coordination-metrics

Metrics That Predict Design Coordination Failure Before It Hits Site

A Python toolkit that extracts leading indicators of coordination failure from standard AEC project data — Navisworks clash exports, submittal registers, RFI logs, and meeting minutes. Designed for BIM managers, design coordinators, and digital engineering leads who need to catch problems weeks before they reach site.

Why These Metrics

Design coordination on complex buildings is where projects are won or lost:

• 70% of construction defects originate in design (GIRI, 2019) — most are coordination failures between disciplines, not individual design errors.
• Rework costs 5-15% of total project value (CII) — and the majority traces back to information that was available but never surfaced at the right time.

The standard practice of counting open clashes tells you where you are, not where you're heading. These metrics are the derivatives — they tell you whether coordination is improving or deteriorating, while there's still time to act.

Quick Start

pip install coordination-metrics

from coordination_metrics import build_trajectory, compute_trajectory_slope

summaries = build_trajectory(["round1.xml", "round2.xml", "round3.xml"])
result = compute_trajectory_slope(summaries)
print(f"Slope: {result['slope']:+.1f} clashes/day — {result['interpretation']}")

Core Metrics

#	Metric	What It Measures	Healthy	Critical
1	Clash Trajectory Slope	Rate of change in total hard clashes across detection rounds	Negative slope (clashes decreasing)	Positive slope > 2/day
2	Recurring Clash Rate	Percentage of resolved clashes that reappear near the same location	< 10%	> 25%
3	First-Submission Approval Rate	Submittals approved on the first attempt, by discipline	> 75%	< 50%
4	RFI Response Time P90	90th percentile response time — exposes the long tail	P90 < 7 days	P90 > 14 days
5	Meeting Decision Rate	Fraction of agenda items that reach a decision, correlated with attendance	> 70%	< 45%

Metric Maturity

Metric	Status	Notes
Clash Trajectory	Stable	Exponential decay model validated against sample data
Recurring Clashes	Beta	Works well with BCF/GUID data; spatial matching has known limitations in dense MEP zones
Approval Rates	Stable	Requires column mapping for your specific platform export
RFI Distribution	Stable	Most reliable metric; survival analysis handles open RFIs
Meeting Decisions	Experimental	Requires custom CSV data; <10% of teams produce this format today
ECV	Beta	Novel metric; S-curve shape is configurable but defaults may not suit all project types
Benchmarks	Indicative	Based on published research + author estimates; not empirical percentile distributions

Full Dashboard

from coordination_metrics import CoordinationHealthDashboard

dashboard = CoordinationHealthDashboard(data_dir="./project_data/")
health = dashboard.run()

print(f"Overall: {health.overall_health:.0f}/100 ({health.health_level.value})")
dashboard.generate_html_report(health, output_path="report.html")

Data Sources

Source	Format	Metrics Supported
Navisworks Clash Detective	XML export	Clash trajectory, recurring clashes
Solibri	BCF / CSV results	Clash-based metrics
BIM 360 / ACC	CSV export	Clashes, issues (as RFIs)
Procore	CSV export	Submittals, RFIs
Aconex	CSV export	Submittals, RFIs, correspondence
Manual registers	CSV / Excel	All metrics

AI Integration (MCP Server)

Connect to Claude Code as an MCP server for natural-language analysis:

claude mcp add --scope project coordination-metrics -- \
    python -m coordination_metrics.mcp_server

Then ask Claude:

"Analyse the clash trajectory from the exports in ./data/ and tell me which disciplines are falling behind."

Available tools: analyse_clash_trajectory, detect_recurring_clashes, analyse_submittal_rates, analyse_rfi_distribution, analyse_meeting_decisions, generate_coordination_health_report, compute_earned_coordination_value, compare_to_benchmarks, discover_cross_correlations_tool.

Earned Coordination Value (ECV)

A novel composite metric analogous to Earned Value Management (EVM), adapted for design coordination. It answers: "Are we resolving coordination issues fast enough to meet the project milestone?"

from datetime import date
from coordination_metrics.ecv import ECVConfig, compute_ecv

config = ECVConfig(
    project_start=date(2026, 1, 1),
    coordination_deadline=date(2026, 7, 1),
    total_expected_clashes=200,
    total_expected_rfis=100,
    total_expected_submittals=80,
    total_expected_meetings=24,
)

ecv = compute_ecv(
    config=config,
    measurement_date=date(2026, 4, 1),
    clashes_resolved=120,
    rfis_answered=55,
    submittals_approved=45,
    decisions_made=60,
)
print(f"CPI: {ecv.cpi:.2f} — {ecv.status}")
# CPI > 1.0 = ahead, CPI = 1.0 = on track, CPI < 1.0 = behind

Benchmark Comparisons

Compare your project's metrics against industry benchmarks derived from published research (Navigant, GIRI, CII, Chahrour et al.):

from coordination_metrics.benchmarks import compare_to_benchmark

result = compare_to_benchmark("recurring_clash_rate", 12.5)
print(f"{result['insight']}")
# "Your Recurring clash rate (%) of 12.5 is at the 55th percentile."

Supported benchmarks: clash_reduction_rate_per_round, recurring_clash_rate, first_submission_approval_rate, rfi_response_p90_days, rfi_no_response_rate, meeting_decision_rate.

Cross-Metric Correlations

The correlation engine discovers relationships between metrics that reveal systemic coordination failures:

from coordination_metrics.cross_correlation import discover_cross_correlations

insights = discover_cross_correlations(
    clash_trajectory_data={"health": "stalled"},
    recurrence_data={"recurrence_rate_pct": 18.0},
    approval_data={},
    rfi_data={"no_response_pct": 25},
    meeting_data={"avg_decision_rate_pct": 40, "critical_absence": "Mechanical"},
)
for i in insights:
    print(f"[{'ACTION' if i.actionable else 'INFO'}] {i.insight}")

Architecture

coordination_metrics/
  core.py                # Data models: ClashRoundSummary, CoordinationHealth, etc.
  clash_trajectory.py    # Metric 1: slope + exponential decay + zero-clash projection
  recurring_clashes.py   # Metric 2: 3D spatial recurrence detection
  approval_rates.py      # Metric 3: first-submission approval by discipline
  rfi_distribution.py    # Metric 4: response time P90 + bottleneck flagging
  meeting_decisions.py   # Metric 5: decision rate + attendance correlation
  ecv.py                 # Earned Coordination Value (CPI for coordination)
  benchmarks.py          # Industry benchmark database and comparison
  cross_correlation.py   # Cross-metric correlation engine
  dashboard.py           # Unified health score + benchmark + insight integration
  visualizations.py      # Dark-themed matplotlib charts
  exporters.py           # HTML report, JSON, chart images
  mcp_server.py          # FastMCP server for Claude Code integration
  cli.py                 # Command-line interface
  parsers/
    navisworks.py        # Navisworks Clash Detective XML parser
    solibri.py           # Solibri BCF/results parser
    bim360.py            # BIM 360 / ACC export parser
    csv_register.py      # Generic CSV/Excel with auto-detection

Installation

# Core (pandas, numpy, matplotlib)
pip install coordination-metrics

# With MCP server support
pip install "coordination-metrics[mcp]"

# Everything (MCP + scipy + openpyxl)
pip install "coordination-metrics[all]"

Command-Line Interface

# Full health report
coord-metrics report ./data/ --output report.html

# Individual metrics
coord-metrics clashes ./exports/
coord-metrics rfis ./rfi_register.csv
coord-metrics submittals ./submittal_register.csv
coord-metrics meetings ./meeting_minutes.csv

Examples

See the examples/ directory:

• quick_start.py — Parse clash exports and compute trajectory in 10 lines.
• full_dashboard.py — Run all 5 metrics and generate an HTML report.
• navisworks_workflow.py — Navisworks-specific workflow with charts.

References

• GIRI (Get It Right Initiative). Literature Review, Revision 3. 2019.
• Construction Industry Institute. Research Summary 153-1. Rework costs 5-15% of project value.
• Navigant/CMAA. Construction Industry Survey. 2013. ~1M RFIs across 1,362 projects.
• Chahrour, R. et al. Cost-benefit analysis of BIM-enabled design clash detection and resolution. 2020. 20% cost savings.
• Cavka, H.B. et al. Developing owner information requirements for BIM-enabled project delivery. 2015.
• Leite, F. et al. Analysis of modeling effort and impact of different levels of detail in building information models. Automation in Construction, 2011.
• Eastman, C. et al. BIM Handbook. Wiley, 2018.

Contributing

Contributions welcome. Please open an issue first for major changes.

License

MIT — Houssame E. Hsain, 2026.