Sierra, F and Rodboonpha, C (2023) Building information modelling implementation models in Thailand: Drivers, benefits, barriers and lessons learned. Journal of Construction in Developing Countries, 28(2), pp. 37-55. ISSN 1823-6499
Abstract
This study provides an overview of the typical building information modelling (BIM) implementation models in Thailand and a BIM implementation guide for contractors to avoid repeating common mistakes. Generally, BIM is used to produce a three-dimensional (3D) model, update technical drawings, detect clashes, quantify take-offs and create 3D visualisations. The study revealed that the main driver for contractors to use BIM is the request by Thai private developers to use BIM in more than 60% of large projects. In addition, the present study discovered that the main barriers to the implementation of BIM are the productivity of the projects, high initial investment, lack of knowledge and information available about BIM, lack of leadership from the government to promote the change, resistance to change of practice and the long adoption period. As a result, most contractors use BIM below its potential and receive only limited benefits. This study also recommends suggestions to minimise identified barriers.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building information modelling; Thai contractors; Thailand |
| Index terms: | 3D visualization, lessons learned, take-off, drawing, Thailand, implementation, building information modelling, productivity |
| Subjects: | Geography, professional development, management, quantity surveying, information systems, contractual arrangements, technical documentation, visualization |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Digital Applications, Procurement, Geographical Context, Information Management, Cost Management, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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