CC BY
248
DOI: 10.23968/2500-0055-2022-7-1-56-71
ADOPTION OF BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING IN THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LIFE CYCLE: BENEFITS FOR
STAKEHOLDERS
Nguyen Quoc Toan*, Nguyen Van Tam, Tran Ngoc Diep, Pham Xuan Anh
Faculty of Construction Economics and Management, Hanoi University of Civil Engineering 55 Giai Phong Road, Hai Ba Trung Dist., Hanoi, Vietnam
Corresponding author: [email protected]
Abstract
Introduction: Building Information Modeling (BIM) is characterized by potential benefits at many phases of the construction project life cycle. However, no comprehensive study has been conducted to evaluate the benefits of BIM adoption and implementation for project stakeholders in the Vietnamese construction industry context. Methods: This study aimed to identify and evaluate the benefits of BIM adoption and implementation in construction projects based on the perception of project stakeholders through data collection from 159 valid construction practitioners. The reliability and validity tests were performed to analyze collected data by SPSS 22 software. Results: The results demonstrated that four primary clusters of the project stakeholders received benefits when BIM was adopted in construction projects: architectural and structural design units (10 benefits), facility management units (8 benefits), contractors (6 benefits), and owners (6 benefits). These clusters accounted for 58.954%, 5.975%, 4.682%, and 3.736%, respectively, of the variance that characterized the benefits of BIM adoption. The findings indicated that 'improve the quality of design drawings', and 'minimize conflicts/changes' were the most significant BIM benefits for architectural and structural design units, whereas 'convenient for managing project data' and 'easy planning and resource mobilization' were the top benefits for facility management units. For contractors, 'minimize construction errors' and 'construction cost saving' were the most prominent benefits. Besides, BIM brought owners such striking benefits as 'maximize project performance' and 'easier to choose investment options'.
Keywords
BIM, benefits, project stakeholders, construction industry, life cycle.
Introduction
Building Information Modeling (BIM) has been recognized as one of the most efficient technological initiatives in response to the challenges within the construction industry (Azhar, 2011). BIM technology makes it possible to create a digitally constructed accurate virtual model of a building. This technology can be used for facility planning, design, construction, and operation. BIM assists architects, engineers, and builders in visualizing what will be built in a simulated environment so that they could identify potential design, construction, or operational issues. BIM represents a new paradigm within the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry, one that encourages integration of the roles of all stakeholders on a project (Azhar, 2011). A BIM model characterizes the geometry, spatial relationships, geographic information, quantities and properties of building elements, cost estimates, material inventories, and project schedule (Azhar, 2011; Chan et al., 2018). This allows project stakeholders to efficiently collaborate throughout the project lifecycle (Oesterreich and Teuteberg, 2019; Saka and Chan, 2019). BIM can
be viewed as a virtual process that encompasses all aspects, disciplines, and systems of a facility within a single, virtual model; it enables all construction project stakeholders to collaborate more precisely and efficiently than using traditional processes (Azhar, 2011). Team members are constantly refining and adjusting their portions in response to project specifications and design changes to ensure the model is as accurate as possible before the project physically begins (Carmona and Irwin, 2007). One of the primary reasons for BIM adoption is to achieve a proper balance between the project management triangle of scope (features & quality), cost and time (Olawumi and Chan, 2019a; Olawumi et al., 2018), which is one of the most important concerns in the (AEC) industry (Chan et al., 2019b).
Stakeholders can maximize benefits in terms of time, cost, and quality by implementing BIM in construction projects (Wong et al., 2009). However, it is not easy to achieve a right balance between these three factors for the construction projects, since so many strategies and solutions are needed
to accomplish it, and innovation can be one of the possible solutions to strike a balance between these three factors (Chan et al., 2019b). Hence, BIM is a new technology in the construction industry, which is expected to deliver numerous benefits to the industry, such as initial conflict control in the designing (Azhar, 2011), project performance and quality enhancement (Succar, 2009), enhance collaboration among construction stakeholders (Kerosuo et al., 2015; Succar, 2009), effective construction process (Abd Hamid et al., 2018), operation and maintenance of buildings (Hoang et al., 2020), improve visualization of project execution (Haron et al., 2015), decisionmaking process enhancement (Azhar, 2011), effective construction cost (Abbasnejad and Moud, 2013).
Even though BIM has been used in the construction industry in Vietnam since the early 2000s, it is still not widely applied (Van Tam et al., 2021a). This is especially true for construction projects funded with state-managed capital, which makes up the majority of Vietnamese construction projects (Dao et al., 2020). Being aware of BIM benefits, Vietnam has set 2021 as the target year for adopting BIM for all governmental and large construction projects (Dao et al., 2021). Investors and construction firms initially recognized the benefits of adopting BIM after observing the trends of BIM technology adoption. Numerous design Arms and contractors have gradually integrated BIM tools into practical projects ranging from concept design to construction management. However, in the Vietnamese construction industry, BIM implementation is very slow. Its slow adoption and implementation are caused by numerous barriers, of which lack of perceived benefits of BIM adoption is considered to have a key role in this regard (Van Tam et al., 2021b). Moreover, there has been no in-depth research in Vietnam to assess the benefits gained by construction project stakeholders when adopting and implementing BIM. Therefore, this study aims to identify and evaluate BIM implementation benefits in construction projects through data collection from construction practitioners who implemented BIM in Vietnam. Benefits have always been achieved through effective implementation, and vice versa. Hence, BIM benefits should influence construction industry practitioners to foster BIM implementation (Al-Ashmori et al., 2020).
Literature review
BIM has great potential for useful adoption at all stages of the project life cycle. This technology can be used by the owners to understand project needs, by the design team to analyze, design, and develop the project, by the contractors to manage the construction of the project and by the facility managers during operation and decommissioning phases (Bryde et al., 2013; Grilo and Jardim-
Goncalves, 2010). BIM has been proved as a very beneficial approach in reducing uncertainties and improving the efficiency of the construction process (Van Tam et al., 2021b). BIM will provide potential beneficial project outcomes by enabling the rapid analysis of different scenarios related to the life cycle performance of a building (Schade et al., 2011). The study of Fallon and Palmer (Fallon and Palmer, 2007) explained that BIM is very useful in increasing the speed and utility of activities by enhancing the quality of scheduling and cost information throughout the project lifecycle; one of the most frequently observed benefits is increased utility and speed (Memon et al., 2014). Several significant BIM benefits were identified by Al-Ashmori et al. (2020) in Malaysia such as (1) increasing productivity and efficiency; (2) assessing time and cost associated with design change; (3) eliminating clashes in design; (4) improving multiparty communication and maintain synchronized communication; (5) integrating construction scheduling and planning, (6) identifying time-based clashes; and (7) tracking progress during construction. In Hong Kong, Chan et al. (2019b) identified 12 benefits of BIM implementation. They found that the most significant benefits are (1) better cost estimates and control; (2) a better understanding of design; (3) reduce construction cost; (4) better construction planning and monitoring; (5) improve project quality. In Vietnam, the study of (Hoang et al., 2020) assessed 12 BIM benefits; the top five significant benefits were determined as follows: (1) collaboration improvement; (2) more accurate information from a data-rich asset; (3) automatically updated model; (4) improved interoperability; (5) increased employees' productivity and efficiency. In Turkey, 41 benefits of BIM adoption were identified by Seyis (2019). The top benefits include (1) planning the tasks and responsibilities in a timely manner; (2) promoting collaboration and coordination in the early design phase; (3) automatic implementation of design changes into 3D CAD model; (4) decreasing uncertainties in the processes by clarifying risks; (5) reducing time variances in the processes.
The introduction and adoption of any new technological advancement, such as BIM, usually necessitates identifying and addressing the factors that may affect the adoption by project stakeholders in order for the innovations to be successfully implemented and the benefits to be derived from them (Abubakar et al., 2014). In order to foster BIM adoption, identifying its benefits in construction projects is necessary. Therefore, various BIM implementation benefits in construction projects have been identified and classified by numerous researchers from various countries. Table 1 provides the most significant benefits of BIM adoption in construction projects from prior studies.
Table 1. Summary on benefits of BIM adoption from prior studies
Country Study Total benefits identified Benefits of BIM adoption
Australia (Hong et al., 2019) 7 (1) cost saving; (2) time saving; (3) improved team work; (4) improved data management; (5) improved understanding of project.
(Newton and Chileshe, 2012a) 9 (1) improved constructability; (2) improved visualization; (3) improved productivity; (4) reduced clashes; (5) improved quality and accuracy.
(Enegbuma and Ali, 2011b) 7 (1) faster and more effective processes; (2) better design; (3) controlled whole-life costs and environmental data; (4) better production quality; (5) automated assembly.
(Mohd Noor et al., 2018) 12 (1) more realistic start and finish dates of project activities; (2) rapid consideration of many alternatives schedule; (3) helps managing the schedule changes when and as they occur; (4) helps evaluating overall project performance; (5) helps to ensure that the quality-related activities are being performed effectively.
Malaysia (Ibrahim et al., 2019) 56 (1) concepts become clearer and project conceptualization easier; (2) earlier and more accurate visualizations of a design to the owner; (3) support decision making regarding the design; (4) improve feasibility studies; (5) improve simulations and coordination
(Memon et al., 2014) 8 (1) improved scheduling; (2) improved drawing coordinates; (3) improved work quality; (4) single detailed model; (5) control time and cost.
(Al-Ashmori et al., 2020) 7 (1) increase productivity and efficiency; (2) assess time and cost associated with design change; (3) eliminate clashes in design; (4) improve multi-party communication and maintain synchronized communication; (5) integrate construction scheduling & planning.
Indonesia (Sholeh et al., 2020) 6 (1) BIM makes flexibility in design and construction; (2) BIM facilitates supply chain integration between stakeholders; (3) BIM facilitates supply chain integration between project phases; (4) flexible work; (5) better risk-sharing between stakeholders.
Korea (Ashcraft, 2008) 12 (1) single data entry, multiple uses; (2) design efficiency; (3) consistent design bases; (4) 3D modeling and conflict resolution; (5) conflict identification and resolution.
(Chan et al., 2019b) 12 (1) better cost estimates and control; (2) a better understanding of design; (3) reduce construction cost; (4) better construction planning and monitoring; (5) improve project quality.
Hong Kong (Tse et al., 2005) 5 (1) creating views and schedules dynamically and automatically; (2) reflecting changes instantly in all drawings and schedules; (3) single project file; (4) toolbars oriented; (5) compatibility with data exchange standards.
Jordan (Matarneh and Hamed, 2017) 13 (1) reduce rework during construction; (2) maximizing productivity; (3) reduce conflict/changes; (4) clash detection; (5) enhance collaboration & communication.
Nigeria (Saka et al., 2019) 15 (1) facilities management; (2) health and safety; (3) energy management; (4) time saving; (5) better coordination.
Vietnam (Hoang et al., 2020) 14 (1) collaboration improvement; (2) more accurate information from a data-rich asset; (3) automatically updated model; (4) improved interoperability; (5) increased employees' productivity and efficiency.
(Diaz, 2016) 6 (1) better performance and quality of the project; (2) improved productivity; (3) reduction of wastages; (4) faster delivery; (5) new opportunities for revenue and business.
New Zealand (Stanley and Thurnell, 2014) 8 (1) the visualization of projects is increased; (2) collaboration on projects is enhanced; (3) the quality level of the finished projects is improved; (4) project conceptualization is made easier; (5) increased ability to print out design details from 5D software enables greater analysis capability.
Singapore (Qian, 2012) 60 (1) improved forecasting; (2) less project risks; (3) better company image; (4) less mistakes and errors; (5) better project control.
Country Study Total benefits identified Benefits of BIM adoption
Pakistan (Mostafa et al., 2020) 6 (1) early identification of long completion time; (2) shortening the procurement schedule; (3) exploring design constraints for fabricators; (4) reduce differences between design and manufacturing models; (5) reduce the fabrication cycle time.
(Masood et al., 2014) 7 (1) reduced construction cost; (2) reduced construction time; (3) improve quality; (4) reduced human resources; (5) reduce contingencies.
UK (Bryde et al., 2013) 9 (1) cost reduction or control; (2) time reduction or control; (3) communication improvement; (4) coordination improvement; (5) quality increase or control.
Turkey (Seyis, 2019) 41 (1) planning the tasks and responsibilities in a timely manner; (2) promoting collaboration and coordination in early design phase; (3) automatic implementation of design changes into 3D CAD model; (4) decreasing uncertainties in the processes by clarifying risks; (5) reducing time variances in the processes.
India (Diaz, 2016) 10 (1) enhancing the project performance; (2) efficient planning and scheduling; (3) detailing the project stages; (4) generating multiple planned scenarios; (5) being used for project bidding purposes.
Underlying rationale
BIM has been acknowledged as one of the most appropriate platforms for the AEC industry, which is considered to be multi-organizational and multi-disciplinary, helping resolve construction performance challenges during the planning, designing, construction, operation, and maintenance stages of the entire project life cycle (Li et al., 2017). In the literature review, relevant studies were explored to identify BIM adoption and implementation in construction projects. Although many studies discussed BIM benefits, there is a gap in the literature regarding specific benefits for project stakeholders. Besides, although the developed countries are harvesting the fruits of the benefits of adopting BIM for the construction industry, the adoption and implementation of BIM for construction projects in Vietnam are very much limited. Therefore, the goal of this study was to determine and evaluate the benefits of BIM adoption for each project stakeholder. To achieve the goal, two main objectives were set:
• To identify the most significant benefits of BIM adoption for project stakeholders.
• To evaluate the most significant benefits of BIM adoption for project stakeholders.
The results of this study are expected to be useful for policymakers, governments, construction enterprises, and other stakeholders in their quest to boost the current uptake of BIM in various construction projects not only in Vietnam but also in other countries with the same socio-economic or cultural circumstances.
The literature review was conducted by collecting and studying relevant research papers considering the various benefits of BIM adoption in the construction industry. These papers reported the top significant BIM benefits. In the course of the study,
we revised all benefits by eliminating the replicates, refining the statements, and sharing the updated list with professionals in the construction industry to evaluate the presented benefits and finalize the list. Thus, a long list of benefits was shortened to include the 30 substantial benefits of BIM adoption in construction projects for four main project stakeholders: owners, designers, facility managers, and contractors. The benefits of BIM adoption in construction projects and their related sources are shown in Table 2.
Methodology
1.1. Questionnaire survey and respondents
The literature review was carried out to articulate issues regarding the benefits of BIM adoption and implementation in the construction industry with a particular emphasis on the Vietnamese construction sector. The review also aimed at identifying the potential BIM benefits in construction projects. As a result, a total of 30 significant benefits of BIM adoption for construction project stakeholders were identified in the study. These BIM benefits were tabulated in the form of a questionnaire. The questionnaire was composed of two main parts. The first part contained demographics of the respondents and project characteristics. Its main purpose was to describe the respondents in order to effectively ensure reliability and strengthen research findings. The second part included the list of the identified benefits.
Respondents were selected for the survey based on their previous participation in or direct implementation of construction projects adopting BIM tools in Vietnam. Based on their experience, they evaluated the degree of BIM adoption benefits importance in construction projects following a 5-point Likert scale (i.e.,1 — not important, 2 — somewhat important, 3 — neutral, 4 — important, 5 — very important).
Table 2. Benefits of BIM for construction project stakeholders
Code Benefits of BIM adoption References
OB Benefits for Owners
OB1 Easier to choose investment options (Eastman et al., 2011; Mesaros and Mandicak, 2017)
OB2 Improve operation and construction management (Ashcraft, 2008; Hoang et al., 2020; Olawumi and Chan, 2019a; Seyis, 2019)
OB3 Early design assessment to ensure project requirements are met (Azhar, 2011; Mesaros & Mandicak, 2017)
OB4 Maximize project performance (Bryde et al., 2013; Diaz, 2016; Enegbuma and Ali, 2011; Olawumi and Chan, 2019a)
OB5 Better marketing of project by making effective use of 3D renderings and walk-through animations (Azhar, 2011; Eastman et al., 2011)
OB6 Low financial risk because of reliable cost estimates and reduced number of change orders (Azhar, 2011; Eastman et al., 2011)
DB Benefits for Designers
DB1 Improve efficiency of design options (Ashcraft, 2008; Enegbuma and Ali, 2011; Hong et al., 2019; Ibrahim et al., 2019; Olawumi and Chan, 2019; Saka et al., 2019; Seyis, 2019)
DB2 Improve the quality of design drawings (Ibrahim et al., 2019; Memon et al., 2014; Olawumi and Chan, 2019; Saka et al., 2019)
DB3 Easy conflict detection (Diaz, 2016; Ibrahim et al., 2019; Matarneh and Hamed, 2017; Saka et al., 2019; Stanley and Thur-nell, 2014)
DB4 Minimize conflicts/changes (Al-Ashmori et al., 2020; Ashcraft, 2008; Hong et al., 2019; Ibrahim et al., 2019; Matarneh and Hamed, 2017; Newton and Chileshe, 2012b; Olawumi and Chan, 2019)
DB5 Easy to adjust design changes (Al-Ashmori et al., 2020; Ibrahim et al., 2019; Seyis, 2019; Sholeh et al., 2020)
DB6 Easy quantity take-off and cost estimation (Bryde et al., 2013; Chan et al., 2019b; Hong Duyen et al., 2018; Newton and Chileshe, 2012b; Seyis, 2019)
DBl Reduce design time and costs (Ibrahim et al., 2019; Seyis, 2019; Stanley and Thur-nell, 2014)
DB8 Easy energy efficiency evaluation of options (Ashcraft, 2008; Hoang et al., 2020; Olawumi and Chan, 2019; Saka et al., 2019; Seyis, 2019)
DB9 Cooperation and commitment of professional bodies (Chan et al., 2019b; Ibrahim et al., 2019; Qian, 2012)
DB10 Easy product transfer (Azhar, 2011; Mesaros and Mandicak, 2017; Qian, 2012)
FB Benefits for Facility Managers
FB1 Easy planning and resource mobilization (Al-Ashmori et al., 2020; Chan et al., 2019a; Diaz, 2016; Ibrahim et al., 2019; Olawumi and Chan, 2019; Seyis, 2019)
FB2 Project management and execution improvement (Azhar, 2011; Eastman et al., 2011)
FB3 Easier to coordinate contractors and stakeholders (Chan et al., 2019b; Eastman et al., 2011)
FB4 Easier to track and supervise design, construction, and operation (Al-Ashmori et al., 2020; Ibrahim et al., 2019)
FB5 Predicting potential hazards and solving them (Ibrahim et al., 2019; Stanley and Thurnell, 2014)
Code Benefits of BIM adoption References
FB6 Convenient for managing project data (Enegbuma and Ali, 2011; Hong et al., 2019; Ibrahim et al., 2019; Olawumi and Chan, 2019; Qian, 2012; Saka et al., 2019; Seyis, 2019)
FB7 Better management and operation of facilities (Azhar, 2011; Eastman et al., 2011; Meadati et al., 2010)
FB8 Operational simulation for maintainability (Azhar, 2011; Eastman et al., 2011; Meadati et al., 2010; Mesaros and Mandicak, 2017)
CB Benefits for Contractors
CB1 Easy clash detection (Diaz, 2016; Ibrahim et al., 2019; Matarneh and Hamed, 2017; A. Saka et al., 2019; Stanley & Thurnell, 2014)
CB2 Minimize construction errors (Ashcraft, 2008; Ibrahim et al., 2019; Mostafa et al., 2020; Qian, 2012; Saka et al., 2019; Seyis, 2019)
CB3 Convenient for handing over works (Azhar, 2011)
CB4 Convenient for planning and resource provisioning (Al-Ashmori et al., 2020; Chan et al., 2019a; Diaz, 2016; Ibrahim et al., 2019; Olawumi and Chan, 2019; Seyis, 2019)
CB5 Construction time saving (Bryde et al., 2013; Chan et al., 2019a; Hong et al., 2019; Ibrahim et al., 2019; Masood et al., 2014; Mostafa et al., 2020; Qian, 2012; Saka et al., 2019; Seyis, 2019)
CB6 Construction cost saving (Ashcraft, 2008; Bryde et al., 2013; Chan et al., 2019a; Diaz, 2016; Hoang et al., 2020; Hong et al., 2019; Ibrahim et al., 2019; Masood et al., 2014; Olawumi and Chan, 2019; Qian, 2012; Saka et al., 2019)
Out of 250 questionnaires distributed among construction practitioners, only 168 were filled in. Answers with incomplete data or missing values were removed. Finally, 159 valid questionnaires were collected (age average — 32.5, SD = 4.528), this represented an approximately 63.6% usable response rate.
1.2. Survey results
Among 159 valid answers, 78.62% respondents were male and 21.37% were female. Most of the them — 151 respondents (94.97%) — had bachelor's degrees. Only seven respondents (4.40%) had master's degrees, and only one respondent had a PhD (0.63%). This is relevant to the years of their experience in the construction industry. More than a half — 93 respondents (58.49%) — had 1-5 years of experience. Other groups had experience of 6-10 (22.01%), 11-15 (10.06%), and 16-20 years (2.52%). Besides, 11 respondents (6.92%) had more than 20 years of experience.
In terms of organizations involved in construction projects, the majority — 81 respondents — worked at contractor companies, accounting for 50.84% of the total. Those organizations were followed by design enterprises, with 66 respondents (41.51%), and 12 owners (7.55%). In terms of job position, the majority were designers (64 respondents, accounting for 40.25% of the total). The share of project managers/ facility managers was 22.01% (35 respondents);
while estimators (35 respondents) and site engineers (24 respondents) accounted for 22.01% and 15.09%, respectively.
In terms of construction characteristics, most of the projects were related to building (106 projects, 66.67%), followed by industrial ones (28 projects, 17.61%). Infrastructure projects accounted for 10.06% (16 projects) while the figure for transportation was only 5.66% (9 projects). Among these projects, 90 (56.60%) were private-financed, 57 (31.45%) were public-financed, and the rest 12 projects (7.55%) were financed using offshore funds. More than a half of the projects (102 projects, 64.15%) were medium to big scale (> 15 VND billions), and 50 projects (31.45%) were small scale (< 15 VND billions), while only 7 projects (4.40%) were nationally important.
Data analysis
1. Internal consistency of the questionnaire
Cronbach's alpha is a measure the reliability of internal consistency that assumes the same thresholds but yields lower values than the composite reliability. We aimed to determine Cronbach's alpha so as to confirm that the criteria associated with the Likert's scale measure each variable that was intended to be measured (which is the importance of each benefit of BIM adoption in construction projects for stakeholders). The study of (Vaske et al., 2017) explained that Cronbach's alpha measures the extent to which answers to survey questions correlate with
each other, which means a estimates the proportion of variance that is systematic or consistent in a set of survey responses. The standard for evaluating the level of relevance of the model is a value where Cronbach's alpha is higher than 0.7. Then questionnaires are generally accepted as accurate (Fang et al., 2004; Hai et al., 2022; Hair et al., 1998). The 'Cronbach's Alpha if item deleted' option makes it possible to examine whether the removal of any items would enhance the reliability of a specific variable scale that showed an unsatisfactory
Cronbach's alpha value (i.e., the score less than 0.3). Cronbach's alpha coefficient can be determined by Eq. (1) as follows:
NC
Cronbach's alpha a =----—, (1)
v + ( N -1) C (1)
where N represents the number of item indicators; C the coefficient of correlation of the average nonredundant indicator (i.e., the mean of the lower or upper triangular matrix); and v is the average variance.
Table 3. Results of Cronbach's alpha test of internal consistency
Code Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted Cronbach's Alpha
OB1 0.895
OB2 0.886
OB3 0.880 0.913
OB4 0.896
OB5 0.928
OB6 0.898
DB1 0.939
DB2 0.940
DB3 0.940
DB4 0.941
DB5 0.941 0.947
DB6 0.942
DB7 0.940
DB8 0.942
DB9 0.943
DB10 0.941
FB1 0.945
FB2 0.938
FB3 0.940
FB4 0.939 0.948
FB5 0.941
FB6 0.939
FB7 0.940
FB8 0.946
CB1 0.899
CB2 0.880
CB3 0.898 0.904
CB4 0.880
CB5 0.885
CB6 0.878
As demonstrated in Table 3, the results of Cronbach's alpha for the components are 0.913, 0.947, 0.948, and 0.904, respectively. These values are higher than 0.7, thereby reliability is acceptable. The observed variables have Cronbach's alpha if item is deleted > 0.3, thus they are closely related to
other variables; these variables are all measuring the same construct and therefore there will be no basis for removing any item.
2. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test and Bartlett's test of sphericity
The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling
Adequacy and Bartlett's Test of Sphericity were adopted to assess if exploratory factor analysis is reasonable. Bartlett's test for testing the null hypothesis assumed that the extracted principal components or factors did not make unique contributions to the outcome being investigated or are significantly correlated with each other. The following is recommended: 0.5 < KMO < and Sig < 0.05 (Bryman and Cramer, 2011; Hair et al., 1998). As shown in Table 4, the result of the KMO test indicated a coefficient value of 0.937 > 0.5,
3. Factor loadings
Variables with eigenvalue less than 1 do not have better function in summarizing information than original factors. Hence, variables are only extracted if eigenvalue is more than 1 and are accepted if variance extracted is more than 50%. In other words, the software statistically defined a group of factors as highly intercorrelated when the group had eigenvalue
which is a strong measure of sampling adequacy. This demonstrated that the partial correlations or multicollinearity structures between the factors were sufficient to justify aggregating the variables into related sets for extraction of the principal components. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity with Sig = 0.00 < 0.05 proves that the observed variables have an overall correlation with each other. Hence, the result reinforced the four principal components' reliability and validity extracted from the 30 observed variables.
of at least 1. The other components, with eigenvalue less than 1, were considered as "scree" and assumed not to represent any real traits underlying the 30 variables. Factor loadings describe how much correlation exists between observed variables and underlying factors. These values should be more than 0.3 (Bryman and Cramer, 2011; Hair et al., 1998).
Code Component
DB FB CB OB
DB2 0.754
DB4 0.746
DB1 0.743
DB7 0.692
DB10 0.667
DB3 0.664
DB9 0.634
DB6 0.618
DB5 0.555 0.504
DB8 0.524
FB6 0.736
FBI 0.708
FB7 0.691
FB4 0.688
FB3 0.686
FB2 0.685
FB8 0.518 0.565
FB5 0.516
Table 4. Results of KMO and Bartlett's tests
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy 0.937
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 4952.620
df 435
Sig 0.000
Table 5. Factor loadings on the four components
Code Component
DB FB CB OB
CB2 0.754
CB6 0.713
CB4 0.675
CB1 0.653
CB5 0.556
OB5 0.518 0.547
CB3
OB4 0.815
OB1 0.799
OB3 0.741
OB2 0.723
OB6 0.618
Initial eigenvalues 17.686 1.793 1.405 1.121
% of variance 58.954 5.975 4.682 3.736
Cumulative % 58.954 64.929 69.611 73.347
Table 5 provides the results for three extracted components and principal variables loaded on the four components (i.e., DB — Benefits for Designers, FB — Benefits for Facility Managers, CB — Benefits for Contractors, and OB — Benefits for Owners). The four underlying categories of variables accounted for 73.347 % of the total cumulative variance. It is more than 50%, which proves that the variation of the observed variables is considered acceptable. Table 5 shows that all observed variable correlations are more than 0.3, indicating a robust inter-item correlation within each principal component. It also demonstrates a strong representation of the variables by the extracted elements. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to analyze the relationships among the correlated variables and reduce the data, which helped to confirm the structure of the model. Factors with loading below 0.50 (cut-off for significance) or incidence of cross-loading were found to be weak indicators of the constructs and therefore were not included in the components (Cho et al., 2009; Field, 2013). On that basis, several problematic factors were omitted from all items, including DB5 — easy to adjust design changes, CB3 — convenient for handing over works, FB8 — operational simulation for maintainability, and OB5 — reduce time solving conflicts.
Discussion
This section will discuss the benefits of BIM implementation in construction projects for stakeholders based on data analysis results. The analysis is divided into four primary parts as follows: benefits of BIM adoption for architectural and structural design units, benefits of BIM adoption for
facility management units, benefits of BIM adoption for contractors, and benefits of BIM adoption for project owners, which are discussed in this section.
1. Benefits of BIM adoption for architectural and structural design units
As demonstrated in Table 5, 10 variables loaded strongly and positively on the DB component, of which there was only one item cross-loading on another component, accounting for 33.3% of the total number of variables. This component explains 58.954% of the total variance among 30 variables. This means that analysis of the underlying benefits of BIM adoption in the order of their relative loading coefficients could confirm the valuable BIM implementation in construction projects. The most prominent benefit within the cluster of benefits for architectural and structural design units is 'improve the quality of design drawings'. This finding was further supported by studies of (Al-Ashmori et al., 2020; Ashcraft, 2008; Chan et al., 2019b; Enegbuma and Ali, 2011; Ibrahim et al., 2019; Mostafa et al., 2020), which revealed that one of the primary advantages of BIM adoption was improved drawing quality. This may be because building proposals can be rigorously analyzed, simulations performed quickly, and performance benchmarked, enabling improved and innovative solutions; documentation output is flexible and exploits automation (Azhar, 2011).
The surveyed respondents evaluated 'minimize conflicts/changes' as the second influential benefit for designers. This result is in the line with the findings of several previous studies (Diaz, 2016; Ibrahim et al., 2019; Matarneh and Hamed, 2017;
Saka et al., 2019; Stanley and Thurnell, 2014), which demonstrated that BIM is capable of detecting potential conflicts and minimizing drawing changes during the design phase. Clash avoidance is a key part of the design and construction process. During the design process, every BIM module or user shall assess design decisions and clashes to see if there is any problem early in the design stage (Ibrahim et al., 2019). Detecting clashes and minimizing conflicts and changes during construction are two of the top ways engineers say BIM adds value to a project (Matarneh and Hamed, 2017).
Implementing BIM in construction projects also brings several benefits for architectural and structural design units such as 'improve efficiency of design options', 'reduce design time and costs', 'easy product transfer', 'cooperation and commitment of professional bodies', and 'easy quantity take-off and cost estimation'. In fact, with an appropriate price database, the construction costs will be significantly saved. This utility is especially meaningful in the design phase of a project when the designs often change, and the investor urgently needs information to choose the option in time (Ashcraft, 2008; Chan et al., 2019b; Saka et al., 2019; Seyis, 2019; Stanley and Thurnell, 2014). The study of (Ashcraft,
2008) indicated that the model contains necessary information on quantity and estimated cost, avoiding processing of material take-offs manually, thus reducing error and misunderstanding.
The early design and pre-construction phases are the most important stages in deciding on the sustainability characteristics of a building (Azhar et al., 2009). In the early stages of design development, traditional Computer-Aided Design (CAD) planning environments usually lack the capacity to conduct sustainability analyses. Usually, construction performance evaluations are carried out after the architectural design and construction documents have been created. This failure to consistently evaluate sustainability during the design process results in inefficient retroactive design adjustment to meet a set of performance criteria (Schlueter and Thesseling,
2009). Access to a comprehensive collection of data regarding the shape, materials, context, and systems of a building is needed to realistically evaluate building performance in the early design and pre-construction phases. Since BIM enables multi-disciplinary data to be superimposed within a single model, it provides an opportunity to integrate sustainability measures into the design process (Autodesk, 2008). Azhar (Azhar, 2011) found that by conducting BIM-based sustainability analyses, data for up to 17 LEED® (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, a green building ranking system used in the USA) credits can be obtained in the design process. This implies that a building knowledge model can be used for LEED® research
as a by-product, thereby saving considerable time and energy.
2. Benefits of BIM adoption for facility management units
As shown in Table 5, the FB component received the second-highest factor loading with 8 of the 30 variables, accounting for 26.7% of the items. This reveals that BIM adoption in construction projects can bring eight primary benefits for facility management units. This component accounts for 5.975% of the variance among the 30 items. The most prominent benefit within this cluster is 'convenient for managing project data'. "With the BIM database, any information about an equipment is just one click away", as Reddy (2011) stated. In the past, buildings would be turned over to facility managers with boxes and piles of manuals and warranties from the owner. In order to obtain data on product details, warranties, product life cycle, maintenance controls, replacement costs, installation and repair procedures, and even place an order for a replacement online, facility managers can now click on any equipment or fixture (Jordani, 2010). Developments in mobile phones and tablets (such as iPhone® and iPad®) and Virtual Reality (AR) have made it possible to gain full information about a building by simply pointing the device to it. An AR-based program, InfoSPOT®, developed at the Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, was reported by Joyce (2012), which enables facility managers to quickly obtain "on the spot" information about equipment using their smartphones.
The second prominent benefit for facility management units is 'easy planning and resource mobilization'. This is because BIM provides project management with a visual model and integrated elements such as construction progress, labor chart, and construction cost development chart, helping managers with easy tracking and supervision. Moreover, monitoring and tracking progress during the project life cycle significantly influenced the practitioners' decision to enhance mutual trust, respect, and personal commitments to cooperation (Al-Ashmori et al., 2020). Besides, implementing BIM in construction projects can bring other benefits for the facility management, such as 'project management and execution improvement', 'easier to coordinate contractors and stakeholders', 'easier to track and supervise design, construction, and operation', 'predicting potential hazards and solving them', 'better management and operation of facilities', and 'operational simulation for maintainability'. The challenge of managing a project is to ensure project success, and the key to achieve it is risk management at the earliest stages before it becomes costlier (Abdullah et al., 2015). Facility management departments can use BIM for renovations, space planning, and maintenance operations (Azhar, 2011). Thanks to BIM models, potential hazards are not
only anticipated at the early stage, but they are also solved automatically by the software.
3. Benefits of BIM adoption for contractors
The constructor is the third principal component
receiving benefits of BIM implementation in construction projects. This cluster includes six variables (20.00% of the total) and explains 14.682% of the total variance among 30 variables. Contractors and subcontractors can use BIM for many tasks such as quantity take-off and cost estimation (Duyen et al., 2018); early identification of design errors through clash detections; construction planning and constructability analysis; onsite verification, guidance, and tracking of construction activities; offsite prefabrication and modularization; site safety planning; value engineering and implementation of lean construction concepts; and communication with the project owner, designer, subcontractors and workers on site (Hardin and McCool, 2015; Nguyen et al., 2021; Nguyen Van et al., 2021; Van Tam et al., 2018). According to the analysis results, 'minimize construction errors' and 'construction cost saving' are the most prominent benefits for contractors when adopting BIM in construction projects. These findings were supported by (Ibrahim et al., 2019) who explained that construction errors, besides causing cost-related waste, strongly affects the project's sustainability. Implementation of BIM in the construction phase will be able to reduce error, rework and waste for better sustainability for construction since it is connected to the database.
Implementing BIM in construction projects also can bring several other benefits for constructors, such as 'easy clash detection', 'convenient for handing over work', 'convenient for planning and resource provisioning', and 'construction time saving'. The study of (Azhar et al., 2012) presented a case study illustrating the use of BIM by the general contractor (GC) to minimize design errors via clash detections. The project was a $35 million academic building at the campus of Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. The architect of the project designed the architectural model. The GC received drawings of 2D structural and MEP structures from project engineers and turned them into 3D BIM models. The GC was able to save approximately $259,000 by combining all 'single' BIM models and through clash detections in the pre-construction phase.
4. Benefits of BIM adoption for project owners
As provided in Table 5, only 5 variables were loaded in this cluster, accounting for 16.67% of the total; explaining 3.736 % of the total variance among 30 variables. In projects where BIM technologies and processes are implemented, owners can gain considerable benefits (Eastman et al., 2011; Reddy, 2011). The most prominent benefit for project owners is 'maximize project performance'.
This result is in line with some previous studies such as (Chan et al., 2019b; Diaz, 2016; Mohd Noor et al., 2018; Olawumi and Chan, 2019; Seyis, 2019), which affirmed that the main advantage of BIM is an increase in building performance and quality. Project performance was also considered as an item giving most benefits towards the project quality (Mohd Noor et al., 2018). The surveyed respondents evaluated 'easier to choose investment options' as the second prominent benefit for project owners. Besides, several other benefits of BIM adoption in this cluster include 'improve operation and construction management', 'early design assessment to ensure project requirements are met', 'better marketing of project by making effective use of 3D renderings and walk-through animations', and 'low financial risk because of reliable cost estimates and reduced number of change orders'. In fact, 3D renderings can be easily generated in a house with little additional effort (Azhar, 2011). The study of (Chan et al., 2019b) indicated that BIM implementation improves project quality variables by facilitating the ease of assessment of construction materials and work processes. An organization's policy or strategy toward integrating and implementing BIM in their work processes aims to reduce financial risk and improve their competitive advantages.
Conclusions, contributions, and limitations
BIM represents a new paradigm within the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry, one that encourages integration of the roles of all stakeholders on a project. Implementing BIM in the construction industry can bring valuable benefits for project stakeholders. The survey showed that construction practitioners belong to four primary clusters of project stakeholders receiving benefits of BIM adoption in construction projects: architectural and structural design units (10 benefits), facility management units (8 benefits), contractors (6 benefits), and owners (6 benefits). The reliability and validity of the research design and findings were evaluated via prescribed quality assurance tests, including Cronbach's alpha test of internal consistency, KMO measure of sampling adequacy, Bartlett's test of sphericity, and factor loadings. The analysis of the test results confirmed the reliability and validity of the research design and findings.
According to the findings, 'improve the quality of design drawings' and 'minimize conflicts/ changes' are the most significant BIM benefits for architectural and structural design units. Meanwhile, 'convenient for managing project data' and 'easy planning and resource mobilization' are benefits that facility management units gained most from BIM. As for contractors, 'minimize construction errors' and 'construction cost saving' were the most prominent BIM benefits. For owners, BIM's two most striking
benefits are 'maximize project performance' and 'easier to choose investment options'.
The main contribution of this study to the existing body of knowledge is the investigation of the benefits of BIM implementation and adoption for project stakeholders. In the context of the Vietnamese construction industry, this study contributes to filling a crucial knowledge gap by providing information on various manageable BIM benefits to boost BIM in construction projects and attain high performance in a typical developing economy setting.
The main limitation of this study is that it was conducted only in the Vietnamese construction industry context. It seems rather modest compared to many countries and construction projects
applying BIM technology around the world. This was a snapshot view of BIM adoption benefits for stakeholders aimed to foster BIM implementation in the Vietnamese construction industry; hence, the findings are not future proof. Rapid changes driven by advanced technology would necessitate these benefits to be re-investigated and up to date with new and emerging critical benefits. In addition, this study does not provide quantitative parameters to help the readers understand the extent of the benefits (e.g., cost-saving, time saving) for project stakeholders in a specific project case. Therefore, further studies should consider the benefits of BIM implementation in construction projects at different levels such as industry level, enterprise level, project level, or activity level.
References
Abbasnejad, B. and Moud, H. I. (2013). BIM and basic challenges associated with its definitions, interpretations and expectations. International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA), Vol. 3. Issue 2, pp. 287-294.
Abd Hamid, A. B., Mohd Taib, M. Z., Abdul Razak, A. N. N. and Embi, M. R. (2018). Building information modelling: challenges and barriers in implement of BIM for interior design industry in Malaysia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Vol. 40, 012002. DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/140/1/012002.
Abdullah, N., Jabar, M. A., Sidi, F. and Yah, Y. (2015). Early prediction model to manage risks in earliest stages to increase project success. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, Vol. 81, No. 3, pp. 413-419.
Abubakar, M., Ibrahim, Y. M., Kado, D. and Bala, K. (2014). Contractors' perception of the factors affecting Building Information Modelling (BIM) adoption in the Nigerian Construction Industry. 2014 International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering, June 23-25, 2014, Orlando, Florida, USA. DOI: 10.1061/9780784413616.022.
Al-Ashmori, Y. Y., Othman, I., Rahmawati, Y., Mugahed Amran, Y. H., Abo Sabah, S. H., Rafindadi, A. D. and Mikic, M. (2020). BIM benefits and its influence on the BIM implementation in Malaysia. Ain Shams Engineering Journal, Vol. 11, Issue 4, pp. 1013-1019. DOI: 10.1016/j.asej.2020.02.002.
Ashcraft, H. W. (2008). Building information modeling: A framework for collaboration. Construction Lawyer, Vol. 28, No. 3.
Autodesk (2008). Improving building industry results through integrated project delivery and building information modeling. [online] Available at: https://damassets.autodesk.net/content/dam/autodesk/flles/bim_and_ipd_whitepaper. pdf [Date accessed: 02.01.2021].
Azhar, S. (2011). Building information modeling (BIM): Trends, benefits, risks, and challenges for the AEC industry. Leadership and Management in Engineering, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 241-252.
Azhar, S., Brown, J. and Farooqui, R. (2009). BIM-based sustainability analysis: An evaluation of building performance analysis software. 45th ASC Annual Conference, April 1-4, 2009, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Azhar, S., Khalfan, M. and Maqsood, T. (2012). Building information modelling (BIM): now and beyond. Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 15-28. DOI: 10.5130/ajceb.v12i4.3032.
Bryde, D., Broquetas, M. and Volm, J. M. (2013). The project benefits of Building Information Modelling (BIM). International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 31, Issue 7, pp. 971-980. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.12.001.
Bryman, A. and Cramer, D. (2011). Quantitative data analysis with IBM SPSS 17, 18 & 19. Hove, East Sussex: Routledge, 377 p.
Carmona, J. and Irwin, K. (2007). BIM: who, what, how and why. Building Operating Management, Vol. 54, No. 10, pp. 37-39.
Chan, A. P. C., Ma, X., Yi, W., Zhou, X. and Xiong, F. (2018). Critical review of studies on building information modeling (BIM) in project management. Frontiers of Engineering Management, Vol. 5, Issue 3, pp. 394-406. DOI: 10.15302/J-FEM-2018203.
Chan, D. W. M., Olawumi, T. O. and Ho, A. M. L. (2019a). Critical success factors for building information modelling (BIM) implementation in Hong Kong. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 26, Issue 9, pp. 18381854. DOI: 10.1108/ECAM-05-2018-0204.
Chan, D. W. M., Olawumi, T. O. and Ho, A. M. L. (2019b). Perceived benefits of and barriers to Building Information Modelling (BIM) implementation in construction: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Building Engineering, Vol. 25, 100764. DOI: 10.1016/j.jobe.2019.100764.
Cho, K. M.., Hong, T. H. and Hyun, C. T. (2009). Effect of project characteristics on project performance in construction projects based on structural equation model. Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36, Issue 7, pp. 10461-10470. DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2009.01.032.
Dao, T.-N., Chen, P.-H. and Nguyen, T.-Q. (2021). Critical success factors and a contractual framework for construction projects adopting building information modeling in Vietnam. International Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 19, Issue 1, pp. 85-102, DOI: 10.1007/s40999-020-00542-3.
Dao, T.-N., Nguyen, T.-Q. and Chen, P.-H. (2020). BIM adoption in construction projects funded with state-managed capital in Vietnam: legal issues and proposed solutions. In: Ha-Minh, C., Dao, D., Benboudjema, F., Derrible, S., Huynh, D. and Tang, A. (eds.), CIGOS 2019, Innovation for Sustainable Infrastructure, Vol. 54. Singapore, Springer, pp. 1211-1216. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-15-0802-8_194.
Diaz, P. M. (2016). Analysis of benefits, advantages and challenges of building information modelling in construction industry. Journal of Advances in Civil Engineering, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 1-11. DOI: 10.18831/djcivil.org/2016021001.
Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., & Liston, K. (2011). BIM handbook: A guide to building information modeling for owners, managers, designers, engineers and contractors. 2nd edition. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 634 p.
Enegbuma, W. I. and Ali, K. N. (2011a). A preliminary critical success factor (CSFs) analysis of building information
modelling (BIM) implementation in Malaysia. Proceedings of the Asian Conference on Real Estate (ACRE 2011): Sustainable Growth, Management Challenges, October 3-5 October, Thistle Johor Bahru, Malaysia.
Enegbuma, W. I. and Ali, K. N. (2011b). A preliminary study on building information modeling (BIM) implementation in Malaysia. In: Liu, S. Z., Javed, A. A., Ni, F. D. and Shen, A. W. (eds.), Proceedings of 2011 3rd International Post Graduate Conference in Engineering (IPCIE2011), July 11-12, Hong Kong, Vol. 1. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Polytechnic University, pp. 399-407.
Fallon, K. K. and Palmer, M. E. (2007). General buildings information handover guide: Principles, methodology and case studies. An industry sector guide of the information handover guide series. US Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 89 p.
Fang, D., Li, M., Fong, P. S.-W. and Shen, L. (2004). Risks in Chinese construction market—contractors' perspective. Journal of construction engineering and management, Vol. 130, Issue 6, pp. 853-861. DOI: 10.1061/ (ASCE)0733-9364(2004)130:6(853).
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. 4th edition. London: SAGE Publications, 952 p.
Grilo, A. and Jardim-Goncalves, R. (2010). Value proposition on interoperability of BIM and collaborative working environments. Automation in Construction, Vol. 19, Issue 5, pp. 522-530. DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2009.11.003.
Hai, D. T., Toan, N. Q. and Van Tam, N. (2022). Critical success factors for implementing PPP infrastructure projects in developing countries: the case of Vietnam. Innovative Infrastructure Solutions, Vol. 7, Issue 1, 89. DOI: 10.1007/ s41062-021-00688-6.
Hair, J. F., Tatham, R. L., Anderson, R. E. and Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 730 p.
Hardin, B. and McCool, D. (2015). BIM and construction management: proven tools, methods, and workflows. 2nd edition. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 416 p.
Haron, A. T., Marshall-Ponting, A. J., Zakaria, Z., Nawi, M. N. M., Hamid, Z. A. and Kamar, K. A. M. (2015). An industrial report on the Malaysian building information modelling (BIM) taskforce: issues and recommendations. Malaysian Construction Research Journal, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 21-36.
Hoang, G. V., Vu, D. K. T., Le, N. H. and Nguyen, T. P. (2020). Benefits and challenges of BIM implementation for facility management in operation and maintenance face of buildings in Vietnam. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Vol. 869, 022032. DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/869/2/022032.
Hong, Y., Hammad, A. W. A., Sepasgozar, S. and Akbarnezhad, A. (2019). BIM adoption model for small and medium construction organisations in Australia. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 26, Issue 2, pp. 154-183. DOI: 10.1108/ECAM-04-2017-0064.
Hong Duyen, D., Tam, N., Yen, N. and Hoai An, L. (2018). Application Building Information Modelling (BIM) in Quantity surveying: Learnt lessons from some countries in the world. Journal of Science and Technology in Civil Engineering (STCE) - NUCE, Vol. 12. No. 1, pp. 46-52. DOI: 10.31814/stce.nuce2018-12(1)-06.
Ibrahim, H. S., Hashim, N. and Jamal, K. A. A. (2019). The potential benefits of Building Information Modelling (BIM) in construction industry. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Vol. 385, 012047. DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/385/1/012047.
Jordani, D. A. (2010). BIM and FM: The portal to lifecycle facility management. Journal of Building Information Modeling, Spring 2010, pp. 13-16.
Joyce, E. (2012). Augmented reality for facilities management edges closer to real-world applications. Engineering News Record.
Kerosuo, H., Miettinen, R., Paavola, S., Maki, T. and Korpela, J. (2015). Challenges of the expansive use of Building Information Modeling (BIM) in construction projects. Production, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 289-297. DOI: 10.1590/0103-6513.106512.
Li, X., Wu, P., Shen, G. Q., Wang, X. and Teng, Y. (2017). Mapping the knowledge domains of Building Information Modeling (BIM): A bibliometric approach. Automation in Construction, Vol. 84, pp. 195-206. DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2017.09.011.
Masood, R., Kharal, M. K. N. and Nasir, A. R. (2014). Is BIM adoption advantageous for construction industry of Pakistan? Procedia Engineering, Vol. 77, pp. 229-238. DOI: 10.1016/j.proeng.2014.07.021.
Matarneh, R. and Hamed, S. (2017). Barriers to the adoption of building information modeling in the Jordanian building industry. Open Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 325-335. DOI: 10.4236/ojce.2017.73022.
Meadati, P., Irizarry, J. and Akhnoukh, A. K. (2010). BIM and RFID integration: a pilot study. 2nd International Conference on Construction in Developing Countries (ICCIDC-II) "Advancing and Integrating Construction Education, Research & Practice", August 3-5, 2010, Cairo, Egypt, pp. 570-578.
Memon, A. H., Rahman, I. A., Memon, I. and Azman, N. I. A. (2014). BIM in Malaysian construction industry: status, advantages, barriers and strategies to enhance the implementation level. Research Journal of Applied Sciences,
Engineering and Technology, Vol. 8, Issue 5, pp. 606-614. DOI: 10.19026/rjaset.8.1012.
Mesáros, P. and Mandicák, T. (2017). Exploitation and benefits of BIM in construction project management. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Vol. 245, Issue 6, 062056. DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/245/6/062056.
Mohd Noor, S. N. A., Junaidi, S. R. and Ramly, M. K. A. (2018). Adoption of building information modelling (bim): factors contribution and benefits. Journal of Information System and Technology Management, Vol. 3, Issue 10, pp. 47-63.
Mostafa, S., Kim, K. P., Tam, V. W. Y. and Rahnamayiezekavat, P. (2020). Exploring the status, benefits, barriers and opportunities of using BIM for advancing prefabrication practice. International Journal of Construction Management, Vol. 20, Issue 2, pp. 146-156. DOI: 10.1080/15623599.2018.1484555.
Newton, K. and Chileshe, N. (2012a). Awareness, usage and benefits of building information modelling (BIM) adoption -the case of the South Australian construction organisations. In: Smith, S. D (ed.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2012, Edinburgh, UK. Edinburgh: Association of Researchers in Construction Management, pp. 3-12.
Newton, K. L. and Chileshe, N. (2012b). Enablers and barriers of building information modelling (BIM) within South Australian construction organisations. Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference of Australasian University Building Educators Association (AUBEA), July 4-6, 2012, Sydney, Australia. Sydney: University of New South Wales. DOI: 10.13140/2.1.4964.1607.
Nguyen, V. T., Nguyen, B. N., Nguyen, T. Q., Chu, A. T. and Dinh, H. T. (2021). The impact of the COVID-19 on the construction industry in Vietnam. International Journal of Built Environment and Sustainability, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 47-61. DOI: 10.11113/ijbes.v8.n3.745.
Nguyen Van, T., Nguyen Quoc, T. and Le Dinh, L. (2021). An analysis of value chain in the Vietnam construction industry. International Journal of Sustainable Construction Engineering and Technology, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 12-23. DOI: 10.30880/ ijscet.2021.12.03.002.
Oesterreich, T. D. and Teuteberg, F. (2019). Behind the scenes: Understanding the socio-technical barriers to BIM adoption through the theoretical lens of information systems research. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol 146(C), pp. 413-431. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2019.01.003.
Olawumi, T. O. and Chan, D. W. M. (2019a). An empirical survey of the perceived benefits of executing BIM and sustainability practices in the built environment. Construction Innovation, Vol. 19, Issue 3, pp. 321-342. DOI: 10.1108/ CI-08-2018-0065.
Olawumi, T. O. and Chan, D. W. M. (2019b). Building information modelling and project information management framework for construction projects. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 53-75. DOI: 10.3846/jcem.2019.7841.
Olawumi, T. O., Chan, D. W. M., Wong, J. K. W. and Chan, A. P. C. (2018). Barriers to the integration of BIM and sustainability practices in construction projects: A Delphi survey of international experts. Journal of Building Engineering, Vol. 20, pp. 60-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.jobe.2018.06.017.
Qian, A. Y. (2012). Benefits and ROI of BIM for multi-disciplinary project management. Singapore: National University of Singapore.
Reddy, K. P. (2011). BIM for building owners and developers: making a business case for using BIM on projects. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 230 p.
Saka, A. B. and Chan, D. W. M. (2019). A scientometric review and metasynthesis of building information modelling (BIM) research in Africa. Buildings, Vol. 9, Issue 4, 85. DOI: 10.3390/buildings9040085.
Saka, A. B., Chan, D. W. M. and Olawumi, T. O. (2019). A systematic literature review of building information modelling in the architecture, engineering and construction industry - the case of Nigeria. EDMIC 2019: Environmental Design and Management International Conference, pp. 728-738.
Schade, J., Olofsson, T. and Schreyer, M. (2011). Decision-making in a model-based design process. Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 29, Issue 4, pp. 371-382. DOI: 10.1080/01446193.2011.552510.
Schlueter, A. and Thesseling, F. (2009). Building information model based energy/exergy performance assessment in early design stages. Automation in Construction, Vol. 18, Issue 2, pp. 153-163. DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2008.07.003.
Seyis, S. (2019). Pros and cons of using building information modeling in the AEC industry. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 145, Issue 8, 04019046. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)C0.1943-7862.0001681.
Sholeh, M. N., Nurdiana, A., Setiabudi, B. and Suharjono (2020). Identification of potential uses of Building Information Modeling (BIM) for construction supply chain management: preliminary studies. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Vol. 448, 012064. DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/448/1/012064.
Stanley, R. and Thurnell, D. P. (2014). The benefits of, and barriers to, implementation of 5D BIM for quantity surveying in New Zealand. Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 105-117. DOI: 10.5130/AJCEB.v14i1.3786.
Succar, B. (2009). Building information modelling framework: A research and delivery foundation for industry stakeholders. Automation in Construction, Vol. 18, Issue 3, pp. 357-375. DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2008.10.003.
Tse, T.-C. K., Wong, K.-D. A. and Wong, K.-W. F. (2005). The utilisation of building information models in nD modelling: a study of data interfacing and adoption barriers. Journal of Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), Vol. 18, Special Issue "From 3D to nD Modelling", pp. 85-110.
Van Tam, N., Diep, T. N., Quoc Toan, N. and Le Dinh Quy, N. (2021a). Factors affecting adoption of building information modeling in construction projects: A case of Vietnam. Cogent Business & Management, Vol. 8, Issue 1, 1918848. DOI: 10.1080/23311975.2021.1918848.
Van Tam, N., Huong, N. L. and Ngoc, N. B. (2018). Factors affecting labour productivity of construction worker on construction site: A case of Hanoi. Journal of Science and Technology in Civil Engineering (STCE) - NUCE, Vol. 12, No. 5, pp. 127-138. DOI: 10.31814/stce.nuce2018-12(5)-13.
Van Tam, N., Quoc Toan, N., Phong, V. V. and Durdyev, S. (2021b). Impact of BIM-related factors affecting construction project performance. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, ahead-of-print. DOI: 10.1108/IJBPA-05-2021-0068.
Vaske, J. J., Beaman, J. and Sponarski, C. C. (2017). Rethinking internal consistency in Cronbach's alpha. Leisure Sciences, Vol. 39, Issue 2, pp. 163-173. DOI: 10.1080/01490400.2015.1127189.
Wong, A. K. D., Wong, F. K. W. and Nadeem, A. (2009). Attributes of building information modelling and its development in Hong Kong. HKIE Transactions, Vol. 16, Issue 2, pp. 38-45. DOI: 10.1080/1023697X.2009.10668156.
