Can a workflow be considered BIM without linking, shared coordinates, or copy/monitor in Revit?

[Mr_TripleM]

I’ve read that some BIM professionals do not use architectural model linking, shared coordinates acquisition, or the copy/monitor feature in their Revit discipline models, whether Structural or MEP.

My question is:

If these steps are not performed before starting the modeling, or never applied throughout the project, would that still be considered work under BIM methodology?

And if they are not applied, how could that absence be compensated for the workflow to still be regarded as a valid BIM process for coordination?

[RDAOU · Accepted solution]

@Mr_TripleM 

It depends on the broader workflow and intent of the process. Using BIM authoring tools like Revit without performing key coordination tasks like linking the architectural model, acquiring shared coordinates, or using Copy/Monitor does not automatically disqualify the work from being “BIM” but it may undermine key principles of BIM, especially in collaborative and coordinated environments.

BIM (Building Information Modeling) is not about the software alone, but about:

• Centralizing data in a model-based workflow
• Facilitating coordination between disciplines
• Enabling better decision-making through information-rich models
• Supporting lifecycle use (design, construction, FM)

So even if certain Revit features are not used, the methodology could still be considered BIM if:

• The models are information-rich
• The teams collaborate regularly and transparently
• The design process is model-driven and coordinated, even if manually
• There is a defined process for clash detection, documentation, updates, etc.

If linking/shared coordinates/copy-monitor are skipped, alternatives or compensatory measures must be in place to maintain a BIM-compliant process. For example

• Manual coordination workflows:
  1. Models are exported regularly and aligned manually using origin-to-origin placement
  2. Coordination happens in Navisworks or Solibri with strict clash resolution protocols
  3. Communication is frequent and well-documented in a Common Data Environment (CDE)
• BIM Execution Plan (BEP) clarity:
  1. The BEP (or BxP) clearly defines why those Revit features are not used, and what alternative processes are followed
  2. Roles, responsibilities, file naming, and coordination steps are defined and followed
     
• Robust QA/QC procedures:
  1. Teams check for changes and maintain alignment using visual comparison tools or manual review
  2. Coordination issues are tracked through BCF (BIM Collaboration Format) or issue-tracking platforms

The downside and risks of not using those features would potentially or eventually be the misalignment between models (especially in large/complex projects), more manual effort in coordination; a greater potential for errors in geometry or systems integration and eventually the lost opportunity for automation (e.g., auto-monitoring changes). So I would say “No”, using Revit without architectural linking, shared coordinates, or copy/monitor doesn’t inherently disqualify your work from being part of a BIM process. But yes without compensating workflows, such an approach could deviate from BIM best practices and compromise coordination, which is a core goal of BIM.

If those features are omitted, it’s important that alternative coordination strategies are defined and documented. Project goals and deliverables align with BIM Level of Development (LOD) and standards

Regardless of all that, BIM is all about communication. The Stakeholders, and most importantly the project leads, has to agree on the methodology and implementation.