Shahruddin, S; Zairul, M and Haron, A T (2021) Redefining the territory and competency of architectural practitioners within a BIM-based environment: A systematic review. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 17(5-6), pp. 376-410. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
Within the digital era of building information modelling (BIM), the sustainability of architectural business practices and architect’s professional values is highly anticipated by the competencies of individual architectural practitioners in performing their day-to-day job activities. However, their lack of competencies remains a significant barrier towards successful implementation of BIM within an organisation and individual architectural project. Previous review studies of BIM competencies have yet to focus on any architectural discipline, and therefore, this study attempts to redefine the expected BIM competence acts expected from the architects serving an architectural institutional environment. Towards this end, the PRISMA Statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) was employed to assess the empirical evidence found in the literature. The findings have confirmed that within a BIM-based environment, being competent is no longer viewed as being 'technology savvy' but rather having an ability to demonstrate change management, strategic planning, finance and budgeting, and project delivery sets of competencies in day-to-day job activities. This discovery extends the base knowledge of BIM competencies sets particularly for architectural practitioners and offers valuable and practical insights for architectural institutions to structure a framework of professional pathways for future architectural practitioners.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | architectural practice; building information modelling; competency framework; institutional environment; systematic review |
| Index terms: | meta-analysis, architect, practitioner, change management, project delivery, competence, evidence, budgeting, systematic literature review, implementation, building information modelling, architectural practice, strategic planning |
| Subjects: | evaluation and assessment methods, management, practitioner, personnel development, information systems, financial management, business, profession, project delivery, contractual arrangements, research evaluation and metrics |
| Topics: | Procurement, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions, Human Resources, Digital Applications, Organizational Design, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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