Chang, J; Xie, X and Parlikad, A K (2025) Cloud-based building information modelling (CBIM): Software engineers' insights into improving asset information quality. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 15(3), pp. 594-611. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Purpose: This research investigates the capabilities of Cloud-based Building Information Modelling (CBIM) in managing quality asset information, drawing upon software engineers' perspectives. Compelling statistics highlight the relationship between building information and environmental sustainability. However, despite the growing utilisation of CBIM in the Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry, a significant knowledge gap remains concerning its effectiveness in maintaining quality asset information. Design/methodology/approach: This study employed an exploratory qualitative approach, utilising semi-structured interviews with thirteen software engineers actively developing technological solutions for the AEC industry. Following thematic analysis, the findings are categorised into four dimensions: strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and technological limitations. Subsequently, these findings are analysed in relation to previously identified information quality problems. Findings: This research reveals that while CBIM improves project coordination and information accessibility, its effectiveness is challenged by the need for manual updates, vulnerability to human errors and dependency on network services. Technological limitations, notably the absence of automated updates for as-built drawings and the risk of data loss during file conversions in the design phase, coupled with its reduced capability to validate context-specific information from the user's viewpoint, emphasise the urgent need for managerial strategies to maximise CBIM's capabilities in addressing information quality problems. Originality/value: This study augments the understanding of CBIM, highlighting the managerial implications of a robust information management process to safeguard information integrity. This approach fosters sustainable practices anchored in reliable information essential for achieving desired outcomes. The findings also have broader managerial implications, especially for sectors that employ CBIM as an instrumental tool.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | asset information quality; built environment; cloud-based BIM; information quality; sustainable information management |
| Index terms: | interview, drawing, strategy, methodology, thematic analysis, vulnerability, environmental sustainability, as-built drawing, conversion, accessibility, building information modelling, sustainable practice, qualitative approach, engineer, integrity, effectiveness, design phase, built environment, statistics, dimension, coordination |
| Subjects: | mathematical modelling, data collection methods, profession, health monitoring assessment and metrics, technical documentation, methods and analysis, performance management, management, information systems, infrastructure and transport systems, sustainable practices, professional practice, health safety and environment, research methods, inclusive design, manufacturing engineering, environmental hazards |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions, Design Practice, Urban Studies, Digital Applications, Organizational Design, Engineering Principles, Health and Safety, Sustainability, Quality 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