundamental part of day to day work with the models.

Furthermore, with Design Collaboration being an extended UI of the Docs folders/files, it causes great confusion between users who are not not delivering complex models via Docs, and those who are delivery complex models via Design Collaboration. Design Collaboration ends up being an incomplete picture of model distribution across the entire delivery team.

This is due to those delivering simple models not needing the extra expense of a BIM Collaborate license. This creates inequity on the platform that negatively affects overall project delivery and platform adoption.

This issue remains no better in ACC. While the Build, Takeoff, and Cost Management modules have a Files tab reflecting the entire Docs space, the Design Collaboration and Model Coordination do not. Is there something special about Build, Takeoff, and Cost Management that they get such a feature? This again demonstrates inequity of platform features.

This leads to the final point that if Design Collaboration and Model Coordination were to also receive a Files tabs, then this effectively makes Docs redundant. You could essentially roll Docs, Design Collaboration, and Model Coordination into a single highly-valued module called Design, with Files being a common tab across Design and the other Build modules.

When we see the Build modules constantly growing, it's frustrating to see the design stage remain quite stagnant and fragmented.

It's time to consolidate them together.

This request sits closely alongside my other recent request for a Docs/files redesign to move away from using folders.

[Chad-Smith]

Thought it would be good to pull together the below mock screenshot of how this may look.

At first glance you might think how complex and confusing this could be. And you would be right. It's actually not until you lay it out together like this that you realise how fragmented the current UI/modules are across the design stage. The reality is that they are all required to outline a cohesive argument for their use.

But simply moving all these features to the same module as additional tabs is not the end solution. When bringing them all to the same module there is now much more scope for improving the overall user experience. As I suggested in my original post, it allows the workflow features to finally act as workflows. 

Some additional comments to match the numbering in the image:

1. Home as per current functionality.
2. Issues as per current functionality.
3. This really isn’t required as similar information is found elsewhere, and especially if publishing was faster and more reliable.
4. Changes as per current functionality.
5. Models as per current functionality, but it really wouldn’t be required if Files did a much better job of document management.
6. Clashes as per current functionality.
7. Views not only for coordinated models, but how about in any document? The ability to save and recall a ‘View’ is generally missing from the platform. We need something similar to other platforms, and Navisworks viewpoints.
8. All other Files. This really needs redeveloping to bring it into the modern age of a CDE.
9. There is a peculiar belief at Autodesk that people during the Design stage don’t issue Sheets? So Sheets is included here (from the Build module) so they can be formally issued prior to the Build stage. This is pretty fundamental stuff.
10. And same for Photos. It would be handy to have a photo library for pre-construction purposes.

[Chad-Smith]

In this post I want to drill down a little more on a comment from my original post regarding Design Collaboration.

I think everyone will be familiar with the saying that "a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link".

This is Design Collaboration in a nutshell.

Design Collaboration, in principal, contains a number of excellent features. Especially the graphical nature of the team's swim lanes, packages, and sharing. It just makes sense, and gives a very clear picture of what is happening across those teams.

But when one or more design teams are not licensed for BIM Collaborate/Pro, and instead prefer to simply upload into Document Management and copy files from WIP to Shared, it introduces gaps into the Design Collaboration UI and workflow. When information is missing from the overall picture it instils doubt, which ultimately leads to a reduction in use, and even discontinued use on future projects.

Parties that won't, or financially cannot justify BIM Collaborate/Pro licensing (which I am not judging anyone for) weakens the philosophy behind Design Collaboration, which greatly weakens it's value. When Design Collaboration acts as a 'UI wrapper' for an otherwise manual process in Docs, it can be difficult to justify the licensing cost when the manual process doesn't really take any longer than doing it via Design Collaboration.

This is why Design Collaboration needs to be consolidated into the Document Management module/UI. Design Collaboration as a workflow must be made available to the lowest denominator of the design team. It's juxtaposed between having excellent features and UI, while easily failing due to the weakest link and licensing costs.

[rauburn]

Also - the graphic interface needs an overhaul as well. The icons and terminology is like speaking Klingon to a lot of users. 

And then the cardinal sin of bad UI/UX - the hidden "..." menu. NEVER hide critical UI components from users, people get frustrated when they can't find the tools they need, and a lot of users rely on visual queues to discover what features they can access.

[Chad-Smith]

To add some further evidence of the Autodesk disconnect between what is imagined/marketed vs what the reality is.

In a recent webinar, the below screenshot was shown with the a range of 'Shared Data' across all stages. But the reality is that only 2 of the 10 items are available to the BIM Collaborate Pro users during the 'Design' stage. All other items are siloed to 'Build' users.

[Chad-Smith]

I've created an Idea that expresses my thoughts around Bridge and connected projects that ties in with this idea.

Bridging workflows (not just files) between accounts // Meshed Projects - Autodesk Community

[tawney.vaughan]

for real. how soon can this become reality??? i am very tired of people getting glue confused with docs. we are leaders in cutting edge technology for the construction industry. we are constantly having to train field foreman and old school project managers how to use this software and Autodesk has never made this process seamless or easy. every little new item that they advertise comes with a new set of learning curves. the only reason autodesk is as successful as it is is due to necessity. they are the only company around that can support an ever growing industry. all we are asking for is a little bit of forethought and understanding from a users perspective. we see the possibilities are endless with this software so we end up a little confused when it does not deliver.

we only want autodesk to be the best it can be for all users greater good. ultimately you will still get our money because that is the nature of the beast. please make our money worth it. thank you 🙂

[Chad-Smith]

A related idea.

ACC // 'Model Property Breakdown' - Need it in the design stage, not just for the field - Autodesk C...

[Chad-Smith]

With the recent inclusion of the Model Property Breakdown, Model Coordination Views can now be saved with filtered element visibility control.

i.e. We can effectively create something similar to a Navisworks Clash Detective Test, that more specifically defines which categories/elements to clash. It's an additive process, not subtractive.

This now makes the Model Coordination module practically redundant.

If the MC and DC modules were consolidated:

• The Models tab information (who updated and when) would be replaced by the DC swim lanes info.
• The Clashes tab would be replaced by the new Views filtering feature of Model Property Breakdown.
• Each View could now show the number of clashes, rather than relying on the Clash Matrix. And, it now opens up the ability to track clash status, similar to the Navisworks Clash Detective dashboard.
• The Views tab would include a Create View button, which would then ask which models to include. This addresses the removal of the Models tab.

Moving the Views tab to Design Collaboration does so without really losing any functionality.

[Flies-Eyes]

Just combine the **** lot (Docs - Collaborate - Coordinate - Build) and let's get on with delivering projects.  As it currently stands the ACC is a dog's breakfast and not even close to being a viable industry solution.

[Chad-Smith]

A related idea.

ACC Docs // Integrate Build Sheets - Autodesk Community

[Chad-Smith]

Autodesk, can we please, at the bare minimum, get a Files tab added to Design Collaboration?

With such as strong affinity between DC's models that are stored in Files, it makes perfect sense that this should have already been a feature by now. It makes far more sense than Build having a Files tab.

Surely, this is no more complicated than the flip a switch to make that tab visible.