Ashworth, S J (2021) The evolution of facility management (FM) in the building information modelling (BIM) process: An opportunity to use critical success factors (CSF) for optimising built assets. PhD thesis, Liverpool John Moores University, UK.
Abstract
Purpose: To explore the evolution of Facility Management (FM) in the Building Information Modelling (BIM) process. The research aimed to establish Critical Success Factors (CSF) which help deliver successful BIM projects, and to present these in a ‘FM-BIM Mobilisation Framework’. Background: Inefficiencies, poor collaboration and a focus on short-term costs in the construction industry, combined with a lack of innovation and digital competency when ordering projects, have resulted in a failure to deliver assets which have sustainable outcomes over their whole-life. Methodology: A mixed methods concurrent convergent design, incorporating side-by-side narrative text analysis was adopted to merge qualitative/quantitative findings. Critical Success Themes (CST) from literature were then used to establish CSF through; 19 interviews with FM/BIM experts, and a questionnaire to gauge FM industry awareness of BIM (using UK and international inputs). The final merged CSF were incorporated into a framework. This was validated using a two-stage process with a focus group using some of the same FM/BIM experts. Key findings: 10 CSF Main-Themes (MT), with a 100 Sub-Themes (ST) were identified covering important digital skills, knowledge and competences people require to contribute to the BIM process. Clients and Facility Mangers (FMs) must engage early if the full benefits of BIM are to be realised in the operational phase. They must clearly define their information requirements to align with business processes, and collaborate with the delivery team to ensure information is captured/transferred into the relevant management systems. Originality/value: The comprehensive end-to-end framework combines FM and BIM CSF into one online interactive tool which provides a wealth of useful knowledge, sources, benefits and practical examples. Although based on the UK BIM Framework, the alignment with ‘ISO 19650’ ensures it will also benefit an international audience. Keywords: Facility Management (FM), Building Information Modelling (BIM), ‘FM-BIM Mobilisation Framework’, digitalisation, information requirements.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Tucker, M |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | competence; failure; skills; building information model; building information modelling; collaboration; innovation; client; UK; critical success factor; information modelling; text analysis; focus group; interview |
| Index terms: | information modelling, mixed method, building information modelling, construction industry, text analysis, digitalization, management system, focus group, interview, ISO, built asset, critical success factor, questionnaire, competence, narrative, collaboration, methodology, evolution |
| Subjects: | environmental science, analytical methods, digital technology, asset management, digital design, research methods, standards development, control systems, data collection methods, industry analysis, information systems, qualitative and interpretive research, personnel development, management |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Human Resources, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Quality Management, Sustainability, Project Management |
| 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