ISO 19650 Information Management

BS EN ISO 19650‑3:2020

My first attempt based on ISO 19650-2 did cover the Delivery Phase of the project only, and the effort try to loosely overlay the RIBA stages of work was a bit off the mark.[1]

First, I would like to thank CDBB and David Churcher specifically who spent his time looking at my infographic and kindly pointed out all the errors.

So here is my second attempt, which I believe provide better and more accurate infographic which in turn assists in the understanding of information management processes required on the projects where compliance with ISO 19650 standards is required.

Hope that the single page graphical representation of the process overlayed with now accurately included RIBA stages of work will help to plan and use information effectively and efficiently.

Ever since the publication of ISO 19650-3, I was asking myself the two questions:

  1. Do we need two separate standards for the Delivery Phase and Operational Phase?
  2. How similar are the two standards?

Although Part 2 is meant for Delivery Phase and Part 3 for the Operational Phase of the asset. I believe there is far too much repetition, and the minor differences between the two almost identical standards could be combined into one.

First of all, it is worth mentioning that the ISO 19650-3 already has an allowance in the process for the Delivery Phase of the Asset, i.e. depicted in Fig.4 of the ISO 19650-3 (Activity group C).

So I decided to make a direct comparison of the processes included in ISO 19650 part 2 & 3 two standards.

The summary of my findings are:

Status Percentage
does not match34.55%
match2233.33%
exact match2740.91%
ISO-2 no equivalent1015.15%
ISO-3 no equivalent46.06%
Total66100.00%
Table 1 – ISO 19650-2 vs ISO 19650-3 Process terminology comparison summary 1

The items with status ‘match’ mean that the description used is not exactly the same but maintain the same meaning i.e.

5.6.6 Activities for the collaborative production of information – match –  5.6.7 Activities for production of information

6% of the ISO-2 terminology have been omitted in part 3, but 10% of new terms (steps) have been introduced in the ISO-3   

Most of the steps introduced in ISO-3 are either relating to trigger events or references to AIR, OIR, AIM – all of which are missing from ISO-2 but are needed to manage the information during delivery of the asset correctly.

So if you ignore the non-equivalent and agree that ‘exact match’ and ‘match’ are equal, the summary looks dramatically different

exact match + match4994.23%
does not match35.77%
Total525.77%
Table 2 – ISO 19650-2 vs ISO 19650-3 Process terminology comparison summary 2

Looking at this now, the standards have 94% similarity in the information management process – meaning (to me at least) that in both Delivery and Operational phases should/can follow the same process.

Moreover, although ISO 1950-2 does refer to OIR and AIR in clause 5.2.1, there are no requirements to recognize what those OIR and AIR should be and that’s because it’s ISO 19650 Part 3 requirement –,, but I would argue that you need the OIR and AIR guidance as much at Delivery Phase as at Operational phase

Nevertheless, it’s refreshing to see the workflow significantly improved in 19650-3

Therefore I decided to rebuild my infographic entirely here its is my version of one page ISO 19650-3 Information Management process



[1] The RIBA Stages overlay based on CDBB Guidance Part D p25 Figure 9

Leave a Reply