Subhead: A practical delivery model for firms that need more BIM modeling capacity than their current headcount can provide.
For US construction firms, project executives, BIM/VDC managers, and operations leaders.
Key Takeaway: US AEC firms are short on the modeling capacity they need to keep bidding, not short on work. The onshore + offshore BIM delivery model pairs a US-based lead with a dedicated offshore team that builds and maintains the BIM models, giving firms more modeling capacity without adding headcount.
A construction firm does not fall behind on a project simply because it cannot find enough workers. It falls behind when the modeling capacity a project depends on is not available at the moment the project needs it, which is usually well before the labor shortage makes it into a headline.
That gap is showing up earlier in the process than most firms expect. Bureau of Labor Statistics data from May 2026 reported 224,000 unfilled construction positions at the end of March, and Associated Builders and Contractors estimates the industry needs 349,000 net new workers in 2026, rising to 456,000 in 2027. Neither figure includes ordinary replacement hiring.
More mid-size AEC firms are responding the same way: pairing a US-based team with a dedicated offshore team that builds and maintains the BIM models, under a shared execution plan. This is the onshore + offshore BIM delivery model, and it is the model Excelize is built around.
Why the Labor Shortage Is Not a Problem the Industry Can Wait Out
The near-term shortage is only part of the picture. McKinsey estimates that 41% of the people working in US construction as of 2020 will have retired by 2031. That is not a temporary dip in available labor. It is a structural change in who is available to do the work, and it affects the most experienced, highest-output workers first, because they are also the most expensive and the slowest to replace.
Put the numbers together and a pattern emerges: the workers leaving the industry are experienced, and the workers entering it are not arriving fast enough to offset that loss.
For a firm managing a growing pipeline, that shows up as a BIM team stretched across too many projects, schedules slipping because no one is available to build or update a model, and bids the firm would otherwise pursue going to a competitor instead.
| Metric | Figure | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Unfilled construction positions (March 2026) | 224,000 | Bureau of Labor Statistics |
| Net new workers needed in 2026 | 349,000 | Associated Builders and Contractors |
| Net new workers needed in 2027 | 456,000 | Associated Builders and Contractors |
| Share of 2020 construction workforce retired by 2031 | 41% | McKinsey & Company |
Why Productivity Gains Have Not Closed the Gap
If construction productivity were improving at the same rate as the rest of the economy, a tighter labor supply would matter less. It is not. McKinsey’s research puts construction productivity growth at 0.4% a year between 2000 and 2022, against roughly 2% for the total economy.
Over two decades, that is a 10% total improvement in construction, compared with growth several times larger across the broader economy. Global construction spending is still projected to rise from $13 trillion in 2023 to $22 trillion by 2040, so the volume of work is increasing faster than the industry’s ability to execute it efficiently.
Rework accounts for a large, avoidable share of that gap. A widely cited PlanGrid/FMI Corporation study found that miscommunication and inaccurate project data cost the US construction industry more than $177 billion a year in lost labor time, a figure the industry still treats as its benchmark because the underlying conditions have not meaningfully changed.
Roughly half of that cost traces back to poor coordination and inaccessible information, which is precisely what an accurate, well-maintained BIM model is designed to prevent before it reaches the field.
That is the practical case for BIM, and for a delivery model that can actually staff it. A model only prevents rework if there is enough qualified capacity to build it correctly, keep it current as the design changes, and run clash detection before problems reach the job site. Capacity, not intent, is what most firms are short on.
See where a BIM workflow is losing time. A short review of a current modeling process usually identifies where the capacity gap sits, and what closing it would take.
Talk to Excelize’s BIM Delivery Team→What the Onshore + Offshore BIM Delivery Model Actually Changes
The offshore team functions as an extension of the in-house team, not as a separate vendor relationship. Offshore BIM professionals build and update models in tools such as Revit, Navisworks, and BIM 360, working from drawings, RFIs, and a BIM Execution Plan set by the onshore lead.
The onshore team continues to own client relationships, site coordination, and any decision that requires someone physically present or contractually accountable.
This model does not remove the need for local expertise, and it does not shift accountability for model accuracy away from the firm delivering the project. What it changes is where the labor-intensive modeling work is performed, not who is responsible for the outcome.
A firm still needs a qualified onshore lead reviewing the work; the model simply gives that lead more capacity to review and coordinate rather than model from scratch.
The mechanism that makes this work is time-zone overlap combined with a follow-the-sun handoff. A US-based architect or engineer leaves markups, comments, or clash reports at the end of the workday.
The offshore team addresses those during its own working hours and returns updated models before the US team returns.
Well-run partnerships, including how Excelize structures its delivery teams, also build in a few hours of live daily overlap for real-time coordination, so the relationship functions as an extension of the workday rather than an overnight handoff with no opportunity for clarification.
Why Firms Are Adopting This Model: Four Operational Reasons
Speed. Distributing modeling work between an onshore lead and an offshore execution team avoids the delay of a hiring cycle that can take months. An offshore team already fluent in current BIM standards and software does not require the ramp-up time a new in-house hire would need.
Cost predictability. Firms pay for offshore BIM capacity at a transparent, usage-based rate rather than carrying the fully loaded cost of additional salaried staff, benefits, and software licenses that sit idle between projects. Capacity can scale up for a busy quarter and scale back down without a layoff, a flexibility an in-house team structurally cannot offer.
Fewer errors. Offshore teams organized by discipline, architectural, structural, MEP, bring a depth that is difficult to replicate with generalist in-house staff spread across every project. Combined with a defined BEP and consistent LOD requirements, this specialization is what reduces the rework figures cited above; the gain comes from accuracy, not only from added throughput.
More capacity for the in-house team. Every hour an in-house architect or project manager spends on routine model updates is an hour not spent on client relationships, site problem-solving, or the parts of a project that require someone physically present. Firms that offload modeling capacity consistently report their in-house teams shifting time toward that higher-value work instead.
Assess capacity against the next bid. A capacity assessment can show what an offshore BIM team would cost against a firm’s next quarter of bid volume before any commitment is made.
Request a Capacity Assessment→Selecting an Offshore BIM Delivery Partner: What to Verify
Not every offshore arrangement produces the same result. A few criteria separate a genuine extension of the team from a new source of coordination problems:
- Time-zone overlap, not only asynchronous handoff. Daily live overlap for real-time questions matters more than most marketing material suggests.
- A documented BIM Execution Plan, agreed before work begins, covering LOD requirements, model ownership, and revision workflow.
- Discipline-specific specialization, rather than generalist modelers spread across architectural, structural, and MEP work at once.
- Compatible tooling. Revit, Navisworks, BIM 360, or the equivalent cloud collaboration platform the in-house team already uses, so files move without translation friction.
- A track record on projects of comparable complexity and scale, not simply years in business.
Where the BIM Services Market Is Headed
This is not a workaround limited to firms facing an immediate shortage. One 2026 market analysis sizes the global BIM services market at approximately $9.35 billion in 2025, growing to $29.6 billion by 2034, a 12.22% compound annual growth rate driven by tighter project timelines, increasing model complexity, and continued pressure on in-house capacity across the AEC sector.
That same report names Excelize among the market’s active participants. As BIM mandates expand and project data requirements become more demanding, firms without a scalable modeling strategy are likely to find themselves at a structural disadvantage on tenders where BIM deliverables are now a baseline expectation rather than an add-on.
Firms that treat onshore + offshore delivery as a standing part of their operating model, rather than a temporary fix for one difficult project, are better positioned to bid competitively while the labor market remains constrained.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the onshore + offshore BIM delivery model?
A US-based team retains client relationships, site coordination, and final decisions, while a dedicated offshore team builds and maintains the BIM models under an agreed execution plan. The offshore team operates as an extension of the in-house team rather than as a separate outside vendor.
Is offshore BIM modeling as accurate as an in-house team?
Accuracy depends on process rather than location. Offshore teams operating under a defined BIM Execution Plan, with discipline-specific specialists and consistent LOD requirements, routinely produce models with fewer clashes and less rework than a generalist in-house team stretched across too many projects.
How much does an onshore + offshore BIM model save compared to hiring in-house?
Savings generally come from avoiding the fully loaded cost of additional salaried staff, including recruiting, training time, benefits, and software licenses that sit idle between projects, and from paying for capacity only when it is needed. The exact figure depends on firm size and project mix, so a direct comparison against a specific staffing plan is more useful than an industry average.
Do offshore BIM teams work in real time with US-based teams?
Well-run arrangements include daily overlapping hours for live coordination, in addition to a follow-the-sun handoff in which the offshore team addresses markups and clash reports at the end of the US workday and returns updated models before the next US workday begins.
What software do offshore BIM teams typically use?
Most offshore BIM teams work in the same tools US firms already use: Autodesk Revit for modeling, Navisworks for clash detection and coordination, and BIM 360 or an equivalent cloud platform for file sharing and version control. Confirming toolset compatibility before a project begins avoids file-translation delays later.
Can a small or mid-size firm use this model, or is it limited to large contractors?
Mid-size firms are where this model is most commonly used, since they typically lack the volume to justify a full in-house BIM department year-round but still need to compete against larger firms that maintain one. A usage-based offshore arrangement allows a smaller firm to scale modeling capacity for a busy season without carrying the fixed overhead of permanent headcount.
Discuss a project pipeline. Whether the constraint is modeling capacity, clash resolution turnaround, or bid volume, a direct conversation is the most reliable way to determine what a distributed BIM team would change for a given firm.
Start a Conversation with Excelize→Excelize provides onshore + offshore BIM delivery services for US construction and AEC firms, including discipline-specific modeling, clash detection and coordination, and BIM Execution Plan development for projects of varying scale and complexity.