‘The organisations that succeed treat data as their most valuable asset.’
How can construction data remain reliably usable across tools, teams, and time? According to Antonio Canciulli of ACCA Software, the answer lies in openBIM. The future of the industry depends less on which software prevails, and more on who owns the data — and whether we can trust it.
Many construction projects today rely on software solutions from a range of different vendors. Yet information is still frequently lost, and workflows remain fragmented. What needs to happen to enable project stakeholders to collaborate effectively, regardless of the software they use?
The problem has never been a lack of software, but rather that data remains trapped within it. Fragmentation is not a tool problem, but an ownership problem. The unrealistic assumption is: “Everyone should use the same platform.” That will never happen -and it shouldn’t. The realistic answer is data neutrality: open exchange formats (IFC, BCF, IDS) plus a shared environment where everyone works with the same, up-to-date information, regardless of their preferred authoring tool. The true test of interoperability is simple: Can you switch at any time? If your data is held hostage by a single vendor, you don’t have collaboration – you have dependency. This conviction leads us not to fight the tools that people already value, but to open them up: Our approach even allows a proprietary authoring tool to participate fully in an openBIM workflow. Collaboration happens when professionals stop defending their software and start owning their data.
IFC is widely regarded as the key standard for the open exchange of BIM data. How well does this work in real-world projects today, and where do the biggest challenges still lie?
IFC works — and it works far better than its critics admit. For coordination, federation, clash detection, and above all long-term access to data independent of any vendor, it’s proven at scale every day. The challenges are less about the format and more about how we use it. First: An IFC file is only as good as the requirements behind it, so “garbage in, garbage out” is a real risk. The answer isn’t to abandon IFC — it’s to specify and validate. This is exactly why IDS (Information Delivery Specification) and automated data-quality checking matter so much: they turn “we exported an IFC” into “we delivered verifiable data.” Second: Infrastructure has lagged behind building construction for years—a gap that IFC 4.3 now closes. And third: Non-destructive editing and round-tripping have historically been the weak points—and that is exactly what IFC 5 (IFCX) aims to remedy with its USD foundation by enabling real-time collaborative editing. The biggest challenge in a nutshell: Stop treating IFC as an export format and start treating it as a contract.
Large construction projects generate thousands of models, drawings, documents, and revisions. How can we prevent a Common Data Environment from becoming just another massive data repository, and how can it instead become a truly reliable, shared source of information for all project stakeholders?
A CDE is not a hard drive—the moment you treat it as such, it becomes a data graveyard. The difference between a storage repository and a reliable source of information is governance. Three things make the difference. First: defined information status—information must be clearly labeled as “in progress,” “shared,” “published,” or “archived,” as specified by ISO 19650. Only then will all stakeholders know the status of a piece of information and how reliable it is. Second: validation steps—information should be verified before it is released, so that “published” truly means trustworthy and not merely “uploaded.” Third: linking and traceability—documents should be linked to the model objects they describe. In addition, comprehensive version control and an audit trail are required. This ensures that data is not merely stored but remains discoverable, verifiable, and retrievable. When these three requirements are met, a CDE ceases to be a place where files die and becomes the single reliable reference that the entire team actually uses. AI is also increasingly helping in this regard by making the right information visible at the right moment. But technology alone does not solve the problem: a data graveyard emerges when you digitize only the storage but not the surrounding process.
Digital twins are intended to connect buildings and infrastructure with up-to-date data from the real world. What roles do BIM, GIS and IoT play in this, and at what point does a static model actually become a functioning digital twin?
Put simply: BIM is the ‘what’, GIS is the ‘where’, and IoT is the ‘now’. BIM provides the object and its structured information. GIS locates this object within its territorial and ecological context, which is indispensable as soon as you move from individual buildings to infrastructure, sites or an entire city. The IoT gives the model a pulse by feeding back real-time data from sensors. A model doesn’t become a digital twin simply because it looks photorealistic; rather, it becomes one when it closes the loop by capturing reality, updating itself and providing a basis for decision-making. That decision then feeds back into the real-world asset. The threshold is not geometric detail, but the feedback loop. We see this in practice in our work on geographic digital twins with Esri. There, openBIM IFC models and ArcGIS data are linked bidirectionally. In the case of the City of Rome’s digital twin, for example, over a hundred measures are coordinated within a single 3D environment. A static model shows how something was planned. A functioning twin shows how it is behaving right now and helps you decide what to do next.
Artificial intelligence is becoming increasingly prevalent in architecture and construction. In which specific areas of design and BIM processes is AI already delivering tangible value today, and how can we ensure that its outputs remain transparent, verifiable and professionally accountable?
The added value of AI is evident today, primarily in less spectacular areas — and that is precisely its advantage. It’s not about ‘AI designing the building’. It is far more relevant when it checks a model against requirements, validates data quality, enriches classifications and quantities, accelerates documentation and drawing preparation, and suggests initial variants that a professional then refines. In planning, we’re exploring the use of AI as a true co-designer for the early concept phase. As far as responsibility is concerned, my position is clear: AI is an assistant to a responsible expert, not a replacement for them. Ultimately, a human signs off on the plans, and a black box cannot be held liable. To ensure that AI remains transparent and verifiable, it must be based on open, structured and verifiable data rather than opaque inputs. This is no coincidence — it’s yet another argument in favour of openBIM. If the underlying data is verifiable, so are the AI’s conclusions. The AI must disclose its work, the professional must remain in the loop, and the standards must provide the foundation for this.
Looking five years ahead, what is your vision for the exchange and use of BIM data? How will project stakeholders share, access and work with information in the future?
In five years, I expect the industry to be more organised around data and objectives, and less around individual tools. In my view, this will be the most significant change. We’ll talk less and less about which files we’re sending to whom, or which software someone can use. Instead, project participants will access a shared, constantly updated source of information. Increasingly, it will be AI that puts the work steps together for us. We will specify the goal for the AI, which will be able to use open interfaces to call upon specific functions from software solutions that we might not know about or be able to use ourselves, such as processing tasks from one application, checks from another and calculations from a third. This means that functions from different providers can be combined to accomplish a specific task. We’re already seeing protocols like MCP emerge which are becoming a kind of common language between AI and external applications. This isn’t just a theoretical topic for us: we’ll be presenting the integration of MCP into our solutions at the buildingSMART International Summit in Tokyo, with which we’re entering the awards competition.
So, does this mean that specific software is becoming less important, and that open data and interoperable processes are becoming the decisive factors?
Exactly. The specific technology will matter less and less compared to the principle behind it. Experts focus on the result; tools become interchangeable commodities in the background. However, this only works under one condition: the data must be open and interoperable. AI can only orchestrate services from different providers if those services speak a common language, and open standards ensure this. This is where the threads of our conversation today come together: The more open the data, the more AI can build on it and the less important it is which software you’re currently using. The model does not end with handover, though: It lives on in operation as a digital twin, accessible to everyone via a browser with free access. It is not the organisations with the most software that will succeed, but those that treat their data as their true asset. At BIM World Munich, we will demonstrate exactly that.
Antonio Cianciulli
In his role as Chief Marketing Officer and Deputy CEO, Antonio Cianciulli has driven the strategic development and innovation of ACCA Software S.p.A. for over three decades. He is responsible for the company’s global marketing, communications and business development strategies, focusing particularly on the digital transformation of the architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) industry.
A long-standing proponent of openBIM® and digital technologies for the built environment, he is dedicated to developing solutions based on BIM, GIS, IoT, facility management, virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR). Through this work, he is making a significant contribution to the development of innovative products for the design, construction, and management of buildings and infrastructure.
He believes that technological innovation is crucial in making the construction industry more efficient, sustainable, and collaborative worldwide.
ACCA software
Headquartered in Bagnoli Irpino, Italy, ACCA software has been developing digital solutions for the entire lifecycle of construction projects — from planning and cost estimation to safety, construction site management, and the subsequent operation of buildings and infrastructure — since 1989. Within the BIM ecosystem, ACCA has established a particularly strong position through openBIM® and open standards, offering the world’s largest selection of IFC-certified software solutions. At the heart of this is usBIM, a cloud-based Common Data Environment (CDE) certified by buildingSMART International as an IFC-CDE. ACCA therefore considers itself to be not only a software provider, but also an active contributor to the development of interoperable BIM processes, for example in the context of IFC 4.3 for infrastructure and future IFC developments. The goal is for BIM data to remain usable across different systems and for project participants to be able to collaborate independently of proprietary, siloed solutions.