Adoption of building information modeling in Chinese construction industry: The technology-organization-environment framework

Chen, Y; Yin, Y; Browne, G J and Li, D (2019) Adoption of building information modeling in Chinese construction industry: The technology-organization-environment framework. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(9), pp. 1878-1898. ISSN 0969-9988

Abstract

Purpose: Building information modeling (BIM) is recognized as a major innovation in the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry. Understanding the factors that influence the AEC’s adoption of BIM will benefit the research and practice of BIM. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach: This study provides empirical evidence for the accumulated knowledge of BIM adoption by examining the context of Chinese construction industry. Based on the technology-organization-environment (TOE) framework in the innovation diffusion literature, the authors develop a research model that integrates the critical success factors related to the technology of BIM, the construction company and the environment in Chinese construction industry. The authors collected two different data sets from engineering consulting firms and construction firms in China, and conducted rigorous analyses using a sophisticated statistical approach. Findings: The authors found that the relative advantage of BIM was a major factor that enabled BIM adoption, while the complexity of BIM was an inhibiter. In addition, management support was also a significant antecedent of BIM adoption. However, organizational readiness was significant for engineering consulting firms but not for construction firms. Surprisingly, the authors did not find consistent significant impacts of any environmental factors. Last, younger firms were more likely to adopt BIM. Originality/value: One of the first to apply the TOE framework to integrate three groups of factors that may explain BIM adoption in China. Such a comprehensive framework provides a much broader perspective of BIM adoption to evaluate the impacts of different antecedent factors. The authors conducted an empirical study based on survey data collected from two different types of companies, i.e., engineering consulting firms and construction firms, representing the two parties in the principal-agent relationship of a construction project. One of the first to apply a sophisticated statistical approach, i.e., partial least squares, to analyze the data in the BIM literature.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: adoption; building information modelling; China; construction industry; technology-organization-environment framework
Index terms: innovation diffusion, survey, construction company, construction firm, evidence, construction project, methodology, complexity, environmental factor, critical success factor, agent, partial least square, China, building information modelling, relative advantage, empirical study, construction industry
Subjects: systems engineering, statistical analysis, information systems, industry analysis, sociology, Geography, production management, research methods, environmental science, practitioner, control systems, innovation studies, organization, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods
Topics: Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Digital Applications
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