Digital tools are becoming central to how construction projects are designed, coordinated, documented, and delivered. Building Information Modeling (BIM), artificial intelligence (AI), and other technology-supported workflows can improve project planning and coordination, while also raising new questions about responsibility, reliance, and evidence.
At the 2026 American Arbitration Association® (AAA®) Construction Conference, “Building Resilience: The Future of Construction Disputes and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in an Ever-Changing World,” panelists examined how the growing use of digital tools is changing design and coordination disputes.
The message for construction teams: technology can help identify risks and improve project delivery, but it does not eliminate professional judgment or contractual responsibility. Parties need to define how digital tools will be used, who may rely on them, and who is responsible when something goes wrong.
AI Is Making BIM More Powerful
AI is making BIM and other digital construction tools more powerful. Project teams may use AI-supported tools to generate design options, analyze project data, identify risks, update drawings, or test different project scenarios.
But AI remains a tool, not a substitute for professional judgment. As these tools become more common, disputes may focus on how AI-supported outputs were reviewed, verified, and incorporated into project decisions.
BIM Models Need Clear Contract Status
One of the most important questions in digital construction is whether the BIM model is part of the contract. If the model is a contract document, parties need to know which version controls, who can update it, and what level of reliance is permitted.
When contracts do not clearly define the role of the BIM model, disputes may arise over whether parties were entitled to rely on it when pricing, coordinating, or building the work. Clear contract language can help reduce later fights over model accuracy, version control, and responsibility for errors.
Digital Coordination Risks Should Be Assigned Up Front
BIM and AI-supported workflows can improve coordination, but they also make responsibility harder to define. When multiple parties are relying on the same model or digital output, the contract should make clear how that information may be used and who is responsible for reviewing it.
For owners, contractors, design professionals, and consultants, those questions should be addressed before a dispute arises. Clear contract language can help reduce later fights over model accuracy, access, data integrity, and responsibility if a digital output is wrong.
AI May Change How Professional Responsibility Is Evaluated
AI does not erase the standard of care for design and construction professionals. But it may affect how parties, advocates, arbitrators, and mediators evaluate whether a professional acted reasonably under the circumstances.
As technology evolves, disputes may turn on which tools were used, how they were checked, whether reliance on them was reasonable, and whether the human review process was sufficient. The legal standard may remain familiar, but the facts will become more technical.
Digital Evidence Requires Technical Fluency
Disputes involving AI and BIM may raise complex evidentiary questions. Parties may need to understand how digital tools were used, what information supported the output, who reviewed it, and whether the project data was reliable.
This makes technical fluency increasingly important in ADR. Arbitrators and mediators handling technology-driven construction disputes may need to understand digital workflows well enough to keep the process focused on the key issues: reliance, verification, responsibility, and causation.
Read the Full Report
The AAA report, “Building Resilience: The Future of Construction Disputes and ADR in an Ever-Changing World,” examines the risks reshaping construction projects and disputes.
Download the report for insights on managing disruption, resolving claims earlier, and keeping complex projects moving.