Davies, K; McMeel, D J and Wilkinson, S (2017) Making friends with Frankenstein: Hybrid practice in BIM. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 24(1), pp. 78-93. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose Although the potential of Building Information Modelling (BIM) to generate process and performance improvement in the construction industry has been widely documented, very few projects operate in a wholly BIM environment. The purpose of this paper is to explore the factors that lead to hybrid practice in BIM across disciplines or project stages, and accommodations that must be reached within BIM project frameworks to allow for it. Design/methodology/approach In-depth semi-structured interviews were carried out with 38 BIM specialists from Australia and New Zealand, representing a variety of construction industry disciplines and roles. Data on current practice and experiences in BIM were analysed using a thematic approach within a qualitative framework. Findings Hybrid BIM practice is shown to be a common experience for practitioners in New Zealand and Australia. It is presented as a valid model of BIM adoption; both as a development stage in the process towards more complete BIM implementation, and also as an adoption model in its own right. Research limitations/implications The paper is based on data from New Zealand and Australia, which are currently developing BIM markets. Although surveys have demonstrated many similarities in BIM adoption processes internationally, results may be less applicable to more mature markets. Practical implications The paper suggests that instead of regarding hybrid BIM negatively as an unsuccessful implementation, companies should seek to identify and manage the causes and effects of hybridisation in order to improve project outcomes. Originality/value This paper addresses the management of transitional stages of BIM implementation, which is often overlooked in research.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | project management; innovation; change management; project teams; building information modelling; hybrid practice |
| Index terms: | building information modelling, New Zealand, project outcome, Australia, performance improvement, hybrid practice, markets, implementation, construction industry, project management, project team, interview, change management, survey, methodology, practitioner |
| Subjects: | Geography, project management theory and practice, performance measurement, management, research methods, industry analysis, information systems, practitioner, data collection methods, project completion, business, contractual arrangements, economic analysis, project delivery |
| Topics: | Procurement, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Business Strategy, Organizational Design, Quality Management, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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