BIM Model Adoption Malaysia

See
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272826803
Preliminary building information modelling

adoption model in Malaysia
Article in Construction Innovation · October 2014

DOI: 10.1108/CI-01-2014-0012
CITATIONS READS
9 293
3 authors:
Wallace Imoudu Enegbuma Godwin Uche Aliagha

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
20 PUBLICATIONS 65 CITATIONS 36 PUBLICATIONS 65 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Kherun Nita Ali

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
47 PUBLICATIONS 153 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
technology adoption View project
The Development of Property Management Index (PMI) for Effective Service Delivery in Stratified
Residential Property View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Wallace Imoudu Enegbuma on 20 May 2016.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Construction Innovation
Preliminary building information modelling adoption model in Malaysia: A strategic
information technology perspective
Wallace Imoudu Enegbuma Uche Godwin Aliagha Kherun Nita Ali
Article information:
To cite this document:
Wallace Imoudu Enegbuma Uche Godwin Aliagha Kherun Nita Ali , (2014),"Preliminary building information
modelling adoption model in Malaysia", Construction Innovation, Vol. 14 Iss 4 pp. 408 - 432
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA At 19:21 13 November 2014 (PT)
Permanent link to this document:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/CI-01-2014-0012
Downloaded on: 13 November 2014, At: 19:21 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 168 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 90 times since 2014*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Farzad Pour Rahimian, Rahinah Ibrahim, M.E. Murphy, (2014),"Implementing innovation: a stakeholder
competency-based approach for BIM", Construction Innovation, Vol. 14 Iss 4 pp. 433-452
Yunfeng Chen, Hazar Dib, Robert F. Cox, (2014),"A measurement model of building information modelling
maturity", Construction Innovation, Vol. 14 Iss 2 pp. 186-209
Farzad Pour Rahimian, Rahinah Ibrahim, Jun Wang, Xiangyu Wang, Wenchi Shou, Bo Xu,
(2014),"Integrating BIM and augmented reality for interactive architectural visualisation", Construction
Innovation, Vol. 14 Iss 4 pp. 453-476
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 581774 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1471-4175.htm
CI
14,4
Preliminary building information
modelling adoption model in
Malaysia
408 A strategic information technology
perspective
Wallace Imoudu Enegbuma

Department of Quantity Surveying, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,
Johor, Malaysia
Uche Godwin Aliagha
Department of Geoinformation Science, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,
Johor, Malaysia, and
Kherun Nita Ali
Department of Quantity Surveying, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,
Johor, Malaysia
Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to investigate the relationship between building information modelling
(BIM) adoption from the perspectives of people, process and technology to strategic information
technology (IT) in construction mediated by collaborative processes for new BIM entrants. The demand
pull for more effective project delivery in the construction industry across the globe has continued to
transform design techniques from two-dimensional, three-dimensional (3D) and, currently, BIM.
Leverage on IT is pivotal for construction industry development as earmarked by the Malaysian
construction industry master plan. BIM uptake by stakeholders in Malaysia construction industry is on
a gradual increase. BIM generates and manages building data during its life cycle via 3D, real-time,
dynamic building modelling.
Design/methodology/approach – BIM model is dependent on collaborative contribution by project
teams’ input at various stages. However, challenges such as people, process and technology impede an
effective adoption rate in Malaysia. This paper presents a continuation of an ongoing theoretical
framework developed, to further investigate the relationship between BIM adoption from perspectives
of people, process and technology to strategic IT in construction and collaborative process. To develop
the framework, an extensive literature review on factors affecting BIM adoption was carried out. The
underlining gap stems from a positivist standpoint in examining human – IT interaction. The model
builds on conceptual technology acceptance models incorporating strategic IT implementation and
collaborative processes in the industry.
Findings – The paper examined factors affecting BIM adoption in Malaysia. The factors are further
affected by the environment where BIM is utilised. The paper also presents the mediating effect of
collaboration for new BIM entrants. Overall, the theorised hypotheses delineate the strength and
Construction Innovation
Vol. 14 No. 4, 2014 significance of the examined relationship within the model. Subsequently, the data will be collected
pp. 408-432 from construction industry professionals (architects, quantity surveyors, engineers and contractors)
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1471-4175
through the developed survey instrument. The hypotheses will undergo structural equation modelling
DOI 10.1108/CI-01-2014-0012 to analyse the desired statistical power, test for close versus exact fit and complexity of the model.
Social implications – The findings will delineate the variables with predominant impact on BIM Building
adoption and serves as a guide to future policymaking on BIM implementation in Malaysia.
Originality/value – Current research on BIM in Malaysia is limited to readiness and awareness. This information
paper extends the need for empirical findings from construction professionals’ perception of BIM. The modelling
findings also explain reasons for BIM adoption in new BIM entrants and add to current body of
knowledge on IT acceptance model formation.
Keywords Malaysia, Adoption, Construction industry, Strategic, Building information modelling
(BIM), Information technology (IT) 409
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Malaysian construction industry is continually adapting to meet competitive challenges
around the globe. Thus, the need to imbibe change reaction and modernism from
capacity and knowledge acquired, tapping from similar initiatives by the UK
construction industry stipulated in Latham’s (1994) report. Hamid and Kamar (2010)
recommended the construction best practice programme model for Malaysia
construction industry, involving rethinking information technology (IT) programmes
and tools. The UK National Building Specification National building information
modelling (BIM) 2012 Report expressed a competitive disadvantage syndrome for
organisations lagging behind in BIM adoption (Malleson, 2012). The
Malaysian–German Chambers of Commerce projected a 5.2 per cent expansion in the
construction industry as a result of civil engineering works from government stimulus
package. The analysis also hinged a successful growth rate on technological
investments in IT, similar to growth in other sectors spawn by IT. Malaysian
construction industry should take a cue for a more sustainable construction growth
performance. Under the 10th Malaysian Plan, an estimated growth of 3.7 per cent per
annum is expected compared to the nations’ 6 per cent per annum gross domestic
product (GDP) (Brandt and Yong, 2011). The construction industry in Malaysia remains
one of the fastest growing construction industries across the globe (ABCSE, 2007). This
aids Malaysia rankings as a newly industrialised nation (Mankiw, 2008) and an
emerging economy (Dow Jones Indexes, 2011). The revolutionary BIM tool in the
architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) industry presents great advantages
towards the vision on Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) master plan
and the nations’ 2020 vision through increase in key performance indicators and
productivity. BIM provides sustainable assessment tool for life cycle simulations,
efficient costing, improvement in engineering quality, promising new crop of graduates
and better communication in generating alternate ideas and analysing the impact of
such ideas (Nguyen et al., 2010; CRC, 2007; Russell et al., 2009; Ibrahim et al., 2004; Kaner
et al., 2008; Smith et al., 2005; Sun and Zhou, 2010; Leicht et al., 2007). However, every
new IT tool is without inherent challenges such as: inherent interoperability issues, legal
and contractual aspects management BIM pedagogy, BIM training and high cost of
purchasing software (Rezgui and Zarli, 2006; Taylor et al., 2007; Enegbuma et al., 2010;
Tse et al., 2005; Rosenberg, 2006; PSDC, 2010). The first section of the paper introduces
the current scenario in the industry, benefits and challenges of BIM. Subsequent
sections delineate the modalities of BIM adoption and present state in Malaysia, factors
identified, methodological approach, results and discussion. The focus of this paper are
geared towards answering the following research questions: Is BIM perception (factors
CI affecting BIM) a source for effective BIM adoption? Is collaborative processes mediating
the relationship between strategic IT planning and BIM adoption? Which factors exhibit
14,4 a higher influence in BIM perception in Malaysia? and Which factors exhibit a higher
influence in strategic IT planning in Malaysia?
Building information modelling

410 The rapid growth and transformation of buildings to meet exceedingly complex use,
design, planning and construction require more sophisticated technology in line with
computer-aided design (CAD), present in BIM (Prowler, 2012). Models seek better
perfection in creation of forms and buildings (Teran, 2008). BIM is the collaboration of
different stakeholders at different phases of the life cycle of a facility to insert, extract,
update or modify information in the model to support and reflect the roles of that
stakeholder. The model is a shared digital representation with open standards for
interoperability (Smith and Edgar, 2008; McCuen, 2008). The process generates and
manages building data during its life cycle using three-dimensional (3D), real-time,
dynamic building modelling software to increase productivity in building design and
construction. This encompasses building geometry, spatial relationships, geographic
information and quantities and properties of building components (Lee et al., 2006). BDS
(Building Design Systems) and RUCAPS (Really Universal Computer-Aided Production
System) formed the early parts of BIM development which were sold across the UK and
the USA. This version was followed by SONATA in 1986, although limited to central
work stationing, personalised computer CAD systems such as ArchiCAD were in
developmental stages. Subsequently, GLIDE (Graphical Language for Interactive
Design), GLIDE-II and CAEADS (Computer Aided Engineering and Architectural
Design System) (See, 2007). Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) is an open and neutral
data format for openBIM borne by the increased pressure to integrate various BIM
formats and software to smoothen the collaborative platform. IFC is registered with the
International Standardisation Organisation (ISO), as ISO 16739 and specification are
developed and maintained by BuildingSMART International (IFC, 2002, 2012).
Information Delivery Manuals (IDM) in ISO 29481-1:2010 is an initiative by
BuildingSMART geared towards the capture of real-life construction documentation,
with several challenging tests carried out to capture real-life construction data that is
universally accepted by the BIM support software. Timely update and quality
information dissemination forms a key part and strict guideline from initiation of the
process, development, application for official status with BuildingSMART, approval
and publishing (Karlshoj, 2011). International Framework for Dictionaries was hatched
to control vocabulary of construction terminology inevitably essential to support data
exchange (Bell et al., 2008). Model view definition defines a subset of the IFC schema
needed to satisfy one or many exchange requirements of the AEC industry using IDM
exchange requirement in its definition (Liebich et al., 2001).
Comparatives on global BIM adoption experiences

On a global scale, BIM adoption faces several challenges. This section highlights
elements unique to several countries. In the USA, the push for BIM manifested beyond
expectations with governments’ compulsory implementation in General Services
Administration’s (GSA) building designs (Rosenberg, 2006). Subsequently, to reduce
neutral carbon footprint on new buildings and upgrade to existing facilities, other
bodies such as National Building Information Standards, US Army Corps of Engineers, Building
International Alliance for Interoperability and Construction Specifications Institute
resulted to inclusion of BIM-specific clause in building contracts evident in LACCD
information
Building Information Modelling Standards (LACCD BIMS) Interim Version 2.0 (LACCD modelling
BIM, 2009; AIA, 2010; BIWG, 2011). Similarly, OSCRE initiated the Sweet Spot
Modelling™ though System Dynamics Modelling, a method to run multiple times-based
“what-if” scenarios to partner GSA and NIBS. In the UK, successes from several case 411
studies such as the 5 per cent reduction in project costs (£210 million) at Heathrow T5
have influenced the Government’s Construction Strategy to mandate for full
collaborative 3D BIM minimum standards by 2016 (Faithful Gould, 2009; Philip, 2012).
The BIM Working Strategy report by the UK Government opined that construction
projects would be done twice: once in the model and then on site, with parties ensuring
BIM model accuracy at every stage. The UK aims to align with experiences from the
GSA (McAdam, 2010; Udom, 2012; BIWG, 2011). In The Netherlands, a faster pace in
adoption was experienced as BIM is in its 20th year of research (an offspring from CAD
innovation). Initiatives such as COINS project, BIM Case Week and Dynamic BIM
initiative were carried out to sensitise the industry. Furthermore, the adoption of BIM
lead to creation of BIM servers, emergence of BIM as a marketing brand and attracted
European Union (EU) research funding intUBE (van Nederveen et al., 2010). Epic
advancements have also been experienced in Scandinavian regions, as Finland Senate
(property services agency) carried out BIM pilot since 2001 to produce their product
model and eventually implemented full BIM in 2007 (Khosrowshahi and Arayici, 2012;
BIWG, 2011), Norway Directorate for Public Property and Construction Management
uses IFC BIM for automated code checking from experiences gained in The Norwegian
Defence Estates Agency BIM pilots ran from 2007 to 2009. While, in Denmark, 3D/BIM
is used for design, call for tender and an electronic handover of information to clients
(Duncan et al., 2012). The Palaces and Properties Agency, The Danish University and
Property Agency and Defence Construction Service are continuously exploring wider
BIM requirements (BIWG, 2011). In Asia, Singapore, due to stiffer measures to building
standards, implemented the CORENET e-PLAN Check system (Construction Real
Estate NETwork) launched by Singapore’s Ministry of National Development. It
provides automated compliance checking against building codes for schemes designed
using BIM while in Hong Kong, several initiatives such as:
• favourable policy for CAD standard in 2005 tagged works project information
standard (WPIS);
• the Development Bureau (DevB) has incorporated CAD and object-oriented CAD
into WPIS called CSWP;
• the Hong Kong Housing Authority deployed BIM in selected projects and included
BIM in the fiscal year 2008-2010 programme of activities. It was aimed to
encourage sustainable green living projects; and
• the Hong Kong Institute of Building Information Modelling was established in
2009 (Faithful Gould, 2009; Wong et al., 2011).
Sri Lankan construction industry also faces challenges of inadequate BIM technologies
hindering BIM adoption which suggest they are in an infancy stage (Jayasena and
Weddikkara, 2012; Thwala et al., 2012; Abdullah et al., 2012). In the various highlighted
CI comparatives, people, process and technology, amongst others, represent key
determinants of BIM adoption rates in various construction industries. The onus lies on
14,4 new BIM entrants to identify and avoid the shortcomings experienced by prior BIM
industries.
Malaysian scenario
412 IT continues to transform and plays a vital role in determining innovative effects on
project delivery in the Malaysian construction sector. The rise in BIM paradigm resulted
from the push for better and more effective productivity in the industry; hence, building
better Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) opened standard data model for
interoperability. The Malaysian Governments’ aggressive drive to developed nation

and exportation of construction services to India and South-East Asia intertwined with
government-to-government projects has also favoured BIM propagation. The
Malaysian CIDB published a ten-year construction industry master plan in 2007. This
was done to refocus the strategic position and plot the future direction of the industry
breeding an innovative, sustainable, professional, profitable and world-class
construction industry. The plan included 7 strategic thrusts, 21 strategic
recommendations, 82 action plans and 453 activities. Important to this study is the
leverage on IT towards achieving the set vision of 2015 (Chan and Theong, 2013). In
Malaysia, local contractors were able to effectively compete with foreign contractors
operating in Malaysia due to 805 contract allocations earned; reduction in the industry’s
reliance on migrant workers to improve quality and productivity through Industrialised
Building Systems; the implementation of Quality Assessment System In Construction;
improved design process and efficiency of the building approval process through total
IT spending by construction companies. However, inadequate knowledge and
awareness on sustainable building practices are present (Shari and Soebarto, 2014).
However, BIM uptake in Malaysia construction industry is at an infancy stage (Haron
et al., 2012). BIM maturity is often defined by the level of usage (Jayasena and
Weddikkara, 2013). From the Bew-Richards BIM Maturity Model and Succar models
perspective, it can be seen that construction industry Malaysia still fall between Stages
1 and 2 and pre-BIM-Modelling 1, respectively (Figures 1 and 2), although the debate on
Figure 1.
Bew-Richards BIM
maturity model
the most suitable BIM Maturity Model still exists between Bew-Richards BIM Maturity Building
Model and Succar’s BIM Maturity Stages (Jayasena and Weddikkara, 2013).
However, irrespective of the stage of adoption, awareness levels are increasingly
information
raised by seminars/workshops and training on BIM carried out by various bodies modelling
(CIDB, Jabatan Kerja Raya, Royal Institute Surveyors Malaysia). Similarly, in
construction firms within handling large-scale projects, in-house training is encouraged
(Ali et al., 2013). The unsettling precedence of such a new system in the industry faces 413
challenges closely linked to the cultural background of the construction industry in
Malaysia. The construction professionals not limited to architects, quantity surveyors,
engineers and contractors are faced with challenging tasks of comprehending new BIM
definitions, technology, process and new roles. In addition, dissimilarity in technical

terminology and process flow of BIM as studied earlier compared in different countries
contributes immensely to BIM confusion in the industry (Haron et al., 2012). Revit,
Bentley, ArchiCAD, Tekla and BoCAD are readily available object-based modelling
software applications (Haron, 2013).
Theoretical background
People
Jordani (2008) argued that BIM offers an unsettling precedence to an already
defragmented construction industry which offers less surety. In addition, he highlighted
that new processes to enhance the construction process, electronic designs and
construction professionals must acknowledge the individual risk associated with
such a new technology. Other authors contributed that boundaries of professional
responsibility and work product are not clearly defined, creating uncertainty for
liability in a BIM model. They believe that the trend of older professionals still lags
behind, while younger professionals lack experience in legal matters with a need for
flexible legal form of agreement between construction teams to meet the rapid growth
(Rosenberg, 2006; Salmon, 2009). The emergence of local user groups in various
localities to discuss BIM concepts, software applications and products including
information sharing on achievements has shown an adaptive response by people for
BIM improvements (Lega, 2008). Owner awareness is lacking in terms of information
regarding successes of BIM by other competitive companies in operation, maintenance,
repair and remodelling. While, other seminar authors proposed a future expansion of
current pedagogy in education of building professionals due to current challenges of
constructing sustainable life cycle buildings (Edgar, 2008; Henderson and Jordan, 2009).
Process
Construction industry reports such as those of Simon (1944), Banwell (1964) and British
Property Federation (1983), except the Latham (1994) report, have ignored IT as an
integral process in construction. However, Aouad et al. (2010) emphasise that
Figure 2.
BIM maturity stages in
linear view
CI technology development alone places less attention to organisational and human issues.
Furthermore, fewer staffs to regularly update BIM models and inadequate human
14,4 resource training exist in the construction industry (Aouad et al., 2010; Rezgui and Zarli,
2006; Yan and Damain, 2008; Liu, 2010; Thwala et al., 2012). For smooth BIM
implementation within an organisation, strict consideration must be given to the
long-term goals of the organisation and requirement. Similarly, managing the cost of
414 ownership can be actualised through BIM, with diligent improvement in BIM practices
owners’ BIM metamorphosis into a Business Intelligence Model, placing it right within
corporate mission and objectives. Similar to the CAD migration from manual drawings,
BIM is faced with an ever-challenging bureaucracy by top management due to new risk
and liability fears consummating into a lengthy list of disclaimers during model sharing
(Smith, 2007; Jordani, 2008). BIM implementation in the US coast guard on subsequent
Charleston Regional Strategic Plan achieved partial success. Full success was
eventually marred by people’s culture and senior leadership resistance to new
methodologies; workflow changes; and technological innovation (Hammond, 2008).
Technology
Jordani (2008) highlighted that owner’s push for faster product delivery improvement,
safer construction environment, reduced construction cost, lean adoption to eliminate
waste and proactive drive by industry professionals to assimilate new technology such
as BIM. Ibrahim et al. (2010) opined that Malaysian construction industry grapples with
advanced IT and project management techniques which forms an essential part to
high-tech and capital intensive construction in line with American Institutes of
Architects push for advancement and open standards. McGraw – Hill construction
report suggests that for BIM to strive and meet the challenges of the future, model
objects needs to be readily available for smooth information extraction. Although,
product library was created by software companies to represent generic components,
they lack enough data to represent the specifications of building product manufacturers
(BPMs). Knowledge of BIM software, inadequate reference material and component
database provide challenges in BIM education in tertiary institutions. Onuma (2008)
found that inherent deficiencies in BIM specification provide inadequate differentiation
between requirement for BIM deliverables and technology to deliver such information.
East (2009) added that during hyper collaborative platforms such as BIM Storm,
participants had to revert to do some manual communication (Jones and Lien, 2008).
Strategic IT planning
As industries transform, from adversarial to cooperative thinking with more emphasis
on business process, the construction industry in transforming into long-term strategic
planning to cope with the dynamic nature of economic, technological and social factors.
Strategic IT usage, although perceived with a degree of reluctance by the construction
industry is currently transforming, as most business processes were never designed but
formed by ad hoc means. Research in labour and cost-saving by Adam Smith and
Fredrick Taylor provided an initiating argument towards a re-think of business process
(Davenport and Short, 1990; Johanssen et al., 1993; Betts, 1999). Sustainable competitive
advantage is maintained through innovative process improvement and management
reliant on IT to provide enabling environment (Kangas, 1999; Moingeon et al., 1998;
Alshawi, 2007). Information and communication technology showed a positive and
significant impact on the Malaysian economy from 1982-2004 which established a Building
change from the norm of investments on agrarian economy to one of manufacturing and
industrialisation (Kuppusamy and Shanmugam, 2007). Technology acceptance and
information
usage has been studied extensively, and by expanding Ajzen and Fishbein Model of modelling
1975, Fred Davies formulated the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). The model
explained the theory of reasoned action, which Davies conceptualised the existence of a
response predicted by user motivation and influenced by external stimulus consisting of 415
the system features and capabilities which triggered the use of a system (Ajzen and
Fishbein, 1975). Perceived change was reported by Davenport (1993) to be a structured
and measured sets of activities designed for specific product for various markets and
clientele. In construction, process change from inception, project completion and FM

stages provide benefits to clients in Malaysian construction industry. Business Process
Re-engineering (BPR) drives organisations to change their career paths, training,
recruitment and policies (Anthony, 1965; Porter and Millar, 1985; Liang and Cohen,
1994). Factors highlighted in driving BPR are organisational training, reward,
communication, research and development (Kohar et al., 2012).
Collaborative processes
Jayasena and Weddikkara (2013) emphasised on the need for collaborative processes in
the construction industry which they posit helps in assessing BIM maturity. The
authors further defined collaboration in construction as an agreement among specialist
to share their abilities in a particular process, to achieve the larger objectives of the
project as a whole, as defined by a client, a community or a society at large. Collaboration
can also be seen as working together in a seamless team for common objectives that
deliver benefits to all. It is more effective when undertaken at the project inception stage
(Hobbs, 1996; Anumba and Newnham, 2000). The construction industry presents a
rather unique approach to collaboration which, when done ineffectively, creates islands
of automation (Kalay, 2001; Yeomans, 2006; Sun and Aouad, 2000). Major challenges to
effective collaboration exist in the construction industry due to independent working
and taking decisions which affects the project team (Anumba et al., 1997, 2001, 2002;
Yeomans, 2006). Issues bordering around undefined boundary between teamwork and
collaboration, including unsolved issues of shared-understanding, alignment of purpose
and shared meaning. Lang et al. (2002) opined that different educational upbringing,
terminologies and adversarial contractual agreement further provide barriers to
collaboration.
BIM adoption
The communication of innovation, over time, amongst members of the same social
systems over a period of time is often referred to as a product of complex social
interaction. Panuwatwanich et al. (2009) posit that the social system acts as a
determinant of socio-psychological processes within the social system. Rogers (2003)
described diffusion of innovation as the acceptance and usage of new technology, while
innovation denotes a new product or process technology or administrative procedure.
This research targets the adoption of BIM within the Malaysian construction industry to
foster prompt attention and improvement of grey areas within the industry. Seminar
authors in innovation diffusion proposed new models of diffusion of new technologies
with complimentary implications for increasing the rate of innovation in the industry
CI (Bain et al., 2001; Dackert et al., 2004; Kanter, 1988; West, 1990). Furthermore,
investigations identified four forces that drive innovation:
14,4
(1) competitive advantage;
(2) process problems;
(3) technological opportunity; and
416 (4) institutional requirements (Rogers and Schoemaker, 1971; Damanpour, 1991;
Mitropoulos and Tatum, 2000).
Rogers (1983) argued that relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, observability

and tradability are determining factors for technology diffusion. The structural
equation modelling (SEM) path study towards improving innovation diffusion level
within the architectural and engineering design, delineated definitive pathways and
practical strategies harnessed by the construction industry to derive outcomes from
innovation via diagnosing and improving their existing innovation capability which
invariably strengthen their business performance (Panuwatwanich et al., 2009).
Research methodology
The methodological choices for BIM research are closely linked to automation, diffusion
and IT. Several seminal authors have directly researched into BIM (Blain, 2010; Coates
et al., 2010; Jardim-Goncalves and Grilo, 2010; Jeong et al., 2009; Jung and Joo, 2010;
Kaner et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2006; Liu, 2010; Olatunji et al., 2010; Hamil, 2012; McCuen
and Suermann, 2007; Rosenberg, 2006; Succar, 2009, 2011; Suermann and Issa, 2007; Sun
and Zhou, 2010; Wong, 2011; Ren and Kumaraswamy, 2013; Kurul et al., 2013; Haron,
2013; Ali et al., 2013). This research presents a diverse approach of study in ontology,
implementation and measurement frameworks. However, none of the approaches
studied provide a blend towards the human and IT aspects of BIM. Hence, this research
draws its research methodological approach from dominant IT field and management
perspectives in human–IT interaction, in an attempt to further improve BIM adoption.
This study used an exploratory research design. It began by studying various related
literature, previous and existing models and frameworks, as well as several other
approaches used in BIM adoption studies. This study is also part of an ongoing research
work. Based on the various factors identified from the literature review, it developed a
theoretical model. The relationships of this construct or identified factors were
determined using a set of direct and indirect theoretical hypotheses derived from the
literature review findings. The hypotheses used for explaining the relationships that
exist among the various identified factors that influence BIM adoption are presented
below:
H1. There is significant relationship between people and business process
re-engineering.
H2. There is significant relationship between process and business process
re-engineering.
H3. There is significant relationship between technology and business process
re-engineering.
H4. There is significant relationship between process and computer-integrated Building
construction.
information
H5. There is significant relationship between technology and computer-integrated modelling
construction.
H6. There is significant relationship between people and collaborative processes.
H7. There is significant relationship between process and collaborative processes. 417
H8. There is significant relationship between technology and collaborative
processes.
H9. There is significant relationship between business process re-engineering and

BIM adoption.
collaborative processes.
computer integrated construction.
H12. There is significant relationship between computer-integrated construction
and collaborative processes.
and BIM adoption.
H14. There is significant relationship between collaborative processes and BIM
adoption.
This paper considers theories/models as sets of statements or principles outlined to
elucidate facts or an occurrence. For a theory to attain universal acceptance, emphasis is
placed on the repetitious testing, whereby, in several instances, the theory successfully
predicts an occurrence (Oye, 2013). Theory is also considered as a linkage of variables to
test the casual relationship of an occurrence. In this research, BIM adoption is been
considered. Theories, in-time, after due supervision, examination, reasoning, testing and
re-testing, become standards of prediction. This standard further directs researchers on
the strengths of each variables, construct relationships and situations for innovative
correlation (Singleton et al., 1993; Powell and Connaway, 2004; Oye, 2013). Models and
theories are often used interchangeably in various fields. The difference is established
by the need to prove and verify a model, which, subsequently, transcends to a theory.
Theories emerge from organised and prescribed illustration of previous empirical
generalisations and experimental testing, while models do not follow strictly empirical
generalisation and testing (Burch, 2003; Venkatesh et al., 2003; Oye, 2013). On the
epistemological stand point, positivism plays a forward role in IT research, drawing
critiques and highlighted limitations for improvements (Stone, 1990). About 81 per cent
of published empirical research stem from the positivist standpoint (Chen and
Hirschheim, 2004). BIM follows the IT perspectives thus in line with behaviourism of
positivism. This research started with an extensive literature study on the subject of
BIM to capture the factors affecting BIM adoption in the Malaysian construction
industry, denoted as BIM perception factors. Exploratory interviews to capture views
from the observed construction professionals (Enegbuma and Ali, 2013) were carried
CI out, confirming the BIM perception factors. This paper presents the derived abstract
conceptualisation and development of the theoretical framework towards the BIM
14,4 model.
This conceptual model builds from previous studied conceptual technology
acceptance models such as Theory of Reasoned Action, TAM, Theory of Planned
Behaviour, Innovation Diffusion Theory, Decomposed Theory of Planned Behaviour,
418 Extension of Technology Acceptance Model (TAM2) and Unified Theory of Acceptance
and Use of Technology (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980; Davis, 1986; Ajzen, 1985; Rogers,
2003; Taylor and Todd, 1995; Venkatesh and Davis, 2000; Venkatesh et al., 2003;
Solomon et al., 2014). The basic concept is shown in Figure 3. However, several changes
to suit BIM in construction have been made (Enegbuma and Ali, 2012, 2013).
Subsequently, a survey will be utilised as a quantitative approach to validate the model.
The target respondents are construction professional (architects, quantity surveyors,
engineers and contractors). The process is clearly reported in the ongoing research work
for smooth replication in other developing BIM maturity stages (Churchill, 1979; Collis
et al., 2003). The research model encompasses prior research literature gaps on BIM
perceptions and the effects on diffusion for construction industries adopting building
information modelling. Existing literature an underlining need for adequate strategic IT
planning which drew from IT acceptance models, business process re-engineering and
collaborative construction.
Main findings
The model, shown in Figure 4, builds on BIM perception in the construction industry
towards effective BIM adoption incorporating strategic IT implementation (Betts, 1999),
technology acceptance model (Davis, 1986; Chuttur, 2009), business process
re-engineering (Anthony, 1965; Porter and Millar, 1985; Liang and Cohen, 1994) and
collaborative processes. Figure 4 also shows a mediating effect of collaborative
processes between BIM perception and BIM adoption. While Figure 5 shows the full
Stimulus Organism Response

System features User’s Motivation Actual System
Figure 3. and capabilities to Use System Use
Conceptual model for
technology acceptance Source: Davis (1985), Chuttur (2009)
Strategic IT in
Construction
BIM Perception BIM Adoption
Collaborative
Processes
Figure 4.
Overview of research
model Source: Enegbuma and Ali (2012)
BIM Perception
Strategic IT in Building
Construction
information
Business Process
modelling
H1
Re-engineering
People
H2 H10 H9
H3
H6 419
H7 Collaborative H14
Process BIM Adoption
H8
Processes
H4 H11
H12 H13
Technology Computer
H5 Integrated
Construction
Figure 5.
Research model and
Source: Enegbuma and Ali (2012) hypotheses
research model accompanied by the derived direct and indirect hypotheses. The
hypotheses are presented as follows:
Discussion
BIM perception and strategic IT in construction
In the research model shown in Figure 5, the first five hypotheses were generated within
BIM perception and strategic IT in construction:
H1. There is significant relationship between people and business process
re-engineering.
H2. There is significant relationship between process and business process
re-engineering.
H3. There is significant relationship between technology and business process
re-engineering.
H4. There is significant relationship between process and computer-integrated
construction.
H5. There is significant relationship between technology and computer-integrated
construction.
Hence, the causative linkage between BIM Perception and strategic IT in construction as
posited in the literature will be discussed. Sommerville and Craig (2006) put forward that
IT implementation relies on the perception from people, process and technological
knowhow due to inadequate artificial intelligence in software and devices. However,
failure of stakeholders’ competency leads to failure in sustaining innovations (Murphy
et al., 2011). Human interaction with a new system influences the rate of implementation
in an organisation. Drivers such as communication, human activity, system processing,
design, specification and tradeoffs are necessary considerations (Fedelman, 2002; AIR
Walker v. Northumberland County Council [1995] 1 All ER 737; Sommerville and Craig,
2006). Cultural change of modifying the traditional standard process present great
CI challenges (Sánchez and Valencia, 2011), where only a selected number of professionals
utilise the BIM model (Iguarán, 2010).This denotes an adamant resistance to change
14,4 towards new systems in the construction industry. The phenomenon known as people
managers translates the importance of people in organisations adapting to new IT
technologies. Hence, understanding ways to tap into individual creative energy,
intelligence, initiative and managing change allay fears to change is critical to
420 implementation success (Towers, 1996; Cooper and Markus, 1995; Kennedy, 1994;
Arendt et al., 1995; Alshawi, 2007). Although fears arise from the perceived reduction in
professional fees with BIM, cost savings from energy savings, maintenance, informed
decisions, purchasing, clash detection and reduced request for information adds value to
the project for clients, hence, the onus to demonstrate the level of value added to clients
(Hamil, 2012). Australian-unique BIM guideline covers the specifications for product
data management (PDM), covering the issues of product libraries, addresses language
and classification issues (Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation,
2009; Palos et al., 2014). The report by the UK Cabinet is creating demand for accurate
product data and support for BIM-based PDM. There is need for future development in
building product libraries and attention to functional shortcomings and data processing
deficiencies which exist in the current libraries (Palos et al., 2014). Alshawi (2007) argued
that technological push generated more awareness on the need for improvement in
business process and re-engineering. In addition, incompatibility in IT applications
creates islands of automation, challenging the normal business processes needed for
computer-integrated construction.
BIM perception and collaborative processes

The next three hypotheses were generated within BIM perception and collaborative
processes:
H6. There is significant relationship between people and collaborative construction.
H7. There is significant relationship between process and collaborative
construction.
H8. There is significant relationship between technology and collaborative
construction.
Hence, the causative link between BIM perception and collaborative processes, as posited in
the literature, are examined. Collaboration is a unified platform that enables interaction
between various individuals or groups of individuals in the project team. This triggers a
creative process and enables sharing of ideas within openness, honesty, trust and mutual
respect towards achieving a common goal. Certain philosophies argues that, irrespective of
the manner of communication, either synchronised or asynchronous collaboration, the basic
premise lies in the communication between one or more individuals. This view point was
further stressed when collaboration is referred to as an activity. Emphasis is laid on
technology as an enabler providing an atmosphere for various technologies to interact
(Butler Group, 2003; Wilkinson, 2005). The initial cost of acquiring the software, training
personnel and technical support present great challenges. Castañeda (2009) argued that the
level of detailing was not fully exploited. BIM utilisation stimulated a downward trend in
variation orders geared towards a zero variation order for projects. Nummelin et al. (2011)
suggested that larger construction companies’ demand BIM from designers in their own
projects, and, in instances where functioning models are non-existent, they model in-house. Building
The apprehension of distrust and litigation processes often leads to ineffective collaboration.
The non-collaborative nature of the construction industry is fuelled by the rampant silo
information
working mode, where all intelligent, coordination and agility advantages gained in a modelling
collaborative environment are corrupted or lost (Owen et al., 2010; Jayasena and
Weddikkara, 2013). Procurement systems in various industries often contribute to
inadequate collaboration. BIM effectiveness relies on accurate and timely information from 421
all professionals, where this is nonexistent, BIM faces challenges as such software
applications are intolerant to errors (Gunathilake and Jayasena, 2008; Jayasena and
Weddikkara, 2013). Early collaboration provide the opportunity for practical solutions for
constructability complexities, owner awareness and government push also further increases
BIM usage (Cannistraro, 2010).
Strategic IT in construction, collaborative processes and BIM adoption

The final six hypotheses within literature bordered around strategic IT in construction,
collaboration and BIM adoption:
BIM adoption.
collaborative construction.
computer-integrated construction.
and collaborative construction.
and BIM adoption.
H14. There is significant relationship between collaborative construction and BIM
adoption.
Integrating IT systems with business processes reshapes and facilitates the
organisational culture, performed task, coordinated activities (Davenport and Short,
1990; Hinterhuber, 1995; Hammer, 1990; Willcocks and Smith, 1994; Tapscott and
Caston, 1993; Klenke, 1994; Alter, 1990; Davenport, 1993; Alshawi, 2007). However, to
achieve greater business re-engineering, prompt attention is given to modelling new
business processes around the implemented IT systems (Koch et al., 1999; Alshawi,
2007). Yeomans et al. (2006) expressed the need for certain project teams to provide extra
effort towards achieving collaboration; however, in Malaysia, current literature is void
of which project team members should, with the advent of BIM, engage more for a push
towards effective collaboration. Yeomans et al. (2006) also argues that there is no
resulting disadvantage from adopting collaboration practices in the industry,
dependent on the commitment of the project team, merger of collaborative ideals with
procurement systems and developing a means to capture and report the benefits.
Gradual adoption is recommended for the supply chain to compensate for technology,
CI training, legal and cultural changes to be effectively communicated and adopted by both
supply and client side (BIWG, 2011). Knowledge and understanding of project
14,4 management and BIM principles, top management support and organisational culture
are the most influential factors in formulating a BIM implementation strategy. Other
factors include transparency, process efficiency and new decision-making procedures
(Florez et al., 2013), in some instances, main contractor instruct a compulsory BIM use
422 (Isaza, 2008). Sommerville and Craig (2006) argued that the increase usage of IT in
business processes, resulting from the increased awareness of the benefits of open
collaborative efforts by project teams in the construction industry. The push for
effective collaboration will inadvertently provide higher productivity and returns on
investments for clients increasing demands.
Conclusion
As Malaysia moves towards its target vision of high-income economy, BIM provides
adequate IT leverage in the construction sector. The unsettling impact that BIM
brings to the Malaysian construction industry and its professionals is continually
been debated by researchers. Overcoming the challenges of increased BIM adoption
and usage promises a more sustainable and competitive construction process in all
ramifications. This paper presents findings from an on-going research aimed at
improving BIM adoption through examining factors that affect BIM adoption,
analysis of the factors intertwined hypothesised relationships and examining
mediating variables within the model. This paper contributes to both theory and
practice of IT in the construction industry. The research instrument effectively
captured BIM adoption constructs including embedded cultural influences which
are key indicators to measuring BIM adoption indices in Malaysia. This is in line
with Murphy et al. (2011) who suggested a stakeholder-centred approach for
successful innovation in the industry. The perceived theoretical contribution lies in
the ability of the significant factors generated by this research to provide numerical
values and directions for future BIM research in Malaysia, the variance value
generated through SEM will also add to prior understanding of the model
relationships as advised by Davies and Harty (2013). On the managerial aspects, the
validated framework will invariably affect how organisations make decisional
changes regarding BIM in the industry. Direction for investment by government
and private sector investors on BIM to adapt with the dynamic changes experienced
by business environment and competition in the construction industry. At this
stage, future research should focus on extending the current model with other
previously unperceived constructs, input of other previously unperceived
relationship mediators, selections of other industry players such as clients and
software developers and a cross-sectional survey in other countries with similar
BIM maturity stages. Subsequently, data will be collected from construction
industry professionals (architects, quantity surveyors, engineers and contractors)
through the developed survey instrument. The hypotheses will undergo SEM to
analyse the desired statistical power, test for close versus exact fit and complexity of
the model.
References Building
ABCSE (2007), Renewable Energy in Asia: Malaysia Report, Australia Business Council for
Sustainable Energy (ABCSE), Klagenfurt.
information
AIA (2010), “BIM implementation: an owner’s guide to getting started”, Construction
modelling
User Roundtable, available at: www.aia.org/aiaucmp/groups/aia/documents/pdf/
aiab085571.pdf
Abdullah, A., Bilau, A.A., Enegbuma, W.I., Ajagbe, A.M., Ali, K.N. and Bustani, A.S. (2012), 423
“Small and medium sized construction firms job satisfaction and evaluation in Nigeria”,
International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 35-40.
AIR Walker v. Northumberland County Council [1995] 1 All ER 737.
Ajzen, I. (1985), “From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behaviour”, in Kuhl, L. and
Beckmann, L. (Eds), Action-Control: From Cognition to Behaviour, Springer, Heidelberg, pp. 11-39.
Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1975), “A bayesian analysis of attribution processes”, Psychological
Bulletin, Vol. 82 No. 2, pp. 261-277.
Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1980), Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Ali, K.N., Al-Jamalullail, S.N.N.I. and Boon, T.C. (2013), Building Information Modeling Awareness
and Readiness: Among Quantity Surveyors and Quantity Surveying Firms, Royal
Institution of Surveyors Malaysia (RISM), Selangor.
Anumba, C.J., Evbuomwan, N.F.O. and Baron, G. (1997), “Communication issues in
concurrent life-cycle design and construction”, BT Technology Journal, Vol. 15 No. 1,
pp. 209-216.
Anumba, C.J. and Newnham, L.N. (2000), “Computer-based collaborative building design:
conceptual model”, International Journal of Construction Information Technology, Vol. 8
No. 1, pp. 1-14.
Anumba, C.J., Ugwu, O.O., Newnham, L. and Thorpe, A. (2001), “A multi-agent system for
distributed collaborative design”, Logistics Information Management, Vol. 14 Nos. 5/6,
pp. 355-366.
Anumba, C.J., Ugwu, O.O., Newnham, L. and Thorpe, A. (2002), “Collaborative design of
structures using intelligent agents”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 89-103.
Alshawi, M. (2007), Rethinking IT in Construction and Engineering: Organisational Readiness,
Taylor and Francis, London and New York, NY.
Alter, A. (1990), “The corporate make-over”, CIO, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 32-42.
Anthony, R.A. (1965), Planning and Control Systems: A Framework for Analysis, Division of
Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, Cambridge,
MA.
Aouad, G., Ozorhon, B. and Abbott, C. (2010), “Facilitating innovation in construction directions
and implications for research and policy”, Construction Innovation, Vol. 10 No. 4,
pp. 374-394.
Arendt, C., Landis, R. and Meister, T. (1995), The Human Side of Change – Part 4, IIE Solutions,
Norcross, GA, pp. 22-27.
Bain, P.G., Mann, L. and Pirola-Merlo, A. (2001), “The innovation imperative: the relationships
between team climate, innovation, and performance in research and development teams”,
Small Group Research, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 55-73.
Banwell, H. (1964), Report of the Committee on the Placing and Management of Contracts for
Building and Civil Engineering Works, HMSO, London.
CI Bell, H., Bjørkhaug, L., Bjaaland, A. and Grant, R. (2008), “IFD Library White Paper”,
available at: www.ifd-library.org/images/IFD_Library_White_Paper_2008-
14,4 04-10_I.pdf (accessed January 2012).
Betts, M. (1999), Strategic Management of IT in Construction, Blackwell Science, Oxford.
Bew, M. and Richards, M. (2008), “Bew-Richards BIM maturity model”, BuildingSMART
Construct IT Autumn Members Meeting, Brighton.
424 BIWG (2011), “Strategy paper for the government construction client group from the BIM
industry working group”, A report commissioned by the Department of Business,
Innovation and Skills, URN 11/948, BIWG.
Blain, D.B. (2010), “Improving your construction design process through building information
modeling”, Contractors Center Point, available at: www.contractorscenterpoint.com/2010/
04/improving-your-construction-design-process-through-building-information-modeling.html
(accessed 10 March 2011).
Brandt, T. and Yong, J. (2011), Market Watch Malaysia 2011 - Construction Industry,
Malaysian-German Chambers of Commerce, Kuala Lumpur, pp. 1-13.
British Property Federation (1983), Manual of the BPF System for Building Design and
Construction, British Property Federation, London.
Burch, T. (2003), “Demograph in a new key: a theory of population theory”, Demographic
Research, Vol. 9 No. 11, pp. 263-284.
Butler Group (2003), Workgroup and Enterprise Collaboration – Reducing the Costs and
Increasing the Value of Collaborative Working, Butler Group, Hull.
Cannistraro, M.P. (2010), “Savings through collaboration: a case study on the value of BIM”,
Journal of Building Information Modeling, pp. 29-30.
Castañeda, C. (2009), Plan for Integration of Building Information Modelling - BIM - with Cost
Estimation Tools and Programming Projects, Uniandes, Bogota.
Chan, T.K. and Theong, M.C. (2013), “A review of the performance of the Malaysian construction
industry”, Proceedings of International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and
Construction (CIB) World Building Congress 2013, Brisbane, 5-9 May.
Chen, W. and Hirschheim, R. (2004), “A paradigmatic and methodological examination of
information systems research from 1991 to 2001”, Information Systems Journal, Vol. 14
No. 3, p. 197.
Churchill, G.A. (1979), “A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs”,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol 16 No. 1, p. 64.
Chuttur, M.Y. (2009), “Overview of the technology acceptance model: origins, developments and
future directions, IN university, USA”, Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems,
Vol. 9 No. 37, available at: http://sprouts.aisnet.org/9-37
Coates, P., Arayici, Y., Koskela, L., Kagioglou, M., Usher, C. and O’Reilly, K. (2010), “The key
performance indicators of the bim implementation process”, paper presented at the
International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering, Nottinham.
Collis, J., Hussey, R., Hussey, J. and Inglis, R. (2003), Business Research: A Practical Guide for
Undergraduate and Postgraduate Students, 2nd ed., Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, NY.
Cooper, R. and Markus, M. (1995), “Human engineering”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 36 No. 4,
pp. 39-50.
Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation (2009), Australian BIM Guidelines
Book, Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation, available at: http://
issuu.com/guillermo-am/docs/bim_guidelines_book? viewMode¼magazine& Building
mode¼embed (accessed 26 September 2013).
CRC Construction Innovation (2007), “Adopting BIM for facilities management: solutions for
information
managing the Sydney opera house”, Cooperative Research Center for Construction modelling
Innovation, Brisbane.
Dackert, I., Loov, L. and Martensson, M. (2004), “Leadership and climate for innovation in teams”,
Economic and Industrial Democracy, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 301-318. 425
Damanpour, F. (1991), “Organizational innovation: a meta analysis of effects of determinants and
moderators”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 555-590.
Davenport, T. (1993), Process Innovation: Re-engineering Work through Information Technology,
Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Davenport, T.H. and Short, J.E. (1990), “The new industrial engineering: information technology
and business process redesign”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 13 No. 14, pp. 11-27.
Davis, F.D. (1986), “A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user
information systems: theory and results”, PhD thesis, Sloan School of Management,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MA.
Davies, R. and Harty, C. (2013), “Measurement and exploration of individual beliefs about the
consequences of building information modelling use”, Construction Management and
Economics, Vol. 31 No. 11, pp. 1110-1127, DOI: 10.1080/01446193.2013.848994.
Dow Jones Indexes (2011), Country Classification System, Dow Jones Indexes, available at: www.
djindexes.com/mdsidx/downloads/brochure_info/Dow_Jones_Indexes_Country_
Classification_System.pdf (accessed 30 September 2011).
Duncan, E.E., Eluwa, S.E. and Ajagbe, M.A. (2012), “Urbanization and 3D city modelling for
developing countries-a comparative study”, Electronics Journal of Information Systems for
Developing Countries, Vol. 54 No. 5, pp. 1-20.
East, E.W. (2009), “Performance specifications for building information exchange”, Journal of
Building Information Modelling, pp. 18-20.
Edgar, A. (2008), “Building value through building information innovation”, Journal of Building
Information Modelling, pp. 38.
Enegbuma, W.I. and Ali, K.N. (2012), “A theoretical framework for building information
modelling penetration in malaysian construction industry”, Proceedings of Management in
Construction Research Association (MiCRA) Post Graduate Conference, Kuala Lumpur.
Enegbuma, W.I. and Ali, K.N. (2013), “Hypothesis analysis of building information modelling
penetration in malaysian construction industry”, Proceedings of AMIDDS - Architectural
Management and IDDS, Selected Papers Presented at the International Council for
Research and Innovation in Building and Construction (CIB) World Building Congress
Construction and Society, Brisbane, 5-9 May, pp. 263-276.
Enegbuma, W.I., Yuen, K.W. and Ali, K.N. (2010), “ICT competence amongst quantity surveying
students in Malaysia”, 3rd International Graduate Conference on Engineering, Science, and
Humanities Proceedings (IGCESH2010), Johor.
Faithful Gould (2009), “Building information modeling – coming of age?”, International
Construction Intelligence, Vol. 21 No. 2.
Fedelman, U. (2002), “Temporal and simultaneous processing in the brain: a possible cellular basis
of cognition”, Kybernetes, Vol. 31 Nos 3/4, pp. 432-481.
Flórez, M., Guevara, J., Ozuna, A. and Vargas, H. (2013), “The process of implementing project
management and BIM in the Colombian AEC industry”, Proceedings of CIB World Building
Congress, Brisbane, 5-9 May.
CI Gunathilake, S. and Jayasena, H.S. (2008), “Developing a relational approach to contracting: the Sri
Lankan context”, paper presented at the Proceedings of the CIB International Conference on
14,4 Building Education and Research, Kandalama.
Hamid, Z.A. and Kamar, K.A.M. (2010), “Modernising the Malaysian construction industry”,
Proceedings of the W089 - Special Track 18th International Council for Research and
Innovation in Building and Construction (CIB) World Building Congress, Publication 380,
426 pp. 267-280.
Hamil, S. (2012), “What will BIM mean for design fees?”, in Waterhouse, R. (Ed), National BIM
Report, NBS, pp. 15-16, available at: www.thenbs.com/topics/bim/articles/whatwill
BIMMeanForDesignFees.asp
Hammer, M. (1990), “Re-engineering work: don’t automate, obliterate”, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 68 No. 4, pp. 104-112.
Hammond, D.M. (2008), “The BIM balancing act”, Journal of Building Information Modelling,
pp. 12-14.
Haron, A.T. (2013), “Organisational readiness to implement building information modelling: a
framework for design consultants in Malaysia”, PhD thesis, School of the Built
Environment Faculty of Business, Law and the Built Environment, University of Salford,
Salford, Manchester.
Haron, A.T., Marshall-Ponting, A.J., Hamid, Z.A., Kamar, K.A.M., Hashim, S. and Wahab, N.A.
(2012), “Building information modelling (BIM): the core concept and the benefits”, available
at: www.bimthinkspace.com/2009/12/episode-13-the-bim-maturity-index.html
Henderson, L. and Jordan, N.L. (2009), “A modest proposal for a transdisciplinary curriculum: for
the design, construction, management and maintenance of architecture”, Journal of
Hinterhuber, H.H. (1995), “Business process management: the European approach”, Business
Change & Re-engineering, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 63-73.
Hobbs, R.W. (1996), “Leadership through collaboration”, AIArchitect, Vol. 3 No. 11.
Ibrahim, A.R., Roy, M.H., Ahmed, Z. and Imtiaz, G. (2010), “An investigation of the status of the
Malaysian construction industry”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 17 No. 2,
pp. 294-308.
Ibrahim, M., Krawczyk, R. and Schipporiet, G. (2004), “A Web-based approach to transferring
architectural information to the construction site based on the bim object concept”,
Proceedings of the Association for Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia
(CAADRIA).
IFC (2002), “IFC model based operation and maintenance of buildings (IFC-mBomb)”, available at:
http://cig.bre.co.uk/iai_uk/iai_projects/ifcmbomb
IFC (2012), “Industry foundation classes”, available at: http://buildingsmart-tech.org/
specifications/ifc-overview
Iguarán, A. (2010), A First Step to Implementation of BIM in State Contracts, FONADE as a
Management Tool in Your Construction Project, Uniandes, Bogota.
Isaza, O. (2008), Plan for Implementation of Building Information Modelling (BIM) as a Tool for
Planning and Control of Construction Projects, Uniandes, Bogota.
Jardim-Goncalves, R. and Grilo, A. (2010), “SOA4BIM: putting the building and construction
industry in the single European information space”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 19
No. 4, pp. 388-397.
Jayasena, H.S. and Weddikkara, C. (2012), “Building information modelling for Sri Lankan Building
construction industry”, paper presented at the World Construction Conference 2012 –
Global Challenges in Construction Industry, Colombo. information
Jayasena, H.S. and Weddikkara, C. (2013), “Assessing the BIM maturity in a BIM infant industry”, modelling
Proceedings of the Second World Construction Symposium 2013: Socio-Economic
Sustainability in Construction, Colombo, 14-15 June.
Jeong, Y.-S., Eastman, C.M., Sacks, R. and Kaner, I. (2009), “Benchmark tests for BIM data 427
exchanges of precast concrete”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 469-484.
Johanssen, H.J., McHugh, P., Pendlebury, A.J. and Wheele, W.A. (1993), Business Process
Reengineering: Breakpoint Strategic for Market Dominance, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
Jones, S.A. and Lien, J.K. (2008), “Towards interoperable building product content”, Journal of
Jordani, D. (2008), “BIM: a healthy disruption to a fragmented and broken process”, Journal of
Jung, Y. and Joo, M. (2010), “Building information modelling (BIM) framework for practical
implementation”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 126-133.
Kalay, Y.E. (2001), “Enhancing multi-disciplinary collaboration through semantically rich
representation”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 741-755.
Kaner, I., Sacks, R. and Kassian, W. (2008), “Case studies of BIM adoption for precast concrete
design by mid-sized structural engineering firms”, ITcon, Vol. 13, pp. 303-323.
Kangas, K. (1999), “Competency and capabilities based competition and the role of information
technology: the case of trading by a Finland-based firm to Russia”, Journal of Information
Technology Cases and Application, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 4-22.
Kanter, R.M. (1988), “When a thousand flowers bloom: structural, collective, and social conditions
for innovation in organization”, in Staw, M. and Cummings, L.L. (Eds), Research in
Organizational Behaviour 10B, JAI Press, pp. 169-211.
Karlshoj, J. (2011), Information Delivery Manuals, BuildingSMART International user Group,
available at: http://iug.buildingsmart.com/idms (accessed January 2012).
Kennedy, C. (1994), “Re-engineering: the human costs and benefits”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 27
No. 5, pp. 64-72.
Khosrowshahi, F. and Arayici, Y. (2012), “Roadmap for implementation of BIM in the UK
construction industry”, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 19
No. 6, pp. 610-635.
Klenke, K. (1994), “Information technologies as drivers of emergent organisational forms: a
leadership perspective”, in Baskerville, R., Smithson, S., Ngwenyama, O. and Degross, J.
(Eds), Transforming Organisations with Information Technology, Elsevier Science,
Amsterdam, pp. 323-341.
Koch, C., Slater, D. and Baatz, E. (1999), The ABC’s of ERP, CIO, London.
Kohar, U.H.A., Senina, A.A. and Ismaila, K. (2012), “The cultivation of organizational innovation
amongst Malaysian Bumiputera (Indigenous) ICT-based small firms”, Procedia - Social and
Behavioural Sciences, Vol. 40 No. 358, pp. 358-363.
Kuppusamy, M. and Shanmugam, B. (2007), “Islamic countries economic growth and ICT
development: the Malaysian case”, Journal of Economic Cooperation, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 99-114.
Kurul, E., Abanda, H., Tah, J.H. and Cheung, F. (2013), “Rethinking the build process for BIM
adoption”, Proceedings of International Council for Research and Innovation in Building
and Construction (CIB) World Building Congress 2013, Brisbane, 5-9 May.
CI LACCD BIM (2009), “Building information modeling standards (LACCD BIMS)”, 2.0 C.F.R, Los
Angeles Community College District, available at: www.viewbyview.com/html/bim_
14,4 guidelines.html
Lang, S.Y.T., Dickinson, J. and Bucha, R.O. (2002), “Cognitive factors in design”, Computers in
Industry, Vol. 48, pp. 89-98.
Latham, M. (1994), “Constructing the team”, Final Report of the Government/Industry Review of
428 Procurement and Contractual Arrangements in the UK Construction Industry, HMSO, London.
Lee, G., Sacks, R. and Eastman, C.M. (2006), “Specifying parametric building object behaviour
(BOB) for a building information modelling system”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 15
No. 6, pp. 758-776.
Lega, A. (2008), “Synergy in the sandbox”, Journal of Building Information Modelling,

pp. 44-46.
Leicht, R., Fox, S., Mäkelainen, T. and Messner, J. (2007). “Building information models, display
media and team performance: an exploratory study”, Working Paper No. 88, VTT,
available at: www.vtt.fi/inf/pdf/workingpapers/2007/W88.pdf
Liang, Y. and Cohen, E. (1994), “Business process re-engineering: an overview”, South-Central
Small College Computing Conference, Amarillo, 15-16 April, pp. 130-136.
Liebich, T., Geiger, A., Katranuschkov, P., Linhard, K., Steinmann, R. and Weise, M. (2001),
“mvdXML schema”, available at: http://buildingsmart-tech.org/downloads/
accompanying-documents/formats/mvdxml-documentation/MVD%20formal%20
schema%20proposal%20V0-5.pdf/view (accessed January 2012).
Liu, Z. (2010), Feasibility Analysis of BIM Based Information System for Facility Management at
WPI, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA.
McCuen, T. and Suermann, P.E. (2007), “The interactive capability maturity model and 2007 AIA
tap BIM award winners”, Viewpoint #33, AECbytes, 6 December, available at:
www.aecbytes.com/viewpoint/2007/issue_33.html
McAdam, B. (2010), “Building information modelling: the UK legal context”, International Journal
of Law in the Built Environment, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 246-259.
McCuen, T.L. (2008), “Building information modelling and the interactive capability maturity
model”, available at: http://ascpro0.ascweb.org/archives/cd/2008/paper/CPRT
276002008.pdf
Malleson, A. (2012), “BIM survey: summary of findings”, in Waterhouse, R. (Ed), National BIM
Report, NBS, pp. 8-15.
Mankiw, N.G. (2008), Principles of Economics, 6th ed., South-Western Cengage Learning, Natorp
Boulevard, OH.
Mitropoulos, P. and Tatum, C.B. (2000), “Forces driving adoption of new information
technologies”, Journal of Construction Engineering Management, Vol. 126 No. 5,
pp. 340-348.
Moingeon, B., Ramanantsoa, B., Me’tais, E. and Orton, J.D. (1998), “Another look at
strategy-structure relationships: the resource-based view”, European Management
Journal, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 298-304.
Murphy, M., Heaney, G. and Perera, S. (2011), “A methodology for evaluating construction
innovation constraints through project stakeholder competencies and FMEA”,
Construction Innovation, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 416-440.
Nguyen, T.H., Shehab, T. and Gao, Z. (2010), “Evaluating sustainability of architectural designs
using building information modelling”, The Open Construction and Building Technology
Journal, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 1-8.
Nummelin, J., Sulankivi, K., Kiviniemi, M. and Koppinen, T. (2011), “Managing building Building
information and client requirements in construction supply chain – constructor’s view”,
paper presented at Conference Proceedings, CIB, Sophia Antipolis. information
Olatunji, O.A., Sher, W.D. and Gu, N. (2010), “Building information modeling and quantity modelling
surveying practice”, Emirates Journal for Engineering Research, Vol. 15 No. 1,
pp. 67-70.
Onuma, K. (2008), “Integration today using open standards: BIMStorm™, Rotterdam to Los 429
Angeles and beyond”, Journal of Building Information Modelling, pp. 14-18.
Owen, R., Amor, R., Palmer, M., Dickinson, J., Tatum, C.B., Kazi, A.S. and East, B. (2010),
“Challenges for integrated design and delivery solutions”, Architectural Engineering and
Design Management, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 232-240.

Oye, N.D. (2013), “Information and communication technology acceptance framework for
Nigerian public university academicians”, PhD thesis, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Palos, S., Kiviniemi, A. and Kuusisto, J. (2014), “Future perspectives on product data management
in building information modeling”, Construction Innovation, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 52-68.
Panuwatwanich, K., Stewart, R.A. and Mohamed, S. (2009), “Critical pathways to enhanced
innovation diffusion and business performance in Australian design firms”, Automation in
Construction, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 790-797.
Philip, D. (2012), “BIM: the UK government value proposition. UK government strategy task
group. Cabinet office”, Department for Business Innovation and Skills, available at:
www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/34710/12-1327-
building-information-modelling.pdf
Porter, M.E. and Millar, V.E. (1985), “How information gives you competitive advantage”,
Harvard Business Review, Vol. 63 No. 4, pp. 149-160.
Powell, R.R. and Connaway, L.P. (2004), Basic Research Methods for Librarians, 4th ed., Libraries
Unlimited, Westport.
Prowler, D. (2012), “Whole building design: the role of buildings and the case for whole building
design”, National Institute of Building Sciences, available at: www.wbdg.org/wbdg_
approach.php
PSDC (2010), Finding of the Survey on Degree of Adoption and Interest of 3D Software among
Professionals, Professional Services Development Corporation (PSDC), Johor Bahru.
Ren, A. and Kumaraswamy, M.M. (2013), “Exploring the conflicts between BIM and existing
project processes in Hong Kong”, Proceedings of International Council for Research and
Innovation in Building and Construction (CIB) World Building Congress 2013, Brisbane,
5-9 May.
Rezgui, Y. and Zarli, A. (2006), “Paving the way to the vision of digital construction: a strategic
roadmap”, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 132 No. 7, pp. 767-776.
Rogers, E.M. (1983), Diffusion of Innovations, Free Press, New York, NY.
Rogers, E.M. (2003), Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed., Free Press, New York, NY.
Rogers, E.M. and Schoemaker, F.F. (1971), Communication of Innovations: A Cross Cultural
Approach, Free Press, New York, NY.
Rosenberg, T.L. (2006), “Building information modelling”, available at: www.ralaw.com/
resources/documents/Building%20Information%20Modeling%20-%20Rosenberg.pdf
Russell, A., Staub-French, S., Tran, N. and Wong, W. (2009), “Visualizing high-rise building
construction strategies using linear scheduling and 4D CAD”, Automation in Construction,
Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 219-236.
CI Salmon, J.L. (2009), “The legal revolution in construction: how collaborative agreements, BIM and
lean construction methods support integrated project delivery”, Journal of Building
14,4 Information Modelling, pp. 18-19.
Sánchez, C. and Valencia, J. (2011), Design Organizational Process Maps for Implementation of
BIM in a Construction Company, Uniandes, Bogota.
Shari, Z. and Soebarto, V. (2014), “Investigating sustainable practices in the Malaysian office
430 building developments”, Construction Innovation, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 17-35.
Simon, E. (1944), The Placing and Management of Building Contract, HMSO, London.
Smith, D. (2007), “An introduction to building information modelling (BIM)”, Journal of Building
Information Modelling, pp. 12-14.
Smith, D. and Edgar, A. (2008), “Building information modeling”, available at: www.wbdg.org/
bim/bim.php (accessed 12 August 2010).
Smith, D., Wall, J. and Betts, M. (2005), “A45 ICT curriculum design to bridge the gap between
industry and academia”, paper presented at the Construction Research Conference of the
Rics Foundation – the Australian Universities’ Building Educators Association Conference,
Brisbane, 4-8 July.
Singleton, R.A., Straits, B.C. and Straits, M.M. (1993), Approaches to Social Research, 2nd ed.,
Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
Solomon, O., Alina, S., Wahab, I. and Ajagbe, M.A. (2014), “Factors influencing internet banking
adoption in Nigeria: a literature review”, Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference
on Computer, Intelligent Computing and Education Technology, Hong Kong.
Sommerville, J. and Craig, N. (2006), Implementing IT in Construction, Taylor and Francis, London
and New York.
Stone, J. (1990), “Skepticism as a theory of knowledge”, Philosophy and Phenomenological
Research, Vol. 60 No. 3, pp. 527-545.
Succar, B. (2009), “Building information modelling framework: a research and delivery foundation
for industry stakeholders”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 357-375.
Succar, B. (2011), BIM Industrial Transformation in Australia, IBS/BIM Roundtable:
Mechanisation of Industrialised Building System (IBS) Building Information Modelling
(BIM), ChangeAgents AEC, Cyberjaya, Selangor.
Suermann, P.C. and Issa, R.R.A. (2007), “BIM effects on construction key performance indicators
(KPI) survey”, Journal of Building Information Modelling, pp. 26-27.
Sun, M. and Aouad, G. (2000), “Integration technologies to support organisational changes in the
construction industry, 7th ISPE International conference on Concurrent Engineering, Lyon,
pp. 596-604.
Sun, W.Z. and Zhou, G.Q. (2010), “KPIs: analysing the impact of building information modeling on
construction”, Proceedings of the Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management
(IE&EM) IEEE 17Th International Conference, Xiamen, DOI: 10.1109/
ICIEEM.2010.5646595, pp. 354-356.
Tapscott, D. and Caston, A. (1993), Paradigm Shift: The New Promise of Information Technology,
McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Taylor, J.M., Liu, J. and Hein, M.F. (2007), Integration of Building Information Modelling (BIM)
into an ACCE Accredited Construction Management Curriculum, Auburn University,
Auburn, AL.
Taylor, S. and Todd, P.A. (1995), “Understanding information technology usage: a test of
competing models”, Information Systems Research, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 144-176.
Teran, J.F. (2008), “Building modelling from antiquity to our day”, Journal of Building Information Building
Modelling, pp. 42-43.
Thwala, D.W., Ajagbe, A.M., Enegbuma, W.I., Bilau, A.A. and Long, C.S. (2012), “Sudanese small
information
and medium sized construction firms: an empirical survey of job turnover”, Journal of modelling
Basic, Applied Scientific Research, Vol. 2 No. 8, pp. 7414-7420.
Towers, S. (1996), “Re-engineering: middle managers are the key asset”, Management Services,
Vol. 40 No. 12, pp. 17-18. 431
Tse, T.K., Wong, K.A. and Wong, K.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, Vol. 10, pp. 85-110.
Udom, K. (2012), “BIM: mapping out the legal issues”, National Building Specification, available
at: www.thenbs.com/topics/BIM/articles/bimMappingOutTheLegalIssues.asp
Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F.D. (2000), “A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model:
four longitudinal field studies”, Management Science, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 186-204.
Venkatesh, V., Davis, F.D., Morris, M.G. and Davis, G.B. (2003), “User acceptance of information
technology: towards a unified view”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 425-478.
Van Nederveen, S., Beheshti, R. and Willems, P. (2010), “Building information modelling in the
Netherlands: a status report”, paper presented at the CIB 2010 World Congress, Salford
Quays, Manchester.
West, M.A. (1990), “The social psychology of innovation in groups”, in West, M.A.. and Farr, J.L.
(Eds), Innovation and Creativity at Work, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, pp. 309-333.
Wilkinson, P. (2005), Construction Collaboration Technologies: The Extranet Evolution, Taylors
and Francis, London and New York.
Willcocks, L. and Smith, G. (1994), IT-Enabled Business Process Re-engineering: From Theory to
Practice, Oxford University Working Papers, Oxford.
Wong, K.A. (2011), “Building information modelling for tertiary construction education in Hong
Kong”, Journal of Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), Vol.16, pp. 467-476.
Wong, K.A., Wong, K.F. and Nadeem, A. (2011), “Government roles in implementing building
information modelling systems: comparison between Hong Kong and the United States”,
Construction Innovation, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 61-76.
Yan, H. and Damian, P. (2008), “Benefits and barriers of building information modelling”, 12th
International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering, Beijing.
Yeomans, S.G., Bouchlaghem, N.M. and El-Hamalawi, A. (2006), “An evaluation of current
collaborative prototyping practices within the AEC industry”, Automation in Construction,
Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 139-149.
Further reading
Arayici, Y., Coates, P., Koskela, L., Kagioglou, M., Usher, C. and O’Reilly, K. (2011), “BIM
adoption and implementation for architectural practices”, Structural Survey, Vol. 29
No. 1, pp. 7-25.
Dangerfield, B., Green, S. and Austin, S. (2010), “Understanding construction competitiveness: the
contribution of system dynamics”, Construction Innovation, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 408-420.
Egan, J. (1998), Rethinking Construction: The Report of the Construction Task Force, Department
of the Environment, Transport and Regions, London.
Hecht, L. (2010), “Laying the foundation for BIM interoperability”, Journal of Building Information
Modelling, pp. 19-20.
CI Miller, D. (2012), “BIM from the point of view of a small practice”, in Waterhouse, R. (Ed), National
BIM Report, NBS, pp. 6-7.
14,4 Przybyla, J. (2010), “The next frontier for BIM: interoperability with GIS”, Journal of Building
Information Modelling, pp. 14-18.
Corresponding author
Wallace Imoudu Enegbuma can be contacted at: wenegbuma2@live.utm.my
432
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
View publication stats

BIM Model Adoption Malaysia

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

BIM Model Adoption Malaysia

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

See

Preliminary building information modelling

Article in Construction Innovation · October 2014

Wallace Imoudu Enegbuma Godwin Uche Aliagha

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Kherun Nita Ali

technology adoption View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Permanent link to this document:

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Wallace Imoudu Enegbuma

Building information modelling

Comparatives on global BIM adoption experiences

interoperability. The Malaysian Governments’ aggressive drive to developed nation

definitions, technology, process and new roles. In addition, dissimilarity in technical

clientele. In construction, process change from inception, project completion and FM

Rogers (1983) argued that relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, observability

H9. There is significant relationship between business process re-engineering and

Stimulus Organism Response

BIM perception and collaborative processes

Strategic IT in construction, collaborative processes and BIM adoption

investments for clients increasing demands.

Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Lega, A. (2008), “Synergy in the sandbox”, Journal of Building Information Modelling,

Design Management, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 232-240.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

View publication stats

Anda mungkin juga menyukai