Resource search

Search DataDrivenAEC

Type at least two characters to search.

Looking for live projects? Explore open projects or browse the feed.

Open the full search page →

← All workflows

AEC workflow

Automate the Practice

Move from a repetitive task to a controlled automation with authorized inputs, explicit rules, review, and failure handling.

209 resources shown.

Follow the process

How to turn a repeatable AEC task into a controlled automation

Choose one repeatable task, define its inputs and outputs, and make errors observable before connecting it to live work. A useful automation reduces manual repetition while leaving consequential decisions, credentials and recovery under clear ownership.

Your deliverable: A tested task contract, versioned workflow, evidence of expected and failure cases, and an owned release and recovery procedure.

Skip to the resource library ↓

Before you start

  • A mapped manual task and a named owner who can judge its output.
  • Authorized source and destination systems, with sample records that contain no customer secrets.
  • A defined record identity, input/output schema and acceptable failure behavior.
  • A test environment, least-privilege credentials and a way to stop or reverse unintended effects.

  1. Define one task and its observable outcome

    Inputs
    Current manual steps, examples, exceptions and the task owner’s success criteria.
    Action
    Pick a bounded trigger and output. Write what the workflow may read, change or send and which actions need approval. Use an expected-output example to agree success before choosing nodes or agents.
    Output
    A task contract with trigger, input/output fields, acceptance cases and prohibited side effects.
    Review checkpoint
    Could another person decide from the output whether this specific task succeeded?
    Common mistake
    Automating an ambiguous process and treating a completed run as a successful business outcome.

    Resources for this step

  2. Confirm access, data boundaries and credentials

    Inputs
    Authorized systems, data classification, retention needs and the task contract.
    Action
    Use only the access the task needs. Keep credentials outside shared templates and logs. Separate test from live destinations, agree retention and avoid sending project documents to services the project has not approved.
    Output
    An access and data-handling record with credential owner, approved destinations and retention rules.
    Review checkpoint
    Would a test failure or diagnostic log expose customer information or allow an unauthorized action?
    Common mistake
    Copying a working credential or customer payload into a downloadable example.

    Resources for this step

  3. Map fields and define record identity

    Inputs
    Representative records, required output fields and source identifiers or revisions.
    Action
    Specify field mappings, unit and date handling, validation and a stable identity for updates. Keep missing values explicit. When automating model data, verify object and revision references before applying repeated changes.
    Output
    A transformation specification with validation rules, identity keys and update behavior.
    Review checkpoint
    Can the same input be replayed without creating duplicate records or changing the wrong model element?
    Common mistake
    Using display names as unique identifiers or converting ambiguous dates without a defined rule.

    Resources for this step

    • Dynamo technology overview

      Inspect a documented model-data automation route when the task concerns model elements and repeatable transformations.

  4. Build and replay a sandbox pilot

    Inputs
    Task contract, mappings, synthetic examples and isolated test destinations.
    Action
    Implement the smallest useful path and compare observed outputs with the expected examples. Record workflow and node versions. Keep test evidence separate from vendor descriptions and do not describe a walkthrough as a tested deployment.
    Output
    A versioned pilot with expected-versus-observed output and a clear tested-scope record.
    Review checkpoint
    Was the actual workflow imported and executed in the stated environment, rather than only described?
    Common mistake
    Labelling a plausible node diagram as production-ready without executing its paths.

    Resources for this step

    • n8n technology overview

      Review a vendor-documented orchestration option; test the chosen integrations and versions before relying on them.

      Commercial disclosure: the n8n destination discloses an affiliate relationship. This process link is not an independent performance ranking.

  5. Test failures, duplicates and recovery

    Inputs
    Working pilot, identity rules and examples of malformed, duplicate and partial inputs.
    Action
    Exercise missing fields, retries, timeouts, rate limits and a failure after a partial write. Confirm what is retried, what is held for a person and how an operator can resume safely. Log enough to diagnose a failure without retaining secret payloads.
    Output
    Failure-case evidence, duplicate-handling rules and a stop, rollback or recovery procedure.
    Review checkpoint
    Can the owner recover from a partial run without duplicate side effects or lost work?
    Common mistake
    Retrying the entire workflow after a partial write and sending the same notification or record twice.

    Resources for this step

  6. Release with an owner and monitor the real outcome

    Inputs
    Passed task and failure cases, approved permissions and the workflow owner’s acceptance.
    Action
    Approve the live destination and permitted effects separately from the test. Introduce a bounded live scope, monitor output quality and assign maintenance. Record version changes and repeat affected tests; keep sending or submitting consequential material subject to the agreed approval.
    Output
    An owned release record with monitoring, review dates and a reversible change procedure.
    Review checkpoint
    Does someone notice failures, know when to stop the workflow and own changes to its dependencies?
    Common mistake
    Leaving an automation unattended after an integration or document format changes.

    Resources for this step

Worked journey: route a notice into a review queue

Synthetic training example only: the project, records and outcomes below are invented to explain the process. This is not evidence of a tested implementation, customer result or professional approval.

Task contract
The intended output is one review record per source notice, not an automatically submitted proposal.
Access
Synthetic notices go to a test queue; production credentials and client documents stay outside the example.
Mapping
The notice identifier is the update key. Missing deadlines remain unknown rather than being filled with a guessed date.
Pilot
The example plan calls for comparing the actual imported workflow’s output with expected records; it does not claim those tests have run.
Recovery
A duplicate notice and a failure after a write are explicit test cases; recovery must not create another review record.
Release
Only after real acceptance would an owner authorize a small live feed and monitor exceptions. Submission remains a separate action.

Automation release and recovery checklist

Select and copy the checklist into your project document. Complete it there; this page does not save project information.

Continue to the resource library ↓

Back to the data automation process ↑

209 connected resources

Explore this workflow

AEC technology profiles connected to this workflow.

Workflow pick

Dynamo

Open-source visual programming for computational design automation

Open resource →Workflow pick

n8n

Build self-hosted or cloud automations across APIs, documents, and business systems

Open resource →

2050 Materials

Sustainability data platform for building materials

Open resource →

2050 Materials API

REST API for real-time building material sustainability data

Open resource →

Agave

Connecting construction project and accounting records

Open resource →

Aino.World

AI-powered spatial data analysis for site planning

Open resource →

Airtable

AI-powered low-code platform for collaborative apps

Open resource →

Airteam

Drone-to-3D-model measurement platform for roofing, solar, and facade trades

Open resource →

AirWorks

AI-powered geospatial intelligence for infrastructure projects

Open resource →

Alloovium

AI document intelligence layer for construction that answers project questions with citations

Open resource →

Allsite.ai

AI-powered site design and grading optimization

Open resource →

AMP by Stantec

Parametric design automation for rapid feasibility studies

Open resource →
Browse technology directory →

A human decision first

Being data-driven goes beyond technology

It starts with good questions, trusted evidence, and clear decisions.

Book a conversation →