Ahmed, Y A; Shehzad, H M F; Khurshid, M M; Abbas Hassan, O H; Abdalla, S A and Alrefai, N (2024) Examining the effect of interoperability factors on building information modelling (BIM) adoption in Malaysia. Construction Innovation, 24(2), pp. 606-642. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose: Building information modelling (BIM) has transformed the traditional practices of the Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry. BIM creates a collaborative digital representation of built environment data. Competitive advantage can be achieved with collaborative project delivery and rich information modelling. Despite the abundant benefits, BIM’s adoption in the AEC is susceptible to confrontation. A substantial impediment to BIM adoption often cited is data interoperability. Other facets of interoperability got limited attention. Other academic areas, including information systems, discuss the interoperability construct ahead of data interoperability. These interoperability factors have yet to be surveyed in the AEC industry. This study aims to investigate the effect of interoperability factors on BIM adoption and develop a comprehensive BIM adoption model. Design/methodology/approach: The theoretical foundations of the proposed model are based on the European interoperability framework (EIF) and technology, organization, environment framework (TOE). Quantitative data collection from construction firms is gathered. The model has been thoroughly examined and validated using partial least squares structural equation modelling in SmartPLS software. Findings: The study’s findings indicate that relative advantage, top management support, government support, organizational readiness and regulation support are determinants of BIM adoption. Financial constraints, complexity, lack of technical interoperability, semantic interoperability, organizational interoperability and uncertainty are barriers to BIM adoption. However, compatibility, competitive pressure and legal interoperability do not affect BIM adoption. Practical implications: Finally, this study provides recommendations containing the essential technological, organizational, environmental and interoperability factors that AEC stakeholders can address to enhance BIM adoption. Originality/value: To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is one of the first studies to combine TOE and EIF in a single research model. This research provides empirical evidence for using the proposed model as a guide to promoting BIM adoption. As a result, the highlighted determinants can assist organizations in developing and executing successful policies that support BIM adoption in the AEC industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | adoption model; determinants; building information modelling; interoperability |
| Index terms: | competitive advantage, Malaysia, government support, building information modelling, relative advantage, data interoperability, information modelling, collaborative project, built environment, foundations, determinant, interoperability, structural equation modelling, construction firm, top management, methodology, evidence, regulation, information system, partial least square, complexity |
| Subjects: | digital design, Geography, research methods, data exchange, management, structural engineering, information systems, systems and processes, systems engineering, statistical analysis, political science, infrastructure and transport systems, market analysis, innovation studies, organization, evaluation and assessment methods, government bodies, risk assessment, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Urban Studies, Organizational Design, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Procurement, Governance |
| 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