Chen, Y; Dib, H and Cox, R F (2014) A measurement model of building information modelling maturity. Construction Innovation, 14(2), pp. 186-209. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose - There is a growing requirement for a rating system of building information modelling maturity (BIMM) to compare the effectiveness of modelling processes in construction projects. The literature related to BIMM contains theoretical proposals and description of their maturity models. However, the research efforts are limited and lacking substantial theoretical and empirical justifications. This paper is a unique attempt to integrate previous models by performing empirical investigations of key factors for measuring BIMM in construction projects. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach - A national survey was designed to extract the perception of 124 BIM-related practitioners and academicians about the conceptual model. Then, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were employed to identify and test the key factors underlying the 27 areas. Findings - A principal component factor analysis of the collected data had suggested a five-factor model, which explained 69.839 per cent of the variance. The construct validity of the model was further tested by confirmatory factor analysis. The results indicated that all factors were important in measuring BIMM; however, compared with the factors of technology and people, more emphasis was put on the factors of process and information. Originality/value - The key value of the paper is to increase the understanding of multi-dimension nature of BIMM through empirical evidence and to provide practitioners and researchers with the insight regarding particular emphasis on the factors related to modelling process and information.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | quality management,factor analysis,process improvement,maturity model,bim,construction management |
| Index terms: | confirmatory factor analysis, process improvement, proposal, construction project, methodology, evidence, practitioner, validity, building information modelling, variance, national survey, maturity model, dimension, quality management, modelling, investigation, factor analysis, effectiveness |
| Subjects: | measurement and scaling, statistical analysis, information systems, quality assurance, management, performance management, research methods, production management, evaluation, research products and data, project planning, health monitoring assessment and metrics, analytical methods, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, practitioner |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Project Management, Roles and Professions, Digital Applications, Quality Management |
| 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