Building Information Modelling:
conceptual constructs and
performance improvement tools
Bilal Succar
Submitted for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy, December 2013
School of Architecture and Built Environment
Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment
University of Newcastle, Callaghan NSW 2308
bsuccar@changeagents.com.au
Declaration
This thesis by published works is submitted for the award of Doctor of Philosophy from
the University of Newcastle.
Some of the papers included as part of this submission are jointly authored and I hereby
certify that I have included a written statement from each co-author or project leader -
endorsed by the Faculty Assistant Dean (Research Training) - attesting to my
contribution to the joint publications. Where work embodied in this thesis has been
conducted in collaboration with other researchers, or in other institutions, I have
included a statement clearly outlining the extent of collaboration, with whom and under
what auspices.
This thesis contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other
degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution and, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, contains no material previously published or written by another
person, except where due reference has been made in the text.
I give consent to the final version of my thesis being made available worldwide when
deposited in the University’s Digital Repository, subject to the provisions of the
Copyright Act 1968.
Bilal Succar
December 16, 2013
i
Acknowledgements
This study journey spanned eight years along which I enjoyed the
support of many colleagues, friends and family. I’m in debt to all
for their intellectual input, encouragement or active support.
I owe most gratitude to the formative words of my mentor
Hadret El-Sheikh Abdul-Rahman El-Helou, the loving support of
my wife Siham, the tender patience of my daughters Noor and Mariam, and the
sympathetic guidance of my primary supervisor AProf Willy Sher.
I also owe much gratitude to my secondary supervisors Prof Tony Williams (Newcastle
University and Avondale College) for his sound advice over the years, and AProf
Guillermo Aranda-Mena (RMIT University) for his friendship and encouragement to
undertake this study in the first place.
Thank you to all those how participated in the international focus groups and offered
their time and valuable input. My sincere appreciation for the assistance provided by
Prof Miroslaw Skibniewski (Maryland University), AProf Bob Owen (Salford then QUT),
and Prof Andy Wong (Hong Kong Polytechnic University) in organizing focus group
sessions at their respective institutions. I also wish to thank Prof Andrew Baldwin for
organizing a session at Loughborough University which was sadly cancelled when
Eyjafjallajökull spewed its volcanic ash into the path of my - and so many other – flights.
I would like to acknowledge the sound advice provided by Prof Alistair Gibb
(Loughborough University) covering the Thesis by Publication route; a route I
subsequently followed and now highly recommend to future PhD students.
Finally, I extend my appreciation to the thesis’ international reviewers from the
universities of São Paulo and Salford. Their generous input - and that of all anonymous
paper reviewers - has assisted in improving the deliverables of this study/journey which
I hereby present to domain researchers and fellow practitioners.
ii
Thesis Overview
Building Information Modelling (BIM) is a set of technologies, processes and policies
enabling multiple stakeholders to collaboratively design, construct and operate a
facility.
There are numerous challenges attributed to BIM adoption by industry and academia.
These represent a number of knowledge gaps each warranting a focused investigation
by domain researchers. This study does not isolate a single gap to address but espouses
a holistic view of the knowledge problem at hand. It contributes to the discussion a set
of conceptual constructs that clarify the knowledge structures underlying the BIM
domain. It also introduces a number of practicable knowledge tools to facilitate BIM
learning, assessment and performance improvement.
This study is delivered through complementary papers and appendices to answer two
primary research questions. The first explores the knowledge structures underlying the
BIM domain whilst the second probes how these knowledge structures can be used to
facilitate the measurement and improvement of BIM performance across the
construction industry.
To address the first question, the study identifies conceptual clusters underlying the BIM
domain, develops descriptive taxonomies of these clusters, exposes some of their
conceptual relationships, and then delivers a representative BIM framework. The BIM
framework is composed of three-axes which represent the main knowledge structures
underlying the BIM domain and support the development of functional conceptual
models.
To address the second question, BIM framework structures are extended through
additional concepts and tools to facilitate BIM performance assessment and
development of individuals, organizations and teams. These additional concepts include
competency sets, assessment workflows and measurement tools which can be used to
assess and improve the BIM performance of industry stakeholders.
iii
In addressing these research questions, a pragmatic approach to research design based
on available literature and applicable theories has been adopted. By combining several
research strategies, paradigms and methods, this study (1) generates several new
conceptual structures (e.g. frameworks, models and taxonomies) which collectively
clarify the knowledge structures underlying the BIM domain; and (2) develops a set of
workflows and tools that facilitate BIM assessment, learning and performance
improvement.
This study delivers an extendable knowledge structure upon which to build a host of BIM
performance improvement initiatives and tools. As a set of complementary papers and
appendices, the study presents a rich, unified yet multi-layered environment of
conceptual constructs and practicable tools; supported by a common framework, a
domain ontology and simplified visual representations. Individually, each paper
introduces a new framework part or solidifies a previous one. Collectively, the papers
form a cohesive knowledge engine that generates assessment systems, learning
modules and performance improvement tools.
iv
Thesis structure
The thesis is delivered in three parts - introduction document, published papers and
supporting appendices:
Part I: introduction document
The introduction document identifies the research questions, research
design and study deliverables. Part I includes eleven sections:
Sections 1-3 introduce the research context, research background and discuss the
importance of BIM;
Sections 4-6 identify the research questions underpinning this study, discuss the
conceptual background and overall research design;
Sections 7-8 introduce a hierarchy of conceptual structures and clarify how the BIM
framework has been constructed;
Section 9 introduces the study’s research deliverables, the common themes
underlying the submitted papers, and how different research
deliverables aggregate into a conceptual and practical continuum;
Section 10 provides a conclusion, identifies a study limitation and introduces its
future extensions; and
Section 11 includes the introduction document’s bibliographic references.
Part II: published papers
Part 2 includes nine papers – in three types - submitted as part of this
thesis. Paper types are explained in section 9 of Part I:
Paper A1: A Proposed Framework to Investigate Building Information Modelling
through Knowledge Elicitation and Visual Models
Paper A2: The BIM Framework: a Research and Delivery Foundation
Paper A3: Building Information Modelling Maturity Matrix
Paper A4: The Five Components of BIM Performance Measurement
v
Paper A5: Measuring BIM Performance: Five Metrics
Paper A6: An integrated approach to BIM competency assessment, acquisition
and application
Paper B1: Building Information Modeling: analyzing noteworthy publications of
eight countries using a knowledge content taxonomy
Paper B2: A proposed approach to comparing the BIM maturity of countries
Paper C: BIM in Practice - BIM Education, a Position Paper by the Australian
Institute of Architects and Consult Australia
Part III: appendices
Part III includes six appendices to clarify and support submitted papers:
Appendix A: the BIM ontology
Appendix B: BIM knowledge content taxonomy
Appendix C: citations of published papers
Appendix D: focus groups info sheet and feedback form
Appendix E: statements of contribution
Appendix F: aggregation of all bibliographic references cited in this study
vi
PART I
INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT
This document introduces the research topics, questions, design and
deliverables. It summarizes the contribution each submitted paper
made towards this study, explores common research themes across
papers, and provides an insight into future study extensions.
Table of contents
Research context ............................................................................................................ 2
Research background..................................................................................................... 2
Importance of BIM ......................................................................................................... 3
BIM benefits ................................................................................................................... 3
BIM challenges ............................................................................................................... 4
Research questions ........................................................................................................ 6
Research aims and objectives ....................................................................................... 7
Conceptual background ................................................................................................. 8
Previous research ........................................................................................................... 8
Applicable theories ......................................................................................................... 9
Experiential knowledge ................................................................................................ 12
Thought experiments ................................................................................................... 12
Research design ........................................................................................................... 13
Research paradigms ..................................................................................................... 13
Positivist paradigm...................................................................................................14
Interpretive paradigm ..............................................................................................14
Critical paradigm ......................................................................................................14
Discussion: adopting a mixed paradigm...................................................................15
Research strategy ......................................................................................................... 15
Deduction ................................................................................................................16
Induction ..................................................................................................................16
Abduction ................................................................................................................17
Retroduction ............................................................................................................17
Discussion: adopting a mixed strategy .....................................................................18
Research method ......................................................................................................... 19
Data collection.............................................................................................................. 21
Conceptual constructs ................................................................................................. 23
Frameworks .................................................................................................................. 24
Models.......................................................................................................................... 26
Taxonomies .................................................................................................................. 27
Classifications ............................................................................................................... 27
Dictionaries................................................................................................................... 28
Ontologies .................................................................................................................... 29
Framework development ............................................................................................ 29
Research deliverables .................................................................................................. 33
List of included papers ................................................................................................. 33
Content summary of included papers .......................................................................... 34
Research themes across included papers..................................................................... 39
An expansive research continuum ............................................................................... 41
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 45
Current limitations ....................................................................................................... 46
Future extensions ......................................................................................................... 46
Summary ...................................................................................................................... 48
References .................................................................................................................... 49
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 1
Research context
Building Information Modelling (BIM) is the current expression of technical and
procedural innovation within the construction industry. It is a methodology that
generates, exchanges and manages a constructed facility’s data throughout its life cycle.
While BIM is solidly rooted in technological advances, partially transferred from other
industries, it extends into the realm of social exchanges between organizational actors.
A focused analysis of the BIM domain is thus necessarily an in-depth investigation of
multi-layered organizational dynamics, changing knowledge structures across industry
sectors and evolving market requirements. To understand BIM, its disparate parts must
be identified as well as the sum of these parts; individual deliverables must be defined
alongside the requirements for these deliverables; and individual concepts and tools
must be recognized in addition to the relationship between them. In essence, to
holistically understand BIM, it must be considered as a multi-faceted paradigm, an
emergent interdisciplinary field of research and application within the construction
industry.
Research background
BIM concepts, tools and workflows have been extensively discussed in peer-reviewed
literature, industry seminars and online public discussions. Within these, BIM is
described as a catalyst for change (Bernstein, 2005) poised to reduce industry’s
fragmentation (CWIC, 2004), improve its efficiency/effectiveness (Hampson & Brandon,
2004) and lower the high costs of inadequate interoperability (NIST, 2004). These
assertions – abridged as they may be - include several mental constructs derived from
organizational studies, information systems and regulatory fields. Such divergence and
breadth highlight the need for clear conceptual constructs – taxonomies, ontologies,
models and frameworks - to organize domain knowledge, facilitate BIM learning within
industry and academia, and enable the development of practicable performance
improvement tools. Several conceptual constructs are developed as part of this study
and will be explored in subsequent sections.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 2
Importance of BIM
The importance of BIM stems from its significant benefits and substantial challenges. As
summarized in sections 3.1 and 3.2, BIM concepts and workflows promise to deliver
substantial benefits to “all participants in the process of designing, constructing, owning
and refurbishing buildings” (BIS, 2011, p. 7). These deliverables however are subject to
substantial cultural challenges, legal barriers and process complexity. Some of the more
impactful benefits and challenges are discussed below:
BIM benefits
The benefits attributed to BIM represent unique project deliverables and invariably
reflect industry’s long-term expectations from this new CAD paradigm (Ibrahim,
Krawczyk, & Schipporeit, 2004, p. 1). Below is a non-exhaustive list summarizing BIM
benefits:
• BIM will reduce industry’s fragmentation (CWIC, 2004);
• BIM significantly reduces labour costs, production rework and installation conflicts
(Khanzode, Fischer, & Reed, 2008);
• BIM creates a transparent project environment (Leicht & Messner, 2008);
• BIM enhances collaboration between construction professionals (Alshawi & Faraj,
2002);
• BIM is an “integration of product and process modelling” (Kimmance, 2002, p. 6);
• BIM allows rapid/accurate updating of changes; reduction of effort required for
establishing spatial programmes; improved communication within the project
team; and elevated confidence in scope completeness (Manning & Messner, 2008)
as reported in (Linderoth, 2010);
• BIM results in a “clear improvement in engineering design quality, in terms of error-
free drawings, and steadily increasing improvement in labour productivity” (Kaner,
Sacks, Kassian, & Quitt, 2008, p. 303);
• A combined BIM/Lean approach is more efficient than a Design-Bid-Build or a
Design-Build project delivery process (USAF, 2010);
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 3
• BIM can address the emerging challenges of sustainability within the construction
industry (Watson, 2010);
• The adoption of BIM principles will allow all construction industry players to gain
“substantial benefits in financial terms” (BIS, 2011, p. 7); and
• BIM has many benefits including: automated assembly, better design, controlled
whole-life costs and environmental data, enhanced processes, higher production
quality, and improved customer service (ACG, 2010).
BIM challenges
Industry’s expectations of BIM are neither readily nor necessarily matched by reality.
Numerous studies have shown that implementing BIM presents significant challenges in
BIM education, multidisciplinary workflows and organizational transformation. A non-
exhaustive list summarizing these is provided below:
• BIM adoption and collaboration is negatively affected by construction industry’s
confrontational culture (Watson, 2011);
• BIM is adversely influenced by “organizational and cultural divisions between
designers and builders and between contractors and subcontractors” (Dossick &
Neff, 2009, p. 466);
• BIM implementation across an organization has significantly different, and even
competing requirements, to BIM implementation on projects (Kunz, 2012);
• There are only a few “procedures or tools to guide practical BIM implementation
processes” (Mäkeläinen, Hyvärinen, & Peura, 2012, p. 497);
• BIM adoption is affected by the lack of interoperability between different software
platforms (Eastman, Teicholz, Sacks, & Liston, 2011);
• There are many business and legal barriers to collaborative BIM processes
(Sebastian, 2010);
• BIM causes workflow disruptions and requires a reconsideration of construction
business practices (Mihindu & Arayici, 2008);
• BIM implementation has resulted in the emergence of new knowledge and skill gaps
within industry (Mihindu & Arayici, 2008); and
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 4
• BIM technologies and processes represent a disruptive paradigm shift affecting
established processes within the construction industry (Shelden, 2009) (Younas,
2010) (Watson, 2011) and “one of the most disruptive (positive or negative)
episodes in the history of architectural education” (Denzer & Hedges, 2008, p. 9).
In addition to these domain-specific challenges, BIM reflects the complex and
interdependent nature of design and construction projects (Austin, Newton, Steele, &
Waskett, 2002) (Froese, 2010) and its adoption by industry is challenged by the same
factors affecting technology-adoption in general. In their research covering the
construction industry, Peansupap and Walker (2005), identified several factors
underlying the slow uptake of information and communication technology (ICT) by
organizations. These factors include: the complex nature of the construction industry;
ICT immaturity levels; poor availability of tools for evaluating the benefits of using ICT;
and lack of understanding of ICT implementation processes. These factors are likely to
apply as well to BIM - as a technology-driven process within the construction industry -
and need to be addressed if BIM is to be adopted and its benefits realized.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 5
Research questions
Industry’s far-ranging expectations from BIM tools and workflows and the challenges of
meeting these expectations (section 3.2) uncover numerous knowledge gaps, each of
which warrants investigation. Rather than investigating each gap individually, this study
espouses a holistic view and adopts two complementary research questions:
Research question 1: What are the knowledge structures underlying the BIM domain?
This is a hypothetical question (Dillon, 1984) intended to generate a
theoretical framework through conceptual analysis. This question is
addressed through the development of a theoretical framework that
organizes BIM concepts and their relationships.
Research question 2: How can these knowledge structures be harnessed to assist
industry stakeholders to adopt BIM or improve their BIM performance?
This question is demonstrative (Dillon, 1984); intended to illustrate the
usefulness of the framework through representative models and
applicable tools. This question is addressed through generating a set
of practicable tools that can be used by industry and academia to
measure BIM competency, inform BIM implementation and facilitate
BIM education.
This study addresses these research questions through the iterative development of
conceptual constructs and practicable tools (sections 8 and 8.6) which were
consecutively delivered through interdependent publications (Part II). Before
summarizing the collective deliverables of this study (section 10), the next sections
clarify the research aims and explore the conceptual background informing this
investigation and guiding its research approach.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 6
Research aims and objectives
The main research aim of this study is to generate conceptual constructs and practicable
tools to facilitate structured BIM adoption by industry and academia. This is practically
important because BIM implementation - as an advanced technology-driven process –
needs to be well-structured and well-managed as a condition of its success (Peansupap
& Walker, 2005) (Green & Hevner, 2000).
This research aim translates into a number of complementary research objectives and
sub-objectives; some were identified at the start of the study, others were progressively
added or refined. Research objectives can be summarised as follows:
• Reduce domain complexity
• Delimit BIM concepts and identify their relationships
• Develop a visual language to capture and represent knowledge
• Develop numerous interconnected conceptual constructs that can be:
o Adopted or extended by fellow researchers and practitioners
o Transformed into performance assessment and improvement tools
o Applied across disciplines, technologies and markets
• Deliver research outcomes that retain relevance and representation irrespective
of advances in BIM-related technologies
• Lay the foundations for the future development of a technology adoption meta-
framework and a knowledge-representation mid-level theory
• Exchange domain knowledge with industry stakeholders
• Encourage future PhD students to follow the thesis by publication route
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 7
Conceptual background
The research questions, aims and objectives discussed in sections 4 and 0 are a reflection
of a set of paradigms, theories and concepts collectively forming the study’s conceptual
background. This conceptual background - according to Maxwell (2005) - is in turn based
on several sources including: previous research; applicable theories; the researcher’s
own experiential knowledge; and the researcher’s thought experiments. These are
discussed below:
Previous research
This study includes two main literature reviews and several complementary ones
distributed across included papers (section 10.1). The first main literature review was
conducted in paper A2 (all papers are included in Part II) to inform the development of
a conceptual framework representing the BIM domain. At the time paper A2 was
published (late 2008), no substantial BIM frameworks existed 1 and none of the reviewed
noteworthy BIM publications (NBPs – e.g. BIM guides, protocols or specifications) were
based on an explicit conceptual structure which could be readily adopted or improved.
The absence of conceptual structures within NBPs constituted a significant research gap,
which was targeted and partially addressed by paper A2. A follow-up, more extensive
literature review conducted six years later (paper B1, 2013) identified several new BIM
frameworks - including those of Taylor and Bernstein (2009), Jung and Joo (2010), Singh,
Gu, and Wang (2011), Feng, Mustaklem, and Chen (2011) and Cerovsek (2012) - thus
signalling a narrowing of this once wide knowledge gap.
The second main literature review was conducted in paper A3 and was later partially
updated in paper A5. The review covered numerous maturity, business performance,
excellence and quality management models to identify a suitable assessment structure
for measuring and improving BIM performance. However, these models were found to
1
A partial, theoretical BIM framework was available through TNO’s BIM wiki (http://wiki.e-
bouw.org/index.php?title=BIM_-_Building_Information_Model(ing), last accessed September 2008. The
actual website is no longer available but its textual contents can be gleaned from a web archive snapshot
(http://bit.ly/12a93wN) and this file: http://www.tno.nl/downloads/The%20BIM%20Landscape.pdf, last
accessed June 28, 2013.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 8
lack the flexibility required for assessing different organizational scales (e.g. individuals,
organizations, teams and markets - see Table 3 in A3) and did not differentiate between
the notions of capability (an ability to perform a task) and that of maturity (degrees of
excellence in performing a task). The lack of a model suitable for assessing BIM
performance across different organizational scales presented a second significant
knowledge gap which was targeted and addressed in published papers: paper A3
introduced several conceptual constructs and tools that can be applied to assess
organizations, teams and larger organizational scales (e.g. country-wide maturity); and
paper A6 introduced conceptual concepts and tools that can be applied to assess the
BIM competency of individuals and groups.
These two main literature reviews were complemented by additional reviews spread
across other papers including: benefits of conceptual mapping and knowledge
visualization (paper A1), and an analysis of the different connotations of the term
‘competency’ as applied to professional abilities (paper A6). These main and
complementary reviews helped identify the two research questions; guided the
development of new methods to assess BIM performance; and identified a visual
approach to simplify and represent BIM concepts and their relationships.
Applicable theories
Several existing theories informed the initial analysis of BIM concepts and their
relationships. These theories offered clear insights into how to understand complex
knowledge structures and their component parts. However, when attempting to apply
these established theories to clarify the knowledge structures underlying the BIM
domain and to develop practicable tools based on these constructs, the limitations of
each theory became evident.
Table 1 identifies five theories initially considered – and then discounted - as applicable
to guide this study and help answer the two research questions:
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 9
Table 1. Existing theories employed to facilitate BIM understanding
THEORY HOW THE THEORY INFORMED THIS STUDY
Systems Systems Theory provides a framework by which groups of elements and their
Theory properties may be studied jointly to understand outcomes (Ackoff, 1971) (Chun,
as applied to Sohn, Arling, & Granados, 2008).
Organizations
and Study considerations and theory limitations: using Systems Theory, BIM can be
Management analysed as either an abstract system or as a system of systems; the first deals
with concepts without attending to their practical application while the second
treats BIM as a collection of interrelated abstract and concrete systems. While
BIM can be considered in many respects as a System of Systems (Cerovsek,
2012), such an approach does not allow the analysis of BIM concepts and
relationships from a non-systems’ perspective. Also, Systems Theory is applicable
in understanding machine-machine and human-machine interactions, but it is
not applicable in understanding human-human interactions.
Systems Systems Thinking focuses on causes, rather than events, but does not isolate the
Thinking smaller parts of the system being studied. Rather, it considers the numerous
as applied to interactions of the system in question (Chun et al., 2008).
Knowledge
Management Study considerations and theory limitations: through Systems Thinking, BIM can
be analysed as a knowledge system leveraged to achieve organizational and
industrial goals. Systems Thinking can identify drivers of successful BIM
implementation; however, actual implementation steps cannot be identified. To
facilitate BIM implementation, both activities and causes/effects need to be
understood. Also, granular parts of the knowledge system – and their
interactions - are as important to analyse as the knowledge system itself.
Diffusion of DOI theory attempts to “define the process by which an innovation is
Innovation communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a
(DoI) social system”(Rogers, 1995, p. 5). That is, DOI theory seeks to explain the
dynamics of why/how a new technology spreads.
Study considerations and theory limitations: Through DOI, the diffusion of BIM -
as an innovative technological solution proliferating across the construction
industry - can be analysed (Fox & Hietanen, 2007) (Mutai, 2009). However, DOI
does not facilitate the understanding of BIM as an interacting set of technologies,
processes and polices; nor does it facilitate the generation of practicable
performance improvement tools.
Technology TAM theorizes that an individual’s acceptance of a new technological solution is
Acceptance influenced by its perceived usefulness and ease of use. TAM incorporates several
Model (TAM) theoretical constructs including subjective norm, voluntariness, image, job
relevance, output quality and result demonstrability (Davis, 1989) (Venkatesh &
Davis, 2000).
Study considerations and theory limitations: as a technology-driven solution,
BIM adoption by individuals – and by extension project teams - can be analysed
under this model. However, this model cannot be applied to organizational
systems, or to identify the relationship between project teams.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 10
Complexity Complex systems are comprised of a large number of components and causal
Theory connections amongst them. Each component is self-contained yet shows a high
degree of synergy with other components - where the whole is more than the
sum of its parts (Homer-Dixon, 2001) (Froese, 2010).
Study considerations and theory limitations: understanding BIM as a complex
system allows the identification of its components and their interconnectedness.
However, like many other established theories, Complexity Theory does not
facilitate the development of practicable performance improvement tools.
In summary, the theories listed 2 in Table 1 can be applied in analysing BIM concepts and
their relationships. However, they are difficult to apply in generating practicable tools
from that analysis. Rather than adopting an existing theory to address the research
questions, the author opted to develop a new theoretical framework; an inductive
approach “[more suitable for researchers who are more concerned about] the
correspondence of their findings to the real world than their coherence with existing
theories or laws” (Meredith, Raturi, Amoako-Gyampah, & Kaplan, 1989, p. 307). This
decision to develop a new theoretical framework - instead of testing concepts and
relationships against existing theories - is in line with Glaser and Strauss’ 1967
recommendation where they lamented how social researchers had become overly
concerned with testing existing theories while neglecting the process of generating
them (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) (Blaikie, 2000). Also, developing a theoretical framework
- rather than adopting existing theories – provides this study with the theoretical
flexibility it needs to address the two complementary research questions (section 4).
2
Coordination, Organization and Structuration theories were also reviewed as part of this study but found
to be less applicable towards addressing the research questions; they were thus excluded from Table 1.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 11
Experiential knowledge
This researcher’s industry-based BIM expertise 3 has played a significant role in this
study. The development of the framework has been informed by a “combination of
grasping and transforming experience” (Kolb, Boyatzis, & Mainemelis, 2000, p. 2).
While recognizing the possibility of bias (Maxwell, 2005), the researcher acknowledges
the impossibility of detachment (Blaikie, 2000) from the research topic. He thus adopted
the view promoted by Glesne, Peshkin and Strauss (as discussed in Blaikie, 2000) which
argued for researchers to mine their own experience while engaging in critical
subjectivity, a “quality of awareness in which we do not suppress our primary
experience; nor do we allow ourselves to be swept away and overwhelmed by it; rather
we raise it to consciousness and use it as part of the inquiry process” (Reason, 1988, p.
12) (Reason, 1994).
Thought experiments
Thought experiments or speculative model-building exercises (Lave & March, 1993) are
mental representations which allow researchers to suggest plausible explanations that
interpret observations, and then, to support or disprove them (Maxwell, 2005). Thought
experiments build-upon a researcher’s experiential knowledge (section 6.3) to generate
“concepts, relations, features, chunks, plans, heuristics, theories [and] mental models”
(Cooke & McDonald, 1986, p. 1424).
As it is difficult - and arguably undesirable - to discount the role personal experiences
play in informing research (Corbin & Strauss, 2008), this study employs the researcher’s
experiential, domain-specific knowledge to generate a set of complementary models
which explain BIM concepts and their relationships. Through thought experiments, the
researcher “[thoroughly immersed himself] in the topic under consideration in order to
pull the commonalities and patterns into a unique, insightful perspective”. Through such
immersion, the researcher was able to see “connections and patterns in what was
heretofore just a series of inexplicable events or studies”(Meredith, 1993, p. 8).
3
The researcher is an industry BIM advisor and has worked as such since 2004.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 12
Research design
This thesis does not seek to prove, disprove or compare phenomena but rather to
discover the underlying structures of a nascent domain of knowledge. To satisfy the
research questions identified in section 4, this study adopted an interpretive paradigm,
a retroductive strategy, and an exploratory mixed-data collection methodology. These
are briefly discussed below:
Research paradigms
Research paradigms are the philosophical perspectives (or world views) about what
constitutes valid research (Myers, 1997a). Research paradigms are based on
epistemological 4, ontological 5 or metaphysical 6 assumptions covering the nature of
knowledge and how it can be obtained (Myers, 1997b) (Meredith et al., 1989). This study
has adopted a paradigm closer to interpretive and critical assumptions than to positivist
ones. As will be evident in the published papers, the research conducted does not strive
to confirm an existing phenomenon or to measure it against another but seeks to bring
meaning and structure to a series of phenomena (BIM concepts and their relationships)
through a human perspective. The study also includes epistemological elements
pertaining to critical thought – not only to study BIM as a set of interrelated phenomena
within a historical context but also to inform how BIM is implemented within
organizations and the wider industry. Below is a summary of the three research
paradigms followed by (section 7.1.4) how this thesis is positioned relative to them:
4
Epistemological assumptions relate to the notions of knowledge and how it can be achieved.
5
Ontological assumptions or beliefs have to do with the “essence of phenomena under investigation; that
is, whether the empirical world is assumed to be objective and hence independent of humans, or
subjective and hence having existence only through the action of humans in creating and recreating
it”(Orlikowski & Baroudi, 1991, p. 7).
6
Metaphysical assumptions relate to the notions of truth and its origin.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 13
Positivist paradigm
The positivist paradigm has its roots in the natural sciences and is premised on the
existence of a priori, real, unidirectional and fixed cause-effect relationship that is
“capable of being identified and tested via hypothetic-deductive logic and analysis”
(Orlikowski & Baroudi, 1991, p. 9). Positivists generally assume that reality is objectively
given and can be measured independently of the observer and his/her instruments.
Positivist generally attempt to test theory and increase the predictability of a
measurable phenomenon (Myers, 1997a).
Interpretive paradigm
The interpretive paradigm assumes that people create and associate their own
subjective meanings as they interact with the world around them. Interpretive research
“does not predefine dependent and independent variables, but focuses on the full
complexity of human sense making as the situation emerges” (Myers, 1997a -
Interpretive Research section) as attributed to (Kaplan & Maxwell, 2005). Interpretive
thought assumes, according to Orlikowski and Baroudi (1991, p. 15), that researchers
“can never assume a value-neutral stance, and [are] always implicated in the
phenomena being studied. Researchers' prior assumptions, beliefs, values, and interests
always intervene to shape their investigations”.
Critical paradigm
The critical paradigm assumes that “social reality is historically constituted, and hence
that human beings, organizations, and societies are not confined to [current or existing
situations]” (Orlikowski & Baroudi, 1991, p. 19). Critical thought aims to investigate and
expose – what is assumed to be – contradictions and restrictions within social systems
(including groups, organizations and societies) and thus transform these social systems
(Myers, 1997a). A single phenomenon, according to critical thought, cannot be isolated
from its social environment but must be studied within its socio-historical context.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 14
Discussion: adopting a mixed paradigm
At the heart of this study is the researcher’s contention that knowledge does not reside
at opposite extremes of deductivist and inductivist thought. While objective reality –
independent from researchers – does exist and has intrinsic value, measuring it without
the results being altered by a researcher’s preconceptions, research approach or
measurement tools cannot be demonstrated. Irrespective of the above, choosing a
single epistemological position is neither helpful nor necessary. As discussed in Walsham
(1995, p. 382), Lee (1991) states that research paradigms are complementary, and
positivist and interpretive approaches can be combined. This study thus adopts a mixed
paradigm and complements it with a mixed research strategy as discussed below:
Research strategy
A research strategy is the approach adopted to answer research questions. As identified
by Blaikie (2000), there are four main research strategies: inductive, deductive,
abductive and retroductive. As will be discussed in section 7.2.4, retroduction is the
research strategy best suited to underpin this study. However, retroduction on its own
is not enough to address both research questions (section 4). According to Atkinson
(2011), retroduction - or 'hypothesis formulation' – is but the first stage of an enquiry.
The hypothesis must then be tested using both induction and deduction. Through
inductive creativity (Reisman, 2004) (Saaty, 1998), new frameworks, new taxonomies or
new theoretical predictions can be generated. However, since an inductive strategy can
only make a prediction or suggest a solution (by amalgamating previous solutions or by
proposing a new one) but cannot test that solution or confirm that prediction, a
deductive strategy is then needed to test the theory and confirm its validity. Below is a
summary of the four research strategies:
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 15
Deduction
Deductive reasoning provides theoretical explanations on the world and then, by a
process of trial and error, uses data to reject false ones. Theories “which survive this
critical process are provisionally accepted, but never proven to be true” (Blaikie, 2000,
p. 105). Deduction attempts to confirm or dispute a theoretical prediction and does not
generate a prediction on its own. Deduction can only strengthen, weaken or disprove a
priori theoretical propositions or predictions. In essence, conceptual deductions occur
when a framework or a theory – regardless how it was formed - is compared with reality.
Since this thesis is concerned with uncovering and representing the knowledge
structures underlying the BIM domain, a deductivist approach is not suitable as a
primary research strategy. However, as discussed in section 7.2.4, a deductive approach
to test inductively generated models is partially required.
Induction
Conceptual induction is an approach where researchers analyse recurring phenomena
to infer the underlying structure of a system. The system under investigation does not
necessarily need to be complex but can be a “human interpretation or conceptualization
for which explicit rules have never been explicated” (Meredith, 1993, p. 9). With
conceptual induction, the objective is to use a system’s elements to describe a specific
phenomenon accurately and explain how it occurs. The accuracy of the description and
explanation is “usually based on the consistency between the explanation inferred and
the description of the phenomenon, particularly its elements and [their] relationships”
(Meredith, 1993, p. 9). According to Popper (2002, p. 27), an explanation or inference is
considered ‘inductive’ when “it passes from singular statements (sometimes called
‘particular’ statements), such as accounts of the results of observations or experiments,
to universal statements, such as hypothesis or theories”.
Since the candidate did not start with a blank slate as required by inductivists (Glaser &
Strauss, 1967), a purely inductive strategy will not be suitable. This is especially true as
the candidate developed this study in the “context of ontological, conceptual and
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 16
theoretical assumptions” held by the researcher/practitioner (Blaikie, 2000; White,
1997, p. 745).
Abduction
The abductive research approach was proposed by the philosopher Charles Sanders
Pierce (Miller & Brewer, 2003) in the early 1930s and is mostly – if not exclusively -
applicable to social sciences (Blaikie, 2000). Abductive research refers to the “process
used to generate social scientific accounts from social actors’ accounts; for deriving
technical concepts and theories from lay concepts and interpretations of social life”
(Blaikie, 2000, p. 114). That is, abduction gives “access to any social world [by] the
accounts given by the people who inhabit it. These accounts contain the concepts that
people use to structure their world - the meanings and interpretations, the motives and
intentions which people use in their everyday lives and which direct their behaviour”
(Atkinson, 2011, p. 3).
Since this study does not seek to represent reality through the experiences of social
actors other than the candidate’s own (refer to section 6.3), the abductive research
approach has not be used in this research.
Retroduction
According to Blaikie (2000, p. 108), the retroductive strategy is the “logic of enquiry
associated with the philosophical approach of Scientific Realism”. Similar to deductive
research, it “starts with an observed regularity but seeks a different type of
explanation”. Using retroduction, events are explained by postulating and identifying
structures and causal powers capable of generating them (Sayer, 1992); and by locating
the “real underlying structure or mechanism that is responsible for producing the
observed regularity” (Blaikie, 2000, p. 25). Retroduction uses “creative imagination and
analogy to work back from data to an explanation” and involves the “building of
hypothetical models as a way of uncovering the real structures and mechanisms which
are assumed to produce empirical phenomena” (Blaikie, 2000, p. 25). In constructing
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 17
these hypothetical models, “ideas may be borrowed from known structures and
mechanisms in other fields” (Atkinson, 2011, p. 2). According to (Downward &
Mearman, 2007, p. 2), retroduction “can be contrasted to other research strategies,
such as deduction or induction, as not simply developing specific claims from general
premises nor general claims from specific premises, respectively, but the ‘mode of
inference in which events are explained by postulating (and identifying) mechanisms
which are capable of producing them’ (Sayer, 1992, p. 107).”
This study organizes the domain knowledge by inferring BIM concepts and their
relationships, generating theoretical constructs (frameworks and models) to represent
these concepts/relations, and then using these constructs to develop tools for practical
application. Such an approach is considered an artificial reconstruction of reality
(Meredith et al., 1989, p. 307), a hypothesis-building exercise which mostly lends itself
to the retroductive research strategy. However, as discussed earlier in this section, a
retroductive strategy on its own is not sufficient to address the study’s requirements.
Discussion: adopting a mixed strategy
In summary, this study adopted a mixture of research strategies to formulate the BIM
framework and other knowledge constructs which – hypothetically - underlie the BIM
domain. In generating this hypothesis, this study has employed an inductivist strategy
to infer general statements from necessarily specific experiential knowledge. Finally, it
employed deductivist strategies - through collecting exploratory data (section 7.4) - to
test whether these conceptual models can be considered as an accurate representation
of objective reality. Such amalgamation of inductive and deductive approaches is not
peculiar to this study but - according to Downward and Mearman (2007) - combining
them is central to retroductive activity.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 18
Research method
A research method represents how a study moves “from the underlying philosophical
assumptions to research design and data collection” (Myers, 1997a). According to
Mitroff and Mason (1982), as mentioned in Meredith et al. (1989), research methods
can be classified according to two ‘dimensions’. The first dimension is referred to as
rational/existential and is concerned with the researcher’s underlying philosophical
assumptions (ontological, epistemological or metaphysical). Through this dimension,
the nature of knowledge/truth can be defined as rational - purely logical and
independent from man, or as existential; can only be understood through human
experience. The second dimension is referred to as natural/artificial 7 and is concerned
with the source and type of data to be used within research. Through this dimension,
the nature of data/information to be collected is either described as natural – objective
data derived from direct observation, or artificial; derived from interpretation and the
artificial reconstruction of reality.
Using the aforementioned classification, Meredith et al. (1989) generated a matrix
(Figure 1) which positions research methods along the two dimensions underlying
research design:
7
Mitroff and Mason (1982) originally referred to this dimension as the empiricism/idealism dimension
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 19
Figure 1. Framework of Research Methods – adopted from Meredith et al. (1989), the dotted polygon
highlights the cells which collectively represent the research methods employed by this study
According to Downward and Mearman (2007, p. 3), the “specific nature of research
questions and programmes will govern the choice of specific methods”. This study
employed a mixture of methods to address the research questions: in illustrating the
knowledge structures underlying the BIM domain and developing the knowledge tools,
conceptual modelling and Inductive Inference – methods residing within the
interpretive/artificial cell of Figure 1 - were used to describe and explain the framework.
However, to test the conceptual constructs – as a hypothetical representation of reality
- focus groups and feedback forms were used as methods to capture subject matter
expert’s perception of reality (Meredith et al., 1989) (Mitroff & Mason, 1982).
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 20
Data collection
While qualitative approaches have been criticized for being overly subjective and lacking
in replicability and generalizability, quantitative approaches have also been criticized for
lacking representative validity within social – as opposed to natural - environments
(Hewson, 2006). To bridge this divide, pragmatists argue that the research method to
be used should be selected according to its instrumental value in enabling people to
understand the world (Hammersley, 2006). To satisfy the hypothetical and
demonstrative nature of the research questions (section 4), this study embraced a
pragmatic approach to research design (Hammersley, 2006) (Tashakkori & Teddlie,
1998). As described below, both quantitative and qualitative data were collected from
BIM subject matter experts (SME)s to calibrate knowledge constructs against SME’s
perception of reality (Meredith et al., 1989) (Mitroff & Mason, 1982).
Foundational parts of the BIM framework were first submitted for scrutiny through
peer-reviewed publications (papers A1-A3, a record of citations received to date is
provided in Part III - Appendix C). To reach a wider audience and capture additional
feedback, the author also published and maintained a weblog8 covering many of the
concepts explored in this study. The contents of posts and peer-reviewed papers also
formed a basis for several industry presentations and workshops9 which provided
additional feedback avenues.
Following this initial exploration and informal data collection, top-level framework
components and a set of conceptual models were presented to subject matter experts.
To represent a subset of industry stakeholders, 70 SMEs from both industry and
academia were invited to participate in focus groups across three countries: the United
States, the United Kingdom and Hong Kong. Each focus group included an average of 12
SMEs to “maximize the depth of expression” from each participant and “allow
meaningful interaction with both the moderator and amongst themselves within the
8
Several of the conceptual models developed as part of this study were published through BIM Thinkspace
(www.BIMthinkspace.com). Starting in October 2005, the blog published a total of 26 posts in 8 years (14
post topics are directly derived from this study); attracted 1025 subscribers and 107,000 page views (as
of June 27, 2013).
9
A list is presentations and workshops is provided at http://changeagents.blogs.com/about.html
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 21
constraints of available time” (Debus, 1989, p. 13). During focus group sessions,
participants discussed the framework’s components with the researcher/facilitator and
amongst themselves, commented on the framework’s clarity, accuracy and usability,
and whether they found value in the framework’s visual representations. A total of 63
participants also provided anonymous feedback in the form of written comments and
suggestions. Analysis and discussion of the aforementioned feedback is yet to be
published. For reference purposes, the structured questionnaire used during focus
group sessions is provided in Part III - Appendix D.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 22
Conceptual constructs
BIM is an emergent field of research and application. To facilitate BIM adoption by
industry stakeholders, BIM concepts and their relationships need to be simplified,
structured and described through theoretical constructs that organize domain
knowledge (Reisman, 1988) (Diane, 1998). Once domain knowledge is organized,
practicable knowledge tools can be developed to facilitate performance improvement.
This study delivers a representative theoretical framework, a construct that simplifies a
complex phenomenon by identifying its concepts and their inter-relations (Dubin, 1978).
The BIM framework is built upon several interrelated models, taxonomies and
classifications as illustrated in Figure 2 below 10:
Figure 2. Hierarchy of conceptual constructs within the BIM framework
10
The first iteration of this conceptual hierarchy was based on the ‘grouped archetypes’ graph by CEN
(2004, p. 34) which includes ‘vocabulary’, ‘dictionary’, classification’, ‘taxonomy’ and ‘ontology’.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 23
The next sections (8.1 - 8.5) explain the different types of conceptual constructs
delivered by this study. These constructs are later identified against published papers in
section 10.3 and illustrated as a conceptual and practical continuum in section 10.1:
Frameworks
According to Meredith, a framework is “essentially a pre-theory and may well substitute
in many ways for a theory. That is, like theory it may identify relevant variables, classify
them, describe their interactions, and allow a mapping of items (such as the existing
literature or research studies) on to the framework” (Dubin, 1978, p. 7). A framework
shows “the gestalt, the structure, the anatomy or the morphology of a field of
knowledge or the links between seemingly disparate fields or sub-disciplines” (Reisman,
1994, p. 92).
A well-structured theoretical framework can thus assist in organizing domain
knowledge, eliciting tacit expertise and facilitating the creation of new knowledge. The
utility of such frameworks is articulated by Minsky (1975) who states:
“Here is the essence of the theory: When one encounters a new situation
(or makes a substantial change in one's view of the present problem) one
selects from memory a structure called a Frame. This is a remembered
framework to be adapted to fit reality by changing details as necessary. A
frame is a data-structure for representing a stereotyped situation...
Attached to each frame are several kinds of information. Some of this
information is about how to use the frame. Some is about what one can
expect to happen next. Some is about what to do if these expectations
are not confirmed. We can think of a frame as a network of nodes and
relations.” (Minsky, 1975, p. 2)
As a network of nodes and relations, the BIM framework is continuously expanding by
adding new - or refining existing - interrelated nodes: models, taxonomies,
classifications and terms. The BIM framework however is primarily a three-axial
structure (Figure 3) supporting all other conceptual constructs:
• X-axis: BIM fields of activity identifying domain players, their requirements and
deliverables;
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 24
• Y-axis: BIM stages delineating the minimum capability benchmarks and
revolutionary milestones which can be further subdivided into incremental steps
to guide BIM implementation; and
• Z-axis: BIM lenses representing distinctive layers of analysis that – when applied
to fields and stages - generate knowledge views which abstract the BIM domain
and control its complexity by removing unnecessary detail (Kao & Archer, 1997).
Through lenses, domain researchers can isolate particular aspects of the
construction industry to generate knowledge views that either (a) highlight
observables which meet the research criteria or (b) filter out those that do not.
Figure 3. A tri-axial model of the BIM framework: fields, stages and lenses
The Tri-axial model representing the BIM framework (Figure 3) is a reflection of three
implicit principles underlying this study. First, to understand BIM, one needs to
understand its parts, their overlaps and interactions. In this respect, it is not sufficient
to focus on BIM technologies (e.g. software, hardware, networks and data), but similar
attention must be given to processes (e.g. leadership, knowledge and skills) and
governing policies (e.g. contracts, standards and codes). Second, for an organization or
a team to implement BIM tools and workflows, it is important to recognize both
revolutionary stages and incremental steps. While these capability stages and
implementation steps may include a large number of activities and respective resources,
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 25
these – with the appropriate knowledge constructs and tools - can be both quantified
and qualified. Third, to reduce BIM domain complexity, it must be analysed using
multiple lenses; each revealing a manageable part of the overall knowledge landscape.
Using lenses allows a focused analysis of a specific discipline (e.g. architecture,
engineering or facility management), a certain scale (e.g. market, organization or
individual), or a particular conceptual part (e.g. equipment, tasks or benefits), yet
without severing ontological connections to larger constructs or to other disciplines,
scales and conceptual parts.
Models
Models are simplified representations and abstractions of the “enormous richness of
this world” (Ritter, 2010, p. 360) (Lave & March, 1993). A good model, according to Ritter
(2010, p. 349), “provides a more condensed representation of what was originally
given”. It contributes to knowledge sharing by reducing complexity and ambiguity, and
– as a result - makes “insights more portable between people”. For a model to accurately
represent a phenomenon, the model-builder needs to judiciously identify (a) how
observations/data are to be condensed into the model without losing any essential
attributes of the phenomenon, and (b) how to identify the right level of
simplicity/complexity to be built into the model so it facilitates understanding of the
phenomenon (Ritter, 2010). As opposed to mathematical or statistical models (Reisman,
1988) which represent data and their relationships, a conceptual model includes a set of
concepts, “characteristics associated with certain events, objects, or conditions […to]
represent or describe (but not explain) an event, object, or process” (Meredith, 1993, p. 5).
Several models were developed as part of this study to represent complex concepts and
facilitate their understanding. Some of these models are descriptive (e.g. the Venn
diagram representing interlocking BIM fields – papers A1-A3), some are predictive (e.g.
the model representing the effects of BIM on project lifecycle phases - paper A2) while
others are instructive – explaining the sequence of actions to be followed to achieve a
pre-defined outcome (e.g. the workflow model representing competency identification,
classification, aggregation and use - paper A6).
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 26
Taxonomies
Taxonomies are an efficient and effective way to organize and consolidate knowledge
(Reisman, 2005) (Hedden, 2010). A well-structured taxonomy allows “the meaningful
clustering of experience” (Kwasnik, 1999, p. 24). In developing specialized taxonomies
to organize BIM domain knowledge, this study adopted the guidelines introduced by
Vogel and Wetherbe (1984) and Gregor (2006). That is, a taxonomy is expected to be
“complete and exhaustive; [includes] classes that encompass all phenomena of interest;
[is based on] decision rules, [which are] simple and parsimonious to assign instances to
classes; and the classes should be mutually exclusive. In addition, as taxonomies are
proposed to aid human understanding, [these classes should be] easily understood and
[...] appear natural” (Gregor, 2006, p. 619).
This study delivers several BIM-specific taxonomies to clarify the knowledge structures
underlying the BIM domain and facilitate the development of conceptual models and
performance improvement tools. For example, the organizational hierarchy, BIM
competency hierarchy and BIM knowledge content taxonomy (papers A3, A6 and B1
respectively) are conceptual constructs to support performance assessment of
individuals, organizations and whole markets (paper B1 compares the BIM maturity of 8
countries based on their noteworthy BIM publications). Each of these taxonomies are “a
means toward a number of different ends; one of these ends is providing direction
and/or guidance to expansion or generalization of knowledge” (Reisman, 1988, p. 216).
Classifications
Classification is the “meaningful clustering of experience” (Kwasnik, 1999, p. 24) and
“lies at the heart of every scientific field” (Lohse, Biolsi, Walker, & Rueter, 1994, p. 36).
Classification is also a heuristic tool useful during the formative stages of discovery,
analysis and theorizing (Davies, 1989). For example, when reviewing existing literature,
classification is a simple method to organize concepts and allow patterns to emerge
(Diane, 1998).
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 27
This study delivers several classifications to support the development of conceptual
models. Some of these classifications have been adopted from other fields and then
customized to suit the specific requirements of this study. For example, the BIM
maturity level classification is an amalgamation of several maturity levels from across
the construction and software industries (paper A3). Also, new classifications were
developed to meet the particular requirements of this study. For example, the BIM
granularity levels classification has been developed to separate low-detailed BIM
capability self-assessments from highly-detailed, professionally-delivered BIM maturity
audits (paper A3). Each of these classifications provides a foundation for multiple
taxonomies and conceptual models. For example, model uses - the deliverables
expected from using BIM tools - is a classification used to populate several taxonomies
and conceptual models including organizational requirements (taxonomy), team
deliverables (taxonomy) and project workflows (conceptual model – paper A6, Figure 9).
Dictionaries
A dictionary is a “reference source in print or electronic form containing words usually
alphabetically arranged along with information about their forms, pronunciations,
functions, etymologies, meanings, and syntactical and idiomatic uses” (Merriam-
Webster, 2013 - Item 1). Dictionaries are a collation of terms and their definitions and
form the foundations of larger knowledge structures – classifications, taxonomies and
conceptual models.
Throughout this study, a list of commonly used BIM terms were investigated and used.
A large number of these were later collated into a cohesive BIM dictionary that
eliminates conflicting definitions; identifies synonyms; and allows classifications and
taxonomies to be consistently formulated. Delivered through a dedicated online tool
under a Creative Commons 3.0 license, the BIM dictionary is a web of meaning (Cristea,
2004) connecting terms to each other and to other knowledge bases. As of June 2013,
the BIM dictionary included more than 370 interlinked BIM terms and their research-
based definitions (BIMe, 2013). A sample of these terms is provided in paper A6 –Table 5.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 28
Ontologies
Ontologies are “content theories about the sorts of objects, properties of objects, and
relations between objects that are possible in a specified domain of knowledge. They
provide potential terms for describing our knowledge about the domain”
(Chandrasekaran, Josephson, & Benjamins, 1999, p. 20). According to Van Heijst,
Schreiber, and Wielinga (1997, pp. 192-193), there are several types of ontologies
including application, domain, generic and representation ontologies. Domain
ontologies play an important role in acquiring, analysing and reusing domain knowledge
by making implicit assumptions explicit and facilitating communication between people
(Milton, 2007a) (Milton, 2007b) (Cottam, 1999) (Noy & McGuinness, 2001) (Studer,
Benjamins, & Fensel, 1998). Through ontologies, domain concepts and their
relationships can be interdependently formalised through knowledge acquisition,
introspection and representation which, in turn, can form a basis for additional
knowledge acquisitions (Holsapple & Joshi, 2006).
The BIM ontology is intended as a domain vocabulary (Chandrasekaran et al., 1999) for
representing BIM concepts and their relationships; facilitating knowledge acquisition
from subject matter experts; and sharing domain knowledge. The BIM ontology is
discussed in detail in Part III - Appendix A.
Framework development
According to Meredith (1993), theory building – from models through frameworks to
theories - is an iterative process passing through three repetitive stages: description,
explanation and testing (Meredith, 1993) (Meredith et al., 1989). The three stages are
briefly explored below:
• The description stage develops a description of reality; identifies phenomena;
explores events; and documents findings and behaviours. According to Dubin
(1978, p. 85):
“In every discipline, but particularly in its early stages of development,
purely descriptive research is indispensable. Descriptive research is the
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 29
stuff out of which the mind of man, the theorist, develops the units that
compose his theories. The very essence of description is to name the
properties of things: you may do more, but you cannot do less and still
have description. The more adequate the description, the greater is the
likelihood that the units derived from the description will be useful in
subsequent theory building.”
• The explanation stage builds upon descriptions to infer a concept, a conceptual
relationship or a construct; and then, develops a framework or a theory to
explain and/or predict behaviours or events. Explaining is the process of (a)
identifying a phenomenon’s purpose, (b) showing that a new phenomenon is an
instance of a familiar phenomenon or (c) positioning a new phenomenon under
an existing or new law (Meredith et al., 1989). In essence, the explaining stage
develops a testable theoretical proposition which clarifies what has previously
been described.
• The testing stage inspects explanations and propositions for validity; tests
concepts or their relationships for accuracy; and tests predictions against new
observables.
Figure 4. The Normal Research Cycle (Meredith, 1993 - Page 4)
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 30
The three stages (Figure 4) are cyclical as the process of testing concepts and theoretical
propositions necessitates the collection of additional descriptions; which generate new
concepts and/or modify existing ones; and which, in turn, require additional testing
(Meredith et al., 1989). As discussed below, the three theory-building stages are all
required to generate understandable and usable models, frameworks or theories that
can describe, explain and predict reality:
• If the description stage is omitted, the theoretical proposition developed by
researchers is not based on observation or field data. The propositions will then
lack external validity yielding a research result which is “disconnected from the
real world and irrelevant to the reality of the problems […] These findings we
‘call ivory-tower prescriptions’" (Meredith, 1993, p. 4);
• If the explanation stage is omitted, the research iterates between describing and
testing thus yielding no new models, frameworks or theories. With the absence
of explanation, only explanatory models - which can only simulate reality without
explaining it - can be generated. Also, without proper explanation, the theoretical
proposition cannot be understood and is thus unlikely to be adopted; and
• If the testing stage is omitted, the research alternates between describing
observables and explaining them yet without validating these propositions.
Without testing, theoretical propositions can be discounted as anecdotal,
unreliable, and thus unsuitable to build additional research.
This study adopted a similar cyclical path to that described by Meredith (1993) - from
describing; to explaining; to testing; and then back to describing. First, a description of
the BIM domain was generated through a process of inductive inference (Michalski,
1987), conceptual clustering (Michalski & Stepp, 1987) and reflective learning (Van der
Heijden & Eden, 1998) (Walker, Bourne, & Shelley, 2008). Second, a theoretical
framework was developed to visually explain the knowledge structures underlying the
BIM domain. Third, the BIM framework and many of its constituent models were tested
through focus groups and peer-reviewed publications.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 31
The adoption of this three-staged approach for developing the BIM framework and its
conceptual models is not only consistent with Meredith (1993) but it reflects the
retroductive research strategy underlying this study (section 7.27.2.4). In developing a
theoretical model, retroduction follows a similar three-step approach: first, “the
research starts in the domain of actual, by observing connections between phenomena
[…]. To do so, as a second step, researchers build a hypothetical model, involving
structures and causal powers located in the domain of real, which, if it were to exist and
act in the postulated way, would provide a causal explanation of the phenomena in
question. The third step is to subject the postulated explanation to empirical scrutiny”
(Leca & Naccache, 2006, p. 635).
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 32
Research deliverables
This section first lists and then summarizes the contents of three types of papers
included as part of this submission:
• Type A includes six published peer-reviewed papers (A1-A6) with the candidate
being the sole or primary author;
• Type B includes two peer-reviewed papers (B1 and B2) with the candidate being the
second author. Paper B1 has been accepted for publication (but not yet published)
while paper B2 is under review (no acceptance note issued); and
• Type C includes a single published peer-reviewed paper composed of three
complementary documents. The candidate played a primary role in authoring and
paper C which includes several co-authors, and forms part of a collaborative effort
between industry and academia.
As will be clarified in section 10.2, the contributions made by the candidate within these
papers are complementary and collectively form the unified deliverables of this study.
List of included papers
This section lists the nine papers (in three types) constituting this thesis by publication:
Succar, B., Sher, W., & Aranda-Mena, G. (2007). A proposed framework to
investigate Building Information Modelling through knowledge elicitation
and visual models. Paper presented at the Australasian Universities
Building Education (AUBEA2007), Melbourne, Australia.
Succar, B. (2009). Building information modelling framework: a research
and delivery foundation for industry stakeholders. Automation in
Construction, 18(3), 357-375.
Succar, B. (2010). Building Information Modelling maturity matrix. In J.
Underwood & U. Isikdag (Eds.), Handbook of research on Building
Information Modelling and construction informatics: concepts and
technologies (pp. 65-103): Information Science Reference, IGI Publishing.
Succar, B. (2010). The five components of BIM performance measurement.
Paper presented at the CIB World Congress, Salford, United Kingdom.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 33
Succar, B., Sher, W., & Williams, A. (2012). Measuring BIM performance:
five metrics. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 8(2), 120-
142.
Succar, B., Sher, W., & Williams, A. (2013). An integrated approach to BIM
competency acquisition, assessment and application. Automation in
Construction, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.05.016
(Published online, In Press).
Kassem, M., Succar, B., & Dawood, N. (2014). Building Information
Modeling: analyzing noteworthy publications of eight countries using a
knowledge content taxonomy In R. Issa & S. Olbina (Eds.), Building
Information Modeling: applications and practices in the AEC industry.
University of Miami: ASCE. (Approved for publication).
Kassem, M., Succar, B., Dawood, N. (2013). A proposed approach to
comparing the BIM maturity of countries. CIB W78 2013, 30th international
Conference on applications of IT in the AEC industry, 9-12 October 2013,
Beijing, China.
Succar, B., Agar, C., Beazley, S., Berkemeier, P., Choy, R., Rosetta Di
Giangregorio, Donaghey, S., Linning, C., Macdonald, J., Perey, R., & Plume,
J. (2012). BIM in Practice - BIM Education, a position paper by the
Australian Institute of Architects and Consult Australia.
http://www.bim.architecture.com.au/
Content summary of included papers
This section summarizes the research deliverables of papers listed in section 10.1. It
discusses how each paper relates to other papers and contributes towards addressing
the research questions identified in section 4:
A Proposed Framework to investigate Building Information Modelling
through knowledge elicitation and visual models (Succar, Sher, & Aranda-
Mena, 2007)
Paper A1 is the first article developed as part of this study. It briefly
introduced the BIM term, proposed a prototypical framework and
suggested an investigative methodology to identify, capture and represent
BIM interactions. The paper then identified ontology-supported visual
models as a means to elicit and organize expert knowledge, compared the
terms ‘information visualization’ and ‘knowledge visualization’, and
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 34
identified the latter as an appropriate method to represent BIM
interactions. This paper played an important role in establishing the need
for an overarching BIM framework, the necessity for an underlying BIM
ontology and the importance of knowledge visualization for eliciting and
representing domain knowledge.
Building information modelling framework: a research and delivery
foundation for industry stakeholders (Succar, 2009)
This scene-setting paper extended the prototypical BIM framework
introduced in paper A1. Two new conceptual dimensions where added and
the BIM framework now represented three main interconnected
components (fields, stages, and lenses). In addition to reviewing a number
of noteworthy BIM publications (e.g. BIM guides), this paper established
several principles upon which this study revolves including - including:
• The BIM domain is complex and requires a structured approach to
organize its underlying knowledge, facilitate its implementation, and
bridge the chasm separating academic from industrial understandings
of BIM;
• The BIM domain can be understood by capturing the interactions and
overlaps between three main different types of players and their
respective deliverables and requirements;
• BIM diffusion within organizations and across markets, its effect on
project lifecycle phases, and the myriad of steps needed to improve
performance can be understood and measured through revolutionary
stages and evolutionary steps;
• The complexity of the BIM domain can be represented through the
careful application of distinctive layers of analysis (referred to as BIM
lenses and filters) which remove unnecessary detail and isolate the
knowledge areas requiring attention;
• To capture and represent complex BIM concepts and their relationships,
a specialized domain ontology is needed; and
• To share BIM knowledge with a wide audience, a visual language is
required.
In summary, most concepts, models and taxonomies - developed in
subsequent papers, and submitted as part of this study - are based on the
principles introduced in this paper.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 35
Building Information Modelling maturity matrix (Succar, 2010a)
This paper builds upon the principles and conceptual deliverables of paper
A2 to introduce additional models and taxonomies. These were then used
to generate practicable tools that can be used by organisations and project
teams to assess their own BIM ability. In addition to an extended literature
review covering existing maturity models, performance excellence and
quality management frameworks, this paper delivered the following:
• A conceptual differentiation between BIM capability and BIM maturity
to enable two unique yet complementary types of assessment;
• BIM competency sets to be used for assessment and implementation;
• An organisational scale, a taxonomy for tailoring capability/maturity
assessments to suit varied organisational sizes – from markets and
industries, through organizations and teams, to individual members;
• The BIM Maturity Index (BIMMI) to be used in measuring BIM maturity
- the quality and repeatability of BIM abilities;
• A granularity index for tailoring BIM tools, guides and reports to suit
different levels of assessment detail;
• A low-detail, maturity assessment scoring system; and
• The BIM Maturity Matrix, a static performance measurement and
improvement tool that identifies the correlation between BIM stages,
competency sets, maturity levels and organisational scales.
In summary, this paper introduced a practicable tool derived from the BIM
framework’s components. Its indices and taxonomies – applied in A3 to
measure the BIM performance of organizations and teams - were later
extended and applied to smaller (individuals - refer to paper A6) and larger
organizational units (countries - refer to papers B1 and B2).
The Five Components of BIM performance measurement (Succar, 2010b)
This paper summarizes the research conducted and the conceptual
constructs generated in paper A3. It also introduces a new conceptual
model explaining the role BIM fields, stages and lenses play in generating
BIM competency sets (Fig 3 in paper A4). Another deliverable of this paper
is the simplified correlation of five BIM framework components (capability
stages, maturity levels, competency sets, organisational scales, and
granularity levels) for the purpose of performance measurement. In
summary, this paper positions the framework and its many components as
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 36
a theoretical – as well as practical - structure for assessing and improving
BIM performance within and across different organizational scales.
Measuring BIM Performance: five metrics (Succar, Sher, & Williams, 2012)
This paper further explores the conceptual background underpinning BIM
performance assessment and includes an updated review of BIM maturity
frameworks which emerged since the BIM Maturity Matrix chapter was
published (paper A3). The paper then discusses the five BIM performance
assessment metrics; how they complement each other; and how they
jointly enable targeted performance analyses through a simple assessment
workflow. In summary, this paper further solidifies the arguments
surrounding BIM performance assessment of organizations and teams, and
identifies future practical applications for these assessments.
An integrated approach to BIM competency assessment, acquisition and
application (Succar, Sher, & Williams, 2013)
This paper expands upon previously published papers covering
organizational capability, to focus on individual competencies as the
building blocks of organizational ability. Several additional taxonomies and
conceptual models were introduced to extend the applicability of the BIM
framework, from assessing organizations and teams (papers A3-A5), to
their human ingredient. The main deliverables of this paper can be
summarized as follows:
• The introduction of several taxonomies and conceptual models
including: units of analysis, competency manifestations, competency
levels, and a tiered taxonomy of individual BIM competencies;
• The introduction of a flow-model describing how competency items can
be identified, classified, aggregated and used;
• The introduction of a knowledge engine to generate integrated
assessment components, learning modules and process workflows; and
• The introduction of a prototypical online assessment tool linked to a
BIM dictionary and e-learning modules (Figure 10).
In summary, this paper extends the BIM framework’s coverage to
individuals, the smallest organizational units. It thus widens this study’s
conceptual platform and facilitates the future development of multi-scale
assessment, learning and performance improvement tools.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 37
Building Information Modeling: analyzing noteworthy publications of
eight countries using a knowledge content taxonomy (Kassem, M., Succar,
B., Dawood, N., 2014) (accepted for publication June 25, 2013)
This paper reviews 55 noteworthy BIM publications (NBP)s from across 8
countries and analyses their knowledge content using a BIM knowledge
content (BKC) taxonomy. The NBP definition and BKC taxonomy are both
derived from the conceptual constructs developed as part of this study:
• The delimitation of noteworthy BIM publications is derived from the
interaction between BIM fields and BIM lenses (refer to paper A2); and
• The BIM knowledge content (BKC) taxonomy is a filtered representation
of the BIM policy field – please refer to Part III, Appendix B.
In summary, the main deliverables of this paper - a collaborative effort with
other researchers – support and extend this study as follows:
• Extends the literature review conducted in paper A2 to cover new
noteworthy BIM publications;
• Tests the applicability of the BIM framework in generating new
knowledge structures to suit varied research aims; and
• Adapts framework taxonomies to investigate and identify new
knowledge gaps within the BIM domain.
A proposed approach to comparing the BIM maturity of countries
(Kassem, M., Succar, B., Dawood, N., 2013)
This paper builds upon the literature reviewed within paper B1 to propose
three new, country-scale BIM maturity metrics. These metrics are intended
to augment BIM adoption data typically collected through survey tools, by
measuring the availability of noteworthy BIM publications (NBP)s, their
distribution across different BIM knowledge contents (BKC, refer to Part III
- Appendix B) and the perceived relevance of each NBP in addressing a
specific BIM topic. This paper makes two main contributions to this study:
• Introduces a 5-level metric to assesses the relative relevance of
noteworthy BIM publications; and
• Applies the study’s conceptual constructs in assessing - in addition to
organizations, teams and individuals (papers A3-A6) - the BIM maturity
of countries.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 38
BIM in Practice - BIM Education, a position paper by the Australian
Institute of Architects and Consult Australia (Succar, Agar, Beazley,
Berkemeier, Choy, Giangregorio, Donaghey, Linning, Macdonald, Perey, &
Plume, 2012)
This position paper stems from the efforts of the BIM Education Working
Group (EWG), part of the Australian Institute of Architects and Consult
Australia BIM/IPD initiative. The EWG included eleven members from
industry (practicing professionals) and academia (university/TAFE lecturers
and researchers). The paper delivered as a result of this collaborative effort
included three complementary documents that identified BIM learners and
their varied requirements; explored BIM learning providers and the current
status of BIM education; defined the BIM learning spectrum; and
generated a draft collaborative BIM education framework. The dedicated
framework, the knowledge structures – namely BIM competencies and
sample educational deliverables – are derived from the research
conducted for paper A6.
Declaration: I hereby certify that this paper has been done in collaboration with
other researchers and conducted under the auspices of the BIM/IPD Steering
Group of the Australian Institute of Architects and Consult Australia. My
contributions to this effort – as a working group Chair and the main author of the
BIM Education documents - have been delivered as an unpaid volunteer.
Research themes across included papers
Table 2 below explores the common research themes across papers submitted as part
of this thesis by publication. It lists the literature reviews conducted, the research
methodology used and the distribution of conceptual constructs and practicable tools
across papers. The table highlights the step-wise progression from foundational,
conceptual work to practicable research deliverables:
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 39
Table 2. Study deliverables across the nine papers
A A A A A C A B B Introduct.
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 document
Literature reviews
Available frameworks
Competency connotations
Knowledge visualization principles
Performance measurement models
Research methodology
Conceptual background
Framework development methodology
Research design
Underlying theories
Conceptual constructs
BIM Framework + Tri-axial model
BIM fields
Players
Deliverables
Requirements
Overlaps
Interactions
BIM lenses and filters
BIM capability stages
BIM ontology
Collaborative BIM Education Framework
Competency approaches
Competency components + manifestations
Competency sets
Competency units of analysis
Granularity levels
Individual competency classes and sub-classes
Organizational hierarchy and scales
Knowledge content taxonomy
Project lifecycle phases
Seed competency inventory
Triple A competency + competency flow models
BIM acquisition + BIM learning Modules
BIM application + sample BIM workflow
BIM assessment + assessment workflow
Practicable knowledge tools
BIM dictionary, online module
BIM maturity index (BIMMI)
BIM maturity matrix (BIm³)
Individual competency assessment, online tool
Individual competency index (ICI)
Noteworthy BIM publications – relevance (R-metric)
Organizational capability/maturity score
Legend: indicates topic mentioned within publication indicates topic improved upon previous published version
Notes: BIM fields and BIM players where termed BIM nodes and BIM participants respectively in paper A1
BIM capability stages where interchangeably called BIM maturity stages in paper A2
The term viDCO replaced the term IPD – as used in A2 and A3 – starting in paper A4
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 40
An expansive research continuum
The deliverables of this study are a product of multiple interwoven research paths
forming an expansive research mesh. This mesh was first initiated through describing,
explaining and testing (section 10) a small number of interconnected conceptual
constructs; using test results to refine initial constructs and develop new ones; and then
repeating the cyclical process to continually solidify and expand the mesh. This study
thus delivers – in addition to multiple conceptual constructs and practicable tools - an
expansive research continuum. To clarify this deliverable, three visual knowledge models
(VKM) 11 have been developed:
• A Study Timeline (Figure 5) identifying the study’s basic chronology and published
deliverables;
• A Research Path (Figure 6) identifying the study’s major milestones along four
research sub-paths: literature review, research methodology, conceptual
development and data collection. This VKM also identifies a number of future
research activities pursuant to each research sub-path; and
• A Research Continuum (Figure 7) representing the study’s network of conceptual
and practical deliverables across submitted publications. The continuum highlights
how each paper delivers a number of conceptual constructs which either extend
earlier constructs/tools or support the development of new ones. Constructs are
hierarchical (refer back to Figure 2) yet interconnect through explicit ontological
relations (refer to Appendix A). For example, this VKM clarifies how noteworthy BIM
publications (a dictionary term defined in paper B1, 2013) and the BIM Maturity
Matrix (a practical tool introduced in paper A3, 2010) are ontologically-connected
to constructs published within papers A1 and A2 (2007 and 2009 respectively).
11
Please note that conceptual models and visual knowledge models are not synonymous. A conceptual
model is an abstraction of reality (refer back to Section 8.2) and may not necessarily have a visual
representation (e.g. a personal mental model). A visual knowledge model (VKM) however refers to the
visual language (e.g. data graphs, workflow charts or Venn diagrams) used in representing mental models
and other conceptual constructs – be it a classification, taxonomy, framework or theory. VKMs are
extensively used throughout this study and have been discussed within paper A1 – the first publication.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 41
A2 paper A2 paper A4 accounts
Dec received most for 30% of total
citations to date downloads to date
600 exploratory 13
re EA
to online assessments UB
es
A
lin conducted to date
on
EA
07
f ro m W7
813
UB
a ds C10 IB
nlo WB
A
C
ow IB
rd
C
e
ap
s
lp
ion
ful
at
cit
ive
A3 A4
lat
A1 A5 C
re
July
Dec May
A6 B1 B2
Mar Aug Jun Oct Feb
Study Timeline v1.0 (Succar, 2013)
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
main l main litera
i t e ra t u re AU US UK HK t u re re v i e w 2
re v i e w 1 informal interviews
OFFICIAL MASTERS TO focus groups conducted THESIS BY PRACTICAL
START DATE PhD UPGRADE in different countries PUBLICATION COMPLETION
JUN 2005 OCT 2007 JAN 2012 (DECISION) DEC 2013
A1 A Proposed Framework to investigate B1 Building Information Modeling: analyzing Academic conferences attended
Building Information Modelling through noteworthy publications of eight countries to deliver papers included within
knowledge elicitation and visual models using a knowledge content taxonomy the thesis.
(Succar, Sher, & Aranda-Mena, 2007) (Kassem, M., Succar, B., Dawood, N., 2014)
A2 Building information modelling framework: B2 A proposed approach to comparing the BIM Relative number of citations
a research and delivery foundation for maturity of countries (Kassem, M., Succar, received - 239 citations by Dec
industry stakeholders (Succar, 2009) B., Dawood, N., 2013) 2013. Graph is indicative only.
A3 Building Information Modelling maturity C BIM in Practice - BIM Education, a position Relative number of full-paper
matrix (Succar, 2010a) paper by the Australian Institute of Architects downloads from self-storage sites
and Consult Australia (Succar, Agar, Beazley, (academia.net & researchgate.edu)
The Five Components of BIM performance Berkemeier, Choy, Giangregorio, Donaghey, - 13,000 downloads by Dec 2013.
A4 measurement (Succar, 2010b) Linning, Macdonald, Perey, & Plume, 2012) Graph is indicative only.
A5 Measuring BIM Performance: five metrics literature reviews conducted This graph identifies major research activities
(Succar, Sher, & Williams, 2012) throughout the study conducted between June 2005 and December
An integrated approach to BIM competency data collection including informal 2013. For additional information, please refer
A6 assessment, acquisition and application interviews, focus groups and to Research Path and Research Continuum.
(Succar, Sher, & Williams, 2013) exploratiry online assessments Study Timeline v1.0 (Succar, 2013)
PART I: INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT Figure 5. Study Timeline v1.0 PAGE 42
A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 C A6 B1 B2
)
, 20 13
u cca r
v1.
2 (S dynamic competency metrics and tools 1
ath
hP
arc individual
se
Re competencies market maturity metrics 2
cts BIM fields;
market
ru maturity
st lenses; stages;
experiential
c on competency
sets; ontology
knowledge
u al organizational capability improvement workflows/tools 3
t scales; granularity
c ep r e s e a r c h me levels; assessment
n t ho workflows
co do organizational market performance benchmarking 4
study started lo capability
June 2005 established research g
aims, strategy i o n exploratory
t shifted to thesis
y
a
and design
l ida by publication assessments knwoledge modelling 5
data collection & co n c e p t u a l v international formalised
focus groups conceptual
hierarchies
litera expanding the competency knowledge-base 6
previous tur
studies er
ev
BIM; history of CAD; iew BIM
available frameworks; education assessing NBPs of additional countries 7
knowledge visualization
BIM guides, protocols
and mandates across
multiple countries
performance
measurement
models individual
competency
conceptual validation publication
milestone milestone A1 number
f u t u re re s earch
the path signifies how the actions/ the link signifies how actions/deliverables
Research Path v1.2 by Bilal Succar, December 2013
methodology literature review deliverables at one milestone lead to actions/ at one milestone influences the actions/
milestone milestone deliverables at other same-type milestones deliverables at other milestones also refer to Study Timeline and Research Continuum
PART I: INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT Figure 6. Research Path v1.2 PAGE 43
A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 C A6 B1 B2
Research Continuum v1.1 (Succar, 2013)
R1
R2 R3
F
F
F
mework
m e work
u c ts
fra
fra
n
c o n s tr
se
ol om
at u
io
c
ti-
c
th la b
e r k orativ e e d uc pe
te n cy m ul
tri-
axial fra me wo
TX2 TX2
TX5 TX5
TR3 TR3
D1 D2 D3 D7 D8 D9 10 11 12 13
D D D D
M
M
M
M
M
M
TX2
M
M
M
M
CL2
Po
Organizational
Scales Capability
Stages
START LEARNER
nents
index
nents
0 1 2 3 4
Competency Maturity
Pr Te
Granularity Levels Levels
ow
END
DEFINED MANAGED INTEGRATED
LE
AR
R
E
ID
el
el
NIN
G PROV
po
level b level c level d
el
po
k fl
w
cy
od
M
od
LE
AR U
NIN TR
G SPEC
od
om
fl o
fi e ca le m nd im
or
m
en
ex
BI co as rk
m
m
m
m s ns d at y w gl c
i
lds s lea
e
pa er ivi ple
of e n q uir
y bility stage es a
n d fi l t
M
m aturity i
n urit
y m atrix
ses
sment w
o dual co mpe m e ntation r nin g trian
ark
e t m a t urit
y
part of MD13
TX4
D4 D5 D6
X1 X2 X3 X4 X5
s
ra te
M
M
M
T MD1
T
T
T
T
POLICY
es
FI E L D
gene
1 [D]
[C] EXEC
MD3
rat
[O]
ses
a b
2 [D]
& topics
d DOMAIN
ne
[C]
P R O CE S S T E C H N O LO G Y
onomy
FI E L D FIELD [O]
ge
pha
c
3 [D] CORE
[C]
s
[O]
on
ps
ti pr
le
fi e
ld interac fi e l d o v e r
la oje yc
ct lifec
ax
hy
TX1
ts
ga om co
se
tt
ts
rc
no
or
ra se s, its n
c
k
niz e co pet r mp wle te
atio nal hi mpetency e n cy tie etency un dge con
R1 R2 L1 L2 L3 L4 R3 L5
C
C
C
C
C
T
T
T
MD1
MD3
to virtually construct a
0 pre-BIM a Initial 0 None 0 None R0 Redundant
Modelling Defined Discovery Basic Relevant
to extend the analysis of a
to explore the possibilities of 1 b 1 1 R1
tio ns
to study what-if scenarios for a
Modelling Information to detect possible collisions within a Building
2 Collaboration c Managed 2 Evaluation 2 Intermediate inf R2 Regarded
orm
shaping an organised a structure, an
forming set of data: to calculate construction costs of enclosed space,
presenting, meaningful,
to analyse constructability of a a constructed
s
scoping actionable environment
3 Integration d Integrated 3 Certification 3 Advanced R3 Recommended
to plan the deconstruction of a
to manage and maintain a
viDCO Optimised Auditing Expert Requisite
ica
4 e 4 4 R4
ob
bl
ot
BI co
M
co el pu s
ls
ca ge ls gr e el
n
M re
s
ew
s
not f jec I ma v mp v
atio ns o t-based B pab
ility sta turity leve anu
larity le etency le orthy BIM leva
nce le
v
T L1 T L2 TL 3 TL 4 TL 5
Research Continuum v1.1 by Bilal Succar, December 2013
FR frameworks TL practicable tool
This graph represents the study’s conceptual and practical
MD models A1 published paper continuum across publications. Each paper includes a number of
s essment
r y matrix
conceptual constructs which support and/or extend earlier
r y score
matrix
TX taxonomy direct connection constructs. Multi-level constructs are either purely conceptual -
CL classifications indirect link intended to clarify/represent domain knowledge - or practicable
a ry
yielding performance assessment and improvement tools.
TR terminology part of ontology relation implementation ste p BIM maturity disco v e BIM maturity disco v e online BIM dictio n online competency a s also refer to Study Timeline and Research Path
s
PART I: INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT Figure 7. Research Continuum v1.1 PAGE 44
Conclusion
This study is an expression of two complementary research questions: what are the
knowledge structures underlying the BIM domain; and, how can these knowledge
structures be harnessed to assist industry stakeholders to adopt BIM or improve their
BIM performance? The first question explores the knowledge structures underlying the
BIM domain whilst the second probes how these knowledge structures can be used to
improve the BIM performance of industry stakeholders.
These two research questions have been addressed through the development of new
conceptual constructs (e.g. classifications, taxonomies, models, an ontology and a
framework) which collectively illustrate the knowledge structures underlying the BIM
domain; and through the introduction of a set of tools and workflows that facilitate BIM
assessment, learning and performance improvement.
The next sections briefly discuss the study’s current limitations, future extensions, and
provides a succinct summary of its deliverables.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 45
Current limitations
This study has been limited by the number of testing cycles (section 8.6) performed to
date. While 63 subject matter experts participated in focus groups in 2010, and more
than 300 online users have since participated in exploratory competency assessments,
these numbers – while statistically representative - are thinly spread across the
framework’s many models and tools. Collection of additional data is required before
data saturation (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) (Morse, 1995) can be reached and purposeful
data analyses can be conducted.
To address this limitation, a new set of focus groups will be conducted to test and
validate the study’s models and tools. Also, as indicated by exploratory research, a
significant amount of meaningful data can be collected through the online assessment
tool (prototype shown in paper A6, Figure 10). This additional primary data can then be
amalgamated with the data collected in 2010, comprehensively analysed and duly
published.
Future extensions
Using the BIM framework as a theoretical structure, several constructs delivered by this
study will be extended, new constructs generated, and additional tools developed.
Below is a succinct list of planned extensions:
• Based on assessment metrics developed in papers A3-A6 serving varied
organizational scales (refer to paper A3), a multi-assessment framework is currently
being developed to amalgamate the results of different assessment types (e.g.
individual competency with organizational maturity);
• Extending the seed competency inventory introduced in paper A6, additional
competency items will be generated to populate a specialized online platform
(currently hosts more than a thousand competency items). Using a dedicated online
module and - in collaboration with industry associations - assessments will be
conducted to generate industry-wide BIM competency benchmarks;
• Based on the sample competency-based workflow introduced in paper A6 (Figure
9), a custom version of Business Process Model and Notation (Muehlen & Recker,
2008) (OMG, 2013) will be developed. The customised notation will benefit from
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 46
the terminology defined within the BIM dictionary and the concepts, relationships,
and attributes defined by the BIM ontology (refer to Part III - Appendix A) to capture
and visually represent complex BIM workflows. Combining a visually-accessible
process modelling language with well-defined terms and a specialized ontology will
facilitate the development of competency-based workflows. These can be used by
industry stakeholders to guide BIM implementation and collaboration;
• The BIM competency hierarchy (introduced in paper A6) will be extended into a BIM
competence ontology (Draganidis, Chamopoulou, & Mentzas, 2006) (Hirata, Ikeda,
& Mizoguchi, 2001) that matches widely adopted definitions and metadata
standards (IMS, 2002) (IEEE, 2008). This is intended to facilitate coordinating the
BIM competence ontology with other competence ontologies covering varied
knowledge domains;
• The online BIM Dictionary (introduced in paper A6) will be expanded to include
additional terms and descriptions (currently includes 370 terms). An expanded
dictionary will contribute to further reducing term ambiguity and enable the
development of interconnected competency assessments, learning modules and
performance workflows;
• The competency identification, classification, aggregation and multiuse model
(Figure 5 of paper A6) will be developed into a framework with the addition of new
taxonomies and classifications. This is intended to facilitate the identification new
sets of BIM competencies across different disciplines, specialities and markets;
• The collaborative BIM education framework introduced in paper C will be extended
with additional taxonomies and conceptual models. This is intended to support the
development of a BIM academy - currently being contemplated in Australia – tasked
with developing BIM-focused learning modules for both industry and academia; and
• Based on performance assessment tools developed throughout this study – and also
in collaboration with industry associations - a seed BIM accreditation and
certification programme will be developed. The programme will clarify BIM
performance milestones and provide individuals and organizations with incentives
to assess and continuously improve their BIM performance.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 47
Summary
Building Information Modelling (BIM) is the current expression of technical and
procedural innovation within the construction industry. It is a methodology that
generates, exchanges and manages a constructed facility’s data throughout its life cycle.
There are significant benefits and challenges attributed to BIM tools and workflows. To
holistically understand BIM, its conceptual parts must be understood as well as the
relationship between them.
Benefiting from previous research and applicable theories - and reflecting the
candidate’s experiential knowledge and thought experiments - this study adopted a
pragmatic research design and a mixed research strategy. Through nine published
papers (2007-2013), this study investigated the knowledge structures underlying the
BIM domain, developed an expansive theoretical framework to represent these
structures, and delivered a number of practicable tools to assist industry stakeholders
to assess and improve their BIM performance.
In summary, the deliverables of this study included:
• A set of metrics and tools to assess BIM capability, maturity and competency;
• A seed competency inventory to assist in developing BIM learning modules;
• A conceptual engine to integrate BIM assessment, learning and implementation;
• An interconnected BIM dictionary to reduce topic ambiguity;
• A set of models, taxonomies and classifications to represent domain knowledge;
• A BIM ontology to formalise BIM concepts and interlink conceptual constructs;
• A visual language to simplify complex BIM topics; and
• An expandable theoretical framework to connect all deliverables – conceptual and
practical - and support the development of new ones.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 48
References
ACG. (2010). Productivity in the Building Network-Assessing the Impacts of Building Information
Models, Report to the Built Environment, Innovation and Industry Council (BEIIC) (pp.
98). Sydney: Allen Consulting Group.
Ackoff, R. L. (1971). Towards a System of Systems Concepts. MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 17(11),
661-671. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.17.11.661
Alshawi, M., & Faraj, I. (2002). Integrated construction environments: technology and
implementation. Construction Innovation, 2(1), 33-51.
Atkinson, D. (2011). Approaches and Strategies of Social Research, Essay for Reasearch Methods
Class, RMIT. http://minyos.its.rmit.edu.au/~dwa/Methods.html
Austin, S., Newton, A., Steele, J., & Waskett, P. (2002). Modelling and managing project
complexity. International Journal of Project Management, 20(3), 191-198.
Bernstein, P. (2005, December 14, 2013). Integrated Practice: It’s Not Just About the Technology.
Retrieved October 9, 2008, from http://bit.ly/1j5NZVO
BIMe. (2013). The BIM Dictionary. Retrieved May 26, 2013, from BIM Excellence (BIMe)
http://www.BIMexcellence.net/dictionary
BIS. (2011). A Report for the Government Construction Client Group, Building Information
Modelling (BIM) Working Party Strategy: Department for Business Innovation & Skills
(BIS).
Blaikie, N. W. H. (2000). Designing Social Research: The Logic of Anticipation: Polity Press.
CEN. (2004). European eConstruction Framework (EeF) - Context and Scope for “eConstruction”
CEN Workshop Agreement: European Committee for Standardization.
Cerovsek, T. (2012). BIM cube and systems-of-systems framework eWork and eBusiness in
Architecture, Engineering and Construction (pp. 421-428): CRC Press.
Chandrasekaran, B., Josephson, J. R., & Benjamins, V. R. (1999). What are ontologies, and why
do we need them? Intelligent Systems and Their Applications, IEEE [see also IEEE
Intelligent Systems], 14(1), 20-26.
Chun, M., Sohn, K., Arling, P., & Granados, N. F. (2008). Systems Theory and Knowledge
Management Systems: The Case of Pratt-Whitney Rocketdyne. Paper presented at the
Proceedings of the 41st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.
Cooke, N. M., & McDonald, J. E. (1986). A formal methodology for acquiring and representing
expert knowledge. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the IEEE.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for
Developing Grounded Theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
Cottam, H. (1999). Ontologies to Assist Process Oriented Knowledge Acquisition (Draft): SPEDE,
Rolls-Royce plc 1999 covered by SPEDE IPR agreement.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 49
Cristea, A. I. (2004). What can the Semantic Web do for Adaptive Educational Hypermedia?
Educational Technology and Society, 7(4), 40-58.
CWIC. (2004). The Building Technology and Construction Industry Technology Roadmap. In A.
Dawson (Ed.). Melbourne: Collaborative Working In Consortium.
Davies, R. (1989). The Creation of New Knowledge by Information Retrieval and Classification.
Journal of Documentation, 45(4), 273-301.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of
Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
Debus, M. (1989). Methodological Review: a Handbook for Excellence in Focus Group Research:
Academy for Educational Development, Washington D.C.
Denzer, A., & Hedges, K. (2008). From CAD to BIM: Educational strategies for the coming
paradigm shift. AEI.
Diane, H. P. (1998). Across the manufacturing-marketing interface Classification of significant
research. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 18(12), 1205-
1222.
Dillon, J. T. (1984). The Classification of Research Questions. Review of Educational Research,
54(3), 327-361.
Dossick, C. S., & Neff, G. (2009). Organizational divisions in BIM-enabled commercial
construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(4), 459-467.
Downward, P., & Mearman, A. (2007). Retroduction as Mixed-Methods Triangulation In
Economic Research: Reorienting Economics Into Social Science. Cambridge Journal of
Economics, 31(1), 77-99. doi: 10.1093/cje/bel009
Draganidis, F., Chamopoulou, P., & Mentzas, G. (2006). An Ontology Based Tool for Competency
Management and Learning Paths. Paper presented at the I-KNOW 2006, Graz, Austria.
Dubin, R. (1978). Theory Building: Free Press New York.
Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., & Liston, K. (2011). BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building
Information Modeling for Owners, Managers, Designers, Engineers and Contractors (2
ed.): Wiley.
Feng, C.-W., Mustaklem, O., & Chen, Y.-J. (2011). The BIM-Based Information Integration Sphere
for Construction Projects. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 28th International
Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC 2011), Seoul, Korea.
http://www.iaarc.org/publications/fulltext/S04-6.pdf
Fox, S., & Hietanen, J. (2007). Interorganizational use of building information models: potential
for automational, informational and transformational effects. Construction
Management and Economics, 25(3), 289 - 296.
Froese, T. M. (2010). The impact of emerging information technology on project management
for construction. Automation in Construction, 19(5), 531-538. doi: DOI:
10.1016/j.autcon.2009.11.004
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 50
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative
research Retrieved from http://bit.ly/gfXxgX
Green, G., & Hevner, A. (2000). The Successful Diffusion of Innovations: Guidance for Software
Development Organizations. IEEE Software, 17(6), 96.
Gregor, S. (2006). The Nature of Theory in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611-642.
Hammersley, M. (Ed.). (2006). Sensitizing Concepts. London: SAGE.
Hampson, K., & Brandon, P. (2004). Construction 2020: A Vision of Australia's Property and
Construction Industry. Australia: CRC Construction Innovation.
Hewson, C. (Ed.). (2006). Mixed Methods Research. London: SAGE.
Hirata, K., Ikeda, M., & Mizoguchi, R. (2001). Total resolution for human resource development
based on competency ontology. ICCE2001.
Holsapple, C. W., & Joshi, K. D. (2006). Knowledge Management Ontology. In D. G. Schwartz
(Ed.), Encyclopedia of Knowledge Management (pp. 397-402): Idea Group Reference.
Homer-Dixon, T. (2001). The Ingenuity Gap. Canada: Vintage.
Ibrahim, M., Krawczyk, R., & Schipporeit, G. (2004). A Web-Based Approach to Transferring
Architectural Information to the Construction Site Based on the BIM Object Concept.
Paper presented at the CAADRIA 2004 Conference, Seoul, South Korea.
IEEE. (2008). IEEE Standard for Learning Technology - Data Model for Reusable Competency
Definitions. IEEE Std 1484.20.1-2007, C1-26. doi: 10.1109/ieeestd.2008.4445693
IMS. (2002). IMS Reusable Definition of Competency or Educational Objective – Information
Model IMS Global Learning Consortium Version 1.0 - Final Specification. Lake Mary, FL:
IMS Global Consortium.
Jung, Y., & Joo, M. (2010). Building information modelling (BIM) framework for practical
implementation. Automation in Construction, In Press, Corrected Proof. doi: DOI:
10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.010
Kaner, I., Sacks, R., Kassian, W., & Quitt, T. (2008). Case studies of BIM adoption for precast
concrete design by mid-sized structural engineering firms. ITCON, 18, 303-323.
Kao, D., & Archer, N. P. (1997). Abstraction in conceptual model design. International journal of
human-computer studies, 46(1), 125-150.
Kaplan, B., & Maxwell, J. (2005). Qualitative Research Methods for Evaluating Computer
Information Systems. In J. Anderson & C. Aydin (Eds.), Evaluating the Organizational
Impact of Healthcare Information Systems (pp. 30-55). New York: Springer.
Khanzode, A., Fischer, M., & Reed, D. (2008). Benefits and Lessons Learned of Implementing
Building Virtual Design and Construction (VDC) Technologies for Coordination of
Mechanical, Eectrical, and Plumbing (MEP) Systems on a Large Healthcare Project.
ITCON, 18, 324-342.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 51
Kimmance, A. G. (2002). An integrated Product and Process Information Modelling System for
On-Site Construction. (DX240137). Thesis (Ph. D.) - University of Loughborough, UK.
Kolb, D. A., Boyatzis, R. E., & Mainemelis, C. (2000). Experiential Learning Theory: Previous
Research and New Directions. In R. J. Sternberg & L. F. Zhang (Eds.), Perspectives on
Cognitive, Learning, and Thinking Styles. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kunz, A. (2012). Challenges to BIM Adoption and why Project-Led Implementations Succeed and
Office Implementations Fail. American Building Today. Retrieved from American
Building Today website: http://bit.ly/1j5NISB
Kwasnik, B. (1999). The Role of Classification in Knowledge Representation and Discovery.
Library Trends, 48(1), 22-47.
Lave, C. A., & March, J. G. (1993). An Introduction to Models in the Social Sciences. Lanham,
Maryland: University Press of America.
Leca, B., & Naccache, P. (2006). A Critical Realist Approach To Institutional Entrepreneurship.
Organization, 13(5), 627-651. doi: 10.1177/1350508406067007
Lee, A. S. (1991). Integrating Positivist and Interpretive Approaches to Organizational Research.
Organization Science, 2(4), 342-365.
Leicht, R., & Messner, J. (2008). Moving Toward an ‘Intelligent’ Shop Modelling Process. ITCON,
18, 286-302.
Linderoth, H. C. J. (2010). Understanding adoption and use of BIM as the creation of actor
networks. Automation in Construction, 19(1), 66-72. doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2009.09.003
Lohse, G. L., Biolsi, K., Walker, N., & Rueter, H. H. (1994). A Classification of Visual
Representations. Communications of the ACM, 37(12), 36-49. doi:
http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/198366.198376
Mäkeläinen, T., Hyvärinen, J., & Peura, J. (2012). BIM practices and challenges framed - an
approach to systemic change management eWork and eBusiness in Architecture,
Engineering and Construction (pp. 497-504): CRC Press.
Manning, R., & Messner, J. (2008). Case studies in BIM implementation for programming of
healthcare facilities; . ITCON, 13, 246-257.
Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications, Inc.
Meredith, J. (1993). Theory building through conceptual methods. International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, 13(5), 3.
Meredith, J. R., Raturi, A., Amoako-Gyampah, K., & Kaplan, B. (1989). Alternative research
paradigms in operations. Journal of Operations Management, 8(4), 297-326. doi: Doi:
10.1016/0272-6963(89)90033-8
Merriam-Webster. (2013). Dictionary. Retrieved May 36, 2013, from Merriam-Webster,
Encyclopedia Britanica http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dictionary
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 52
Michalski, R. S. (1987). Concept Learning. In S. S. Shapiro (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Artificial
Intelligence (Vol. 1, pp. 185-194). New York: Wiley.
Michalski, R. S., & Stepp, R. E. (1987). Clustering. In S. S. Shapiro (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Artificial
Intelligence (Vol. 1, pp. 103-111). New York: Wiley.
Mihindu, S., & Arayici, Y. (2008, 9-11 July 2008). Digital Construction through BIM Systems will
Drive the Re-engineering of Construction Business Practices. Paper presented at the
Visualisation, 2008 International Conference.
Miller, R. L., & Brewer, J. D. (2003). The A-Z of Social REsearch. London: Sage.
Milton, N. R. (2007a). Knowledge Acquisition in Practice: A Step-by-step Guide: Springer, London.
Milton, N. R. (2007b). Specification for the General Technological Ontology (GTO).
http://www.pcpack.co.uk/gto/notes/files/GTO%20Spec%20v4.doc
Minsky, M. (Ed.). (1975). A Framework for Representing Knowledge. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Mitroff, I. I., & Mason, R. O. (1982). Business Policy and Metaphysics: Some Philosophical
Considerations. The Academy of Management Review, 7(3), 361-371.
Morse, J. M. (1995). The Significance of Saturation. Qualitative Health Research, 5(2), 147-149.
Muehlen, M., & Recker, J. (2008). How Much Language Is Enough? Theoretical and Practical Use
of the Business Process Modeling Notation. In Z. Bellahsène & M. Léonard (Eds.),
Advanced Information Systems Engineering (Vol. 5074, pp. 465-479): Springer Berlin
Heidelberg.
Mutai, A. (2009). Factors Influencing the Use of Building Information Modeling (BIM) within
Leading Construction Firms in the United States of America. (Doctor of Philosophy
Doctor of Philosophy), Indiana State University, Terre Haute.
Myers, M. D. (1997a). Qualitative Research in Information Systems.
http://www.qual.auckland.ac.nz/
Myers, M. D. (1997b). Qualitative Research in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 21(2), 241-
242.
NIST. (2004). Cost Analysis of Inadequate Interoperability in the U.S. Capital Facilities Industry.
In M. P. O. C. Gallaher, A. C.; Dettbarn, J. L., Jr.; Gilday, L. T. (Ed.): National Institute of
Standards and Technology.
Noy, N. F., & McGuinness, D. L. (2001). Ontology Development 101: A Guide to Creating Your
First Ontology. http://www.lsi.upc.edu/~bejar/aia/aia-web/ontology101.pdf
OMG. (2013, Dec 2, 2013). Object Management Group, Business Process Model and Notation
(BPMN). Retrieved Dec 2, 2013, 2013, from http://www.bpmn.org/
Orlikowski, W. J., & Baroudi, J. J. (1991). Studying Information Technology in Organizations:
Research Approaches and Assumptions. Information Systems Research, 2(1), 1-28.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 53
Peansupap, V., & Walker, D. H. T. (2005). Factors Enabling Information and Communication
Technology Diffusion and Actual Implementation in Construction Organisations.
Electronic Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 10, 193-218.
Popper, K. (2002). The Logic of Scientific Discovery popper Retrieved from http://bit.ly/oKNRUY
Reason, P. (Ed.). (1988). Human Inquiry in Action: Development in New Paradigm Research -
Introduction. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Reason, P. (Ed.). (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research - Three Approaches to Participative
Inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Reisman, A. (1988). On alternative strategies for doing research in the management and social
sciences. Engineering Management, IEEE Transactions on, 35(4), 215-220.
Reisman, A. (1994). Creativity in MS/OR: Expanding Knowledge by Consolidating Knowledge.
Interfaces, 24(3), 91-99.
Reisman, A. (2004). How can OR/MS Educators Benefit From Creating and Using Taxonomies?
INFORM Transactions on Education, 4(3), 55-65. doi: 10.1287/ited.4.3.55
Ritter, H. (2010). Models as Tools to Aid Thinking: Towards a Theory of Thinking. In B. Glatzeder,
V. Goel & A. Müller (Eds.), (pp. 347-374): Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovation. New York: Free Press.
Saaty, T. L. (1998). Reflections and Projections on Creativity in Operations Research and
Management Science: a Pressing Need for a Shift in Paradigm. Operations Research,
46(1), 9.
Sayer, A. (1992). Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach Retrieved from
http://bit.ly/gHz6Md
Sebastian, R. (2010). Breaking through Business and Legal Barriers of Open Collaborative
Processes based on Building Information Modelling (BIM). Paper presented at the W113-
Special Track 18th CIB World Building Congress May 2010 Salford, United Kingdom.
Shelden, D. (2009). Information Modelling as a Paradigm Shift. Architectural Design, 79(2), 80-
83. doi: 10.1002/ad.857
Singh, V., Gu, N., & Wang, X. (2011). A theoretical framework of a BIM-based multi-disciplinary
collaboration platform. Automation in Construction, 20(2), 134-144. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.011
Studer, R., Benjamins, V. R., & Fensel, D. (1998). Knowledge engineering: Principles and
methods. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 25(1-2), 161-197.
Succar, B. (2009). Building information modelling framework: A research and delivery
foundation for industry stakeholders. Automation in Construction, 18(3), 357-375.
Succar, B. (2010a). Building Information Modelling Maturity Matrix. In J. Underwood & U. Isikdag
(Eds.), Handbook of Research on Building Information Modelling and Construction
Informatics: Concepts and Technologies (pp. 65-103): Information Science Reference, IGI
Publishing.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 54
Succar, B. (2010b). The Five Components of BIM Performance Measurement. Paper presented at
the CIB World Congress, Salford, United Kingdom.
Succar, B., Agar, C., Beazley, S., Berkemeier, P., Choy, R., Giangregorio, R. D., Donaghey, S.,
Linning, C., Macdonald, J., Perey, R., & Plume, J. (2012). BIM in Practice - BIM Education,
a Position Paper by the Australian Institute of Architects and Consult Australia.
http://www.bim.architecture.com.au/
Succar, B., Sher, W., & Aranda-Mena, G. (2007). A Proposed Framework to Investigate Building
Information Modelling Through Knowledge Elicitation and Visual Models. Paper
presented at the Australasian Universities Building Education (AUBEA2007), Melbourne,
Australia. http://aubea.org.au/ocs/viewpaper.php?id=15&cf=1
Succar, B., Sher, W., & Williams, A. (2012). Measuring BIM performance: Five metrics.
Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 8(2), 120-142. doi:
10.1080/17452007.2012.659506
Succar, B., Sher, W., & Williams, A. (2013). An integrated approach to BIM competency
acquisition, assessment and application (published online). Automation in Construction,
35, 174-189. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.05.016
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and
Quantitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Taylor, J., & Bernstein, P. (2009). Paradigm Trajectories of Building Information Modeling
Practice in Project Networks. Journal of Management in Engineering, 25(2), 69-76. doi:
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2009)25:2(69)
USAF. (2010). BIM/LEAN-Enabled Project Delivery Comparison, US Airforce Presentation,
PowerPoint Slide no. 17: FedCon 10.
Van der Heijden, K., & Eden, C. (1998). The Theory and Praxis of Reflective Learning in Strategy
Making. In C. Eden & J.-C. Spender (Eds.), Managerial and organizational cognition:
Theory, methods and research (pp. 58-75). London: Sage.
Van Heijst, G., Schreiber, A. T., & Wielinga, B. J. (1997). Using explicit ontologies in KBS
development. International journal of human-computer studies, 46(2-3), 183-292.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance
Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 46(2), 186-204. doi:
10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
Vogel, D. R., & Wetherbe, H. C. (1984). MIS research: a profile of leading journals and
universities. Data Base, 16(1), 3-14.
Walker, D. H. T., Bourne, L. M., & Shelley, A. (2008). Influence, stakeholder mapping and
visualization. Construction Management and Economics, 26(6), 645 - 658.
Walsham, G. (1995). The Emergence of Interpretivism in IS Research. Information Systems
Research, 6(4), 376-394.
Watson, A. (2010). BIM - A Driver for Change. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the
International Conference of Computing in Civil and Building Engineering, Nottingham,
UK. http://www.engineering.nottingham.ac.uk/icccbe/proceedings/pdf/pf69.pdf
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 55
Watson, A. (2011). Digital buildings – Challenges and opportunities. Advanced Engineering
Informatics, 25(4), 573-581. doi: 10.1016/j.aei.2011.07.003
White, S. (1997). Beyond Retroduction? — Hermeneutics, Reflexivity and Social Work Practice.
British Journal of Social Work, 27(5), 739-753.
Younas, M. Y. (2010). Exploring the challenges for the implementation and adoption of BIM.
(International Master of Science in Construction & Real Estate Management Master's),
Helsinki Metropolia University of Applied Sciences.
PART I | INTRODUCTION DOCUMENT PAGE 56
PART II
SUBMITTED PAPERS
Part II aggregates all papers submitted as part of this thesis. For a
discussion of paper types or contributions each paper made toward
other papers and the overall study, please refer to Part I, section 9.
PAPER A1
A Proposed Framework to Investigate Building
Information Modelling through Knowledge Elicitation
and Visual Models
Succar, B., Sher, W., & Aranda-Mena, G. (2007). A Proposed Framework to
Investigate Building Information Modelling Through Knowledge Elicitation and
Visual Models. Paper presented at the Australasian Universities Building
Education (AUBEA2007), Melbourne, Australia.
Download paper: http://bit.ly/BIMPaperA1
PAPER A2
Building information modelling framework: A research
and delivery foundation for industry stakeholders
Succar, B. (2009). Building information modelling framework: A research and
delivery foundation for industry stakeholders. Automation in Construction,
18(3), 357-375.
Download paper: http://bit.ly/BIMPaperA2
PAPER A3
Building Information Modelling Maturity Matrix
Succar, B. (2010). Building Information Modelling Maturity Matrix. In J.
Underwood & U. Isikdag (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Building
Information Modelling and Construction Informatics: Concepts and
Technologies (pp. 65-103): Information Science Reference, IGI Publishing.
Download paper: http://bit.ly/BIMPaperA3
PAPER A4
The Five Components of BIM Performance
Measurement
Succar, B. (2010). The Five Components of BIM Performance
Measurement. Paper presented at the CIB World Congress, Salford,
United Kingdom.
Download paper: http://bit.ly/BIMPaperA4
PAPER A5
Measuring BIM performance: Five metrics
Succar, B., Sher, W., & Williams, A. (2012). Measuring BIM performance: Five
metrics. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 8(2), 120-142.
Download paper: http://bit.ly/BIMPaperA5
PAPER A6
An integrated approach to BIM competency
acquisition, assessment and application
Succar, B., Sher, W., & Williams, A. (2013). An integrated approach to BIM
competency acquisition, assessment and application. Automation in
Construction, (published online on June 2013)
Download paper: http://bit.ly/BIMPaperA6
PAPER B1
Building Information Modeling: Analyzing Noteworthy
Publications of Eight Countries Using a Knowledge
Content Taxonomy
Kassem, M., Succar, B., Dawood, N. (2014). Building Information Modeling:
Analyzing Noteworthy Publications of Eight Countries Using a Knowledge
Content Taxonomy, ASCE technical book chapter (approved for publication
on June 25, 2013)
Download paper: http://bit.ly/BIMPaperB1 (available in March 2014)
PAPER B2
Building information modelling framework: A research
and delivery foundation for industry stakeholders
Kassem, M., Succar, B., Dawood, N. (2013). A Proposed Approach to
Comparing the BIM Maturity of Countries. CIB W78 2013, 30th international
Conference on Applications of IT in the AEC Industry, 9-12 October 2013,
Beijing, China.
Download paper: http://bit.ly/BIMPaperB2
PAPER C
BIM in Practice - BIM Education, a Position Paper by
the Australian Institute of Architects and Consult
Australia
Succar, B., Agar, C., Beazley, S., Berkemeier, P., Choy, R., Rosetta Di
Giangregorio, Donaghey, S., Linning, C., Macdonald, J., Perey, R., & Plume, J.
(2012). BIM in Practice - BIM Education, a Position Paper by the Australian
Institute of Architects and Consult Australia.
Download paper: http://bit.ly/BIMPaperC
PART III
APPENDICES
This thesis by publication includes six appendices: Appendices A and B
include two foundational knowledge structures developed as part of
this study yet partially used within published papers; Appendix C lists
citations received to published works to date to indicate potential
impact achieved to date; Appendix D includes the focus group’s
information sheet and feedback form used during primary data
collection; Appendix E includes ‘statements of contribution’ for papers
A1, A5, A6, B1, B2 and C; and Appendix F includes a compilation of all
bibliographic references cited within the introduction document,
submitted papers and appendices.
APPENDIX A
The BIM ontology
Appendix A: the BIM ontology v2.0
Building Information Modelling: conceptual constructs and performance improvement tools
Introduction
The BIM ontology is an informal, semi-structured, domain ontology intended for
knowledge acquisition and communication between people. It is intended to represent
knowledge interactions (push/pull) between BIM players, their deliverables and
requirements (Figure 1) as described within Papers A1 and A2 (Succar, Sher, & Aranda-
Mena, 2007) (Succar, 2009).
The BIM ontology includes BIM-specific concepts, their relations and attributes
facilitate analysis of domain knowledge (Noy & McGuinness, 2001), enable the
construction of a domain framework (Studer, Benjamins, & Fensel, 1998), and support
knowledge acquisition and communication (Milton, 2007a; Milton, 2007b) (Cottam,
1999) (Studer et al., 1998). Figure 1 below illustrates how ontological objects underlie
the BIM Framework. The concept map (Figure 1 - right) is a visual representation of the
ontological relationship between the three concepts (BIM Fields, BIM Stages and BIM
Lenses); while the visual knowledge model (Figure 1left) abstracts these relationships
into the Tri-axial Model, a simplified graphical representation to facilitate
communication. As discussed in Papers A1 and A2, this combination of visual modelling
driven by explicit ontological relations renders the BIM Framework and its many
conceptual constructs more accessible for analysis, modification and extension.
Also, as depicted in Figure 7 (Part I: Introduction Paper), ontological relations enable a
‘conceptual mesh’ linking different types of conceptual constructs: frameworks, models,
taxonomies, classifications and specialized dictionary terms.
PART III | APPENDIX A PAGE 251
Figure 1. Knowledge model (left) + concept map representing underlying ontological structure (right)
Generating the BIM ontology
The BIM ontology has been generated by amending and reusing existing ontologies; a
process recommended by Noy and McGuiness (2001). The reuse of an existing ontology
followed Gruber’s criteria for shared ontologies: clarity, coherence, extensibility,
minimal encoding bias and minimum ontological commitment (Gruber, 1995). Based on
these criteria, the BIM ontology was first derived from the General Technological
Ontology (Milton, 2007a) (Milton, 2007b) and the General Process Ontology (Cottam,
1999). While earlier iterations of the BIM ontology followed source definitions, newer
iterations are more closely matched with the conceptual and practical requirements of
the BIM domain.
PART III | APPENDIX A PAGE 252
Knowledge objects
The BIM ontology comprises of four high-level knowledge objects: concepts, attributes,
relations and knowledge views (Table 1). Starting with version 1E, the ontology has been
expanded to include specific to BIM collaboration and BIM performance assessment.
Table 1. BIM Ontology: Knowledge Objects Summary
Knowledge Description Example Derived Original
Objects From Syntax
Concepts includes concepts, tasks People , Products Extended from n/a
and task components GTO
Attributes attributes and values to Glossary of BIM Extended from n/a
be associated with terms GTO
Concepts
Relations relation between ‘is part of’, Extended from n/a
Concepts ‘has expertise’ GTO
Knowledge a purposeful compilation a generated view or Derived from GTO Home Page
Views of Concepts, Attributes publication -modified syntax,
and Relations different meaning
Table 2. Concepts
Concept Description (if needed) Example Derived Knowledge
From Model
Activity Includes sub-activities, Merge models, New
tasks, sub-tasks and steps meet client, design
a stadium
Artefact Physical or digital items A Training Log is an New Level of
acting as clues to or proof artefact proving the Evidence
of the existence of process availability of a taxonomy
or a policy training plan or
programme
Capability The abilities of Model-based New BIM Capability
organizations and teams collaboration Stages
Certificate A formal testimony of A trainer’s New
capability certificate
Competency The abilities of individuals The ability to New BIM
and groups generate a thermal Competency
analysis within an Taxonomy
object-based model
Component Virtual objects e.g. Revit family, New
GDL object
Constraints Limitations and barriers Capacity, GPO
geography, money, modified
time... meaning
Data Source Data source The Australian New
Bureaux of
statistics
PART III | APPENDIX A PAGE 253
Concept Description (if needed) Example Derived Knowledge
From Model
Deliverable Non-physical products and Description, New
services analysis,
representation,
drawing
Document A digital or analogue A report New
document
Equipment Machines, vehicles... A computer, a car New
Event Happenings in a domain Training session, a GTO
wether controlled or not milestone, an
accident, a data
entry...
Example Illustration of meaning , a Arup is an example GTO
representation of a type, of a company (an
an instance org unit
Field A field of enquiry The BIM New BIM Fields
technology, process
and policy fields
Function Purpose of a product Measures GTO
and/or each its sub- distances, scans
components (applies to documents...
objects)
Incentive Drivers for a course of Profit, marketing, New
action or inaction publicity,
Intellectual
property,
Efficiency, hr
benefits
Knowledge Domains, sub-domains, Knowledge GTO
Domain disciplines, specialities elicitation (Knowledg
e Areas)
modified
syntax
Maturity The quality, repeatability Maturity level New Maturity
and excellence within Levels
capability
Message Message Email message New
Metric A system or standard of Degree of Certainty New
measurement
Milestone A significant and A project milestone New
recognizable event; a
stage or step along a
process
Model use A deliverable of using 3D Augmented reality, New BIM Wheel
models construction
sequencing, model-
based estimation
Organizational Markets, industries, AEC industry, GPO & Organizational
Unit disciplines, organizations companies, GTO (Org Hierarchy
and parts of organizations departments, Units)
groups, teams modified
syntax
PART III | APPENDIX A PAGE 254
Concept Description (if needed) Example Derived Knowledge
From Model
Place A location Melbourne’s GTO
central business (locations)
district modified
syntax
Player Those who take action in a Organizations, GPO BIM Fields,
specific field (technology, individuals or (People) Field
process or policy). stakeholders modified Interactions
name/ and Field
meaning Overlaps
Product Assemblies, parts, A building, a pre- GTO (Phys
materials... cast panel Entities)
modified
syntax
Recommendation An advice aiming to Modelling best GTO
generate or modify action practices (Advice)
modified
syntax
Requirement Mandatory characteristic A business or a GPO
technical demand
Result Results, conclusions and Fail, pass, true, GPO
interpretations false, continue,
return...
Roles Responsibilities of people Designer, foreman GTO
involved in the domain Knowledge
engineer
Sample Sample A tile sample New
Social Value Mechanism and effects Respectability, trust New
occurring in a social worthiness, risk-
context tolerance, cultural
values, innovation,
leadership and
championship
Space A built and identifiable Room, floor, New
enclosed area
Software End-user software Word, Revit, GTO
programs or a bit if code Illustrator, CMaps... (Software)
modified
syntax
Tool A single function physical A screw driver, a New
device (knowledge tools shovel…
are covered in Knowledge
Views, a higher level
ontology component)
Trigger Special events whose Receive a sales GTO
occurrence initiates tasks order, change in
in the domain policy...
Workbench A set of complex Knowledge New BIM
developmental activities Foundations’ Excellence
grouped together as workbench Knowledge
workload packages and Infrastructure
assigned to specialist Workbenches
working groups
PART III | APPENDIX A PAGE 255
Table 3. Attributes
Attribute Description Example Derived Original
Name From syntax
Cost A monetary value $100 New N/A
expressed in whole
numbers, fractions and
decimals
Count An expression of Number of staff, cars, GTO - modified Numeric
elemental numbers using drawings syntax al
integers
Description An explanation expressed Glossary, GTO - modified Sentence
using words, phrases and Descriptions syntax
sentences
Grade A variables denoting Importance New N/A
preference or (High/Low),
developmental Priority (1,2, 3),
achievement expressed in Order (first, second,
integers, percentages or third,…), Degrees of
text Relevance, Levels of
Maturity
Link A hypertext connection A hyperlink, UNC GTO - modified Hypertex
path, email address syntax and meaning t
or similar
Location The coordinates of an Geo Tag, x/y/z New N/A
object within a physical
space
Order An arrangement whether Project Phases, New N/A
chronological or spatial – Organizational Scales
not preferential or
developmental (refer to
Grade)
Proposition A mutually exclusive Left or Right, True or New N/A
distinction between clear False
choices (or not known)
State A description of condition Final submission New N/A
whether temporary or
permanent
Time An expression of 10 weeks New N/A
chronology expressed in
minutes, second, days,
etc…
Type A differentiation of genus Gender GTO - modified Categoric
(male/Female), syntax and meaning al
PART III | APPENDIX A PAGE 256
Table 4. Relations List (version 1E - extended)
Relation Relation
aborts interchanges (interoperable exchange)
aggregates interviews
allows involves
analyses joins
appends knows
approve leads
audits links to
authorizes locates
causes maintains
certifies makes
checks maintains
chooses manages
classifies maximises
completes measures
collaborates with merges
collates minimises
collects models
commissions monitors
communicates with occupies
compares operates
conducts owns
confirms participates in
constructs performs
consults plans
contacts populates
contains prepares
continues prioritises
controls procures
coordinates produces
decreases provides
delimits provides for
delivers pulls (specific to BIM knowledge exchanges)
demolishes pushes (specific to BIM knowledge exchanges)
demonstrates qualifies
deselects quantifies
designs questions
detects receives
describes recommends
develops regulates
discovers (as in BIM Assessment GLevel 1) rejects
divides replaces
discusses with requires
documents reviews
educates revises
empowers runs
establishes samples
estimates selects
exchanges shares
explodes (for CAD blocks/cells/families) simulates
evaluates starts
facilitates stops
federates supplies
PART III | APPENDIX A PAGE 257
Relation Relation
follows surveys
functions as tests
generates tracks
guides trains
has part transfer
has resource transmits
identifies understands
ignores updates
implements uses
increases validates
informs warns
initiates writes
integrates
Table 5. Knowledge Views (version 2)
Name Description Example
Knowledge A delimited self-contained view of multiple A training manual, a journal
Document concepts and their relations - irrespective of article, a CAD drawing, a web-
knowledge content format (text, images or page
graphs) or knowledge content medium
(hardcopy or softcopy)
Knowledge A structured view of concepts and their A concept map, repertory grid,
Model relations. Knowledge Models includes timeline, process map, concept
classifications, taxonomies, ontologies, models, map, flowchart, Gantt chart...
frameworks and theories. Knowledge Models
are not self-contained and are typically
represented within Knowledge Documents (as
a graph, list or matrix) embedded within
Knowledge Tools
Knowledge An interactive view of concepts and their A calculator, an online
Tool relations intended to assess, assist and educate assessment tool, a cad software…
its users. A tool has modifiable variables
leading to varied outputs based on inputs
Knowledge A repository of raw data, structured A web store, wiki, content
Store information and Knowledge Documents management system, database…
PART III | APPENDIX A PAGE 258
Revision history
The Revision Table below lists previous iterations and their change log:
V. Date Applies to Description
1.0 18 Oct ‘07 All Initial version prepared for Updated Research Proposal
1.1 8 Mar ‘08 Concepts Organizational Group becomes Organizational Unit – Description
broadened to include Markets, Industries, Disciplines and their sub-
parts
Modify description of Recommendation (added intent to generate
action)
Added Deliverables
Modified examples under Incentives (broadened)
Added Human Resources
Modified examples of Information Resources (added graphical and
non-graphical databases)
Modified Places to Locations (broader meaning – reverted to GTO’s
original term)
Modified description of Agents (included Organizational Champions
and renamed managerial consultant to Industrial Consultant)
Modified description of Social Phenomena (added innovation &
championship)
Modified Software Tools to Software Applications
1.2 26 Jul ‘08 Concepts Modified description of Social Phenomena (modified respectability,
trust worthiness, risk-tolerance, cultural values and added
leadership)
Attributes Modified description of Number (added monetary value)
1.3 10 Jul ‘11 Relations New relations added
Some relations modified or removed
Relations are presented through a two-column table to represent
both active and passive voices
Attributes Added Preposition, Relevance, Time, Cost and Location as new or
separate Attribute
Renamed Text to Description, Category to Type
Concepts Renamed Actors to Players
Added Agents
1.4 17 Nov ‘11 Views Added Knowledge Tools as a new view
Concepts Added Artefacts as a new concept
Relations Added and modified many relationships
1.5 24 Mar ’13 Introduction Modified introductory text
Versioning Changed version numbering from alphanumeric to numeric. V1A is
now V1.0…V1F is now V1.5
1.6 9 Jun ’13 Introduction Updated for submission as an appendix to the PhD thesis
Relations Removed passive voice
1.7 17 Jun ‘13 Introduction Minor text refinements
2.0 13 Dec ‘13 All A major ontological realignment with the BIM Framework
Concepts An overhaul of concepts to match the BIM Framework
Concepts are now referenced in singular tense
Links to Knowledge Models are added
Attributes Replaced Relevance with Grade
Replaced Number with Count
Added Grade, Order and State
Modified the description of all attributes – unified syntax
Views Merged Knowledge Matrix with Knowledge Document
Calibrated the description of all Knowledge Views
PART III | APPENDIX A PAGE 259
References
Cottam, H. (1999). Ontologies to Assist Process Oriented Knowledge Acquisition (Draft): SPEDE,
Rolls-Royce plc 1999 covered by SPEDE IPR agreement.
Gruber, T. R. (1995). Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge
sharing? International journal of human-computer studies, 43(5-6), 907-928.
Milton, N. R. (2007a). Knowledge Acquisition in Practice: A Step-by-step Guide: Springer,
London.
Milton, N. R. (2007b). Specification for the General Technological Ontology (GTO).
http://www.pcpack.co.uk/gto/notes/files/GTO%20Spec%20v4.doc
Noy, N. F., & McGuinness, D. L. (2001). Ontology Development 101: A Guide to Creating Your
First Ontology. http://www.lsi.upc.edu/~bejar/aia/aia-web/ontology101.pdf
Studer, R., Benjamins, V. R., & Fensel, D. (1998). Knowledge engineering: Principles and
methods. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 25(1-2), 161-197.
Succar, B. (2009). Building information modelling framework: A research and delivery
foundation for industry stakeholders. Automation in Construction, 18(3), 357-375.
Succar, B., Sher, W., & Aranda-Mena, G. (2007). A Proposed Framework to Investigate Building
Information Modelling Through Knowledge Elicitation and Visual Models. Paper
presented at the Australasian Universities Building Education (AUBEA2007),
Melbourne, Australia. http://aubea.org.au/ocs/viewpaper.php?id=15&cf=1
PART III | APPENDIX A PAGE 260
APPENDIX B
The BIM knowledge content taxonomy
Appendix B: BIM knowledge content taxonomy v2.2
Building Information Modelling: conceptual constructs and performance improvement tools
Introduction
The BIM knowledge content (BKC) taxonomy includes multiple classifications to organize
knowledge content within noteworthy BIM publications 1 (NBP)s and other knowledge
deliverables. BIM knowledge content refers to conceptual and procedural knowledge 2
usable by an individual, team or organization to conduct a relevant activity or deliver a
measureable outcome.
The taxonomy includes the following classifications:
• BIM Knowledge Content Clusters (BKCC) – three clusters and 18 labels, refer to section 1.1;
• BIM Knowledge Content Relevance (BKCR) – five relevance levels. refer to section 1.2;
• BIM Knowledge Content Publication Type (e.g. book, report, journal paper or web page);
• BIM Knowledge Content Issuer Type (e.g. government, commercial entity, industry
association or community of practice);
• BIM Knowledge Content Geographical Coverage (e.g. Australia, US, UK or EU);
• BIM Knowledge Content Format (e.g. to-do list, flowchart, matrix or mind map); and
• Other classifications based on metrics (e.g. reliability, currency, interactivity and impact)
Below is an exploration of the two classifications used in papers B1 and B2:
1
Noteworthy BIM publications (NBP)s refers to research by academia and efforts/initiatives by industry
which cover BIM concepts and workflows, and result in one or more publications which are widely
discussed, adopted or referenced.
2
BCT applies to documents which include data/information intended for human consumption and
application. BCT does not apply to data/information intended for machine use or machine learning.
Software ontologies and metadata are two examples of what does not qualify for listing within/through
the BCT.
PART III | APPENDIX B PAGE 261
BIM Knowledge Content Clusters
The BIM knowledge content clusters (BKCC) - the main classification within the BKC - is
an extension of the three BIM fields (refer to paper A2), one of the three main
components of the BIM framework. The BKCC includes numerous content labels (e.g.
report, plan or programme) that can be used to assess the knowledge content of
documents and other knowledge deliverables.
This classification has been used in paper B1 to assess noteworthy BIM publications
(NBP)s and distribute them – not according to their titles but - according to their
knowledge content. BKCC encourages an in-depth examination of NPBs’ contents by
“[shifting] the focus of perusal and interaction away from potentially uninformative
document surrogates (such as titles, sentence fragments and URLs) to actual document
content, and uses this content to drive the information seeking process” (White, Jose, &
Ruthven, 2005 - page 1).
The BIM Content Taxonomy includes eighteen content labels 3 (Table 1) organized under
three content clusters (Figure 1) – guides, protocols and mandates:
• Guides: documents which are descriptive and optional. Guides clarify goals, report on
surveys/accomplishments or simplify complex topics. Guides do not provide detailed steps
to follow to attain a goal or complete an activity.
• Protocols: documents which are prescriptive and optional. Protocols provide detailed steps
or conditions to reach a goal or deliver a measureable outcome. While documents within
this cluster are prescriptive, they are optional to follow unless dictated within a Mandate
(see next cluster).
• Mandates: documents which are prescriptive and dictated by an authority. Mandates
identify what should be delivered and – in some cases – how, when and by whom it should
be delivered.
3
BIM Content Labels are not mutually exclusive. A Noteworthy BIM Publication (NBP) may require three
or more labels to adequately describe its contents.
PART III | APPENDIX B PAGE 262
Figure 1. The BIM Content Taxonomy
Table 1. BIM Content Taxonomy
LABEL LABEL LABEL LABEL
CLUSTER CODE NAME DEFINITION - BIM SPECIFIC
Guides G1 Best Practice Operational methods arising from experience;
promoted as advantageous; and replicable by other
individuals, organizations and teams. This label applies
to publications which list unambiguous and detailed
recommendations, and which if applied as
recommended, generate similar advantageous
outcomes
G2 Case Study Summary and analysis (descriptive or explanatory) of
projects and organizational efforts. This label applies
to both research and industry publications which
share lessons learned by others, and cover BIM
deliverables, workflows, requirements, challenges and
opportunities
G3 Framework Theoretical structures explaining or simplifying
or Model complex aspects of the BIM domain by identifying
meaningful concepts and their relationships
G4 Guideline Compilation of several BIM content types with the aim
of providing guidance to individuals, teams or
organizations. Guides typically provide insight into a
complex topic (e.g. BIM Implementation Guide or
Facility Handover Guide). Guides typically focus on
knowledge-intensive topics, while Manuals (a
complementary label) focus on skill-intensive ones.
Due to the generic nature of this label, it should not be
applied in isolation but in conjunction with other
labels
PART III | APPENDIX B PAGE 263
LABEL LABEL LABEL LABEL
CLUSTER CODE NAME DEFINITION - BIM SPECIFIC
G5 Learning All types of analogue and digital media (e.g. printed
Module or manual or online videos) which deliver conceptual or
Material practical insight intended/suitable for education,
training or professional development within industry
or academia
G6 Report Compilation or summary of results arising from an
assessment, calculation or review process (e.g. BIM
capability report or profitability statement)
G7 Strategy or Articulation of vision, mission and long-term goals.
Vision This label applies to publications which identify a long-
term strategy (and possibly middle-term
goals/milestones) but without identifying the
resources required and detailed steps needed to fulfil
the strategy
G8 Taxonomy Classification covering roles, types, levels, elements
or and other structured concepts. This label applies to
Classificatio publications which introduce classifications of five or
n more items within a structured list; and which have a
clear use in assessment, learning or implementation
(e.g. construction elements, BIM roles, data exchange
types or levels of detail)
Protocols P1 Metric or Tools and criteria suitable for establishing levels of
Benchmark performance of systems, projects, individuals, teams,
organizations and other organizational units 4. This
label applies to publications which include tools or
explicit metrics/indicators for establishing usability,
profitability, productivity, competency, capability or
similar
P2 Manual A structured document which is intended to clarify the
steps needed to perform a measureable activity or
deliver a measureable outcome (e.g. BIM training
Manual). Manuals typically focus on skill-intensive
topics, while Guides (a complementary label) typically
focus on skill-intensive ones. Due to the generic
nature of this label, it should not be applied in
isolation but in conjunction with other labels
P3 Plan A document describing activities to be performed,
resources to be used and milestones to be reached
within a defined timeframe. This label applies to
publications describing – in adequate detail - how a
specific strategy can be fulfilled or a pre-defined goal
can be reached (e.g. a BIM Implementation Plan
detailing how to fulfil a BIM Capability Strategy)
P4 Procedure Structured information covering successive steps
or workflow needed to fulfil an operational, rather than strategic,
requirement. A documented Procedure includes the
small steps needed to deliver, if executed by a
competent individual, a pre-defined and desired
4
There are 12 organizational units, each with their own unique metrics (refer to Building Information
Modelling Maturity Matrix (Succar, 2010).
PART III | APPENDIX B PAGE 264
LABEL LABEL LABEL LABEL
CLUSTER CODE NAME DEFINITION - BIM SPECIFIC
outcome. A Workflow identifies major successive
activities to be performed and decision gates to pass-
through towards reaching a delivery milestone or
fulfilling a project/organizational objective
P5 Protocol or Agreed or customary method of product/service
Convention development or delivery which are not by themselves
contractually binding (e.g. keeping minutes of
meetings, how to name files and frequency of
exchanging models)
P6 Specification A set of criteria used to define or judge the quality of
or products (e.g. object dimensions or data richness) and
Prescription services (e.g. timeliness). Specifications may or may
not be a Standard (a separate label). COBie is an
example of BIM-related specifications which may
become a service/delivery standard over time
P7 Standard or Detailed set of product/service descriptions
Code (prescriptive or performance-based) acting as a
reference to be measured against. This label typically
denotes a set of specifications (a separate label) which
are authoritative and test-proven (e.g. barrier-free or
accessibility standards)
Mandates M1 Contract or Legally-binding document and its subparts – including
Agreement contractual additions, amendments and disclaimers.
This label applies to contracts and clauses, not to
publications describing or promoting them (e.g. the
label applies to AIA Documents E203, G201 and G202
but not to the AIA IPD guide)
M2 Programme A document associating one or more classification to
or Schedule time and/or location. For example, a BIM competency
improvement programme is a document linking BIM
competencies, BIM roles (and possibly other
classifications) to a timeline or target dates
M3 Requiremen Expectation or qualification mandated by clients,
t, Rule or regulatory authorities or similar parties. This label
Policy applies to publications with explicit identification of
requirements to be met (e.g. organizational capability
or previous experience) or products/services to be
delivered (e.g. a tender/bid document)
PART III | APPENDIX B PAGE 265
BIM Knowledge Content Relevance
The BIM knowledge content relevance (BKCR) is a classification that can be applied to
the knowledge deliverables (e.g. documents or publications) of organizational units. The
BKCR includes five relevance values (R-values):
• R0 - Redundant: the deliverable is dated or includes information which is no
longer useful
• R1 - Relevant: the deliverable is relevant, current and contains actionable
information
• R2 - Regarded: the deliverable is highly-relevant, well-cited and well-used
• R3 - Recommended: the deliverable is authoritative and impactful and
considered a reference
• R4 - Requisite: the deliverable is the most authoritative in its relevant domain
The BKCR classification has been used in paper B2 to assess noteworthy BIM publications
and test their contribution towards country-scale maturity.
Notes
As discussed in Paper B2 (Kassem, Succar, & Dawood, 2014), the BKC taxonomy provides
– in addition to organizing knowledge within NBPs - the traditional functions of indexing
support and retrieval support (Hedden, 2010). The BKC facilitates indexing support
through its controlled vocabulary which allows indexers to classify documents in a
consistent manner. Without a controlled vocabulary, multiple documents with the same
content may erroneously carry different headings. Indexers may also inadvertently use
synonyms for classifying similar documents (Hedden, 2010, p. 15).
Retrieval support is a direct consequence of indexing support (Hedden, 2010, p. 22) and
refers to the ability of a classification to facilitate searching and improve find-ability
within databases. The BKC taxonomy can be readily transformed into a facetted
classification with its labels (a content type facet) augmented with additional facets –
e.g. a content format facet, content relevance facet or issuer type facet. The BKC can
thus support both information retrieval and the faceted analysis (Kwasnik, 1999).
PART III | APPENDIX B PAGE 266
Version history
The Revision Table below lists previous iterations and their change log:
V. Date Applies to Description
1.0 2 Aug ‘11 All Initial version
1.1 21 Jan ‘12 Labels Content labels renamed
1.2 10 Jan ‘13 Definitions Minor changes to Summary Definitions
1.3 11 Feb ‘13 Introduction Text modified to enhance clarity of purpose
Labels Label syntax changed from plural to singular
1.4 16 Feb ‘13 Labels New more granular labels added
Hybrid labels introduced
Classifications Renamed ‘Other Classifications’ to ‘Complementary
Classifications’
1.5 11 Apr ‘13 Introduction Added quote
Included 2 images to explain how the taxonomy development
Labels Added three Content Label Sets
Removed ‘Assessment Tool’ to avoid overlap with Metrics
1.6 29 May ‘13 Title Renamed from BIM Content Taxonomy (BCT) to BIM
Knowledge Content (BKC) taxonomy to clarify the use of the
BIM Management Lens in generating all classifications
Classifications Added the ‘Relevance’ classification to be used in a CIB W78
conference paper (Kassem, Succar and Dawood, 2013)
Labels Modified labels to match updated naming of BIM fields
2.0 8 Jun ‘13 Introduction Updated for submission as an appendix to the PhD thesis
Classifications Reorganized all classifications
Provided text to discuss two main classifications (BKCC and
BKCR) and identified where they have been used
Removed ‘Authority’ as a separate classification type to avoid
overlaps with the ‘Mandates’ cluster within BKCC
2.1 18 Jun ‘13 Introduction Minor text refinements
2.2 19 Sep ‘13 New section Added a Notes section
References
Hedden, H. (2010). The accidental taxonomist (1st ed.). Medford, United States: Information Today.
Kassem, M., Succar, B., & Dawood, N. (2014). Building Information Modeling: Analyzing Noteworthy
Publications of Eight Countries Using a Knowledge Content Taxonomy In R. Issa & S. Olbina (Eds.), Building
Information Modeling: Applications and Practices in the AEC Industry. University of Miami: ASCE.
Kwasnik, B. (1999). The Role of Classification in Knowledge Representation and Discovery. Library Trends,
48(1), 22-47.
White, R. W., Jose, J. M., & Ruthven, I. (2005). Using top‐ranking sentences to facilitate effective information
access. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(10), 1113-1125.
PART III | APPENDIX B PAGE 267
APPENDIX C
Citations of published papers
Appendix C: citations of published papers v1.0
Building Information Modelling: conceptual constructs and performance improvement tools,
This appendix is a compilation of citations received for published papers submitted as part of
this study. Starting in 2008, citations were monitored 1 and recorded to provide insights into
what and how published papers, conceptual constructs and practicable tools have been
received by domain researchers. These citations contribute to the thesis’ validity argument
and will hopefully encourage other research students to adopt a thesis by publication strategy.
This compilation will be become outdated rapidly. However, it will serve as a benchmark to
compare future citation numbers and citation contents over a number of years. It will thus
facilitate the analysis of the study’s research impact, clarify if/which/how BIM framework
components have been adopted, and inform the development of new conceptual structures.
Table 1 provides a summary of citations received by type A papers 2, peer-reviewed articles
with the PhD candidate being the sole or primary author. Table 2 is a non-exhaustive list of
citing articles with a succinct analysis of how this study’s concepts and tools were cited:
Table 1. A summary of published papers and their total citations to date.
Code Paper title Reference Article Type Publication Citations
Year to date
A1 A Proposed Framework to (Succar, Sher, & Conference 2007 6
Investigate Building Information Aranda-Mena, paper
Modelling Through Knowledge 2007)
Elicitation and Visual Models
A2 Building information modelling (Succar, 2009) Journal paper 2009 192
framework: A research and
delivery foundation for industry
stakeholders
A3 Building Information Modelling (Succar, 2010a) Book chapter 2010 19
Maturity Matrix
A4 The Five Components of BIM (Succar, 2010b) Conference 2010 19
Performance Measurement paper
A5 Measuring BIM performance: (Succar, Sher, & Journal paper 2012 3
Five metrics Williams, 2012)
A6 An integrated approach to BIM (Succar, Sher, & Journal paper 2013 n/a
competency assessment, Williams, 2013)
acquisition and application
Total citations received by official submission date - June 30, 2013: 176
Total citations received by final thesis submission - December 14, 2013: 239
1
Citations of published works were mainly monitored using automatic citation alerts sent by SCOPUS
and Google Scholar. Some published works – which are not indexed by search engines - where
discovered during literature reviews conducted throughout this study.
2
Paper types B and C are excluded from this appendix. For more information about paper types, please
refer to section 9 of Part I.
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 268
Table 2. A succinct review of citing articles including the context in which the citation is provided
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
Paper A1: A Proposed Framework to Investigate…
1 Building Surveying: A Conference “In fact if we are to believe some of (Zillante,
Sustainable Profession Paper the claims that are being made by 2008)
or A Passing Fad? March 2008 the developers of the new Building
Information Modelling (BIM)
systems it will not be long before
we have a tool that allows for
digital documentation, digital take
offs and measurement linked to a
pricing and costing program with a
digital link to the BCA which will
enable the architects’ original
digital documentation to be
measured, costed and checked
against the provisions of the BCA at
the touch of a button or the click of
a computer mouse (Succar et al
2007).” p. 98
2 Building information Journal Paper Succar et al. (2007) defined BIM as (Aranda-
modelling demystified: March 2009 “a set of interacting policies, Mena,
does it make business processes and technologies Crawford,
sense to adopt BIM? producing a methodology to Chevez, &
manage the essential building Froese,
design and project data in digital 2009)
format throughout the building’s
life-cycle” – p. 421
3 Towards Integrated Journal Paper “The term building information (Rekola,
Design and Delivery November modelling is considered to include Kojima, &
Solutions: Pinpointed 2010 the process of exchanging Mäkeläinen,
Challenges of information and working on the 2010)
Process Change BIM(s) (Succar et al., 2007)” p. 264
4 An Ethnographically PhD Thesis “Succar et al. (2007) argued for the (Abdelmohs
Informed Analysis of October 2011 emerging and revolutionary role of en, 2011)
Design Intent BIM in practice, as it produces a
Communication in BIM- technological and procedural shift
enabled Architectural that affects all participants in the
Practice AEC industry. They also highlight
the interaction between processes,
technologies and policies that takes
place in BIM to generate a
consistent methodology that
manages design and project
information throughout a building
lifecycle. At the same time, they
point out the issues related to
semantics, meaning and
interpretation that result from the
engagement of multiple
participants in the process” p. 14
5 Building Information Conference Generic Citation (also references a (Patrick,
Modelling (BIM), Paper white paper by ChangeAgents) Munir, &
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 269
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
Utilised During the October 2012 Jeffrey,
Design and Construction 2012)
Phase of a Project has
the Potential to Create a
Valuable Asset in its
Own Right (‘BIMASSET’)
at Handover that in turn
Enhances the Value of
The Development
6 Architectural Technology Conference Model used without citation. The (Kouider &
and the BIM acronym: Paper BIM Nodes model, as used with Paterson,
Critical Perspectives of March 2013 permission and attribution by Mr 2013)
Evangelical and Sohail Razvi in an AECbytes
Evolutionary Paradigms blogpost, is not referred back to the
for Technical Design model’s author. “In a BIM business
model, Razvi (2008) noted that a
third technology node which
interlocks with the other two has
become critical to process
development (Fig. 1)” – page 124
Paper A2: Building information modelling framework…
1 Building Information Conference “Several efforts have been made by (Olatunji &
Modelling (BIM) System Paper some authors to provide Sher, 2009)
in Construction in 2020: January comprehensive definitions of
Opportunities and 2009 BIM”...“Guillermo Aranda-Mena,
Implications John Crawford et al. (2008) and
(Succar 2008) provide holistic
description of the trend of BIM
adoption and implementation in
different parts of the world”...
“However, efforts are on-going by
application developers, researchers
and policy makers to improve the
slow of BIM adoption and further
define business factors that are
inherent in BIM deployment” – pp.
2&5
2 Information Online “Hence, according to Succar (2009), (Persson,
management in Journal BIM can be regarded as a Malmgren,
industrial housing June methodology to manage product & Johnsson,
design and manufacture 2009 data throughout a building's life- 2009)
cycle consisting of a set of
interacting policies, processes and
technologies.” – p. 112
3 Empirical Analysis of PhD Thesis “Many powerful software systems (Tatari,
Construction Enterprise 02.07.09 are being utilized during the project 2009)
Information Systems: (available life cycle in the construction
Assessing the Critical online) environment. Yet, since insufficient
Factors and Benefits attention has been given to the
integration of these systems, an
islands of automation’ problem has
emerged. System integration, which
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 270
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
enhances “the value added in
whole network of shareholders
throughout the building lifecycle”
(Succar 2009), is necessary to avoid
this problem” p. 39
4 Model for developing PhD Thesis “Currently, BIM is characterized as (Zuppa,
trust in construction August 2009 a tool, process and/or product that 2009)
management develops virtual intelligent models
linked to other construction
management tools (i.e. schedule,
estimates) that promote
collaboration, visualization and
constructability reviews beneficial
to all stakeholders throughout the
lifecycle of the facility (Kymmell
2008; Succar 2009)” p. 117
5 Developing a Conference Minor misquote (Laakso,
multidisciplinary process Paper 2009)
view on IFC September
standardization 2009
6 Services in Digital Journal Paper “Succar’s extensive BIM definition (Penttila,
Design: new visions for Sep 2009 attempts to form a unified 2009)
AEC-field collaboration description of contemporary BIM
[16] (p. 465)... connecting also a
global socio-political issue of
modelling for long term building
design [16] (p. 468)... Policy issues
are crucially important in the
preliminary phases of a building
project planning, i.e. before the
project launch. This was well
addressed in the pre-interviews
performed in the early of this
research study. Also Succar claims
decision making and policy being
one constitutive field for building
information models [16] - p. 472.
7 Simulation and BIM For Conference “Recent developments in the (Tuohy,
Building Design, Paper buildings industry and the 2009)
Commissioning and 23.09.09 associated legislation are moving
Operation: a (available towards a more automated and
Comparison with The online) integrated approach. The
Microelectronics recognition of building simulation in
Industry recent legislation leading to more
widespread adoption as well as the
ongoing development and
increasing adoption of the Building
Information Management (BIM)
methodology (including adoption
by the US Army (Succor, 2009)) are
steps in this direction.” – p. 1539
8 A Study of the Conference “Interoperability – Succar (2009 (Davidson,
Deployment and Impact Paper p.363) defines interoperability as 2009)
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 271
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
of Building Information Oct 2009 ‘the ability of two or more systems
Modelling Software in or components to exchange
the Construction information and to use the
Industry information that has been
exchanged” – p. 4
9 Automated construction Conference One citation “Information which is (Mrkela &
schedule creation using Paper contained in BIM is usually Rebolj,
project information Oct 2009 aggregated. If we need specific 2009)
model information, we have to select it
and conceptually divide it based on
fields and stages and also through
the point of view, which is called
through lens. Depending on how
much information is included in
BIM, fields and stages can be sub-
divided according to the meaning of
the information (Succar B. 2009).”
10 Modelling sustainable Conference More consideration is being given (Toth,
and optimal solutions paper to whole of building lifecycle Fernando,
for building services Nov, 2009 considerations earlier on in the Salim,
integration in early design process, which is Drogemuller
architectural design: necessitating the embrace of , Burry,
confronting the integrated design policies, Burry, &
software and technologies and processes (Succar, Frazer,
professional 2009) 2009)
interoperability deficit
11 New Interfaces, new Conference No quote…referencing Succara (León &
scenarios. Vroom n.0: Paper Molina,
Vroom n.0: The Nov 2009 2009)
emerging potential of
collaborative 3D web
platforms
12 Research and Journal Paper No longer available online (Ji, Zhang,
development of high- (Chinese Yang, &
rise steel structural BIM Language) Chang,
software and its Nov 2009 2009)
application in Shanghai
Center Project
13 A CAD-Based Interface Book Chapter Generic citation (Lin, 2010)
Management System Jan 2010
using Building
Information Modelling
in Construction
14 Building Information Book Chapter “Succar (2009) proposed a BIM (Gerrard,
Modelling in the Jan 2010 framework which aims to provide a Zuo,
Australian Architecture, research and delivery foundation so Zillante, &
Engineering and that industry practitioners can have Skitmore,
Construction Industry a better understanding of 2010)
underlying knowledge structures
and from this are able to negotiate
implementation requirements. This
is a tri-axial model involving BIM
stages, BIM lenses and BIM fields.
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 272
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
The model also defined the
interactions between policy,
technology and process is
imperative for the implementation
of BIM in the AEC industry.” p. 524
15 Effective Capture, Conference Referenced in bibliography only (Shahrin,
Translating and paper Johansen,
Delivering Client Jan 2010 Lockley, &
Requirements Using Udeaja,
Building Information 2010)
Modelling (BIM)
Technology
16 The application of Book Chapter Generic citation (Olatunji &
Building Information Jan 2010 Sher,
Modelling in Facilities 2010b)
Management
17 Understanding adoption Journal Paper “…the actor network approach can (Linderoth,
and use of BIM as the Jan 2010 also be applied on the framework 2010)
creation of actor developed by Succar [45] in which
networks three interrelated and reinforcing
fields (each of them encompassing
a wide array of actors) are
identified in order to frame BIM
implementation.” p. 71
18 Value proposition of Journal Paper “Hence, it becomes necessary to (Grilo &
interoperability on BIM Jan 2010 understand the value level that BIM Jardim-
and collaborative and interoperability may bring to Goncalves,
working environments AEC players [47]” references Succur 2010)
[sic] - p. 527
19 Effective Capture, Workshop Referenced in bibliography but not (Shahrin et
Translating and Paper cited within text al., 2010)
Delivering Client Feb 2010
Requirements Using
Building Information
Modelling (BIM)
Technology
20 Meer begrip voor meer Master’s Extensive quotes (Idema,
grip - Greater Thesis 2010)
understanding of grip- Feb 2010
graduate research into
the use of virtual
construction by
construction companies
in the B & E sector to
obtain quantities
21 Fostering E-Services in Conference Extensive citations and use of (Reffat,
Architecture and Paper knowledge models 2010)
Construction Using the March 2010
Building Information
Model
22 Advantages And Master’s Multiple quotes and one visual (Lehtinen,
Disadvantages of Thesis knowledge model (modified) 2010)
Vertical Integration in May 2010
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 273
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
The Implementation of
Systemic Process
Innovations: Case
studies on implementing
building information
modelling (BIM) in the
Finnish construction
industry
23 Building Information Conference Many generic references plus one (Olatunji,
Modelling Processes: Paper inaccurate statement: “According Sher, Gu, &
Benefits for May 2010 to (Succar 2009), it is difficult to Ogunsemi,
Construction Industry effect, monitor and manage change 2010)
in the construction industry.”
24 Building Information Conference The ICMM limitation (a full page) (Haron,
Modelling: Literature Paper plus two images are Marshall-
Review on Model to May 2010 copied/referenced from the BIM Ponting, &
Determine the Level of Maturity Matrix Chapter. Aouad,
Uptake by Organisation 2010)
25 Implementation of Master’s of No quote, just listed in the (Luthra,
Building Information Science, bibliographic section 2010)
Modeling in Purdue
Architectural Firms in May, 2010
India
26 A review and outlook for Journal Paper Extensive quotes and a Figure (the (Cerovsek,
a ‘Building Information June, 2010 BIM Cube) influenced by some of 2011)
Model’ (BIM): A multi- the framework’s visual models.
standpoint framework
for technological
development
27 Developing incentives Conference A couple of citations plus using the (Oti &
for collaboration in the Paper June BIM Fields venn diagram (Figure 1, Tizani,
AEC Industry 2010 page 2 2010)
28 Research and Conference Inaccurate citation (Wong &
application of Building Paper “Current delivery methods include Yang, 2010)
Information Modelling June 2010 providing the facility manger with
(BIM) in the CAD documentation or creating a
Architecture, Record BIM (Succar 2009) but this is
Engineering and highly inadequate.” p. 7
Construction (AEC)
industry: a review and
direction for future
research
29 BIM - A Driver for Conference “Succar defines a series of (Watson,
Change Paper (increasingly integrated) stages in 2010)
June-July the deployment of BlM and notes
2010 that the associated changes at an
organisational and industrial level
will be transformational rather than
incremental (Succar, 2009)”…. “Just
how this will resolve itself is unclear
but, as Succar implies, some form
of IT based integrated project
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 274
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
delivery will be part of the
solution.” p. 6
30 Exploring the challenges Master’s Extensive quotes (Younas,
for the implementation Thesis 2010)
and adoption of BIM July,
2010
31 Closure to “Areas of Journal Paper Mistakenly refers to the framework (Hartmann,
Application for 3D and August, as advocating a single integrated Gao, &
4D Models on 2010 model: “In particular, our Fischer,
Construction Projects” experience with applying BIM in 2010)
practice does not support the
notion—put forth by the discusser
and others, e.g., Succar (2009)—
that one integrated information
model of a building can technically
support all practical data needs
throughout the life cycle of a
project” – p. 933
32 Assessing the Impact of Conference Multiple citation and an adaptation (Matipa,
New Rules of Cost Paper of the BIM Fields Venn diagram Cunningha
Planning on Building Sep 2010 m, & Naik,
Information Model 2010)
(BIM) Schema Pertinent
to Quantity Surveying
Practice
33 Application of Building Master’s A few quotations (Yiye, 2010)
Information Model Thesis
(BIM) in building Oct 2010
thermal comfort and
energy consumption
analysis
34 Enhancing Control of Conference Multiple quotes, two diagrams and (Oommen,
Built Assets through Paper one table have been adapted. 2010)
Computer Aided Design Oct 2010
- Past, Present and
Emerging Trends
35 KPIs: Analyzing the Conference Mistaken attribution to Fig.1 - a (Wei-zhuo &
impact of Building Paper visual knowledge model by Alan Guo-qiang,
Information Modeling October 2010 Edgar 2010)
on construction industry
in China
36 Model Interoperability Journal Paper “Building Information Modelling is (Steel,
in Building Information October 2010 an interdependent network of Drogemuller
Modelling policies, processes and , & Toth,
technologies [3]…” p. 2 2010)
37 Attributes of Building Journal Paper Extensive Use. The three BIM Fields (Wong,
Information Modelling November are used to structure the whole Wong, &
Implementations in 2010 paper. Nadeem,
Various Countries 2010)
38 BIM-based Scheduling of Conference “There are numerous explanations (Andersson
Construction: A Paper and definitions of Building &
Comparative Analysis of November Information Modeling, BIM, Büchmann-
Prevailing and BIM- 2010 available in literature, e.g. … a set Slorup,
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 275
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
based Scheduling of interacting policies, processes 2010)
Processes and technologies… (Succar 2009)…”
p. 3
39 Building Information Master Thesis A few general citations (Baba,
Modeling in Local December 2010)
Construction Industry 2010
40 Government roles in Journal Paper Cursory note as a general resource (Wong,
implementing building December Wong, &
information modelling 2010 Nadeem,
systems: Comparison 2011)
between Hong Kong and
the United States
41 'Using the Knowledge Conference “The development of curricula and (Coates,
Transfer Partnership Paper learning material very much Arayici, &
model as a method of December depends on a prediction of the Koskela,
transferring BIM and 2010 future. Using the BIM maturity 2010)
Lean process related index maybe one way of
knowledge between considering future development
academia and industry: (Succar, 2009).” p. 6
A Case Study Approach
42 BIM - the Next Step in Master’s Multiple use of definitions and (Winberg &
the Construction of Civil Thesis visual knowledge models Dahlqvist,
Structures 2010 2010)
43 Building information Journal Paper “A more comprehensive BIM (Jung & Joo,
modelling (BIM) 2010 perspective was recently proposed 2010)
framework for practical by Succar [40], encompassing far
implementation more variables than those
identified in CIC frameworks” – p.
127
44 Building Information Journal Paper Use of a Knowledge Model, “Some (Olatunji,
Modeling and 2010 common interpretations of BIM” – Sher, & Gu,
Quantity Surveying Figure 2, p. 69 2010a)
Practice
45 Industrialised Housing Master Thesis Several citations specifically related (Jansson,
Design Efficiency 2010 to BIM stages. One figure (BIM 2010)
Stages – linear model) used
46 Implementation of Conference Generic citation (Rowlinson,
Building Information Paper Collins,
Modeling (BIM) in 2010 Tuuli, & Jia,
Construction: A (possibly 2010)
Comparative Case Study submitted
Dec o9)
47 Modelling Outcomes of Book Chapter General references within the (Olatunji,
Collaboration in Building 2010 article Sher, & Gu,
Information 2010b)
Modelling Through
Gaming Theory Lenses
48 Legal Implications of Conference “To address this (Succar 2009) (Olatunji &
BIM: Model Ownership Paper suggests that BIM adoption and Sher, 2010a)
and Other Matters 2010 implementation frameworks must
Arising be comprehensive and objective,
involving all stakeholders – the
industry, government and
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 276
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
research” –
p. 460
49 Optimizing BIM Master’s Adaptation of the BIM Stages – (Mulenga &
Adoption and Mindset Thesis reference not included in Han, 2010)
Change - Emphasize on 2010 bibliography list although it is
a Construction Company mentioned within the body of the
thesis
50 The Impact of Building Conference “According to (Succar 2009), the (Olatunji,
Information Modelling Paper applications of BIM transcend Sher, &
on Construction Cost 2010 discipline or institutional Ogunsemi,
Estimation boundaries, and its definitions are 2010)
being tailored to multidisciplinary
concepts” –
p. 195
51 Using BIM as a Project Master’s Multiple citations and images (Broquetas,
Management Tool - How Thesis 2011)
can BIM improve the January 2011
delivery of Complex
Construction Projects?
52 Design Error Reduction: Journal paper Multiple generic references. The (Love,
Toward the Effective March 2011 BIM definition developed through Edwards,
Utilization of Building the framework is mistakenly Han, & Goh,
Information Modeling attributed to Penttila 2011)
53 A review and outlook for Journal Paper Multiple citations and an (Tomo,
a ‘Building Information April 2011 acknowledgement of assistance 2011)
Model’ (BIM): A multi-
standpoint framework
for technological
development
54 Analysis of the Conference Multiple citations and the use of (Godager,
Information Needs for Paper the Venn Diagram image (BIM 2011)
Existing Buildings for May 2011 Fields)
Integration in Modern
BIM-Based Building
Information
Management
55 A Preliminary Review on Journal Paper “To address this (Succar, 2009) (Olatunji,
the Legal Implications of May 2011 suggests that BIM adoption and 2011b)
BIM and Model implementation frameworks must
Ownership be comprehensive and objective,
involving all stakeholders – the
industry, government and
research” p. 693
56 Knowledge and Conference One quote: “BIM can provide the (Arayici,
Technology Transfer Paper required valued judgments that Coates,
from Universities to May 2011 create more sustainable Koskela, &
Industries: A Case Study infrastructures, which satisfy their Kagioglou,
Approach from the Built owners and occupants (Succar, 2011)
Environment Field 2009)” p. 6
57 Modelling Journal Paper Inaccurate citation: “This research (Olatunji,
Organizations’ Structural May 2011 was conducted in Australia. Some 2011a)
Adjustment to BIM authors have reported that BIM
Adoption: a Pilot Study adoption in Australia is still slow
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 277
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
on Estimating (e.g. (London et al., 2008, Succar,
Organizations 2009))” p. 660
58 The 3D Coordinated Journal Paper A couple of quotations plus a use of (Lv, Zou,
Building Design Based May, 2011 one image “Building Information Huang, &
on Building Information Models and their objects — flow Xu, 2011)
Modeling diagram” p. 6588, Fig. 1
59 BIM facilitated web Conference Several citations…The authors (Wu, 2011)
service for LEED Paper adapted the BIM Stages model to a
automation June 2011 BIM-LEED process integration road
map.
60 Research Project Cost Journal paper “Building Information Modelling (Kovacic,
Benefits of Integrated June 2011 (BIM) is a set of interacting policies, Filzmoser,
Planning: First processes and technologies Faatz, &
experiment-results generating a “methodology to Koeszegi,
manage the essential building 2011)
design and project data in digital
format throughout the building’s
life-cycle” (Succar, 2009).” p. 258
61 The BIM-Based Conference “Although many researchers and (Feng,
Information Integration Paper organizations have developed Mustaklem,
Sphere for Construction June 29, 2011 guidelines and frameworks for BIM & Chen,
Projects adoption into the AEC industry 2011)
[1,2], outlining the added value
benefit of BIM to the industry as a
whole (and not as a desperate set
of technologies), and even though
these researches have contributed
to this field of study, they still lack
in developing an information model
to effectively map different BIM
processes and stakeholders, and
integrate the information resulting
from the various data exchanges
and interaction between them.” p.
156
62 Enhancing Maintenance Conference One citation: “Succar (2009) (Su, Lee, &
Management Using Paper explored publicly available Lin, 2011)
Building Information June-July international guidelines and
Modeling In Facilities 2011 introduced the BIM framework, a
Management research and delivery foundation
for industry stakeholders” pp. 753-4
63 Creation of an Evolutive Conference Generic citation (Iordanova,
Conceptual Know-how Paper Forgues, &
Framework for July 2011 Chiocchio,
Integrative Building 2011)
Design
64 How to Measure the Master’s Multiple citations (Barlish,
Benefits of BIM, a Case Thesis 2011)
Study Approach August 2011
65 Empirical Analysis of Journal Paper One citation: “System integration, (Tatari &
Construction Enterprise September which enhances “the value added in Skibniewski,
Information Systems: 2011 whole network of shareholders 2011)
Assessing System throughout the building lifecycle”
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 278
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
Integration, Critical (Succar 2009), is necessary to avoid
Factors, and Benefits this problem”.
66 Integrating BIM and Conference “Succar (2009) gave a deeper (John &
Planning Software for Paper description for BIM as he defined it Ganah,
Health and Safety Site September as a set of interacting polices, 2011)
Induction 2011 process and technologies
generating a methodology to
manage the key building design
information in a digital format
throughout the building life-cycle”.
67 Digital Buildings - Journal Paper “Succar defines a series of (Watson,
Challenges and October, 2011 (increasingly integrated) stages in 2011)
Opportunities the deployment of BIM and notes
that the associated changes at an
organisational and industrial level
will be transformational rather than
incremental.”
68 A Framework for Conference Minor citation
Building Information Paper (Bogen,
Fusion October 2011 Rashid, &
East, 2011)
69 Beyond MOF Conference One citation (Duddy &
Constraints - Multiple Paper Kiegeland,
Constraint Set Meta October 2011 2011)
modelling for Lifecycle
Management
70 BIM Versus PLM: Risks Conference BIM is “the process of creating and (Otter, Pels,
and Benefits Paper using digital models for design, & Iliescu,
October 2011 construction and/or operations of 2011)
projects” according to [Succar,
2009],
71 CloudBIM: Management Conference “A building information model at
of BIM Data in a Cloud Paper the very simplest level can be (Bogen et
Computing Environment October 2011 viewed as the complete collection al., 2011)
of information about a building,
offering a phaseless workflow
(Succar 2009)”. BIM data is
accessed and manipulated by
utilising certain “tools of enquiry”,
such as “lenses” and “filters”;
lenses highlight certain objects that
meet a particular criteria (e.g.
photovoltaic) whilst filters remove
objects that do not meet the
criteria (Succar 2009)”.
72 A Domain Specific Journal Paper Attribution (citation only loosely (Şenyapılı &
Software Model for November refers to what is wrote within the Bozdağ,
Interior Architectural 2011 BIM Framework): 2012)
Education and Practice “The general-purpose software are
chosen due to their wide spread
use and long existence in the
market, as well as their varied
utilization in 2D drawing, 3D
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 279
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
modeling and building information
modeling (BIM) [4,19].”
73 On Decision-Making and Conference Multiple citations of 2 papers (Mom, Tsai,
Technology- Paper & Hsieh,
Implementing Factors Nov 2011 2011)
for BIM Adoption
74 BIM Adoption in Iceland Master’s Extended citation of BIM Stages (Kjartansdót
and Its Relation to Lean Thesis plus the usage of three images: BIM tir, 2011)
Construction December as MIB, Project Lifecycle Phases
2011 liner model and BIM Maturity
Stage.
75 Validation of Autodesk Conference General reference only – no citation (Vangimalla,
Ecotect™ Accuracy for paper Olbina, Issa,
Thermal And Daylighting December & Hinze,
Simulations 2011 2011)
76 Process-and project- Doctoral “Succar (2009) defined BIM as an (Zerjav,
level issues of design Thesis integrated concept consisting 2012)
management in the built processes, policies and technology”
environment p. 69 (disagrees with the definition)
77 Building Information Journal Paper “In response to the increase in BIM- (Ilozor &
Modeling and January 2012 related research, Succar (2009) Kelly, 2012)
Integrated Project developed a research framework
Delivery in the to: systematize knowledge;
Commercial advance awareness and
Construction Industry: A implementation; recast BIM as an
Conceptual Study integrated solution; and connect
the gap that exists between the
understandings of BIM by those in
academia and their counterparts in
active practice (p. 358). Refer to Fig.
2 for a depiction of Succar’s (2009)
framework, which represents the
interplay of BIM fields (players and
deliverables), stages
(implementation maturity) and
lenses (“knowledge views”). Succar
(2009) argues that IPD should be
the desired endpoint of all BIM
implementations, concurring with
the AIA (2007) and Froese’s (2010)
analysis, stating that, “…the long
term vision of BIM [is that of] an
amalgamation of domain
technologies, processes and
policies” P. 25
Tri-axial Framework image reused
78 Building Information Master’s Two figures and extensive citations (Ren, 2011)
Modeling Integrated Thesis covering BIM Fields, Capability and
with Electronic February Maturity
Commerce Material 2012
Procurement and
Supplier Performance
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 280
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
Management System
79 Expanding uses of Journal Paper Two citations: (Hannele,
building information February “BIM is connected usually to more Reijo, Tarja,
modeling in life-cycle 2012 integrated collaborative processes Sami, Jenni,
construction projects also when it comes to contractual & Teija,
relationships (in a mature form 2012)
realized
in “Integrated Project Delivery”)”
“A most “mature” use of BIM is
seen to involve collaboratively
created, shared, and maintained
models across project lifecycle
[11].”
80 Using building Journal Paper “[BIM] is an emerging technological (Shrivasta &
information modeling to February and procedural shift within the Chini, 2012)
assess the initial 2012 Architect [sic], Engineering,
embodied energy of a Construction (AEC) and Operations
building industry (Succar, 2009).” p. 4
81 Epistemology of Journal Paper “…life cycle and temporal contexts, (El-Diraby,
Construction Informatics March 2012 the evolving nature of data and 2012)
their use with time, is becoming an
integral part in any recent BIM
strategy (see for example…Succar
2009…)
82 How to measure the Journal Paper General citation (Barlish &
benefits of BIM — A (based on Sullivan,
case study approach Master’s 2012)
Thesis
referenced
above
March 2012
83 Building Information Journal Paper General citation (Sattineni &
Modeling: Trends in the April 2012 Bradford,
US Construction 2012)
Industry
84 User-centric knowledge Journal Paper General citation (Lee &
representations based April 2012 Jeong,
on ontology for AEC (online) 2012)
design collaboration
85 User perceptions of ICT Journal Paper General citation (Jacobsson
impacts in Swedish April 2012 & Linderoth,
construction companies: 2012)
‘it’s fine, just as it is’
86 Why advanced buildings Conference Two citations “The BIM initiative (Tuohy &
don’t work? Paper may provide a framework within Murphy,
April 2012 which improved processes could be 2012)
integrated (Succar, 2009)””
Processes to address the
performance gaps identified here
do not yet appear to be defined or
even a focus within the current BIM
roadmap (Succar, 2009, BIS, 2012).
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 281
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
87 A Framework for an Conference “The level of maturity as to the (Forgues,
Integrated and Paper adoption of new methods of work Iordanova,
Evolutionary Body of May 2012 and new technologies can be & Chiocchio,
Knowledge measured through a maturity 2012)
matrix. Succar (Succar, 2008)
recently proposed a framework for
BIM, including process, technology
and policy aspects. On this same
basis, he also developed a maturity
matrix for BIM adoption.”
88 Generic Model for Journal Paper One citation ‘Building information (Lu, Peng,
Measuring Benefits of May 2012 modeling is argued to be a useful Shen, & Li,
BIM as a Learning Tool tool for reducing the construction 2013)
in Construction Tasks industry’s
fragmentation, improving its
efficiency/effectiveness, and
lowering the high costs of
inadequate interoperability (Succar
2009)’’
89 Toward Performance Conference Extensive referencing of three (Mom &
Assessment of BIM Paper articles: The BIM Framework, The Hsieh,
Technology June 2012 BIM Maturity Matrix and The Five 2012b)
Implementation Components of BIM Performance
Measurement (most citations are
from the BIM Maturity Matrix)
90 Toward performance Conference Multiple citations of 3 papers (Mom &
assessment of BIM Paper Hsieh,
technology Jun 2012 2012a)
implementation
91 Authorization Journal Paper General Citation (Skandhaku
Framework using July 2012 mar, Reid,
Building Information Dawson,
Models Drogemuller
, & Salim,
2012)
92 A Knowledge-Based Technical General citation (Kim,
Framework for Report Rajagopal,
Automated Space-Use July 2012 Fischer, &
Analysis Kam, 2012)
93 BREEAM Based Dynamic Conference One citation “Building information (Kasim, LI, &
Sustainable Building Paper modelling is becoming an Rezgui,
Design Assessment July 2012 indispensable tool for providing 2012)
integrated solutions to the current
AEC (Succar 2009)”.
94 Mobile 2D Conference “Succar (2009) explored publicly (Lin, Su, &
Barcode/BIM-based Paper available international guidelines Chen, 2012)
Facilities Maintaining July 2012 and introduced the BIM framework,
Management System a research and delivery foundation
for industry stakeholders”
95 Using a BIM maturity Conference Extensive number of citations (Shih, Sher,
matrix to inform the Paper & Williams,
development of AEC July 2012 2012)
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 282
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
integrated curricula
96 Cloud-based framework Journal Paper Unknown – no access to Journal (Qinghua,
for the implementation July 2012 (Chinese portal) Haitao,
of BIM Yongkui, &
Lili, 2012)
97 An Integrated BIM PhD Thesis Single citation “Ontology has also (Lucas,
Framework to Support August 2012 been used for defining formal 2012)
Facility Management in relationships and capture
Healthcare techniques and methodologies in
Environments BIM development (Succar, 2009).”
98 An Activity Theoretical Book Chapter One quote (Miettinen,
Approach to BIM- (103) Kerosuo,
research Aug 2012 Korpela,
Mäki, &
Paavola,
2012)
99 A Utilization Approach Book Chapter Multiple citations and detailed (Jadhav &
of BIM for Integrated (71) quotations covering BIM Fields and Koutamanis,
Design Process Aug 2012 BIM Stages 2012)
100 BIM: In Search of the Journal Paper “We posit that this technology – (Forgues &
Organisational Architect August 2012 and the Lejeune,
final copy new related processes and policies 2013)
(Succar, 2009)”…” Succar (2009)
identifies three levels of supply
chain transformation, moving from
automating the BIM process within
each firm, to breaking boundaries
between firms, first through
collaboration, then through
integration.”… “Model deliverables
extend beyond semantic object
properties to include business
intelligence, lean construction
principles, green policies and
whole-‐lifecycle costing.” (Succar,
2009: 365)”
101 BIM Cube and Systems- Book Chapter Multiple citations including “One of (Cerovsek,
of-Systems Framework (55) the most prominent and also 2012)
August 2012 inspiring for the BIM Cube was
developed by Succar (2009), who
developed a holistic multi-
dimensional framework that is
represented by a tri-axial
knowledge model comprising of:
BIM Fields of activity identifying
domain ‘players’ and their
‘deliverables’. These fields are
represented on the x-axis, BIM
Stages delineating implementation
maturity levels (y-axis) and BIM
Lenses providing the depth and
breadth of enquiry necessary to
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 283
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
identify, assess and qualify BIM
Fields and BIM Stages (z-axis)”
102 BIM Practices and Book Chapter One citation “One well known (Mäkeläinen
Challenges Framed – an (65) framework illustrates the BIM , Hyvärinen,
Approach to Systemic Aug 2012 approach as a tri-axial-model of & Peura,
Change Management BIM Stages, BIM Lenses and BIM 2012)
Fields together with three
interlocking fields of BIM Activities:
policy field, process field and
technology field. The aim for these
frameworks has been to enable the
stakeholders to understand
underlying knowledge structures
and negotiate BIM implementing
requirements (Succar 2009)”
103 BIM Technologies and Book Chapter One generic citation (Paavola,
Collaboration in a Life- (113) Kerosuo,
cycle Project Aug 2012 Mäki,
Korpela, &
Miettinen,
2012)
104 Design and Software Book Chapter One citation although it may be (Baumgärtel
Architecture of a Cloud- (2) inaccurately referencing the BIM ,
based Virtual Energy Aug 2012 ontology (assumed to be a schema Katranuschk
Laboratory for Energy- not a conceptual ontology) ov, &
efficient Design and Life Scherer,
Cycle Simulation 2012)
105 Integrated Collaborative Book Chapter One generic citation (Jadhav &
Approach to Managing (69) Koutamanis,
Building Information Aug 2012 2012)
Modeling Projects
106 Transportation System Book Chapter One generic citation (Szpytko,
Architecture for (96) 2009)
Intelligent Management Aug 2012
107 BIM and Online Conference One generic citation (Charalamb
Collaboration Paper ous,
Platforms–An Sep 2012 Demian,
investigation into Yeomans,
emerging requirements Thorpe,
Peters, &
Doughty,
2012)
108 BIM Implementation Conference A few citations and quotations (Ahmad,
Plans: a Comparative Paper Demain, &
Analysis Sep 2012 Price, 2012)
109 Design of flexible and Conference One generic citation (Krystallis,
adaptable healthcare Paper Demian, &
buildings of the future-a Sep 2012 Price, 2012)
BIM approach
110 A Framework for Conference Several citations (including one for (Dib, Chen,
Measuring Building Paper BIM Thinkspace) and comparisons & Cox,
Information Modeling Oct 2012 with other ‘BIM maturity’ 2012)
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 284
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
Maturity Based on frameworks. “Succar’s BIMMI
Perception of offered a comprehensive
Practitioners and framework based on a
Academics Outside the comparatively exhaustive review of
USA previous research effort, however,
areas for information management
are kind of weak” – p. 246
111 Boundaries Matter – Book Chapter Not known – no access to paper (Lehtinen,
The Pros and Cons of October 2012 2012)
Vertical Integration in
BIM Implementation
112 A Research Review on Journal Paper “A framework designed to assess (Merschbro
Building Information December construction firms’ readiness for ck &
Modeling in 2012 BIM adoption in terms of IT Munkvold,
Construction―An competence and experience is 2012a)
presented by Succar [2009]” – p.
Area Ripe for IS
217
Research
113 Information Integration Journal Paper Unknown – article is in Chinese, (Ball, Gui,
and Collaborative Dec 2012 citation discovered through Google Peng, & Hu,
Computation For Scholar alerts 2012)
Complex Structural
Model
114 Roadmap for Journal Paper This paper is based on the (Khosrowsh
implementation of BIM Dec 2012 structures introduced in the ahi &
in the UK construction framework “The overarching Arayici,
industry methodology is based on the use of 2012)
maturity concept using the Succar
(2009) framework” – p. 613
115 Building information Conference Citation listing the Benefits of BIM (Clements &
modeling como Paper as identified within the BIM Cachadinha,
ferramenta de December Framework paper 2012)
visualização de 2012
realidade aumentada
em obras de
reabilitação–um caso de
estudo
116 BIM nas obras públicas Conference Extensive citations of BIM stages (Taborda,
em Portugal: Paper including the use of one visual 2012)
Condicionantes para December model
uma implementação 2012
com sucesso
117 Towards Understanding Journal Paper No access to article, requested (Ayyaz,
BPR Needs for BIM 2012 from author Ruikar, &
Implementation Emmitt,
2012)
118 Adaptable buildings: A Journal Paper One citation (Gosling,
systems approach 2012 Sassi, Naim,
& Lark,
2012)
119 Aligning Building Journal Paper “Researchers (see for example Ref. (Hartmann,
Information Model 2012 [13]) have since long advocated van
Tools and Construction that one of the main advantages of Meerveld,
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 285
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
Management Methods the implementation of BIM based Vossebeld,
tools is the global improvement of &
all project processes for all Adriaanse,
organizations that work together on 2012)
one construction project. Focusing
on a number of business processes
of one single organization within a
project context might actually
hinder the full leverage of all
benefits on such a global project
level.”
120 Application of Model Master’s “Emerged in academic terms similar (Do
Supported Collaboration Thesis to nD Modelling and Integrated Nascimento,
In Information 2012 Design Systems, which changed its 2012)
Technology for terminology to BIM in order to
Construction Projects In agree with the market reality
The City Of São José Dos (Succar, 2009)” – p. 86, translated
Pinhais from Portuguese using Google
Translate
121 A Research Review on Journal Paper “A framework designed to assess (Merschbro
Building Information (revision, final construction firms’ readiness for ck &
Modeling in version not BIM adoption in terms of IT Munkvold,
Construction―An Area available) competence and experience is 2012b)
Ripe for IS Research 2012 presented by Succar [2009]”
122 BIM for Facilitation of Report One generic citation (Amirebrahi
Land Administration Section mi, 2012)
Systems in Australia 2012
123 Course Outline, Masters Course Article used as a ‘basic bibliographic (PPU, 2012)
of Project Management Outline 2012 reference’ for the course
124 Development of Model- Master’s One generic citation (Paukkeri,
based Process for Thesis 2012)
Navigation Dredging 2012
125 Extension of Building Master’s One citation – paper is in Chinese (Lin, 2012)
Information Model for Thesis
Disaster Mitigation: 2012
Using the Revit Platform
126 Integration in the Journal Paper One generic citation (Kamara,
project development 2012 2012)
process of a Private
Finance Initiative (PFI)
project
127 Physical Access Control Book Section One generic citation (Skandhaku
Administration Using 2012 mar, Salim,
Building Information Reid, &
Models Dawson,
2012)
128 Towards Coordinated Generic citations (Lavikka,
BIM based Design and Smeds, &
Construction Process Smeds,
2012)
129 Utilisation of Building Master’s A couple of citations plus one graph (Häkkinen,
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 286
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
Information Models in Thesis (in Finnish) 2012)
Production Organisation 2012
of Foundation
Engineering
130 Expanding uses of Journal paper Two citations covering the (Hannele et
building information 2012 definition or a ‘mature use of BIM’ al., 2012)
modeling in life-cycle on pages 115 and 119
construction projects,
131 A WebGL application Master’s “In other word, it is a way to (Ferreira,
based on BIM IFC Thesis digitally store and organise all the 2012)
2012 policies, processes, technologies,
designs and projects concerning the
life cycle of a building (Succar
2009)” p. 34
132 Building Information Bachelor Extensive citation of several papers (Garvin,
Modeling (BIM) Thesis and industry publications 2012)
Performance Assessment 2012
Framework for
Organisations in the
Singapore Construction
Industry
133 Building information Journal Paper “The findings from the (Per Anker
modelling in Denmark January 2013 questionnaire surveys presented in & Elvar Ingi,
and Iceland this paper could be used as 2013)
benchmarks in such re-evaluations.
It could also be interesting to relate
the findings to frameworks for BIM
maturity as presented for instance
by Succar (2009).
134 Building Information Journal Paper “However, at present, public sector (Porwal &
Modeling (BIM) January 2013 is not ready with respect to the Hewage,
partnering framework product, process, and people to 2013)
for public construction position BIM adoption to the level
projects of IPD [26]”
“A coordinated BIM-Partnering
framework for the design
procurement is proposed with the
following interrelated objectives:
….To provide a computational
framework [26]”?!
135 Reinforcement Journal Paper General citation…”Engineering, (Cho, Lee, &
Placement in a Concrete February Construction, and Operations Bae, 2013)
Slab Object Using 2013 (AECO) industry (Succar, 2009) and
Structural Building can save time and cost and improve
Information Modeling quality throughout the building’s
life cycle. BIM integrates the
knowledge of AEC industries and
academic research efforts using
information technology (IT) and
computer hardware”
136 A research towards Master’s A number of citations plus a (De Vries,
completing the asset Thesis referenced adaptation of one visual 2013)
information life cycle March 2013 knowledge model
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 287
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
137 BIM implementation in Master’s References the three components (Parreira,
organizational processes Thesis of the BIM Framework (in 2013)
in construction March 2013 Portuguese) –
companies - a case (in p. 16
study Portuguese)
138 Performance Journal Paper “Ontology within BIM development (Sarhan &
measurement in the UK March 2013 has also been used to define formal Fox, 2013)
construction industry relationships between elements
and its role in (Succar, 2009)” – p. 78
supporting the
application of lean
construction concepts
139 The Integration of PhD Thesis Two generic citations plus an (Hetheringt
Architectural Design and March 2013 inaccurate quote “Succar (2009) on, 2013)
Energy Modelling describes BIM as a catalyst for
Software change, predicted to reduce
fragmentation in the AEC industry
and improve
efficiency/effectiveness” – p. 127
140 Changing building user Journal Paper Generic citation (Gulliver,
attitude and April 2013 Grzybek,
organisational policy Radosavljevi
towards sustainable c, & Wiafe,
resource use in 2013)
healthcare
141 Cloud Computing for the Journal Paper Used as a reference only. No inline (Beach,
Architecture, April 2013 citations Rana,
Engineering & Rezgui,
Construction Sector: Parashar, &
Requirements, Cardiff,
Prototype & Experience 2013)
142 Decision Making and Bachelor Generic citation within a footnote – (Hanlon,
Design Cognition in the Thesis p. 33 2013)
age of Building April 2013
Information Models
143 Implementing BIM Conference “Building Information Modeling (Martin-
techniques for energy Paper is defined broadly as being “a set of Dorta,
analysis: a case study of April 2013 interacting policies, processes Assef,
buildings at university of technologies generating Cantero, &
la Laguna a methodology to manage the Rufino,
essential building design and 2013)
project data in digital format
throughout the building’s life-cycle”
(PENTTILÄ, 2006; SUCCAR, 2009)” -
page 61
144 A Governance Approach Journal Paper Three citations. However, the (Rezgui,
for BIM Management April 2013 authors have misunderstood the Beach, &
across Lifecycle and essence of BIM Lenses and Filters Rana, 2013)
Supply Chains Using and applied these to model views.
Mixed-Modes of The paper adopts 2 of 3 capability
Information Delivery stages as bases for its governance
model yet modifies/expands their
connotations in a useful/usable
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 288
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
manner.
145 A pilot model for a proof Journal paper “Ontology within BIM development (Lucas,
of concept healthcare May 2013 has also been used to define formal Bulbul, &
facility information relationships between elements Thabet,
management prototype (Succar, 2009)” – p. 78 2013)
146 BIM-supported planning Conference Generic citations – also cites the (Kovacic,
process for sustainable Paper Five Components paper Oberwinter,
buildings–Process May 2013 & Müller,
Simulation and 2013)
Evaluation through
Exploratory Research
147 Utilizing Building May 2013 Generic Citation (Nagy,
Information Models 2013)
with Mobile Augmented
Reality and Location-
Based Services
148 A Knowledge-Based Journal Paper “Frameworks have been developed (Kim,
Framework for June 2013 and used in the construction Rajagopal,
Automated Space-Use industry either to view domain Fischer, &
Analysis knowledge in an organized way [4– Kam, 2013)
6] or to implement a novel method
and facilitate its use [7–9]”- p. 166
149 Analysis of BIM Journal Paper “Succar (2009) pointed out three (Zhang, Tan,
application relationship June 2013 levels for ID of BIM application – & Zhang,
with integration degree function application of single 2013)
of construction model, cooperative work of model-
environment based and integrated application of
life-cycle construction process.” – p.
93
150 A Practice oriented BIM Conference Several citations. The framework is (Kassem,
framework and paper used as a base to conduct data Iqbal, &
workflows June 2013 collection to develop another Dawood,
framework 2013)
151 A survey on modeling Journal Paper A generic citation (Monteiro &
guidelines for quantity Available Poças
takeoff-oriented BIM- online June Martins,
based design 2013 2013)
152 Customer interactive Journal Paper Generic citation (Lee & Ha)
building information Available
modeling for apartment online
unit design June 2013
153 From justification to Journal Paper Generic citation (Love,
evaluation: Building Available Simpson,
information modeling online Hill, &
for asset owners June 2013 Standing,
2013)
154 Building Information Master’s Extensive use of BIM fields and (Majcherek,
Modelling in the Thesis stages with adaptation of 2 visual 2013)
business of architecture: June 2013 knowledge models
Case of Sweden
155 Enhancing team Conference “Succar (2009), Philp (2012) and (Hossain,
integration in Building Paper June other authors (Eastman et al., 2011) Munns, &
Information Modelling 2013 agreed that implementation of BIM Rahman,
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 289
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
(BIM) projects. involves fundamental change in the 2013)
working procedure in the project
delivery process; which is a cultural
shift, the key challenge” p.81
156 Building Information Conference “There are many (Succar, 2009, (Vernikos,
Modelling and offsite Paper June Sacks et al 2010) that believe BIM Goodier, &
construction In civil 2013 improves communication indirectly Gibb, 2013)
engineering through its 3-D elements and
visualisations, effectively
communicating information on r
spatial, logistical and material
requirements” p.3
157 O ensino de BIM no Journal Article Multiple citations with a focus on (Ruschel,
Brasil: onde estamos? June 2013 BIM Stages (as relevant to BIM Andrade, &
(The teaching of BIM in education) Morais,
Brazil where are we) 2013)
158 Comparative Conference One citation of BIM term definition (Kulasekar
Effectiveness of Paper June a,
Quantity Surveying in a 2013
Building Information
Jayasena,
Modelling &
Implementation Ranadewa
, 2013)
159 Identification of a Conference Two citations, one indirect (Gunaseka
Technological Paper June quotation ra &
Framework for 2013
Implementing Building
Jayasena,
Information Modelling 2013)
In Sri Lanka
160 Assessing the BIM Conference Extensive citations and 1 model. A (Jayasena &
Maturity in a BIM Infant Paper June discussion of BIM stages and Bew- Weddikkara
Industry 2013 Richards BIM levels. , 2013)
161 Facilitating meaningful Conference Generic citation (Harty &
collaboration in Paper June Laing, 2013)
architectural design 2013
through the adoption of
BIM (Building
Information Modelling)
162 Factors affecting the Conference One citation – BIM definition (Panuwatwa
current diffusion of BIM: Paper July nich &
a qualitative study of 2013 Peansupap,
online professional 2013)
network
163 BIM implementation: Conference Extensive citations of BIM stages (Sackey,
from capability maturity Paper July including an adaptation of a visual Tuuli, &
models to 2013 knowledge model. First paper to Dainty,
implementation strategy adopt the viDCO term. Also 2013)
references the Five Components
paper
164 Beyond sharing: Journal Paper Generic citation (Miller,
cultivating cooperative July 2013 2013)
transportation systems
through geographic
information science
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 290
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
165 Characteristics of Green Book Chapter No access to chapter – citation (Gandhi &
BIM: Process and July 2013 discovered through Google Scholar Jupp, 2013)
Information alerts
Management
Requirements
166 Incomplete BIM Book Chapter No access to chapter – citation (Jupp, 2013)
Implementation: July 2013 discovered through Google Scholar
Exploring Challenges alerts
and the Role of Product
Lifecycle Management
Functions
167 Developing a Building Book Chapter No access to chapter – citation (Love et al.,
Information Modelling July 2013 discovered through Google Scholar 2013)
Educational Framework alerts
for the Tertiary Sector in
New Zealand
168 Sustainable Construction Conference Unknown – no access to content (He, Wang,
Project Life-Cycle Paper yet & Liu, 2014)
Management Based on August 2013
Building Information
Modeling
169 Development of Building Conference Generic citation (Shih &
Information Modelling Paper Sher, 2014)
Enabled Code Checking August 2013
Systems for Australia
170 Organisational readiness PhD Thesis Multiple citations (Haron,
to implement building August 2013 2013)
information modelling:
A framework for design
consultants in Malaysia
171 Exploring the adoption Journal Paper Generic and inaccurate citation (Zahrizan,
of Building Information August 2013 “The United Kingdom (UK), the Ali, Haron,
Modelling (BIM) in the United States of America (USA), Marshall-
Malaysian construction Singapore, Hong Kong, Australia Ponting, &
industry- a qualitative and Denmark have established a Abd, 2013)
approach policy whereby public construction
projects are required to use BIM
[34] and [16].” – page 392
172 Plumes: Towards a Conference One citation “The BIM (Robert,
unified approach to Paper August covers an extensive range of assets Delinchant,
building physical 2013 (Succar, 2009)” – page 2831 Hilaire, &
modeling Tanguy,
2013)
173 Construction Industry Journal Paper No citation, just a reference in the (Kalinichuk
Products Diversification September bibliography & Tomek,
by Implementation of 2013 2013)
BIM
174 The project benefits of Journal Paper Three citations, mainly about BIM (Bryde,
Building Information October 2013 term definition…One quote “It has Broquetas,
Modelling (BIM) been defined as “a set of & Volm,
interacting policies, processes and 2013)
technologies generating a
methodology to manage the
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 291
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
essential building design and
project data in digital format
throughout the building's life-cycle”
(Succar, 2009: 357)
175 Applications of GIS- Journal Paper No access yet (Sergi & Li,
Enhanced Networks of October 2013 2014)
Engineering Information
176 A semiotic analysis of Journal Paper “Contrary to this conceptualization (Hartmann)
user interfaces of Available of computer systems as semiotic
building information Online Sep knowledge encoding devices,
model systems 2013 researchers usually characterize BI
software as systems to support the
seamless information exchange
between applications (Succar,
2009). These scholars have
acknowledge the support of
communication activities between
different participants involved in a
design and construction project as
one of the main benefits that BI
systems offer (Tomo and
Cerovsek, 2011; Succar, 2009).” –
page 5
177 Enhancing Knowledge Journal Paper General citation of the BIM (Ho, Tserng,
Sharing Management September Framework and the Five Metrics & Jan, 2013)
Using BIM Approach in 2013 articles
Construction
178 Application of Journal Paper Unknown – no access to content (Gan & Luo,
Earthquake Resistance September yet 2013)
Analysis Technique in 2013
the Design of
Constructional
Engineering
179 Lessons From Using BIM Journal Paper Inaccurate citation “Therefore, (Luth,
to Increase Design- September there have been numerous case Schorer, &
Construction Integration 2013 studies identifying the benefits, and Turkan,
testing the capabilities and 2013)
limitations of BIM (Barlish and
Sullivan 2012; Sacks and Barack,
2008; Succar, 2009).” – page 4
180 "BIM & cloud" Journal Paper Unknown – no access to content (Xiaobo,
management system Sep 2013 yet 2013)
security research In Chinese
181 Novas demandas para as Journal Paper Two citations including “Succar (De Paula,
empresas de projeto de Sep 2013 (2009) defines the stages of Uechi, &
edifícios (New demands evolution of the implementation of Melhado,
for building design firms) BIM and points to be worked for 2013)
evolution to occur from one stage
to another. The volume and
complexity of the changes
identified in the BIM stage, both
organizational and industrial, are
transformational and cannot be
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 292
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
implemented without an
incremental evolution (Succar,
2009).” – page 139 as translated
from Portuguese using Google
Translate
182 A distributed virtual Conference Generic citation (Zhou, Tah,
reality application Paper & Heesom,
framework for Oct 2013 2013)
collaborative
construction planning
using BIMserver
183 High-Performance Licentiate Generic citation (Ren, 2013)
Building Design and Thesis
Decision-Making Oct 2013
Support for Architects in
the Early Design Phases
184 Construction waste PhD Thesis Two inaccurate citations “However, (Porwal,
management at source: a Nov 2013 at present, the public sector is not 2013)
Building Information ready to accept BIM at the level of
Modeling based system IPD (Succar et al., 2009)” – page 25,
dynamic approach and “To provide a computational
framework (Succar, 2009) that can
be developed and implemented as
an interactive computational BIM-
Partnering design management tool
to assist BIM managers and similar
roles” – page 144.
185 Early Implementation of Journal Paper Two citations “Penttila, (2006) (Barrett,
Building Information Nov 2013 appreciates that BIM is more than a Spillane, &
Modeling into a Cold- 3D CAD system that creates a Lim, 2013)
Formed Steel Company: building’s geometrical data, but a
Providing Novel Project methodology, essential to manage
Management Techniques the project data in a digital format
and Solutions to Industry throughout the building’s lifecycle,
this may be through interacting
policies, processes and
technologies [22]” – page 166. The
other citation is more generic and
refers to how BIM encourages
waste reduction – page 170
186 Early Implementation of Conference “Penttila, (2006) appreciates that (Barett,
BIM into a Cold-Formed Paper BIM is more than a 3D CAD system Treacy,
Steel Design/ Fabricator Nov 2013 that creates a building’s O'Reilly,
and an geometrical data, but a Spillane,
Architectural/Planning methodology essential to manage Lim, von
Consultancy the project data in a digital format Meding,
throughout the building’s lifecycle Geary,
through interacting policies, Deary, &
processes and technologies (Succar, Booth,
2009)” 2013)
187 Green BIM and Green Conference Generic Citation (Ghandi &
Star certification Paper Jupp, 2013)
practices: Case studies in Nov 2013
commercial high-rise
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 293
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
office design.
188 Successfully Conference “Not only do a wide range of (Ryan,
implementing building Paper definitions of BIM exist but, as Miller, &
information modelling in Nov 2013 Succar (2009) presents, completely Wilkinson,
New Zealand: different terms are used all with the 2013)
maintaining the intent of describing BIM.”
relevance of contract
forms and procurement
models
189 Governance Model for Journal Paper One citation “It has also become (Thomas,
Cloud Computing in November accepted that BIM should present 2013)
Building Information 2013 the complete model of the
Management (accepted for building as a “phaseless” workflow
publication) [37]” – page 3
190 BIM implementation Journal Paper One generic citation: “From BIM (Eadie,
throughout the UK December stage 2 individual disciplinary BIM Browne,
construction project 2013 models within each discipline Odeyinka,
lifecycle: an analysis provided separately may be McKeown,
supplied at commissioning and & McNiff,
handover [55].” – page 146 2013)
191 Contractor practices for Journal Paper Inaccurate citation “Succar (2009) (Pala, Edum-
managing extended December showed that adoption of Fotwe,
supply chain tiers 2013 technologies such as BIM is limited Ruikar,
as they are being evolved and have Doughty, &
not reached to a maturity stage” – Peters,
page 10 (of early cite document) 2014)
192 BIM Feasibility Study For Journal Paper Generic citation (Kim & Park,
Housing Refurbishment December 2013)
Projects In The UK. 2013
Paper A3: Building Information Modelling Maturity Matrix
1 Building Information Conference The ICMM limitation (a full page) (Haron et
Modelling: Literature Paper plus two images are al., 2010)
Review on Model to May 2010 copied/referenced from the BIM
Determine the Level of Maturity Matrix Chapter.
Uptake by Organisation
2 Challenges to Conference “We sought to define three levels (Manzione,
implementation of paper of maturity of BIM implementation Abaurre,
collaborative design August 2010 in companies from the model Melhado, &
process: analysis of (Succar, 2009) with reductions and Owen,
human factor simplifications. 2011)
We understand that the full use of
the model (Succar, 2009) can only
be made from a sectoral approach
in the AEC and a broad spectrum of
respondents. According to the
Brazilian reality the adoption of this
model will require refinements and
the introduction of other sub-levels
of granularity before stage 1 as
defined by the researcher.”
translated from Portuguese p.
3 Tool for Benchmarking Journal Paper Extensive quotes yet arguing the (Sebastian
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 294
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
BIM Performance of November BIM Maturity Matrix can measure & Van Berlo,
Design, Engineering and 2010 only organizational BIM and not the 2010)
Construction Firms in Product Model itself.
the Netherlands
4 Building Information Master Thesis A few general citations (Baba,
Modeling in Local December 2010)
Construction Industry 2010
5 Design Process PhD Thesis “While I did not add BIM maturity (Senescu,
Communication June 2011 to my assessments of 2011)
Methodology communication and complexity, I
am confident that I could have used
an assessment method such as the
BIM Maturity Matrix (Succar 2010)
to demonstrate that the
effectiveness of product
communication increased with
increased usage of BIM”
6 Benefits and ROI of BIM Undergraduat Heavily based on the BIM Maturity (Qian, 2012)
for Multi-Disciplinary e Report Index, Maturity Matrix and Scoring
Project Management March 2012 System. Survey developed based on
the above and data then collected
from industry.
7 Quality and Maturity of Conference Extensive citations (Giel & Issa,
BIM Implementation Paper 2012)
within the AECO June 2012
Industry
8 Toward Performance Conference Extensive referencing of the (Mom &
Assessment of BIM Paper previous work in three articles: The Hsieh,
Technology June 2012 BIM Framework, The BIM Maturity 2012b)
Implementation Matrix and The Five Components of
BIM Performance Measurement
(most citations are from the BIM
Maturity Matrix)
9 Using a BIM maturity Conference Extensive number of citations. The (Shih et al.,
matrix to inform the Paper BIM Maturity Matrix is used as a 2012)
development of AEC July 2012 basis for assessing two case studies.
integrated curricula
10 A Framework for Conference Extensive citations – more than 20 (Chen, Dib,
Measuring Building Paper from the BIM Maturity Matrix and 1 & Cox,
Information Modeling October 2012 from BIM ThinkSpace 2012)
Maturity in Construction
Projects
11 Construction Innovation Book “Frameworks for measuring BIM (Akintoye,
and Process 2012 maturity can greatly facilitate Goulding, &
Improvement organisations in positioning Zawdie,
themselves against their 2012)
Competitors in terms of
technological, methodological and
process maturity.
Such a maturity framework is
explained in Succar (201 0), where a
five-
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 295
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
level BIM-specific maturity index is
developed to measure the BIM
maturity of organisations” (p. 400)
12 Dictionary of Dictionary 8 dictionary terms are derived from (Khosrowpo
Information Science and 2012 the chapter: BIM Capability Stages, ur, 2012)
Technology BIM Competency Sets, and BIM
Fields, BIM Lenses, BIM Maturity
Index (BIMMI), BIM Maturity
Matrix, BIM Organizational Scales,
and BIM Step – pp. 85 and 86
13 Building Information Bachelor Extensive citation of several papers (Garvin,
Modeling (BIM) Thesis and industry publications 2012)
Performance Assessment 2012
Framework for
Organisations in the
Singapore Construction
Industry
14 Contemporary PhD Thesis One extensive citation of BIM (Farias,
Strategies for May 2013 nodes and stages – also references 2013)
Sustainable Design BIM Thinkspace episode 9
15 Synthesis of Existing BIM Conference Basic comparison of BIM maturity (Giel & Issa,
Maturity Toolsets to Paper tools 2013)
Evaluate Building June 2013
Owners’ BIM
Competency
16 Systems Engineering as Book Chapter No access yet – citation detected (Pels, Beek,
a First Step to Effective July 2013 through Google Scholar & Otter,
Use of BIM 2013)
17 Proposition for a PhD Thesis Three models and a number of (Manzione,
Collaborative Design citations with a focus on BIM Stages 2013)
Process Management and their effect on project lifecycle
Conceptual Structure phases
using BIM
18 Organisational readiness PhD Thesis Multiple citations (Haron,
to implement building August 2013 2013)
information modelling:
A framework for design
consultants in Malaysia
19 Research on Structure Journal Paper Unknown – journal not available. (Guo, 2013)
Model of Building September Citation reference appearing
Information Modeling 2013 through Google email alerts
Technology
Paper A4: The Five Components of BIM Performance Measurement
1 Open Information Web page “InPro generated the necessary (INPRO,
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 296
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
Environment for October 2010 knowledge to facilitate the 2010)
Knowledge-Based construction industry to take a
Collaborative Processes significant step to progress with
throughout the Lifecycle BIM (refer to the implementation
of a Building – What is stages as described by Succar
Inpro (Succar, B. (2010) The Five
Components of BIM Performance
Measurement, in: Proceedings of
CIB World Congress, Salford, UK).”
- section 2
2 Tool for Benchmarking Journal Paper Extensive quotes yet arguing that (Sebastian
BIM Performance of November the BIM Maturity Matrix can & Van Berlo,
Design, Engineering and 2010 measure only organizational BIM 2010)
Construction Firms in and not the Product Model itself
the Netherlands
3 Optimizing BIM Master’s Several citations (Mulenga &
Adoption and Mindset Thesis Han, 2010)
Change - Emphasize on 2010
a Construction Company
4 How to Measure the Master’s Several citations and direct quotes (Barlish,
Benefits of BIM, a Case Thesis 2011)
Study Approach August 2011
5 BIM in Different Conference “These criteria were based on the (Sebastian,
Methods of Project paper main aspects of the BIM 2011)
Delivery October 2011 performance measurement tools
used in The Netherlands and in the
USA (Sebastian and Van Berlo 2010;
Succar 2010)” p. 6
6 BIM – Adding Value By Conference General citation (Macdonald,
Assisting Collaboration Paper 2011)
October 2011
7 On Decision-Making and Conference Multiple citations (Mom et al.,
Technology- Paper 2011)
Implementing Factors Nov 2011
for BIM Adoption
8 Building Information Master’s Two figures and extensive citations (Ren, 2011)
Modeling Integrated Thesis covering BIM Fields, Capability and
with Electronic February Maturity
Commerce Material 2012
Procurement and
Supplier Performance
Management System
9 How to measure the Journal Paper Multiple citations and 1 figure (Barlish &
benefits of BIM — A (based on Sullivan,
case study approach Master’s 2012)
Thesis)
March 2012
10 BIM at Small Master’s “The questions asked were based (Leeuwis,
Architectural Firms Thesis on the topics of the BIM Maturity 2012)
April 2012 Index by Succar (2010) and the BIM
Quick Scan of TNO (Sebastian and
van Berlo 2010)”
11 Toward performance Conference Multiple citations of 3 papers (Mom &
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 297
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
assessment of BIM Paper Hsieh,
technology Jun 2012 2012a)
implementation
12 Toward Performance Conference Extensive referencing of previous (Mom &
Assessment of BIM Paper work in the BIM Framework, The Hsieh,
Technology June 2012 BIM Maturity Matrix and The Five 2012b)
Implementation Components (most citations are
from the BIM Maturity Matrix)
13 BIM-Supported Conference Generic citation (Kovacic &
Lifecycle-oriented paper Oberwinter,
Design for Energy June-July 2012)
Efficient Industrial 2012
Facility - a Case Study
14 Using a BIM maturity Conference Extensive number of citations (Shih et al.,
matrix to inform the Paper 2012)
development of AEC July 2012
integrated curricula
15 BIM Anatomy An Master’s References the use of DCO, closely (Hooper,
investigation into Thesis adapts Project Lifecycle Phases 2012)
implementation August 2012 without attribution. Copies an
prerequisites image from Episode 14 on
BIMThinkSpace.com (with
attribution) but without listing it in
the bibliography
16 Building Information Bachelor Extensive citation of several papers (Garvin,
Modeling (BIM) Thesis and industry publications 2012)
Performance Assessment 2012
Framework for
Organisations in the
Singapore Construction
Industry
17 BIM-supported planning Conference Generic citations – also cites the (Kovacic et
process for sustainable Paper BIM Framework paper al., 2013)
buildings–Process May 2013
Simulation and
Evaluation through
Exploratory Research
18 Interdisciplinary, BIM- Conference Two inaccurate citations “In this (Oberwinter
supported planning Paper context BIM addresses primarily , Kovacic,
process July 2013 the process of model‐building Müller,
and information exchange Kiesel,
Skoruppa, &
(Succar 2010)” and “Rather the
Mahdavi,
design process itself needs to be 2013)
organized (Succar 2010, Penttilä
2008)” – pages 2 & 3
19 BIM implementation: Conference Extensive citations of BIM stages (Sackey et
from capability maturity Paper July including an adaptation of a visual al., 2013)
models to 2013 knowledge model. First paper to
implementation strategy adopt the viDCO term. Also
references the BIM Framework
Paper A5: Measuring BIM performance: Five metrics
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 298
Publication title Type/Date Context Reference
1 Using a BIM maturity Conference Extensive number of citations (Shih et al.,
matrix to inform the Paper 2012)
development of AEC July 2012
integrated curricula
2 Improving Conference Used BIM Stages (pre-BIM, Stage 1 (Merschbro
Interorganizational Paper and Stage 2) for assessing the ck &
Design Practices in the June 2013 capability of research subjects. Munkvold,
Wood‐based Building Sample citation: “From the 2013)
Industry discussion emerged that the
organizations working in the wood-
based building industry can be
roughly classified into three levels
of ‘BIM capability’ (Succar, 2012)” –
p. 482
3 Enhancing Knowledge Journal Paper General citation of the BIM (Ho et al.,
Sharing Management September Framework and the Five Metrics 2013)
Using BIM Approach in 2013 articles
Construction
Paper A6: An integrated approach to competency…
Published online June
20, 2013…no citations to
date
Paper B1: Building Information Modeling: analyzing noteworthy publications…
To be published in
February 2014
Paper B2: A proposed approach to comparing the BIM maturity of countries
Published October 12,
2013…no citations to
date
Paper C: BIM in Practice – BIM Education
1 Exploring BIM-based Conference Extensive quotations…The paper is (Suwal,
education perspectives Paper partially based on the BIM in Jäväjä,
Nov 2013 Practice – BIM Education set of Rahman, &
papers. Gonzalez,
2013)
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 299
Bibliography
Abdelmohsen, S. M. A. (2011). An Ethnographically Informed Analysis of Design Intent
Communication in BIM-enabled Architectural Practice. (PhD Doctor of Philosophy),
Georgia Institute of Technology. Retrieved from
https://smartech.gatech.edu/bitstream/handle/1853/41181/abdelmohsen_sherif_m_
201108_phd.pdf
Ahmad, M. A., Demain, P., & Price, A. D. F. (2012). BIM Implementation Plans: a Comparative
Analysis. Paper presented at the Association of Researchers in Construction
Management (ARCOM) 28th Annual Conference, Edinburgh, UK.
http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-docs/proceedings/ar2012-0033-
0042_Ahmad_Demian_Price.pdf
Akintoye, A., Goulding, J., & Zawdie, G. (2012). Construction Innovation and Process
Improvement (First ed.). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Amirebrahimi, S. (2012). BIM for Facilitation of Land Administration Systems in Australia. In A.
Rajabifard, I. Williamson & M. Kalantari (Eds.), A National Infrastructure for Managing
Land Information, a Research Snapshot (pp. 95-99).
Andersson, N., & Büchmann-Slorup, R. (2010, 16-18 November, 2010). BIM-based Scheduling
of Construction: A Comparative Analysis of Prevailing and BIM-based Scheduling
Processes. Paper presented at the Applications Of IT In The AEC Industry: Proceeding
Of The 27th International Conference - CIB W78 2010, Cairo, Egypt.
Aranda-Mena, G., Crawford, J., Chevez, A., & Froese, T. (2009). Building information modelling
demystified: does it make business sense to adopt BIM? International Journal of
Managing Projects in Business, 2(3), 419-434. doi: 10.1108/17538370910971063
Arayici, Y., Coates, P., Koskela, L., & Kagioglou, M. (2011). Knowledge and Technology Transfer
from Universities to Industries: A Case Study Approach from the Built Environment
Field. Paper presented at the International Higher Education Congress: New Trends
and Issues, Istanbul, Turkey.
http://usir.salford.ac.uk/15876/2/Knowledge_and_Technology_Transfer_from_Univer
sities_to_Industries_A_Case_Study_Approach_from_the_Built_Environment_Field.pdf
Ayyaz, M., Ruikar, K., & Emmitt, S. (2012). Towards Understanding BPR Needs for BIM
Implementation (pp. 18-28): IGI Global.
Baba, H. D. (2010). Building Information Modeling in Local Construction Industry. (Master's of
Science), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Nahru. Retrieved from
http://eprints.utm.my/15311/1/HammadDaboBabaMFKA2010.pdf
Ball, L. Z., Gui, L. Y., Peng, L., & Hu, Q. (2012). Complex structural model information
integration and collaborative computing. Industrial Construction, 42(10).
Barett, S., Treacy, M., O'Reilly, B., Spillane, J., Lim, J., von Meding, J., Geary, K., Deary, N., &
Booth, G. (2013). Early Implementation of BIM into a Cold-Formed Steel Design/
Fabricator and an Architectural/Planning Consultancy. Paper presented at the 38th
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 300
Australasian University Building Educators Association (AUBEA) Conference, Auckland,
New Zealand.
Barlish, K. (2011). How to Measure the Benefits of BIM, a Case Study Approach. (Master of
Science), Arizona State University. Retrieved from
http://repository.asu.edu/attachments/57013/content/Barlish_asu_0010N_10983.pdf
Barlish, K., & Sullivan, K. (2012). How to measure the benefits of BIM — A case study approach.
Automation in Construction, 24(0), 149-159. doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2012.02.008
Barrett, S. A., Spillane, J. P., & Lim, J. B. (2013). Early Implementation of Building Information
Modeling into a Cold-Formed Steel Company: Providing Novel Project Management
Techniques and Solutions to Industry. American Journal of Civil Engineering and
Architecture, 1(6), 164-173.
Baumgärtel, K., Katranuschkov, P., & Scherer, R. (2012). Design and Software Architecture of a
Cloud-based Virtual Energy Laboratory for Energy-efficient Design and Life Cycle
Simulation eWork and eBusiness in Architecture, Engineering and Construction (pp. 9-
16): CRC Press.
Beach, T. H., Rana, O. F., Rezgui, Y., Parashar, M., & Cardiff, U. (2013). Cloud Computing for the
Architecture, Engineering & Construction Sector: Requirements, Prototype &
Experience. Journal of Cloud Computing: Advances, Systems and Applications, 2(1), 8.
Bogen, C., Rashid, M., & East, W. (2011). A Framework for Building Information Fusion. Paper
presented at the ICT for a Low Carbon Economy, Building Data Models, Proceedings of
the 2nd Workshop organised by the EEB Data Models Community CIB Conference
W078-W012, Sophia Antipolis, France. http://2011-cibw078-
w102.cstb.fr/papers/Paper-66.pdf
Broquetas, M. (2011). Using BIM as a Project Management Tool - How can BIM improve the
delivery of Complex Construction Projects? (Master Degree Master's Thesis), HFT
Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany. (x)
Bryde, D., Broquetas, M., & Volm, J. M. (2013). The project benefits of Building Information
Modelling (BIM). International Journal of Project Management, 31(7), 971-980. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.12.001
Cerovsek, T. (2011). A review and outlook for a ‘Building Information Model’(BIM): A multi-
standpoint framework for technological development. Advanced Engineering
Informatics, 25(2), 224-244.
Cerovsek, T. (2012). BIM cube and systems-of-systems framework eWork and eBusiness in
Architecture, Engineering and Construction (pp. 421-428): CRC Press.
Charalambous, G., Demian, P., Yeomans, S., Thorpe, T., Peters, C., & Doughty, N. (2012). BIM
and Online Collaboration Platforms–An investigation into emerging requirements.
Paper presented at the Engineering, Project and Production Management (EPPM
2012), 3rd International Conference, University of Brighton, UK.
http://www.ppml.url.tw/EPPM/conferences/2012/downioad/SESSON3_A/04%20E147
.pdf
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 301
Chen, Y., Dib, H., & Cox, R. F. (2012). A Framework for Measuring Building Information
Modeling Maturity in Construction Projects. Paper presented at the 29th International
Conference on Applications of IT in the AEC Industry - CIB W078, Beirut Lebanon.
Cho, Y. S., Lee, S. I., & Bae, J. S. (2013). Reinforcement Placement in a Concrete Slab Object
Using Structural Building Information Modeling. Computer-Aided Civil and
Infrastructure Engineering. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8667.2012.00794.x
Clements, J., & Cachadinha, N. (2012). Building information modeling como ferramenta de
visualização de realidade aumentada em obras de reabilitação–um caso de estudo.
Paper presented at the Building Congress, 2012, Coimbra, Portugal.
http://hdl.handle.net/10362/10013
Coates, P., Arayici, Y., & Koskela, L. (2010). Using the Knowledge Transfer Partnership model as
a method of transferring BIM and Lean process related knowledge between academia
and industry: A Case Study Approach. Paper presented at the International Conference
of Ecobuild America: Sustainable, High Performance & Technology Solutions for Built
Environment, Washington DC, USA. http://usir.salford.ac.uk/12890/
Davidson, A. R. (2009). A Study of the Deployment and Impact of Building Information
Modelling Software in the Construction Industry. e-Engineering: a journal of research
papers written by undergraduate students in the Faculty of Engineering, the University
of Leeds(1).
De Paula, N., Uechi, M. E., & Melhado, S. B. (2013). Novas demandas para as empresas de
projeto de edifícios (New demands for building design firms). Ambiente Construído,
13(3), 137-159.
De Vries, L. (2013). A research towards completing the asset information life cycle. (Master's of
Science in Geographical Information Management and Applications), TU Delft, The
Netherlands. Retrieved from http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/student-theses/2013-
0425-200627/Thesis%20report.pdf
Dib, H., Chen, Y., & Cox, R. (2012, 17-19 October 2012). A Framework for Measuring Building
Information Modeling Maturity Based on Perception of Practitioners and Academics
Outside the USA. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the CIB W78 2012: 29th
International Conference, Beirut, Lebanon.
Do Nascimento, E. L. (2012). Application of Model Supported Collaboration In Information
Technology for Construction Projects In The City Of São José Dos Pinhais (translated
title from Portuguese). (Masters in Civil Construction Maters), Universidade Federal do
Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil. Retrieved from
http://www.prppg.ufpr.br/ppgcc/sites/www.prppg.ufpr.br.ppgcc/files/dissertacoes/d
0178.pdf
Duddy, K., & Kiegeland, J. (2011). Beyond MOF Constraints - Multiple Constraint Set Meta
modelling for Lifecycle Management. Paper presented at the ACM/IEEE 14th
International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems,
Wellington, New Zealand.
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 302
Eadie, R., Browne, M., Odeyinka, H., McKeown, C., & McNiff, S. (2013). BIM implementation
throughout the UK construction project lifecycle: An analysis. Automation in
Construction, 36(0), 145-151. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.09.001
El-Diraby, T. E. (2012). Epistemology of Construction Informatics. Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, 138(1), 53-65.
Farias, F. (2013). Contemporary Strategies for Sustainable Design. (PhD Doctor of Philosophy),
Texas A&M University, Texas, United States. Retrieved from
http://repository.tamu.edu/handle/1969.1/149379
Feng, C.-W., Mustaklem, O., & Chen, Y.-J. (2011). The BIM-Based Information Integration
Sphere for Construction Projects. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 28th
International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC 2011),
Seoul, Korea. http://www.iaarc.org/publications/fulltext/S04-6.pdf
Ferreira, N. B. T. (2012). A WebGL application based on BIM IFC. (Master's in Information
Engineering), Universidade Fernando Pessoa. Retrieved from
http://bdigital.ufp.pt/bitstream/10284/3712/1/A%20WebGL%20Application%20Based
%20on%20BIM%20IFC%20-%20Nelson%20Ferreira%2019004.pdf
Forgues, D., Iordanova, I., & Chiocchio, F. (2012). A Framework for an Integrated and
Evolutionary Body of Knowledge. Paper presented at the Construction Research
Congress, ASCE 2012, Indiana. USA.
http://rebar.ecn.purdue.edu/crc2012/papers/pdfs/-275.pdf
Forgues, D., & Lejeune, A. (2013). BIM: In Search of the Organisational Architect. International
Journal of Project Organisation and Management, 0(0).
Gan, C., & Luo, X. S. (2013). Application of Earthquake Resistance Analysis Technique in the
Design of Constructional Engineering. Advanced Materials Research, 756-759, 4482-
4486.
Gandhi, S., & Jupp, J. (2013). Characteristics of Green BIM: Process and Information
Management Requirements. In A. Bernard, L. Rivest & D. Dutta (Eds.), Product Lifecycle
Management for Society (Vol. 409, pp. 596-605): Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Garvin, G. J. (2012). Building Information Modeling (BIM) Performance Assessment Framework
for Organisations in the Singapore Construction Industry. (Bachelor of Science - Project
and Facilities Management Bachelor of Science), National University of Singapore.
(U086761Y)
Gerrard, A., Zuo, J., Zillante, G., & Skitmore, M. (2010). Building Information Modelling in the
Australian Architecture, Engineering and Construction Industry. In J. Underwood & U.
Isikdag (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Building Information Modelling and
Construction Informatics: Concepts and Technologies (pp. 521-544): Information
Science Reference, IGI Publishing.
Ghandi, S., & Jupp, J. R. (2013). Green BIM and Green Star certification practices: Case studies
in commercial high-rise office design. Paper presented at the 38th Australasian
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 303
University Building Educators Association (AUBEA) Conference, Auckland, New
Zealand.
Giel, B., & Issa, R. R. A. (2012). Quality and Maturity of BIM Implementation within the AECO
Industry. Paper presented at the 14th International Conference on Computing in Civil
and Building Engineering, Moscow.
http://www.icccbe.ru/paper_long/0234paper_long.pdf
Giel, B., & Issa, R. R. A. (2013). Synthesis of Existing BIM Maturity Toolsets to Evaluate Building
Owners’ BIM Competency. Paper presented at the 2013 ASCE International Workshop
on Computing in Civil Engineering (IWCCE), University of Southern California, CA.
Godager, B. (2011). Analysis of the Information Needs for Existing Buildings for Integration in
Modern BIM-Based Building Information Management. Paper presented at the 8th
International Conference on Environmental Engineering; ICEE-2011 - International
Conference on Environmental Engineering, Vilnius, Lithuania.
http://old.vgtu.lt/leidiniai/leidykla/Enviro2011/Articles/4/886_892_Godager_B.pdf
Gosling, J., Sassi, P., Naim, M., & Lark, R. (2012). Adaptable buildings: A systems approach.
Sustainable Cities and Society(0). doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2012.11.002
Grilo, A., & Jardim-Goncalves, R. (2010). Value proposition on interoperability of BIM and
collaborative working environments. Automation in Construction, 19(5), 522-530. doi:
DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2009.11.003
Gulliver, S., Grzybek, H., Radosavljevic, M., & Wiafe, I. (2013). Changing building user attitude
and organisational policy towards sustainable resource use in healthcare. Health Policy
and Technology, 0(0). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2013.03.006
Gunasekara, K., & Jayasena, H. S. (2013). Identification of a Technological Framework for
Implementing Building Information Modelling In Sri Lanka. Paper presented at the The
Second World Construction Symposium 2013: Socio-Economic Sustainability in
Construction, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
http://www.suranga.net/publications/2013_bim_tech_framework.pdf
Guo, X. F. (2013). Research on Structure Model of Building Information Modeling Technology.
Advanced Materials Research, 791, 1704-1709.
Häkkinen, L. (2012). Utilisation of Building Information Models in Production Organisation of
Foundation Engineering. (Master's of Science Master’s Degree), Tampere University of
Technology, Finland.
Hanlon, B. P. O. (2013). Decision Making and Design Cognition in the age of Building
Information Models. (Bachelor of Science), School of Built Environment, Limerick
Institute of Technology.
Hannele, K., Reijo, M., Tarja, M., Sami, P., Jenni, K., & Teija, R. (2012). Expanding uses of
building information modeling in life-cycle construction projects. Work: A Journal of
Prevention, Assessment and Rehabilitation, 41(0), 114-119. doi: 10.3233/wor-2012-
0144-114
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 304
Haron, A. T. (2013). Organisational readiness to implement building information modelling: A
framework for design consultants in Malaysia. University of Salford. Retrieved from
http://usir.salford.ac.uk/29383/1/AHMAD_TARMIZI_PhD_eThesis_2013_BIM_readine
ss.pdf
Haron, A. T., Marshall-Ponting, A., & Aouad, G. (2010). Building Information Modelling-
Literature Review on Model to Determine the Level of Uptake by Organisation. Paper
presented at the W078 - Special Track, 18th CIB World Building Congress, Salford,
United Kingdom.
Hartmann, T. A semiotic analysis of user interfaces of building information model systems.
Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 0(ja), null. doi: doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-
5487.0000358
Hartmann, T., Gao, J., & Fischer, M. (2010). Closure to “Areas of Application for 3D and 4D
Models on Construction Projects” by Timo Hartmann, Ju Gao, and Martin Fischer.
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(8), 932-934.
Hartmann, T., van Meerveld, H., Vossebeld, N., & Adriaanse, A. (2012). Aligning Building
Information Model Tools and Construction Management Methods. Automation in
Construction, 22(0), 605-613. doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2011.12.011
Harty, J., & Laing, R. (2013, 27-29 June 2013). Facilitating meaningful collaboration in
architectural design through the adoption of BIM (Building Information Modelling).
Paper presented at the Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD),
2013 IEEE 17th International Conference on.
He, G., Wang, G., & Liu, H. (2014). Sustainable Construction Project Life-Cycle Management
Based on Building Information Modeling. In J. Wang, Z. Ding, L. Zou & J. Zuo (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 17th International Symposium on Advancement of Construction
Management and Real Estate (pp. 31-42): Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Hetherington, R. (2013). The Integration of Architectural Design and Energy Modelling
Software. (Doctor of Philosophy PhD), The Open University. Retrieved from
http://oro.open.ac.uk/38060/1/ThesisRobinaHetherington.pdf
Ho, S.-P., Tserng, H. P., & Jan, S.-H. (2013). Enhancing Knowledge Sharing Management Using
BIM Approach in Construction. The Scientifc World Journal, 0(0).
Hooper, M. (2012). BIM Anatomy An investigation into implementation prerequisites. (Master's
Thesis), Lund University, Lund, Sweden. Retrieved from
http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downloadFile&recordOId=2972126&fileOId=
2972151
Hossain, M. K., Munns, A., & Rahman, M. M. (2013). Enhancing team integration in Building
Information Modelling (BIM) projects. Paper presented at the ARCOM Doctoral
Workshop on BIM Management and Interoperability, Birmingham School of the Built
Environment, Birmingham City University, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-docs/workshops/2013-06-20_Birmingham.pdf#page=82
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 305
Idema, H. J. (2010). Meer begrip voor meer grip. (Master in Civil Engineering and Management
Master Thesis), Universiteit Twente.
Ilozor, B. D., & Kelly, D. J. (2012). Building Information Modeling and Integrated Project
Delivery in the Commercial Construction Industry: A Conceptual Study. Journal of
Engineering, Project, and Production Management, 2(1), 23-36.
INPRO. (2010, 25 October, 2010). Open Information Environment for Knowledge-Based
Collaborative Processes throughout the Lifecycle of a Building - What is InPro,
Background and General Project Information. Retrieved June 26, 2013, from
http://www.inpro-project.eu/what.asp
Iordanova, I., Forgues, D., & Chiocchio, F. (2011). Creation of an Evolutive Conceptual Know-
how Framework for Integrative Building Design. Paper presented at the Computer
Aided Architectural Design Futures 2011: Proceedings of the 14th International
Conference on Computer Aided Architectural Design Futures, Liege, Belgium.
http://www.architexturez.net/sites/default/files/pdf/cf2011_p108.content.pdf
Jacobsson, M., & Linderoth, H. C. J. (2012). User perceptions of ICT impacts in Swedish
construction companies: ‘it’s fine, just as it is’. Construction Management and
Economics, 30(5), 339-357. doi: 10.1080/01446193.2012.672757
Jadhav, M., & Koutamanis, A. (2012). Integrated collaborative approach to managing building
information modeling projects. Paper presented at the eWork and eBusiness in
Architecture, Engineering and Construction. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/b12516-83
Jansson, G. (2010). Industrialised housing design efficiency. (Master's Master's Thesis),
Department of Civil, Mining and Environmental Engineering, Division of Structural
Engineering – Timber Structures, Luleå.
Jayasena, H. S., & Weddikkara, C. (2013). Assessing the BIM Maturity in a BIM Infant Industry.
Paper presented at the The Second World Construction Symposium 2013: Socio-
Economic Sustainability in Construction, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
http://www.suranga.net/publications/2013_bim_maturity.pdf
Ji, J., Zhang, Q., Yang, H., & Chang, Z. (2009). Research and development of high-rise steel
structural BIM software and its application in Shanghai Center Project. Journal of
Southeast University. Natural Science Edition, 39.
John, G. A., & Ganah, A. (2011). Integrating BIM and Planning Software for Health and Safety
Site Induction. Paper presented at the The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors
International Research Conference, COBRA 2011, 12-13 September 2011, University of
Salford, UK. http://clok.uclan.ac.uk/2787/
Jung, Y., & Joo, M. (2010). Building information modelling (BIM) framework for practical
implementation. Automation in Construction, In Press, Corrected Proof. doi: DOI:
10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.010
Jupp, J. R. (2013). Incomplete BIM Implementation: Exploring Challenges and the Role of
Product Lifecycle Management Functions. In A. Bernard, L. Rivest & D. Dutta (Eds.),
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 306
Product Lifecycle Management for Society (Vol. 409, pp. 630-640): Springer Berlin
Heidelberg.
Kalinichuk, S., & Tomek, A. (2013). Construction Industry Products Diversification by
Implementation of BIM. International Journal of Engineering and Technology, 3(4),
254-262.
Kamara, J. M. (2012). Integration in the project development process of a Private Finance
Initiative (PFI) project. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 8(4), 228-
245. doi: 10.1080/17452007.2012.666729
Kasim, T., LI, H., & Rezgui, Y. (2012). BREEAM Based Dynamic Sustainable Building Design
Assessment. Paper presented at the European Group for Intelligent Computing in
Engineering (EG-ICE), Technische Universität München, Germany, Munich, Germany.
http://www.cie.bv.tum.de/upload/egice/papers/25.pdf
Kassem, M., Iqbal, N., & Dawood, N. (2013). A Practice oriented BIM framework and workflows
Paper presented at the 2013 ASCE International Workshop on Computing in Civil
Engineering (IWCCE), University of Southern California, CA.
Khosrowpour, M. (2012). Dictionary of Information Science and Technology (2nd ed.): Idea
Group Inc (IGI) Global.
Khosrowshahi, F., & Arayici, Y. (2012). Roadmap for implementation of BIM in the UK
construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management,
19(6), 610-635. doi: 10.1108/09699981211277531
Kim, K. P., & Park, K. S. (2013). BIM Feasibility Study For Housing Refurbishment Projects In The
UK. Organization, Technology & Management In Construction: an International
Journal, 5(Special), 765-774.
Kim, T. W., Rajagopal, R., Fischer, M., & Kam, C. (2012). A Knowledge-Based Framework for
Automated Space-Use Analysis CIFE Technical Report (pp. 1-34). Stanford: Center for
Integrated Facility Engineering (CIFE), Stanford University.
Kim, T. W., Rajagopal, R., Fischer, M., & Kam, C. (2013). A knowledge-based framework for
automated space-use analysis. Automation in Construction, 32(0), 165-176. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.08.002
Kjartansdóttir, I. B. (2011). BIM Adoption in Iceland and Its Relation to Lean Construction.
(Master of Science in Construction Management Masters), Reykjavík University,
Reykjavík.
Kouider, T., & Paterson, G. J. (2013). Architectural Technology and the BIM acronym: Critical
Perspectives of Evangelical and Evolutionary Paradigms for Technical Design. Paper
presented at the 4th International Congress of Architectural Technology, Sheffield, UK.
Kovacic, I., Filzmoser, M., Faatz, S., & Koeszegi, S. T. (2011). Research Project Cost Benefits of
Integrated Planning: First experiment-results.pdf. Organization, Technology &
Management In Construction: an International Journal, 3(1), 254-263.
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 307
Kovacic, I., & Oberwinter, L. (2012). BIM-Supported Lifecycle-oriented Design for Energy
Efficient Industrial Facility - a Case Study. Paper presented at the Creative Construction
Conference 2012, Budapest, Hungary.
http://publik.tuwien.ac.at/files/PubDat_209663.pdf
Kovacic, I., Oberwinter, L., & Müller, C. (2013). BIM-supported planning process for sustainable
buildings–Process Simulation and Evaluation through Exploratory Research. Paper
presented at the CIB 2013 World Congress, Brisbane, Australia.
Krystallis, I., Demian, P., & Price, A. D. (2012, September 5-7, 2012). Design of flexible and
adaptable healthcare buildings of the future-a BIM approach. Paper presented at the
First UK Conference on BIM, Newcastle, UK.
Kulasekara, G., Jayasena, H. S., & Ranadewa, K. A. T. O. (2013). Comparative Effectiveness
of Quantity Surveying in a Building Information Modelling Implementation. Paper
presented at the The Second World Construction Symposium 2013: Socio-Economic
Sustainability in Construction, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
http://www.suranga.net/publications/2013_bim_qseffectiveness.pdf
Laakso, M. (2009, September 2009). Developing a Multidisciplinary Process View on IFC
Standardization. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2009 w78 Conference -
Managing IT in Construction / Managing Construction for Tomorrow, Istanbul, Turkey.
Lavikka, R., Smeds, M., & Smeds, R. (2012). Towards coordinated BIM based design and
construction process eWork and eBusiness in Architecture, Engineering and
Construction (pp. 513-520): CRC Press.
Lee, J., & Jeong, Y. (2012). User-centric knowledge representations based on ontology for AEC
design collaboration. Computer-Aided Design, In Press. doi: 10.1016/j.cad.2012.03.011
Lee, S., & Ha, M. Customer interactive building information modeling for apartment unit
design. Automation in Construction(0). doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.05.026
Leeuwis, A. J. (2012). BIM at Small Architectural Firms - English Summary. (Master Real Estatae
& Housing Masters), Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands.
Lehtinen, T. (2010). Advantages And Disadvantages of Vertical Integration in The
Implementation of Systemic Process Innovations: Case studies on implementing
building information modelling (BIM) in the Finnish construction industry. (Master’s
Thesis Master’s Thesis), Aalto University. Retrieved from
http://lib.tkk.fi/Dipl/2010/urn100299.pdf
Lehtinen, T. (2012). Boundaries Matter – The Pros and Cons of Vertical Integration in BIM
Implementation, Advances in Production Management Systems. Value Networks:
Innovation, Technologies, and Management. In J. Frick & B. Laugen (Eds.), (Vol. 384,
pp. 578-585): Springer Boston.
León, E. A., & Molina, M. R. (Eds.). (2009). New Interfaces, new scenarios. Vroom n. 0: Vroom n.
0: The emerging potential of collaborative 3D web platforms. Sao Paulo, Brazil.
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 308
Lin, Y.-C. (2010). A CAD-Based Interface Management System using Building Information
Modelling in Construction. In J. Underwood & U. Isikdag (Eds.), Handbook of Research
on Building Information Modelling and Construction Informatics: Concepts and
Technologies (pp. 170-169): Information Science Reference, IGI Publishing.
Lin, Y.-M. (2012). Extension of Building Information Model for Disaster Mitigation: Using the
Revit Platform. (Master's Thesis), National Central University, Chungli City, Taoyuan
County. Retrieved from http://etd.lib.nctu.edu.tw/cgi-
bin/gs32/ncugsweb.cgi?o=dncucdr&s=id=%22GC993202098%22.#XXXX
Lin, Y. C., Su, Y. C., & Chen, Y. P. (2012). Mobile 2D Barcode/BIM-based Facilities Maintaining
Management System. Paper presented at the Mobile 2D Barcode/BIM-based Facilities
Maintaining Management System, Singapore. http://www.ipedr.com/vol43/011-
ICFME2012-M00027.pdf
Linderoth, H. C. J. (2010). Understanding adoption and use of BIM as the creation of actor
networks. Automation in Construction, 19(1), 66-72. doi:
10.1016/j.autcon.2009.09.003
Love, P., Edwards, D., Han, S., & Goh, Y. (2011). Design Error Reduction: Toward the Effective
Utilization of Building Information Modeling. Research in Engineering Design, 1-15. doi:
10.1007/s00163-011-0105-x
Love, P. E. D., Simpson, I., Hill, A., & Standing, C. (2013). From justification to evaluation:
Building information modeling for asset owners. Automation in Construction, 0(0). doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.05.008
Lu, W., Peng, Y., Shen, Q., & Li, H. (2013). Generic Model for Measuring Benefits of BIM as a
Learning Tool in Construction Tasks. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 139(2), 195-203. doi: doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000585
Lucas, J., Bulbul, T., & Thabet, W. (2013). A pilot model for a proof of concept healthcare
facility information management prototype. Journal of Information Technology in
Construction (ITCON), 18.
Lucas, J. D. (2012). An Integrated BIM Framework to Support Facility Management in
Healthcare Environments. (PhD PhD), Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University, Blacksburg, VA. Retrieved from
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-08072012-155247/ (etd-08072012-
155247)
Luth, G. P., Schorer, A., & Turkan, Y. (2013). Lessons From Using BIM to Increase Design-
Construction Integration. Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction.
Luthra, A. (2010). Implementation of Building Information Modeling in Architectural Firms in
India. (Master of Science Master's), Purdue University.
Lv, X., Zou, Y., Huang, Y., & Xu, J. (2011). The 3D Coordinated Building Design Based on Building
Information Modeling. Advanced Materials Research, 243 - 249, 6587-6591. doi:
10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.243-249.6587
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 309
Macdonald, J. (2011). BIM – Adding Value by Assisting Collaboration. Paper presented at the
Lightweight Structures Association Australia,, Sydney, Australia.
http://codebim.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/2011_Macdonald_LSAA.pdf
Majcherek, E. (2013). Building Information Modelling in the business of architecture: Case of
Sweden. (Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management Master's of Science), KTH
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. Retrieved from http://www.diva-
portal.org/smash/get/diva2:634189/FULLTEXT01.pdf
Mäkeläinen, T., Hyvärinen, J., & Peura, J. (2012). BIM practices and challenges framed - an
approach to systemic change management eWork and eBusiness in Architecture,
Engineering and Construction (pp. 497-504): CRC Press.
Manzione, L. (2013). Proposition for a Collaborative Design Process Management Conceptual
Structure using BIM. (PhD in Engineering PhD), University of São Paulo, São Paulo,
Brazil.
Manzione, L., Abaurre, M. W., Melhado, S. B., & Owen, R. (2011). Challenges to
implementation of collaborative design process: analysis of human factor. Paper
presented at the TIC2011, Salvador, Bahia, Brasil. http://www.coordenar.com.br/wp-
content/uploads/2013/04/2011_projetocolaborativo-tic.pdf
Martin-Dorta, N., Assef, P. G. d. C., Cantero, J. D. l. T., & Rufino, G. R. (2013, April 17-19, 2013).
Implementing BIM techniques for energy analysis: a case study of buildings at
university of la Laguna. Paper presented at the Environmental security, geological
hazards and management, Tenerife, UK.
Matipa, W. M., Cunningham, P., & Naik, B. (2010). Assessing the Impact of New Rules of Cost
Planning on Building Information Model (BIM) Schema Pertinent to Quantity Surveying
Practice. Paper presented at the Association of Researchers in Construction
Management (ARCOM) 26th Annual Conference, Reading, England.
http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-docs/proceedings/ar2010-0625-
0632_Matipa_Cunningham_and_Naik.pdf
Merschbrock, C., & Munkvold, B. (2013, 12-14 June 2013). Improving Interorganizational
Design Practices in the Wood‐based Building Industry. Paper presented at the 7th
Nordic Conference on Construction Economics and Organization, Trondheim, Norway.
Merschbrock, C., & Munkvold, B. E. (2012a). A Research Review on Building Information
Modeling in Construction―An Area Ripe for IS Research. Communications of the
Association for Information Systems, 31(10).
Merschbrock, C., & Munkvold, B. E. (2012b). A Research Review on Building Information
Modeling in Construction - An Area Ripe for IS Research. Communications of the
Association for Information Systems, 31(1), 10.
Miettinen, R., Kerosuo, H., Korpela, J., Mäki, T., & Paavola, S. (2012). An activity theoretical
approach to BIM-research eWork and eBusiness in Architecture, Engineering and
Construction (pp. 777-781): CRC Press.
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 310
Miller, H. J. (2013). Beyond sharing: cultivating cooperative transportation systems through
geographic information science. Journal of Transport Geography, 31, 296-308. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.04.007
Mom, M., & Hsieh, S.-H. (2012a). Toward performance assessment of BIM technology
implementation. Paper presented at the International Conference on Computing in
Civil and Building Engineering (ICCBBE2012), Moscow, Russia. http://bit.ly/O7KxZD
Mom, M., & Hsieh, S.-H. (2012b). Toward Performance Assessment of BIM Technology
Implementation. Paper presented at the 14th International Conference on Computing
in Civil and Building Engineering, Moscow.
http://www.icccbe.ru/paper_long/0187paper_long.pdf
Mom, M., Tsai, M. H., & Hsieh, S.-H. (2011). On Decision-Making and Technology-Implementing
Factors for BIM Adoption. Paper presented at the International Conference on
Construction Applications of Virtual Reality (CONVR2011), Weimar, Germany.
Monteiro, A., & Poças Martins, J. (2013). A survey on modeling guidelines for quantity takeoff-
oriented BIM-based design (corrected proof). Automation in Construction, 0(0). doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.05.005
Mrkela, A., & Rebolj, D. (2009). Automated construction schedule creation using project
information model. Paper presented at the CIB W78 Conference - Managing IT in
Construction, Istanbul, Turkey. http://itc.scix.net/data/works/att/w78-2009-1-03.pdf
Mulenga, K., & Han, Z. (2010). Optimizing BIM Adoption and Mindset Change - Emphasize on a
Construction Company. (Master of Science Master's), Chalmers University of
Technology, Göteborg, Sweden. Retrieved from
http://www.kelmatics.com/apps/documents/
Nagy, M. V. (2013). Utilizing Building Information Models with Mobile Augmented Reality and
Location-Based Services. (Master of Science in Informatics), Norwegian University of
Science and Technology. Retrieved from http://www.diva-
portal.org/smash/get/diva2:664085/FULLTEXT01.pdf
Oberwinter, L., Kovacic, I., Müller, C., Kiesel, K., Skoruppa, L., & Mahdavi, A. (2013).
Interdisciplinary, BIM-supported planning process. Paper presented at the Creative
Conference Conference, Budast, Hungary.
http://publik.tuwien.ac.at/files/PubDat_219839.pdf
Olatunji, O., & Sher, W. (2010a, May 10-13, 2010). Legal Implications of BIM: Model Ownership
and Other Matters Arising. Paper presented at the W113-Special Track 18th CIB World
Building Congress Salford, United Kingdom.
Olatunji, O., Sher, W., Gu, N., & Ogunsemi, D. (2010). Building Information Modelling
Processes: Benefits for Construction Industry. Paper presented at the W078 - Special
Track, 18th CIB World Building Congress, Salford, United Kingdom.
Olatunji, O., Sher, W., & Ogunsemi, D. (2010, May 10th-13th). The impact of Building
Information Modelling on Construction Cost estimation. Paper presented at the W055 -
Special Track, 18th CIB World Building Congress, Salford, United Kingdom.
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 311
Olatunji, O. A. (2011a). Modelling Organizations’ Structural Adjustment to BIM Adoption: a
Pilot Study on Estimating Organizations. Electronic Journal of Information Technology
in Construction (ITCON), Special Issue Innovation in Construction e-Business, 16(38),
687-696.
Olatunji, O. A. (2011b). A Preliminary Review on the Legal Implications of BIM and Model
Ownership. Electronic Journal of Information Technology in Construction (ITCON),
Special Issue Innovation in Construction e-Business, 16(40), 687-696.
Olatunji, O. A., & Sher, W. (2010b). The application of Building Information Modelling in
Facilities Management. In J. Underwood & U. Isikdag (Eds.), Handbook of Research on
Building Information Modelling and Construction Informatics: Concepts and
Technologies (pp. 239-253): Information Science Reference, IGI Publishing.
Olatunji, O. A., Sher, W., & Gu, N. (2010a). Building Information Modeling and Quantity
Surveying Practice. Emirates Journal for Engineering Research, 15(1), 67-70.
Olatunji, O. A., & Sher, W. D. (2009). Building Information Modelling (BIM) System in
Construction in 2020: Opportunities and Implications. Paper presented at the BuHu 9th
International Postgraduate Research Conference (IPGRC 09), Salford Quays, Greater
Manchester, UK. http://bit.ly/jalW0
Olatunji, O. A., Sher, W. D., & Gu, N. (2010b). Modelling Outcomes of Collaboration in Building
Information Modelling Through Gaming Theory Lenses. In I. Wallis, L. Bilan, M. Smith &
A. S. Kazi (Eds.), Industrialised, Integrated, Intelligent Sustainable Construction, I3COn
Handbook 2 (pp. 91-108). UK: I3CON and BSRIA.
Oommen, C. (2010). Enhancing Control of Built Assets through Computer Aided Design - Past,
Present and Emerging Trends. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Tenth
International Conference for Enhanced Building Operations, Kuwait.
http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/94092/ESL-IC-10-10-
45.pdf?sequence=1
Oti, A. H., & Tizani, W. (2010). Developing incentives for collaboration in the AEC Industry.
Paper presented at the Proceedings of the International Conference on Computing in
Civil and Building Engineering, Nottingham, UK.
Otter, A. d., Pels, H. J., & Iliescu, I. (2011). BIM Versus PLM: Risks and Benefits. Paper presented
at the Proceedings of the CIB W078 - W102 Conference: Computer, Knowledge,
Building, Sophia Antipolis, France.
http://cibworld.xs4all.nl/dl/publications/W078_W102_pub365.pdf
Paavola, S., Kerosuo, H., Mäki, T., Korpela, J., & Miettinen, R. (2012). BIM Technologies and
Collaboration in a Life-cycle Project eWork and eBusiness in Architecture, Engineering
and Construction (pp. 855-862): CRC Press.
Pala, M., Edum-Fotwe, F., Ruikar, K., Doughty, N., & Peters, C. (2014). Contractor practices for
managing extended supply chain tiers. Supply Chain Management: An International
Journal, 19(1), 4-4.
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 312
Panuwatwanich, K., & Peansupap, V. (2013). Factors affecting the current diffusion of BIM: a
qualitative study of online professional network. Paper presented at the Creative
Construction Conference, Budapest, Hungary.
Parreira, J. P. d. C. (2013). BIM implementation in organizational processes in construction
companies - a case study (Portuguese Language). (Master's in Civil Engineering), The
New University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal. Retrieved from
http://run.unl.pt/bitstream/10362/9907/1/Parreira_2013.pdf
Patrick, R., Munir, M., & Jeffrey, H. (2012). Building Information Modelling (BIM), Utilised
During the Design and Construction Phase of a Project has the Potential to Create a
Valuable Asset in its Own Right (‘BIMASSET’) at Handover that in turn Enhances the
Value of The Development. Paper presented at the 12th International Conference for
Enhanced Building Operations, Manchester, England.
http://icebo2012.com/cms/resources/uploads/files/papers/19%20BIM%20ASSET%20P
APER%20working%20final.pdf
Paukkeri, H. (2012). Development of Model-based Process for Navigation Dredging. (Master's
Thesis Master's), AALTO University, Finland. Retrieved from
http://civil.aalto.fi/fi/tutkimus/vesi/opinnaytteet/paukkeri2012.pdf
Pels, H., Beek, J., & Otter, A. (2013). Systems Engineering as a First Step to Effective Use of
BIM. In A. Bernard, L. Rivest & D. Dutta (Eds.), Product Lifecycle Management for
Society (Vol. 409, pp. 651-662): Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Penttila, H. (2009). Services in Digital Design: new visions for AEC-field collaboration.
International Journal of Architectural Computing, 7, 459-478.
Per Anker, J., & Elvar Ingi, J. (2013). Building information modelling in Denmark and Iceland.
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 20(1), 99-110. doi:
10.1108/09699981311288709
Persson, S., Malmgren, L., & Johnsson, H. (2009). Information management in industrial
housing design and manufacture. ITCON(14), 110-122.
Porwal, A. (2013). Construction waste management at source: a Building Information Modeling
based system dynamic approach. (Doctor of Philosophy), Unversity of British Columbia,
Okanagan, Canada. Retrieved from
https://elk.library.ubc.ca/bitstream/handle/2429/45509/ubc_2014_spring_porwal_at
ul.pdf?sequence=1
Porwal, A., & Hewage, K. N. (2013). Building Information Modeling (BIM) partnering framework
for public construction projects. Automation in Construction, 31(0), 204-214. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.12.004
PPU. (2012). Universidade Estadul de Londrina_Masters of Project Management - Course
Outline. http://www.ppu.uem.br/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Gest%C3%A3o-de-
Processo-de-Projeto.pdf
Qian, A. Y. (2012). Benefits and ROI of BIM for Multi-Disciplinary Project Management. (Project
Management), National University of Singapore. Retrieved from
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 313
http://www.icoste.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Benefits-and-ROI-of-BIM-for-
Multi-Disciplinary-Project-Management.pdf
Qinghua, Haitao, P., Yongkui, L., & Lili, Q. (2012). Cloud-based framework for the
implementation of BIM. Construction Economics (translated), 5.
Reffat, R. M. (2010). Fostering E-Services in Architecture and Construction Using the Building
Information Model. Paper presented at the The 5th eServices Symposium of the
Eastern Province, Comprehensive eServices: Successes and Challenges, Al-Khobar,
Saudi Arabia. www.eservices-sa.org/Event/UploadFiles/Book5.pdf
Rekola, M., Kojima, J., & Mäkeläinen, T. (2010). Towards integrated design and delivery
solutions: pinpointed challenges of process change. Architectural Engineering and
Design Management, 6(4), 264-278.
Ren, J. (2013). High-Performance Building Design and Decision-Making Support for Architects in
the Early Design Phases. (Licentiate Thesis), The Royal Institute of Technology,
Stockholm, Sweden. Retrieved from http://www.diva-
portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:664309
Ren, Y. (2011). Building Information Modeling Integrated with Electronic Commerce Material
Procurement and Supplier Performance Management System. (Master of Science),
University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, US. Retrieved from
http://hdl.handle.net/1903/12349
Rezgui, Y., Beach, T., & Rana, O. (2013). A Governance Approach for BIM Management across
Lifecycle and Supply Chains Using Mixed-Modes of Information Delivery. Journal of
Civil Engineering & Management, 19(2), 239-258. doi: 10.3846/13923730.2012.760480
Robert, S., Delinchant, B., Hilaire, B., & Tanguy, Y. (2013, August 26-28). Plumes: Towards a
unified approach to building physical modeling. Paper presented at the 13th
Conference of IBPSA 2013.
Rowlinson, S., Collins, R., Tuuli, M. M., & Jia, Y. (2010). Implementation of Building Information
Modeling (BIM) in construction: A comparative case study, Hong Kong, Macau.
Ruschel, R. C., Andrade, M. L. V. X. d., & Morais, M. d. (2013). O ensino de BIM no Brasil: onde
estamos? Ambiente Construído, 13, 151-165.
Ryan, A., Miller, G., & Wilkinson, S. (2013). Successfully implementing building information
modelling in New Zealand: maintaining the relevance of contract forms and
procurement models. Paper presented at the 38th Australasian University Building
Educators Association (AUBEA) Conference, Auckland, New Zealand.
Sackey, E., Tuuli, M., & Dainty, A. (2013). BIM implementation: from capability maturity models
to implementation strategy. Paper presented at the Sustainable Building Conference
2013, Coventry, UK. http://www.coventry.ac.uk/Global/Faculty%20events/SB13/SB13-
21-BIM-implementation-from-capability-maturity-models-to-implementation-
strategy.pdf
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 314
Sarhan, S., & Fox, A. (2013). Performance measurement in the UK construction industry and its
role in supporting the application of lean construction concepts (Vol. 13).
Sattineni, A., & Bradford, H. (2012). Building Information Modeling: Trends in the US
Construction Industry. Design Principles and Practices, 5(4), 187-203.
Sebastian, R. (2011). BIM in Different Methods of Project Delivery. Paper presented at the ICT
for a Low Carbon Economy, Building Data Models, Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop
organised by the EEB Data Models Community CIB Conference W078-W012, Sophia
Antipolis, France. http://2011-cibw078-w102.cstb.fr/papers/Paper-134.pdf
Sebastian, R., & Van Berlo, L. (2010). Tool for Benchmarking BIM Performance of Design,
Engineering and Construction Firms in the Netherlands. Architectural Engineering and
Design Management, Special Issue: Integrated Design and Delivery Solutions, 6, 254-
263. doi: 10.3763/aedm.2010.IDDS3
Senescu, R. R. (2011). Design Process Communication Methodology. (Doctor of Philosophy),
Stanford University, Stanford. Retrieved from
http://cife.stanford.edu/wiki/lib/exe/fetch.php?media=rs:papers:senescu-
designprocesscommunicationmethodology.pdf
Şenyapılı, B., & Bozdağ, B. G. (2012). A Domain Specific Software Model for Interior
Architectural Education and Practice. Automation in Construction, 21(0), 10-23. doi:
10.1016/j.autcon.2011.05.008
Sergi, D. M., & Li, J. (2014). Applications of GIS-Enhanced Networks of Engineering Information.
Applied Mechanics and Materials, 444, 1672-1679.
Shahrin, F., Johansen, E., Lockley, S., & Udeaja, C. (2010). Effective Capture, Translating and
Delivering Client Requirements Using Building Information Modelling (BIM)
Technology. Paper presented at the ARCOM Research Workshop on Decision Making
Across Levels, Time and Space: Exploring Theories, Methods and Practices, University
of Manchester.
http://www.academia.edu/1196255/EFFECTIVE_CAPTURE_TRANSLATING_AND_DELIV
ERING_CLIENT_REQUIREMENTS_USING_BUILDING_INFORMATION_MODELLING_BIM_
TECHNOLOGY
Shih, S.-Y., & Sher, W. (2014). Development of Building Information Modelling Enabled Code
Checking Systems for Australia. In J. Wang, Z. Ding, L. Zou & J. Zuo (Eds.), Proceedings
of the 17th International Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management
and Real Estate (pp. 1003-1010): Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Shih, S.-Y., Sher, W., & Williams, A. (2012). Using a BIM maturity matrix to inform the
development of AEC integrated curricula. Paper presented at the 37th Annual
International Conference, Proceedings of the Australasian Universities Building
Educators Association (AUBEA), Sydney. http://hdl.handle.net/1959.13/933959
Shrivasta, S., & Chini, A. (2012). Using Building Information Modeling to assess the initial
embodied energy of a building. The International Journal of Construction
Management, 12(1), 51-63.
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 315
Skandhakumar, N., Reid, J., Dawson, E., Drogemuller, R., & Salim, F. (2012). An Authorization
Framework using Building Information Models. The Computer Journal. doi:
10.1093/comjnl/bxs098
Skandhakumar, N., Salim, F., Reid, J., & Dawson, E. (2012). Physical Access Control
Administration Using Building Information Models. In Y. Xiang, J. Lopez, C. C. J. Kuo &
W. Zhou (Eds.), Cyberspace Safety and Security (Vol. 7672, pp. 236-250): Springer
Berlin Heidelberg.
Steel, J., Drogemuller, R., & Toth, B. (2010). Model interoperability in building information
modelling. Software and Systems Modeling, 1-11. doi: 10.1007/s10270-010-0178-4
Su, Y. C., Lee, Y. C., & Lin, Y. C. (2011). Enhancing Maintenance Management Using Building
Information Modeling In Facilities Management. Paper presented at the 28th
Conference of the International Association for Automation and Robotics in
Construction (ISARC), Seoul, Korea. http://www.iaarc.org/publications/fulltext/S22-
5.pdf
Succar, B. (2009). Building information modelling framework: A research and delivery
foundation for industry stakeholders. Automation in Construction, 18(3), 357-375.
Succar, B. (2010a). Building Information Modelling Maturity Matrix. In J. Underwood & U.
Isikdag (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Building Information Modelling and
Construction Informatics: Concepts and Technologies (pp. 65-103): Information Science
Reference, IGI Publishing.
Succar, B. (2010b). The Five Components of BIM Performance Measurement. Paper presented
at the CIB World Congress, Salford, United Kingdom.
Succar, B., Sher, W., & Aranda-Mena, G. (2007). A Proposed Framework to Investigate Building
Information Modelling Through Knowledge Elicitation and Visual Models. Paper
presented at the Australasian Universities Building Education (AUBEA2007),
Melbourne, Australia. http://aubea.org.au/ocs/viewpaper.php?id=15&cf=1
Succar, B., Sher, W., & Williams, A. (2012). Measuring BIM performance: Five metrics.
Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 8(2), 120-142. doi:
10.1080/17452007.2012.659506
Succar, B., Sher, W., & Williams, A. (2013). An integrated approach to BIM competency
acquisition, assessment and application (published online). Automation in
Construction, 35, 174-189. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.05.016
Suwal, S., Jäväjä, P., Rahman, M. A., & Gonzalez, V. (2013). Exploring BIM-based education
perspectives. Paper presented at the 38th Australasian University Building Educators
Association (AUBEA) Conference, Auckland, New Zealand.
Szpytko, J. (2009). Transportation System Architecture for Intelligent Management Marine
Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation: CRC Press.
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 316
Taborda, P. (2012). BIM nas obras públicas em Portugal: Condicionantes para uma
implementação com sucesso. Paper presented at the Building Congress, 2012,
Coimbra, Portugal. http://hdl.handle.net/10362/10012
Tatari, M. O. (2009). Empirical Analysis of Construction Enterprise Information Systems:
Assessing the Critical Factors and Benefits. (PhD), University of Maryland (College Park,
Md.), Maryland. Retrieved from
http://www.lib.umd.edu/drum/bitstream/1903/9131/1/Tatari_umd_0117E_10220.pd
f
Tatari, O., & Skibniewski, M. J. (2011). Empirical Analysis of Construction Enterprise
Information Systems: Assessing System Integration, Critical Factors, and Benefits.
Journal of Computing and Civil Engineering, 25(5), 347.
Thomas, B. (2013). Governance Model for Cloud Computing in Building Information
Management. IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, 99(PrePrints), 1-1.
Tomo, C. (2011). A Review and Outlook for a ‘Building Information Model’ (BIM): A Multi-
Standpoint Framework for Technological Development. Advanced Engineering
Informatics, 25(2), 224-244. doi: 10.1016/j.aei.2010.06.003
Toth, B., Fernando, R., Salim, F., Drogemuller, R., Burry, J., Burry, M., & Frazer, J. H. (2009).
Modelling sustainable and optimal solutions for building services integration in early
architectural design: confronting the software and professional interoperability deficit.
Proceedings off Cumulus 38 Degrees South, Hemispheric Shifts Across Learning,
Teaching and Research.
Tuohy, P. (2009). Simulation and BIM For Building Design, Commissioning and Operation: a
Comparison with The Microelectronics Industry. Paper presented at the Building
Simulation 2009, Eleventh International IBPSA Conference, Glasgow, Scotland.
http://www.ibpsa.org/proceedings/BS2009/BS09_1538_1545.pdf
Tuohy, P. G., & Murphy, G. B. (2012). Why advanced buildings don’t work? Paper presented at
the Proceedings of 7th Windsor Conference: The changing context of comfort in an
unpredictable world, Network for Comfort and Energy Use in Buildings, Cumberland
Lodge, Windsor, UK, 12-15 April 2012.
https://pure.strath.ac.uk/portal/files/19994378/Tuohy_PG_Pure_Why_advanced_buil
dings_dont_work_Apr_2012.pdf
Vangimalla, P. R., Olbina, S. J., Issa, R. R., & Hinze, J. (2011). Validation of Autodesk Ecotect™
Accuracy For Thermal And Daylighting Simulations. Paper presented at the WSC 2011
Proceedings of the 2011 Winter Simulation Conference, Phoenix, Arizona.
http://www.informs-sim.org/wsc11papers/300.pdf
Vernikos, V. K., Goodier, C. I., & Gibb, A. G. F. (2013). Building Information Modelling and
offsite construction In civil engineering. Paper presented at the ARCOM Doctoral
Workshop on BIM Management and Interoperability, Birmingham School of the Built
Environment, Birmingham City University, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-docs/workshops/2013-06-20_Birmingham.pdf#page=82
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 317
Watson, A. (2010). BIM - A Driver for Change. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the
International Conference of Computing in Civil and Building Engineering (icccbe),
Nottingham, UK.
http://www.engineering.nottingham.ac.uk/icccbe/proceedings/pdf/pf69.pdf
Watson, A. (2011). Digital buildings – Challenges and opportunities. Advanced Engineering
Informatics, 25(4), 573-581. doi: 10.1016/j.aei.2011.07.003
Wei-zhuo, S., & Guo-qiang, Z. (2010). KPIs: Analyzing the impact of Building Information
Modeling on construction industry in China. Paper presented at the Industrial
Engineering and Engineering Management (IE&EM), 2010 IEEE 17Th International
Conference on.
Winberg, A., & Dahlqvist, E. (2010). BIM - the Next Step in the Construction of Civil Structures.
(Master's Thesis), Royal Institute of Technology KTH. (ISSN 1103-4297)
Wong, A. K., Wong, F. K., & Nadeem, A. (2011). Government roles in implementing building
information modelling systems: Comparison between Hong Kong and the United
States. Construction Innovation: Information, Process, Management, 11(1), 61-76.
Wong, A. K. D., Wong, F. K. W., & Nadeem, A. (2010). Attributes of Building Information
Modelling Implementations in Various Countries. Architectural Engineering and Design
Management, Special Issue: Integrated Design and Delivery Solutions, 6, 288-302.
Wong, J., & Yang, J. (2010). Research and application of Building Information Modelling (BIM)
in the Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry: a review and direction
for future research. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 6th International
Conference on Innovation in Architecture, Engineering & Construction (AEC),
organized in collaboration with the Centre for Innovative and Collaborative
Engineering at Loughborough University, UK, Pennsylvania, US.
http://eprints.qut.edu.au/38333/1/38333.pdf
Wu, W. (2011, June 19-22,). BIM Facilitated Web Service for LEED Automation. Paper
presented at the Proceedings of the 2011 ASCE International Workshop on Computing
in Civil Engineering, Miami, Florida.
Xiaobo, C. (2013). "BIM & cloud" management system security research. Construction
Economy(7), 93-96.
Yiye, L. (2010). Application of Building Information Model (BIM) in building thermal comfort
and energy consumption analysis. (Master's M. Phil), The Hong Kong Polytechnic
University, Kowloon, Hong Kong. Retrieved from
http://repository.lib.polyu.edu.hk/jspui/bitstream/10397/4301/2/b24415820_ir.pdf
Younas, M. Y. (2010). Exploring the challenges for the implementation and adoption of BIM.
(International Master of Science in Construction & Real Estate Management Master's),
Helsinki Metropolia University of Applied Sciences.
Zahrizan, Z., Ali, N. M., Haron, A. T., Marshall-Ponting, A., & Abd, Z. (2013). Exploring the
adoption of Building Information Modelling (BIM) in the Malaysian construction
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 318
industry: a qualitative approach. International Journal of Research in Engineering and
Technology, 2(8), 384-395.
Zerjav, V. (2012). Process-and project-level issues of design management in the built
environment. (Doctor of Science in Civil Engineering Doctor of Science in Civil
Engineering), Vienna University of Technology. Retrieved from
http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/30870261/AC07812616.pdf?AW
SAccessKeyId=AKIAIR6FSIMDFXPEERSA&Expires=1374307898&Signature=7HIUCfJd%2
FJB4rb2NqQSb8pcNsFM%3D&response-content-disposition=inline
Zhang, M., Tan, D., & Zhang, Y. (2013). Analysis of BIM application relationship with integration
degree of construction environment. Chinese Journal of Population Resources and
Environment, 11(1), 92-96. doi: 10.1080/10042857.2013.777527
Zhou, W., Tah, J., & Heesom, D. (2013). A distributed virtual reality application framework for
collaborative construction planning using BIMserver. Paper presented at the
Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Construction Applications of
Virtual Reality (CONVR), London, UK.
Zillante, G. (2008). Building Surveying: A Sustainable Profession or A Passing Fad? Paper
presented at the 2008 AIBS South Australian Conference – Climate Change: Engaging
the elements.
http://www.aibs.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=167&Itemid
=147
Zuppa, D. (2009). Model for developing trust in construction management. (PhD Thesis),
University of Florida. Retrieved from http://etd.fcla.edu/UF/UFE0024734/zuppa_d.pdf
PART III | APPENDIX C PAGE 319
APPENDIX D
Focus groups info sheet and feedback form
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT
Focus Group Feedback Form
Building Information Modelling Framework
Document Version 2.2 (17/05/2010)
Bilal Succar Willy Sher
PhD Candidate Senior Lecturer (primary supervisor)
Bilal.Succar@uon.edu.au Willy.Sher@newcastle.edu.au
Tel +614 1255 6671 Tel +61 2 4921 5794
Fax +61 3 8502 7872 Fax +61 2 4921 6913
PART I: Participant Details (1 page)
PART II: Feedback Sheets (6 pages)
Please do not complete this anonymous feedback form before
reviewing the Research Project Information Statement and
signing the Research Participant’s Consent Form
PART III | APPENDIX D PAGE 320
Part II: Participant Details
Page 2 of 8
V2.2 May 17, 2010
Please provide all applicable details to
assist the researcher in contextualising
your comments and suggestions. No
personal information will be shared or
disclosed. When completing this form,
please use CAPITAL LETTERS as much
as possible....Thank you.
Role within Industry only if applicable
(e.g. architect, engineer, contractor,...)
Role within Academia only if applicable
(e.g. researcher, lecturer,...)
Focus Group Location e.g. RMIT UNIVERSITY, MELBOURNE AUSTRALIA
(Institution, City and Country)
Focus Group Date e.g. 23/11/2010
(day/month/year)
PART III | APPENDIX D PAGE 321
Framework top-level component Part I: Feedback Sheets
BIM Capability Stages Page 3 of 8
V2.2 May 17, 2010
Knowledge Model and Summary
BIM Capability is the basic ability to perform a task or deliver a BIM service/product. BIM Capability
Stages (or BIM Stages) define the minimum BIM requirements. BIM Stages identify a fixed starting point
- the status before BIM implementation, three fixed BIM stages and a variable ending point which allows
for unforeseen future advancements in technology.
Feedback Section 1 (required): Do you agree with the following statements?
BIM Stages are clear and Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
easy to understand
BIM Stages are accurate Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
and representative
BIM Stages are usable for
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
implementation, assessment and
education
The knowledge model facilitates Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
my understanding of BIM
Feedback Section 2 (optional): Please provide additional written feedback or suggestions
PART III | APPENDIX D PAGE 322
Framework top-level component Part I: Feedback Sheets
BIM Fields (players, requirements and deliverables) Page 4 of 8
V2.2 May 17, 2010
Knowledge Model and Summary
BIM Fields are conceptual clusters of domain players interacting and overlapping within the AECO
industry. There are three BIM Field Types (Technology, Process and Policy) and three Field Components
(Players, Requirements and Deliverables).
Feedback Section 1 (required): Do you agree with the following statements?
BIM Fields are clear and Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
easy to understand
BIM Fields are accurate Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
and representative
BIM Fields are usable for
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
implementation, assessment and
education
The knowledge model facilitates Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
my understanding of BIM
Feedback Section 2 (optional): Please provide additional written feedback or suggestions
PART III | APPENDIX D PAGE 323
Framework top-level component Part I: Feedback Sheets
BIM Lenses Page 5 of 8
V2.2 May 17, 2010
Knowledge Model and Summary
Sample Lenses:
Change Management
Construction/Project Management
Data Management
Design Management
Financial Management
Human Resource Management
Knowledge Management
Organisational Behaviour
Process Management
Quality Management
Product Management
Supply Chain Management
Risk Management
BIM Lenses represent the third dimension of the Framework and generate its depth of enquiry. BIM
Lenses are distinctive layers of analysis which allow the researchers to selectively focus on any aspect
of the AECO industry and generate knowledge views that either (a) highlight observables which meet
the research criteria or (b) filter out those that do not.
Feedback Section 1 (required): Do you agree with the following statements?
BIM Lenses are clear and Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
easy to understand
BIM Lenses are accurate Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
and representative
BIM Lenses are usable for
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
implementation, assessment and
education
The knowledge model facilitates Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
my understanding of BIM
Feedback Section 2 (optional): Please provide additional written feedback or suggestions
PART III | APPENDIX D PAGE 324
Sample framework deliverable Part I: Feedback Sheets
BIM Competency Sets Page 6 of 8
V2.2 May 17, 2010
Knowledge Model and Summary
A BIM Competency Set is a hierarchical collection of individual competencies identified for the purposes
of BIM implementation and assessment. If BIM Competency Set is used for active implementation, they
are referred to as BIM Implementation Steps. However, if used for assessing existing implementations,
they are referred to as BIM Assessment Areas.
Feedback Section 1 (required): Do you agree with the following statements?
BIM Competencies are clear and Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
easy to understand
BIM Competencies are accurate Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
and representative
BIM Competencies are usable for
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
implementation, assessment and
education
The knowledge model facilitates Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
my understanding of BIM
Feedback Section 2 (optional): Please provide additional written feedback or suggestions
PART III | APPENDIX D PAGE 325
Sample framework deliverables Part I: Feedback Sheets
BIM Maturity Levels Page 7 of 8
V2.2 May 17, 2010
Knowledge Model and Summary
BIM Maturity is the ability to excel in performing a task or delivering a BIM service/product and its
benchmarks (the five maturity levels) are performance improvement milestones for teams and
organizations aspire to or work towards. The progression from low to higher levels of maturity indicate (i)
better control through minimising variations between performance targets and actual results, (ii) better
predictability and forecasting by lowering variability in competency, performance and costs, and (iii)
greater effectiveness in reaching defined goals and setting new more ambitious ones
Feedback Section 1 (required): Do you agree with the following statements?
BIM Maturity Levels are clear and Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
easy to understand
BIM Maturity Levels are accurate Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
and representative
BIM Maturity Levels are usable for
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
implementation, assessment and
education
The knowledge model facilitates Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
my understanding of BIM
Feedback Section 2 (optional): Please provide additional written feedback or suggestions
PART III | APPENDIX D PAGE 326
Optional empty feedback sheet for any additional Part I: Feedback Sheets
Comments or Suggestions Page 8 of 8
V2.2 May 17, 2010
PART III | APPENDIX D PAGE 327
APPENDIX E
Statements of contribution
PART III | APPENDIX E PAGE 328
PART III | APPENDIX E PAGE 329
PART III | APPENDIX E PAGE 330
PART III | APPENDIX E PAGE 331
PART III | APPENDIX E PAGE 332
PART III | APPENDIX E PAGE 333
PART III | APPENDIX E PAGE 334
PART III | APPENDIX E PAGE 335
PART III | APPENDIX E PAGE 336
PART III | APPENDIX E PAGE 337
PART III | APPENDIX E PAGE 338
APPENDIX F
Compilation of all bibliographic references cited
within the introduction document, submitted
papers and preceding appendices
Appendix F: compiled bibliography v1.0
Building Information Modelling: conceptual constructs and performance improvement tools
1. Abdelmohsen, S. M. A. (2011). An 11. AIA, (2007), Integrated project delivery: a guide,
Ethnographically Informed Analysis of Design AIA California Council, Washington, DC, U.S.
Intent Communication in BIM-enabled
12. AIA. (2008). Model Progression Specifications.
Architectural Practice. (Doctor of Philosophy),
In M. P. Specifications (Ed.): AIA California
Georgia Institute of Technology.
Council.
2. Accenture Consulting, (2004). “e-Government
13. AIA, (2012a), E203: Building Information
Leadership: High Performance, Maximum
Modeling and Data Exhibit, The American
Value”, fifth annual global study of e-
Institute of Architects, Washington, DC, U.S.
government, Washington, U.S.
14. AIA, (2012b), G Document 201: Project Digital
3. ACG. (2010). Productivity in the Building
Data Protocol Form, The American Institute of
Network-Assessing the Impacts of Building
Architects, Washington, DC, U.S.
Information Models, Report to the Built
Environment, Innovation and Industry Council 15. AIA, (2012c), G Document 202: Building
(BEIIC) (pp. 98). Sydney: Allen Consulting Group. Information Modeling Form, The American
Institute of Architects, Washington, DC, U.S.
4. Ackoff, R. L. (1971). Towards a System of
Systems Concepts. MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 16. AIA-CA, (2012), BIM in Practice - BIM Education,
17(11), 661-671. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.17.11.661 a Position Paper by the Australian Institute of
Architects and Consult Australia, Available at:
5. AEC, (2012), AEC UK: BIM Protocol
http://www.bim.architecture.com.au/ [last
Implementing UK BIM Standards for the
accessed April 10, 2013].
Architectural, Engineering and Construction
industry 17. AIA and University of Minnesota, (2012), IPD
http://aecuk.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/aec Case Studies, The American Institute of
ukbimprotocol-v2-0.pdf, [last accessed April 10, Architects, Washington, DC, U.S.
2013].
18. Akintoye, A., Goulding, J., & Zawdie, G. (2012).
6. AGC. (2006). The Contractors' Guide to BIM - Construction Innovation and Process
Edition 1: Associated General Contractors of Improvement (First ed.). Chichester, UK: John
America (AGC). Wiley & Sons.
7. AGC, (2006a), Consensus Docs 301 BIM 19. Alroomi, A., Jeong, D., & Oberlender, G. (2012).
Addendum, the Associated General Contractor Analysis of Cost-Estimating Competencies Using
of America, Arlington, U.S. Criticality Matrix and Factor Analysis. Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management,
8. AGC, (2006b), The Contractors' Guide to BIM
138(11), 1270-1280. doi:
(1st Ed), Associated General Contractors of
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000351
America, Arlington, U.S.
20. Alshawi, M., & Faraj, I. (2002). Integrated
9. AGC. (2013). Certificate of Management —
construction environments: technology and
Building Information Modeling. Retrieved
implementation. Construction Innovation, 2(1),
January 4, 2013, from
33-51.
http://www.agc.org/cs/cm-bim
21. AMCA, (2012a), BIM-MEP AUS, Roadmap, 2012
10. Ahmad, M. A., Demain, P., & Price, A. D. F.
Parliamentary Launch, Melbourne, Australia: Air
(2012). BIM Implementation Plans: a
Conditioning and Mechanical Contractors’
Comparative Analysis. Paper presented at the
Association of Australia.
Association of Researchers in Construction
Management (ARCOM) 28th Annual 22. AMCA, (2012b), BIM-MEP AUS Practices:
Conference, Edinburgh, UK. Naming Conventions and Units of Measure.
http://www.arcom.ac.uk/- Melbourne, Australia: Air Conditioning and
docs/proceedings/ar2012-0033- Mechanical Contractors’ Association of
0042_Ahmad_Demian_Price.pdf Australia.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 339
23. Amirebrahimi, S. (2012). BIM for Facilitation of 32. Armstrong, P. I., Day, S. X., McVay, J. P., &
Land Administration Systems in Australia. In A. Rounds, J. (2008). Holland's RIASEC Model as an
Rajabifard, I. Williamson & M. Kalantari (Eds.), A Integrative Framework for Individual
National Infrastructure for Managing Land Differences. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
Information, a Research Snapshot (pp. 95-99). 55(1), 1.
24. Andersson, N., & Büchmann-Slorup, R. (2010, 33. Astley, W. G., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1983).
16-18 November, 2010). BIM-based Scheduling Central perspectives and debates in
of Construction: A Comparative Analysis of organization theory. Administrative science
Prevailing and BIM-based Scheduling Processes. quarterly, 245-273.
Paper presented at the Applications of IT In The
34. Atkinson, D. (2011). Approaches and Strategies
AEC Industry: Proceeding Of The 27th
of Social Research, Essay for Reasearch
International Conference - CIB W78 2010, Cairo,
Methods Class, RMIT.
Egypt.
http://minyos.its.rmit.edu.au/~dwa/Methods.ht
25. Anfara, V. A., & Mertz, N. T. (2006). Theoretical ml
frameworks in qualitative research: SAGE
35. Austin, S., Newton, A., Steele, J., & Waskett, P.
Publications.
(2002). Modelling and managing project
26. Anthony, F. (1992). A software process complexity. International Journal of Project
immaturity model. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes, Management, 20(3), 191-198.
17(4), 22-23. doi:
36. Autodesk. (2005, 12 June, 2006). Parametric
http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/141874.141878
Building Modeling: BIM's Foundation. from
27. ANZRS, (2011), Australian & New Zealand Revit http://images.autodesk.com/adsk/files/Revit_BI
Standards. Version 3 (2012), Available at: M_Parametric_Building_Modeling_Jun05.pdf
http://www.anzrs.org/ [last accessed April 10,
37. Ayyaz, M., Ruikar, K., & Emmitt, S. (2012).
2013]
Towards Understanding BPR Needs for BIM
28. APEC, (2004). “E-government from a User’s Implementation (pp. 18-28): IGI Global.
Perspective”, APEC Telecommunication and
38. Baba, H. D. (2010). Building Information
Information Working Group 29th Meeting
Modeling in Local Construction Industry.
(APEC TEL 29), Hong Kong, China, March 21- 26,
(Master's of Science), Universiti Teknologi
2004.
Malaysia, Johor Nahru. Retrieved from
29. Aranda-Mena, G., Crawford, J., Chevez, A., & http://eprints.utm.my/15311/1/HammadDaboB
Froese, T. (2009). Building information abaMFKA2010.pdf
modelling demystified: does it make business
39. Bach, J. (1994). The Immaturity of the CMM.
sense to adopt BIM? International Journal of
AMERICAN PROGRAMMER, 7, 13-18.
Managing Projects in Business, 2(3), 419-434.
doi: 10.1108/17538370910971063 40. Baird, L., & Henderson, J. C. (2001). The
Knowledge Engine: How to create fast cycles of
30. Arayici, Y., Coates, P., Koskela, L., & Kagioglou,
knowledge to performance and performance to
M. (2011). Knowledge and Technology Transfer
knowledge: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
from Universities to Industries: A Case Study
Approach from the Built Environment Field. 41. Ball, L. Z., Gui, L. Y., Peng, L., & Hu, Q. (2012).
Paper presented at the International Higher Complex structural model information
Education Congress: New Trends and Issues, integration and collaborative computing.
Istanbul, Turkey. Industrial Construction, 42(10).
http://usir.salford.ac.uk/15876/2/Knowledge_a
nd_Technology_Transfer_from_Universities_to
_Industries_A_Case_Study_Approach_from_the
_Built_Environment_Field.pdf
31. Arif, M., Egbu, C., Alom, O., & Khalfan, M. M. A.
(2009). Measuring knowledge retention: a case
study of a construction consultancy in the UAE.
Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management, 16(1), 92-108.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 340
42. Bannan-Ritland, B., Dabbagh, N., & Murphy, K. 49. Baumgärtel, K., Katranuschkov, P., & Scherer, R.
(2000). Learning object systems as constructivist (2012). Design and Software Architecture of a
learning environments: Related assumptions, Cloud-based Virtual Energy Laboratory for
theories, and applications. In D. Wiley (Ed.), The Energy-efficient Design and Life Cycle
Instructional Use of Learning Objects: Online Simulation eWork and eBusiness in
Version (Vol. 24). Online: Association for Architecture, Engineering and Construction (pp.
Instructional Technology and the Association for 9-16): CRC Press.
Educational Communications and Technology.
50. BCA, (2012), Singapore BIM Guide (ver 1.0),
Retrieved from
Building and Construction Authority, Singapore,
http://reusability.org/read/chapters/bannan-
2012.
ritland.doc.
51. Beach, T. H., Rana, O. F., Rezgui, Y., Parashar,
43. Barett, S., Treacy, M., O'Reilly, B., Spillane, J.,
M., & Cardiff, U. (2013). Cloud Computing for
Lim, J., von Meding, J., Geary, K., Deary, N., &
the Architecture, Engineering & Construction
Booth, G. (2013). Early Implementation of BIM
Sector: Requirements, Prototype & Experience.
into a Cold-Formed Steel Design/ Fabricator and
Journal of Cloud Computing: Advances, Systems
an Architectural/Planning Consultancy. Paper
and Applications, 2(1), 8.
presented at the 38th Australasian University
Building Educators Association (AUBEA) 52. BEIIC, (2010), Productivity In The Buildings
Conference, Auckland, New Zealand. Network: Assessing The Impacts Of Building
Information Models. Melbourne, Australia: Built
44. Barison, M. B., & Santos, E. T. (2010). An
Environment Innovation and Indutry Council
overview of BIM specialists. Paper presented at
(BEIIC).
the Computing in Civil and Building Engineering,
Proceedings of the International Conference, 53. Benner, P. (1984). From Novice to Expert:
Nottingham, UK, Nottingham University Press. Excellence and Power in Clinical Nursing
Practice. Menlo Park, California: Addison-
45. Barison, M. B., & Santos, E. T. (2011). The
Wesley Publishers Company.
Competencies of BIM Specialists: A Comparative
Analysis of the Literature Review and Job Ad 54. Bentley. (2003, July 12, 2008). Does the Building
Descriptions. Paper presented at the Industry Really Need to Start Over - A Response
International Workshop on Computing in Civil from Bentley to Autodesk's BIM-Revit Proposal
Engineering 2011. for the Future. Retrieved July 12, 2008, from
http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/41182% http://www.laiserin.com/features/bim/bentley
28416%2973 _bim_whitepaper.pdf
46. Barlish, K. (2011). How to Measure the Benefits 55. Bentley. (2006, 12 June, 2006). Build As One -
of BIM, a Case Study Approach. (Master of BIM is a new way of approaching the design and
Science), Arizona State University. Retrieved documentation of building projects. from
from http://www.bentley.com/en-
http://repository.asu.edu/attachments/57013/c US/Promo/Build+As+One/What+is+it/
ontent/Barlish_asu_0010N_10983.pdf
56. Bergmann, B. (2000). Arbeitsimmanente
47. Barlish, K., & Sullivan, K. (2012). How to Kompetenzentwicklung. Kompetenzentwicklung
measure the benefits of BIM - A case study und Berufsarbeit, 11, 11-39.
approach. Automation in Construction, 24(0),
57. Berio, G., & Harzallah, M. (2005). Knowledge
149-159. doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2012.02.008
management for competence management.
48. Barrett, S. A., Spillane, J. P., & Lim, J. B. (2013). Journal of Universal Knowledge Management
Early Implementation of Building Information (1), 21-28.
Modeling into a Cold-Formed Steel Company:
58. Berlo, L., Dijkmans, T., Hendriks, H, Spekkink, D.
Providing Novel Project Management
and Pel, W. (2012), BIM Quickscan: Benchmark
Techniques and Solutions to Industry. American
of BIM Performance in The Netherlands,
Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture,
Proceedings of the CIB W78 2012: 29th
1(6), 164-173.
International Conference, Beirut, Lebanon, 17-
19 October.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 341
59. Bernstein, P. (2005, October 9, 2008). 72. Bohlouli, M., Ansari, F., & Fathi, M. (2012).
Integrated Practice: It’s Not Just About the Design and Realization of Competence Profiling
Technology. Retrieved October 9, 2008, from Tool for Effective Selection of Professionals in
http://www.aia.org/aiarchitect/thisweek05/tw0 Maintenance Management. Paper presented at
930/tw0930bp_notjusttech.cfm the Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), 2012
IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man,
60. Bertin, J. (2000). Matrix theory ofgraphics.
and Cybernetics, Seoul, Korea.
Information Design Journal, 10(1), 5-19.
73. Bono, E. D. (1970). Lateral Thinking; Creativity
61. Bew, M., Underwood, J., Wix, J., & Storer, G.
Step by Step. New York: Harper & Row.
(2008). Going BIM in a Commercial World.
Paper presented at the EWork and EBusiness in 74. Broquetas, M. (2011). Using BIM as a Project
Architecture, Engineering and Construction: Management Tool - How can BIM improve the
European Conferences on Product and Process delivery of Complex Construction Projects?
Modeling (ECCPM 2008), Sophia Antipolis, (Master Degree Master's Thesis), HFT Stuttgart,
France. Stuttgart, Germany. (x)
62. BIMe, (2013). www.BIMexcellence.net [last 75. Brozova, H., & Subrt, T. (2008). Competency
visited May 19, 2013] Mapping and Modelling in System Design.
Scientia Agriculturae Bohemica, 39(2), 125-131.
63. BIMe. (2013). The BIM Dictionary. Retrieved
May 26, 2013, from BIM Excellence (BIMe) 76. Bryde, D., Broquetas, M., & Volm, J. M. The
http://www.BIMexcellence.net/dictionary project benefits of Building Information
Modelling (BIM). International Journal of
64. BIMScore, (2013). www.BIMScore.com [last
Project Management (0). doi:
visited May 19, 2013]
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.12.0
65. BIMserver. (2011). Open Source Building 01
Information Modelserver. Retrieved October
77. Bryde, D., Broquetas, M., & Volm, J. M. (2013).
20, 2011, from http://bimserver.org/
The project benefits of Building Information
66. BIPS, (2008), bips værktøjer, available at: Modelling (BIM). International Journal of
http://bips.dk/ [last accessed April 11, 2013]. Project Management, 31(7), 971-980. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.12.0
67. BIPS. (2008). Digital Construction, 3D Working
01
Method: Danish Government.
78. Buchholz, W. (2006). Ontology. In D. G.
68. BIS. (2011). A Report for the Government
Schwartz (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Knowledge
Construction Client Group, Building Information
Management (pp. 694-702): Idea Group
Modelling (BIM) Working Party Strategy:
Reference.
Department for Business Innovation & Skills
(BIS). 79. BuildingSMART, (2011a), Public sector demand
for BIM, Newsletter n6, November 2011
69. Blaikie, N. W. H. (2000). Designing Social
Research: The Logic of Anticipation: Polity Press. 80. BuildingSMART, (2011b), All set for the 2015,
the BIM Issue, Build Smart, Issue 09, 2011
70. Bo, X., & Albert, P. C. C. (2012). Measuring
complexity for building projects: a Delphi study. 81. buidingSMART (Producer). (2012, January 4,
Engineering, Construction and Architectural 2013). Certification of Building Information
Management, 19(1), 7-24. Modelling (BIM) Competency for Individuals and
Companies, buildingSMART Singapore.
71. Bogen, C., Rashid, M., & East, W. (2011). A
Retrieved from
Framework for Building Information Fusion.
http://www.aces.org.sg/pdf/110-
Paper presented at the ICT for a Low Carbon
2012_Certification%20of%20BIM%20Competen
Economy, Building Data Models, Proceedings of
cy%20for%20Individuals%20and%20Companies
the 2nd Workshop organised by the EEB Data
_29%20May%202012.pdf
Models Community CIB Conference W078-
W012, Sophia Antipolis, France. http://2011-
cibw078-w102.cstb.fr/papers/Paper-66.pdf
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 342
82. BuildingSMART, (2012), National Building 92. Cerovsek, T. (2011). A review and outlook for a
Information Modelling Initiative, A strategy for ‘Building Information Model’(BIM): A multi-
the focussed adoption of building information standpoint framework for technological
modelling and related digital technologies and development. Advanced Engineering
processes for the Australian built environment Informatics, 25(2), 224-244.
sector, vol. 1, buidlingSMART Australasia.
93. Cerovsek, T. (2012). BIM cube and systems-of-
83. Burgun, A. and Bodenreider, A., (2001), Aspects systems framework eWork and eBusiness in
of the taxonomic relation in the biomedical Architecture, Engineering and Construction (pp.
domain, In Proceedings of the international 421-428): CRC Press.
conference on Formal Ontology in Information
94. Cerovšek, T., Zupančič, T., & Kilar, V. (2010).
Systems, vol 2001 (FOIS '01), ACM, New York,
Framework for model-based competency
NY, USA, 222-233.
management for design in physical and virtual
84. Byggekostnader, (2010), worlds. ITcon–Journal of Information
Byggekostnadsprogrammet for prosjektet Nr. Technology in Construction, 15(1), 1-22.
14292 Bygg Ned Barrierene Rapport fra
95. Chan King, C., Heng, L., & Martin, S. (2012). The
dybdeintervju – kvalitativ, available at:
use of virtual prototyping for hazard
http://www.byggekostnader.no/ [last accessed
identification in the early design stage.
April 5, 2013].
Construction Innovation: Information, Process,
85. Cabinet Office, (2011), Government Management, 12(1), 29-42.
Construction Strategy, - Construction Industry
96. Chandrasekaran, B., Josephson, J. R., &
Council, London, UK, 2011.
Benjamins, V. R. (1999). What are ontologies,
86. Cabinet Office, (2012), The Government Soft and why do we need them? Intelligent Systems
Landings Policy, available at and Their Applications, IEEE [see also IEEE
http://www.bimtaskgroup.org/gsl-policy-2/ Intelligent Systems], 14(1), 20-26.
[last accessed April 5, 2013].
97. Charalambous, G., Demian, P., Yeomans, S.,
87. Card, S. K., & Mackinlay, J. (1997). The structure Thorpe, T., Peters, C., & Doughty, N. (2012). BIM
of the information visualization design space. and Online Collaboration Platforms–An
Paper presented at the IEEE Symposium on investigation into emerging requirements.
Information Visualization, Phoenix, AZ, USA. Paper presented at the Engineering, Project and
Production Management (EPPM 2012), 3rd
88. Cartlidge, A., Hanna, A., Rudd, C., Macfarlane, I.,
International Conference, University of
Windebank, J., & Rance, S. (2007). An
Brighton, UK.
Introductory Overview of ITIL® V3, Version 1.0.
http://www.ppml.url.tw/EPPM/conferences/20
In A. Cartlidge & M. Lillycrop (Eds.): The UK
12/downioad/SESSON3_A/04%20E147.pdf
Chapter of the IT Service Management Forum.
98. Chen, Y., Dib, H. & Cox, R. F. (2012). “A
89. CIBER, (2012), Building Information Modelling
Framework for Measuring Building Information
(BIM): Australian Perspectives and Adoption
Modeling Maturity in Construction Projects”,
Trends, prepared for the Tasmanian Building
29th International Conference on Applications
and Construction Industry Training Board. In G.
of IT in the AEC Industry - CIB W078, Beirut
Brewer (Ed.). Tasmania, Australia: Centre for
Lebanon.
Interdisciplinary Built Environment Research,
University of Newcastle. 99. Cheng, C.P., Lau, G.T., Law, K.H., and Pan, J.
(2008), Albert Jones Regulation retrieval using
90. CIC, (2013), BIM Protocol: Standard Protocol for
industry specific taxonomies, Artificial
use in projects using Building Information
Intelligence and Law September, vol(16), Issue
Models, 1st ed, - Construction Industry Council,
3, pp. 277-303
London, UK, 2013.
100. Cho, Y. S., Lee, S. I., & Bae, J. S. (2013).
91. CEN. (2004). European eConstruction
Reinforcement Placement in a Concrete Slab
Framework (EeF) - Context and Scope for
Object Using Structural Building Information
“eConstruction” CEN Workshop Agreement:
Modeling. Computer-Aided Civil and
European Committee for Standardization.
Infrastructure Engineering. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-
8667.2012.00794.x
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 343
101. Chun, M., Sohn, K., Arling, P., & Granados, N. F. 109. Cottam, H. (1999). Ontologies to Assist Process
(2008). Systems Theory and Knowledge Oriented Knowledge Acquisition (Draft): SPEDE,
Management Systems: The Case of Pratt- Rolls-Royce plc 1999 covered by SPEDE IPR
Whitney Rocketdyne. Paper presented at the agreement.
Proceedings of the 41st Hawaii International
110. CPC, (2011), CPIx BIM assessment form -
Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.
Construction Project Information, available at
102. Clancey, W. J. (1993). The knowledge level http://www.cpic.org.uk/ [last accessed April 5,
reinterpreted: modeling socio-technical 2013].
systems. In K. M. Ford & J. M. Bradshaw (Eds.),
111. Crawford, J. K. (2006). The Project Management
Knowledge acquisition as modeling table of
Maturity Model. Information Systems
contents (pp. 33-49): John Wiley & Sons, New
Management, 23(4), 50-58.
York.
112. CRC-CI, (2007), National Guidelines and Case
103. Clements, J., & Cachadinha, N. (2012). Building
Studies 2007-002-EP, available at:
information modeling como ferramenta de
http://www.construction-
visualização de realidade aumentada em obras
innovation.info/index.php?id=1083, [last
de reabilitação–um caso de estudo. Paper
accessed Apil 8, 2013].
presented at the Building Congress, 2012,
Coimbra, Portugal. 113. CRC-CI. (2008, August 14, 2009). National
http://hdl.handle.net/10362/10013 Guidelines and Case Studies 2007-002-EP. 2008,
from http://bit.ly/AUguide
104. Clemson. (2007, 14 April 2007). Definition of
Policy, Clemson University - Office of Research 114. Cristea, A. I. (2004). What can the Semantic
Compliance, Definitions of Research Compliance Web do for Adaptive Educational Hypermedia?
Terms. Definitions of Research Compliance Educational Technology and Society, 7(4), 40-
Terms. Retrieved 14 April 2007, from 58.
http://www.clemson.edu/research/orcSite/orcI
115. Crosby, P. B. (1979). Quality is free: The art of
RB_DefsP.htm
making quality certain. New York: New
105. Coates, P., Arayici, Y., & Koskela, L. (2010). Using American Library.
the Knowledge Transfer Partnership model as a
116. CWIC. (2004). The Building Technology and
method of transferring BIM and Lean process
Construction Industry Technology Roadmap. In
related knowledge between academia and
A. Dawson (Ed.). Melbourne: Collaborative
industry: A Case Study Approach. Paper
Working In Consortium.
presented at the International Conference of
Ecobuild America: Sustainable, High 117. CWIC. (2005). Collaborative Working in
Performance & Technology Solutions for Built Construction, The Building and Construction
Environment, Washington DC, USA. Industry Technology Roadmap. In A. Dawson
http://usir.salford.ac.uk/12890/ (Ed.). Melbourne: Department of Industry,
Tourism and Resources.
106. CONCUR. (2001, July 11, 2008). Concurrent
Design and Engineering in Building and Civil 118. Dainty, A. R. J., Cheng, M.-I., & Moore, D. R.
Engineering - A project sponsored by the (2005). Competency-based Model for Predicting
European Commission under Brite-Euram 3 Construction Project Managers’ Performance.
(GROWTH) programme. Retrieved August 14, Journal of Management in Engineering, 21(1), 2-
2009, 2008, from http://bit.ly/CONCUR 9.
107. Cooke, N. M., & McDonald, J. E. (1986). A formal 119. Davenport, T. H. (1992). Process Innovation:
methodology for acquiring and representing reengineering work through information
expert knowledge. Paper presented at the technology: Harvard Business School Press.
Proceedings of the IEEE.
120. Davidson, A. R. (2009). A Study of the
108. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of Deployment and Impact of Building Information
Qualitative Research: Techniques and Modelling Software in the Construction
Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory Industry. E-Engineering: a journal of research
(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE papers written by undergraduate students in
Publications. the Faculty of Engineering, the University of
Leeds (1).
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 344
121. Davies, R. (1989). The Creation of New 133. Diane, H. P. (1998). Across the manufacturing-
Knowledge by Information Retrieval and marketing interface Classification of significant
Classification. Journal of Documentation, 45(4), research. International Journal of Operations &
273-301. Production Management, 18(12), 1205-1222.
122. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, 134. Dib, H., Chen, Y., & Cox, R. (2012, 17-19 October
Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of 2012). A Framework for Measuring Building
Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), Information Modeling Maturity Based on
319-340. Perception of Practitioners and Academics
Outside the USA. Paper presented at the
123. DBIS, (2011), BIM Management for value, cost &
Proceedings of the CIB W78 2012: 29th
carbon improvement, report number URN
International Conference, Beirut, Lebanon.
11/948, Department of Business, Innovation
and Skills, London, UK, 2011. 135. DIISR, (2010), Issue Paper: Digital Modelling and
the Built Environment, Built Environment Digital
124. De Jong, T., & Ferguson-Hessler, M. G. M.
Modelling Working Group: Department of
(1996). Types and qualities of knowledge.
Innovation, Industry, Science and Research.
Educational psychologist, 31(2), 105-113.
136. Dillon, J. T. (1984). The Classification of
125. De Paula, N., Uechi, M. E., & Melhado, S. B.
Research Questions. Review of Educational
(2013). Novas demandas para as empresas de
Research, 54(3), 327-361.
projeto de edifícios (New demands for building
design firms). Ambiente Construído, 13(3), 137- 137. Do Nascimento, E. L. (2012). Application of
159. Model Supported Collaboration In Information
Technology for Construction Projects In The City
126. Det Digitale Byggeri, (2010), Digital Construction
Of São José Dos Pinhais (translated title from
– a government initiative available at:
Portuguese). (Masters in Civil Construction
http://www.detdigitalebyggeri.dk/english [last
Maters), Universidade Federal do Paraná,
accessed April 8, 2013].
Curitiba, Brazil. Retrieved from
127. De Vasconcelos, J. B., Kimble, C., Miranda, H., & http://www.prppg.ufpr.br/ppgcc/sites/www.pr
Henriques, V. (2009). A Knowledge-Engine ppg.ufpr.br.ppgcc/files/dissertacoes/d0178.pdf
Architecture for a Competence Management
138. Doss, D. A., Chen, I. C. L., & Holland, L. D. (2008).
Information System. Paper presented at the UK
A proposed variation of the capability maturity
Academy for Information Systems Conference
model framework among financial management
Proceedings 2009.
settings. Paper presented at the Allied
128. De Vries, L. (2013). A research towards Academies International Conference, Tunica.
completing the asset information life cycle.
139. Dossick, C. S., & Neff, G. (2009). Organizational
(Master's of Science in Geographical
divisions in BIM-enabled commercial
Information Management and Applications), TU
construction. Journal of Construction
Delft, The Netherlands. Retrieved from
Engineering and Management, 136(4), 459-467.
http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/student-
theses/2013-0425-200627/Thesis%20report.pdf 140. Downward, P., & Mearman, A. (2007).
Retroduction as Mixed-Methods Triangulation
129. Debus, M. (1989). Methodological Review: a
In Economic Research: Reorienting Economics
Handbook for Excellence in Focus Group
Into Social Science. Cambridge Journal of
Research: Academy for Educational
Economics, 31(1), 77-99. doi:
Development, Washington D.C.
10.1093/cje/bel009
130. Denzer, A., & Hedges, K. (2008). From CAD to
141. Draganidis, F., Chamopoulou, P., & Mentzas, G.
BIM: Educational strategies for the coming
(2006). An Ontology Based Tool for Competency
paradigm shift. AEI.
Management and Learning Paths. Paper
131. Denzin, N. K. (Ed.). (1978). Sociological presented at the I-KNOW 2006, Graz, Austria.
Methods: A Sourcebook (2nd ed.). New York:
142. Draganidis, F., & Mentzas, G. (2006).
McGraw-Hill.
Competency based management: a review of
132. Derbentseva, N., Safayeni, F., & Cañas, A. J. systems and approaches. Information
(2007). Concept maps: Experiments on dynamic Management & Computer Security, 14(1), 51-
thinking. Journal of Research in Science 64.
Teaching, 44(3), 448-465.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 345
143. Dubin, R. (1978). Theory Building: Free Press 154. Ellström, P.-E. (1997). The many meanings of
New York. occupational competence and qualification.
Journal of European Industrial Training, 21(6),
144. Dubois, D. D. (1998). The Competency
266-273. doi: 10.1108/03090599710171567
Casebook: Twelve Studies in Competency-based
Performance Improvement: Human Resource 155. Eppler, M., & Burkhard, R. A. (2005). Knowledge
Development Press. Visualization. In D. G. Schwartz (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of Knowledge Management (pp.
145. Duddy, K., & Kiegeland, J. (2011). Beyond MOF
551-560). Covent Garden, London: Idea Group
Constraints - Multiple Constraint Set Meta
Reference.
modelling for Lifecycle Management. Paper
presented at the ACM/IEEE 14th International 156. Eppler, M. J., & Platts, K. W. (2009). Visual
Conference on Model Driven Engineering Strategizing: The Systematic Use of Visualization
Languages and Systems, Wellington, New in the Strategic-Planning Process. Long Range
Zealand. Planning, 42(1), 42-74.
146. E-BOUW. (2008, July 10, 2008). Building 157. Ermilova, E., & Afsarmanesh, H. (2006).
Information Model(ing) - TNO wiki (no longer Competency and Profiling Management in
online). 2008, from http://wiki.e- Virtual Organization Breeding Environments
bouw.org/index.php?title=BIM_- Network-Centric Collaboration and Supporting
_Building_Information_Model(ing) Frameworks (Vol. 224, pp. 131-142): Springer
US.
147. Eadie, R., Browne, M., Odeyinka, H., McKeown,
C., & McNiff, S. (2013). BIM implementation 158. Fallon, K. K., & Palmer, M. E. (2007). General
throughout the UK construction project Buildings Information Handover Guide:
lifecycle: An analysis. Automation in Principles, Methodology and Case Studies (pp.
Construction, 36(0), 145-151. doi: 91): NIST.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.09.001
159. Farias, F. (2013). Contemporary Strategies for
148. Eastman, C. (1999). Building Product Models: Sustainable Design. (PhD Doctor of Philosophy),
Computer Environments Supporting Design and Texas A&M University, Texas, United States.
Construction. Florida, USA: CRC Press LLC. Retrieved from
http://repository.tamu.edu/handle/1969.1/149
149. Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., & Liston, K.
379
(2011). BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building
Information Modeling for Owners, Managers, 160. Feng, C.-W., Mustaklem, O., & Chen, Y.-J.
Designers, Engineers and Contractors (2 ed.): (2011). The BIM-Based Information Integration
Wiley. Sphere for Construction Projects. Paper
presented at the Proceedings of the 28th
150. Edgar, A. (2007, July 12, 2008). NBIMS -
International Symposium on Automation and
Overview of Building Information Models
Robotics in Construction (ISARC 2011), Seoul,
presentation. Retrieved July 12, 2008, from
Korea.
http://www.facilityinformationcouncil.org/bim/
http://www.iaarc.org/publications/fulltext/S04-
docs/BIM_Slide_Show.ppt.
6.pdf
151. EFQM. (2008). European Foundation for Quality
161. Ferber, J., & Gutknecht, O. (1998). A meta-
Management. Retrieved December 23, 2008,
model for the analysis and design of
from http://www.efqm.org/
organizations in multi-agent systems. Paper
152. El-Diraby, T.A., Lima, A. and Feis, B., (2005), presented at the Multi Agent Systems, 1998.
Domain taxonomy for construction concepts: Proceedings. International Conference on.
toward a formal ontology for construction
162. Ferreira, N. B. T. (2012). A WebGL application
knowledge, Journal of Computing in Civil
based on BIM IFC. (Master's in Information
Engineering ASCE, vol 19 (4), pp. 395–406.
Engineering), Universidade Fernando Pessoa.
153. El-Diraby, T. E. (2012). Epistemology of Retrieved from
Construction Informatics. Journal of http://bdigital.ufp.pt/bitstream/10284/3712/1/
Construction Engineering and Management, A%20WebGL%20Application%20Based%20on%
138(1), 53-65. 20BIM%20IFC%20-
%20Nelson%20Ferreira%2019004.pdf
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 346
163. FIATECH. (2005). Capital Projects Technology 174. Fussel, T., Beazley, S., Aranda-Mena, G., Chevez,
Roadmap. (12 June 2006). A., Crawford, J., Succar, B., Drogemuller, R.,
www.fiatech.org/projects/roadmap/cptri.htm Gard, S., & Nielsen, D. (2009). National
Guidelines for Digital Modelling: Case Studies,
164. Filipe, J., & Liu, K. (2000). The EDA model: an
Cooperative Research Centre for Construction
organizational semiotics perspective to norm-
Innovation. Brisbane, QLD.
based agent design. Paper presented at the
Proceedings of the Agents' 2000 Workshop on 175. Fuxman, A., Giorgini, P., Kolp, M., &
Norms and Institutions in Multi-Agent Systems. Mylopoulos, J. (2001). Information systems as
Spain. social structures. Paper presented at the
Proceedings of the international conference on
165. Fischer, M. (2001). Introduction to 4D Research.
Formal Ontology in Information Systems-
2006. http://www.stanford.edu/group/4D/
Volume 2001.
166. Ford, K. M., Bradshaw, J. M., Adams-Webber, J.
176. Gan, C., & Luo, X. S. (2013). Application of
R., & Agnew, N. M. (1993). Knowledge
Earthquake Resistance Analysis Technique in
acquisition as a constructive modeling activity.
the Design of Constructional Engineering.
International Journal of Intelligent Systems,
Advanced Materials Research, 756-759, 4482-
8(1), 9-32.
4486.
167. Forgues, D., Iordanova, I., & Chiocchio, F.
177. Gandhi, S., & Jupp, J. (2013). Characteristics of
(2012). A Framework for an Integrated and
Green BIM: Process and Information
Evolutionary Body of Knowledge. Paper
Management Requirements. In A. Bernard, L.
presented at the Construction Research
Rivest & D. Dutta (Eds.), Product Lifecycle
Congress, ASCE 2012, Indiana. USA.
Management for Society (Vol. 409, pp. 596-
http://rebar.ecn.purdue.edu/crc2012/papers/p
605): Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
dfs/-275.pdf
178. Garrett, J. and Teizer, J., (2009), Human Factors
168. Forgues, D., & Lejeune, A. (2013). BIM: In Search
Analysis Classification System Relating to
of the Organisational Architect. International
Human Error Awareness Taxonomy in
Journal of Project Organisation and
Construction Safety.” Journal of Construction
Management, 0(0).
Engineering and Management, vol 135(8), pp.
169. Forze, C. and Di Nuzzo, F., (1998), Meta-analysis 754–763.
Applied to Operations Management:
179. Garvin, G. J. (2012). Building Information
Summarizing the Results of Empirical Research,
Modeling (BIM) Performance Assessment
International Journal of Production Research,
Framework for Organisations in the Singapore
vol 36(3), pp. 837-61.
Construction Industry. (Bachelor of Science -
170. Fox, S., & Hietanen, J. (2007). Project and Facilities Management Bachelor of
Interorganizational use of building information Science), National University of Singapore.
models: potential for automational, (U086761Y)
informational and transformational effects.
180. Gazendam, H. W., & Jorna, R. J. (1998). Theories
Construction Management and Economics,
about architecture and performance of multi-
25(3), 289 - 296.
agent systems: University of Groningen.
171. Froese, T. (2003a). Future Directions for IFC-
181. GBA, (2013), Rgd BIM Norm 2013, Government
Based Interoperability. ITCON, 8(Special Issue
Building Agency, The Netherlands, 2013.
IFC - Product models for the AEC arena), 231-
246. 182. Gerrard, A., Zuo, J., Zillante, G., & Skitmore, M.
(2010). Building Information Modelling in the
172. Froese, T. (2003b). Future Directions for Model-
Australian Architecture, Engineering and
Based Interoperability. Paper presented at the
Construction Industry. In J. Underwood & U.
Construction Research 2003.
Isikdag (Eds.), Handbook of Research on
173. Froese, T. M. (2010). The impact of emerging Building Information Modelling and
information technology on project management Construction Informatics: Concepts and
for construction. Automation in Construction, Technologies (pp. 521-544): Information Science
19(5), 531-538. doi: DOI: Reference, IGI Publishing.
10.1016/j.autcon.2009.11.004
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 347
183. Ghandi, S., & Jupp, J. R. (2013). Green BIM and 192. Gregor, S. (2006). The Nature of Theory in
Green Star certification practices: Case studies Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611-
in commercial high-rise office design. Paper 642.
presented at the 38th Australasian University
193. Grilo, A., & Jardim-Goncalves, R. (2010). Value
Building Educators Association (AUBEA)
proposition on interoperability of BIM and
Conference, Auckland, New Zealand.
collaborative working environments.
184. Giel, B., & Issa, R. R. A. (2012). Quality and Automation in Construction, 19(5), 522-530.
Maturity of BIM Implementation within the doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2009.11.003
AECO Industry. Paper presented at the 14th
194. Gruber, T. R. (1993). A translation approach to
International Conference on Computing in Civil
portable ontology specifications. Knowledge
and Building Engineering, Moscow.
Acquisition, 5(2), 199-220.
http://www.icccbe.ru/paper_long/0234paper_l
ong.pdf 195. Gruber, T. R. (1995). Toward principles for the
design of ontologies used for knowledge
185. Giel, B., & Issa, R. R. A. (2013). Synthesis of
sharing? International journal of human-
Existing BIM Maturity Toolsets to Evaluate
computer studies, 43(5-6), 907-928.
Building Owners’ BIM Competency. Paper
presented at the 2013 ASCE International 196. GSA. (2006). The National 3D-4D-BIM Program.
Workshop on Computing in Civil Engineering Washington, DC: U.S. General Services
(IWCCE), University of Southern California, CA. Administration - Public Buildings Service, Office
of the Chief Architect.
186. Gillies, A., & Harris, D. (2009). Performance
improvement in a Community Care Setting in 197. GSA, (2007), GSA BIM guides Series, U.S.
Canada. Paper presented at the Proceedings of General Services Administration, Washington
the 4th European Conference on DC, U.S.
Entrepreneurship and Innovation, The
198. Gulliver, S., Grzybek, H., Radosavljevic, M., &
University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Wiafe, I. (2013). Changing building user attitude
187. Gillies, A., & Howard, J. (2003). Managing and organisational policy towards sustainable
change in process and people: Combining a resource use in healthcare. Health Policy and
maturity model with a competency-based Technology, 0(0). doi:
approach. Total Quality Management & http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2013.03.006
Business Excellence, 14(7), 779-787. doi:
199. Gunasekara, K., & Jayasena, H. S. (2013).
10.1080/1478336032000090996
Identification of a Technological Framework for
188. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Implementing Building Information Modelling In
discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for Sri Lanka. Paper presented at the The Second
qualitative research Retrieved from World Construction Symposium 2013: Socio-
http://bit.ly/gfXxgX Economic Sustainability in Construction,
Colombo, Sri Lanka.
189. Godager, B. (2011). Analysis of the Information
http://www.suranga.net/publications/2013_bi
Needs for Existing Buildings for Integration in
m_tech_framework.pdf
Modern BIM-Based Building Information
Management. Paper presented at the 8th 200. Guo, X. F. (2013). Research on Structure Model
International Conference on Environmental of Building Information Modeling Technology.
Engineering; ICEE-2011 - International Advanced Materials Research, 791, 1704-1709.
Conference on Environmental Engineering,
201. Häkkinen, L. (2012). Utilisation of Building
Vilnius, Lithuania.
Information Models in Production Organisation
http://old.vgtu.lt/leidiniai/leidykla/Enviro2011/
of Foundation Engineering. (Master's of Science
Articles/4/886_892_Godager_B.pdf
Master’s Degree), Tampere University of
190. Gosling, J., Sassi, P., Naim, M., & Lark, R. (2012). Technology, Finland.
Adaptable buildings: A systems approach.
202. Halfawy, M. R., & Froese, T. (2002, 12-14 June
Sustainable Cities and Society (0). doi:
2002). Modeling and Implementation of Smart
10.1016/j.scs.2012.11.002
AEC Objects: An IFC Perspective. Paper
191. Graphisoft. (2006). Virtual Building concept. presented at the CIB w78 conference -
www.graphisoft.com/products/virtual_building/ Distributing Knowledge in Building, Aarhus
School of Architecture, Denmark.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 348
203. Hammersley, M. (Ed.). (2006). Sensitizing 213. Harty, J., & Laing, R. (2013, 27-29 June 2013).
Concepts. London: SAGE. Facilitating meaningful collaboration in
architectural design through the adoption of
204. Hampson, K., & Brandon, P. (2004).
BIM (Building Information Modelling). Paper
Construction 2020: A Vision of Australia's
presented at the Computer Supported
Property and Construction Industry. Australia:
Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD), 2013 IEEE
CRC Construction Innovation.
17th International Conference on.
205. Hanlon, B. P. O. (2013). Decision Making and
214. He, G., Wang, G., & Liu, H. (2014). Sustainable
Design Cognition in the age of Building
Construction Project Life-Cycle Management
Information Models. (Bachelor of Science),
Based on Building Information Modeling. In J.
School of Built Environment, Limerick Institute
Wang, Z. Ding, L. Zou & J. Zuo (Eds.),
of Technology.
Proceedings of the 17th International
206. Hannele, K., Reijo, M., Tarja, M., Sami, P., Jenni, Symposium on Advancement of Construction
K., & Teija, R. (2012). Expanding uses of building Management and Real Estate (pp. 31-42):
information modeling in life-cycle construction Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
projects. Work: A Journal of Prevention,
215. Hedden, H., (2010), The Accidental Taxonomist
Assessment and Rehabilitation, 41(0), 114-119.
(1st Ed.), Information Today Inc: Medford, U.S.
doi: 10.3233/wor-2012-0144-114
216. Henderson, R. M., & Clark, K. B. (1990).
207. Hardgrave, B. C., & Armstrong, D. J. (2005).
Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of
Software process improvement: it's a journey,
Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of
not a destination. Commun. ACM, 48(11), 93-
Established Firms. Administrative science
96. doi:
quarterly, 35(1), 9-30.
http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1096000.1096028
217. Hetherington, R. (2013). The Integration of
208. Haron, A. T. (2013). Organisational readiness to
Architectural Design and Energy Modelling
implement building information modelling: A
Software. (Doctor of Philosophy PhD), The Open
framework for design consultants in Malaysia.
University. Retrieved from
University of Salford. Retrieved from
http://oro.open.ac.uk/38060/1/ThesisRobinaHe
http://usir.salford.ac.uk/29383/1/AHMAD_TAR
therington.pdf
MIZI_PhD_eThesis_2013_BIM_readiness.pdf
218. Hevey, D. (1997). The UK National (and Scottish)
209. Haron, A. T., Marshall-Ponting, A., & Aouad, G.
Vocational Qualification System: State of the Art
(2010). Building Information Modelling-
or in a State? International Journal of Training
Literature Review on Model to Determine the
and Development, 1(4), 242-258. doi:
Level of Uptake by Organisation. Paper
10.1111/1468-2419.00024
presented at the W078 - Special Track, 18th CIB
World Building Congress, Salford, United 219. Hewson, C. (Ed.). (2006). Mixed Methods
Kingdom. Research. London: SAGE.
210. Hartmann, T. A semiotic analysis of user 220. Hietanen, J., and Lehtinen, S., (2006), The Useful
interfaces of building information model Minimum, Tampere University of Technology,
systems. Journal of Computing in Civil Virtual Building Laboratory.
Engineering, 0(ja), null. doi:
221. Hijazeh, E. H. M. (2011). Adopting a
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000358
Competency Based Human Resource
211. Hartmann, T., Gao, J., & Fischer, M. (2010). Management System in Palestine Cellular
Closure to “Areas of Application for 3D and 4D Communication LTD-JAWWAL. (Master in
Models on Construction Projects” by Timo Engineering Management Masters), As-Najah
Hartmann, Ju Gao, and Martin Fischer. Journal National University, Nablous, Palestine.
of Construction Engineering and Management, Retrieved from http://bit.ly/13lTkeR
136(8), 932-934.
222. Hirata, K., Ikeda, M., & Mizoguchi, R. (2001).
212. Hartmann, T., van Meerveld, H., Vossebeld, N., Total resolution for human resource
& Adriaanse, A. (2012). Aligning Building development based on competency ontology.
Information Model Tools and Construction ICCE2001.
Management Methods. Automation in
Construction, 22(0), 605-613. doi:
10.1016/j.autcon.2011.12.011
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 349
223. Ho, S.-P., Tserng, H. P., & Jan, S.-H. (2013). 233. IAI. (2005, 12 June, 2006). Building Smart:
Enhancing Knowledge Sharing Management Project Collaboration through Virtual Design
Using BIM Approach in Construction. The and Construction. Retrieved 12 June, 2006,
Scientifc World Journal, 0(0). from http://buildingsmart.org.au/
224. Hoffman, R. R., & Lintern, G. (2006). Eliciting 234. Ibrahim, M., & Krawczyk, R. (2003). The Level of
and Representing the Knowledge Experts The Knowledge of CAD Objects within the Building
Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Information Model. Paper presented at the
Performance. New York: Cambridge University ACADIA 2003 Conference, Muncie, IN, USA.
Press.
235. Ibrahim, M., Krawczyk, R., & Schipporeit, G.
225. Holsapple, C. W., & Jones, K. (2006). Knowledge (2004). A Web-Based Approach to Transferring
Management Strategy Formation. In D. G. Architectural Information to the Construction
Schwartz (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Knowledge Site Based on the BIM Object Concept. Paper
Management (pp. 419-428): Idea Group presented at the CAADRIA 2004 Conference,
Reference. Seoul, South Korea.
226. Holsapple, C. W., & Joshi, K. D. (2006). 236. Idema, H. J. (2010). Meer begrip voor meer grip.
Knowledge Management Ontology. In D. G. (Master in Civil Engineering and Management
Schwartz (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Knowledge Master Thesis), Universiteit Twente.
Management (pp. 397-402): Idea Group
237. IEEE. (1990). IEEE Standard Computer
Reference.
Dictionary: A Compilation of IEEE Standard
227. Homer-Dixon, T. (2001). The Ingenuity Gap. Computer Glossaries Institute of Electrical and
Canada: Vintage. Electronics Engineers. New York.
228. Hooper, M. (2012). BIM Anatomy An 238. IEEE. (2008). IEEE Standard for Learning
investigation into implementation prerequisites. Technology - Data Model for Reusable
(Master's Thesis), Lund University, Lund, Competency Definitions. IEEE Std 1484.20.1-
Sweden. Retrieved from 2007, C1-26. doi:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downl 10.1109/ieeestd.2008.4445693
oadFile&recordOId=2972126&fileOId=2972151
239. İLAL, M. E. (2007). The Quest for Integrated
229. Hossain, M. K., Munns, A., & Rahman, M. M. Design System: a Brief Survey of Past and
(2013). Enhancing team integration in Building Current Efforts. Middle East Technical University
Information Modelling (BIM) projects. Paper Journal of the Faculty of Architecture (METU
presented at the ARCOM Doctoral Workshop on JFA), 24(2), 10.
BIM Management and Interoperability,
240. Ilozor, B. D., & Kelly, D. J. (2012). Building
Birmingham School of the Built Environment,
Information Modeling and Integrated Project
Birmingham City University, Birmingham,
Delivery in the Commercial Construction
United Kingdom. http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-
Industry: A Conceptual Study. Journal of
docs/workshops/2013-06-
Engineering, Project, and Production
20_Birmingham.pdf#page=82
Management, 2(1), 23-36.
230. Howard-Grenville, J. A. (2005). The persistence
241. IMS. (2002a). IMS Reusable Definition of
of flexible organizational routines: The role of
Competency or Educational Objective - Best
agency and organizational context. Organization
Practice and Implementation Guide IMS Global
Science, 16(6), 618-636.
Learning Consortium Version 1.0 - Final
231. HR-XML-Consortium. (2003). Competencies. Specification. Lake Mary, FL: IMS Global
(Measurable Characteristics). Recommendation. Consortium.
Retrieved from HR-XML Consortium website:
242. IMS. (2002b). IMS Reusable Definition of
http://ns.hr-xml.org/2_0/HR-XML-
Competency or Educational Objective –
2_0/CPO/Competencies.pdf
Information Model IMS Global Learning
232. Hutchinson, A., & Finnemore, M. (1999). Consortium Version 1.0 - Final Specification.
Standardized process improvement for Lake Mary, FL: IMS Global Consortium.
construction enterprises. Total Quality
Management, 10, 576-583.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 350
243. INPRO. (2010, 25 October, 2010). Open 251. IU. (2009b). The Indiana University Architect's
Information Environment for Knowledge-Based Office - IU BIM Proficiency Matrix (Multi-tab
Collaborative Processes throughout the Excel Workbook). 9 tabs. Retrieved from Indiana
Lifecycle of a Building - What is InPro, University BIM Standards website:
Background and General Project Information. http://www.indiana.edu/~uao/IU%20BIM%20Pr
Retrieved June 26, 2013, from oficiency%20Matrix.xls
http://www.inpro-project.eu/what.asp
252. Jaafari, A. (1997). Concurrent Construction and
244. Intagliata, J., Ulrich, D., & Smallwood, N. (2000). Life Cycle Project Management. Journal of
Leveraging leadership competencies to produce Construction Engineering and Management,
leadership brand: Creating distinctiveness by 123(4), 427-436.
focusing on strategy and results. Human
253. Jaco, R. (2004). Developing an IS/ICT
Resource Planning, 23(3), 12-23.
management capability maturity framework.
245. Iordanova, I., Forgues, D., & Chiocchio, F. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2004
(2011). Creation of an Evolutive Conceptual annual research conference of the South African
Know-how Framework for Integrative Building institute of computer scientists and information
Design. Paper presented at the Computer Aided technologists on IT research in developing
Architectural Design Futures 2011: Proceedings countries, Stellenbosch, Western Cape, South
of the 14th International Conference on Africa.
Computer Aided Architectural Design Futures,
254. Jacobsson, M., & Linderoth, H. C. J. (2012). User
Liege, Belgium.
perceptions of ICT impacts in Swedish
http://www.architexturez.net/sites/default/file
construction companies: ‘it’s fine, just as it is’.
s/pdf/cf2011_p108.content.pdf
Construction Management and Economics,
246. ISO. (2004). ISO/IEC 15504-4:2004 Information 30(5), 339-357. doi:
Technology - Process Assessment Part 4: 10.1080/01446193.2012.672757
Guidance on use for process improvement and
255. Jadhav, M., & Koutamanis, A. (2012). Integrated
process capability determination. Retrieved
collaborative approach to managing building
October 11, 2008, from
information modeling projects. Paper presented
http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogu
at the eWork and eBusiness in Architecture,
e_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=37462
Engineering and Construction.
247. ISO. (2008a). ISO 9000 / ISO 14000 Quality http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/b12516-83
Management Principles. Retrieved Decemer
256. Jalote, P. (2000). Moving from ISO9000 to the
23, 2008, from http://www.iso.org/iso/qmp
Higher Levels of the Capability Maturity Model
248. ISO. (2008b). ISO 9001:2008 Quality (CMM). Paper presented at the The 22nd
Management Systems. Retrieved Decemer 23, international conference on Software
2008, from Engineering, Limerick, Ireland.
http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnu
257. Jansson, G. (2010). Industrialised housing design
mber=46486
efficiency. (Master's Master's Thesis),
249. IU, (2009). “The Indiana University Architect's Department of Civil, Mining and Environmental
Office - IU BIM Proficiency Matrix (Multi-tab Engineering, Division of Structural Engineering –
Excel Workbook)”, 9 tabs, available: Timber Structures, Luleå.
http://www.indiana.edu/~uao/IU%20BIM%20Pr
258. Jayasena, H. S., & Weddikkara, C. (2013).
oficiency%20Matrix.xls [accessed March 26,
Assessing the BIM Maturity in a BIM Infant
2011].
Industry. Paper presented at the The Second
250. IU. (2009a). The Indiana University Architect's World Construction Symposium 2013: Socio-
Office - BIM Design & Construction Economic Sustainability in Construction,
Requirements, Follow-Up Seminar (PowerPoint Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Presentation). 32. Retrieved from Indiana http://www.suranga.net/publications/2013_bi
University BIM Standards website: m_maturity.pdf
http://www.indiana.edu/~uao/IU%20BIM%20R
ollout%20Presentation%209-10-2009.pdf
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 351
259. Ji, J., Zhang, Q., Yang, H., & Chang, Z. (2009). 270. Kalinichuk, S., & Tomek, A. (2013). Construction
Research and development of high-rise steel Industry Products Diversification by
structural BIM software and its application in Implementation of BIM. International Journal of
Shanghai Center Project. Journal of Southeast Engineering and Technology, 3(4), 254-262.
University. Natural Science Edition, 39.
271. Kamara, J. M. (2012). Integration in the project
260. Jiao, W., Debenham, J., & Henderson-Sellers, B. development process of a Private Finance
(2005). Organizational models and interaction Initiative (PFI) project. Architectural Engineering
patterns for use in the analysis and design of and Design Management, 8(4), 228-245. doi:
multi-agent systems. Web Intelligence and 10.1080/17452007.2012.666729
Agent Systems, 3(2), 67-83.
272. Kaner, I., Sacks, R., Kassian, W., & Quitt, T.
261. John, G. A., & Ganah, A. (2011). Integrating BIM (2008). Case studies of BIM adoption for precast
and Planning Software for Health and Safety concrete design by mid-sized structural
Site Induction. Paper presented at the The Royal engineering firms. ITCON, 18, 303-323.
Institution of Chartered Surveyors International
273. Kao, D., & Archer, N. P. (1997). Abstraction in
Research Conference, COBRA 2011, 12-13
conceptual model design. International journal
September 2011, University of Salford, UK.
of human-computer studies, 46(1), 125-150.
http://clok.uclan.ac.uk/2787/
274. Kaplan, B., & Maxwell, J. (2005). Qualitative
262. Johnson, C. E., Hurtubise, L. C., Castrop, J.,
Research Methods for Evaluating Computer
French, G., Groner, J., Ladinsky, M., McLaughlin,
Information Systems. In J. Anderson & C. Aydin
D., Plachta, L., & Mahan, J. D. (2004). Learning
(Eds.), Evaluating the Organizational Impact of
management systems: technology to measure
Healthcare Information Systems (pp. 30-55).
the medical knowledge competency of the
New York: Springer.
ACGME. Medical Education, 38(6), 599-608. doi:
10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.01792.x 275. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996a). The
Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy Into
263. Jonassen, D. H. (2005). Tools for Representing
Action: Harvard Business School Press.
Problems and the Knowledge Required to Solve
Them Knowledge and Information Visualization 276. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996b). Using the
(pp. 82-94). Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management
System. Harvard Business Review, 74, 75-87.
264. Jones, C. (1994). Assessment and control of
software risks: Prentice-Hall, New Jersey. 277. Kasim, T., LI, H., & Rezgui, Y. (2012). BREEAM
Based Dynamic Sustainable Building Design
265. Jung, Y., & Joo, M. (2010). Building information
Assessment. Paper presented at the European
modelling (BIM) framework for practical
Group for Intelligent Computing in Engineering
implementation. Automation in Construction, In
(EG-ICE), Technische Universität München,
Press, Corrected Proof. doi: DOI:
Germany, Munich, Germany.
10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.010
http://www.cie.bv.tum.de/upload/egice/papers
266. Jupp, J. R. (2013). Incomplete BIM /25.pdf
Implementation: Exploring Challenges and the
278. Kassem, M., Iqbal, N., & Dawood, N. (2013). A
Role of Product Lifecycle Management
Practice oriented BIM framework and
Functions. In A. Bernard, L. Rivest & D. Dutta
workflows Paper presented at the 2013 ASCE
(Eds.), Product Lifecycle Management for
International Workshop on Computing in Civil
Society (Vol. 409, pp. 630-640): Springer Berlin
Engineering (IWCCE), University of Southern
Heidelberg.
California, CA.
267. Jupp, V. (Ed.). (2006). The Sage dictionary of
279. Kashyap, V. & Sheth, A., (1996), Schematic and
social research methods. London: SAGE.
semantic similarities between database objects:
268. Kagioglou, M., Cooper, R., & Aouad, G. (2001). A context-based approach, VLDB Journal, vol 5
Performance management in construction: a (4).
conceptual framework. Construction
280. Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993). The
Management and Economics, 19(1), 85-95.
Discipline of Teams. Harvard Business Review,
269. Kakabadase, A. P. (1991). The Wealth Creators: 71, 111-120.
Top People, Top Teams, Executive Best Practice.
London: Kogan Page.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 352
281. Keller, T., Gerjets, P., Scheiter, K., & Garsoffky, 291. Kiviniemi, A., (2007), Finnish ICT Barometer
B. (2006). Information visualizations for 2007, Tekes. Available at:
knowledge acquisition: The impact of http://cic.vtt.fi/projects/vbe-
dimensionality and color coding. Computers in net/data/2007_ICT_barometer.pdf [last
Human Behavior, 22(1), 43-65. accessed on 22/04/2013].
282. Keller, T., & Tergan, S. O. (2005). Visualizing 292. Kiviniemi, A., Tarandi, V., Karlshøj, J., Bell, H., &
Knowledge and Information: An Introduction Karud, O. J. (2008). Review of the Development
Knowledge and Information Visualization: and Implementation of IFC compatible BIM:
Searching for Synergies. Springer-Verlag: Erabuild.
Heidelberg (pp. 1-23).
293. Kjartansdóttir, I. B. (2011). BIM Adoption in
283. Khanzode, A., Fischer, M., & Reed, D. (2008). Iceland and Its Relation to Lean Construction.
Benefits and Lessons Learned of Implementing (Master of Science in Construction Management
Building Virtual Design and Construction (VDC) Masters), Reykjavík University, Reykjavík.
Technologies for Coordination of Mechanical,
294. Kolb, D. A., Boyatzis, R. E., & Mainemelis, C.
Eectrical, and Plumbing (MEP) Systems on a
(2000). Experiential Learning Theory: Previous
Large Healthcare Project. ITCON, 18, 324-342.
Research and New Directions. In R. J. Sternberg
284. Khemlani, L. (2005). Academic Research in & L. F. Zhang (Eds.), Perspectives on Cognitive,
Architectural Computing. AECbytes. Learning, and Thinking Styles. New Jersey:
http://www.aecbytes.com/buildingthefuture/Ar Lawrence Erlbaum.
chComputingResearch.htm
295. Kong, S. C. W., Li, H., Liang, Y., Hung, T.,
285. Khosrowpour, M. (2012). Dictionary of Anumba, C., & Chen, Z. (2005). Web services
Information Science and Technology (2nd ed.): enhanced interoperable construction products
Idea Group Inc (IGI) Global. catalogue. Automation in Construction, 14(3),
343-352.
286. Khosrowshahi, F., & Arayici, Y. (2012). Roadmap
for implementation of BIM in the UK 296. Kosovac, B., Froese, T. M., & Vanier, D. J. (2000,
construction industry. Engineering, Construction 28-30 June, 2000.). Integrating Heterogeneous
and Architectural Management, 19(6), 610-635. Data Representations In Model-Based AEC-FM
doi: 10.1108/09699981211277531 Systems. Paper presented at the CIT 2000 – The
CIB-W78, IABSE, EG-SEA-AI International
287. Kim, K. P., & Park, K. S. (2013). BIM Feasibility
Conference on Construction Information
Study For Housing Refurbishment Projects In
Technology, Reykjavik, Iceland.
The UK. Organization, Technology &
Management In Construction: an International 297. Kotnik, T. (2010). Digital Architectural Design as
Journal, 5(Special), 765-774. Exploration of Computable Functions.
International Journal of Architectural
288. Kim, T. W., Rajagopal, R., Fischer, M., & Kam, C.
Computing, 8(1), 1-16.
(2012). A Knowledge-Based Framework for
Automated Space-Use Analysis CIFE Technical 298. Kouider, T., & Paterson, G. J. (2013).
Report (pp. 1-34). Stanford: Center for Architectural Technology and the BIM acronym:
Integrated Facility Engineering (CIFE), Stanford Critical Perspectives of Evangelical and
University. Evolutionary Paradigms for Technical Design.
Paper presented at the 4th International
289. Kim, T. W., Rajagopal, R., Fischer, M., & Kam, C.
Congress of Architectural Technology, Sheffield,
(2013). A knowledge-based framework for
UK.
automated space-use analysis. Automation in
Construction, 32(0), 165-176. doi: 299. Kovacic, I., Filzmoser, M., Faatz, S., & Koeszegi,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.08.002 S. T. (2011). Research Project Cost Benefits of
Integrated Planning: First experiment-
290. Kimmance, A. G. (2002). An integrated Product
results.pdf. Organization, Technology &
and Process Information Modelling System for
Management In Construction: an International
On-Site Construction. (DX240137). Thesis (Ph.
Journal, 3(1), 254-263.
D.) - University of Loughborough, UK.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 353
300. Kovacic, I., & Oberwinter, L. (2012). BIM- 309. Kunz, J., & Fischer, M. (2005). Virtual design and
Supported Lifecycle-oriented Design for Energy construction: themes, case studies and
Efficient Industrial Facility - a Case Study. Paper implementation suggestions. Center for
presented at the Creative Construction Integrated Facility Engineering, Working Paper
Conference 2012, Budapest, Hungary. (97).
http://publik.tuwien.ac.at/files/PubDat_209663
310. Kwak, Y. H., & Ibbs, W. C. (2002). Project
.pdf
Management Process Maturity (PM)2 Model.
301. Kovacic, I., Oberwinter, L., & Müller, C. (2013). ASCE, Journal of Management in Engineering,
BIM-supported planning process for sustainable 18(3), 150-155.
buildings–Process Simulation and Evaluation
311. Kwasnik, B. (1999). The Role of Classification in
through Exploratory Research. Paper presented
Knowledge Representation and Discovery.
at the CIB 2013 World Congress, Brisbane,
Library Trends, 48(1), 22-47.
Australia.
312. Laakso, M. (2009, September 2009). Developing
302. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Bell, B. S. (2003). Work
a Multidisciplinary Process View on IFC
Groups and Teams in Organizations. In W. C.
Standardization. Paper presented at the
Borman, D. R. Ilgen & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 2009 w78 Conference -
Handbook of psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 333-375).
Managing IT in Construction / Managing
London: Wiley.
Construction for Tomorrow, Istanbul, Turkey.
303. KPMJ, (1997). “Electronic Commerce Research
313. Lainhart IV, J. W. (2000). COBIT™: A
Report”, London, UK.
Methodology for Managing and Controlling
304. Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A Revision of Bloom's Information and Information Technology Risks
Taxonomy: An Overview. Theory Into Practice, and Vulnerabilities. Journal of Information
41(4), 212-218. doi: Systems, 14(s-1), 21-25.
10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
314. Landauer, C. (1998). Data, information,
305. Krystallis, I., Demian, P., & Price, A. D. (2012, knowledge, understanding: computing up the
September 5-7, 2012). Design of flexible and meaning hierarchy. Paper presented at the IEEE
adaptable healthcare buildings of the future-a International Conference Systems, Man, and
BIM approach. Paper presented at the First UK Cybernetics, San Diego, California.
Conference on BIM, Newcastle, UK.
315. Lave, C. A., & March, J. G. (1993). An
306. Kubba, S., (2012) Handbook of Green Building Introduction to Models in the Social Sciences.
Design and Construction, Elsevier: Watham, Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America.
USA.
316. Lavikka, R., Smeds, M., & Smeds, R. (2012).
307. Kulasekara, G., Jayasena, H. S., & Ranadewa, K. Towards coordinated BIM based design and
A. T. O. (2013). Comparative Effectiveness of construction process eWork and eBusiness in
Quantity Surveying in a Building Information Architecture, Engineering and Construction (pp.
Modelling Implementation. Paper presented at 513-520): CRC Press.
the The Second World Construction Symposium
317. Lawler, E. E. I. (1994). From job-based to
2013: Socio-Economic Sustainability in
competency-based organizations. Journal of
Construction, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Organizational Behavior, 15(1), 3-15.
http://www.suranga.net/publications/2013_bi
m_qseffectiveness.pdf 318. Le, M. A. T., Mohus, F., Kvarsvik, O. K., & Lie, M.
(2006). The HITOS project-A full scale IFC test.
308. Kunz, A. (2012). Challenges to BIM Adoption
Paper presented at the Ework and Ebusiness in
and why Project-Led Implementations Succeed
Architecture, Engineering and Construction:
and Office Implementations Fail. American
Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on
Building Today. Retrieved from American
Product and Process Modelling, 13-15
Building Today website:
September 2006, Valencia, Spain.
http://www.americanbuildingtoday.com/challe
http://www.fsr.is/lisalib/getfile.aspx?itemid=18
nges-to-bim-adoption-and-why-project-led-
58
implementations-succeed-and-office-
implementations-fail/
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 354
319. Leca, B., & Naccache, P. (2006). A Critical Realist 330. Levine, L. (2000). Learning: The Engine for
Approach To Institutional Entrepreneurship. Technology Change Management - CrossTalk,
Organization, 13(5), 627-651. doi: The Journal of Defense Software Engineering.
10.1177/1350508406067007 CrossTalk, The Journal of Defense Software
Engineering, (January).
320. Lee, A., Wu, S., Aouad, G., Cooper, R., & Tah, J.
http://www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/2000/01/le
(2005). nD Modelling Roadmap: A Vision for nD-
vine.html
Enabled Construction. Salford: University of
Salford. 331. Ley, T., & Albert, D. (2003). Identifying
employee competencies in dynamic work
321. Lee, A., Wu, S., Marshall-Ponting, A. J., Aouad,
domains: methodological considerations and a
G., Cooper, R., Koh, I., Fu, C., Betts, M.,
case study. Journal of Universal Computer
Kagioglou, M., & Fischer, M. (2003). Developing
Science, 9(12), 1500-1518.
a Vision of nD-Enabled Construction. Salford:
University of Salford. 332. Liaserin, J. (2002, June 26, 2012). Comparing
Pommes and Naranjas. 2002, from
322. Lee, A. S. (1991). Integrating Positivist and
http://www.laiserin.com/features/issue15/feat
Interpretive Approaches to Organizational
ure01.php
Research. Organization Science, 2(4), 342-365.
333. Liebich, T. (Ed.). (2002). Standard analysis –
323. Lee, J., & Jeong, Y. (2012). User-centric
Current AEC situation – Building Models:
knowledge representations based on ontology
European network for product and project data
for AEC design collaboration. Computer-Aided
exchange, e-work and e-business in
Design, In Press. doi: 10.1016/j.cad.2012.03.011
Architecture, Engineering and Construction, IST
324. Lee, S., & Ha, M. Customer interactive building – 2001-32035 (January).
information modeling for apartment unit
334. Liebich, T., Weise, M., Böhms, M., Bonsma, P.,
design. Automation in Construction (0). doi:
Fies, B., Bordeau, M., Dunwell, S., Pratt, J.,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.05.026
Babič, N. Č., Tibaut, A., & Nour, M. (2008). InPro
325. Leeuwis, A. J. (2012). BIM at Small Architectural - Specifications For An Open ICT Platform (pp.
Firms - English Summary. (Master Real Estatae 6): Integrated Project (InPro) co-funded by the
& Housing Masters), Delft University of European Commission within the Sixth
Technology, Delft, Netherlands. Framework Programme.
326. Lehtinen, T. (2010). Advantages And 335. Lin, Y.-C. (2010). A CAD-Based Interface
Disadvantages of Vertical Integration in The Management System using Building Information
Implementation of Systemic Process Modelling in Construction. In J. Underwood & U.
Innovations: Case studies on implementing Isikdag (Eds.), Handbook of Research on
building information modelling (BIM) in the Building Information Modelling and
Finnish construction industry. (Master’s Thesis Construction Informatics: Concepts and
Master’s Thesis), Aalto University. Retrieved Technologies (pp. 170-169): Information Science
from http://lib.tkk.fi/Dipl/2010/urn100299.pdf Reference, IGI Publishing.
327. Lehtinen, T. (2012). Boundaries Matter – The 336. Lin, Y.-M. (2012). Extension of Building
Pros and Cons of Vertical Integration in BIM Information Model for Disaster Mitigation:
Implementation, Advances in Production Using the Revit Platform. (Master's Thesis),
Management Systems. Value Networks: National Central University, Chungli City,
Innovation, Technologies, and Management. In Taoyuan County. Retrieved from
J. Frick & B. Laugen (Eds.), (Vol. 384, pp. 578- http://etd.lib.nctu.edu.tw/cgi-
585): Springer Boston. bin/gs32/ncugsweb.cgi?o=dncucdr&s=id=%22G
C993202098%22.#XXXX
328. Leicht, R., & Messner, J. (2008). Moving Toward
an ‘Intelligent’ Shop Modelling Process. ITCON, 337. Lin, Y. C., Su, Y. C., & Chen, Y. P. (2012). Mobile
18, 286-302. 2D Barcode/BIM-based Facilities Maintaining
Management System. Paper presented at the
329. León, E. A., & Molina, M. R. (Eds.). (2009). New
Mobile 2D Barcode/BIM-based Facilities
Interfaces, new scenarios. Vroom n. 0: Vroom n.
Maintaining Management System, Singapore.
0: The emerging potential of collaborative 3D
http://www.ipedr.com/vol43/011-ICFME2012-
web platforms. Sao Paulo, Brazil.
M00027.pdf
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 355
338. Linderoth, H. C. J. (2010). Understanding 348. Luthra, A. (2010). Implementation of Building
adoption and use of BIM as the creation of actor Information Modeling in Architectural Firms in
networks. Automation in Construction, 19(1), India. (Master of Science Master's), Purdue
66-72. doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2009.09.003 University.
339. Lindgren, R., Henfridsson, O., & Schultze, U. 349. Lv, X., Zou, Y., Huang, Y., & Xu, J. (2011). The 3D
(2004). Design Principles for Competence Coordinated Building Design Based on Building
Management Systems: a Synthesis of an Action Information Modeling. Advanced Materials
Rresearch Study. MIS Quarterly, 28(3), 435-472. Research, 243 - 249, 6587-6591. doi:
10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.243-249.6587
340. Lockamy III, A., & McCormack, K. (2004). The
development of a supply chain management 350. Macdonald, J. (2011). BIM – Adding Value by
process maturity model using the concepts of Assisting Collaboration. Paper presented at the
business process orientation. Supply Chain Lightweight Structures Association Australia,,
Management: An International Journal, 9(4), Sydney, Australia. http://codebim.com/wp-
272-278. content/uploads/2013/06/2011_Macdonald_LS
AA.pdf
341. Lohse, G. L., Biolsi, K., Walker, N., & Rueter, H.
H. (1994). A Classification of Visual 351. Macdonald, J. A. (2012). A Framework for
Representations. Communications of the ACM, Collaborative BIM Education across the AEC
37(12), 36-49. doi: Disciplines. Paper presented at the AUBEA
http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/198366.198376 2012, Sydney, AU.
342. Love, P., Edwards, D., Han, S., & Goh, Y. (2011). 352. Maddocks, A. P., Sher, W. D., & Wilson, A.
Design Error Reduction: Toward the Effective (2000). A Web-based personal and professional
Utilization of Building Information Modeling. development tool to promote lifelong learning
Research in Engineering Design, 1-15. doi: within the construction industry. Educational
10.1007/s00163-011-0105-x Technology and Society, 3(1), 77-83.
343. Love, P. E. D., Simpson, I., Hill, A., & Standing, C. 353. Majcherek, E. (2013). Building Information
(2013). From justification to evaluation: Building Modelling in the business of architecture: Case
information modeling for asset owners. of Sweden. (Entrepreneurship and Innovation
Automation in Construction, 0(0). doi: Management Master's of Science), KTH Royal
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.05.008 Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
Retrieved from http://www.diva-
344. Lu, W., Peng, Y., Shen, Q., & Li, H. (2013).
portal.org/smash/get/diva2:634189/FULLTEXT0
Generic Model for Measuring Benefits of BIM as
1.pdf
a Learning Tool in Construction Tasks. Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, 354. Mäkeläinen, T., Hyvärinen, J., & Peura, J. (2012).
139(2), 195-203. doi: BIM practices and challenges framed - an
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000585 approach to systemic change management
eWork and eBusiness in Architecture,
345. Lucas, J., Bulbul, T., & Thabet, W. (2013). A pilot
Engineering and Construction (pp. 497-504):
model for a proof of concept healthcare facility
CRC Press.
information management prototype. Journal of
Information Technology in Construction 355. Manning, R., & Messner, J. (2008). Case studies
(ITCON), 18. in BIM implementation for programming of
healthcare facilities; . ITCON, 13, 246-257.
346. Lucas, J. D. (2012). An Integrated BIM
Framework to Support Facility Management in 356. Mansfield, R. S. (1996). Building competency
Healthcare Environments. (PhD PhD), Virginia models: Approaches for HR professionals.
Polytechnic Institute and State University, Human Resource Management, 35(1), 7-18.
Blacksburg, VA. Retrieved from
357. Manzione, L. (2013). Proposition for a
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-
Collaborative Design Process Management
08072012-155247/ (etd-08072012-155247)
Conceptual Structure using BIM. (PhD in
347. Luth, G. P., Schorer, A., & Turkan, Y. (2013). Engineering PhD), University of São Paulo, São
Lessons From Using BIM to Increase Design- Paulo, Brazil.
Construction Integration. Practice Periodical on
Structural Design and Construction.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 356
358. Manzione, L., Abaurre, M. W., Melhado, S. B., & 366. McCormack, K. (2001). Supply Chain Maturity
Owen, R. (2011). Challenges to implementation Assessment: A Roadmap for Building the
of collaborative design process: analysis of Extended Supply Chain. Supply Chain Practice,
human factor. Paper presented at the TIC2011, 3, 4-21.
Salvador, Bahia, Brasil.
367. McCormack, K., Ladeira, M. B., & Oliveira, M. P.
http://www.coordenar.com.br/wp-
V. d. (2008). Supply chain maturity and
content/uploads/2013/04/2011_projetocolabor
performance in Brazil. Supply Chain
ativo-tic.pdf
Management: An International Journal, 13(4),
359. Marrelli, A. F. (1998). An introduction to 272-282. doi: 10.1108/13598540810882161
competency analysis and modeling.
368. McCuen, T. L. (2007). Author response to
Performance Improvement, 37(5), 8-17.
comment - "The Interactive Capability Maturity
360. Martin-Dorta, N., Assef, P. G. d. C., Cantero, J. D. Model and 2007 AIA TAP BIM Award Winners"
l. T., & Rufino, G. R. (2013, April 17-19, 2013). blog post. AECbytes. http://tinyurl.com/cztsto
Implementing BIM techniques for energy
369. McGraw-Hill Construction, (2012). “The
analysis: a case study of buildings at university
Business value of BIM in North America: Multi-
of la Laguna. Paper presented at the
Year Trend Analysis and User Ratings (2007-
Environmental security, geological hazards and
2012)”, Bedford, U.S.
management, Tenerife, UK.
370. Meredith, J. (1993). Theory building through
361. Mathes, A. (2004). Folksonomies - Cooperative
conceptual methods. International Journal of
Classification and Communication through
Operations & Production Management, 13(5), 3.
Shared Metadata. Paper presented at the
Computer Mediated Communication, 371. Meredith, J. R., Raturi, A., Amoako-Gyampah, K.,
LIS590CMC (Doctoral Seminar), Graduate School & Kaplan, B. (1989). Alternative research
of Library and Information Science, University of paradigms in operations. Journal of Operations
Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Management, 8(4), 297-326. doi: Doi:
http://www.adammathes.com/academic/comp 10.1016/0272-6963(89)90033-8
uter-
372. Merriam-Webster. (2013). Dictionary.
mediatedcommunication/folksonomies.html
Retrieved May 36, 2013, from Merriam-
362. Mathieu, J., Maynard, M. T., Rapp, T., & Gilson, Webster, Encyclopedia Britanica
L. (2008). Team Effectiveness 1997-2007: A http://www.merriam-
Review of Recent Advancements and a Glimpse webster.com/dictionary/dictionary
Into the Future. Journal of Management, 34(3),
373. Merschbrock, C., & Munkvold, B. (2013, 12-14
410-476. doi: 10.1177/0149206308316061
June 2013). Improving Interorganizational
363. Matipa, W. M., Cunningham, P., & Naik, B. Design Practices in the Wood‐based Building
(2010). Assessing the Impact of New Rules of Industry. Paper presented at the 7th Nordic
Cost Planning on Building Information Model Conference on Construction Economics and
(BIM) Schema Pertinent to Quantity Surveying Organization, Trondheim, Norway.
Practice. Paper presented at the Association of
374. Merschbrock, C., & Munkvold, B. E. (2012a). A
Researchers in Construction Management
Research Review on Building Information
(ARCOM) 26th Annual Conference, Reading,
Modeling in Construction―An Area Ripe for IS
England. http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-
Research. Communications of the Association
docs/proceedings/ar2010-0625-
for Information Systems, 31(10).
0632_Matipa_Cunningham_and_Naik.pdf
375. Merschbrock, C., & Munkvold, B. E. (2012b). A
364. Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative Research
Research Review on Building Information
Design: An Interactive Approach. Thousand
Modeling in Construction - An Area Ripe for IS
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Research. Communications of the Association
365. McClelland, D. C. (1973). Testing for for Information Systems, 31(1), 10.
Competence Rather Than for Intelligence.
376. Michalski, R. S. (1987). Concept Learning. In S. S.
American psychologist, 28(1), 1.
Shapiro (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Artificial
Intelligence (Vol. 1, pp. 185-194). New York:
Wiley.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 357
377. Michalski, R. S., & Stepp, R. E. (1987). Clustering. 389. Mom, M., & Hsieh, S.-H. (2012a). Toward
In S. S. Shapiro (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Artificial Performance Assessment of BIM Technology
Intelligence (Vol. 1, pp. 103-111). New York: Implementation. Paper presented at the 14th
Wiley. International Conference on Computing in Civil
and Building Engineering, Moscow.
378. Miettinen, R., Kerosuo, H., Korpela, J., Mäki, T.,
http://www.icccbe.ru/paper_long/0187paper_l
& Paavola, S. (2012). An activity theoretical
ong.pdf
approach to BIM-research eWork and eBusiness
in Architecture, Engineering and Construction 390. Mom, M., & Hsieh, S.-H. (2012b). Toward
(pp. 777-781): CRC Press. performance assessment of BIM technology
implementation. Paper presented at the
379. Mihindu, S., & Arayici, Y. (2008, 9-11 July 2008).
International Conference on Computing in Civil
Digital Construction through BIM Systems will
and Building Engineering (ICCBBE2012),
Drive the Re-engineering of Construction
Moscow, Russia. http://bit.ly/O7KxZD
Business Practices. Paper presented at the
Visualisation, 2008 International Conference. 391. Mom, M., Tsai, M. H., & Hsieh, S.-H. (2011). On
Decision-Making and Technology-Implementing
380. Milgram, P. and Kishino, F., (1994), A Taxonomy
Factors for BIM Adoption. Paper presented at
of Mixed Reality Visual Displays, IEICE
the International Conference on Construction
Transactions on Information and Systems E77-
Applications of Virtual Reality (CONVR2011),
D, vol. 12, pp. 1321-1329.
Weimar, Germany.
381. Miller, H. J. (2013). Beyond sharing: cultivating
392. Monteiro, A., & Poças Martins, J. (2013). A
cooperative transportation systems through
survey on modeling guidelines for quantity
geographic information science. Journal of
takeoff-oriented BIM-based design (corrected
Transport Geography, 31, 296-308.
proof). Automation in Construction, 0(0). doi:
382. Miller, R. L., & Brewer, J. D. (2003). The A-Z of http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.05.005
Social REsearch. London: Sage.
393. Morgan, G. (2006). Images of Organization.
383. Milton, N. R. (2007a). Knowledge Acquisition in Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
Practice: A Step-by-step Guide: Springer,
394. Morse, J. M. (1995). The Significance of
London.
Saturation. Qualitative Health Research, 5(2),
384. Milton, N. R. (2007b). Specification for the 147-149.
General Technological Ontology (GTO).
395. Mrkela, A., & Rebolj, D. (2009). Automated
http://www.pcpack.co.uk/gto/notes/files/GTO
construction schedule creation using project
%20Spec%20v4.doc
information model. Paper presented at the CIB
385. Minsky, M. (Ed.). (1975). A Framework for W78 Conference - Managing IT in Construction,
Representing Knowledge. New York: McGraw- Istanbul, Turkey.
Hill. http://itc.scix.net/data/works/att/w78-2009-1-
03.pdf
386. Mirabile, R. J. (1997). Everything You Wanted to
Know about Competency Modeling. Training 396. Muehlen, M., & Recker, J. (2008). How Much
and development, 51(8), 73-77. Language Is Enough? Theoretical and Practical
Use of the Business Process Modeling Notation.
387. Mitroff, I. I., & Mason, R. O. (1982). Business
In Z. Bellahsène & M. Léonard (Eds.), Advanced
Policy and Metaphysics: Some Philosophical
Information Systems Engineering (Vol. 5074, pp.
Considerations. The Academy of Management
465-479): Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Review, 7(3), 361-371.
397. Mulenga, K., & Han, Z. (2010). Optimizing BIM
388. Mom, M. & Hsieh, S.-H. (2012). “Toward
Adoption and Mindset Change - Emphasize on a
Performance Assessment of BIM Technology
Construction Company. (Master of Science
Implementation”, in 14th International
Master's), Chalmers University of Technology,
Conference on Computing in Civil and Building
Göteborg, Sweden. Retrieved from
Engineering, Moscow.
http://www.kelmatics.com/apps/documents/
http://www.icccbe.ru/paper_long/0187paper_l
ong.pdf
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 358
398. Mustière, S., Zucker, J. D., & Saitta, L. (1999). 410. NIST. (2004). Cost Analysis of Inadequate
Cartographic generalization as a combination of Interoperability in the U.S. Capital Facilities
representing and abstracting knowledge. Industry. In M. P. O. C. Gallaher, A. C.; Dettbarn,
Proceedings of the seventh ACM international J. L., Jr.; Gilday, L. T. (Ed.): National Institute of
symposium on Advances in geographic Standards and Technology.
information systems, 162-164.
411. NIST and FIATECH, (2007), NISTIR 7417 General
399. Mutai, A. (2009). Factors Influencing the Use of Buildings Information Handover Guide:
Building Information Modeling (BIM) within Principles, Methodology and Case Studies,
Leading Construction Firms in the United States National Institute of Building Sciences,
of America. (Doctor of Philosophy Doctor of Washington, DC, U.S.
Philosophy), Indiana State University, Terre
412. NIST, (2007). “National building information
Haute.
modeling standard - version 1.0 - part 1:
400. Myers, M. D. (1997a). Qualitative Research in overview, principles and Methodologies”,
Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 21(2), 241- National Institute of Building Sciences,
242. Washington, DC, U.S.
401. Myers, M. D. (1997b). Qualitative Research in 413. NIST. (2008). Baldrige National Quality Program
Information Systems. - Criteria for Performance Excellence.
http://www.qual.auckland.ac.nz/ http://www.quality.nist.gov/PDF_files/2008_Bu
siness_Nonprofit_Criteria.pdf
402. Nagy, M. V. (2013). Utilizing Building
Information Models with Mobile Augmented 414. Novak, J. D. (2003, 1 April, 2007). CMap Tools -
Reality and Location-Based Services. (Master of Concept map about concept maps. Retrieved 1
Science in Informatics), Norwegian University of April, 2007, 2007, from
Science and Technology. Retrieved from http://cmapskm.ihmc.us/servlet/SBReadResour
http://www.diva- ceServlet?rid=1064009710027_1483270340_27
portal.org/smash/get/diva2:664085/FULLTEXT0 090&partName=htmltext
1.pdf
415. Novak, J. D., & Cañas, A. J. (2006). The origins of
403. NATSPEC. (2011). Table 4.1 – BIM Roles and the concept mapping tool and the continuing
responsibilities. In N. N. B. G. v1.0.pdf (Ed.), PDF evolution of the tool. Information Visualization,
(1.0 ed.). Sydney. 5(3), 175-184.
404. NATSPEC, (2011), National BIM Guide and 416. Noy, N. F., & McGuinness, D. L. (2001). Ontology
Project BIM Brief template. Sydney, Australia: Development 101: A Guide to Creating Your
NATSPEC. First Ontology.
http://www.lsi.upc.edu/~bejar/aia/aia-
405. NBS, (2013). “National BIM Report 2013”, NBS
web/ontology101.pdf
National BIM library, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
417. NPEC. (2002). Defining and Assessing Learning:
406. NHA, (2011), Norwegian Home Builders' BIM
Exploring Competency-Based Initiatives,
Manual (ver1), Norwegian Homebuilders
Prepared for the Council of the National
Association, 2011.
Postsecondary Education Cooperative (NPEC)
407. NHBC Foundation, (2013), Building Information and its Working Group on Competency-Based
Modelling - an introduction for house builders, Initiatives by Elizabeth A. Jones and Richard
Publication NF 49, Bucks, UK. A.Voorhees, with Karen Paulson, under the
sponsorship of the National Center for
408. NIBS. (2007). National Institute for Building
Education Statistics (NCES). Washington, DC:
Sciences (NIBS) Facility Information Council (FIC)
U.S. Department of Education.
– BIM Capability Maturity Model. Retrieved
October 11, 2008, from 418. NSCC, (2013), First Steps to BIM Competence: A
www.buildingsmartalliance.org/client/assets/fil Guide for Specialist Contractors, The National
es/bsa/BIM_CMM_v1.9.xls Specialist Contractor Council, London, UK.
409. Nightingale, D. J., & Mize, J. H. (2002). 419. NYCDDC, (2012), BIM Guidelines, New York City
Development of a Lean Enterprise Department of Design & Construction, Long
Transformation Maturity Model. Information Island City, NY.
Knowledge Systems Management, 3(1), 15-30.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 359
420. Oberwinter, L., Kovacic, I., Müller, C., Kiesel, K., 429. Olatunji, O. A., & Sher, W. (2010b). The
Skoruppa, L., & Mahdavi, A. (2013). application of Building Information Modelling in
Interdisciplinary, BIM-supported planning Facilities Management. In J. Underwood & U.
process. Paper presented at the Creative Isikdag (Eds.), Handbook of Research on
Conference Conference, Budast, Hungary. Building Information Modelling and
http://publik.tuwien.ac.at/files/PubDat_219839 Construction Informatics: Concepts and
.pdf Technologies (pp. 239-253): Information Science
Reference, IGI Publishing.
421. OGC. (2008). Portfolio, Programme, and Project
Management Maturity Model (P3M3) (pp. 183): 430. Olatunji, O. A., Sher, W., & Gu, N. (2010c).
Office of Government Commerce - England. Building Information Modeling and Quantity
Surveying Practice. Emirates Journal for
422. OGC. (2009). Information Technology
Engineering Research, 15(1), 67-70.
Infrastructure Library (ITIL) - Offic eof
Government Commerce. Retrieved February 431. Olatunji, O. A., & Sher, W. D. (2009). Building
13, 2009, from http://www.itil- Information Modelling (BIM) System in
officialsite.com/home/home.asp Construction in 2020: Opportunities and
Implications. Paper presented at the BuHu 9th
423. Ohio DAS, (2010), State of Ohio Building
International Postgraduate Research
Information Modeling Protocol, Ohio
Conference (IPGRC 09), Salford Quays, Greater
Department of Administrative Services,
Manchester, UK. http://bit.ly/jalW0
Columbus, Ohio, US.
432. Olatunji, O. A., Sher, W. D., & Gu, N. (2010d).
424. Olatunji, O., & Sher, W. (2010a, May 10-13,
Modelling Outcomes of Collaboration in
2010). Legal Implications of BIM: Model
Building Information Modelling Through Gaming
Ownership and Other Matters Arising. Paper
Theory Lenses. In I. Wallis, L. Bilan, M. Smith &
presented at the W113-Special Track 18th CIB
A. S. Kazi (Eds.), Industrialised, Integrated,
World Building Congress Salford, United
Intelligent Sustainable Construction, I3COn
Kingdom.
Handbook 2 (pp. 91-108). UK: I3CON and BSRIA.
425. Olatunji, O., Sher, W., Gu, N., & Ogunsemi, D.
433. Ollerenshaw, A., Aidman, E., & Kidd, G. (1997).
(2010a). Building Information Modelling
Is an illustration always worth ten thousand
Processes: Benefits for Construction Industry.
words? Effects of prior knowledge, learning
Paper presented at the W078 - Special Track,
style and multimedia illustrations on text
18th CIB World Building Congress, Salford,
comprehension. International Journal of
United Kingdom.
Instructional Media, 24(3), 227-238.
426. Olatunji, O., Sher, W., & Ogunsemi, D. (2010b,
434. Onuma. (2011). Onuma Model Server.
May 10th-13th). The impact of Building
Retrieved October 20, 2011, from
Information Modelling on Construction Cost
http://onuma.com/products/BimDataApi.php
estimation. Paper presented at the W055 -
Special Track, 18th CIB World Building Congress, 435. Oommen, C. (2010). Enhancing Control of Built
Salford, United Kingdom. Assets through Computer Aided Design - Past,
Present and Emerging Trends. Paper presented
427. Olatunji, O. A. (2011a). Modelling Organizations’
at the Proceedings of the Tenth International
Structural Adjustment to BIM Adoption: a Pilot
Conference for Enhanced Building Operations,
Study on Estimating Organizations. Electronic
Kuwait.
Journal of Information Technology in
http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1
Construction (ITCON), Special Issue Innovation
969.1/94092/ESL-IC-10-10-45.pdf?sequence=1
in Construction e-Business, 16(38), 687-696.
436. Orlikowski, W. J., & Baroudi, J. J. (1991).
428. Olatunji, O. A. (2011b). A Preliminary Review on
Studying Information Technology in
the Legal Implications of BIM and Model
Organizations: Research Approaches and
Ownership. Electronic Journal of Information
Assumptions. Information Systems Research,
Technology in Construction (ITCON), Special
2(1), 1-28.
Issue Innovation in Construction e-Business,
16(40), 687-696.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 360
437. Oti, A. H., & Tizani, W. (2010). Developing 446. Patrick, R., Munir, M., & Jeffrey, H. (2012).
incentives for collaboration in the AEC Industry. Building Information Modelling (BIM), Utilised
Paper presented at the Proceedings of the During the Design and Construction Phase of a
International Conference on Computing in Civil Project has the Potential to Create a Valuable
and Building Engineering, Nottingham, UK. Asset in its Own Right (‘BIMASSET’) at Handover
that in turn Enhances the Value of The
438. Otter, A. d., Pels, H. J., & Iliescu, I. (2011). BIM
Development. Paper presented at the 12th
Versus PLM: Risks and Benefits. Paper
International Conference for Enhanced Building
presented at the Proceedings of the CIB W078 -
Operations, Manchester, England.
W102 Conference: Computer, Knowledge,
http://icebo2012.com/cms/resources/uploads/f
Building, Sophia Antipolis, France.
iles/papers/19%20BIM%20ASSET%20PAPER%20
http://cibworld.xs4all.nl/dl/publications/W078_
working%20final.pdf
W102_pub365.pdf
447. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and
439. Oxford. (2007, 15 April 2007). "Technology" -
research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park,
Compact Oxford English Dictionary. Compact
California: Sage.
Oxford English Dictionary. from
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/techn 448. Paukkeri, H. (2012). Development of Model-
ology?view=uk based Process for Navigation Dredging.
(Master's Thesis Master's), AALTO University,
440. Paavola, S., Kerosuo, H., Mäki, T., Korpela, J., &
Finland. Retrieved from
Miettinen, R. (2012). BIM Technologies and
http://civil.aalto.fi/fi/tutkimus/vesi/opinnayttee
Collaboration in a Life-cycle Project eWork and
t/paukkeri2012.pdf
eBusiness in Architecture, Engineering and
Construction (pp. 855-862): CRC Press. 449. Paulk, M. C. (1994). A Comparison of ISO 9001
and the Capability Maturity Model for Software.
441. Padaki, V. (2002). Making the organisation
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Software Engineering
learn: Demystification and management action.
Institute, Carnegie-Mellon University.
Development in Practice, 12(3-4), 321-337. doi:
10.1080/0961450220149708 450. Paulk, M. C., Weber, C. V., Garcia, S. M.,
Chrissis, M. B., & Bush, M. (1993). Key Practices
442. Pala, M., Edum-Fotwe, F., Ruikar, K., Doughty,
of the Capability Maturity Model - Version 1.1
N., & Peters, C. (2014). Contractor practices for
(U. S. D. o. C. National Technical Information
managing extended supply chain tiers. Supply
Service, Trans.) (1.1 ed.). Pittsburgh, PA:
Chain Management: An International Journal,
Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon
19(1), 4-4.
University.
443. Panuwatwanich, K., & Peansupap, V. (2013).
451. Peansupap, V., & Walker, D. H. T. (2005).
Factors affecting the current diffusion of BIM: a
Factors Enabling Information and
qualitative study of online professional network.
Communication Technology Diffusion and
Paper presented at the Creative Construction
Actual Implementation in Construction
Conference, Budapest, Hungary.
Organisations. Electronic Journal of Information
444. Paquette, G. (2007). An Ontology and a Technology in Construction, 10, 193-218.
Software Framework for Competency Modeling
452. Pederiva, A. (2003). The COBIT® Maturity Model
and Management. Journal of Educational
in a Vendor Evaluation Case. INFORMATION
technology and Society, 10(3), 1-21.
SYSTEMS CONTROL JOURNAL, 3, 26-29.
445. Parreira, J. P. d. C. (2013). BIM implementation
453. Pels, H., Beek, J., & Otter, A. (2013). Systems
in organizational processes in construction
Engineering as a First Step to Effective Use of
companies - a case study (Portuguese
BIM. In A. Bernard, L. Rivest & D. Dutta (Eds.),
Language). (Master's in Civil Engineering), The
Product Lifecycle Management for Society (Vol.
New University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
409, pp. 651-662): Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Retrieved from
http://run.unl.pt/bitstream/10362/9907/1/Parr 454. Penn State, (2010), BIM Project Execution
eira_2013.pdf Planning Guide and Templates – Version 2.0
BIM Project Execution Planning, CIC Research
Group, Department of Architectural
Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 361
455. Penn State, (2012), Planning Guide for Facility 465. PPU. (2012). Universidade Estadul de
Owners– Version 1.0, CIC Research Group, Londrina_Masters of Project Management -
Department of Architectural Engineering, The Course Outline. http://www.ppu.uem.br/wp-
Pennsylvania State University. content/uploads/2012/01/Gest%C3%A3o-de-
Processo-de-Projeto.pdf
456. Penttila, H. (2009). Services in Digital Design:
new visions for AEC-field collaboration. 466. Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The Core
International Journal of Architectural Competence of the Corporation. Harvard
Computing, 7, 459-478. Business Review, 68(3), 79-91.
457. Penttilä, H. (2006). Describing The Changes In 467. Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1987). Cognitive Science. In S. S.
Architectural Information Technology To Shapiro (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Artificial
Understand Design Complexity And Free-Form Intelligence (Vol. 1, pp. 120-124). New York:
Architectural Expression. ITCON, 11(Special Wiley.
Issue The Effects of CAD on Building Form and
468. Qian, A. Y. (2012). Benefits and ROI of BIM for
Design Quality), 395-408.
Multi-Disciplinary Project Management. (Project
458. Per Anker, J., & Elvar Ingi, J. (2013). Building Management), National University of Singapore.
information modelling in Denmark and Iceland. Retrieved from http://www.icoste.org/wp-
Engineering, Construction and Architectural content/uploads/2011/08/Benefits-and-ROI-of-
Management, 20(1), 99-110. doi: BIM-for-Multi-Disciplinary-Project-
10.1108/09699981311288709 Management.pdf
459. Persson, S., Malmgren, L., & Johnsson, H. 469. Qinghua, Haitao, P., Yongkui, L., & Lili, Q. (2012).
(2009). Information management in industrial Cloud-based framework for the implementation
housing design and manufacture. ITCON (14), of BIM. Construction Economics (translated), 5.
110-122.
470. Reason, P. (Ed.). (1988). Human Inquiry in
460. Pfitzner, M., Bög, M., Neuberg, F., Bögl, M., Jan Action: Development in New Paradigm
Tulke, H., Nummelin, O., YIT, Benning, P., & Research - Introduction. Newbury Park, CA:
Bouygues. (2007). European Integrated Project Sage.
InPro - Overview: A consortium of participants.
471. Reason, P. (Ed.). (1994). Handbook of
461. Pittenger, D. J. (1993). The Utility of the Myers- Qualitative Research - Three Approaches to
Briggs Type Indicator. Review of Educational Participative Inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Research, 63(4), 467-488. doi:
472. Reffat, R. M. (2010). Fostering E-Services in
10.3102/00346543063004467
Architecture and Construction Using the
462. Popper, K. (2002). The Logic of Scientific Building Information Model. Paper presented at
Discovery popper Retrieved from the The 5th eServices Symposium of the Eastern
http://bit.ly/oKNRUY Province, Comprehensive eServices: Successes
and Challenges, Al-Khobar, Saudi Arabia.
463. Porwal, A. (2013). Construction waste
www.eservices-
management at source: a Building Information
sa.org/Event/UploadFiles/Book5.pdf
Modeling based system dynamic approach.
(Doctor of Philosophy), Unversity of British 473. Reich, J. R., Brockhausen, P., Lau, h., & Reimer,
Columbia, Okanagan, Canada. Retrieved from U. (2002). Ontology-Based Skills Management:
https://elk.library.ubc.ca/bitstream/handle/242 Goals, Opportunities and Challenges. Journal of
9/45509/ubc_2014_spring_porwal_atul.pdf?seq Universal Computer Science, 8(5), 506-515.
uence=1
474. Reinach, S. and Viale, A., (2006), Application of
464. Porwal, A., & Hewage, K. N. (2013). Building the human error framework to conduct train
Information Modeling (BIM) partnering accident/incident investigations, Accident
framework for public construction projects. Analysis and Prevention, vol 38, pp. 396-406.
Automation in Construction, 31(0), 204-214.
475. Reisman, A., (1988), On alternative strategies
doi:
for doing research in the management and
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.12.004
social sciences. Engineering Management, IEEE
Transactions on, vol 35(4), pp. 215-220.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 362
476. Reisman, A. (1994). Creativity in MS/OR: 487. Rowlinson, S., Collins, R., Tuuli, M. M., & Jia, Y.
Expanding Knowledge by Consolidating (2010). Implementation of Building Information
Knowledge. Interfaces, 24(3), 91-99. Modeling (BIM) in construction: A comparative
case study, Hong Kong, Macau.
477. Reisman, A. (2004). How can OR/MS Educators
Benefit From Creating and Using Taxonomies? 488. Ruschel, R. C., Andrade, M. L. V. X. d., & Morais,
INFORM Transactions on Education, 4(3), 55-65. M. d. (2013). O ensino de BIM no Brasil: onde
doi: 10.1287/ited.4.3.55 estamos? Ambiente Construído, 13, 151-165.
478. Reisman, A., (2005), Transfer of technologies: a 489. Russell, S. (2000). ISO 9000: 2000 and the EFQM
cross-disciplinary taxonomy, Omega, vol 33(3), Excellence Model: competition or co-operation?
pp. 189-202. Total Quality Management, 11(4-6), 657-665.
479. RIBA - Royal Institute of British Architects, 490. Ryan, A., Miller, G., & Wilkinson, S. (2013).
(2012) BIM Overlay to the RIBA Outline, RIBA Successfully implementing building information
Publishing, London. modelling in New Zealand: maintaining the
relevance of contract forms and procurement
480. Rekola, M., Kojima, J., & Mäkeläinen, T. (2010).
models. Paper presented at the 38th
Towards integrated design and delivery
Australasian University Building Educators
solutions: pinpointed challenges of process
Association (AUBEA) Conference, Auckland,
change. Architectural Engineering and Design
New Zealand.
Management, 6(4), 264-278.
491. Saaty, T. L. (1998). Reflections and Projections
481. Ren, J. (2013). High-Performance Building
on Creativity in Operations Research and
Design and Decision-Making Support for
Management Science: a Pressing Need for a
Architects in the Early Design Phases. (Licentiate
Shift in Paradigm. Operations Research, 46(1), 9.
Thesis), The Royal Institute of Technology,
Stockholm, Sweden. Retrieved from 492. Sackey, E., Tuuli, M., & Dainty, A. (2013). BIM
http://www.diva- implementation: from capability maturity
portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:664309 models to implementation strategy. Paper
presented at the Sustainable Building
482. Ren, Y. (2011). Building Information Modeling
Conference 2013, Coventry, UK.
Integrated with Electronic Commerce Material
http://www.coventry.ac.uk/Global/Faculty%20e
Procurement and Supplier Performance
vents/SB13/SB13-21-BIM-implementation-
Management System. (Master of Science),
from-capability-maturity-models-to-
University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland,
implementation-strategy.pdf
US. Retrieved from
http://hdl.handle.net/1903/12349 493. Sahibudin, S., Sharifi, M., & Ayat, M. (2008).
Combining ITIL, COBIT and ISO/IEC 27002 in
483. Rezgui, Y., Beach, T., & Rana, O. (2013). A
Order to Design a Comprehensive IT Framework
Governance Approach for BIM Management
in Organizations. Paper presented at the
across Lifecycle and Supply Chains Using Mixed-
Modeling & Simulation, 2008. AICMS 08. Second
Modes of Information Delivery. Journal of Civil
Asia International Conference Kuala Lumpur,
Engineering & Management, 19(2), 239-258.
Malaysia.
doi: 10.3846/13923730.2012.760480
494. Salvato, C. (2009). Capabilities unveiled: The
484. Ritter, H. (2010). Models as Tools to Aid
role of ordinary activities in the evolution of
Thinking: Towards a Theory of Thinking. In B.
product development processes. Organization
Glatzeder, V. Goel & A. Müller (Eds.), (pp. 347-
Science, 20(2), 384-409.
374): Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
495. Salvato, C., & Rerup, C. (2011). Beyond
485. Robert, S., Delinchant, B., Hilaire, B., & Tanguy,
Collective Entities: Multilevel Research on
Y. (2013, August 26-28). Plumes: Towards a
Organizational Routines and Capabilities.
unified approach to building physical modeling.
Journal of Management, 37(2), 468-490. doi:
Paper presented at the 13th Conference of
10.1177/0149206310371691
IBPSA 2013.
486. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovation.
New York: Free Press.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 363
496. Sampson, D., & Fytros, D. (2008). Competence 506. Sebastian, R. (2011). BIM in Different Methods
Models in Technology-Enhanced Competence- of Project Delivery. Paper presented at the ICT
Based Learning Handbook on Information for a Low Carbon Economy, Building Data
Technologies for Education and Training. In H. Models, Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop
H. Adelsberger, K. Kinshuk, J. M. Pawlowski & D. organised by the EEB Data Models Community
G. Sampson (Eds.), (pp. 155-177): Springer CIB Conference W078-W012, Sophia Antipolis,
Berlin Heidelberg. France. http://2011-cibw078-
w102.cstb.fr/papers/Paper-134.pdf
497. Sanchez, J. I., & Levine, E. L. (2009). What is (or
should be) the difference between competency 507. Sebastian, R., & Van Berlo, L. (2010). Tool for
modeling and traditional job analysis? Human Benchmarking BIM Performance of Design,
Resource Management Review, 19(2), 53-63. Engineering and Construction Firms in the
Netherlands. Architectural Engineering and
498. Sanghi, S. (2007). The Handbook of Competency
Design Management, Special Issue: Integrated
Mapping: Understanding, Designing and
Design and Delivery Solutions, 6, 254-263. doi:
Implementing Competency Models in
10.3763/aedm.2010.IDDS3
Organizations (Second Edition ed.). New Delhi:
Published by Vivek Mehra for Sage Publications. 508. SEI. (2006a). Capability Maturity Model
Integration for Development (CMMI-DEV),
499. Santini, S. (2002). Using language more
Improving processes for better products (pp.
responsibly. Computer, 35(12), 126, 128.
573). Pittsburgh, PA: Software Engineering
500. Sarhan, S., & Fox, A. (2013). Performance Institute / Carnegie Melon.
measurement in the UK construction industry
509. SEI. (2006b). Capability Maturity Model
and its role in supporting the application of lean
Integration Standard (CMMI) Appraisal Method
construction concepts (Vol. 13).
for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) A, Version
501. Sarshar, M., Haigh, R., Finnemore, M., Aouad, 1.2- Method Definition Document (pp. 246).
G., Barrett, P., Baldry, D., & Sexton, M. (2000). Pittsburgh, PA: Software Engineering Institute /
SPICE: a business process diagnostics tool for Carnegie Melon.
construction projects. Engineering Construction
510. SEI. (2008a). Capability Maturity Model
& Architectural Management, 7(3), 241-250.
Integration - Software Engineering Institute /
502. Sattineni, A., & Bradford, H. (2012). Building Carnegie Melon. Retrieved October 11, 2008,
Information Modeling: Trends in the US 2008, from
Construction Industry. Design Principles and http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/index.html
Practices, 5(4), 187-203.
511. SEI. (2008b). Capability Maturity Model
503. Sayer, A. (1992). Method in Social Science: A Integration for Services (CMMI-SVC), Partner
Realist Approach Retrieved from and Piloting Draft, V0.9c (pp. 504). Pittsburgh,
http://bit.ly/gHz6Md PA: Software Engineering Institute / Carnegie
Melon.
504. Sebastian, R. (2009). Changing Roles of
Architects, Engineers and Builders through BIM 512. SEI. (2008c). CMMI for Services. Retrieved
Application in Healthcare Building Projects in December 24, 2008, from
the Netherlands. Paper presented at the http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/models/CMMI-
Changing Role, New Roles, New Challenge, Services-status.html
2009, Noordwijk Aan Zee, Netherlands.
513. Senate, (2007a), SENATE Properties BIM
http://www.changingroles09.nl/uploads/File/Fi
Guidelines, available at:
nal.Sebastian.pdf
http://www.senaatti.fi/document.asp? [last
505. Sebastian, R. (2010). Breaking through Business accessed April 1, 2013]
and Legal Barriers of Open Collaborative
514. Senate, (2007b), Senate Properties: BIM
Processes based on Building Information
Requirements 2007 Volume 1: General part,
Modelling (BIM). Paper presented at the W113-
available at:
Special Track 18th CIB World Building Congress
http://www.senaatti.fi/tiedostot/BIM_2007_Vo
May 2010 Salford, United Kingdom.
l1_General_Part.pdf, [last accessed April 10,
2013].
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 364
515. Senate. (2008, August 14, 2009). SENATE 524. Shrivasta, S., & Chini, A. (2012). Using Building
Properties BIM Guidelines. Retrieved July 10, Information Modeling to assess the initial
2008, 2007, from http://bit.ly/Senaatti embodied energy of a building. The
International Journal of Construction
516. Senate, (2012), Senate Properties: BIM
Management, 12(1), 51-63.
Requirements 2012, available at:
http://www.en.buildingsmart.kotisivukone.com 525. Simmons, C., Williams, A., Sher, W., & Levett-
/3, [last accessed April 25, 2013]. Jones, T. (Eds.). (2012). Work ready: e-portfolios
to support professional placements. Sydney,
517. Senescu, R. R. (2011). Design Process
NSW: Office for Learning and Teaching, DIISRTE.
Communication Methodology. (Doctor of
Philosophy), Stanford University, Stanford. 526. Singh, V., Gu, N., & Wang, X. (2011). A
Retrieved from theoretical framework of a BIM-based multi-
http://cife.stanford.edu/wiki/lib/exe/fetch.php? disciplinary collaboration platform. Automation
media=rs:papers:senescu- in Construction, 20(2), 134-144. doi:
designprocesscommunicationmethodology.pdf http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.011
518. Şenyapılı, B., & Bozdağ, B. G. (2012). A Domain 527. Skandhakumar, N., Reid, J., Dawson, E.,
Specific Software Model for Interior Drogemuller, R., & Salim, F. (2012a). An
Architectural Education and Practice. Authorization Framework using Building
Automation in Construction, 21(0), 10-23. doi: Information Models. The Computer Journal. doi:
10.1016/j.autcon.2011.05.008 10.1093/comjnl/bxs098
519. Sergi, D. M., & Li, J. (2014). Applications of GIS- 528. Skandhakumar, N., Salim, F., Reid, J., & Dawson,
Enhanced Networks of Engineering Information. E. (2012b). Physical Access Control
Applied Mechanics and Materials, 444, 1672- Administration Using Building Information
1679. Models. In Y. Xiang, J. Lopez, C. C. J. Kuo & W.
Zhou (Eds.), Cyberspace Safety and Security
520. Shahrin, F., Johansen, E., Lockley, S., & Udeaja,
(Vol. 7672, pp. 236-250): Springer Berlin
C. (2010). Effective Capture, Translating and
Heidelberg.
Delivering Client Requirements Using Building
Information Modelling (BIM) Technology. Paper 529. STAND-INN. (2007, 11 July, 2008). Integration of
presented at the ARCOM Research Workshop performance based building standards into
on Decision Making Across Levels, Time and business processes using IFC standards to
Space: Exploring Theories, Methods and enhance innovation and sustainable
Practices, University of Manchester. development. Retrieved August 14, 2009, from
http://bit.ly/STAND-INN
521. Shelden, D. (2009). Information Modelling as a
Paradigm Shift. Architectural Design, 79(2), 80- 530. Steel, J., Drogemuller, R., & Toth, B. (2010).
83. doi: 10.1002/ad.857 Model interoperability in building information
modelling. Software and Systems Modeling, 1-
522. Shih, S.-Y., & Sher, W. (2014). Development of
11. doi: 10.1007/s10270-010-0178-4
Building Information Modelling Enabled Code
Checking Systems for Australia. In J. Wang, Z. 531. Stephens, S. (2001). Supply Chain Operations
Ding, L. Zou & J. Zuo (Eds.), Proceedings of the Reference Model Version 5.0: A New Tool to
17th International Symposium on Advancement Improve Supply Chain Efficiency and Achieve
of Construction Management and Real Estate Best Practice. Information Systems Frontiers,
(pp. 1003-1010): Springer Berlin Heidelberg. 3(4), 471-476.
523. Shih, S.-Y., Sher, W., & Williams, A. (2012). Using 532. Studer, R., Benjamins, V. R., & Fensel, D. (1998).
a BIM maturity matrix to inform the Knowledge engineering: Principles and
development of AEC integrated curricula. Paper methods. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 25(1-
presented at the 37th Annual International 2), 161-197.
Conference, Proceedings of the Australasian
Universities Building Educators Association
(AUBEA), Sydney.
http://hdl.handle.net/1959.13/933959
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 365
533. Su, Y. C., Lee, Y. C., & Lin, Y. C. (2011). Enhancing 541. Succar, B., (2013), BIM Knowledge Content
Maintenance Management Using Building Taxonomy v1.3. Building Information Modelling:
Information Modeling In Facilities Management. conceptual framework and performance
Paper presented at the 28th Conference of the improvement models (PhD Thesis - not
International Association for Automation and published). School of Architecture and Built
Robotics in Construction (ISARC), Seoul, Korea. Environment, University of Newcastle, NSW
http://www.iaarc.org/publications/fulltext/S22- Australia.
5.pdf
542. Succar, B. (2013). "Building Information
534. Succar, B. (2009). Building information Modelling: conceptual models and a facilitative
modelling framework: A research and delivery framework”, PhD Thesis (submitted), School of
foundation for industry stakeholders. Architecture and Built Environment, University
Automation in Construction, 18(3), 357-375. of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW.
535. Succar, B. (2010). "Building Information 543. Succar, B., Sher, W., & Williams, A. (2013). An
Modelling Maturity Matrix, In Jason Underwood integrated approach to BIM competency
& Umit Isikdag (Eds.), Handbook of Research on acquisition, assessment and application
Building Information Modelling and (published online). Automation in Construction,
Construction Informatics: Concepts and 35, 174-189. doi:
Technologies”, New York: IGI Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.05.016
536. Succar, B. (2010a). Building Information 544. Suermann, P. C., Issa, R. R. A., & McCuen, T. L.
Modelling Maturity Matrix. In J. Underwood & (2008). Validation of the U.S. National Building
U. Isikdag (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Information Modeling Standard Interactive
Building Information Modelling and Capability Maturity Model Paper presented at
Construction Informatics: Concepts and the 12th International Conference on
Technologies (pp. 65-103): Information Science Computing In Civil and Building Engineering,
Reference, IGI Publishing. October 16-18, Beijing, China.
537. Succar, B. (2010b). The Five Components of BIM 545. Sun, M., Meng, X., (2009), Taxonomy for change
Performance Measurement. Paper presented at causes and effects in construction projects,
the CIB World Congress, Salford, United International Journal of Project Management,
Kingdom. vol 27 (6), pp. 560-572.
538. Succar, B., Agar, C., Beazley, S., Berkemeier, P., 546. Suwal, S., Jäväjä, P., Rahman, M. A., & Gonzalez,
Choy, R., Giangregorio, R. D., Donaghey, S., V. (2013). Exploring BIM-based education
Linning, C., Macdonald, J., Perey, R., & Plume, J. perspectives. Paper presented at the 38th
(2012a). BIM in Practice - BIM Education, a Australasian University Building Educators
Position Paper by the Australian Institute of Association (AUBEA) Conference, Auckland,
Architects and Consult Australia. New Zealand.
http://www.bim.architecture.com.au/
547. Statsbygg, (2007), Statsbygg goes for BIM,
539. Succar, B., Sher, W., & Aranda-Mena, G. (2007). available at
A Proposed Framework to Investigate Building http://www.statsbygg.no/Aktuelt/Nyheter/Stat
Information Modelling Through Knowledge sbygg-goes-for-BIM/, [last accessed April 2,
Elicitation and Visual Models. Paper presented 2013].
at the Australasian Universities Building
548. Statsbygg, (2011), Statsbygg Building
Education (AUBEA2007), Melbourne, Australia.
Information Modelling Manual - SBM1.2,
http://aubea.org.au/ocs/viewpaper.php?id=15
Statsbygg, Oslo, Norway, 2011.
&cf=1
549. Szpytko, J. (2009). Transportation System
540. Succar, B., Sher, W., & Williams, A. (2012b).
Architecture for Intelligent Management Marine
Measuring BIM performance: Five metrics.
Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation:
Architectural Engineering and Design
CRC Press.
Management, 8(2), 120-142. doi:
10.1080/17452007.2012.659506 550. Taborda, P. (2012). BIM nas obras públicas em
Portugal: Condicionantes para uma
implementação com sucesso. Paper presented
at the Building Congress, 2012, Coimbra,
Portugal. http://hdl.handle.net/10362/10012
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 366
551. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed 561. Tomo, C. (2011). A Review and Outlook for a
Methodology: Combining Qualitative and ‘Building Information Model’ (BIM): A Multi-
Quantitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Standpoint Framework for Technological
Sage. Development. Advanced Engineering
Informatics, 25(2), 224-244. doi:
552. Tatari, M. O. (2009). Empirical Analysis of
10.1016/j.aei.2010.06.003
Construction Enterprise Information Systems:
Assessing the Critical Factors and Benefits. 562. Toth, B., Fernando, R., Salim, F., Drogemuller,
(PhD), University of Maryland (College Park, R., Burry, J., Burry, M., & Frazer, J. H. (2009).
Md.), Maryland. Retrieved from Modelling sustainable and optimal solutions for
http://www.lib.umd.edu/drum/bitstream/1903 building services integration in early
/9131/1/Tatari_umd_0117E_10220.pdf architectural design: confronting the software
and professional interoperability deficit.
553. Tatari, O., & Skibniewski, M. J. (2011). Empirical
Proceedings off Cumulus 38 Degrees South,
Analysis of Construction Enterprise Information
Hemispheric Shifts Across Learning, Teaching
Systems: Assessing System Integration, Critical
and Research.
Factors, and Benefits. Journal of Computing and
Civil Engineering, 25(5), 347. 563. Trichet, F., & Leclère, M. (2003). A Framework
for Building Competency-Based Systems
554. Taylor, J., & Bernstein, P. (2009). Paradigm
Dedicated to Human Resource Management. In
Trajectories of Building Information Modeling
N. Zhong, Z. Ras, S. Tsumoto & E. Suzuki (Eds.),
Practice in Project Networks. Journal of
Foundations of Intelligent Systems (Vol. 2871,
Management in Engineering, 25(2), 69-76. doi:
pp. 633-639). Heidelberg, Berlin: Springer.
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2009)25:2(69)
564. Tuohy, P. (2009). Simulation and BIM For
555. Taylor, J., & Levitt, R. E. (2005). Inter-
Building Design, Commissioning and Operation:
organizational Knowledge Flow and Innovation
a Comparison with The Microelectronics
Diffusion in Project-based Industries. Paper
Industry. Paper presented at the Building
presented at the 38th International Conference
Simulation 2009, Eleventh International IBPSA
on System Sciences, Hawaii, USA.
Conference, Glasgow, Scotland.
556. Tergan, S. O. (2003). Knowledge with computer- http://www.ibpsa.org/proceedings/BS2009/BS0
based mapping tools. Paper presented at the 9_1538_1545.pdf
ED-Media 2003 World Conference on
565. Tuohy, P. G., & Murphy, G. B. (2012). Why
Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia &
advanced buildings don’t work? Paper
Telecommunication Honolulu, HI: University of
presented at the Proceedings of 7th Windsor
Honolulu.
Conference: The changing context of comfort in
557. Thomas, B. (2013). Governance Model for Cloud an unpredictable world, Network for Comfort
Computing in Building Information and Energy Use in Buildings, Cumberland Lodge,
Management. IEEE Transactions on Services Windsor, UK, 12-15 April 2012.
Computing, 99(PrePrints), 1-1. https://pure.strath.ac.uk/portal/files/19994378
/Tuohy_PG_Pure_Why_advanced_buildings_do
558. Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in Action:
nt_work_Apr_2012.pdf
Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory
(5th ed.): McGraw Hill, New York. 566. UKCO. (2011). Government Construction
Strategy. London, UK: United Kingdom Cabinet
559. Timothy R. Athey, M. S. O. (1999). Emerging
Office.
competency methods for the future. Human
Resource Management, 38(3), 215-225. 567. USACE. (2006). US Army Corps of Engineers,
Engineer Research and Development Center -
560. TNO. (2010). BIM QuickScan - a TNO initiative
Building Information Modeling: A Road Map for
(sample QuickScan Report - PDF). 3. Retrieved
Implementation To Support MILCON
from QuickScan (www.BIMladder.nl) website:
Transformation and Civil Works Projects within
http://www.bimladder.nl/wp-
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Washington,
content/uploads/2010/01/voorbeeld-quickscan-
DC: USACE.
pdf.pdf
568. USAF. (2010). BIM/LEAN-Enabled Project
Delivery Comparison, US Airforce Presentation,
PowerPoint Slide no. 17: FedCon 10.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 367
569. USACE, (2006), Building Information Modeling: 579. Vangimalla, P. R., Olbina, S. J., Issa, R. R., &
A Road Map for Implementation To Support Hinze, J. (2011). Validation of Autodesk
MILCON Transformation and Civil Works Ecotect™ Accuracy For Thermal And Daylighting
Projects within the U.S. Army Corps of Simulations. Paper presented at the WSC 2011
Engineers, US Army Corps of Engineers, Proceedings of the 2011 Winter Simulation
Engineer Research and Development Center , Conference, Phoenix, Arizona.
Washington, DC. http://www.informs-
sim.org/wsc11papers/300.pdf
570. USACE, (2011), Building Information Modeling
(BIM) Roadmap Supplement 2 – BIM 580. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A
Implementation Plan for Military Construction Theoretical Extension of the Technology
Projects, Bentley Platform, US Army Corps of Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field
Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Studies. MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 46(2), 186-
Center, Washington, DC. 204. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
571. USACE, (2007), Construction Operations 581. Vernikos, V. K., Goodier, C. I., & Gibb, A. G. F.
Building Information Exchange (COBIE): (2013). Building Information Modelling and
Requirements Definition and Pilot offsite construction In civil engineering. Paper
Implementation Standard, US Army Corps of presented at the ARCOM Doctoral Workshop on
Engineers, Champaign, IL, U.S. BIM Management and Interoperability,
Birmingham School of the Built Environment,
572. USACE, (2012), USACE BIM Minimum Modeling
Birmingham City University, Birmingham,
Matrix (M3) V1.0 20120913, US Army Corps of
United Kingdom. http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-
Engineers, Champaign, IL, U.S.
docs/workshops/2013-06-
573. USCG. (2005). BIM User Guides - presentation 20_Birmingham.pdf#page=82
from the 2nd Congress on Digital Collaboration
582. Vogel, D. R., & Wetherbe, H. C. (1984). MIS
in the Building Industry. Paper presented at the
research: a profile of leading journals and
AIA Buiding Connections.
universities. Data Base, 16(1), 3-14.
574. Uschold, M. (1996). Building Ontologies:
583. Voorhees, R. A. (2001). Competency-Based
Towards a Unified Methodology. Paper
Learning Models: A Necessary Future. New
presented at the Expert Systems '96, the 16th
Directions for Institutional Research, 2001(110).
Annual Conference of the British Computer
doi: 10.1002/ir.7
Society Specialist Group on Expert Systems,
Cambridge, UK. 584. Walker, D. H. T., Bourne, L. M., & Shelley, A.
(2008). Influence, stakeholder mapping and
575. Vaidyanathan, K., & Howell, G. (2007).
visualization. Construction Management and
Construction Supply Chain Maturity Model -
Economics, 26(6), 645 - 658.
Conceptual Framework. Paper presented at the
International Group For Lean Construction 585. Walsham, G. (1995). The Emergence of
(IGLC-15), Michigan, USA. Interpretivism in IS Research. Information
Systems Research, 6(4), 376-394.
576. Van der Brugge, R., & De Haan, H. (2005).
Complexity and Transition Theory. Paper 586. Wang, X. and Dunston P.S., (2011), a user-
presented at the Lof der Verwarring, Engels, centered taxonomy for specifying mixed reality
Rotterdam. systems for AC industry, Journal of Information
Technology in Construction, vol 16, pp. 493-508.
577. Van der Heijden, K., & Eden, C. (1998). The
Theory and Praxis of Reflective Learning in 587. Watson, A. (2010). BIM - A Driver for Change.
Strategy Making. In C. Eden & J.-C. Spender Paper presented at the Proceedings of the
(Eds.), Managerial and organizational cognition: International Conference of Computing in Civil
Theory, methods and research (pp. 58-75). and Building Engineering (icccbe), Nottingham,
London: Sage. UK.
http://www.engineering.nottingham.ac.uk/iccc
578. Van Heijst, G., Schreiber, A. T., & Wielinga, B. J.
be/proceedings/pdf/pf69.pdf
(1997). Using explicit ontologies in KBS
development. International journal of human- 588. Watson, A. (2011). Digital buildings – Challenges
computer studies, 46(2-3), 183-292. and opportunities. Advanced Engineering
Informatics, 25(4), 573-581. doi:
10.1016/j.aei.2011.07.003
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 368
589. Watson, P., & Seng, L. T. (2001). Implementing 599. Winterton, J., Deist, F. D.-L., & Stringfellow, E.
the European Foundation for Quality (2006). Typology of knowledge, skills and
Management Model in construction. competences: clarification of the concept and
Construction Information Quarterly, prototype (Final Draft ed.). Toulouse: Research
Construction paper, 130. report elaborated on behalf of
Cedefop/Thessaloniki, Centre for European
590. Wegelius-Lehtonen, T. (2001). Performance
Research on Employment and Human
measurement in construction logistics.
Resources, Group ESC Toulouse.
International Journal of Production Economics,
69(1), 107-116. 600. Wong, A. K., Wong, F. K., & Nadeem, A. (2011).
Government roles in implementing building
591. Wei-zhuo, S., & Guo-qiang, Z. (2010). KPIs:
information modelling systems: Comparison
Analyzing the impact of Building Information
between Hong Kong and the United States.
Modeling on construction industry in China.
Construction Innovation: Information, Process,
Paper presented at the Industrial Engineering
Management, 11(1), 61-76.
and Engineering Management (IE&EM), 2010
IEEE 17Th International Conference on. 601. Wong, A. K. D., Wong, F. K. W., & Nadeem, A.
(2010). Attributes of Building Information
592. Weinberg, G. M. (1993). Quality software
Modelling Implementations in Various
management (Vol. 2): First-order measurement:
Countries. Architectural Engineering and Design
Dorset House Publishing Co., Inc. New York, NY,
Management, Special Issue: Integrated Design
USA.
and Delivery Solutions, 6, 288-302.
593. White, S. (1997). Beyond Retroduction? —
602. Wong, J., & Yang, J. (2010). Research and
Hermeneutics, Reflexivity and Social Work
application of Building Information Modelling
Practice. British Journal of Social Work, 27(5),
(BIM) in the Architecture, Engineering and
739-753.
Construction (AEC) industry: a review and
594. White, R. W., Jose, J. M., & Ruthven, I., (2005), direction for future research. Paper presented
Using top‐ranking sentences to facilitate at the Proceedings of the 6th International
effective information access, Journal of the Conference on Innovation in Architecture,
American Society for Information Science and Engineering & Construction (AEC), organized in
Technology, vol 56(10), 1113-1125. collaboration with the Centre for Innovative and
Collaborative Engineering at Loughborough
595. Widergren, S., Levinson, A., Mater, J., &
University, UK, Pennsylvania, US.
Drummond, R. (2010, 25-29 July 2010). Smart
http://eprints.qut.edu.au/38333/1/38333.pdf
grid interoperability maturity model. Paper
presented at the Power and Energy Society 603. Wu, W. (2011, June 19-22,). BIM Facilitated
General Meeting, 2010 IEEE, Minnesota, USA. Web Service for LEED Automation. Paper
presented at the Proceedings of the 2011 ASCE
596. Wikipedia. (2007, April 9, 2007). Wiki.
International Workshop on Computing in Civil
Retrieved April 9, 2007, from
Engineering, Miami, Florida.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki
604. Xiaobo, C. (2013). "BIM & cloud" management
597. Wilkinson, P. (2008, July 12, 2008). SaaS-based
system security research. Construction
BIM. Extranet Evolution - Construction
Economy (7), 93-96.
Collaboration Technologies. from
http://www.extranetevolution.com/extranet_e 605. Yiye, L. (2010). Application of Building
volution/2008/04/saas-based-bim.html Information Model (BIM) in building thermal
comfort and energy consumption analysis.
598. Winberg, A., & Dahlqvist, E. (2010). BIM - the
(Master's M. Phil), The Hong Kong Polytechnic
Next Step in the Construction of Civil Structures.
University, Kowloon, Hong Kong. Retrieved from
(Master's Thesis), Royal Institute of Technology
http://repository.lib.polyu.edu.hk/jspui/bitstrea
KTH. (ISSN 1103-4297)
m/10397/4301/2/b24415820_ir.pdf
606. Younas, M. Y. (2010). Exploring the challenges
for the implementation and adoption of BIM.
(International Master of Science in Construction
& Real Estate Management Master's), Helsinki
Metropolia University of Applied Sciences.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 369
607. Young, N., Jones, S., Bernstein, H. M., & Gudgel,
J. (2009). The Business Value of BIM-Getting
Building Information Modeling to the Bottom
Line (pp. 52). MA, Uinted States: McGraw-Hill
Construction.
608. Zahrizan, Z., Ali, N. M., Haron, A. T., Marshall-
Ponting, A., & Abd, Z. (2013). Exploring the
adoption of Building Information Modelling
(BIM) in the Malaysian construction industry: a
qualitative approach. International Journal of
Research in Engineering and Technology, 2(8),
384-395.
609. Zandi, F. (2013). “A Country-Level Decision
Support Framework for Self-Assessment of E-
Commerce Maturity”,iBusiness, 2013, vol 5,
pp. 67-78.
610. Zerjav, V. (2012). Process-and project-level
issues of design management in the built
environment. (Doctor of Science in Civil
Engineering Doctor of Science in Civil
Engineering), Vienna University of Technology.
611. Zhang, M., Tan, D., & Zhang, Y. (2013). Analysis
of BIM application relationship with integration
degree of construction environment. Chinese
Journal of Population Resources and
Environment, 11(1), 92-96. doi:
10.1080/10042857.2013.777527
612. Zhou, W., Tah, J., & Heesom, D. (2013). A
distributed virtual reality application framework
for collaborative construction planning using
BIMserver. Paper presented at the Proceedings
of the 13th International Conference on
Construction Applications of Virtual Reality
(CONVR), London, UK.
613. Zillante, G. (2008). Building Surveying: A
Sustainable Profession or a Passing Fad? Paper
presented at the 2008 AIBS South Australian
Conference – Climate Change: Engaging the
elements.
http://www.aibs.com.au/index.php?option=co
m_content&task=view&id=167&Itemid=147
614. Zuppa, D. and Issa, R., (2008), Aligning interests
key to developing trust in deploying
collaborative technologies in construction, CIB
W78 2008 International Conference on
Information Technology in Construction,
Santiago, Chile, 15 - 17 July 2008.
615. Zuppa, D. (2009). Model for developing trust in
construction management. (PhD Thesis),
University of Florida.
PART III | APPENDIX F PAGE 370
THANK YOU