Chen, Y; Dib, H; Cox, R F; Shaurette, M and Vorvoreanu, M (2016) Structural equation model of building information modeling maturity. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(9): 04016032, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
For the implementation of building information modeling (BIM), an incompatible development among various aspects of a business can lead to different levels of BIM maturity (BIMM) or even project failure. Therefore, it is important to identify key causal factors of BIMM. This research develops a structural equation model of BIMM through three-step multivariate analysis. It starts with exploratory factor analysis to identify three key BIMM factors, which are further tested with confirmatory factor analysis. The causal relationships among the three factors and BIMM are then proposed and validated with structural equation modeling. This research has both practical and theoretical contributions. Practically, the proposed model can be used by practitioners to initiate and evaluate their BIM implementation. Theoretically, the result provides empirical evidence for the multidimensional nature of BIMM and insights into the causal relationships among the factors. Specifically, the factors of process management and technology management are correlated, and both have significant positive impacts on BIMM through the information management factor. However, compared with technology management, process management is identified as more important for BIMM.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building information modeling; confirmatory factor analysis; exploratory factor analysis; information technologies; maturity; project; structural equation model |
| Index terms: | project failure, building information modelling, structural equation model, implementation, multivariate analysis, technology management, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, structural equation modelling, practitioner, process management, evidence, information technology |
| Subjects: | management, information systems, statistical analysis, evaluation and assessment methods, project completion, innovation studies, practitioner, computing systems, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Procurement, Roles and Professions, 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