The RIBA Digital Plan of Work (DPoW) was introduced to bring clarity, consistency, and structure to information management across the built environment. Designed to complement the RIBA Plan of Work by defining information requirements, responsibilities, and digital deliverables at every stage of a project. In practice, however, adoption of the DPoW is rarely straightforward. Many organizations struggle to translate its principles into day-to-day delivery.
Below, we explore the most familiar challenges with DPoW adoption, and how they can be overcome.
The DPoW was developed in response to fragmented industry practices, including discipline‑specific plans of work, generic scopes, overlapping tasks, and inconsistent BIM data/geometry levels. The result was inconsistency and confusion in delivery. These issues remain a challenge when teams attempt to adopt the DPoW and align it with existing processes.
Successful teams prioritize a single source of truth where deliverables, responsibilities, approvals, and status are clearly structured and aligned to RIBA stages from the start. Configurable, stage-based workflows help ensure all parties follow the same plan, reducing ambiguity and fragmentation. Look for a software which provides workflows that can be configured to mirror RIBA stages, ensuring consistency across teams and consultants.
Although designed to complement each other, organizations often struggle to map their information requirements, responsibilities, and BIM deliverables between the DPoW and RIBA Plan of Work stages. Ensuring both frameworks run in parallel without duplication or gaps is not always straightforward.
To overcome this, organizations should adopt stage-based deliverable management, where information requirements are embedded directly into each RIBA stage. Information expectations – such as Asset Information Requirements (AIR), Exchange Information Requirements (EIR), and Project Information Requirements (PIR) – can be built into standardized templates, so every deliverable is clearly defined from the outset. Automated stage gates then ensure that all required information is complete and approved before a project can move forward.
The DPoW requires clarity on who is responsible for which model elements, what level of information is required, and when it must be delivered. This is particularly difficult where BIM maturity varies, or responsibilities differ between organizations.
Define responsibility matrices early and embed information requirements directly into deliverables. Assigning ownership at task level and setting up mandatory information fields removes uncertainty and ensures accountability across all consultants.
The construction industry continues to face varying levels of BIM capability, fragmented IT infrastructure, and inconsistent understanding of digital processes. Teams may not have the systems or training required to deliver information at the maturity levels expected by the DPoW.
On a project or across an organization, look for software with guided, role-based workflows that simplify delivery without requiring deep BIM expertise. Automation and clear task structures reduce manual effort and help lower-maturity teams meet required standards. For one step further, you can also look for role-based interfaces so that users see only the tasks relevant to them, simplifying adoption. These will help to brings lower‑maturity teams up to a functioning level without heavy BIM training.
Real-world disputes have shown that unclear rules on data access, ownership, and Common Data Environment (CDE) management can disrupt collaboration. The TEL vs MML case highlighted the importance of establishing these fundamentals at Stage 0, yet many teams still fail to do so, causing adoption difficulties later.
To avoid this, look to define transparent roles, permissions, and approval processes from the outset. Immutable audit trails and clear visibility of who owns and approves of information helps to protect against misunderstandings that often lead to disputes and program delays.
The DPoW emphasizes structured client review and sign‑off at each stage. In practice, many clients lack understanding, time, or processes to engage effectively with structured BIM deliverables, delaying projects, and undermining the benefits of the DPoW.
By providing intuitive, non-technical views of progress, status, and approvals, client approvals become quicker, clearer, and based on complete information. Clear dashboards, simple approval of workflows, and exportable reports enable informed decision-making without forcing clients into specialist tools of technical knowledge.
7. Cultural resistance and change management
The biggest barrier is cultural with cross-team collaboration. Moving from document-centric workflows to structured information management can feel disruptive, particularly where teams fear transparency or change.
Demonstrating quick wins, such as reduced admin, clearer accountability, and better visibility, builds confidence and accelerates buy-in across projects. This can be done through automation, dashboards, and simplified views to encourage adoption. Once teams see the benefits on one project, they are more likely to become advocated for the process, encouraging adoption across other team members.
The RIBA Digital Plan of Work sets a strong foundation for consistent, structured information management. The challenge lies not in understanding the framework, but in embedding it into everyday project delivery.
By addressing process alignment, responsibility clarity, digital maturity, and cultural change head-on, organizations can move beyond theoretical compliance and realize the full value of the DPoW in practice.
Learn how Tilbury Douglas used Playbook to track their Golden Thread: Download Case Study