Jaradat, S and Sexton, M (2016) BIM articulation in different-sized architectural firms. In: Chan, P W and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 32nd Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2016, Manchester, UK.
Abstract
The empirical domain of research into the implementation of Building Information Modelling (BIM) has tended to be large design practices working on mega projects. The majority of construction projects that use BIM (including mega projects) involve small- and medium-sized design practices (SMDPs). An understanding of how the commonalities and differences that large design practices and SMDPs articulate and implement BIM, and how BIM practices are integrated across the supply chain that may consist of large and small firms, is essential if sector-wide reform is to take place. Research has been conducted that explores the distinctive nature of innovation in small construction firms, but less research articulates how BIM is played out, in the settings of interdisciplinary large and smaller architectural firms. Results are given from case study enquiries of five large design practices and six SMDPs firms that use BIM-enabled design. This research contributes to the understandings of the different contexts of large and (SMDPs). The responses collected from the large firms were mostly evident in the smaller firms. However, certain differences were identified amongst the different-sized firms, in terms of the way practitioners perceived BIM. Smaller firms mainly reflected the technical stance of BIM while more practitioners in the large firms expressed the practice-based approach in describing BIM.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | BIM; implementation; articulation; different-sized architectural firms |
| Index terms: | architectural firm, case study, building information modelling, design practice, small construction firm, practitioner, construction project, implementation |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, business, organization, data collection methods, practitioner, information systems, design process, production management |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Digital Applications, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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