Mutai, A (2009) Factors influencing the use of building information modeling (BIM) within leading construction firms in the United States of America. PhD thesis, Indiana State University, USA.
Abstract
Although Building Information Modeling (BIM) technology is steadily being used within the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry, some aspects of the technology are still unfamiliar within the industry. In addition, as is often the case when new technologies are introduced, several problems associated with adaptation and implementations have surfaced. This is because BIM and the underlying collaborative approaches represent new and untested business concepts. In order to minimize these problems, a clear implementation strategy is required based on the key factors that influence the use of BIM technology. The purpose of this study was to investigate the factors that influence BIM use and assess relationships between these factors and the level of BIM use within leading construction fines in the United States. The study utilized an online survey which was sent to 236 firms focusing on over 80% general building. These firms were drawn from the top 400 contractors listed in the Engineering News Record (ENR) dated October 22, 2008. The statistical techniques of descriptive statistics, reliability analysis, factor analysis, and analysis of variance were used for data analysis. The research findings indicated that 12 factors influence the use of BIM technology: top management support, training, team BIM capability, BIM experience, job relevance, internal support, perceived technology difficulty, interoperability, cost, scope of work, liability, and delivery method. The ANOVA results revealed a variety of interrelationships between the identified factors based on respondent's positions, BIM experience, and company level of BIM use. The study conclusions reinforced the need for a coherent BIM adaptation strategy and supportive environment. This requires substantial top management support and investment in adequate BIM infrastructure and training including both software use and implications on related business processes. Specifically a collaborative approach is recommended in finding optimal solutions for identified factors based on a needs assessment exercise.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Roudebush, W |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | liability; reliability; building information model; building information modeling; interoperability; investment; training; United States; factor analysis |
| Index terms: | top management, United States, data analysis, liability, strategy, construction firm, survey, factor analysis, statistics, implementation, interoperability, building information modelling, variance, new technology, exercise, reliability analysis, United States of America, delivery method, adaptation |
| Subjects: | management, Geography, measurement and scaling, delivery method, systems and processes, information systems, liability law, statistical analysis, mathematical modelling, organization, user focus, data collection methods, reliability engineering, health behaviours and lifestyles, innovation and technology management, data analysis and analytics, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Organizational Design, Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Procurement, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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