Reimagining AEC podcast

The Delivery Plans

11/10/2026
0:00
34:56
Rewind 15 seconds
Fast Forward 15 seconds

On Reimagining AEC, his own podcast, Dr Sepehr Abrishami asks how many task team plans become one master plan whose dates hold, and what a lead appointed party must do when they cannot. A hypothetical community hub, whose three task plans each look sound until they are combined, carries the argument through clauses 5.4.4 and 5.4.5 of ISO 19650-2: who owns the task information delivery plan, the six things it records for every container, setting dates backwards from the milestone, aggregating the master information delivery plan, telling a sequencing conflict from a shortage of time, and the duties to baseline, notify and inform the appointing party.

Chapters

  • 0:00 Opening: three task plans that each meet the deadline until they are combined
  • 3:01 The plan every task team keeps: ownership, maintenance and the five matters to weigh
  • 8:16 Six fields for every container, and what a template adds
  • 13:12 From scope to schedule: dates set backwards, credible durations and external dependencies
  • 17:18 One plan from many: aggregation, the two review windows and the small appointment
  • 21:36 Making the dates work: two conflicts and the achievability test
  • 27:02 Baseline, notify, inform: the duties once the master plan exists, and a forward look
  • 32:08 Close

After listening, you should be able to:

  • State who establishes a task information delivery plan under clause 5.4.4 of ISO 19650-2, that it is maintained throughout the appointment, and the five matters a task team weighs before scheduling, including the four activities that make up production time.
  • Record the six things a task plan holds for every information container, explain why the estimated production duration and the information author must be stated rather than inferred, and separate required content from added management content such as status codes.
  • Turn a task team scope into a container list, set dates backwards from an information delivery milestone through the two review windows, and record an external dependency precisely enough for another party to act on it.
  • Explain why the master information delivery plan is aggregated rather than authored, name the four matters the lead appointed party weighs under clause 5.4.5, and say what change control as an appointment document under clause 5.4.6 means for it, including on an appointment with no appointed parties.
  • Aggregate several task plans, find a cross-team dependency collision, and test a milestone for achievability with three questions asked in the right order, distinguishing a sequencing conflict from a shortage of available time.
  • Baseline a master plan, write a notification a task team can act on, and recognise when the duty to inform the appointing party of a risk to a milestone is triggered, as opposed to quietly rescheduling.

References

British Standards Institution. (2013). PAS 1192-2:2013 Specification for information management for the capital/delivery phase of construction projects using building information modelling. BSI. (Withdrawn, cited as history.)

British Standards Institution. (2018). BS EN ISO 19650-1:2018 Organization and digitization of information about buildings and civil engineering works, including building information modelling (BIM). Information management using building information modelling. Part 1: Concepts and principles. BSI.

British Standards Institution. (2018). BS EN ISO 19650-2:2018 Organization and digitization of information about buildings and civil engineering works, including building information modelling (BIM). Information management using building information modelling. Part 2: Delivery phase of the assets (incorporating corrigendum February 2021, including UK National Annex). BSI.

British Standards Institution. (2019). PD 19650-0:2019 Transition guidance to BS EN ISO 19650 (incorporating corrigendum No. 1). BSI. (Withdrawn, cited as history.)

British Standards Institution. (2020). BS EN 17412-1:2020 Building information modelling. Level of information need. Part 1: Concepts and principles. BSI. (Withdrawn, superseded by BS EN ISO 7817-1:2024, cited as history.)

British Standards Institution. (2020). BS EN ISO 19650-3:2020 Organization and digitization of information about buildings and civil engineering works, including building information modelling (BIM). Information management using building information modelling. Part 3: Operational phase of the assets. BSI.

British Standards Institution. (2024). BS EN ISO 7817-1:2024 Building information modelling. Level of information need. Part 1: Concepts and principles. BSI.

nima. (2026, February 25). Proposed changes to ISO 19650 outlined in BSI/nima webinar. https://wearenima.im/proposed-changes-to-iso-19650-outlined-in-bsi-nima-webinar/

nima. (2026, May 18). Consultation on revisions to ISO 19650 Part 3 opens. https://wearenima.im/consultation-on-revisions-to-iso-19650-part-3-opens/

Royal Institute of British Architects. (2020). RIBA plan of work 2020 overview. RIBA.

UK BIM Framework. (2021). Information management according to BS EN ISO 19650: Guidance Part A: The information management function and resources (Edition 2). UK BIM Framework.

Reimagining AEC is Dr Sepehr Abrishami's own podcast. Every episode of this season on the ISO standards stands on its own.

More episodes from "Reimagining AEC"