Bosch-Sijtsema, P and Gluch, P (2021) Challenging construction project management institutions: The role and agency of BIM actors. International Journal of Construction Management, 21(11), pp. 1077-1087. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
The use of building information modelling (BIM) has opened up for new roles. Previous studies on BIM roles focused on their duties, formal responsibilities and legitimacy, but few studies pay attention to how BIM actors (BIM coordinators and strategists) act to support increased BIM usage. Applying the theoretical construct of institutional work, this paper aims to create an understanding of the role and agency of BIM actors. Based on observations and semi-structured interviews with BIM actors and managers, the findings show: (1) purposive actions of BIM actors to promote and diffuse new BIM practices; (2) tensions between creating new BIM practices and maintaining existing construction management institutions; (3) BIM actor as an interface between the BIM technology and its users. Focusing on the BIM actor’s role and agency gives insights into the hard process of changing and/or disrupting traditional construction management institutions and creating new practices arising from increased digitalization.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building information modelling actor; case studies; institutional work; professional roles |
| Index terms: | digitalization, case study, interview, construction project management, manager, duty, building information modelling, agency, legitimacy, institutional work, traditional construction |
| Subjects: | project management theory and practice, information systems, data collection methods, practitioner, sociology, digital technology, heritage and conservation, contractual role |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Contract Administration, Digital Applications, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Design Practice, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here