Al-Mohammad, M S; Haron, A T; Esa, M; Aloko, M N; Alhammadi, Y; Anandh, K S and Rahman, R A (2023) Factors affecting BIM implementation: Evidence from countries with different income levels. Construction Innovation, 23(3), pp. 683-710. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to empirically analyze the symmetries and asymmetries among the critical factors affecting building information modeling (BIM) implementation between countries with different income levels. To achieve that aim, the study objectives are to identify: critical factors affecting BIM implementation in low-, lower-middle-, upper-middle- and high-income countries; overlapping critical factors between countries with different income levels; and agreements on the critical factors between countries with different income levels. Design/methodology/approach: This study identified potential BIM implementation factors using a systematic literature review and semi-structured interviews with architectural, engineering and construction (AEC) professionals. Then, the factors were inserted into a questionnaire survey and sent to AEC professionals in Afghanistan, India, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia. The collected data was analyzed using the following techniques and tests: mean, standard deviation, normalized value, Kruskal–Wallis, Dunn and Mann–Whitney. Findings: Five critical factors overlap between all countries: “availability of guidelines for implementing BIM,” “cost-benefit of implementing BIM,” “stakeholders' willingness to learn the BIM method,” “consistent views on BIM between stakeholders” and “existence of standard contracts on liability and risk allocation.” Also, the criticality of the factors often differs between income levels, especially between low- and high-income countries, suggesting a significant gap between low- and high-income countries in BIM implementation. Originality/value: This study differs from prior works by empirically analyzing the symmetries and asymmetries in BIM implementation factors between countries with different income levels (i.e. low-, lower-middle-, upper-middle- and high-income countries).
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | automation; building information modeling; building technology; construction innovation; construction management; income level |
| Index terms: | Malaysia, systematic literature review, automation, deviation, India, building information modelling, income, critical factor, interview, questionnaire, evidence, liability, implementation, agreements, Afghanistan, construction innovation, Saudi Arabia, survey, building technology, risk allocation, methodology |
| Subjects: | liability law, contractual arrangements, Geography, contract formation, research evaluation and metrics, economic analysis, financial and cost management, evaluation and assessment methods, engineering systems, information systems, risk assessment, building construction, research methods, financial risk, automation and robotics, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Procurement, Geographical Context, Risk Management, Research Practice, Cost Management, Digital Applications, Contract Administration, Legal Issues |
| 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