BIM Awareness and Readiness 01

1

Royal Institution of Surveyors Malaysia

Building Information Modelling Awareness and Readiness Among Quantity Surveyors and Quantity Surveying Firms

Building Information Modelling Technical Committee Prepared by Dr. Kherun Nita binti Ali Sharifah Noraini Noreen binti Syed Ibrahim Al‐Jamalullail Tan Choon Boon March 2013

2

Building Information Modelling Technical Committee

Sr. Quek Jin Keat, Chair of BIM Technical Committee

Dr. Kherun Nita binti Ali, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

Sharifah Noraini Noreen binti Syed Ibrahim Al‐Jamalullail, Perunding DMA Sdn. Bhd.

Tan Choon Boon, IJM Corporation Bhd.

Sr. Roznita binti Othman, Jabatan Kerja Raya

Dato’ Sr. Peter Tan Choon Hoo, Perunding Kos T & K Sdn. Bhd.

Sr. Chin Keh Liang, Perunding PCT Sdn. Bhd.

Sr. Mohamad Faiz bin Awang, JUBM Sdn. Bhd.

Sr. Mohd Ridzuan bin Lop Zainal Rashid, Perunding Kos T & K Sdn. Bhd.

Chin Wei Min, Perunding PCT Sdn. Bhd.

Suhaibah binti Mohd Ghazali, AQS Services Sdn. Bhd.

3

Table of Contents Building Information Modelling Technical Committee ................................................................................. 2

List of Figures ................................................................................................................................................ 5

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................. 7

RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS ................................................................................................................................. 8

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. 9

PART A: BUILDING INFORMATION MODELLING AWARENESS AMONG QUANTITY SURVEYORS ............... 14

1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 14

2.0 Quantity Surveyors’ Profile ............................................................................................................... 14

3.0 Awareness Profile ............................................................................................................................. 18

3.1 Hardware and software application ........................................................................................ 18

3.2 Preference in types of drawing from architects ...................................................................... 19

3.3 E‐tendering experiences .......................................................................................................... 21

3.4 Knowledge on BIM ................................................................................................................... 22

3.5 Awareness on BIM programmes .............................................................................................. 25

3.6 Involvement in BIM projects .................................................................................................... 28

4.0 Level of awareness of Building Information Modeling (BIM) ........................................................... 30

4.1 Feasibility stage ........................................................................................................................ 30

4.2 Design stage ............................................................................................................................. 32

4.3 Construction stage ................................................................................................................... 34

4.4 In‐use and maintenance stage ................................................................................................. 36

4.5 Quantity surveyors’ task with the incorporation of BIM ......................................................... 37

5.0 Cross Tabulation Analysis .................................................................................................................. 39

5.1 Level of awareness vs gender .................................................................................................. 39

5.2 Level of awareness vs experience ............................................................................................ 43

5.3 Level of awareness vs registration ........................................................................................... 47

PART B: BUILDING INFORMATION MODELLING READINESS AMONG QUANTITY SURVEYING FIRMS ....... 51

6.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 51

7.0 Organisations’ profile ........................................................................................................................ 51

7.1 Designation .............................................................................................................................. 51

7.2 Years of establishment ............................................................................................................. 52

7.3 Number of employees ............................................................................................................. 53

4

7.4 Company turnover ................................................................................................................... 53

7.5 Management certification ....................................................................................................... 54

7.6 Access to computer and internet connection .......................................................................... 55

8.0 Readiness Profile ............................................................................................................................... 56

8.1 Information technology application in Malaysia ..................................................................... 56

8.2 Knowledge on BIM ................................................................................................................... 57

8.3 Participation in BIM program ................................................................................................... 58

8.4 Participation in BIM software training ..................................................................................... 59

8.5 Involvement in BIM Projects .................................................................................................... 60

9.0 Level of readiness among quantity surveying firms ......................................................................... 62

9.1 Technology aspect ................................................................................................................... 62

9.2 People aspect ........................................................................................................................... 64

9.3 Process aspect .......................................................................................................................... 66

9.4 Management aspect ................................................................................................................ 68

10.0 Cross tabulation analysis ................................................................................................................. 70

10.1 Level of readiness vs no. of staff ............................................................................................ 70

10.2 Level of readiness vs years of establishment ......................................................................... 74

5

List of Figures Figure 1: Respondent’s region of working .................................................................................................. 14

Figure 2: Respondent’s age ......................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 3: Respondent’s gender ................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 4: Respondent’s working experience ............................................................................................... 16

Figure 5: Respondent’s registration ............................................................................................................ 17

Figure 6: Respondent’s designation ............................................................................................................ 17

Figure 7: Software application .................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 8: Hardware application ................................................................................................................... 19

Figure 9: Preferences as to work on hardcopy or softcopy ........................................................................ 20

Figure 10: E‐Tendering experience ............................................................................................................. 21

Figure 11: Respondents’ knowledge on BIM .............................................................................................. 22

Figure 12: QS extinction with BIM existence .............................................................................................. 25

Figure 13: Awareness of BIM programmes ................................................................................................. 25

Figure 14: Participation in BIM programmes .............................................................................................. 26

Figure 15: Respondents’ sponsorship ......................................................................................................... 28

Figure 16: Respondent involvement in BIM projects ................................................................................. 28

Figure 17: BIM awareness at feasibility stage ............................................................................................. 32

Figure 18: BIM awareness at design stage .................................................................................................. 34

Figure 19: BIM awareness at construction stage ........................................................................................ 35

Figure 20: BIM awareness to in‐use and maintenance stage ..................................................................... 37

Figure 21: QS tasks with the incorporation of Building Information Modeling .......................................... 38

Figure 22: BIM awareness at feasibility stage vs gender ............................................................................ 39

Figure 23: BIM awareness at design stage vs gender ................................................................................. 40

Figure 24: BIM Awareness at Construction Stage vs Gender ..................................................................... 41

Figure 25: BIM awareness at in‐use and maintenance stage vs gender ..................................................... 42

Figure 26: BIM awareness at feasibility stage vs experience ...................................................................... 43

Figure 27: BIM awareness at design stage vs experience ........................................................................... 44

Figure 28: BIM awareness at construction stage vs experience ................................................................. 45

Figure 29: BIM awareness at in‐use and maintenance stage vs experience .............................................. 46

Figure 30: BIM awareness at feasibility stage vs QS registration ............................................................... 47

Figure 31: BIM awareness at design stage vs QS registration .................................................................... 48

6

Figure 32: BIM awareness at construction stage vs QS registration .......................................................... 49

Figure 33: BIM awareness at in‐use and maintenance stage vs QS registration ........................................ 50

Figure 34: Respondent’s designation .......................................................................................................... 52

Figure 35: Years of establishment .............................................................................................................. 52

Figure 36: Total number of employees ....................................................................................................... 53

Figure 37: Company turnover ..................................................................................................................... 54

Figure 38: Management certification ......................................................................................................... 54

Figure 39: Own computers and internet access ......................................................................................... 55

Figure 40: Information Technology (IT) application in Malaysia construction ........................................... 56

Figure 41: Information Technology (IT) application by QS in Malaysia ...................................................... 57

Figure 42: Staff participation in BIM programme ....................................................................................... 59

Figure 43: Staff participation in BIM software training .............................................................................. 60

Figure 44: Respondent’s involvement in BIM projects ............................................................................... 61

Figure 45: BIM readiness from the aspect of technology ........................................................................... 64

Figure 46: BIM readiness from the aspect of people .................................................................................. 66

Figure 47: BIM readiness from the aspect of process ................................................................................ 68

Figure 48: BIM readiness from the aspect of management ....................................................................... 70

Figure 49: Level of readiness vs number of staff from the aspect of technology ...................................... 70

Figure 50: Level of readiness vs number of staff from the aspect of people ............................................. 71

Figure 51: Level of readiness vs number of staff from the aspect of process ............................................ 72

Figure 52: Level of readiness vs number of staff from the aspect of management ................................... 73

Figure 53: Level of readiness vs number of years of establishment from the aspect of technology ......... 74

Figure 54: Level of readiness vs number of years of establishment from the aspect of people ................ 75

Figure 55: Level of readiness vs number of years of establishment from the aspect of process ............... 76

Figure 56: Level of readiness vs number of years of establishment from the aspect of management ..... 77

7

List of Tables Table 1: Reasons on type of drawing preferred by the quantity surveyors ............................................... 19

Table 2: Brief explanation about BIM knowledge ....................................................................................... 22

Table 3: BIM programmes title ................................................................................................................... 26

Table 4: BIM programmes title ................................................................................................................... 27

Table 5: BIM application in construction stages ......................................................................................... 29

Table 6: Problems experienced ................................................................................................................... 29

Table 7: Benefits experienced ..................................................................................................................... 30

Table 8: BIM awareness at feasibility stage ................................................................................................ 31

Table 9: BIM awareness at design stage ..................................................................................................... 32

Table 10: BIM awareness at construction stage ......................................................................................... 35

Table 11: BIM awareness at in‐use and maintenance stage ...................................................................... 36

Table 12: QS tasks with the incorporation of Building Information Modeling ........................................... 38

Table 13: Brief explanation about BIM knowledge..................................................................................... 58

Table 14: BIM programmes title ................................................................................................................. 59

Table 15: BIM software training ................................................................................................................. 60

Table 16: BIM application in construction stages ....................................................................................... 61

Table 17: Problems experienced ................................................................................................................. 61

Table 18: Benefits experienced ................................................................................................................... 62

Table 19: BIM readiness from the aspect of technology ............................................................................ 63

Table 20: BIM readiness from the aspect of people ................................................................................... 65

Table 21: BIM readiness from the aspect of process .................................................................................. 67

Table 22: BIM readiness from the aspect of management ........................................................................ 69

8

RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS

• AIM to determine the level of awareness among

the quantity surveyors and the level of readiness among the quantity surveying firms towards Building Information Modelling (BIM)

• QUESTIONNAIRES were used as method of

data collection and descriptive statistics were adopted to analyse the data

• AWARENESS is exponentially growing though BIM is still at infancy rate

• READINESS level is high though some

concerned were raised in workforce training supports, legal and integration issues

• LIMITATION of the research lies on the

number of respondents which restricts the generalisation of the findings

• FURTHER data collection will be conducted to substantiate the interim findings of the survey

RESEA

RCH HIGHLIGHTS

9

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. This report presents the interim findings of a survey to determine the level of awareness among

quantity surveyors and the level of readiness among quantity surveying firms towards the

Building Information Modeling (BIM). It is divided into two parts where Part A depicts the result

of the BIM awareness while Part B is for the firms’ BIM readiness.

2. The basis of the survey lies on its extensive literature reviews on the subject matter. Data

collection was conducted among quantity surveyors and quantity surveying firms’ owners by

means of questionnaire as the instrument. Data was then analyzed using descriptive statistics

where frequency and percentage were the analysis techniques used to present the findings.

Cross tabulation was used to present, summarize and visualize how the demographic

characteristics of quantity surveyors inter‐relate with measures of BIM awareness as well as

have a grasp of how firms’ size and years of establishment inter‐relate with measures of BIM

readiness.

3. Questionnaires were distributed to the target respondents during seminars and conferences

held between November 2012 and January 2013. Out of the total of 250 questionnaires

distributed to quantity surveyors during the seminars and conferences, 21.2% were useable for

the analysis. On the other hand, a total of 80 questionnaires were distributed to quantity

surveying firms’ owners but 22.5% were useable for analysis. The low number of participants

may not possibly represent the whole population of the profession, but it is an early indicator of

the awareness and readiness of the wider population.

4. The demographic analysis on the respondents for awareness survey shows that majority of

them has more than ten years of experiences in the industry (60%) with almost equal proportion

of female and male (53%:47%). The same proportion also revealed in age with 53% within the

age group of above 40 years old. In term of registration with the Board of Quantity Surveyors

Malaysia (BQSM), 49% of them are Registered QS as compared to Registered Graduate QS and

Non‐registered QS with the percentage of 38% and 13% respectively. The background of the

respondents shows that they have reasonable experiences in the industry and makes their

responses believable.

10

5. Looking at the awareness profiles of the survey, generally a fairly good level of skills and

knowledge in the information and technology (IT) hardware and software was clearly shown by

the respondents. However, majority of them prefer hardcopy drawings to softcopy due to

easiness in checking, visualizing and documentation purposes. Respondents who request for

softcopy praise how taking off could be done easily and in short period of time.

6. The respondents were asked a direct question of definition of BIM to which majority of them

correctly describe the fundamentals of BIM utility, i.e. integration, 3D models and collaboration.

This demonstrates the growing level of knowledge among them despite the fact that BIM is still

at infancy rate in Malaysia. Although one of them stated that BIM may replace QS’s

fundamental role which is the taking off, majority of them optimistically believe that BIM will

not bring QS profession to extinction.

7. At least for the past one year, BIM is being promoted through seminars or conference such as

QS International Convention, QS Principals Dialogue, BIM Conference and Exhibition and BIM

workshops which were organized by various organizations such as by CIDB, BQSM, RISM and

software vendors. However, many are still not aware of such programmes (50%:50%). And

among the aware group of respondents, only 29% participated in the programmes. The study

also shows that that the majority (63%) out of the percentage who attended the programme

were sponsored by their firms.

8. Only two respondents or 10% have involved in construction project that applied BIM. Although

the number is too low, it is inspiring to realize that QS has started getting involved in such kind

of projects. The QS were engaged at feasibility, design and construction stage. Despite the

benefits they experienced from the projects such as better visualization, faster taking off and

efficient coordination, problems in the implementation were also observed for example lack of

understanding and expertise in BIM, technical difficulties, non‐existence of standard BIM models

and resistance from various parties in the projects.

9. The study then delved into the level of awareness of BIM at different stages of a construction

lifecycle i.e. feasibility stage, design stage, construction stage and in‐use and maintenance stage.

Overall, the results show a considerably high level of awareness at all stages. In general, the

Aware status constitutes above 50% of the respondents in most of the items; while Somewhat

Aware comprises between 29%‐50% and the Not At All Aware is not more than 9%.

11

10. Three variables in the quantity surveyors’ profile were then selected for cross tabulation analysis

against all stages in the construction lifecycle. There are gender, years of experience and

registration with the BQSM. Females dominate the awareness level at Somewhat Aware and

Aware in all stages whereas the males form the majority of the Not At All Aware notion in the

study. As for years of experience versus construction stages, QSs with experience less than 10

years forms the majority in the Aware and Somewhat Aware level of awareness cross all stages.

The findings reveal a similar pattern in the cross tabulation for registration against construction

lifecycle which again the Aware and Somewhat Aware notion for Registered QS is taken over by

the Registered Graduate QS and Non Registered QS. Given the impression that Registered

Graduate and Non Registered QS are the same group of QS with less experience, this pattern is

not greatly astounding.

11. The questionnaires for BIM readiness among quantity surveying firms were responded by the

top management of the organizations either the principals, partners or directors. Majority of

the firms have long years in the industry having been established more than 11 years ago. In

term of size of the firms, it is categorized as small, medium and large depending on the number

of employees where small firms has less than 10 staff, medium is between 11 to 20 staff and

large means more than 20 staff. Small firms form 22% of the total respondents whereas

medium and large share an equal proportion of percentage which is 39% respectively. Most

firms reveal the company’s turnover of over RM 1 million for the year 2010 and 2011 with 67%

of the total respondents having obtained ISO quality certification. All firms stated that 100% of

their staff has access to their own computers and majority of them have 75% of their computers

connected to the internet.

12. In the readiness profiles of the firm, the respondents were asked of their perception of the level

of IT application the construction industry. More than half of the respondents rated the

industry as good or very good level in IT application. They also rated the same for QS level of IT

application. Just as the respondents for BIM awareness, the firms’ owners were asked of their

knowledge in BIM and similarly, most of them described quite correctly the fundamental of BIM.

13. The number of firms’ owners who had sponsored their staff to attend BIM related programmes

is a bit low (47%) though almost the number for those who have not sent any staff to any

programmes. This low number of participation is also reflected in the firms sponsoring staff to

attend BIM related software training which only 29% of them started exposing their staff to such

12

trainings. In addition, only 12% of the respondents have involved in constructions project that

involved BIM. Their involvement was particularly at the design and construction stage. Though

they appreciate the benefits that BIM brings into the construction process such as clear design

analysis at early stage that could prevent variation order during construction, at the same time

they recognize some issues surrounding the BIM implementation. For instance, the cost of the

software and training personnel for skills in BIM.

14. The respondents were then probed on their firms’ readiness from the aspects of technology,

people, process and management. The general findings for the first aspect reveal that the firms

are technologically ready to accept BIM in the construction industry where majority of the

respondents Moderately Agree or Agree to the notions. Most of them do realize that

integration is required for data and information sharing and thus, BIM could provide this feature

to enhance communication among parties. From the aspect of people, Quantity Surveying firms

are ready to accept BIM as long as there is sufficient training to guide them to the optimum

level. All of them agree to assist their workforce in re‐skilling and to capitalize on the rapidly

emerging technologies as it will help to improve and enhance the quality of works or end

product. The optimism among respondents continues at the aspect of process to which the

respondents are ready to accept the emerging new technology to improve and enhance their

quality of works provided that there are proper legal to overcome unwanted legal issues. Last

but not the least, from the management aspect, more than 80% or 13 respondents agree that

they have sufficient resources for research, development and training relating to BIM

implementation because they do have staff that are experienced in ICT adoption. Besides, they

are willing to support the necessary maintenance cost during BIM implementation and spend

additional time to familiarize with the software and enhance knowledge and experience about

BIM. Thus, the respondents are ready to adopt BIM in their firms to enhance the quality of

works.

15. In the cross tabulation analysis, two variables were selected against all aspects of readiness.

There are number of staff (firm size) and years of establishment. In term of size, large‐,

medium‐ and small‐sized firms have a balanced distribution of Moderately Agree and Agree

towards BIM across all aspects of readiness. As for years of establishment, it is clearly seen that

the older firms have more confidence in agreeing to the notions in all aspects of BIM readiness.

13

This depicts that they are more ready for the implementation of BIM in comparison to younger

firms.

16. The limitation of the survey lies on the number of respondents and the short period of time

used in gathering the data. Though the findings look positive, the result is not sufficed to

generalize the BIM awareness and readiness of QS profession as a whole. Further data

collection will be conducted and as to substantiate the interim findings of the survey.

14

PART A: BUILDING INFORMATION MODELLING AWARENESS AMONG QUANTITY SURVEYORS

1.0 Introduction

This chapter presents the findings and discussions of the survey. The chapter is divided into a

few sections i.e. the respondents profile; the respondents’ awareness profile; the respondents’ level of

awareness in feasibility stage, design stage, construction stage and in‐use and maintenance stage; and

finally the cross tabulation analysis.

A total of 250 questionnaires were distributed to the Quantity Surveyors during conferences and

seminars held between November 2012 and January 2013. The return rate is about 21.2% percent

which is 53 responded questionnaires with about 90%‐95% of validity. Bar charts, pie chart and tables

were used to present and summarise the findings.

2.0 Quantity Surveyors’ Profile

Figure 1 shows the state were respondents work within the construction industry. Fifty three

percent of the respondents are from Selangor, followed by thirty eight percent in Kuala Lumpur. Penang

and Johor recorded equal and least number of respondents (four percent). As this preliminary survey is

undertaken and distributed amongst seminar participants in Kuala Lumpur, it is expected that the

majority participants would be operating in Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Darul Ehsan.

Figure 1: Respondent’s region of working

4

38

4

53

0

10

20

30

40

50

Johor Kuala Lumpur Penang Selangor

Percen

tage

%

Fi

are from t

years old

percent re

responde

Fi

three pe

responde

gender. I

group of r

igure 2 shows

the category

and less than

espectively, w

nts are categ

igure 3 revea

rcent) and t

nts. This pr

n this survey

respondents

s the respond

41 years old

n 30 years old

with only one

orised as mat

ls the respon

the remainin

reliminary su

y, the differen

in term of ge

Less than

dents’ age. Fr

and above. T

d are almost

e percent diff

tured respon

Figure 2

ndents’ gende

ng percentag

rvey shows t

nce between

nder.

Figure 3: R

47%

30 years old 31

Male47%

om the pie ch

The percenta

the same, wh

erence. This

dents.

: Respondent’s

er, where alm

ge of forty

that QS prof

both genders

Respondent’s ge

27

26%

%

1 to 40 years old

Female53%

e%

hart, forty sev

ge of respond

hich is twenty

percentage i

age

most half of th

seven perce

fessions are

s is only six p

ender

7%

41 years old and

e

ven percent o

dent within t

y six percent

indicates that

he responden

ent are repr

not monopo

percent and it

d above

of the respon

he age of 31

and twenty s

t nearly half o

ts are female

resented by

olised by only

t is quite a ba

15

dents

to 40

seven

of the

e (fifty

male

y one

alance

16

Figure 4 reveals the respondents’ working experience in construction industry. Twenty one

percent of the respondents have less than 5 years of experience in construction industry, while nineteen

percent are in the category of 6 to 10 years and eleven percent of respondents have 11 to 15 years

experience. The remaining forty nine percent of the respondents are in the category of 16 years and

above working experience. This result is expected as most of the respondents are in the age of 41 years

old and above. This also illustrates that the respondents are well experienced respondents.

Figure 4: Respondent’s working experience

Figure 5 illustrates the respondents’ registration with the Board Of Quantity Surveying Malaysia

(BQSM) being the accredited professional body for quantity surveying profession in the Malaysia

construction industry. A total of forty nine percent are registered QS, followed by thirty eight percent of

registered graduate QS and a remaining of thirteen percent are non ‐ registered QS. This illustrates that

the QS respondents in this preliminary survey should be reliable and represents a good source of

Quantity Surveying professionals. The sample is able to show, preliminarily, what the current levels of

awareness of Building Information Modelling (BIM) are amongst registered QS and registered graduated

QS.

21 1911

49

0

10

20

30

40

50

Less than 5 years

6 to 10 years 11 to 15 years 16 years and above

Percen

tage

%

Fi

responde

followed w

A

Managing

percent re

This resul

QS (Senio

aware of t

igure 6 show

nts are Seni

with assistan

percentage

g Directors. S

epresents the

lt shows that

or QS, QS an

the existence

Percen

tage

%

ws the respon

ior Quantity

t Quantity Su

of seventeen

Six percent o

e Proprietor,

t, a total of fi

d assistant Q

e of Building I

Regi

2051015202530

Figure 5: Res

ndents’ desig

Surveyors,

urveyors repre

n percent are

of the respo

while the re

fty four perc

QS). Therefor

nformation M

Figure 6: Res

istered QS Re

6 9

spondent’s regis

nation in the

whilst twent

esenting six p

e Directors, f

ndents are t

maining thirt

ent from the

re, we could

Modelling (BIM

spondent’s desig

49%

38%

13%

egistered Gradua

1725

stration

e organisatio

ty three per

percent from

followed by

the Principal;

teen percent

e respondents

expect that

M) and its ap

gnation

%

ate QS Non‐re

5 23

n. Twenty fi

rcent are Qu

the responde

nine percent

; the least p

represents o

s are represe

most of the

plication in th

egistered QS

613

ive percent o

uantity Surve

ents.

t representin

percentage of

other designa

enting Profess

m would kno

he QS profess

17

of the

eyors,

ng the

f two

tions.

sional

ow or

sion.

18

3.0 Awareness Profile

3.1 Hardware and software application

Figure 7 shows how much the respondents rate their knowledge and application of desktop

software e.g. Microsoft Office Suite (Word, Excel, Power Point, Microsoft Outlook etc.) in quantity

surveying working environment. The result shows that forty three percent and thirty four percent of the

respondents rated good and very good respectively. Out of that, both percentages of eleven percent of

the respondents rated fair and excellent. With this result, it shows that the software application in

Malaysia’s construction industry is common and they apply it well in their works.

Figure 7: Software application

Figure 8 shows how the respondents rate the application of Information Technology (IT)

hardware (e.g. PC, laptop, tablet, smart phone etc.) in working in the industry. The result shows that

eighty one percent of the respondents rated good, very good and excellent. Out of that, forty five

percent are good, twenty six percent are very good; only a total of nine percent of respondents rated

excellent. A remaining nineteen percent rated fair and poor, with seventeen of the respondent rated

fair and only two percent rated poor. With this result, it shows that the application of IT hardware in

Malaysia’s construction industry is very well applied. By having this knowledge and applying it in

working may enable them to connect with the latest information in faster way, thus enhancing their

quality of works.

11

43

34

11

0

10

20

30

40

50

Fair Good Very Good Excellent

Percen

tage

%

19

Figure 8: Hardware application

3.2 Preference in types of drawing from architects

In this study, a question “When the architect give you drawings which are AutoCAD, are you

able to work on the softcopy or do you still request hardcopy from the architect for taking off

purposes?” was asked. The purpose is to know whether the respondents prefer to work with the

softcopy or still be using the hardcopy drawing for taking off purposes. 56% of them will request for

hardcopy form of drawings for taking off purposes (Figure 9). The reasons gathered are as follow:

Table 1: Reasons on type of drawing preferred by the quantity surveyors

Type of Drawing Answers

Work on the softcopy for taking

off purposes

Cad measure to take off quantities

Can work in the softcopy drawing but the hardcopy might used as checking and easy reference as the softcopy is limited on the full view

Estimate stage used softcopy, for BQ production used hardcopy

Hardcopy is still read although taking off is done from softcopy

It easier, more accurate and fast

More accurate and more easy to the quantity in short time

Easier & the quantity is more accurate, saving more time and reduce waste paper

Taking off using digitizer

Using softcopy is accurate given the scale set by the designer is correct

Will request hardcopy for checking and record purposes

Will still request hardcopy for checking / validate the softcopy

Because all drawings in AutoCAD format is same with hardcopy. It is easier

2

17

45

26

9

0

10

20

30

40

50

Poor Fair Good Very Good Excellent

Percen

tage

%

Wihartap

ll request rdcopy for aking off urposes

to measrule, calhard to

Easy refecompute

As need

At timesbe studi

Because

Companmanuall

Differen

Easy to ctake‐off

For docu

It is easy

Office PC

Softcopyamendmconfuse

Spread d

We have

We prinemploy rapid chdocume

Figure 9

H

ure using Autculator etc. Sunderstand d

erence, able ter screen is li

the hardcopy

s dimension ced

e don’t know A

ny does not usy

nt when done

check discrepelement whi

umentation p

y to refer hard

C technical is

y may be chament. At suchus

drawings bett

e no proper s

t using indepAutoCAD opeanges by Arcents

9: Preferences as

Hardcopy 56%

toCAD formatSave time in ddrawing in Au

to deduct errmited (14'' or

y for manual

could not be s

AutoCAD and

sing any takin

on softcopy,

pancy of the dich might not

purposes

dcopy and ta

sue

nged easily a there will be

ter than on sc

ystem to taki

endent printeerators. Hardh/Eng. has im

s to work on har

Softcopy 44%

t because dodoing measuretoCAD forma

ror/discrepanr 16'' only)

checking pro

seen when an

d do not insta

ng off softwar

difficult to p

drawings (bet drawn in the

king off will b

nd we are noe many versio

creen

ing off directl

er. We don’tcopy needed mplications to

rdcopy or softco

Work osoftcopoff pur

Will rehardcooff pur

n’t have/less ement/takingat rather than

ncy faster, the

ocess

n overall layou

all in QS deskt

re. Taking off

rint, better u

tween Archt. e drawing

be on softcop

ot informed oon of drawing

ly from softco

neither buy Afor evidentia

o QS when do

opy

on the py for taking rposes

quest opy for taking rposes

use of scale g off. But, quin hardcopy

e size of

ut plan needs

top

f is done

se hardcopy

and Eng) and

py

f the which may

opy

AutoCAD nor al purpose as ing contract

20

te

s to

d

Ta

hardcopy

softcopy

timely ma

AutoCAD/

can be do

yet, hardc

evidence.

hardcopy

3.3 Eten

A

whether t

tendering

F

experienc

experienc

QS in Mal

able 1 show

for AutoCAD

brings much

anner. But,

/ Revit progr

one. Neverth

copy drawing

There are

because of li

ndering expe

question “D

the responde

g facility desig

Figure 10 sh

ce or not. Fr

ced E‐Tenderi

aysia do not

ws the brief

D work takin

more benefi

doing taking

amme, thus

heless, from t

g is still in de

also respon

mited knowle

eriences

o you have a

ents are awa

gned for use b

hows the di

rom this pie

ing and only t

get good exp

explanation

ng off purpo

ts in doing ta

off by softc

it may take t

the response

mand by the

nses that sug

edge in AutoC

any E‐Tender

re about BIM

by Quantity S

istribution o

chart, a maj

thirty eight p

posure to e‐te

Figure 10: E

No62%

about the

ses. From t

aking off, as

opy might be

time in unde

e also it can b

e respondents

ggest that so

CAD.

ring experienc

M or not, as

urveyor and

of percentage

ority of sixty

percent had e

endering exer

‐Tendering expe

Y3

respondents’

these respon

it is easier, m

e difficult to

rstanding the

be said that e

s due to easy

ome taking o

ce” was aske

E‐Tendering

relates to BIM

e whether r

y two percent

xperienced E

rcises.

erience

Yes 8%

’ preference

ses, it is no

more accurat

QS who are

e format first

even though

y reference a

off are still d

ed in other to

is an efficien

M.

respondent

t of the resp

E‐Tendering.

of softcopy

doubt that

te and excelle

e not familiar

t before takin

softcopy is e

and can be ke

done manua

o get a rough

nt and transp

have E‐Tend

pondents hav

This indicate

21

y and

using

ent in

r with

ng off

easier,

ept as

lly by

h idea

parent

dering

ve not

s that

22

3.4 Knowledge on BIM

Figure 11 shows the distribution of percentage whether respondents know about BIM or do not

know about BIM. From this chart, more than half or sixty one percent of respondents have poor

knowledge of BIM; with forty two percent stating they don’t have much knowledge of BIM and nineteen

percent saying they do not know at all about BIM. Out of the total respondents, thirty four percent of

them have a fair knowledge about BIM, while four percent knows quite a lot about BIM and only two

percent stated they know a lot about BIM.

Figure 11: Respondents’ knowledge on BIM

In the questionnaire, respondents were asked to give a brief explanation about BIM based on

their knowledge or opinion. The responses was categorised into five categories, namely “cost”, “3D

modelling”, “managing construction information, integrate information, handling QS works and

managing building data”, “measurement tool” and “others”. The responses are as follow:

Table 2: Brief explanation about BIM knowledge

Categories of Answers Answers

Cost Costing and development of drawings combined to achieve desired result.

Facilitating communications, increasing productivity, reducing cost.

3D Modeling 3D taking off

BIM are model visualization, object with parameter which can use for

19

4234

4 20

10

20

30

40

Do not know at all

Not Much Fair Quite a lot A lot

Percen

tage

%

23

4D & 5D etc, collaboration among multidiscipline.

BIM is an integrated information model whereby can shared among the entire stakeholder efficiently.

Modeling based to help the construction process.

Software for QS to do taking off, provide 3D image for Qs to have better view & imagination to do measurement.

Using 3D model, integrated process of design, estimating & construction. Paper less, reduce discrepancies in design, and provide information centre to the construction player.

Using "polyline" in CAD software to come out 3D model & then transfer it to "BIM". Thereafter measurement will be done out.

Managing construction information, integrate information, handling

QS works and managing building data

A new tool of construction model for standardization.

An overall modeling that incorporate must of the information for a building construction and it's visualize.

BIM enables collaboration among designers, QS, client, consultants, etc. in project implementation that can reduce time and cost, and at the same time increase quality, productivity and efficiency.

BIM is a platform of collaboration between different parties to provide information about each tread for a more effective and economical construction.

BIM is professional software incorporating all in one task to complete a project.

BIM is single/one software that provides us all the information needed by enter some of information required.

BIM is a shared knowledge resource among the construction players.

BIM is a system which it can share the information among all the parties and the system must be unique.

Collective information among industry players.

For better integration from various professionals e.g. Architect, QS, Engineers.

Integration of information & knowledge by the construction industry team players to give a value added & cost effective on the project/to the client, i.e. clash identification.

Requires collaboration between construction professionals and early detailing for clash analysis/modeling during design, construction as well as facilities/maintenance management.

A model which integrates all information among the designers and cost estimations in 1 standard, given all coding, item, measurement etc are the same, in order to create a successful project with zero mistakes, etc in shorter time, lesser cost and increase the quality of the project.

Complete the entire task by software to make it more efficiency and

24

easily to catch up in a short period.

Measurement Tool

Using softcopy to measure the GFA as well the BQ ‐ AutoCAD format.

Method of quantification by computer from drawings.

Software that can do every measurement which may replace QS fundamental role i.e. taking off.

Others

On line Qs experience such as E‐Tendering & E‐Bidding

Networking within domestic / LAN.

Architect and engineers need to provide detailed design for clash analysis/modeling.

Table 2 shows the brief explanation about BIM knowledge by the respondents. From these

responses, it shows that the respondents do realise that BIM is not only function for costing but also can

convert 2D drawings into 3D models. Among the respondents some also stated that BIM can be

described as measurement tool for taking off. Apart from that, a majority of the respondents had an

opinion that BIM is used to manage construction information, integrate information, handling QS works

and managing building data. Thus, BIM can enhance the collaboration and communication among the

construction players.

A question “Do you think QS will be slowly extinct in the future with the existence of BIM?” was

asked in the questionnaire, in order to gage their opinion on the effects of BIM application towards QS

in the future.

Figure 12 shows the distribution of respondent opinion on the effects of BIM application

towards QS profession in the future. From this pie chart, a majority of seventy four percent of the

respondents is of the opinion that QS will not be extinct, while twenty six percent believe that QS will be

extinct with the existence of BIM. This shows the majority of the respondents have a positive opinion

regarding BIM and that BIM application will not bring negative effects to the QS profession in the future

and cause the QS profession to be extinct.

3.5 Awar

Fi

seminars,

is fair. Fif

percentag

though M

to enhanc

reness on BI

igure 13 show

conferences

fty percent of

ge also respo

Malaysia had a

ce the awaren

F

IM program

ws the distri

s or workshop

f respondents

nded that the

already set up

ness of BIM, t

F

igure 12: QS ext

mmes

bution of the

p. From this p

s replied that

ey are unawa

p road shows

the percentag

Figure 13: Awar

tinction with BIM

e respondent

pie chart, the

t they are awa

re of BIM pro

s about BIM a

ge of awaren

reness of BIM pr

74%

Yes N

50%

Yes N

M existence

ts awareness

level of awa

are of BIM pr

ogrammes. Th

and many pro

ess of BIM ar

rogrammes

26%

No

50%

No

s on BIM pro

reness amon

rogrammes, h

his can be con

ogrammes ha

re still yet at a

ogrammes su

g the respon

however, the

ncluded that,

ad been cond

a low rate.

25

uch as

dents

same

, even

ucted

Th

programm

Fi

seminars,

had parti

programm

in BIM are

Th

programm

he responden

mes (seminars

Programme

igure 14 sho

conferences

icipated in B

mes. This sho

e still very po

he responden

mes (seminars

nts who are a

s, conference

es Title

A

A

B

P

B

Q

Q

Q

ows the distr

s or workshop

BIM program

ws that, the

or even thou

F

nts whom had

s, conference

aware of the B

es or worksho

Table 3: B

AGM

Awareness BIM

BIM Awarene

Product Launc

Building Inform

QS Conferenc

QSIC 2012

QS Principals'

ribution of re

p. From this

mmes, while

level of QS p

gh various pr

igure 14: Partici

d participated

es or worksho

71%

BIM program

op) as specifie

IM programmes

M (CREAM)

ss for JKR Sta

ch ‐ Glodon

mation Mode

e 2012

Dialogue

espondents’

pie chart, on

majority of

articipation i

rogrammes h

ipation in BIM p

d in BIM prog

op) they atten

29%

Yes No

mes had also

ed in the Tabl

s title

ff (PROKOM J

eling Confere

participation

nly twenty ni

them has n

n any progra

ad been orga

programmes

grammes had

nded as speci

%

o stated the ti

le 3 below.

JKR)

nce & Exhibit

n in BIM pro

ne percent o

ever particip

mmes as to a

anized.

stated the tit

fied in the Ta

tle of the BIM

tion

ogrammes su

of the respon

pated in any

acquire know

tle of the BIM

able 4 below.

26

M

ch as

dents

y BIM

wledge

M

27

Table 4: BIM programmes title

Programmes Title

AGM

Awareness BIM (CREAM)

BIM Awareness for JKR Staff (PROKOM JKR)

Product Launch ‐ Glodon

Building Information Modeling Conference & Exhibition

QS Conference 2012

QSIC 2012

QS Principals' Dialogue

Building Smart Singapore

Lake Constance Germany 5D Conference

Workshop by Cost X

PAQS 2010, PAQS 2011, PAQS 2012

As for the respondents that attended and participated in BIM programmers, the question “Did

you attend such seminars/conference/workshop at your own accord or sponsored by your firm?” was

asked. This is to obtain information of whether the BIM participation is due to instructions from the

firm or because of own self‐awareness.

Figure 15 shows the distribution of respondents’ sponsorship, either they had participated in the

BIM programmes (seminars/conference/workshop) at their own accord or been sponsored by firm.

Sixty three percent of the respondents were sponsored by the firm to participate in such BIM

programmes, while only thirty seven of them participated in the BIM programmes at their own accord.

This results show that the awareness of BIM in firm are higher than awareness as an individual by

twenty six percent. Nevertheless, more awareness programmes of BIM should be organized as there is

no doubt that BIM do bring improvement in the quality of construction project.

3.6 Invol

A

questionn

Fi

all of the

BIM, whil

of the re

applicatio

lvement in B

question “H

naire, to know

igure 16 show

respondents

e only ten pe

espondents h

on of BIM in c

Percen

tage

%

BIM projects

Have you eve

w how many r

ws the distrib

s (ninety perc

ercent of them

have never e

onstruction p

Figur

0

20

40

60

80

A

Figure 15: Re

s

er been invo

respondents

bution of resp

cent) have ne

m involved ha

experienced

projects in Ma

re 16: Responde

37

At my own acco

90%

spondents’ spon

lved in any

have had han

pondents’ han

ever been inv

ands on in pr

in projects

alaysia are sti

nt involvement

ord

Yes No

nsorship

projects that

nds on experi

nds on involv

volved in any

rojects that u

that apply B

ill very low.

in BIM projects

63

Sponsored by

10%

t use BIM?”

ence in hand

vement in BIM

construction

se BIM. This

BIM and it a

s

y my firm

was asked i

ling BIM proj

M project. A

n projects tha

s shows that,

also indicate

28

n the

ects.

Almost

at use

most

s the

29

Next, the respondents who had been involved in the BIM projects were asked more about BIM

application in construction stages, the problems faced and the benefit gains from applying BIM in the

projects.

Table 5: BIM application in construction stages

BIM Application in Construction Stages Design

Construction

Feasibility

Table 5 shows the stages that BIM was being used in the construction project that the

respondents had been involved in. From these responses, it shows that BIM had been applied in three

stages of construction, which are design stage, construction stage and feasibility stage. None of the

respondents had any experience using BIM in the maintenance stage.

Table 6: Problems experienced

Problems

Understanding of BIM concept among fresh grade, and expertise for implementing BIM

Not much experience in BIM

Internet Connections

Lack of training for the designers, PC technical issues (not compatible), no standard library for taking off purposes (using 3D Model), no standard input/measures to create info in the Revit Family/Components for the purpose of taking off

Limited within LAN

Non‐standard object parameters, step learning curve for the 5D BIM software, resistant from internal & external parties, lack of knowledge sharing among governments & industry player, and no standard BIM modeling, QTO & BQ standard imposed by government/authorities

30

Table 6 shows the problems experienced by the respondents during the course of the project

that uses BIM application. From these responses, it shows that the respondents had a difficulty in

understanding BIM concept, have limitations on knowledge of BIM software, and also faces technical

problems such as poor internet connections and limited access.

Table 7: Benefits experienced

Benefits

No information lost, able to visualize the end result, and changing 3D at the same time changes 2D

Increase in technological experience and paperless technology

Time saving in measurement, object visualization, and close detection reduce revoke

With the clash detection, the coordination meeting becomes more efficient and much easier for the designers to facilitate the whole design process

Table 7 shows the benefit experienced by the respondents during the course of the project that

uses BIM application. From these responses, it shows that the respondents agreed that BIM helps to

visualize the projects in 3D, taking off is done much faster, and increases the technology experience.

One of the response also said that the coordination meeting becomes more efficient and much easier

for the designers to facilitate the whole design process, thus, this enhances the collaboration and

communication between the construction player’s team

4.0 Level of awareness of Building Information Modeling (BIM)

4.1 Feasibility stage

Figure 17 and Table 8 shows the BIM awareness at feasibility stage. From the figure above, we

can notice that less than 7% of respondents (which means that only 2 to 3 respondents) are not aware

about the function of BIM during feasibility stage. Approximately 93% or 44 to 45 out of a total of 47

revealed they are aware about the true function of BIM during this stage. In addition to that, we can

see that more than 70% or 29 to 31 respondents are aware that BIM is able to project a model of the

project during this stage as to provide a better visualisation to all parties involved. This would able the

31

clients and designers to make any changes onto the model of which cost implication could be analysed

automatically.

Table 8: BIM awareness at feasibility stage

Not at all aware

Somewhat aware

Aware Total

Percent

(Frequency) Percent

(Frequency) Percent

(Frequency) Percent

(Frequency)

1

A brief design or model can be projected at early stage

MODEAS 4.26 (2) 34.04 (16) 61.70 (29) 100.00 (47)

2 Pre‐estimation can be identified within a shorter period

PRESHO 4.26 (2) 31.91( 15) 63.83 (30) 100.00 (47)

3 Any changes in the design will give effect to the pre‐estimate

CHADPR 6.38 (3) 29.79 (14) 63.83 (30) 100.00 (47)

4 Forming a better integration between designers and client

INTDECL 4.26 (2) 29.79 (14) 65.96 (31) 100.00 (47)

5

Client are able to make a better decision with the projected design or model

BETDEC 4.26 (2) 31.91( 15) 63.83 (30) 100.00 (47)

MODEAS PRESHO CHADPR INTDECL BETDEC

Not at all aware 4.26 4.26 6.38 4.26 4.26

Somewhat Aware 34.04 31.91 29.79 29.79 31.91

Aware 61.70 63.83 63.83 65.96 63.83

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

Valid percentage ( %

)

32

Figure 17: BIM awareness at feasibility stage

4.2 Design stage

Figure 18 and Table 9 shows the BIM awareness at design stage. The percentage of bar chart

fluctuates, but in general more than 80% of respondents are aware about the usage of BIM during

design stage. Out of 12 questions, converting 2D drawings into 3D models score the highest under the

Not at all aware category, which is a 17.3% or 8 respondents. This might be due to the confusion where

respondents think that BIM can alter 2D paper drawings into 3D model. But the actual function is that

designers will need to design the construction model and input the information into it to make it an nD

model. Under the Aware category, serving as an information centre to provide better communication

among construction team members score the highest among the 12 questions, which is a 69.5% or 32

respondents. This is one of the major functions of BIM where the model itself contains a lot of

information regarding the proposed project, so that every members involved can easily understand the

requirement of that particular project. Other than that, the Not at all aware category only scored about

2% to 7% or 1 to 3 respondents. This clearly shows that BIM’s functions in design stage are well known

among Quantity Surveyors.

Table 9: BIM awareness at design stage

Not at all aware

Somewhat aware

Aware Total

Valid

Percent Valid

Percent Valid

Percent Valid

Percent

1 It converts 2D drawings into 3D models

CO2DND 17.39 (8) 30.43 (14) 52.17 (24) 100.00 (46)

2

It serves as an information centre to provide better communication among construction team members

INFOCEN 2.17 (1) 28.26 (13) 69.57 (32) 100.00 (46)

3

It is a platform that links all the data from different software such as AutoCAD, Tekla, Vico and etc.

LINDIFS 4.35 (2) 50 (23) 45.65 (21) 100.00 (46)

4 It reduces discrepancies between architect and engineer drawings

REDIAE 2.13 (1) 40.43 (19) 57.4 (27) 100.00 (47)

33

5 It reduces discrepancies between drawings and bill of quantities

REDRAB 4.35 (2) 45.65 (21) 50 (23) 100.00 (46)

6 It detects clashes between structures and ducting for services

DETCLA 2.27 (1) 40.91 (18) 56.82 (25) 100.00 (44)

7

Provide information such as building’s natural lighting system, building’s components and etc. For example, the door carries information about its fire rating, construction, glazing and also information about suppliers

INFNAT 4.26 (2) 48.94 46.81 (22) 100.00 (47)

8 It can automatically quantify every element and generate Bills of Quantities

AUTQUG 6.38 (3) 48.94 (23) 44.68 (21) 100.00 (47)

9 It increases the accuracy of the quantification for every item

INCACC 4.26 (2) 40.43 (19) 55.32 (26) 100.00 (47)

10 It provides auto quantification with zero miss counting or zero double counting

ZEMISC 6.38 (3) 46.81 (22) 46.81 (22) 100.00 (47)

11 It is able to cut short the duration of tendering by eliminating the taking off process

CUTDUR 6.38 (3) 31.91 (15) 61.70 (29) 100.00 (47)

12 Heading towards paperless technology by storing records in digital form

STORDIG 4.26 (2) 31.91 (15) 63.83 (30) 100.00 (47)

34

Figure 18: BIM awareness at design stage

4.3 Construction stage

Figure 19 and Table 10 reveals the BIM awareness at construction stage. Out of 46 respondents,

almost 90% of them fall in the category of Somewhat Aware and Aware that BIM can improve the

process of construction industry during the construction stage. The maximum and minimum

percentages for Not At All Aware category are 8.70% and 2.17% respectively. There are 4 respondents

that noted they are not aware that application of BIM is able to reduce construction wastage and

shorten construction period, 3 respondents recorded not aware that BIM is able to reduce variation

orders, reduces the probabilities of extension of time due to variation orders and disputes, ease the

project management procedures by following up project activities, cost and time schedule and reduces

dispute due to discrepancies. Only one respondent indicated not aware that BIM have a higher

tendency to meet the clients’ requirements.

From the findings, it can be summed up that Quantity Surveyors are quite aware of the function

and ability of BIM to ease and enhance the process of construction industry during the construction

CO2DND

INFOCEN

LINDIFS

REDIAE

REDRAB

DETCLA

INFNAT

AUTQUG

INCACC

ZEMISC

CUTDUR

STORDIG

Not at all aware 17.3 2.17 4.35 2.13 4.35 2.27 4.26 6.38 4.26 6.38 6.38 4.26

Somewhat aware 30.4 28.2 50.0 40.4 45.6 40.9 48.9 48.9 40.4 46.8 31.9 31.9

Aware 52.1 69.5 45.6 57.4 50.0 56.8 46.8 44.6 55.3 46.8 61.7 63.8

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

Valid percentage (%

)

35

stage. Only minor groups of Quantity Surveyor are not aware about the power of BIM. The finding

proof that BIM is getting stronger, more people get to know about the power of BIM.

Table 10: BIM awareness at construction stage

Not at all aware

Somewhat aware

Aware Total

Valid

Percent Valid

Percent Valid

Percent Valid

Percent

1 Able to reduce construction wastage

REDWAS 8.70 (4) 41.30 (19) 50 (23) 100 (46)

2 Able to shorten the construction period

SHOCOP 8.70 (4) 50 (23) 41.30 (19) 100 (46)

3 Able to reduce variation orders

REDVO 6.52 (3) 41.30 (19) 52.17 100 (46)

4

It reduces the probabilities of extension of time due to variation orders and disputes

REDEOT 6.52 (3) 43.48 (20) 50 (23) 100 (46)

5

It is able to ease the project management procedures by following up project activities, cost and time schedule

FOLOSHE 6.52 (3) 47.83 (22) 45.65 (21) 100 (46)

6 It reduces dispute due to discrepancies

REDISCR 6.52 (3) 47.83 (22) 45.65 (21) 100 (46)

7 The end product able to meet clients’ requirements

ENDCRE 2.17 (1) 47.83 (22) 50 (23) 100 (46)

Figure 19: BIM awareness at construction stage

REDWAS SHOCOP REDVO REDEOTFOLOSH

EREDISCR ENDCRE

Not at all aware 8.70 8.70 6.52 6.52 6.52 6.52 2.17

Somewhat aware 41.30 50.00 41.30 43.48 47.83 47.83 47.83

Aware 50.00 41.30 52.17 50.00 45.65 45.65 50.00

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

Vaid Pe

rcen

tage

(%)

36

4.4 Inuse and maintenance stage

Figure 20 and Table 11 reveals the BIM awareness to In‐use and maintenance stage. We can see

that about 90% and above of respondents are aware about the function of BIM in the In‐use and

Maintenance stage, whereas only 4.35% to 8.89% of respondents fall in the Not At All Aware category.

There are only 2 respondents who are not aware that BIM is able to store historical data as references

for new projects, obtain pre‐estimation on maintenance cost and retrieve the building data for

renovation and replacement purposes. Besides that, 3 respondents are not aware that with the

application of BIM, maintenance can be done at the correct timing and spot and 4 respondents are not

aware that BIM is able to reduce the energy wastage based on the energy reading provided.

From the bar chart, we can see that Quantity Surveyors know that BIM is not only about 3D

designing, whereas BIM is able to create a whole picture of the project which is nD model. They know

that data from BIM can be use for maintenance purposes or even renovation purposes. The readings

depicts that the knowledge of Quantity Surveyors towards BIM is no longer limited to measuring or

designing a project. Instead, BIM is a platform that carries a lot of information regarding the project.

Table 11: BIM awareness at in‐use and maintenance stage

Not at all aware

Somewhat aware

Aware Total

Valid

Percent Valid

Percent Valid

Percent Valid

Percent

1 It is able to store historical data as references for new projects

STOHISD 4.35 (2) 34.78 (16) 60.87 (28) 100 (46)

2 Able to obtain pre‐estimation on maintenance cost

PRESMAC 4.44 (2) 44.44 (20) 51.11 (23) 100 (45)

3

Able to reduce the energy wastage based on the energy reading provided by BIM

REDENER 8.89 (4) 42.22 (19) 48.89 (22) 100 (45)

4 Maintenance can be done at the correct timing and spot

CORTIMS 6.67 (3) 40 (18) 53.33 (24) 100 (45)

5

Able to retrieve the building data for renovation and replacement purposes

RETDAT 4.35 (2) 47.83 (22) 47.83 (22) 100 (46)

37

Figure 20: BIM awareness to in‐use and maintenance stage

4.5 Quantity surveyors’ task with the incorporation of BIM

Figure 21 and Table 12 illustrates the QS tasks with the incorporation of Building Information

Modeling. Out of the total of 48 respondents, 100% of the respondents fall in the category of

Somewhat Aware and Aware, which means that none of the respondents is not aware that the QS tasks

mentioned are still needed even with the incorporation of BIM. From the figure above, we can see that

the percentages are quite evenly distributed among these 9 questions. Ranging from 64.58% to 81.25%

or 31 to 39 respondents out of 48 is totally aware about these issues. From the figure, the result depicts

that QS are aware that the existence of BIM is not a threat to QS profession, instead BIM will ease and

improve the quality and professionalism of QS works.

STOHISD PRESMAC REDENER CORTIMS RETDAT

Not at all aware 4.35 4.44 8.89 6.67 4.35

Somewhat aware 34.78 44.44 42.22 40.00 47.83

Aware 60.87 51.11 48.89 53.33 47.83

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

Valid Percentage (%

)

38

FESTUD

COESPL

PRECON

PRETEND

CALTEND

EVATEND

INTEVAL

INTECER

FINACC

Not at all aware 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Somewhat aware 35.42 27.08 27.08 18.75 22.92 20.83 27.08 25.00 20.83

Aware 64.58 72.92 72.92 81.25 77.08 79.17 72.92 75.00 79.17

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.0090.00

Valid Percentage (%

)

Table 12: QS tasks with the incorporation of Building Information Modeling

Not at all aware

Somewhat aware

Aware Total

Valid

Percent Valid

Percent Valid

Percent Valid Percent

1 QS is still needed to carry out feasibility study

FESTUD 0 (0) 35.42 (17) 64.58 (31) 100.00 (48)

2 QS is still needed to prepare cost estimate and cost plan for new projects

COESPL 0 (0) 27.08 (13) 72.92 (35) 100.00 (48)

3

QS is still needed for contractual task such as preparing condition of contract

PRECON 0 (0) 27.08 (13) 72.92 (35) 100.00 (48)

4

QS is still needed for documentation in preparing tender document

PRETEND 0 (0) 18.75 (9) 81.25 (39) 100.00 (48)

5 QS is still needed to call for tenders

CALTEND 0 (0) 22.9 (11) 77.08 (37) 100.00 (48)

6 QS is still needed to evaluate tenders

EVATEND 0 (0) 20.83 (10) 79.17 (38) 100.00 (48)

7 QS is still needed to carry out interim valuation

INTEVAL 0 (0) 27.08 (13) 72.92 (35) 100.00 (48)

8 QS is still needed to prepare interim certificate

INTECER 0 (0) 25 (12) 75 (36) 100.00 (48)

9 QS is still needed to prepare of final account

FINACC 0 (0) 20.83 (10) 79.17 (38) 100.00 (48)

Figure 21: QS tasks with the incorporation of Building Information Modeling

39

5.0 Cross Tabulation Analysis

5.1 Level of awareness vs gender

Feasibility Stage

Figure 22: BIM awareness at feasibility stage vs gender

Figure 22 illustrates the BIM Awareness at Feasibility Stage against gender. From the figure

shown, the awareness towards BIM in the feasibility stage by female gender is the highest compared to

the male, with an average of sixty percent to seventy five percent awareness. Both female and male

gender had the same percentage of awareness in ‘pre‐estimation can be identified within a shorter

period’ with sixty four percent. From the figure also, it can be seen that there are percentage of male

gender that are Not At All Aware of BIM in feasibility stage compared to none by the female.

F M F M F M

Not at all aware Somewhat aware Aware

MODEAS 0 9 36 32 64 59

PRESHO 0 9 36 27 64 64

CHADPR 0 14 28 32 72 55

INTDECL 0 9 28 32 72 59

BETDEC 0 9 28 36 72 55

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

40

Design Stage

Figure 23: BIM awareness at design stage vs gender

Figure 23 shows the BIM awareness at Design Stage vs gender. As in the feasibility stage, the

female gender again showed a great response in design stage compared to the male. The percentage of

Not At All Aware for female group also none except for, only thirteen percent of female which Not At All

Aware that BIM can converts 2D drawings into 3D models.

F M F M F M


CO2DND 13 23 21 41 67 36

INFOCEN 0 5 21 36 79 59

LINDIFS 0 9 46 55 54 36

REDIAE 0 5 44 36 56 59

REDRAB 0 9 50 41 50 50

DETCLA 0 5 43 38 57 57

INFNAT 0 9 52 45 48 45

AUTQUG 0 14 60 36 40 50

INCACC 0 9 44 36 56 55

ZEMISC 0 14 60 32 40 55

CUTDUR 0 14 36 27 64 59

STORDIG 0 9 24 41 76 50

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

41

Construction Stage

Figure 24: BIM Awareness at Construction Stage vs Gender

Figure 24 shows the BIM awareness at Construction Stage against gender. For this particular

stage, both gender had the same level of awareness. Although the Not At All Aware percentage of male

are higher than the female, the percentage of Aware and Somewhat Aware are almost in the same

range for both male and female gender.

F M F M F M


REDWAS 4 14 42 41 54 45

SHOCOP 4 14 54 45 42 41

REDVO 4 9 46 36 50 55

REDEOT 0 14 50 36 50 50

FOLOSHE 0 14 54 41 46 45

REDISCR 0 14 54 41 46 45

ENDCRE 0 5 50 45 50 50

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

42

Inuse and maintenance stage

Figure 25: BIM awareness at in‐use and maintenance stage vs gender

Figure 25 reveals the BIM awareness at In‐Use and Maintenance Stage against gender. The

highest percentage of Aware is from the female, while the Somewhat Aware is higher among males. The

male also showed a small percentage of Not At All Aware status. In overall, although female gender did

show higher percentage of BIM awareness compared to male, the awareness at In‐Use and

Maintenance stage is still low as the percentage of awareness are in the average of fifty percent.

F M F M F M


STOHISD 0 9 29 41 71 50

PRESMAC 0 9 43 45 57 45

REDENER 4 14 35 50 61 36

CORTIMS 0 14 39 41 61 45

RETDAT 0 9 46 50 54 41

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

43

5.2 Level of awareness vs experience

Feasibility Stage

Figure 26: BIM awareness at feasibility stage vs experience

Figure 26 reveals the BIM awareness at Feasibility Stage against experience. From the figure,

the awareness level is high across all groups of respondents except for the group with 11 to 15 years of

experience, with an average of twenty percent only. The awareness of the group with more than 16

years experience, 6 to 11 years experience and below 5 years experience shows more than fifty percent

that they are aware of BIM in implementation in feasibility stage. Nonetheless, the only groups that are

fully agree by hundred percent on the statement that BIM is forming a better integration between

designers and client is the group that have below 5 years of experience.

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs


MODEAS 0 0 40 0 18 40 40 38 82 60 20 62

PRESHO 0 0 40 0 27 40 40 29 73 60 20 71

CHADPR 0 10 40 0 18 40 40 29 82 50 20 71

INTDECL 0 0 40 0 0 40 40 38 100 60 20 62

BETDEC 0 0 40 0 27 30 40 33 73 70 20 67

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

44

Design Stage

Figure 27: BIM awareness at design stage vs experience

Figure 27 shows the BIM awareness at Design Stage versus experience. The Aware percentage

shows the highest in overall compare to Somewhat Aware and Not At All Aware. In the Aware

percentage, every group of the respondents shows a good percentage of awareness with the range of

fifty percent to eighty percent. This result is excluding the group of 11 to 15 years of experiences where

the Aware percentage of them are only in range of twenty to forty percent.

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs


CO2DND 9 11 40 19 36 11 40 33 55 78 20 48

INFOCEN 0 0 20 0 18 22 40 33 82 78 40 67

LINDIFS 0 0 20 5 55 33 60 52 45 67 20 43

REDIAE 0 0 20 0 45 44 40 36 55 56 40 64

REDRAB 0 0 20 5 36 44 60 48 64 56 20 48

DETCLA 0 0 20 0 50 38 40 38 50 63 40 62

INFNAT 0 11 20 0 45 33 40 59 55 56 40 41

AUTQUG 0 11 20 5 45 44 60 50 55 44 20 45

INCACC 0 0 20 5 36 33 60 41 64 67 20 55

ZEMISC 0 0 20 9 64 44 60 36 36 56 20 55

CUTDUR 0 0 20 9 18 44 60 27 82 56 20 64

STORDIG 0 0 20 5 27 22 60 32 73 78 20 64

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

45

Construction Stage

Figure 28: BIM awareness at construction stage vs experience

Figure 28 reveals the BIM awareness at Construction Stage against experience. In overall, the

level of awareness in this stage is quite poor, as the range of Aware and Somewhat Aware percentages

are within twenty percent to sixty percent only. For the Not At All Aware, the respondents with 11 to 15

years of experience shows the highest percentage, while respondents with more than 16 years of

experience has the least percentage, and none for below 5 years of experience nor the respondents with

6 to 10 years of experience.

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs


REDWAS 0 0 60 5 45 38 20 45 55 63 20 50

SHOCOP 0 0 60 5 55 38 20 59 45 63 20 36

REDVO 0 0 60 0 55 38 20 41 45 63 20 59

REDEOT 0 0 40 5 45 38 40 45 55 63 20 50

FOLOSHE 0 0 40 5 45 50 40 50 55 50 20 45

REDISCR 0 0 40 5 45 50 40 50 55 50 20 45

ENDCRE 0 0 20 0 36 38 60 55 64 63 20 45

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

46

Inuse and Maintenance Stage

Figure 29: BIM awareness at in‐use and maintenance stage vs experience

Figure 29 reveals the BIM awareness at In‐Use and Maintenance Stage versus experience. In

overall, the level of awareness in this stage is quite poor, as the range of Aware and Somewhat Aware

percentages are within twenty percent to seventy five percent only. For Not At All Aware, the

respondents with 11 to 15 years of experience shows the highest percentage, followed by the

respondents with 6 to 10 years experience, while respondents with more than 16 years of experience

showed a very least percentage, and none for below 5 years of experience.

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs


STOHISD 0 13 20 0 36 13 40 41 64 75 40 59

PRESMAC 0 13 20 0 36 38 40 52 64 50 40 48

REDENER 0 13 40 5 45 38 20 48 55 50 40 48

CORTIMS 0 13 20 5 36 25 40 48 64 63 40 48

RETDAT 0 13 20 0 55 38 40 50 45 50 40 50

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

47

5.3 Level of awareness vs registration

Feasibility Stage

Figure 30: BIM awareness at feasibility stage vs QS registration

Figure 30 illustrates the BIM Awareness at Feasibility Stage versus the QS Registration. From the

figure shown, the awareness of Non‐registered QS towards BIM in the feasibility stage is the highest

compared to the Registered Graduate QS and the Registered QS. In overall, every group of respondents

is aware of the role of BIM at the feasibility stage by more than fifty percent. They are aware and

concerned that BIM are a brief design or model that can be projected at early stage, pre‐estimation can

be identified within a shorter period, and any changes in the design will have effect on the pre‐

estimation. They are also aware that BIM is forming a better integration between designers and client,

thus client are able to make a better decision with the projected design or model.

Reg. QSReg.

Grad. QSNon Reg.

QSReg. QS

Reg. Grad. QS

Non Reg. QS

Reg. QSReg.

Grad. QSNon Reg.

QS


MODEAS 4 6 0 39 39 0 57 56 100

PRESHO 4 6 0 35 39 0 61 56 100

CHADPR 9 6 0 30 33 17 61 61 83

INTDECL 4 6 0 39 28 0 57 67 100

BETDEC 4 6 0 39 28 17 57 67 83

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid percentage (%

)

48

Design Stage

Figure 31: BIM awareness at design stage vs QS registration

Figure 31 illustrates the BIM awareness at Design Stage versus the QS registration. In overall,

the Non‐registered QS had shown a great awareness towards BIM at design stage compared to the

Registered Graduate QS and the Registered QS. The Aware percentage by the Non‐registered QS are the

highest among other groups with the range of eighty percent to hundred percent. The percentage of

Non‐ registered QS that Somewhat Aware is also very low and none in Not At All Aware. This shows that

the Non‐registered QS had more knowledge and concern about the BIM implementation in the

construction industry compared to the Registered Graduate QS and the Registered QS.

Reg. QSReg.

Grad. QSNon Reg.

QSReg. QS

Reg. Grad. QS

Non Reg. QS

Reg. QSReg.

Grad. QSNon Reg.

QS


CO2DND 22 18 0 35 29 17 43 53 83

INFOCEN 0 6 0 39 24 0 61 71 100

LINDIFS 4 6 0 61 53 0 35 41 100

REDIAE 0 6 0 39 50 17 61 44 83

REDRAB 4 6 0 52 47 17 43 47 83

DETCLA 0 6 0 41 47 20 59 47 80

INFNAT 4 6 0 52 61 0 43 33 100

AUTQUG 9 6 0 48 67 0 43 28 100

INCACC 4 6 0 43 50 0 52 44 100

ZEMISC 9 6 0 39 67 17 52 28 83

CUTDUR 9 6 0 35 39 0 57 56 100

STORDIG 4 6 0 43 22 17 52 72 83

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

49

Construction Stage

Figure 32: BIM awareness at construction stage vs QS registration

Figure 32 reveals the BIM awareness at Construction Stage against QS registration. Similar to

Design stage, the Non‐registered QS again had the highest percentage in BIM awareness at Construction

stage, compared to other groups of respondent. While the percentage of awareness for Registered

Graduate QS and the Registered QS are almost the same.

Reg. QSReg.

Grad. QSNon Reg.

QSReg. QS

Reg. Grad. QS

Non Reg. QS

Reg. QSReg.

Grad. QSNon Reg.

QS


REDWAS 9 12 0 48 41 17 43 47 83

SHOCOP 9 12 0 57 59 0 35 29 100

REDVO 4 12 0 39 53 17 57 35 83

REDEOT 9 6 0 43 59 0 48 35 100

FOLOSHE 9 6 0 48 65 0 43 29 100

REDISCR 9 6 0 48 59 17 43 35 83

ENDCRE 0 6 0 57 53 0 43 41 100

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

50

Inuse and Maintenance Stage

Figure 33: BIM awareness at in‐use and maintenance stage vs QS registration

Figure 33 shows the BIM awareness at In‐Use and Maintenance Stage against QS registration.

The result of Aware percentage for Non‐registered QS is again higher than Registered Graduate QS and

Registered QS. Despite the low percentage of awareness for Registered Graduate QS and Registered QS

in Aware and Somewhat Aware, both groups also showed small percentage in Not At All Aware, while

none for Non‐registered QS.

Reg. QSReg.

Grad. QSNon Reg.

QSReg. QS

Reg. Grad. QS

Non Reg. QS

Reg. QSReg.

Grad. QSNon Reg.

QS


STOHISD 4 6 0 43 35 0 52 59 100

PRESMAC 4 6 0 48 56 0 48 38 100

REDENER 9 13 0 43 44 33 48 44 67

CORTIMS 9 6 0 43 50 0 48 44 100

RETDAT 4 6 0 48 59 17 48 35 83

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

51

PART B: BUILDING INFORMATION MODELLING READINESS AMONG QUANTITY SURVEYING FIRMS

6.0 Introduction

This chapter presents the interim findings and discussions of the survey. It is divided into a few

sections i.e. the organisations’ profile; the organisations’ readiness profile; the organisations’ level of

readiness in the aspect of technology, people, process and management; and finally the cross tabulation

analysis.

A total of 80 questionnaires were distributed to the firms’ owners during conferences and

seminars held between November 2012 and January 2013. The return rate is about 22.5% percent or 18

responded questionnaires with about 90%‐95% of validity. Bar charts, pie chart and tables were used to

present and summarise the findings.

7.0 Organisations’ profile

7.1 Designation

Figure 34 shows the respondents’ designation in the organisation. Thirty five percent of the

respondents are Directors, followed by Managing Director and Partner with percentage of (eighteen

percent). Principal and Senior Quantity Surveyors represents twelve percent each, while the remaining

six percent are other designations. This result shows that, a total of eighty two percent from the

respondents are represent by the upper level of an organisation which include Director, Managing

Director Partner and Principal. It expected that the persons that manage a firm should be most to

known the existence of Building Information Modelling (BIM) as this application can enhance the quality

of works and help the firm to deliver a project in way better.

52

Figure 34: Respondent’s designation

7.2 Years of establishment

Figure 35 shows the period of years the respondents company have in operation. 53% percent

of the respondent’s firm had been established for more than 15 years, while firms that had been

established in less than 5 years and between 6 to 10 years had equal percentage (18%). The least was

firms established between 11 to 15 years (18%). This illustrates that majority of the respondents

represent organisations which are well experienced in the industry.

Figure 35: Years of establishment

1218 18

35

126

0

10

20

30

40

Principal Partner Managing Director

Director Senior Quantity Surveyor

Others

Percen

tage

%

18 1812

53

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

less than 5 years

6 to 10 years 11 to 15years more than 15years

Percen

tage

%

7.3 Numb

Fi

of the res

having 11

By this re

(represen

sized firm

firms, wh

7.4 Comp

Fi

million rin

two perce

million w

companie

percent.

ber of empl

igure 36 show

spondent ha

1 to 20 emplo

esult, we can

nt by less than

m (represent b

ich makes the

pany turnov

igure 37 reve

nggit. In 2010

ent of them h

were sixty se

es with turnov

oyees

ws the respon

d less than 1

oyees. Only tw

n see that, th

n 10 employe

by more than

e findings som

ver

eals the resp

0, fifty eight

had turnover

even percent

ver below 1 m

le

ndents’ total

10 employee

wenty two pe

he responden

ees), medium‐

n 20 employe

mewhat inclu

Figure 36: Tot

pondents’ com

percent of t

below 1 milli

t, representin

million were

39%

ess than 10

employees in

s and the sa

ercent of the

nts had fulfill

‐sized firm (re

es). Thus, th

sive.

tal number of em

mpany turno

he responde

on. While in

ng an increa

thirty three p

39%

22%

11 to 20

n the firm org

me percenta

respondents

ed all three

epresent by 1

he findings of

mployees

over in 2010

nts had turno

2011, compa

ase of nine

percent, whic

%

more than 20

ganisation. T

age also fall i

s had more th

categories of

11 to 20 emp

f this survey c

and 2011 be

over above 1

anies that had

percent. On

ch represent

Thirty nine pe

in the catego

han 20 emplo

f firms; smal

loyees), and

covered all ty

elow and abo

1 million and

d turnover ab

the other

a decrease of

53

ercent

ory of

oyees.

l firm

large‐

ype of

ove 1

forty

bove 1

hand,

f nine

7.5 Mana

Fi

from firm

percent w

quality of

of the pro

responde

construct

agement cer

igure 38 show

m with an ISO

were from firm

f the products

oducts or effe

nt used the I

ion industry.

Percen

tage

%

rtification

ws the respon

O managemen

ms without IS

s manufactur

ectiveness of

SO managem

58

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Figure 37

ndents’ firm m

nt certificate

SO managem

red or service

the services.

ment in delive

Figure 38: Ma

8

42

2010

With IS

: Company turn

management

(sixty seven

ment certificat

es provided an

. From this re

ery their prod

anagement cert

67

33

2011

67%

33%

SO Withou

nover

certification

percent), w

tion. The cer

nd assure the

esult, it indic

uct and servi

tification

Ab

Be

ut ISO

. Half of the

hile the rema

rtifications fr

e public regar

ates that mo

ices, thus it is

bove 1 million

elow 1 million

respondents

aining thirty

om ISO signif

rding the relia

re than half o

s good sign fo

54

were

three

fy the

ability

of the

or our

55

7.6 Access to computer and internet connection

A question “How many percent of the staff in your firm have access to their own computer? And

“How many percent of computers in your company have access to the internet?” were asked. The

essence of the question is that internet has made information available in a quick and easy manner,

publicly accessible and within easy reach. It enhances communications and social networking, through

owning own computer with an internet access might helps to produce a better quality of product.

Figure 39 shows the distribution of computer ownership and internet access among the staff in

the organisation. Hundred percent of the respondents said that more than seventy five percent of their

staff had their own computer, while seventy eight percent of the respondents also reported that more

than 75 percent of their computers had an internet access. However, the result also shows six percent

of the respondents reported 25 percent to 50 percent of their computers had an internet access, and

the remaining seventeen percent of the respondents indicated that less than 25 percent of their

computer has internet access.

Figure 39: Own computers and internet access

100

17

6

78

0

20

40

60

80

100

<25% 25%‐50% >75%

Percen

tage

%

Staff had access to own computer

Computer with internet access

56

8.0 Readiness Profile

8.1 Information technology application in Malaysia

Figure 40 shows how the respondents rate the application of Information Technology (IT) in

Malaysia construction industry vis‐a‐vis the following scales: Construction industry recently has used

latest information technologies to enhance the performance of worker; increase the productivity and

improve safety; and information technology also plays important role to avoid and mitigate the conflict

and dispute between owner and contractor. The result indicates more than half of the respondent (sixty

one percent) agreed that IT in Malaysia construction industry is either good or very good. The result also

shows that thirty three percent of the respondents rated IT application in Malaysia construction industry

fair while only six percent said is poor.

Figure 40: Information Technology (IT) application in Malaysia construction

Figure 41 shows how the respondents rate the application of Information Technology (IT) by

Quantity Surveyor in Malaysia construction industry. Based on the result, more than half of the

respondents (seventy eight percent) agreed that IT in Malaysia construction industry is good or very

good. The result also shows that seventeen percent of the respondents rated it fair and only six percent

of the respondents is of the notion that application of Information Technology (IT) by Quantity Surveyor

in Malaysia construction industry is poor.

6

33

44

17

0

10

20

30

40

50

Poor Fair Good Very Good

Percen

tage

%

57

Figure 41: Information Technology (IT) application by QS in Malaysia

8.2 Knowledge on BIM

In the survey, respondents were asked to give a brief explanation about BIM based on their

knowledge or opinion. The responses were categories into four categories, namely “3D modelling”,

“managing construction information and integrate information”, “measurement tool” and “others”.

Table 13 shows the brief explanation about BIM knowledge by the respondents. From these

responses, it shows that the respondents do realise that BIM makes 3D modelling analysis clear, makes

visualization of buildings information in 3D models. The respondents also stated that BIM can be

described as measurement tool for taking off purposes, calculating GFA and preparing BQ. Apart from

that, a majority of the respondents had an opinion that BIM play roles as collective information among

industry players.

6

17

50

28

0

10

20

30

40

50

Poor Fair Good Very Good

Percen

tage

%

58

Table 13: Brief explanation about BIM knowledge

Categories of Answers Answers

3D Modeling

3D modeling, clear analysis

An overall modeling that incorporate most of the information for a buildings which is visualize

Collaborative software for clear analysis among 3D modeling during feasible/estimate stage as well as construction; and facilities maintenance after completion

Managing Construction Information and

Integrate Information Collective information among industry player

Measurement Tool

BQ measurement

Knowledge more related to measurement using CAD software

A model software of the various elements of a construction project, where the user can use to extract quantity & lost (the two mere elements among others) for quick production of BQ

Quantification for soft drawings

Softcopy drawings to be used for the purpose of calculating GFA, BQ preparation

Others Use the computer/project software in helping to complete the task

8.3 Participation in BIM program

A question “Have you ever sent your staff to any seminars/conferences/workshop on BIM?” was

asked in order to get the respondents’ feedback about the BIM awareness.

Figure 42 reveals the distribution of respondents’ staff participation in BIM programme. The

percentage of the result is quite close. Forty seven percent of the respondents had sent their staff for

BIM programmes such as seminars, conferences or workshop. And the remaining fifty three percent had

never sent their staff to participate in any BIM programmes. It can therefore be inferred that, even

Malaysia had already set up road shows about BIM and many programmes conducted to enhance the

awareness of BIM, the response from the construction players, precisely the Quantity Surveyor is still

not good enough. Respondents which had sent their staff BIM programmes also stated the title of the

BIM programmes (seminars, conferences or workshop) as specified in the Table 14 below.

R

programm

8.4 Parti

Fo

software?

Fi

training. F

attend or

send their

espondents

mes (seminars

BIM Progr

icipation in

or further an

?” was asked

igure 43 sho

From this pie

r participate

r staff to atte

Figu

whom had s

s, conference

rammes Title

BIM softwar

nalysis, a que

in the questio

ows the distr

e chart, only t

in BIM relate

end or particip

ure 42: Staff par

sent their st

es or worksho

Table 14: B

re training

estion “Have

onnaire.

ibution of re

twenty nine

ed software t

pated in any B

rticipation in BIM

aff BIM prog

op) as specifie

BIM programme

BIM seminars

Introduction

RISM Program

Product Laun

Seminar by C

e you ever se

espondents’ s

percent of th

training, whil

BIM related s

53%

Yes N

M programme

grammes had

ed in the Tabl

es title

s / software lau

to BIM related

mmes

nch ‐ Glodon

ost X

ent your sta

staff particip

he responden

le a majority

software train

47%

No

d stated the

le 14 below.

unch, training

d measuremen

ff for trainin

ation in BIM

nts that had m

of seventy o

ning.

e title of the

t (taking off)

ng on BIM re

M related soft

make their st

one percent

59

e BIM

elated

tware

taff to

never

R

the title o

8.5 Invol

To

involved i

involveme

involved i

involved i

that appli

very low.

N

applicatio

projects.

espondents’

of the BIM pro

lvement in B

o know the r

in any projec

ent in BIM p

in any project

in BIM projec

es BIM and it

ext, the resp

on in construc

Figure

whom sent t

ogrammes as

BIM Software

BIM Projects

espondents e

cts that use B

project. Alm

ts that use B

cts. This show

t also indicate

ondents who

ction stages,

e 43: Staff partic

their staff to

specified in t

Table 15: B

training

s

experience in

BIM?” was as

ost all of th

IM. Only the

ws that, most

es the applic

om had been

the problems

71%

cipation in BIM s

participate i

the Table 15 b

BIM software tra

Training for G

New IT ‐ Auto

n handling BIM

sked. Figure

e responden

e remaining tw

t of the respo

cation of BIM

involved in t

s faced and t

29%

Yes No

software trainin

n BIM relate

below.

aining

Glodon

oCAD

M projects, a

44 shows th

ts (eighty eig

welve percen

ondents neve

in constructi

he BIM proje

the benefit ga

%

ng

d software t

question “Ha

he distributio

ght percent)

nt of the resp

er been exper

on projects in

ect were aske

ained from a

raining had s

ave you ever

on of respond

have never

pondents had

rienced in pro

n Malaysia ar

d more abou

pplying BIM i

60

stated

been

dents’

been

been

ojects

re still

t BIM

in the

Ta

responde

construct

that BIM a

Ta

that used

new softw

the respo

able 16 show

nts had bee

ion which are

also might be

able 17 show

BIM applicat

ware and to p

ndent that th

P

Figure

ws the stage

n involved in

e design stag

e applied in th

Tab

BIM

ws the proble

tion. Their re

provide a tra

he software is

Problems

e 44: Responden

es that BIM

n. The resu

ge and constr

he maintenan

ble 16: BIM appl

M Application

Co

ms experienc

esponses show

ined staff for

s not as good

Table 17: P

Expens

New so

To acqu

Softwa

nt’s involvemen

was being u

lt shows tha

ruction stage

nce stage or in

ication in const

n in Construct

Design

onstruction

ced by the re

w that the fir

r that particu

as expected.

Problems experi

sive software

oftware need

uire / train st

re not as goo

88%

Yes No

t in BIM project

used in the

at BIM had b

. None of th

n feasibility st

ruction stages

tion Stages

espondents d

rms had a diff

ular software

.

enced

learning curv

aff

od as expecte

12%

ts

construction

been applied

he responden

tage.

uring the cou

ficulty allocat

. There is als

ve

d.

n project tha

in two stag

nts had an op

urse of the p

ting budget t

o an opinion

61

at the

ges of

pinion

roject

o buy

from

62

Table 18 below the benefit experienced by the respondents during the course of the project

that used BIM application. The result shows that the respondent agreed that BIM provides detailed

design which involves architect, M&E and engineers at early stage and helps to provide clear analysis,

whereby problems such as design matters can be sorted out earlier. Thus a considerable amount of

variation orders during construction can be prevented from occurring.

Table 18: Benefits experienced

Benefits

Detailed design involving architect, M&E and engineers at early stage and/or clear analysis sorts out design matters earlier and prevent considerable amount of VO's during construction.

9.0 Level of readiness among quantity surveying firms

9.1 Technology aspect

Figure 45 and Table 19 show the BIM readiness from the aspect of technology. In general, we

can notice that majority of the respondents moderately agree that our technology is ready to integrate

BIM in the construction industry. There are 23.53% or 4 respondents who disagree that they outsource

or appoint in‐house staff to be an IT manager for their company. This might be because there are still

some minor Quantity Surveying firms which do not focus much on IT and process their works manually.

Under moderate the first two questions recorded 64.71% (11 respondents) and 70.59% (12

respondents) respectively. The implication is that the current system we are using now is not well

integrated among the parties involved, but respondents did know that this feature is needed for data

and information sharing. For the rest, approximately 50% or more than 8 respondents do agree that we

are ready for the change.

63

Table 19: BIM readiness from the aspect of technology

Disagree Moderate Agree Total

Percent (Frequency)

Percent (Frequency)

Percent (Frequency)

Percent (Frequency)

1

We use collaborative system to record all transactions during a project and all the information required (i.e. integrated project delivery)

COLSYS 17.65 (3) 64.71 (11) 17.65 (3) 100.00 (17)

2

We use integrated system to enables all the data needed by any of the participants interlinked.

INTSYS 11.76 (2) 70.59 (12) 17.65 (3) 100.00 (17)

3

We adopt ICT to improve communication, closer relationships, and overcome the geographical problem.

ADOSIT 5.88 (1) 17.65 (3) 76.47 (13) 100.00 (17)

4

We have adequate information technology infrastructure in place and available to the people in the company.

ADEQIN 5.88 (1) 41.18 (7) 52.94 (9) 100.00 (17)

5

We do focus on ICT skills development and/or employing ICT experts (i.e. either outsourcing or appointing in‐house staff to be an IT Manager etc).

SKIDEV 23.53 (4) 47.06 (8) 29.41 (5) 100.00 (17)

6

We have the basic internet requirements to go online, such as modem, service provider etc.

BASREQ 0.00 (0) 11.76 (2) 88.24 (15) 100.00 (17)

7

We will install the necessary software that meets the minimum requirements to run the BIM software.

WILINS 5.88 (1) 23.53 (4) 70.59 (12) 100.00 (17)

8

We have sufficient hardware with minimum requirements to run the BIM software.

SUFHAR 17.65 (3) 35.29 (6) 47.06 (8) 100.00 (17)

64

Figure 45: BIM readiness from the aspect of technology

9.2 People aspect

Figure 46 and Table 20 show the BIM readiness from the aspect of people. From the figure, we

can see those employees are not familiar with BIM, they might know the function and how powerful

BIM are, but they have not come across with the platform and do not have the chance to experience it

by themselves. This problem can be overcome by proper training or seminars on using BIM. On top of

that, we notice that the firms are ready to provide specific training and available resources to employees

in implementing BIM, 100% or 17 respondents fall in the category of Moderate and Agree. We can say

that the employers can see the future of BIM and they are ready to provide trainings to their employees

to push them to the next level. Besides, 0% or none of the respondents disagree to assist their

workforce in re‐skilling and to capitalize on the rapidly emerging technologies. The rapidly emerging

technologies really change our lifestyle, it helps to improve and enhance the quality of our works or end

product. From the aspect of people, Quantity Surveying firms are ready to accept BIM as long as there is

sufficient training to guide them to the optimum level.

COLSYS INTSYS ADOSIT ADEQIN SKIDEV BASREQ WILINSSUFHA

R

Disagree 17.65 11.76 5.88 5.88 23.53 0.00 5.88 17.65

Moderate 64.71 70.59 17.65 41.18 47.06 11.76 23.53 35.29

Agree 17.65 17.65 76.47 52.94 29.41 88.24 70.59 47.06

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

Valid Percentage (%

)

65

Table 20: BIM readiness from the aspect of people


Percent

(Frequency) Percent

(Frequency) Percent

(Frequency) Percent

(Frequency)

1

Our employees are ‘ready’ or have the correct skills and the right attitude to use the BIM software when it is introduced in our organization.

EMPREA 23.53 (4) 47.06 (8) 29.41 (5) 100.00 (17)

2

We are willing to adopt innovative approaches, using proven technologies, tools and practices.

INOTEC 11.76 (2) 23.53 (4) 64.71 (11) 100.00 (17)

3

Our employees are willing to change their way of work to avoid work inefficiency, disorganization, low morale, and no motivation when introducing BIM in our organization.

CHAGWA 17.65 (3) 35.29 (6) 47.06 (8) 100.00 (17)

4

Our firm will provide specific training and available resources to employees in implementing BIM.

TRARES 5.88 (1) 23.53 (4) 70.59 (12) 100.00 (17)

5

Our firm will provide technical assistance to our employees in implementing BIM.

TECASS 0.00 (0) 35.29 (6) 64.71 (11) 100.00 (17)

6 Our firm has the employees with prior experience in collaborative environments.

EXPCOL 23.53 (4) 52.94 (9) 23.53 (4) 100.00 (17)

7

We are confident in dealing with the education and training requirements of potential BIM users within our organization.

DEATRA 5.88 (1) 52.94 (9) 41.18 (7) 100.00 (17)

8

We will assist our workforce in re‐skilling and to capitalize on the rapidly emerging technologies.

WOFRES 0.00 (0) 47.06 (8) 52.94 (9) 100.00 (17)

9 Our employees are familiar with the BIM.

FAMBIM 58.82 (10) 29.41 (5) 11.76 (2) 100.00 (17)

66

Figure 46: BIM readiness from the aspect of people

9.3 Process aspect

Figure 47 and Table 21 show the BIM readiness from the aspect of process. Generally,

respondents moderately agree that we are ready to accept BIM except for question number 4, 5 and 6

where the score of agree are 81.25% or 13 respondents, 56.25% or 9 respondents and 81.25% or 13

respondents respectively. This showing that they believe BIM standard models will help QS in the

measurement process, confident that the BIM system will provide adequate security for exchange of

information or documents throughout the process and they believe that BIM process can help them to

be better Quantity Surveyor. Finding from question number 7, 8, 9 and 10 shows that respondents are

quite disagree that Malaysia have any proper legal terms to accommodate BIM in the construction

industry. The result ranging from 31.25% to 37.50% or 5 to 6 respondents out of 16 respondents

disagree with those statements. From the aspect of process, respondents are ready to accept the

emerging new technology to improve and enhance their quality of works provided that there are proper

legal systems to overcome unwanted legal issues.

EMPREA

INOTECCHAGWA

TRARES TECASS EXPCOLDEATR

AWOFRE

SFAMBIM

Disagree 23.53 11.76 17.65 5.88 0.00 23.53 5.88 0.00 58.82

Moderate 47.06 23.53 35.29 23.53 35.29 52.94 52.94 47.06 29.41

Agree 29.41 64.71 47.06 70.59 64.71 23.53 41.18 52.94 11.76

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

Valid Percentage (%

)

67

Table 21: BIM readiness from the aspect of process


Percent

(Frequency) Percent

(Frequency) Percent

(Frequency) Percent

(Frequency)

1

We do not have problem in absorbing information systems (IS) and ICT into our work practices.

NPRABS 31.25 (5) 37.50 (6) 31.25 (5) 100.00 (16)

2

We allow technology to be slowly absorbed into the current organizational business processes when implementing new technology into current processes.

TSLOAB 18.75 (3) 50.00 (8) 31.25 (5) 100.00 (16)

3

We will conduct a self‐evaluation within the organization before the implementation of BIM.

SELEVA 12.50 (2) 43.75 (7) 43.75 (7) 100.00 (16)

4 We believe that standard models will help QS in the measurement process

STAMOD 6.25 (1) 12.50 (2) 81.25 (13) 100.00 (16)

5

We are confident that the BIM system will provide adequate security for exchange of information or documents throughout the process.

ADESEC 12.50 (2) 31.25 (5) 56.25 (9) 100.00 (16)

6 We believe that BIM process can help us to be a better QS

BETTQS 6.25 (1) 12.50 (2) 81.25 (13) 100.00 (16)

7

We are confident that there is sufficient law and regulation to protect our rights when using the BIM software.

PRORIG 43.75 (7) 18.75 (3) 37.50 (6) 100.00 (16)

8

We believe that BIM process is compatible with the current legal status regarding electronic transmissions

LEGSTA 37.50 (6) 25.00 (4) 37.50 (6) 100.00 (16)

9 We believe that BIM software does meet current evidentiary requirements legally.

EVIREQ 37.50 (6) 31.25 (5) 31.25 (5) 100.00 (16)

10

We believe that appropriate legal policies and processes are developed to deal with any problem incur by BIM.

LEGPOL 37.50 (6) 31.25 (5) 31.25 (5) 100.00 (16)

68

Figure 47: BIM readiness from the aspect of process

9.4 Management aspect

Figure 48 and Table 22 shows the BIM readiness from the aspect of management. The first five

questions show that 100% or all the respondents (16 respondents) either moderately or totally agree

that from the aspect of management, they are ready to use BIM. With their proper organization

hierarchical structures, they are able to introduce BIM into their company after planning and evaluation

on their capability to implement it. They believe that ICT investment can help them to increase their

business performance or revenue, thus they prefer to learn how BIM may be used to effectively re‐

engineer the processes rather than continue with the conventional or traditional methods. On top of

that, more than 80% or 13 respondents agree that they have sufficient resources for research,

development and training relating to BIM implementation because they do have staff that are

experience in ICT adoption. Besides, they are willing to support the necessary maintenance cost during

BIM implementation and spent additional time to familiarizing ourselves with the software due to lack

of experience about BIM. Thus, from the findings we notice that from the aspect of management,

respondents are ready to adopt BIM in their firms to enhance the quality of works.

NPRABS

TSLOAB

SELEVA

STAMOD

ADESEC

BETTQS

PRORIG

LEGSTA

EVIREQ

LEGPOL

Disagree 31.25 18.75 12.50 6.25 12.50 6.25 43.75 37.50 37.50 37.50

Moderate 37.50 50.00 43.75 12.50 31.25 12.50 18.75 25.00 31.25 31.25

Agree 31.25 31.25 43.75 81.25 56.25 81.25 37.50 37.50 31.25 31.25

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

Valid Percentage (%

)

69

Table 22: BIM readiness from the aspect of management


Percent (Frequency)

Percent (Frequency)

Percent (Frequency)

Percent (Frequency)

1 We believe that BIM can help increase our business performance or revenue.

INCPER 0.00 (0) 43.75 (7) 56.25 (9) 100.00 (16)

2 Our organization hierarchical structures will be able to support BIM implementation.

OHIESU 0.00 (0) 50.00 (8) 50.00 (8) 100.00 (16)

3

We will introduce BIM into our company after planning and evaluation on our capability to implement it.

PLAEVA 0.00 (0) 37.50 (6) 62.50 (10) 100.00 (16)

4 We are aware that technology can help in making ICT investment decisions.

INVDEC 0.00 (0) 25.00 (4) 75.00 (12) 100.00 (16)

5

We prefer to learn how BIM may be used to effectively re‐engineer the processes rather than continue with the conventional/traditional methods.

REGPRO 0.00 (0) 18.75 (3) 81.25 (13) 100.00 (16)

6

Our senior managers are experience in ICT adoption when introducing BIM into our organization.

SMEXAD 18.75 (3) 62.50 (10) 18.75 (3) 100.00 (16)

7

We have sufficient resources for research, development and training relating to BIM implementation.

SUFRES 18.75 (3) 68.75 (11) 12.50 (2) 100.00 (16)

8

We are willing to spent additional time to familiarizing ourselves with the software due to lack of experience about BIM.

SPADTI 6.25 (1) 43.75 (7) 50.00 (8) 100.00 (16)

9 We are willing to support the necessary maintenance cost during BIM implementation.

SUMACO 6.25 (1) 62.50 (10) 31.25 (5) 100.00 (16)

10

We are able to quantify and measure the actual cost of creating and distributing information electronically.

QUANCO 0.00 (0) 68.75 (11) 31.25 (5) 100.00 (16)

11

We are able to conduct cost assessment in order to judge or appraise whether using the BIM process is financially viable.

COSASS 12.50 (2) 43.75 (7) 43.75 (7) 100.00 (16)

70

Figure 48: BIM readiness from the aspect of management

10.0 Cross tabulation analysis

10.1 Level of readiness vs no. of staff

Technology

Figure 49: Level of readiness vs number of staff from the aspect of technology

INCPER

OHIESU

PLAEVA

INVDEC

REGPRO

SMEXAD

SUFRES

SPADTI

SUMACO

QUANCO

COSASS

Disagree 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.75 18.75 6.25 6.25 0.00 12.50

Moderate 43.75 50.00 37.50 25.00 18.75 62.50 68.75 43.75 62.50 68.75 43.75

Agree 56.25 50.00 62.50 75.00 81.25 18.75 12.50 50.00 31.25 31.25 43.75

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.0090.00

Valid Percentage (%

)

≤ 10 11‐20 >20 ≤ 10 11‐20 >20 ≤ 10 11‐20 >20

Disagree Moderate Agree

COLSYS 0 14 0 100 57 75 0 29 25

INTSYS 0 0 0 100 71 75 0 29 25

ADOSIT 0 0 0 17 43 0 83 57 100

ADEQIN 0 0 0 33 71 25 67 29 75

SKIDEV 0 14 0 67 71 50 33 14 50

BASREQ 0 0 0 0 29 0 100 71 100

WILINS 0 0 0 17 57 0 83 43 100

SUFHAR 0 0 0 67 57 25 33 43 75

020406080

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

71

Figure 49 illustrates the level of readiness versus number of staff from the aspect of technology.

From the figure shown, firm which had more than 20 staffs had the highest percentage of readiness

towards BIM in the aspect of technology. They are hundred percent agreed that they had use

collaborative system to record all transactions during a project and all the information required, have

the basic internet requirements to go online, and they will install the necessary software that meets the

minimum requirements to run the BIM software. Meanwhile, none of the firm with more than 20 staffs

and the firm which had below than 10 staffs showed any disagree percentage.

People

Figure 50: Level of readiness vs number of staff from the aspect of people

Figure 50 reveals the level of readiness against the number of staff from the aspect of people.

From the figure shown, the percentage of moderate and agree among all the respondents group are

quite good. Again, the firms with more than 20 staffs agreed with a high percentage. However, there

≤ 10 11‐20 >20 ≤ 10 11‐20 >20 ≤ 10 11‐20 >20


EMPREA 0 0 0 67 86 50 33 14 50

INOTEC 0 0 0 50 43 0 50 57 100

CHAGWA 17 0 0 50 71 0 33 29 100

TRARES 0 0 0 17 43 25 83 57 75

TECASS 0 0 0 33 57 0 67 43 100

EXPCOL 0 0 0 83 71 75 17 29 25

DEATRA 0 0 0 33 71 75 67 29 25

WOFRES 0 0 0 50 57 25 50 43 75

FAMBIM 17 14 0 67 71 100 17 14 0

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

72

were overwhelming hundred percent moderate response to the statement ‘Our employees are familiar

with the BIM’. While, with the same statement, the group of 11 to 20 staffs and the group of below 10

staffs agreed that their employees are familiar with BIM but with a low percentage of seventeen

percent and fourteen percent respectively.

Process

Figure 51: Level of readiness vs number of staff from the aspect of process

Figure 51 illustrates the level of readiness against the number of staff from the aspect of

process. From the figure shown, the firms with below than 10 staffs agreed with a higher percentage

than the firms with more than 20 staffs. Nevertheless, firms with more than 20 staffs disagree by an

average of twenty five percent with the statement ‘We do not have problem in absorbing information

systems (IS) and ICT into our work practices’, ‘We are confident that there is sufficient law and

regulation to protect our rights when using the BIM software’, and ‘We believe that BIM process is

compatible with the current legal status regarding electronic transmissions’, while none of the other

respondent group are disagree.

≤ 10 11‐20 >20 ≤ 10 11‐20 >20 ≤ 10 11‐20 >20


NPRABS 0 0 25 80 57 50 20 43 25

TSLOAB 0 0 0 60 71 75 40 29 25

SELEVA 0 0 0 60 71 25 40 29 75

STAMOD 0 0 0 0 29 25 100 71 75

ADESEC 0 0 0 20 57 50 80 43 50

BETTQS 0 0 0 0 43 0 100 57 100

PRORIG 0 0 25 40 71 50 60 29 25

LEGSTA 0 0 25 40 71 50 60 29 25

EVIREQ 0 0 0 60 71 75 40 29 25

LEGPOL 0 0 0 40 86 75 60 14 25

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

73

Management

Figure 52: Level of readiness vs number of staff from the aspect of management

Figure 52 depicts the level of readiness versus number of staff from the aspect of management.

From the figure shown, the firms with more than 20 staffs agreed with more than fifty percent, except

they only twenty five percent agree that ‘Our senior managers are experience in ICT adoption when

introducing BIM into our organization’ and none for ‘We have sufficient resources for research,

development and training relating to BIM implementation’. Nevertheless, none of the respondent are

disagree.

≤ 10 11‐20 >20 ≤ 10 11‐20 >20 ≤ 10 11‐20 >20


INCPER 0 0 0 60 43 25 40 57 75

OHIESU 0 0 0 60 57 25 40 43 75

PLAEVA 0 0 0 40 43 25 60 57 75

INVDEC 0 0 0 20 29 25 80 71 75

REGPRO 0 0 0 20 29 0 80 71 100

SMEXAD 0 0 0 80 86 75 20 14 25

SUFRES 0 0 0 80 86 100 20 14 0

SPADTI 0 0 0 80 43 25 20 57 75

SUMACO 0 0 0 60 86 50 40 14 50

QUANCO 0 0 0 80 71 50 20 29 50

COSASS 0 0 0 60 71 25 40 29 75

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Valid Percentage (%

)

74

10.2 Level of readiness vs years of establishment

Technology

Figure 53: Level of readiness vs number of years of establishment from the aspect of technology

Figure 53 shows the Level of Readiness vs Years of Establishment from the Aspect of

Technology. From the figure shown, the respondent with 6 to 10 years of establishment had a fair

moderate percentage in the range of fifty percent to hundred percent. Meanwhile, the group of

respondents with 11 to 15 years of establishment had also shown a fair moderate percentage in the

range of fifty percent to hundred percent, except none for the statement ‘We do focus on ICT skills

development and/or employing ICT experts’. In overall, none of all the groups disagree, excluding for

the group more than 16 years of establishment, with eleven percent on the statement of ‘We use

collaborative system to record all transactions during a project and all the information required ‘ and

‘We do focus on ICT skills development and/or employing ICT experts’.

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs


COLSYS 0 0 0 11 100 100 50 78 0 0 50 11

INTSYS 0 0 0 0 100 100 50 89 0 0 50 11

ADOSIT 0 0 0 0 33 50 0 22 67 50 100 78

ADEQIN 0 0 0 0 100 50 50 33 0 50 50 67

SKIDEV 0 0 0 11 100 50 100 44 0 50 0 44

BASREQ 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 11 100 50 100 89

WILINS 0 0 0 0 67 50 0 22 33 50 100 78

SUFHAR 0 0 0 0 67 50 50 56 33 50 50 44

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

75

People

Figure 54: Level of readiness vs number of years of establishment from the aspect of people

Figure 54 illustrates the Level of Readiness vs Years of Establishment from the Aspect of People.

From the figure shown, the respondent with 11 to 15 years of establishment had shown a fairly agree

percentage in the range of fifty percent to hundred percent, except none for the statement of ‘Our

employees are familiar with the BIM’. While the group of respondents within 6 to 10 years of

establishment also shown a fair moderate percentage in the range of fifty percent to hundred percent.

Overall, none of all the groups disagree except for the group from more than 16 years of establishment

and the group from 11 to 15 years of establishment, recording eleven percent and fifty percent

respectively with the same statement of ‘Our employees are familiar with the BIM’.

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs


EMPREA 0 0 0 0 100 100 50 56 0 0 50 44

INOTEC 0 0 0 0 67 50 50 22 33 50 50 78

CHAGWA 33 0 0 0 67 50 50 33 0 50 50 67

TRARES 0 0 0 0 33 50 0 33 67 50 100 67

TECASS 0 0 0 0 67 50 0 22 33 50 100 78

EXPCOL 0 0 0 0 67 100 50 78 33 0 50 22

DEATRA 0 0 0 0 33 50 50 67 67 50 50 33

WOFRES 0 0 0 0 33 50 50 44 67 50 50 56

FAMBIM 0 0 50 11 100 100 50 67 0 0 0 22

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

76

Process

Figure 55: Level of readiness vs number of years of establishment from the aspect of process

Figure 55 depicts the Level of Readiness vs Years of Establishment from the Aspect of Process.

From the figure shown, again, the respondent with 11 to 15 years of establishment showed a fairly

agree percentage in the range of fifty percent to hundred percent, while the group within 6 to 10 years

of establishment also indicated a fairly moderate percentage in the same range percentage. Overall,

none of the groups disagree except for the group within more than 16 years of establishment by

thirteen percent with the same statement ‘We are confident that there is sufficient law and regulation

to protect our rights when using the BIM software’ and ‘We believe that BIM process is compatible with

the current legal status regarding electronic transmissions’.

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs


NPRABS 0 0 0 13 67 100 50 63 33 0 50 25

TSLOAB 0 0 0 0 67 50 50 75 33 50 50 25

SELEVA 0 0 0 0 67 100 50 38 33 0 50 63

STAMOD 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 13 100 50 100 88

ADESEC 0 0 0 0 0 50 50 50 100 50 50 50

BETTQS 0 0 0 0 33 50 0 13 67 50 100 88

PRORIG 0 0 0 13 67 50 0 75 33 50 100 13

LEGSTA 0 0 0 13 33 50 50 75 67 50 50 13

EVIREQ 0 0 0 0 33 100 50 88 67 0 50 13

LEGPOL 0 0 0 0 33 100 0 88 67 0 100 13

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

77

Management

Figure 56: Level of readiness vs number of years of establishment from the aspect of management

Figure 56 reveals the Level of Readiness vs Years of Establishment from the aspect of

management. From the figure shown, most of the respondents’ groups fall within moderate

percentage. The group within 6 to 10 years of establishment recorded hundred percent moderate

agreements to almost every statement, except for the statement ‘We are aware that technology can

help in making ICT investment decisions’ with fifty percent agreement. Nevertheless, none of the

respondent group disagreed in this management aspect.

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs

≤ 5 yrs6‐10 yrs

11‐15 yrs

≥ 16 yrs


INCPER 0 0 0 0 0 100 50 50 100 0 50 50

OHIESU 0 0 0 0 67 100 50 38 33 0 50 63

PLAEVA 0 0 0 0 33 100 50 25 67 0 50 75

INVDEC 0 0 0 0 0 50 50 25 100 50 50 75

REGPRO 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 13 100 0 100 88

SMEXAD 0 0 0 0 100 100 100 63 0 0 0 38

SUFRES 0 0 0 0 100 100 100 75 0 0 0 25

SPADTI 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1

SUMACO 0 0 0 0 67 100 50 63 33 0 50 38

QUANCO 0 0 0 0 67 100 50 63 33 0 50 38

COSASS 0 0 0 0 33 100 50 50 67 0 50 50

0

20

40

60

80

100

Valid Percentage (%

)

Documents

BIM Awareness and Readiness 01