4.2.2. BIM-Specific Requirements

Since BIM improves service delivery, there is a need for commensurate compensation through scales of fees (Hamil 2012). Change of standard in professional practice, notably through clash detection, development of 3D models, simulations, training, time inputting, reviewing and transferring usable data to public bodies, should lead to a design fee rise for designers (Ashcraft 2008). While traditional delivery methods hinder performance-based remuneration because of silos, alternative delivery methods have been found to better distribute the benefits (Sacks et al. 2018).

Issues of model ownership need to be stipulated and standardized to facilitate BIM implementation. Ordinarily, the ownership of the design belongs to the designer following the completion of a project, but since BIM facilitates infrastructure management, models have a significant value for public bodies, which should use and develop BIM in the entire project life-cycle (Porwal and Hewage 2013). Most BIM manuals state that public bodies are the owners of the digital models, information and other deliverables (Sacks et al. 2018).

## 4.2.3. Dysfunctions of Current Rules

The FRA and the FRE, the remuneration regulations applicable to professional services, have not been substantially revised since 1984 and do not reflect the computerization of professional practice, while fee scales have not been indexed for 9 years. Contractual payment schemes are task-led instead of performance-led, and progressive payments do not reflect the additional efforts needed in the early design stage of BIM projects. The rules applicable to benefits harm team integration, further the silo effect and do not reflect the collaborative and multidisciplinary reality of BIM (Ghassemi and Becerik-Gerber 2011). Quebec's contracts do not address the issue of joint authorship when BIM level 3 sometimes makes it impossible to determine where the contribution of one party ends and the other begins.
