The ISO 19650 series has been the bedrock of International Information Management since its inception in 2018, but we are currently standing on the edge of its first major evolution. This week, details have begun to emerge regarding a significant overhaul that will fundamentally reshape how we approach BIM and digital delivery.
We aren’t just looking at minor wording tweaks; ISO 19650 Parts 1, 2, and 3 are all undergoing concurrent updates. This simultaneous “refresh” is designed to align the standards more closely with the reality of modern construction and asset management, moving us toward a more unified “Whole Life” approach to data.
While it’s easy to get lost in the sea of new acronyms, here is the breakdown of the most significant shifts on the horizon based on the recent BSI and nima updates.
The Big Mergers and Name Changes
The headline act of this update is the removal of the siloed distinction between “Delivery” and “Operation.”
- Parts 2 & 3 Joining Forces: ISO 19650-2 (Project Delivery) and ISO 19650-3 (Asset Operation) are being unified into a single, end-to-end process. The goal is to treat information management as a continuous lifecycle rather than a baton-pass that often fails at the point of handover.
- The “New” BEP: Perhaps the most shocking change for many is the rebranding of the BIM Execution Plan (BEP). The current proposal is to rename it the Information Production Plan (IPP).
- Information Management Team: Expect to see the introduction of a formal “Information Management Team” at both the organizational and project levels, clarifying who actually holds the keys to the data.
The Realistic Impact: Audits and Templates
A name change might seem superficial, but for those of us on the ground, it’s anything but. If the “BEP” becomes the “IPP,” every organizational workflow, contract template, and quality management system (QMS) document in your company needs an update.
This has a massive knock-on effect for yearly audits. If your internal ISO 9001 or 19650 certification is tied to specific document names and workflows, you are looking at a significant administrative lift just to stay compliant with the terminology, let alone the actual process.
The “BIM Level 2” Ghost
The biggest hurdle isn’t the standard itself; it’s the industry lag. We are still seeing “BIM Level 2” and “Level of Detail (LOD)” in tender documents today, despite them being superseded years ago.
It takes years for these changes to filter down to the roles that actually build the buildings. Because construction projects often span 3–5 years, teams usually stick to the standards cited in the original contract. This means we end up working in a “hybrid reality” where multiple versions of “the truth” exist simultaneously across different projects. It’s no wonder people are confused—we’ve had six parts of ISO 19650, multiple versions of Level of Information Need, and various ISO object library standards all released in a relatively short window.
My Take: Don’t Panic (Yet)
It is important to remember that these are Draft International Standards (DIS). The official drafts for Parts 1 and 2 are expected around March 10, 2026, with Part 3 following in June.
It’s difficult to be too opinionated until we can get our hands on the actual text. Once the DIS is released, that is our window to take a view and send comments back to the ISO committees. If we think a change is more “red tape” than “added value,” now is the time to say it.
A Better Alternative?
It is easy to moan about new standards, but harder to offer a better solution. If I had my way, we would stop the constant release of new terminology and start focusing on actual working tools.
We don’t need more acronyms; we need:
- Open CDE Platforms: Systems that allow PDFs and data to be transferred between different software without losing the vital metadata we worked so hard to create.
- Universal FM Tools: An open Facilities Management tool that all teams must work to as a minimum—software that accepts IFC models with a fixed list of COBie attributes and classes by default.
Instead of refining the theory of how we manage information every few years, we should be building the systems that make it impossible to do it wrong.
Coulter BIM Information Management 
Leave a comment