Ensar, A and Selin, G (2021) Individual and organisational level drivers and barriers to building information modelling. Journal of Construction in Developing Countries, 26(1), pp. 89-109. ISSN 1823-6499
Abstract
The diffusion of building information modelling (BIM) has remained slow and the search for a solution to the problems that prevent technology acceleration continues. Although there is strong evidence that user resistance is a major factor in delaying the adoption of new technologies, little attention has been paid to the drivers of BIM use in literature. Besides, majority of the studies on organisational barriers focus on large firms, despite strong emphasis laid on increased collaboration in the BIM. In the current study, the drivers of and barriers to BIM adoption and implementation are explored at both individual and organisational levels through a survey conducted on 905 industry professionals from the Turkish construction industry. This study further explores differences between groups of firm size in embracing BIM technologies to assess the extent and presence of digital divide. Results reveal that professionals place more value on performance enhancing factors rather than social influence for the adoption of BIM, indicating the role of improved performance as a driver for BIM. The most prominent barriers, on the other hand, appear to be related to the availability of expertise and skills, a problem that seems to exist not solely within companies but also further down the supply chain. Policymakers seeking to disseminate BIM use may address these concerns and consider these insights to revise policies and incentives.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building information modelling; construction industry; barriers; drivers; digital divide; questionnaire survey |
| Index terms: | evidence, questionnaire, collaboration, survey, digital divide, acceleration, user resistance, implementation, construction industry, presence, new technology, building information modelling |
| Subjects: | evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, digital technology, innovation and technology management, contractual arrangements, environmental science, negotiation, management, project controls, industry analysis, information systems |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Time Control, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Procurement, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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