Transcript: Blockchain and Legal Dispute Avoidance in Construction

And I always fancied construction sector. Somebody described it as the industry that time forgot. Nearly 10% of the spend on construction contracts goes in litigation. So there's a great scope for introducing technology. It's not just the lawyers that are making the money.

A lot of the consultants, because it's such a litigious industry, we moved into online dispute resolution. As a result of that, I felt that blockchain was the way forward. Hello, I'm Brittany Campbell-Turner, and this is The Constructor Podcast, episode number 47. Hello and welcome to The Constructor Podcast, the best way to build it. This podcast is dedicated to helping property owners have certainty in their decisions about their construction projects.

We talk about fostering trusting relationships, help you understand how to lower risk, be under budget and on schedule. And most importantly, exceed your end user's desires. Last week, Jordan Williams, Chief Technology Officer at IntelliWave Technologies talks with us about a platform they call SightSense, and it uses blockchain and internet of things to simplify construction material traceability and produce quality documentation. We talk about how long lead time concerns are relieved and how that leads to reduction of follow-ups. If you missed this episode, check it out at constructor.com slash EP46.

Today is the fourth episode of the five-part series where I interview guests about the use of blockchain in construction. Today's guest, Jeremy Barnett, is one of the founders and a director of the Construction Blockchain Consortium and a practicing lawyer also. He became interested in blockchain because of his research and work in algorithmic dispute avoidance and how that can actually improve the process of historical evidence and record review. What's also interesting is how he talks about smart contracts. I ask him to talk about that specifically from the legal perspective.

He will also share with us about the goals of the Construction Blockchain Consortium and how you can potentially get involved. Let's get into the interview. Welcome to the Constructor Podcast. Thanks for coming on today, Jeremy. No problem at all, good to talk.

Yeah, same here. So you are one of the founders and a director of the Construction Blockchain Consortium and you're also a practicing lawyer. Could you tell us how your research has even got you into blockchain and why construction? Well, it's quite a long story. I got involved in a project at Leeds University a few years ago on virtual courts and we moved into online dispute resolution.

As a result of that, I felt that blockchain was the way forward. And then why construction, particularly with blockchain? I mean, there are lots of different markets that are adopting this and doing research and spending lots of money doing it. What did you think construction was a viable focus? Well, the online dispute resolution community were focusing on consumer disputes, high volume, small disputes.

And I always felt that the role for the technology is in heavy, big, multi-party disputes where people are around the world possibly and there's what we call a need for speed. We waited for the new technology to come along when people were moving onto new communication systems. So we looked at blockchain and I always fancied construction sector because it's a huge sector. Somebody described it as the industry that time forgot. It's one of the biggest sectors, I think, apart from finance in the world.

It's a huge global sector and the figures are quite frightening really. Some people think that nearly 10% of the spend on construction contracts goes in litigation. So there's a great scope for introducing technology. Wow, 10% in litigation, that's an alarming number considering the billions of dollars are contributed to construction every day. It's not just the lawyers that are making the money.

A lot of the consultants, because it's such a litigious industry, a lot of the consultants spend a great deal of their time trying to fix disputes. So we thought if we can save just a tiny percentage of that big number, then that's a good place to start. Wonderful. So could you tell us a little bit about what the Construction Blockchain Consortium is focused on? I understand is that there are six areas of focus.

Could you tell us at a high level what all of the six are? They do tend to merge into each other. We started looking at the areas and we held working groups and meetings and we divided our efforts into these sectors. If I list them, then we can run through them again. The first one, funnily enough, is where the technology interfaces with other technology.

Now that means Internet of Things, big data, artificial intelligence, building information modeling. Then we looked at legal stuff. That's the type of thing I'm talking about. And that's branching out into automated contracting and smart contracts. That's becoming a very interesting area.

We've then got a team of people who are starting to look at the financing of construction projects, such things as site assembly and energy. And then something that the Dean, Alan Penn, the Dean of the Bartlett is very keen on and he's working with a number of other architects together with a number of other architects is where this technology can assist with design and construction and possibly safety. So we're looking at things like culture change. Is this technology going to change the way in which buildings are designed and built?

Can people start collaborating more? You can look at the supply chain, which is of course huge. And it sort of feeds into the next area, which we call building services, which includes building management systems and safety, which is a huge issue now in the UK following the Grenfell Tower disaster. So we're starting to look at buildings as being live things that continue to evolve after they've been handed over. And that relates back to the legal point that I was making earlier about the regulation and how is a building compliant and how can people check that a building is compliant.

And then the final area that we think we should look at is smart cities and social welfare. How can the building become part of the smart cities agenda, which of course feeds nicely into the energy issue that we mentioned a little earlier. So those are the broad areas that we've attempted to focus on and we're running workshops in each of the areas and very quickly people are coming to us in each of the areas and others saying, hey, we can use this technology for these ideas.

Interesting times. Yes, definitely. And from your perspective, the legal perspective, I think that you certainly have a different insight into construction than maybe some of the AEC practitioners might. And I wanna make sure to discuss the things that you're particularly interested in. So that would include obviously the legal aspect, policy and compliance.

Go a little bit deeper into how we address through blockchain algorithmic dispute resolution. The two things that blockchain bring are verified ledges, trusted information. The second thing is automation. So if you put those two things together, then in our experience, you can start building streamlined systems to get parties around a table quickly using techniques, some of which involve artificial intelligence, some of which are about assembly of relevant documents, discovery, disclosure, sentiment analysis and the like in order to see if we can get into a position.

It's better if I give an example, a big building project, say somewhere in Hong Kong or in China, where contractors and designers are from all over the world and it goes wrong and everybody's threatening to walk off sites. The question is, how can we pull everybody together very quickly to focus on the issues? Can we get the right documents to the right people and then start mediating? We're not talking about arbitration. We're not talking about going to court.

We're trying to see, can we get people working together to see if they can get the building back on Flamigay? That's really what we're doing. And we're talking about using blockchain, one, as an anchor for the accurate material and two, to automate the process to get us to a hearing. I think that's a very brief assessment of our thinking. It's really to prevent the dispute in the legal realm, it sounds like.

It's to get all the parts and pieces so that it doesn't even have to get to that point at all. Let's just lay everything out on the table and assess and make it transparent. Yeah, so there's transparency. And actually, we're still toying with the idea of dropping the name algorithmic dispute resolution and calling it algorithmic dispute avoidance, actually. Yes.

And there are dispute avoidance practices around the world, we know. So we think we're tapping into the modern approach to this industry. How can we make a difference rather than just how can we aggravate an already difficult situation? I can already think about how much time would be saved just merely by having the information available and upfront and not even getting to that point. I don't know if I mentioned to you previously that I spent a lot of time reviewing liquidated damages.

I was a schedule manager for a public agency here in Chicago and that was a portion of my job. And I would have to calculate the days out and the actual costs associated with potential liquidated damages. It's just so costly to go after liquidated damages that it doesn't make sense to do it most of the time. But still, I just can think about how much time would be saved if you just had all those parts and pieces available. Yeah, that's very helpful insight.

The vision that we have is that the cases will be dealt with a lot quicker in a more streamlined fashion, so a lot cheaper. But the other side of the coin is it means more people might say, hey, we can try and settle this rather than we'll just carry on. So in our view of the world going forward, there'll be more cases, but they'll be a lot quicker. And the people will have better, the phrase is access to justice. That's one of the objectives that's often spoken about in terms of IT in the legal system.

Very interesting, access to justice. Let's talk a little bit about smart contracts. I know we've kind of talked about what they are in a couple of episodes thus far, but I want to understand what it is from the legal perspective. It may be identified as something different, and I want to get your input on that. So what is a smart contract?

OK, the lawyers love this. My view is the same as quite a few other people. They're neither smart nor are they contracts. Something that's smart thinks for itself. This is the opposite.

This is automated enforcement, actually. So you can write a code to say if this happens, then that will happen. And you don't need to go to court. So they say code is law. I don't know if you've heard that expression, but the coders think it's very important, and they think it's the end of lawyers.

I don't. I actually think, Brittany, whether it's a good thing or a bad thing, it's the beginning of lawyers. It's just that the lawyers will be doing different things in a few years' time. A smart contract, as I say, isn't smart. Everybody decides in advance what's going to happen.

And it's not a contract. The law of the land, whether we're in the States or in the UK or wherever, that's the law. So the big question is, can you change a smart contract, a piece of code, into a written contract? And we've had some students actually looking at that, and they're well on the way to designing something based around a JCT standard form contract that actually can be a piece of code as well, and vice versa. That's quite an interesting way.

But in my view, smart contract is a piece of code. It's computers enforcing the terms. But we had a session at King's College for the CBC. You heard it first here, Brittany. Professor Mozi there, David Mozi, came up with a new idea, something called an enterprise contract that he's thought of, that he announced.

And that's the concept of a contract being a living thing. So as the project grows, the contract grows. Now, that's an interesting concept that nobody's come up with before. The code builds as the project builds. And as more people join the project, the code and the contract, maybe by using artificial intelligence or maybe just by setting it all out in advance, starts to develop and new things are added to it.

So a sort of three dimensional contract, which is quite scary. But this is the guy who's head of the construction faculty at King's College in London, which is recognized as one of the leading, if not the leading, construction faculty, law faculty in the world. That's quite interesting. It really is. And it's really hard to conceptualize what that would look like.

Having AI, obviously the information and process it. There's so many variables that are unknown when you start a contract. It makes sense that you can pull those in as you collect data about field conditions, about past information from different companies that you're working with. I suppose there's lots of information to vet while you're developing this enterprise contract. But I mean, that's certainly a conversation that I would like to take further.

This is the beauty of the consortium. What we've done is we've brought together the academics, together with the industry architects, the developers, the contractors, the and the lawyers. Then we've also brought in the fintech developers who are coming up with the ideas and also insurers who are very interested in how the buildings are shaping up and how their liability can be reduced. And we're also interested in the financiers, the project financiers who put together the buildings. And that's what the consortium is.

It's open source. We're all coming together. Nobody owns any IP, but we're trying to encourage people to set up their own projects, which will be for profit, no doubt, where they can make money and start innovating. That's how it was conceived a year ago, a year and a half ago. And boy, is it working.

Before we head on to that topic, I wanted to touch base with you about safety from a legal perspective. You mentioned the Grenfell incident. I wanted to discuss with you how blockchain could have helped in that scenario. Maybe you could give us a little bit more background of the Grenfell housing incident for those who may not be as familiar as well. Well, this is a terrible case that's been all over the media where a tower block caught fire.

And there were some huge number of deaths in the building, which has really caught the imagination in a terrible way in this country. And the result is going to be a judicial inquiry into what went wrong, because this was an old public building, a local authority housing block, that was improved by the use of cladding to make it look nicer. The building was built in the 60s. People seem to be reporting that it was the cladding that caught fire. But I'm not saying that's true.

Nobody knows yet what the cause of the fire was. A number of causes, there may have been just one cause. And that's what the judge is going to be finding out. And then after he's done that, there will no doubt be an inquest, because there have been some terrible deaths, a large number of deaths. And following an inquest...

Yeah, I think I saw about 80 reported when I was looking up the incident. Oh, yeah. Yeah, so there will no doubt be an inquest into the cause of death. And then following the inquest, no doubt there will be litigation. There could be criminal litigation that's being spoken of in the press, because there's a demand for justice.

People who got this wrong have to be brought to book. So there could be corporate manslaughter charges against people who've done things wrong. And there will no doubt be huge civil litigation where everybody's pointing the finger at everybody else and trying to establish where the financial cost of all this has to lie. So how could blockchain help? Well, it could help in this way.

If all the information about the building was contained in a ledger, then weeks and weeks and weeks of the judge's task, just establishing the facts, could be dealt with a lot quicker. And the judge could move on very quickly with his organization, however he's going to do it, to try to work out what's gone wrong. But the simple task of deciding what actually happened and pouring over the millions and millions of documents that will no doubt come out and all the information, that could be done quicker.

And the second thing is we're starting to look at whether or not we can automate the recording of compliance of the buildings. Now that's a big subject. We're only looking at it at the moment, but could there be a register of all the components of the building and a check as to whether or not they all had appropriate certification? Who certified the buildings? When?

And could there be a red flag? If the platform worked out that something hadn't actually got a fire certificate or appropriate certificate, a warning to somebody that we need to do something, say the fire extinguisher, it needs to be replaced, something like that. It's that type of thing that we're looking at. So we're only saying that crystal ballgazing, if we're going to have safe buildings, then maybe we should start to use this technology from today. Because a building, actually, a bit like a contract, is a live thing.

Buildings are built and then changed. Grenfell Tower was built in the 60s and then changed. People build buildings and then the use changes. People who commission the buildings go bankrupt or get taken over and then somebody else comes in and moves the rooms around and moves the walls around. So a building in some respects is a live being.

And not only that, if you think about it, a building is signed off as being safe on the day it's handed over. Now that could be back in 1960. A continual review of the safety of a building, we started to think that's really where the technology will be taking us. So in future, we have safe buildings. In an ideal instance, I think that the industry and the municipalities, they work towards making sure that the buildings are safe as a result of renovations.

But it's a very good question, is all the information really being taken into account? Yes, you do have as-built drawings and they might be in some folder somewhere, electronic folder, or maybe some plans rolled up in the basement. It's a very good question as to how that information is being taken when any redesign is being done. Well, yeah, I mean, I was talking to somebody about decommissioning nuclear power stations. Okay, this is the opposite.

But the guy frankly said to me, very difficult, because nobody knows how they were built and when they were built back in the 60s. No one's actually quite sure what's at the bottom of them. Therefore, it's very difficult to actually put a plan together to dismantle a building. But buildings aren't demolished and have to be. So again, it's just moving the industry ahead with the technology.

That's really where we are. Just think about all the regulation that's on the power stations. I can't even imagine where to start with that process. That would take months and months of preparation. Oh, yeah.

I can see how blockchain would help for sure. Just having all of that historical record. A lot easier, Brittany, to do it from a new building than to go backwards and try to start to recreate that information on a building that was built 10 years ago. That's virtually, in my view, impossible. You've got to start today with a new building, I think.

Right. No, that makes complete sense. And we're probably going to dig in a little bit more on BIM on another episode to talk about how that can be taken from the design stage, the planning stage, all the way to facilities management. That's definitely the perspective that I'm looking at and pretty excited about as well. That's why we were keen to do it, because at least we don't have to reinvent the wheel here.

If BIM does become implemented, then it makes my life a lot easier, if I can put it that way. That's right. That's right. Completely makes sense. So I do want to ask you, there's a lot of investment into startups.

And for those who aren't as familiar, but ICOs is a way that companies are raising money, utilizing blockchain. And this is something that you're privy to. Could you tell us how companies can do that effectively, startups? Especially since you guys are embarking on this research through the consortium. I'm sure it's something you're hugely aware of.

Could you tell us what the recommendations are? Yeah, tread carefully. That's the recommendation. But don't rule it out. ICOs are initial coin offerings.

Startups are coming together saying, people writing a white paper and saying, we've got an idea to do this, generally in finance. But now it's blowing out a bit like the internet did when that was first discovered. People are raising money, a bit like crowd funding from people who are already experienced investors in crypto coins, people invested in Bitcoin and Ethereum. Those people have made a lot of money because the price of those cryptocurrencies has jumped. So if you and I came up with an idea today for, let's say, a new safety project, and we thought people would be interested in adopting this around the world, we could write a white paper.

We could put it out to the community, the Ethereum community, and see if people would like to send us some ether, which can be turned into real money, fiat money. Rather than going to a venture capitalist and setting out a business plan, we might find that people think, hey, this is a good idea. $500,000 arrived, or a million, or two million, or as has happened in a few, 10 million or 20 million. In one case, 20 million arrived by accident. They wanted 5 million, but they raised 25 million.

They didn't know what to do with it. Now, this is causing all sorts of regulatory problems. The regulators don't like these things because they're worried that people are going to lose their money. There's been a bubble in them. The prices are going up.

Everyone's hoping that if people use the coins and you invested the coins, then you make money. So there's a huge amount of regulation around the world, different regulation. The regulators don't really know whether the existing law applies to these things or not. So it gets very complicated, very technical. You've got to be very careful, especially in the United States, that you don't raise money for a coin, which actually turns into being security because you can get into trouble.

You need lawyers. You need good lawyers. And then my view is, not only do you have to be careful when you're raising the money, but you've got to be very careful to have good governance in place after you've raised the money to make sure that the people who supported you get value for money. So governance, in my view, financial controls, proper prospectuses should be written. And the investors, or if they're not actually investors, people who buy the coins, token holders, they're called, have got to know what they're getting for their money.

Often, they're not getting very much. That's going to be explained to them in full detail. So they don't feel they've been ripped off if it all goes wrong. Interesting area. That is really interesting.

And your recommendations about kind of avoiding the US because it's very stringent. Where are the other opportunities where you can raise money through an ICO? Well, most of the ICOs that do operate in the States and other places have been based in Switzerland, funnily enough. They have sort of foundation. They're not charitable, but the idea is nobody makes any money.

So all the money that comes in goes to make the platform better. And a lot have been based in Switzerland. But now there's regulatory arbitrage going on, which is quite interesting. Some places are making a play for people to base their ICOs in their territories. The best example is Gibraltar.

They want cryptocurrency offerings to be based there, if at all possible, and they're designing a code for the whole of the crypto economy. And also, places like the Isle of Man are looking at codes. Whereas some places like China have come out and said, no, we don't want them at all. Singapore has been very strict about what can be done, what can't be done. The SEC is very nervous, and so is the FCA in the UK.

Canada is an interesting place. On the one hand, they're trying to encourage this type of thing. On the other hand, they're saying, you've got to be very careful, no fraud here. So Canada is not a bad place to start, actually, if you're serious. And if you've got some software, because the Canadian test, actually, at the moment, one that's been proposed, is if you've already built a platform, then that shows you serious, and that shows it's a coin, it's not a business.

It's a big, deep subject, and you need very good lawyers and financial advisors if you're going to do it. Yeah, thank you for that. I think that if there's anyone who's interested in the subject of blockchain, there is an element of understanding that people should have. And this particular system or program that you develop, it's likely something that you could sell to other companies, because simply not that many companies are using it already. And those are certainly good considerations to have in mind if anyone's interested in enrolling out a project similar to that.

Because there's so many applications, Jeremy. Oh, yeah. It started with crypto coins. Blockchain is the underlying software that runs Bitcoin. That's why people are talking about raising money for crypto coins for blockchain, because it's the same technology.

My view is if the university at UCL in London is going to become the expert, which we think we are, in blockchain for the construction sector, we've got to look at ICOs because they are conjoined. You can't really do blockchain and ignore the ICO element, because that's part of the same family, if you understand. You don't have to do an ICO, but at least you've got to understand them. So if the students coming out of the computing department come up with a brilliant idea, and they take it to some contractors and want to do an ICO, I think the university has got an obligation to at least look at them, tell them where the pitfalls are, and point them in the right direction, if there is a right direction.

Right. Just having spoken with us about UCL, and we just want to get a better understanding of who's all involved, who makes up the CBC? Yeah. Well, we've got a governance plan, which is going to be announced soon. We've got people looking at the strategy, the board, which will include representatives from the government, cabinet office, the BIM people who want to see BIM rolled out through the sector, and the people who've put this together.

So there'll be a board. There's a steering group, including a lot of great architects and contractors who've really got us to this place. And then we design a program of events and workshops. And we then want supporters who will have to pay a few thousand pounds a year to show they're interested. And they'll come along to the events that they like and hopefully build projects.

Maybe they'll build their own projects, or maybe they'll collaborate with other members of the consortium. And what we want as well is we want active members. So we want some of the bigger players to come in and then allow the application developer community that we've also got. I mentioned the people who write the code. These are the guys who are coming up with their own ideas for businesses.

They're looking for bigger companies to pilot their ideas. To give you an example, there's one company called Etch who've come through our organization. They've got this great idea for payroll in the construction sector, automated payroll, which means that people working on a building site will be paid as soon as they leave the building site with either cryptocurrency or cash on their smartphone. And they can go straight to the pub in the UK and buy themselves some food and a dinner. And the taxation and the VAT and all the background accounting will be dealt with automatically.

So it's a great idea, which was invented by somebody in the startup community. And they're doing an ICO at the moment. They're trying to raise some money and they want partners. They've found a partner. They're looking for other partners who will then pilot the technology to make it work because it's all about having an idea, but you've got to put it into practice.

And the only way you can put one of these ideas into practice is to working it through with a real business and a big business. So we need people who want to innovate, who want to encourage innovation and are prepared to take a few risks and have a go. That's really what we're looking for. I have a question about the owner perspective. You said that there are a number of architects and contractors and startups and obviously the university.

What is the interest level from the owner perspective, property owners or developers wanting to get involved with us? We're getting interest from all over the field, but the insurers, they can see real benefits in this technology, in this sector. They know what they're insuring at the moment. They're insuring things unlike say the shipping sector where everything's really nailed down. So the insurers of the buildings and the components and the supply chains are very interested.

When we went to Barcelona last week, we spoke on a platform with other people. One of the panels I moderated was all about the real estate industry and how blockchain can help that part of the sector. So somebody I know wants to build a ledger like a land registry, we call it in the UK, which is based on blockchain to make the transfer of title a lot easier. Basic stuff really, again, very sensible. So it sounds like the corporate real estate perspective and the insurance perspective, there's a lot of interest level there.

That makes a lot of sense. There is a lot of wasted time there and people want to make those processes easier and ensure the right things. The other thing which is really where we're going to start, I think is supply chain. So just as an example, just people listening might think, hey, we could do this. A couple of big companies have come in through Hyperledger actually, who we're going to partner with in some way.

And they're going to fund PhD research students to compare the construction sector with different industries who are perhaps more advanced using IT in supply chain. So there's going to be one, we hope, one piece is going to be done to compare construction with the aeronautical industry because safety and supply chains are very advanced. If you think about the idea of planes flying, how many parts there are, everything has to be absolutely nailed down. And the other industry who want to help actually is the car industry.

One of the big German car manufacturers is very keen to join the consortium and to fund a PhD research student who will compare the construction supply chain with the automotive supply chain. That's really where we're coming from. It's just kind of blowing my mind all the possibilities and it's a fun time. I have to say that there's just so much to investigate and to build use cases for, like you mentioned, to get real case studies to determine how the ideas are actually being implemented or can be implemented and working those challenges out and hurling those and applying them at a larger scale.

So I know it's going to take some time, but yeah, I love what you guys are doing. Well, it's a bit like the heady days of the internet. People thinking of great ideas, some will succeed, some will fail. There's some great ideas out there. I love automated quantity surveying.

You fly a drone over the construction site every day and it measures the number of bricks that have been laid. And as soon as you hit a certain number of bricks and the automatic payment is triggered. Simple. I love that. I think that's great.

It doesn't have to be complicated. It could be simple. I do want to make sure to give you the opportunity to make recommendations for any owner. We speak specifically to the owner and like to teach them how they can reduce the uncertainty they have on the construction projects. Is there any particular mindset that should have right now as they're considering blockchain and utilizing it?

What should they be thinking about? Yeah, I think the first step is to really understand the power of the technology. And you do that by looking for things that you're doing all the time where an accurate record would help and also reporting that information to somebody else would help. So going back to real basics, it's a DLT, a distributed ledger. It's a ledger of information.

It's an authenticated ledger. So if you can think in any business that you're involved in of how having a ledger would really help. So next time you do something, you can go straight to the ledger and that can trigger an action. Look for truth. Where is truthful information going to really help?

And then look for where does automation help? Are we doing stuff the computers could be doing? Look in your own business at how you could improve things. And then come along to the CBC. You'll learn.

You can talk to other people. You can talk to our developers. You can join our working groups. Although the construction bot chain consortium is not for profit, but we want all of our people to make profit. So we want to help all of the members, consortiums, turn into profitable businesses.

That's the idea. And we've brought to this area some common sense. We're not dreamers. We're not idealists. We're not here to preach.

We want to learn. We want to push the frontiers out. And we want to help some people make some money. But it's a great journey. It's really interesting times.

And I feel for one, it's marvelous to be given the opportunity to be in the real center of what's really happening in the world. This is fast. This is exciting. And it's breaking things. And I like that.

Any listeners who want to get involved with the CBC, could you tell them what to do, where to go, how to get in contact? Come and find us on the internet. If you type in www.constructionblockchain.org, and then you'll see who's involved, what's going on. And there's forms to fill out on there. Just say who you are and we'll get in touch.

And you can then sign up for the workshops. Come to the things if you're quick. And we'll take it from there. It's quite easy. Great.

Oh, wonderful. Thank you so much, Jeremy. This has been a pleasure. Thanks for talking with us today. Well, thank you, Brittany.

It's been a pleasure. And I hope it's been interesting and we can maybe talk again in future. I definitely had a fun conversation with Jeremy. Let me know if you enjoyed it too by connecting with me at Twitter at Brittany underscore CT or find me on LinkedIn. Or you can just email me too at Brittany at Constructor.com.

Again, that's B-R-I-T-T-A-N-I-E at ConstructRR.com. We will continue our series about blockchain and construction next week. We'll be speaking with Abel Maciel. Abel is an architect and researcher with specific expertise in building information modeling or BIM. He is the main coordinator for the Construction Blockchain Consortium with responsibility on the steering group, secretary and heads the technical committee.

So I'm definitely looking forward to sharing our conversation. It's going to be about how design may be impacted by blockchain and some of the behavioral impacts as well. So don't forget to subscribe at Constructor.com to get email updates from me. If you haven't already subscribed to the podcast, you can do so at iTunes, Stitcher and Google Play. And we're also on TuneIn now.

So working on still getting on more platforms so you can find Constructor anywhere. Please leave a review to show your support and let me know you're enjoying the podcast. I look forward to talking with you guys. Next week.