ST.

MARY’S UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF GRADUGATE STUDIES

BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING (BIM) PROJECT

IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSEMENT: THE CASE OF
ETHIOPIAN CONSTRUCTION WORKS CORPORATION
(ECWC)

BY

MILLION BAYOU TADDESSE

(SGS/0616/2011A)

Advisor: Busha Temesgen (PHD)

AUGEST, 2020

ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA

BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING (BIM) PROJECT
IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSEMENT: THE CASE OF
ETHIOPIAN CONSTRUCTION WORKS CORPORATION
(ECWC)

BY

MILLION BAYOU TADDESSE

(SGS/0616/2011A)

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO ST.MARY’S UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIESIN PARTIAL
FULLFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR MBA IN
PROJECT MANAGEMENT

AUGUST, 2020

ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA

ST. MARY’S UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF GRADUGATE STUDIES

BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING (BIM) PROJECT

IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSEMENT: THE CASE OF
ETHIOPIAN CONSTRUCTION WORKS CORPORATION
(ECWC)

BY

MILLION BAYOU TADDESSE

APPROVED BY BOARD OF EXAMINERS

Dean, graduate studies Signature & Date

Dr.Busha Temesgen
Advisor Signature & Date

Dereje Teklemariam (Ph.D) Aug.16.2020)

External examiner Signature & Date

Muluadam Alemu (Ph.D) Aug.15/2020

Internal examiner Signature & Date

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Predominantly, I would like give my deepest gratitude to ALMIGHTY GOD forgive and helping
me forever

Next, I would like to express my deepest appreciation and gratitude to the research supervisor,
Dr. BUSHA TEMESGEN for his encouragement, guidance, great feedbacks, quake response and
support from the initial to the final level.

And finally I would like to thank to all the participants in the ECWC construction site and main
office who took time from their busy days to complete the questionnaire.
Contents
ACKNOWLEDGMENT ...................................................................................................................................... I
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... V
LIST ACRONYMS ........................................................................................................................................... vi
ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................................... vii
CHAPTER ONE ............................................................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ........................................................................................................... 4
1.3 RESEARCH QUESTION ......................................................................................................................... 4
1.4 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE ......................................................................................................................... 4
1.4.1 GENERAL OBJECTIVE ............................................................................................................. 4
1.4.2 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE .............................................................................................................. 5
1.5 SIGNIFICANCE AND RELEVANCE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................. 5
1.6 SCOPE OF THE STUDY.......................................................................................................................... 5
1.7 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY ............................................................................................................... 5
1.7 ORGANIZATION OF THE RESEARCH .................................................................................................... 5
CHAPTER TWO .............................................................................................................................................. 8
LITERATURE REIVIEW ................................................................................................................................ 8
2.1 THEORETICAL REVIEW......................................................................................................................... 8
2.1.1 OVERVIEW OF BIM ........................................................................................................................... 8
2.1.2 BACKGROUND OF BIM ..................................................................................................................... 8
2.1.3 TRADITIONAL METHOD VS BIM ..................................................................................................... 10
2.1.4 SCOPE OF BIM ................................................................................................................................ 10
2.1.4.1 BIM AS A PRODUCT ........................................................................................................... 11
2.1.4.2 BIM AS A PROCESS ............................................................................................................. 11
2.1.4.3 BIM AS A FACILITY LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT TOOL ............................................ 11
2.1.5 BENEFITS OF USING BIM ................................................................................................................ 11
2.1.6 PILLARS OF BIM ............................................................................................................................. 13
2.1.7 LIMITATIONS OF BIM ..................................................................................................................... 15
2.1.8 BIM LEVEL ...................................................................................................................................... 15
2.2 EMPIRICAL FRAMEWORK .................................................................................................................. 16
2.2.1 BIM PERSPECTIVE BY OTHER COUNTRIES ...................................................................................... 16
2.2.2 SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY FOR BIM IMPLEMENTATION .......................................................... 18
2.2.3 PUSHING FACTORS FOR BIM IMPLEMENTATION .......................................................................... 19
2.2.4 BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENT BIM ...................................................................................................... 22
2.2.5 EMPIRICAL REVIEW ........................................................................................................................ 23
2.3 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK.............................................................................................................. 25
CHAPTER THREE .......................................................................................................................................... 27
METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................................... 27
3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN ............................................................................................................................ 27
3.2 RESEARCH APPROACH ...................................................................................................................... 27
3.3 METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION ....................................................................................................... 27
3.4 DATA SOURCE AND INSTRUMENT .................................................................................................... 27
3.5 SAMPLING TECHNIQUE AND SIZE ..................................................................................................... 27
3.6 DATA ANALYSIS METHOD ................................................................................................................. 28
3.7 RELIABILITY........................................................................................................................................ 28
3.8 VALIDITY ............................................................................................................................................ 28
3.9 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................................... 29
CHAPTER FOUR ........................................................................................................................................... 30
RESULT AND INTERPRETATION ............................................................................................................... 30
4.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 30
4.2 RESPONDENTS GENERAL INFORMATION.......................................................................................... 30
4.3 REASON FOR NOT USING BIM........................................................................................................... 32
4.4 PUSHING FACTORS ............................................................................................................................ 32
4.5 BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENT ................................................................................................................ 35
CHAPTER FIVE ............................................................................................................................................. 39
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECCOMENDATION .............................................................................. 39
5.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ................................................................................................................... 39
5.2 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................... 40
5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................................................ 40
REFERENCE .................................................................................................................................................. 42
APPENDIX .................................................................................................................................................... 48
QUESTIONNAIRE ..................................................................................................................................... 48
PUSHING FACTORS RANK RESULT........................................................................................................... 56
BARRIER RANK RESULTS.......................................................................................................................... 59
DECLARATION ............................................................................................................................................. 64
ENDORSEMENT ........................................................................................................................................... 65
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 2.1 THE BIM IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK (JUNG & JOO, 2011) .............. 19
TABLE 2.2 THE MAIN FACTORS INFLUENCING BIM IMPLEMENTATION ................... 20
TABLE 2.3 BIM BENEFITS ....................................................................................................... 25
TABLE 3.1 REASONS FOR NOT USING BIM ......................................................................... 32
TABLE 4.1 KEY PUSHING FACTORS ..................................................................................... 33
TABLE 4.2 ANOVA FOR PUSHING FACTORS ...................................................................... 35
TABLE 4.3 KEY BARRIERS ...................................................................................................... 36
TABLE 4.4 ANOVA FOR BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENT ........................................................ 37
TABLE 4.5 ROLES OF GOVERNMENT ................................................................................... 37
TABLE 4.6 BIM IMPLEMENTATION ...................................................................................... 38

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 2.1 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK........ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

FIGURE 4.1 RESPONDENTS POSITION................................................................................. 30
FIGURE 4.2 RESPONDENTS EDUCATIONAL LEVEL ........................................................ 31
FIGURE 4.3 RESPONDENTS WORK EXPERIENCE .............................................................. 31
FIGURE 4.4 PUSHING FACTORS ............................................................................................ 33
FIGURE 4.5 KEY PUSHING FACTORS................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
FIGURE 4.6 BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENT ............................................................................... 35
LIST ACRONYMS

2D Two Dimensional

3D Three Dimensional

4D Four Dimensional

5D Five Dimensional

AEC Architecture, Engineering, Construction

BIM Building Information Modelling

BSI British Standards Institute

CAD Computer Aided Drawing

CSG Construction Solid Geometry

ERP Enterprise Resource Planning

FM Facility Management

GSA General Service Administration

IFC Industry Foundation Class

IT Information Technology

LSG London School of Economics

NIBS National Institution of Building Science

PTC Parametric Technologies Corporation

UK United Kingdom

USA United States of America

ABSTRACT
Building Information Modeling (BIM) is rapidly growing technology worldwide as a reliable
instrument for improving the efficiency of construction industry. Developed countries are using
BIM to overcome difficulties and achieve the benefits from implementing BIM. Currently, the
Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry is considered one of the mega
contributors to development in Ethiopia. However, the industry is facing major difficulties such
as unfulfilled client requirement, delay in time, cost overrun, quality issues, conflicts among
stakeholders, safety issues, high requests of change order, increasing in material wastes and
project complexity. Since Ethiopian construction Works Corporation (ECWC) is one of the
major contractor company in Ethiopia, it is characterized by the above difficulties. , therefore
there is an urgent need to adopt the latest technologies and management strategies to eradicate
the recognized problems and to improve the performance of the AEC industry in ECWC. This
research used a primary data analyzed using descriptive analysis to rank the factors which are
identified from different studies and determine the key pushing factors and key barriers to
implement BIM in ECWC and inferential analysis to investigate the variance in perception of
different respondent groups from a total of 74 respondents.

Key words: BIM, AEC, pushing factors, barriers, implementation

vii
CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION
In the last decade, digital transformation has changed a wide range of industrial sectors, resulting
in an amazing increase in product quality, product variety, productivity, and product variety. In
the Architecture, Engineering, Construction (AEC) business, digital tools are highly adopted for
designing, constructing and operating buildings and infrastructure assets. . However, the
continual use of digital information on the whole method chain falls considerably behind
different business domains. All too often, valuable information is lost because information is still
predominantly handed over in the form of drawings, either as physical printed plots on paper or
in a digital but limited format.
Such disruptions in the information flow occur across the entire lifecycle of a built facility: in its
design, construction and operation phases as well as in the very important handovers between
these phases. The planning and realization of built facilities is a complex undertaking involving a
wide range of stakeholders from different fields of expertise. For a successful construction
project, a continuous reconciliation and intense exchange of information among these
stakeholders is necessary. Currently, this typically involves the handover of technical drawings
of the construction project in graphical manner in the form of horizontal and vertical sections,
views and detail drawings. The software used to create these drawings imitates the centuries-old
way of working using a drawing board. However, line drawings cannot be comprehensively
understood by computers. The information they contain can only be partially interpreted and
processed by computational methods. Basing the information flow on drawings alone therefore
fails to harness the great potential of information technology for supporting project management
and building operation. A key problem is that the consistency of the diverse technical drawings
can only be checked manually. This is a potentially massive source of errors, particularly if we
take into account that the drawings are typically created by experts from different design
disciplines and across multiple companies. Design changes are particularly challenging: if they
are not continuously tracked and relayed to all related plans, inconsistencies can easily arise and
often remain undiscovered until the actual construction – where they then incur significant extra
costs for solutions on site. In conventional practice, design changes are marked only by means of
revision clouds in the drawings, which can be hard to detect and ambiguous. The limited
information depth of technical drawings also has a significant drawback in that information on
the building design cannot be directly used by downstream applications for any kind of analysis,
calculation and simulation, but must be re-entered manually which again requires unnecessary
additional work and is a further source of errors. The same holds true for the information
handover to the building owner after the construction is finished. He must invest considerable
effort into extracting the required information for operating the building from the drawings and
documents and enter it into a facility management system. At each of these information
exchange points, data that was once available in digital form is lost and has to be laboriously re-
created.
This is where Building Information Modeling comes into play. By applying the BIM method, a
much more profound use of computer technology in the design, engineering, construction and
operation of built facilities is realized. Instead of recording information in drawings, BIM stores,
maintains and exchanges information using comprehensive digital representations: the building
information models. This approach dramatically improves the coordination of the design
activities, the integration of simulations, the setup and control of the construction process, as
well as the handover of building information to the operator. By reducing the manual re-entering
of data to a minimum and enabling the consequent re-use of digital information, laborious and
error-prone work is avoided, which in turn results in an increase in productivity and quality in
construction projects.
Other industry sectors, such as the automotive industry, have already undergone the transition to
digitized, model-based product development and manufacturing which allowed them to achieve
significant efficiency gains (Kagermann, 2015). The Architecture Engineering and Construction
(AEC) industry, however, has its own particularly challenging boundary conditions: first and
foremost, the process and value creation chain is not controlled by one company, but is dispersed
across a large number of enterprises including architectural offices, engineering consultancies,
and construction firms. These typically cooperate only for the duration of an individual
construction project and not for a longer period of time. Consequently, there are a large number
of interfaces in the network of companies where digital information has to be handed over. As

2
these information flows must be supervised and controlled by a central instance, the onus is on
the building owner to specify and enforce the use of Building Information Modeling.

Building Information Modelling (BIM) has received enormous attention from both academia and
industry (Eastman et al., 2011).BIM not only brings technical benefits to the development
process, but delivers an innovative and integrated working platform to improve productivity and
sustainability throughout the project life cycle (Elmualim and Gilder, 2014). BIM enables
owners to review the design and give feedback through the visualisation of a three-dimensional
(3D) building information model before the facility is constructed. Second, BIM transforms
conventional practice, which is often highly fragmented, to a better collaborative effort that
strengthens the working relationship among project participants. In a BIM platform, team
members have to share their own viewpoints of information with other members to form a
reliable basis of decision making to construct a facility (NIBS, 2015).
A Building Information Model is a comprehensive digital representation of a built facility with
great information depth. It typically includes the three-dimensional geometry of the building
components at a defined level of detail. In addition, it also comprises non-physical objects, such
as spaces and zones, a hierarchical project structure, or schedules. Objects are typically
associated with a well-defined set of semantic information, such as the component type,
materials, technical properties, or costs, as well as the relationships between the components and
other physical or logical entities The construction industry requires to investigate techniques to
decrease project cost, reduce project duration, increase productivity, and improve quality. BIM
has been accepted in the construction industry as a new approach to achieving these objectives
BIM involves the detailed and complete replication of a building in a digital environment with
the sole goal of providing a collaborative platform for managing Building information
throughout the lifecycle of a facility (Aouad et al., 2014). BIM is the process of creating a digital
parametric model which represents the physical and functional characteristic of a building in full
detail and further shared knowledge pool which can be used to form reliable decisions during the
design, construction phases and throughout the life cycle of the facility (Eastman et al., 2011;
Suranga and Weddikkara, 2012).
.

3
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Researchers and management professionals tried to identify gaps of the AEC industry such as
teamwork fragmentations, ineffective coordination, poor communications, buildings low
performance, energy overconsumption, unsustainable buildings (Latham, 1994; Egan, 1998). In
addition to design errors and clashes, project overrun, low productivity, low building quality, the
poor satisfaction of stakeholders /client/users and shortage or unauthenticated data for Facility
Management (FM) during maintenance stage (Eastman, et al., 2008; Arayici, et al., 2012).
On the other hand according to a recent study at the London School of Economics (LSE) in UK
report the management practice in Africa is poor as compared to Europe and North America.
According to this report, Ethiopia is the second from the last followed by Mozambique which
indicates that the management practice in Ethiopia is even far behind from those poor performing
developing countries in Africa.
The international BIM implementation guide shows that global status of BIM adoption is 71%
for North America, 44% Europe, 54% UK, and 40% Australia.
With these driving facts that North America and Europe have a better project management
practice and relatively have high BIM adoption rate, there is an urgent need to adopt the latest
technologies and management strategies to eradicate the recognized problems and to improve the
performance of the AEC industry (Alhumayn, et al., 2017). This research will try to assess the
implementation of BIM in Ethiopia construction works corporation (ECWC) its barriers and
influencing factors for implementation of BIM.

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTION

 What are the pushing factors to implement BIM?
 What are the barriers to implement BIM?
 What should be the role of government in BIM implementation?

1.4 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

1.4.1 GENERAL OBJECTIVE

The thesis aims at assessing BIM implementation and identifying barriers to implement BIM in
ECWC.

4
1.4.2 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE
 To identify whether BIM is implemented or not.
 Exploring the pushing factors to implement BIM.
 Identifying the barriers or challenges to implement BIM.
 Identifying the role of government to implement BIM.

1.5 SIGNIFICANCE AND RELEVANCE OF THE STUDY

The introduction of Building Information Modeling technology to the construction industry
would have positive impact on cost, time and quality. Public projects would bring about
environmental responsiveness, customer satisfaction and better city image. Design and
construction professionals and companies in Ethiopia working in the traditional fragmented
approach are also the benefit groups including ECWC.
This research could have policy impact on the way public projects are approached and designed.

1.6 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The scope of the thesis involves in identifying the factors that leads to BIM implementation and
the expected barriers to implement BIM in ECWC. And also tries to identify the role of
government in the process of BIM implementation.

1.7 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

This study has some limitations. First, data analysis was based on respondents’ perceptions

which can be impacted by some bias. Second, the sample was not stratified by different
professionals, sector and firm; thus, the factors investigated on this paper could not be
generalized for all firms and sectors. These limitations can lead to future works that includes the
understanding of BIM knowledge among different professionals, sector and firm.

1.7 ORGANIZATION OF THE RESEARCH

The study is organized into five chapters. The first chapter deals with introduction presenting
background information and justification of the study. Chapter two consists of review of some
relevant literatures and documents which are found to be important and supportive to the

5
objective of the study. This chapter provides extensive summary to the researches that are related
to BIM implementation. Chapter three outlines the research methodology used to undertake the
study. Major discussion and findings presented in chapter four. Finally, chapter five presents
conclusion and recommendation.

6
7
CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REIVIEW

2.1 THEORETICAL REVIEW

2.1.1 OVERVIEW OF BIM

BIM has been defined in various ways (Abbasnejad & Moud, 2013; Almutiri, 2016). For
example, It has been defined as a group of interacting policies, software, processes and
technologies, (Jung & Joo,2011; Barlish & Sullivan, 2012) or as having a focus on applying
information technology (IT) (Arayici& Aouad, 2010; Azhar, et al., 2015).
Whereas, Eastman, et al.(2011) defined BIM as a process that digitally manages the design,
construction, and Operation and Maintenance. Azhar (2011) defined BIM as a virtual process
that involves all aspects, disciplines, and systems of a facility within a single model that is shared
with all stakeholders across the project lifecycle. Sabol (2008) defined BIM as a sophisticated
software tool that helps to record information and to assist with its components.
Several researchers have cited the benefits of BIM as; leading to improved AEC industry
performance and enhancing coordination and collaboration between various project parties. BIM
is considered a revolutionary technology and management process, proposed as the potential
solution to the current issues in the AEC industry (Liu, et al., 2010; Arayici, et al., 2011; Azhar,
et al., 2015).

2.1.2 BACKGROUND OF BIM

The modeling of 3D geometry was a broad research goal that had many potential uses including
movies, design, and eventually games. The ability to represent a fixed set of polyhedral forms
shapes defined by a volume enclosing a set of surfaces for viewing purposes was developed in
the late 1960s and later led to the first computer graphics fi lm, Tron (in 1987). These early
polyhedral forms could be used for composing an image but not for designing more complex
shapes. In 1973, the easy creation and editing of arbitrary 3D solid shapes was developed
separately by three groups, Ian Braid at Cambridge University, Bruce Baumgart at Stanford, and
Ari Requicha and Herb Voelcker at the University of Rochester Known as solid modeling, these
efforts produced the first generation of practical 3D modeling design tools. Two forms of solid

8
modeling were developed and competed for supremacy. The boundary representation approach
(B - rep) defined shapes using operations of union, intersection, and subtraction — called
Boolean operations on multiple polyhedral shapes and also utilized refining operations, such as
chamfering, slicing, or moving a hole within a single shape. The sophisticated editing systems
developed from combining these primitive shapes and the Boolean operators allowed generation
of a set of surfaces that together were guaranteed to enclose a volume.In contrast, Constructive
Solid Geometry (CSG) represented a shape as a tree of operations and initially relied on diverse
methods for assessing the final shape. Later, these two methods merged, allowing for editing
within the CSG tree (sometimes called the unevaluated shape) and also changing the shape
through the use of general purpose B – rep (called the evaluated shape) . Objects could be edited
and regenerated on demand. The result is the simplest of building shapes a single shape
hollowed with a single floor space with a gable roof and door opening. Notice that all locations
and shapes can be edited via the shape parameters in the CSG tree, however, shape edits are
limited editing operations. First generation tools supported 3D facetted and cylindrical object
modeling with associated attributes, which allowed objects to be composed into engineering
assemblies, such as engines, process plants, or buildings (Eastman 1975; Requicha 1980). This
merged approach to modeling was an important precursor to modern parametric modeling.
Building modeling based on 3D solid modeling was first developed in the late 1970s and early
1980s. CAD systems, such as RUCAPS (which evolved into Sonata), TriCad, Calma, GDS (Day
2002), and university research based systems at Carnegie - Mellon University and the University
of Michigan developed their basic capabilities.
Solid modeling CAD systems were functionally powerful but often overwhelmed the available
computing power. Some aspects of production, such as drawing and report generation, were not
well developed. Also, designing 3D objects was too conceptually foreign for most designers,
who were more comfortable working in 2D. The systems were also expensive. The
manufacturing and aerospace industries saw the potential benefits in terms of integrated analysis
capabilities, reduction of errors, and the move toward factory automation. The current generation
of BIM architectural design tools, including Autodesk Revit ® Architecture and Structure,
Bentley Architecture and its associated set of products, the Graphisoft ArchiCAD ® family, and
Gehry Technology ’ s Digital Project ™ as well as fabrication level BIM tools, such as Tekla
Structures, SDS/2, and Structure works all grew out of the object - based parametric modeling

9
capabilities developed for mechanical systems design. These concepts emerged as an extension
of CSG and B rep technologies, a mixture of university research and intense industrial
development, particularly by Parametric Technologies Corporation ® (PTC) in the 1980s. The
basic idea is that shape instances and other properties can be defined and controlled according to
a hierarchy of parameters at the assembly and sub - assembly levels, as well as at an individual
object level. Some of the parameters depend on user - defined values. Others depend on fixed
values, and still others are taken from or relative to other shapes. The shapes can be 2D or 3D

2.1.3 TRADITIONAL METHOD VS BIM

The transformation from the traditional method to the BIM concept requires changes in many
disciplines such as software and hardware upgrade, changes in processes, and changing the
organizational culture to BIM benefits. The comparison between the traditional method process
and the concept of the BIM process, in traditional methods, the considerable impact occurs in the
construction documentation phases which in turn cause several issues to arise, delaying the
project delivery and increasing the overall project cost. However, BIM process solves these
issues at an early stage (Almutiri, 2016).
(Almutiri, 2016) claimed that the traditional methods suffer from many issues such as lack of
project understanding, poor communication and data loss, problems in sharing information and
poor collaboration between team members. (Duell, et al., 2013) illustrated the difference between
the BIM and traditional methods in sharing data in which in case of traditional method data is
transferred in a fragmented way that the stakeholders in a project obtain data from other
stakeholder through different modes of communication and the data is mostly paper based data
whereas in BIM concept information is obtained from a central database.
The other comparison is based on clash detection in which in case of traditional method clash is
identified at construction stage However, BIM identifies clashes among various designs, early in
the conceptual design phase, and before construction gets started that save time and money
besides promoting the money value and efficiency (Abbasnejad & Moud, 2013).

2.1.4 SCOPE OF BIM

A common interpretation of BIM is missing in terms of its scope and definition between
individuals and professionals. However the U.S. national institution of building science (NIBS,
2007) has divided the BIM scope into three commonly used categorizations;

10
 BIM as a product
 BIM as a collaborative process
 BIM as a facility lifecycle management tool

2.1.4.1 BIM AS A PRODUCT

BIM as a product refers to the actual model as an intelligent digital representation of data about a
facility (NIBS, 2007). In order to qualify as intelligent is not just a 3D representation based on
objects enough. It also has to include some information or properties beyond the graphical
presentation and it is primarily this information in BIM that leads to the biggest benefits for the
industry (Granroth, 2011). The view of BIM as a product is sometimes called the
underdeveloped view of BIM due to that it just considers the model (WSP group, 2011).

2.1.4.2 BIM AS A PROCESS

The view of BIM as a process considers the process of developing a BIM model (the BIM
product) and using it in order to reach project efficiency (WSP group, 2011). At this level of
BIM also the social aspects such as; synchronous collaboration, coordinated work practices, and
institutional and cultural framework are being dealt with. Most companies that today state that
they are working with BIM are looking at this level of BIM and focus on finding processes that
enable them to deliver good and profitable projects. The key point from this view is that BIM is a
marriage between technology and a set of work processes.

2.1.4.3 BIM AS A FACILITY LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT TOOL

The last and most demanding of these views is BIM as a facility lifecycle management tool. This
view sees BIM as management tool, by focusing on a sustainable, verifiable, and repeatable
information based environment in order to guarantee well-understood information exchanges,
workflows, and procedures, throughout the building lifecycle (NIBS, 2007). Due to this long
term perspective is this view extra interesting for client organizations

2.1.5 BENEFITS OF USING BIM

Many of the BIM advantages are observed as direct advantages; however the largest advantages
really are the indirect advantages. The direct advantages include qualities, for instance the

11
enriched imagination, conception and the concentration of building information in the project. In
contrast, the indirect advantages are the essential for cooperation and giving the best result for
project understanding, and reducing the project risk. Simulations authorize us that a design be
planned checked virtually before the real project is constructed. A model can help us to have a
visualization of the project. This visualization provides stimulation view in concerning the
project needs that help to describe the project in an effective manner.
The main BIM benefits can be grouped as, elimination, visualization, and collaboration. There is
actually much overlap amongst these classifications, but they have been selected as the principal
thought around which all the advantages can be better realized. First of all, visualization mainly
indicates the advantages for the improvement and an individual in her/his personal realization as
a consequence of utilizing the BIM. Second of all, collaboration can be the cooperative behavior
of some members in the team as the BIM is encouraging and facilitating it. Finally, elimination
refers generally project-related advantages, for example decreasing the waste, risk, and conflicts
Richard et al. stated in brief BIM advantages and its tools which can be indexed as follows:
1. Materials take off should be simplified.
2. Complex details can be surveyed and analyzed.
3. The different trade components coordination can be reviewed for potential “hits.”
4. Sequence of placing a project with each other is expanded.
5. The 4D, which added time, can be merged to demonstrate how quickly a project can be put
together.
6. Site work eminences among the ultimate eminence and existing conditions could be
determined.
7. The best routing could be reviewed for pipes, lights, ductwork wires, cables, and sprinklers.
8. The site preparations with the hoists and cranes location can be analyzed.
9. Lift schedules would be determined for the steel, concrete, and huge mechanical and electrical
equipment placement.
10. Developing the schedules and the associated argument will be expanded.
11. Problems of potential safety would be evaluated.
12. Alternatives can be assessed in more realistic terms.
13. Coordinating the trade’s former to perform the real work.

12
2.1.6 PILLARS OF BIM
When considering BIM, it can be helpful to consider these four significant factors:
 Policy
 People
 Technology
 Process
It is argued that only when these elements are integrated and working harmoniously that the true
value of BIM will be experienced. If all four elements are fully considered within BIM adoption,
it sets the initiative for a solid foundation of understanding.
Policy
Knowledge of Building Information Modelling (BIM) within the construction industry is on the
rise. The yearly reports produced by the National Building Standards (NBS) are a valuable
resource for learning more about the rate of BIM adoption in international context.
For instance, NBS (2012, 2013) reports demonstrate the decrease in number of construction
workers not aware of BIM, with 6% unaware in 2013, down from around 40% in 2011. This
shows the rising knowledge of BIM, and possibly, its usefulness.
Other statistics show that in the earlier years, about 74% of the industry was not clear enough on
what BIM was. Yet, by 2016 about 54% were aware of and using BIM, with 42% at least aware
of it, and just 4% neither aware of nor using BIM (NBS 2016). Meaning knowledge of BIM has
risen over time.
Regarding the future of BIM, 73% of participants agreed with the statement ‘BIM is the future of
project information’. These statistics indicate that although some gaps are still present,
knowledge of BIM continues to rise. Realistically, awareness is not the only reason for adopting
BIM in the AEC. However, awareness can influence policy changes to adopt BIM where
necessary. In the UK for instance, awareness of BIM and its benefits has led to the government
calling for BIM to be mandatory for public projects. This policy change has influenced the
private sector to follow suit.
People
A core feature of working within a BIM environment is the drive towards encouraging
multidisciplinary collaboration from the outset of a project. The benefits of all disciplines
working together within one core BIM environment are substantial.

13
A major issue experienced within non-BIM design processes is the matter of conflicting design
issues. The ethos of having a core central BIM model is to facilitate a smoother transition
through these issues by identifying conflicts earlier on in the project stages, thus reducing the
negative effects on schedule and costs.
From an early stage, projects can be visualized, allowing client and designer alike to gain an
appreciation of how the design is going to materialize. This allows for important design
decisions and alterations to be made at an early stage, when the cost repercussions are small or
even zero.
Technology
BIM technology has, over the years, helped in carrying out all the pre-construction design
analysis and interrogation, resulting in reduction of conflicts and changes made during the
construction phase that usually have a detrimental effect on a project in terms of wastage,
quality, time and costs.
At the same time, the stringent energy analysis that can take place in the early stages of a BIM
project aims to improve the performance of a project in regards to low-impact design.
Finally, post project completion, a high-quality BIM model can continue to be utilized by an
asset team to assist in the management of their assets in an efficient and environmentally
conscious manner.
The efficiency of the effects of changes within documentation or design is greatly improved as
any changes made that are linked to the main BIM package will automatically be carried through
and updated to all corresponding linked documents and models.

Process
Having the design process completed within a BIM environment using a core 3D BIM model at
the center of the project can lead to multiple benefits later in the process.
The models can be analyzed, allowing for a multitude of model interrogations to take place,
including energy analysis, structural analysis, accurate schedules, and quantity take-offs.It is
argued that using BIM processes for building projects will improve energy efficiency, improve
scheduling, facilitate a reduction of waste, and facilitate a reduction in costs.

14
2.1.7 LIMITATIONS OF BIM
In spite of many approaches, the practical mechanism to adopt and implement BIM is still
lacking. Perhaps, this can be justified by considering the status of BIM in both the developed
countries (where BIM is mandated or nearly mandated) and developing countries (where BIM is
still in its early stages), which show the need for a more practical and applied view of BIM rather
than its potential benefits.

2.1.8 BIM LEVEL

The UK Government BIM strategy is making Level 2 BIM mandatory for all publicly-funded
projects from 2016 onwards. This is to produce collaboration among the construction design
team and reduce the fragmentation in the construction industry identified in Government reports
(Wolstenholme et al, 2009; Egan, 1998; Latham, 1994). The BIM Industry Working Group
(2011) state in the UK the levels of BIM are:-
Level 0 – Unmanaged CAD probably 2D, with paper (or electronic paper) as the most likely
exchange mechanism.
Level 1 – Managed CAD in 2 or 3D format using BS1192:2007 with a collaboration tool
providing a common data environment, possibly some standard data structures and formats.
Commercial data managed by standalone finance and cost management packages with no
integration.
Level 2 – Managed 3D environment held in separate discipline “BIM” tools with attached data.
Commercial data managed by an Enterprise Resource Planning application (ERP). Integration on
the basis of proprietary interfaces or bespoke middleware could be regarded as “pBIM”
(proprietary). The approach may utilize 4D program data and 5D cost elements as well as feed
operational systems.
Level 3 - Fully open process and data integration enabled by web services compliant with
emerging IFC / IFD standards, managed by a collaborative model server. Could be regarded as
iBIM or integrated BIM potentially employing concurrent engineering processes.

15
2.2 EMPIRICAL FRAMEWORK

2.2.1 BIM PERSPECTIVE BY OTHER COUNTRIES

USA

The US General Services Administration (GSA) formulated the National BIM Program way
back in 2003. This program established policy mandating BIM adoption for all Public Buildings
Service projects. GSA also actively partners with BIM vendors, federal agencies, professional
associations, open standard organizations, and academic/research institutions to develop a
community of BIM leaders within GSA. Today, 72% construction firms in the US are believed
to be using BIM technologies for significant cost savings on projects.
And it’s not just the government that has been pushing for the power of visualization,
coordination, simulation, and optimization in the construction, several US states, universities and
private organizations are supporting the adoption of higher BIM standards. In 2009, the
Architect’s Office at the Indiana University issued BIM Standards and Project Delivery
Requirements. In the same year, the Penn State University also acquired a leadership role in
articulating the use of BIM by facility owners.
UK

The UK has swiftly risen become the undisputed BIM champion of the world riding on the wings
of clear national strategy and government support. The British Standards Institute (BSI) have
formal relation with standards committees like the AGI and others. Since April 2016, as part of
the Government’s Construction Strategy which aims to achieve 20% savings in procurement
costs, all centrally-procured construction projects in the UK are required to achieve BIM Level 2.
This mandate not only made the whole industry sit up and take notice, it also accelerated the
process of BIM adoption in the country, because if you are not BIM Level 2 complaint, you just
cannot get your hands on any government project in the UK.
Scandinavian countries

The Scandinavian countries of Norway, Denmark, Finland and Sweden count amongst the
earliest adopters of BIM technologies, with public standards and requirements already in place.

16
In fact, Finland started working on implementing BIM technologies as early as 2002, and by
2007, the Confederation of Finnish Construction Industries had mandated that all design
software packages need to pass Industry Foundation Class (IFC) Certification. It should be noted
that IFC is a vendor-neutral file format which allows models to be shared and worked on
independently of any specific piece of software.
To be fair, since all these countries are relatively smaller, convincing fewer market players and
people to adopt BIM has been a clear advantage for the Scandinavian region.
GERMANY

According to a McGraw Hill Construction Report on BIM, 90% of project owners in Germany
either often or always demand BIM. The survey also found out that rather than the government,
the emphasis is more on commercial and residential buildings. However, the traditionally
conservative German AEC industry hadn’t shown much inclination toward BIM adoption, and
major public sector often went over-budget or would be late in delivery.
SINGAPORE

The government has created a central repository for building codes, regulations and circulars
published by various building and construction regulatory agencies in Singapore. Through this
Construction and Real Estate the Building & Construction Authority set out to implement the
world’s first BIM electronic submission. Since 2015, BIM e-submissions have been mandated
for all projects greater than 5,000 sq mts.
Not just that, since 2010, the Building & Construction Authority has been dispensing grants
through the BIM fund as well, which covers the cost of training, consultancy, hardware and
collaboration software.
FRANCE

France decided in 2014 that it would develop 500,000 houses using BIM by 2017. A budget of
€20 million was also allocated to digitize the building industry. As the benefits from this project
will be evaluated, there is a good possibility that BIM will be made mandatory in public
procurement this year. The initiative was a part of the French government’s Digital Transition
Plan for the construction industry, which aimed to achieve sustainability and reduce costs. Also

17
in 2014, the government launched a research and development project in the construction area to
develop BIM standards for infrastructure projects.

2.2.2 SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY FOR BIM IMPLEMENTATION

Arayici et al. (2011) claimed that setting clear guidance and a methodology guarantees the
achievement of the ultimate benefits of BIM. Several researchers have developed frameworks,
models, and methodologies to implement BIM as follows:
The strategy of Olugboyega (2017) to create a BIM environment can be summarized as:
(1) Acquiring BIM software technologies (according to the project goals) and BIM hardware,
(2) Developing a BIM contents library,
(3) Developing BIM standards, and
(4) Setting up a BIM platform (interoperability tools, collaboration tools, integration tools,
coordination/ clash detection tools and communication tools) according to the types of BIM
software and hardware.
Moreover, Alhumayn, et al. (2017) suggested strategies for implementing BIM in Saudi arabia
which include providing legislation and a supportive regulatory environment, government
funding, educating key players and gaining the experience of advanced countries using BIM.
However, Arayici, et al. (2011) suggested that approaches should be undertaken with a bottom-
up approach rather than top-down. Omar (2015) and Alhumayn et al. (2017) claimed that to
accelerate BIM implementation, government should take the upper hand (top-down approach) by
facilitating smooth information flow.
Wang, et al. (2013) developed a BIM user acceptance model applying a technology acceptance
model (TAM).
Whereas, the EU BIM Task group suggested another strategic framework for BIM adoption in
the public sector: growing capability, pilot projects, measuring and monitoring, case studies and
embedding change (UK Construction Media, 2016). Furthermore, Jung and Joo (2011) proposed
a BIM implementation framework as shown in Table 1.

18
Table2.1 The BIM implementation framework (Jung & Joo, 2011)

Technical (T) Perspective (P) Construction Business Function (C)

1.Data 1. Industry 1. Research and 6. Quality Mgt. 11. Estimating

Property 2. Organization development 7. Cost control 12. Design
2. Relation 3. Project 2. General Admin. 8. Contracting 13. Sales
3. Finance 9.Materials Mgt. 14. Planning
3. Standards 4.Human resource 10. Scheduling
4. Utilization management
5.Safety management

There are also many approaches such as frameworks (Kekana, et al., 2014; Succar & Kassem,
2015) and technology adoption (Masood, et al., 2014; Arayici, et al., 2011) being proposed to
support the implementation of BIM.

2.2.3 PUSHING FACTORS FOR BIM IMPLEMENTATION

Several researchers have argued that the main factors for BIM implementation are recognizing
the benefits of BIM and driving forces (external forces) imposed from externals and/or the
surrounding environment. For example, competitors use BIM, and internal readiness including
IT sophistication and top management support (Liu, et al., 2010; Eadie, et al., 2013; Omar,
2015). The most important factors for increasing BIM implementation are: improved
interoperability between software applications, improved BIM software functionality, more
clearly-defined BIM deliverables between parties, more owners asking for BIM, more 3D
building product manufacturer content, reduced cost of
BIM software, more internal staff with BIM skills, more use of contracts to support BIM, more
external firms with BIM skills and more entry-level staff with BIM skills (McGraw-Hill
Construction, 2012).
Mehran (2015) argued that the main forcing factors for BIM implementation are government
support, BIM contract, standards, and protocols, development of a BIM performance matrix and
industry collaboration.

19
The following table illustrates the main factors BIM implementation uncovered by the literature
review of International Journal of BIM and Engineering Science Volume: 2 Issue: 1; June - 2019

Table2.2 THE MAIN FACTORS INFLUENCING BIM IMPLEMENTATION

.PUSHING FACTORS AUTHORS

External Push for Implementing BIM

Government pressure (Intervention in (Eadie, et al., 2013; Omar, 2015; Willis &
mandating Regmi, 2016
BIM)
Client pressure and demand for application of
BIM in their projects (Saleh, 2015; Almutiri, 2016)
Government support Coordinated
government support and leadership (Smith,
2014; McPartland, 2017) (Smith, 2014; Willis & Regmi, 2016;
Developing industry-accepted BIM standards, McPartland, 2017)
best
practices, and legal protocols
Other external pushes
Raising awareness (promotion and awareness
of BIM)
(Azhar, 2011; Almutiri, 2016; Gerges, M, et
al.,2017)

Internal Push for Implementing BIM

Top Management support (Gerges, et al., 2016; McPartland, 2017)

Cultural change (Liu, et al., 2010; Gerges, et al., 2016)
Collaboration between all project participants (Migilinskas, et al., 2013; Willis & Regmi,2016)
Improving built output quality (McCartney, 2010; Saleh, 2015)
Perceived benefits of BIM (Sebastian, 2011; Azhar, 2011; Omar, 2015)

20
Technical competence of staff (Arayici, et al., 2009; McPartland, 2017)
Financial resources of organization (Eastman, et al., 2011; Succar & Kassem,
2015; Omar, 2015)
The desire for innovation with competitive (Liu, et al., 2010; Eadie, et al., 2013; Omar,
advantages and differentiation in the market. 2015)

Improving the capacity to provide whole-life (Omar, 2015; Gerges, et al., 2016)
value to the client
Safety in the construction process ( to reduce (Omar, 2015; Saleh, 2015)
risk of accident)
BIM training program for staff (Smith, 2014; Gerges, et al., 2016; Gerges, M,
et al., 2017)
Adapting existing workflows to lean oriented (Arayici, et al., 2011; Eastman, et al., 2011)
processes
(McPartland, 2017)
Deciding which tool to use (Arayici, et al., 2011; Eastman, et al., 2011)

Applying successful change management (Gerges, et al., 2016; Willis & Regmi, 2016)
strategies

(Ding, et al., 2015; Saleh, 2015)

Collaboration between all stakeholders (Azhar, et al., 2015; Almutiri, 2016; Ball, 2017)
(Arayici, et al., 2011)
Continuous investment in BIM

Projects complexity and profit declination

Approaches for adoption

21
Every research argued different key factors may be they agree with one or more factor, but do
not agree with all the same factors. Therefore, this study will try to examine factors claimed by
the previous researches and find further factors that have not been mentioned before.

BIM has significant benefits to construction projects through the project lifecycle. However,
unfortunately, most projects do not achieve these benefits because of not adopting and
implementing BIM. (Arayici, et al., 2011; Eastman, et al., 2011)
There are many limitations that slowed BIM implementation and BIM application is still in the
beginning stage to some degree.

2.2.4 BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENT BIM

BIM is perceived as a complex, difficult to implement and expensive technology (Eastman et al.,
2011; Lu and Li, 2011; Roper, 2012). Contrary to the clear benefits that BIM brings to a project
are the difficulties faced in implementing BIM. Brewer (2010) articulates some of these
difficulties and contrasts the chasm between the benefits suggested by the conceptual component
of BIM and the difficulties of the applied reality. This concurs with Succar (2009) who coined
the pejorative phrase “BIM-Wash” to describe the dislocation between BIM potential and BIM
reality. With recognition to the difficulties of BIM adoption, research has also been undertaken
to facilitate uptake (Gu and London, 2010; Roper, 2012). In the Malaysian context, the
preliminary report shows the expense, lack of suitably skilled human resource and organizational
and process difficulties as barriers to BIM adoption (Teo, 2012). Also in the Malaysian context,
Baba (2010) identifies technical (interoperability), process, cost, legal, human resource skills as
barriers and market demand. Besides, an increase in either technical, process or human resource
perspectives will produce a marginal increase in BIM capability, but there is a symbiotic
dependency on the other two perspectives to attain significant improvement.
Financial considerations
BIM typically requires new software and regularly requires new or upgraded hardware to run the
processing intensive software (Autodesk, 2011; Eastman et al., 2011). There is a large
technology component to a BIM implementation. Although concerns continue over the
inoperability of some software and hardware platforms. This can be overcome by providing all
players with the same software, or at the least, software from the same vendor. Any technical

22
barriers to adoption can therefore be eliminated; however this repositions the problem as a
financial issue, as such, there is a financial impact associated with adopting BIM.
The current USA price of Autodesk’s BIM entry level software, Building Design Suite Premium,
is US $6,825 (Autodesk, 2013). These cost indicated above is only for the purchase of basic BIM
software and do not include costs for training and downtime as the company internalizes new
working processes. Adoption of BIM is a major financial investment.
Human resource
Adopting BIM requires fundamental process change within an organization and with it, a
complementary change in the skill sets of the human resource pool. Following the Bews-
Richards Model or American Institute of Architects definition of minimum BIM, this will also
entail concurrent capability increases along the project supply chain, including developers, other
designers, contractors, approvals authorities, all having personnel with the competency to adopt
BIM.
Legal factors
BIM requires collaborative working relationships between design and project team members.
The UK’s Construction-Industry-Council (2013, p. v) states as a key objective of its BIM
Protocol, “In light of industry concerns in respect of IPR and the increased collaboration
involved in a BIM project, clause 6 of the Protocol clearly sets out the IPR provisions required to
enable the Models to be used as intended and to protect the rights of the Project Team Members
against infringement”.
Professional support
As evidenced by Bew and Underwood (2009), Young (2009) and Eastman et al. (2011)
successful BIM implementations typically receive the support of knowledgeable persons or
consultants that have specialist expertise.

2.2.5 EMPIRICAL REVIEW

Results of the study BIM for Infrastructure Sustainability in Developing Countries: the case of
Ethiopia Denamo Addissie Nuramo, University of KwaZulu-Natal indicated that awareness and
preparedness of AEC graduating students to use BIM in the Ethiopian AEC industry is very low.
This is especially true with Civil Engineering graduating students who are responsible to design
and manage construction of majority of infrastructure projects in the country. According to the
study Architecture students have better acquaintance and competence in using the program

23
showing the prospects that Civil Engineering and Construction Technology and Management
program can also enable their students gain the knowledge and skill their students need.

Opportunities And Challenges Of Implementing Building Information Modeling (BIM) In Addis

Ababa Integrated Housing Development Project In this study, the concept of BIM, this has a
great impact and importance in the construction industry. In this context, refereed journal articles
including “BIM” and/or “Building Information Modeling” in their title and/or keywords were
discussed in terms of different dimensions to evaluate the research tendency and gap in BIM
literature. The results of this project to show Changing from the traditional approach to Building
Information Modeling (BIM) implementation is not an easy process. It includes decision making
and the change in management strategies.

Challenges of Building Information Modeling Implementation in Africa: A Case Study of the

Nigerian Construction Industry found that BIM is a great knowledge area within the design,
construction and operation industry and a great deal with Architectural and Construction
Engineering industry. It can be observed from the study that BIM adoption is low in the Nigerian
construction Industry. However the identified challenges and approaches to overcoming them in
the study will assist the Nigerian construction industry to plan for the effective utilization of BIM
in their prospective projects.

Annual International Conference by the Associated Schools of Construction The study aimed to
identify barriers associated with BIM adoption, after a thorough review of the literature. After
analyzing the various research publications, the study was able to determine 36 barriers that
influence BIM implementation. Most of the challenges, including the ones most commonly
established in the literature, were determined at the organization level. This indicates that
companies have to overcome higher resistance regarding BIM implementation than projects.
Most of the significant barriers dealt with the training of employees, lack of national standards
for BIM, management of data, and interoperability of the software. If these barriers are not
tackled at the earliest by various public and private entities associated with the construction
industry, there is a high probability that these obstacles could start impacting at the project levels
and the overall BIM adoption within the industry. In addition, two of the three most commonly
identified barriers “Time needed for hiring/training people to use BIM, and Cost of hiring or
training people to use BIM” dealt with economic conditions of the company and its ability to

24
invest in maintaining innovativeness and competitiveness. These two barriers can be crucial for
small and medium sized design and construction companies.

A research The project benefits (BIM) by David Bryde which is conducted on 35 projects have
found the benefits of BIM and summarized as the table below

Table2.3 BIM BENEFITS

Success criteria Positive benefits

Total instances Total number of % of total projects
Total projects
Cost reduction or control 29 21 60%
Time reduction or control 17 12 34.29%
Communication 15 13 37.14%
improvement
Coordination improvement 14 12 34.29%
Quality increase or control 13 12 34.29%
Negative risk reduction 8 6 14%
Scope clarification 3 3 8.57%
Organization improvement 2 2 5.71%
Software issues 0 0 0.00%

2.3 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

BIM finds elements of a building for example windows, doors , slabs, stairs , and walls by
applying their attributes such as usage, structures, and functions as well as utilizing parametric
technology; Moreover, it can reflect any alterations in the elements of building instantly into the
information about the building configuration by distinguishing the connections between those
attributes. Accordingly, the building elements’ specifications and their relative information can
be gotten by using a simulation model, which provides it possible for making quick decisions
pending a construction project.
Additionally, BIM not only prepares information with regard to amount, expenses, schedules,
and materials but furthermore provides it possible to perform analyzing data that can depend on
the structure and ambience. A BIM is a project simulation which consists the three dimensional

25
(3D) models of the project components by connecting with all the needed information linked to
the project planning, constructing or operating, and decommissioning.
So far he best tool to simulate the construction project within a virtual environment is BIM. This
simulation can have the benefit of taking place on a computer when we are utilizing a software
package. Virtual building points that it can be possible for practicing construction, for
experimenting, and for making regulations in the project before it is fulfilled. Those mistakes,
which are virtual, do not normally have serious subsequences —provided that they are found and
indicated early sufficient which they will be avoided “in the field”. While a project is virtually
planned and made, many significant features should be considered, determined and discussed as
much as possible before the address instructions of construction are concluded. The computer
simulations usage is revolutionary in the building construction subject. Several manufacturing in
the industry have been very magnificently exerting simulation methods for many years ago.
Furthermore, many companies mostly in Europe in the construction field have currently
effectively used resembling methods in the building projects, even though faultfinders assert that
simulations can only profit repetitious production processes, and that construction is by
explanation exclusive.

Barriers to implement

BBBIM Perceived benefits of

Pushing factors
IMPLIMENTATION BIM

Fig 2.1 conceptual framework

26
CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN

The thesis focused on the assessment of Building Information Modeling implementation in
ECWC. The design to be used for the study is a descriptive .the first part of this work comprised
of literature survey which was carried out to provide the background information on Building
Information Modeling, and to identify the pushing factors and challenges or barriers to
implement BIM. Information is obtained through literature search; this included books and
articles in online materials. The second part of the study entail field survey and the main
instrument employed is structured questionnaires.

3.2 RESEARCH APPROACH

This paper will used quantitative research approach. The obtained data collected by
questionnaire is analyzed using statistical analysis to rank the factors and to identify the key
factors.

3.3 METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION

This research consisted two phases .The first phase utilizes an extensive literature review to
build a deep understanding and to cover the research scope. The second phase consists of, a
questionnaire to investigate the research questions raise.
The structured questionnaire are distributed via mail and on hardcopy

3.4 DATA SOURCE AND INSTRUMENT

The research has relied on primary data sources. The primary sources involve self-administered
questionnaires. The questionnaire is used because the research considers it to be more convenient
as respondents could answer at their convenience. The questionnaire developed is based on the
research questions and the literature the questionnaire begun with an introductory statement.

3.5 SAMPLING TECHNIQUE AND SIZE

The population of this research is professionals (engineers, architects, quantity surveyors…)
working in ECWC.

27
The total number of professionals in the company is 81 who are working in projects located in
ADDIS ABABA at head office. To use a statistical equation to calculate the sample size is not
convenient since the population is small. Therefore census is used.

3.6 DATA ANALYSIS METHOD

From the collected data the weighted mean as a descriptive statistical analysis which is based on
the items relative importance is used to rank the pushing factors and barriers to implement.

An inferential statistical test ONE WAY ANOVA a parametric statistical tool is used to
investigate the differences in the perception of different respondent group.

3.7 RELIABILITY
Reliability is the overall internal consistency measure. The acceptance value for alpha if it equals to
0.70 or higher (Mirghani, 2016).

The Cronbach’s alpha value for the study was 0.868 which is higher than the minimum threshold
of 0.7 which implies the data collected from the questionnaire is reliable.

Table 3.1 Reliability

QUESTIONS Cronbach’s alpha coefficient

value

Pushing factor to implement 0.944

BIM
Barriers to implement BIM 0.792

3.8 VALIDITY
Validity is technical terms that refer to the objectivity and credibility of a research project.
(Silverman, 2016). Validation of the data collected takes place throughout the process of data
collection and analysis .since validity is one of the strengths of research as it defines the
correctness of the information from the perspective of all the stakeholders of the research. In this
research the logical process of constructing knowledge through brain storming is essential in
providing concrete validity (Weston, et al., 2001). Furthermore, the questions in this research
were developed from multiple literatures in the field of BIM.

28
3.9 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
‘Some important ethical concerns that should be taken into account while carrying out research
are: anonymity, confidentiality and informed consent’ (Sanjiri, et al., 2014, p. 1, my italics).
Anonymity was achieved by not using any names of participants that contributed to this research;
the participants were assigned codes in the transcription to maintain the anonymity (Saunders, et
al., 2009) throughout the research. Additionally, no names or any other personal information will
be used or distributed while making the presentation of the research. As part of keeping the
confidentiality of the participants, no personal information was taken

Munhall (1988) argues that describing the experiences and information collected from
participants in the most faithful manner is an ethical obligation to any researcher. This research
has taken all the steps to keep the information true to its origin and has not been altered in terms
of the meaning they carry.

29
CHAPTER FOUR

RESULT AND INTERPRETATION

4.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter contains both analyses results and their interpretations. Under the descriptive
statistics, the trends and overall performances of the variables are presented. The statistical tools
such as tables, charts and graphs are used to describe the variables.

4.2 RESPONDENTS GENERAL INFORMATION

Respondent’s position

The received responses are 74 from a total of 81 distributed questionnaires from which 2
responses are incomplete. This implies the response rate is 91.35%.

respondents position
project manager

office engineer

site engineer

architect

quantity surveyour

0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00

FIGURE 4.1 RESPONDENTS POSITION

From the respondents position the majorities are site engineers with 51.35% followed by office
engineers 24.32%.

30
Respondent’s educational level

Most of the respondents’ educational level is B.Sc. (69.85%) and the rest of respondents are MSc
holders with 24.32% share from the total

respondents
educational level
24.32%
BSc
MSc
75.68%

FIGURE4.2 RESPONDENTS EDUCATIONAL LEVEL

Respondents work experience

Most of respondent’s years of experience are 1-5 years (60.81%) the remaining 36.49% have 6-
10 years of experience and 2.7% of the respondents have 11-15 years of experience.

years of experience
16-20

11-15

6-10 years of experience

1-5

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00%

FIGURE 4.3 RESPONDENTS WORK EXPERIENCE

31
4.3 REASON FOR NOT USING BIM
As obtained from the questionnaire result, there is no BIM practice in ECWC and the reason for
not using BIM is summarized in the table below.

TABLE 4.1 REASONS FOR NOT USING BIM

REASON FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

Lack of awareness 26 16.88%

No pushing force to implement 43 27.92%

Cost of implementation is high

12 7.79%

Satisfied with the existing software 31 20.13%

Perceived benefits of BIM are unknown

23 14.94%

BIM is complicated 19 12.34%

The largest percent reported is for” No pushing force to implement” which is 27.92%.Hence, this
percentage implies raising the pushing force influence the BIM adoption and implementation.
And the second largest percentage shows that respondents are satisfied with the existing
software. Therefore the advantage of BIM over the existing software should be described briefly.
And also the reason that there is “lack of awareness” implies that raising of awareness through
promotion or other means will have a positive effect on BIM implementation.

4.4 PUSHING FACTORS

Based on the response the weighted mean and standard deviation are calculated in order to rank
and identify the key pushing factors to implement BIM and presented in figure 5.

32
pushing factors
technical copetency of staff
cultural change
availability of accepted bim standards
competitive pressure
availability of BIM education and training pushing factors
raising awareness
clients requirment or demand for BIM
government enforcement
financial resource of the organization
the percieved benefits of BIM
improve projct delivery
top management effect
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00

FIGURE 4.4 PUSHING FACTORS

From the above listed factors, the key pushing factors are identified in the table below.

TABLE 4.2 KEY PUSHING FACTORS

KEY PUSHING FACTORS

pushing Strongly Strongly weighted standard

factors agree Agree Neutral Disagree. disagree mean deviation rank

Government 62 4 2 0 0
enforcement
91.18% 5.88% 2.94% 0.00% 0.00% 4.88 0.993 1

Client 56 10 0 0 2
requirement
or demand
for BIM
application 82.35% 14.71% 0.00% 0.00% 2.94% 4.74 0.975 2

The 14 42 0 10 2 3.82 0.895 3

33
perceived
benefit of
BIM 20.59% 61.76% 0.00% 14.71% 2.94%

Availability 0 34 24 10 0
of BIM
3.35 0.886
education 0.00% 50.00% 35.29% 14.71% 0.00%
and training 4

Raising of 0 26 22 16 4
awareness
3.03 0.881
e.g. 0.00% 38.24% 32.35% 23.53% 5.88%
promotion 5

From the above table it is clearly identified that the key pushing factors are government
enforcement ,client demand ,perceived benefits of BIM ,availability of BIM education and
training and awareness whose mean and standard deviation ranges 4.88 and 0.993 to 3.03 and
0.88 respectively. From this result the respondents are waiting for external pushing factors
(government and client) that force them to implement and use BIM in their project. This result
may arise from that the respondents are from a contractor company and BIM system must be
applied in the design stage, and the contractor cannot start working on BIM from scratch because
of the long time required for modeling.

The other key pushing factor is BIM benefit. This implies that understanding the advantages and
benefits of BIM results in using the system.

And finally increasing the BIM education and training institutes and rising of awareness may
results in BIM implementation.

To investigate the differences in the perception of respondents groups, i.e. quantity surveyor,
architect, site engineer, office engineer and project manager, analysis of variance (ANOVA) is
performed with 95% confident and the result is presented in the following table.

34
TABLE 4.3 ANOVA FOR PUSHING FACTORS

Source of
SS df MS F P-value F critical
Variation

Between Groups 0.886475 4 0.221619 0.188079 0.943642 2.539689

Within Groups 64.80799 55 1.178327

Total 65.69447 59

From the above table the p-value is greater than the alpha value (0.05) which implies that there is
no significant difference in perception between the groups.

4.5 BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENT

The following figure shows respondent’s claims over barriers to implement BIM. Based on the
response the weighted mean and standard deviation are calculated in order to rank and identify
the key barriers to implement BIM.

barriers to impliment
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0 barriers to impliment

FIGURE 4.5 BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENT

35
From the above table the key barriers are extracted bay ranking the barriers based on their
weighted mean.

Table 4.4 KEY BARRIERS

key barriers
Strongly Strongly Weighted Standard
agree Agree Neutral Disagree disagree mean deviation Rank
cost in terms of time
18 46 6 3 0
and training 24.66% 24.66% 24.66% 24.66% 24.66% 4.08 0.607 1

insufficient
knowledge of BIM 20 32 15 3 0

technology and
definition 28.57% 28.57% 28.57% 28.57% 28.57% 3.99 0.599 2

Legal issues like

13 34 16 7 2
liability issues, need
for regulation and
intellectual property 18.06% 18.06% 18.06% 18.06% 18.06% 3.68 0.578 3

Complicity of BIM 9 37 17 6 3

from existing
software 12.50% 12.50% 12.50% 12.50% 12.50% 3.6 0.574 4

Resistance to 11 29 21 10 0

change 15.49% 15.49% 15.49% 15.49% 15.49% 3.58 0.573 5

From the above table it is clearly identified that the key barriers are cost in terms of time and
training, insufficient knowledge of BIM technology and definition, Legal issues like liability
issues, need for regulation and intellectual property, Complicity of BIM from existing software
and Resistance to change whose mean and standard deviation ranges 4.08 and 0.607 to 3.57 and
0.573 respectively.

36
To investigate the difference sin the perception of respondents groups, i.e quantity surveyor,
architect, site engineer, office engineer and project manager, analysis of variance (ANOVA) is
performed with alpha 0.05 and the result is presented in the following table.

TABLE 4.5 ANOVA FOR BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENT

Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit

Between
Groups 11.7622 4 2.94055 3.829662 0.00672 2.485885

Within
Groups 61.42683 80 0.767835

Total 73.18903 84

As the table shows the p- value which is 0.00672 is less than the alpha value 0.05.this implies
that there is a significant difference between the groups.

TABLE 4.6 ROLES OF GOVERNMENT

ROLE OF GOVERNMENT FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

enforce stakeholders to use BIM 33 27.97%

start BIM implementation from public

projects 41 34.75%

set policy 29 24.58%

promoting BIM user companies 12 10.17%

Should not be involved 3 2.54%

37
From the above table showing the results on the role of government to BIM implementation
implies that first implementing BIM on public projects have the highest percentage followed by
enforcement of stakeholders to use BIM and setting policy for BIM implementation

And the table below shows that most of the respondents believed that BIM should be
implemented soon.

TABLE 4.7 BIM IMPLEMENTATION

BIM should start implemented soon

response frequency percentage

yes 51 68.92%

No 23 31.08%

74 100.00%

38
CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECCOMENDATION

This chapter as a whole presents the summary of findings, concluding remarks for the main
findings in chapter four and important recommendations respectively.

5.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

The research found that there is no BIM practice in the company (ECWC).

The questionnaire respondents ordered the key factors pushing the BIM implementations as
(1)Government enforcement (2) Client requirement or demand for BIM application (3)The
perceived benefit of BIM (4)Availability of BIM education and training (5)Raising of awareness
e.g. promotion

Parallel to the literature and questionnaire respondents identified the barriers as;(1) cost in terms
of time and training (2)insufficient knowledge of BIM technology and definition (3)Legal issues
like liability issues, need for regulation and intellectual property (4)Complicity of BIM from
existing software (5)Resistance to change.

In finding the key pushing factors for BIM implementation there is no significant difference in
respondents group whereas in case of identifying barriers there is a difference in respondents
group.

Questionnaire respondents identified the role of government on BIM implementation as (1)

enforce stakeholders to use BIM with 34.75% (2) start BIM implementation from public projects
with 27.97% and (3) set policy with 24.58%.

And finally the questionnaire respondents suggested that the company (ECWC) should start
implementing BIM soon.

39
5.2 CONCLUSIONS
BIM technology has showed a very quick development over the last decade. It has been widely
used in many large construction projects in developed countries, which have showed that great
benefits can be obtained by implementing BIM. However, there must be enough pushing factor
to implement BIM and there are many barriers limiting the application of BIM.

According to the findings of this research the main pushing factors to implement BIM comes
from the external factors which are government enforcement and client’s requirement for BIM.
Therefore government should enforce to use BIM and encourage companies who have
implemented BIM.

For internal pushing factors which are the perceived benefits of BIM, education and training
availability and rising of awareness, a strong and aggressive promotion work should be done for
consultants, contractors, public institutes, universities and other parts in the construction
industry.

The process of finding barriers has resulted in identifying the key barriers which are

 cost in terms of time and training

 insufficient knowledge of BIM technology and definition
 Legal issues like liability issues, need for regulation and
intellectual property
 Complicity of BIM from existing software
 Resistance to change

5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS
The adoption of BIM by the AEC industry requires a broader framework of laws and regulations
to structure the use of the technology throughout the chain of services and professionals involved
in the building process. The participation of academic institutions is a fundamental phase not
only offering the necessary knowledge during professional education but also as a research hub,
functioning as a resource to AEC industry in general. On the other end of this spectrum, laws and
regulations are important mechanisms that need to be implemented fostering a business

40
environment in which the incremental management of building data becomes a valuable
condition throughout the construction industry.

The government can play a massive role to present convenient practical strategic plans for BIM
implementation by providing a timeframe to mandate BIM as an obligatory requirement in the
AEC industry projects. Also, the government could support the entities to overcome the barriers
that hinder the BIM implementation. For instance, the government can aid entitles to overcome
the initial BIM implementation cost, providing insurance for companies who implemented BIM,
setting implementation standards and policy.

Organizational decision makers have to support the staff (for example train the staff (short
term), and put strategic plans to implement BIM. Every individual has to improve his/her BIM
competencies. These results help every project parties to be highly aware of BIM and understand
its benefits, barriers and the main push factors to implement BIM

41
REFERENCE

Abdullahi B. Saka and DanielW. M. Chan A Sciento metric Review and Meta synthesis of
Building Information Modelling (BIM) Research in Africa Department of
Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom,
Kowloon, Hong Kong, China

Abas, A., 2016. Change Management For Building Information Model

Abbas, A., Din, Z. & Farooqui, R., 2016. Integration of BIM in construction management
education: An overview of Pakistani engineering universities. Procedia
Engineering, Volume 145, pp. 151-157.

Abbasnejad, B. & Moud, H., 2013. BIM and basic challenges associated with its definitions,
interpretations and expectations. International Journal of Engineering Research
and Applications (IJERA), 3(2), pp. 287-29.

Abdul‐Hadi, N., Al‐Sudairi, A. & Alqahtani, S., 2005. Prioritizing barriers to successful
business process re‐engineering (BPR) efforts in Saudi Arabian construction
industry. Construction Management and Economics, 23(3), pp. 305-315.

Ahmed, S. M. and Saram, D. D. de (2001) ‘Construction Coordination Activities: What Is

Important and What Consumes Time’. Reston: American Society of Civil
Engineers.

Ahuja, R., Sawhney, A. and Arif, M. (2014) ‘BIM based conceptual framework for lean
and green integration’, in Proceedings IGLC-22, pp. 123–132.

42
Ahuja, R., Sawhney, A. and Arif, M. (2016) ‘Driving lean and green project outcomes using
BIM: A qualitative comparative analysis’, International Journal of Sustainable
Built Environment.

Timothy Oluwatosin Olawumi and Daniel W.M. Chan An empirical survey of the
perceived benefits of executing BIM and sustainability practices in the built
environment Department of Building and Real Estate, Faculty of Construction
and Environment, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong

Andi, A. and Minato, T. (2004) ‘Representing causal mechanism of defective designs:

exploration through case studies’, Construction Management and Economics,
22(2), pp. 183–192.

Autodesk (2012) A framework for implementing a BIM business transformation.

BIM knowledge assessment: an overview among professionals A survey on the AEC

industry in Sao Paulo, Brazil Aline Valverde Arroteia1, Gustavo Garcia do
Amaral2, Simone Zeni Kikuti3, Silvio Burrattino Melhado4 1,3,4University of
Sao Paulo 2Georgia Institute of Technology Olawumi, Timothy O., & Chan,
DanielW.M.

Boxall, E. (2015). Common Data Environment (CDE): What you need to know for starter.

BRE (1981) Quality Control on Building Sites, Current Paper 7/81. London: BRE.

British Standards Institute (2007) BS1192: Building information management – A

standard framework and guide. London: British Standards Institute.

British Standards Institute (2010) BS 6079-1:2010: Project Management – Principles and

guidelines for the management of projects. London:

43
British Standards Institute (2013) PAS 1192-2:2013: Specification for information
management for the capital/delivery phase of construction projects using building
information modelling.

British Standards Institute (2012) BS ISO 21500: Guidance on project management.

London: British Standards Institute.

Brown, m., 2017. Lean BIM: Six reasons why construction needs to embrace BIM alongside
Lean Thinking | Think BIM.

Building Information Modelling: Proceedings of The 2nd BIM International Conference

(BIC) Anthony Okakpu, Ali GhaffarianHoseini, John Tookey, Jarrod Haar,
Amirhosein Ghaffarianhoseini & Attiq Rehman (2018): A proposed framework
to investigate effective BIM adoption for refurbishment of building projects,
Architectural Science Review

Characterizing BIM-based construction projects: a strategic and contingent BIM

application model oluseye olugboyega1 and aBIMbola windapo2

Critical success factors for building information modelling (BIM) implementation in Hong
Kong
Daniel W.M. Chan, Timothy O. Olawumi and Alfred M.L. Ho Department of Building and
Real Estate, Faculty of Construction and Environment, The Hong Kong
Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong

Dave, B., Koskela, L., Kiviniemi, A., Owen, R. L. and Tzortzopoulis Fazenda, P. (2013)
‘Implementing lean in construction: Lean construction and BIM-CIRIA Guide
C725’. CIRIA.

Department of Business Innovation and Skills (2011) BIM Management for value, cost and
carbon improvement. London.

44
Dubai Municipality , 2013. Guideline for BIM Implementation 196, Dubai: Dubai
Municipality
Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R. and Liston, K. (2011) BIM handbook: A guide to
building information modeling for owners, managers, designers, engineers and
contractors, Second Edition. Hoboken: Wiley.

Elmualim, A. and Gilder, J. (2014) ‘BIM: innovation in design management, influence and
challenges of implementation’, Architectural Engineering and Design
Management.

Fayol, H. (1949) General and Industrial Management. London: Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons
Ltd.
Forgues, D., Staub-French, S., Tahrani,, S. & Barak, H., 2011. Improving efficiency and
productivity in the construction sector through the use of information
technologies, s.l.: CEFRIO.

Froise, T. & Shakantu, W., 2014. Diffusion of innovations: an assessment of building

information modelling uptake trends in South Africa. Journal of Construction
Project Management and Innovation, 4(2), pp. 895-911.

Frost, S., 2017. The Role of Top Management in Helping a Company Achieve. [Online]

Fung, A., 2011. Application of building information modelling (BIM) in the Hong Kong
housing authority’s public housing developments. Presented at the Way Forward
for Facility Management: Building Information Modelling. Hong Kong, Hong
Kong Housing Authority.

Higgin, G. and Jessop, N. (1965) Communication in the Building Industry. London:

Tavistock Publications.

45
Howard, R. & Björk, B., 2008. Building information modelling — experts' views on
standardisation and industry deployment. journal of Advanced Engineering
Informatics, 22(2), pp. 271-280.

Identifying and Prioritizing the Benefits of Integrating BIM and Sustainability Practices in
Construction Projects: A Delphi Survey of International Experts. Sustainable
Cities and Society

John Rogers Heap-Yih Chong Christopher Preece , 2015) Adoption of Building

Information Kiani, I., Sadeghifam, A., Ghomi, S. & Marsono, A., 2015. Barriers to
implementation of Building Information Modeling in scheduling and planning
phase in Iran. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 9(5), pp. 91-97.

Kim, H. et al., 2010. Developing 5D system connecting cost, schedule and 3D model. s.l., In
IABSE Symposium Report . International Association for Bridge and Structural
Engineering., pp. 32-38.

Kiviniemi, A., 2015. Experiences from the BIM-Adoption in Finland and UK. 1 ed.
Liverpool: university of Liverpool School of Architecture.

Kjartansdóttir, I., 2011. BIM adoption in Iceland and its relation to lean construction.
master of science thesis, School of Science and Engineering available at:,
Reykjavík,: Reykjavík University.

Kreider, R. G., & Messner, J. I. (2013). The Uses of BIM: Classifying and Selecting BIM
Uses. The Literature review on model to determine the level of uptake by the
organization. Construction, (1998), 168–184.

Latiffi, A., Mohd, S., Kasim, N. & Fathi, M., 2013. Building information modeling (BIM)
application in Malaysian construction industry. International Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management

46
McGraw Hill Construction. (2012). The Business Value of BIM in North America.
SmartMarket Report.

Neil Calvert, S, 2013Modelling technology (BIM) , Engineering, Construction and

Architectural Management 10 Points and the Benefits of BIM.

New Zealand, B.I.M, 2014. Handbook (2014). A guide to enabling BIM on building
projects.. New Zealand

Daniel W.M. Chan, Timothy O. Olawumi, Alfred M.L. Ho Succar, B. & Kassem, M.,
2015.Perceived benefits of and barriers to Building Information Modelling (BIM)
implementation in construction: The case of Hong Kong
Macro-BIM adoption: Conceptual structures. Automation in Construction, Volume 57,

Succar, B. (2009). Building information modelling framework: A research and delivery

foundation for industry stakeholders.

Tse, T. C. K., Wong, K. D. A. & Wong, K. W. F., 2005. The utilisation of building
information models in nD modelling: a study of data interfacing and adoption
barriers. Journal of Information Technology in Construction

Volk, R., Stengel, J. & Schultmann, F., 2014. Building Information Modeling (BIM) for
existing buildings—Literature review and future needs. Automation in
construction, Volume 38,

Zewein, W., 2017. Assessment of using BIM with Lean Construction for effectiveness
achievement of construction projects in Qatar, Edinburgh: MSc Dissertation
Edinburgh Napier University.

47
APPENDIX

QUESTIONNAIRE

48
ST. MARY’S UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES

BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING (BIM) PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

ASSESSEMENT: the case of ETHIOPIAN CONSTRUCTION WORKS CORPORATION
(ECWC)

Greetings to all,

The following questionnaire targets to investigate the pushing factors for the implementation of
building information modeling (BIM) and barriers to implement BIM in ETHIOPIAN
CONSTRUCTION WORKS CORPORATION (ECWC), it is a part of my dissertation required
Master of Arts in Project Management of Saint Mary’s University.

The collected information from this questionnaire will be used for scientific research only.
Therefore, i am looking for your assistance to collaborate with each other to make an immense
contribution. You are kindly requested to reply the following questions with level of accuracy.

Thanks a lot for your highly appreciated support.

Sincerely

Million Bayou
Email;[email protected]

I appreciate your effort.

49
PART 1 Questions related to you and your company

1. Which of the following best describes your company?

Local authority

Consultancy

Contractor

Architectural practice

2. Select the size of your company

1-20 Employees

21-50 employees

51-100 Employees

101-200 Employees

>201 Employees

3. What is your educational status

BSc

MSc

PHD

4. What is your role in the company?

Quantity surveyor

Architect

50
Engineer

Site manager

Project manager

5. How many years hove you worked as a professional?

1-5 years

6-10 Years

11-15 Years

16-20 Years

>21 Years

PART 2 implementation of BIM

6. Are you currently using BIM?

Yes No

7. Is there a project in your company which uses BIM??

Yes No

If yes, indicate the cost of the project

<5 million birr

6-20 million birr

21-50 million birr

50-100 million birr

51
101-200 million birr

>201 million birr

If no why do you think BIM is not implemented?(multiple selection is possible)

Lack of awareness

No pushing force to implement

Cost of implementation is high

Satisfied with the existing software

Perceived benefits of BIM are unknown

BIM is complicated

PART 3 PUSHING FACTORS

8. How do you explain the following factors that they can push BIM implementation

statement Strongly agree neutral disagree Strongly

agree disagree
Top management effect
To improve project delivery

The perceived benefit of BIM

Financial resource of the organization

Government enforcement

52
Client requirement or demand for
BIM application

Raising of awareness e.g. promotion

Availability of BIM education and

training

Competitive pressure

Availability of accepted BIM

standards

Cultural change

Technical competency of staff

9. How do you explain the following factors that are challenges or barriers for BIM
implementation?

Statement strongly agree neutral disagree strongly

agree disagree
insufficient knowledge of BIM
technology and definition

53
unwillingness to employ the new
technology

Legal issues like liability issues, need

for regulation and intellectual property

No Insurance framework for BIM

applicant

Ownership of BIM data and its

copyright

Contractual issues

Resistance to change

Management

Low rate of return

cost in terms of time and training

cost in terms of specialized software

Cost of required hardware upgrade

54
Functionality and accessibility of BIM
tool

No well-developed practical strategies

and standards

Security and reliability of BIM

Need for sophisticated data

management

Complicity of BIM from existing

software

10. What should be the role of government in implementing BIM?(multiple selection is possible)

Set policy

Enforce stakeholders to apply BIM

Start implementing first from public projects

Promoting BIM user companies

Should not be involved

11. Do you think BIM should be implemented soon?

Yes no

55
PUSHING FACTORS RANK RESULT

strongly strongly weighted standard

pushing factors agree neutral disagree rank
agree disagree mean deviation

Top 0 6 45 13 4

management
8.82 66.18 2.78 0.89 10
effect 0.00% 19.12% 5.88%
% %

To improve 0 14 36 18 0

project
20.59 52.94 2.94 0.88 8
delivery 0.00% 26.47% 0.00%
% %

The perceived 14 42 0 10 2

benefit of
61.76 3.82 0.9 3
BIM 20.59% 0.00% 14.71% 2.94%
%

Financial 0 0 4 48 16

resource of 0.00 1.82 0.96 12

0.00% 5.88% 70.59% 23.53%
the %

56
organization

Government 62 4 2 0 0

enforcement 4.88 0.99 1

5.88
91.18% 2.94% 0.00% 0.00%
%

Client 56 10 0 0 2

requirement
or demand for
14.71 4.74 0.97 2
BIM
82.35% 0.00% 0.00% 2.94%
application %

Raising of 0 26 22 16 4

awareness
e.g. 3.03 0.88 5
38.24 32.35
promotion 0.00% 23.53% 5.88%
% %

Availability 0 34 24 10 0

of BIM
education and 3.35 0.88 4
50.00 35.29
training 0.00% 14.71% 0.00%
% %

Competitive 0 16 28 18 6 2.79 0.89 9

57
pressure 23.53 41.18
0.00% 26.47% 8.82%
% %

Availability 0 32 18 4 14

of accepted
BIM 3 0.88 6
47.06 26.47
standards 0.00% 5.88% 20.59%
% %

Cultural 0 0 14 40 14

change 2 0.94 11
0.00 20.59
0.00% 58.82% 20.59%
% %

Technical 0 16 38 10 4

competency
23.53 55.88 2.97 0.88 7
of staff
0.00% 14.71% 5.88%
% %

58
BARRIER RANK RESULTS
Strongl Disagree Strongly weighted standard
barriers y agree Agree Neutral . disagree mean deviation rank

insufficient 20 32 15 3 0

knowledge
of BIM
technology
and
definition

28.57% 45.71% 21.43% 4.29% 0.00% 3.985714 0.599084 2

unwillingn 13 23 20 13 4

ess to
employ the
new
technology

17.81% 31.51% 27.40% 17.81% 5.48% 3.383562 0.565527 7

Legal 13 34 16 7 2

issues like
liability
issues,
need for
regulation
and
18.06% 47.22% 22.22% 9.72% 2.78% 3.680556 0.578222 3
intellectual

59
property

No 6 14 19 23 11

Insurance
framework
for BIM
applicant

8.22% 19.18% 26.03% 31.51% 15.07% 2.739726 0.565796 11

Ownership 0 8 23 18 23

of BIM
data and
its
copyright

0.00% 11.11% 31.94% 25.00% 31.94% 2.222222 0.593215 17

Contractual 5 21 22 13 12

issues

6.85% 28.77% 30.14% 17.81% 16.44% 2.917808 0.561862 10

Resistance 11 29 21 10 0

to change

15.49% 40.85% 29.58% 14.08% 0.00% 3.577465 0.572933 5

Manageme 1 10 26 20 16

nt 1.37% 13.70% 35.62% 27.40% 21.92% 2.452055 0.578205 14

60
Low rate of 2 22 29 16 4

return

2.74% 30.14% 39.73% 21.92% 5.48% 3.027397 0.560904 8

cost in 18 46 6 3 0

terms of
time and
training

24.66% 63.01% 8.22% 4.11% 0.00% 4.082192 0.607207 1

cost in
3 19 13 27 10
terms of
specialized
software

4.17% 26.39% 18.06% 37.50% 13.89% 2.694444 0.56726 13

Cost of 0 8 43 16 6

required
hardware
upgrade

0.00% 10.96% 58.90% 21.92% 8.22% 2.726027 0.566219 12

Functionali 4 16 0 35 18

ty and
5.48% 21.92% 0.00% 47.95% 24.66% 2.356164 0.583938 15
accessibilit

61
y of BIM
tool

No well- 12 24 25 10 2

developed
practical
strategies
and
standards

16.44% 32.88% 34.25% 13.70% 2.74% 3.465753 0.568254 6

Security 2 22 19 23 4

and
reliability
of BIM

2.86% 31.43% 27.14% 32.86% 5.71% 2.928571 0.561718 9

Need for 0 4 27 28 14

sophisticate
d data
manageme
nt

0.00% 5.48% 36.99% 38.36% 19.18% 2.287671 0.5885 16

Complicity 9 37 17 6 3 3.597222 0.573875 4

62
of BIM
from
existing
software 12.50% 51.39% 23.61% 8.33% 4.17%

63
DECLARATION

I, MILLION BAYOU TADDESSE, would declare this thesis is my original work

prepared under guidance of BUSHA TEMESGEN (PhD). All source materials
utilized for this thesis exertion have been duly recognized. I similarly confirm that
this thesis hasn’t be given to either partially or entirely too any other learning
institutions for obtaining any degree.

Million Bayou Taddesse _____________________________

Name Signature

St. Mary’s University, Addis Ababa, August, 2020

64
ENDORSEMENT

This thesis has been submitted to St. Mary’s University, School of Graduate
Studies for examination with my approval as a university advisor.

BUSHA TEMESGEN (PhD) ___________________

Advisor Signature

St. Mary’s University, Addis Ababa August, 2020

65