Ma, L; Lovreglio, R; Yi, W; Yiu, T W and Shan, M (2023) Barriers and strategies for building information modelling implementation: A comparative study between New Zealand and China. International Journal of Construction Management, 23(12), pp. 2067-2076. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Building Information Modelling (BIM) is a sharing platform that can present a parametric 3 D model with various project information in the form of a digital display. In recent years, BIM adoption has become increasing globally as the Architectural, Engineering, Construction (AEC) industry has recognised its benefits. Meanwhile, many challenges of BIM adoption in different countries have been well documented. To address the gap in literature, this study examines the differences and similarities of BIM adoption between New Zealand and China. A questionnaire was conducted across the two countries to investigate the barriers and strategies for the implementation of BIM. Data from 146 respondents was collected in New Zealand and China. The result shows that there is a difference in the perception of Knowledge Barrier, Technology Barrier, Internal Strategy and External Strategy (Legal/Technology viewpoint) between New Zealand professionals and Chinese professionals. The differences identified offer important implications for government agencies to promote BIM implementation and for BIM service providers to better target the end-users.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | barriers; building information modeling; China; New Zealand; strategies |
| Index terms: | strategy, government agency, China, questionnaire, building information modelling, platform, New Zealand, implementation, comparative study |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, research design and methodology, data collection methods, information systems, administrative law, digital design, Geography, management |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Procurement, Legal Issues, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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