Wang, M.; Mahdiyar, A. and Mustafa Kamal, E. (2026) Risk assessment in digital twin implementation: A general cybernetic best-worst method approach. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 33(7), pp. 5522-5539. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose – This research aims to develop a comprehensive risk assessment model that refines and evaluates significant risks (both opportunities and threats) in the practice of Digital Twin (DT) within the construction industry. Design/methodology/approach – An innovative approach is employed, integrating the Fuzzy Delphi Method and the General Cybernetic Best–Worst Method (G-CY-BWM). Data are collected from 30 experts in the initial phase, with 22 continuing through the complete assessment process. Sensitivity and comparative analyses are performed to validate the findings. Findings – A novel risk assessment model is developed, identifying and assessing 32 critical risk factors. The top two opportunities are "enhancement in key digital enablers" and "higher productivity, " while the two most significant threats are "increase in cost of human resources" and "inadequate collaboration among stakeholders." Sensitivity and comparative analyses were performed to validate the findings, confirming the importance of considering risk interdependencies in the analysis. Research limitations/implications – This research presents a comprehensive risk assessment model and introduces a novel, replicable methodology for digital twin implementation in construction projects, which informs the development of similar models in other fields. The use of purposive sampling limits the generalizability of the findings. Practical implications – The developed model enables practitioners and decision-makers to conduct accurate risk analysis for successful digital twin implementation by effectively leveraging key opportunities and mitigating the most influential threats. Originality/value – This study developed a risk assessment model capable of assessing the risks (opportunities and threats) associated with DT implementation in construction projects, considering their relationships. To this end, the research developed a novel and replicable methodology integrating the Fuzzy Delphi Method, the cybernetic pairwise comparison concept and the general best-worst method to ensure higher accuracy and consistency while reducing the cognitive data-collection load.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | digital construction; digital twin; MCDM; risk assessment model; risk management |
| Index terms: | digital twin, methodology, accuracy, productivity, purposive sampling, risk factor, collaboration, digital construction, comparative analysis, fuzzy Delphi, practitioner, human resource, risk management, construction project, implementation, construction industry, risk assessment, risk analysis |
| Subjects: | information systems, risk assessment, digital engineering, practitioner, professional development, environmental hazards, decision-making and optimization, production management, financial risk, contractual arrangements, industry analysis, management, research methods, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Digital Applications, Roles and Professions, Information Management, Cost Management, Risk Management, Organizational Design, Procurement, Business Strategy, Human Resources, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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