The way they produce ATP is by becoming self-charging batteries of 180mV which drives all the processes in a cell.. To get back to scale; do we have one of these in each cell?
These include the lack of productisation in construction, as well as the lack of knowledge about DfMA principles and practices.. We have drawings moving back and forth across industry silos from architects and engineers to fabricators and beyond in a way that means “we build things, prefabricated or not, that aren't what was originally upfront in the process,” Marks says.. She believes this is where we will see the most change and brings up Gleicher’s Formula for Change (revised by Dannemiller), where dissatisfaction, vision, and steps toward the vision must be greater than resistance.. “I actually think we’ve hit dissatisfaction at this point,” she says, pointing out the various issues across the industry: construction companies unhappy with the money they’re making, designers unhappy with the roles they’re playing, owners dissatisfied with the inconsistency.. And the question that needs answering now is: “what does the future look like?”.Marks says that her job at Autodesk is to help people envision what that future could be by taking the current building blocks and foundational pieces and expanding on them.
She knows there will be resistance and thinks we’ve got to start thinking about things to be able to combat issues like old thinking, processes, contracts, scopes, and procurement methodologies.. “We've got to be able to highlight the dissatisfaction, show people there's a potential vision up.Nobody changes unless there's something better on the other side,” she says.“But we should be able to show them there's something better.”.
The owners want all of this, but the general contractors tell them it isn’t possible.They can’t tell them the concrete steps of action after the vision.
They should figure out how to get those owners what they want, Marks says, and the owners need to be willing to take on some risk.
They need to collaborate.Therefore, the approach is to decide on a single concept to integrate the engineering structurally in an EPCM type contract and to focus purely on deliverables..
This idea does not match reality and undermines the ability to both hold on to and even augment the delivered value.As described by Henry Mintzberg about business strategy, engineering design will always include a combination of deliberate and emergent components.. Pretending a high level of fixation at best is counterproductive and at worst destructive to the project’s ability to deliver value.
This is not the dreaded “change” or “scope creep”, it is about how the proposed project scope will naturally mould and how it can be integrated with how it will be delivered both in its physical, digital, and operational forms.This integration itself will not leave the scope unchanged, the scope and concept will require adaption..