Islamic University of Gaza (IUG) - غزةlibrary.iugaza.edu.ps/thesis/116796.pdf · A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of Requirements for Master's ... The Islamic University

Islamic University of Gaza (IUG)

Higher Education Deanship

Faculty of Engineering

Civil Engineering Department

Construction Project Management

زةـــــــغ – ةـاإلسالمي عةـــــالجام

اـــــــــالعلي اتــالدراس ادةـــــــعم

ةـــــــــــــــــــدســالهن كـلـــــــــية

قســــــــم الهندســة المدنيـــــــــــة

ــــةإدارة المشروعــات الهندسيــــ

An investigation into Building Information Modeling (BIM)

application in Architecture, Engineering and Construction

(AEC) industry in Gaza strip

التصميم صناعت في( BIM) البناء معلوماث نمذجت تكنولوجيا تطبيق في البحث

غزة قطاع في البناء وتشييد

Submitted by:

Lina Ahmed Ata AbuHamra

Supervised by:

Prof. Dr. Adnan Ali Enshassi Distinguished Prof. of Construction Engineering and Management, IUG

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of Requirements for Master's

Degree in Construction Project Management, Civil Engineering

September 2015 AD - 1436 HJ

إقـــــــزار

الخسالة التي تحسل العشػان:أنا السػقع أدناه مقجم

An investigation into Building Information Modeling (BIM)

application in Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC)

industry in Gaza strip

البناء وتشييد التصميم صناعت في( BIM) البناء معلوماث نمذجت تكنولوجيا تطبيق في البحث

غزة قطاع في

أقخ بأن ما اشتسمت عميو ىحه الخسالة إنسا ىي نتاج جيجي الخاص، باستثشاء ما تست اإلشارة إليو حيثسا ورد، وإن ىحه الخسالة ككل، أو أي جدء مشيا لع يقجم مغ قبل لشيل درجة أو لقب عمسي أو

.بحثي لجى أية مؤسدة تعميسية أو بحثية أخخى

DECLARATION

The work provided in this thesis, unless otherwise referenced, is the

researcher's own work, and has not been submitted elsewhere for any other

degree or qualification.

Researcher's name :باحثةاسع ال

Lina Ahmed Ata AbuHamra لينـا أحمــد عطــا أبـؽ حمـرة

E-mail: [email protected]

Signature: ػقيعالت:

Date: 2/9/2015 2/9/2015 التاريخ:

mailto:[email protected]

Citing the thesis

To cite this thesis:

AbuHamra, Lina Ahmed (2015). An investigation into Building Information Modeling

(BIM) application in Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC)

industry in Gaza strip. MSc Thesis, Construction Project Management, Civil

Engineering, The Islamic University of Gaza (IUG), Gaza, Gaza strip, Palestine.

Or:

AbuHamra, L. A. (2015). An investigation into Building Information Modeling (BIM)

application in Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry in

Gaza strip. MSc Thesis, Construction Project Management, Civil Engineering,

The Islamic University of Gaza (IUG), Gaza, Gaza strip, Palestine.

To link to this thesis: http://library.iugaza.edu.ps/thesis/116796.pdf

http://library.iugaza.edu.ps/thesis/116796.pdf

http://library.iugaza.edu.ps/thesis/116796.pdf

ين الله يرفع } :قال تعاىل ال نكه ين و آ منهوا م آوتهوا ال

ل درجات{ الع

11سورة اجملادةل :

صدق هللا العظمي

“All things are difficult before

they are easy”

Thomas Fuller (1608 -1661)

i

Dedication

Firstly, this research is lovingly dedicated to my beloved Father Engineer/ Ahmed Ata

AbuHamra and my beloved Mother Mrs. Rasmia Ali Qatrawi, who have been my

constant source of inspiration. They have given me the guidance and discipline to tackle

any difficulty in this life with enthusiasm and determination. Without their prayers,

love, encouragement and support, this work would not have been made possible. Their

constant love has sustained me throughout my life.

And without a doubt, I dedicate this thesis to my beloved sisters, brothers, best real

friends in Gaza strip in Palestine and other places in the world, as well the entire special

people who have supported me throughout the process of carrying out this work. Their

love and encouragement have had a significant impact on giving me the power to

complete this work.

I also dedicate my work to myself because I have kept trying to learn new things as well

as I have been keen on fidelity and accuracy in achieving my thesis.


ii

Acknowledgements

First of all, I am grateful to ALLAH the Almighty for all blessings in this life and for

giving me power and ability that were necessary to achieve this goal. All thanks and

praise are due to ALLAH ―Alhamdulillah.‖

I would like to express my great appreciation to Prof. Dr. Adnan Ali Enshassi,

Distinguished Professor of Construction Engineering and Management and my research

supervisor, for his patient guidance, enthusiastic encouragement and useful critiques of

this research work. I am proud to be one of his students and to have the opportunity to

be under his supervision.

I would also like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Husameddin Mohammed

Dawoud, Assistant Professor at the College of Applied Engineering and Urban Planning

of The University of Palestine, Gaza. His valuable and constructive advice and

assistance during the planning and development of the methodology of this research

work, as well as his continuous encouragement to me, are priceless. I thank him for his

willingness to dedicate to me much of his time so generously.

The advice was given to me by Dr. Khalid AbdelRaouf Al-Hallaq, Assistant Professor

of Civil Engineering/ Construction Management at The Islamic University of Gaza,

have been of great help in the elimination of confusion at the beginning of the research

in some fundamental things that identified the orientation of the study. His willingness

to support and to facilitate many issues to me is appreciated.

I take this opportunity to express the most sincere gratitude to Dr. Javed Intekhab, PhD

in Phytochemistry, lecturer in the Department of Chemistry, Swami Vivekananda P.G

College, India, for providing me with all the necessary references which needed access

to the present research. I place on record, my sincere thanks to him for having

encouraged me and for his honest and valuable advice according to his extensive

experience.

I wish to send my great thanks to Dr. Davide Polimeno, MPhil in Classical

Archaeology, External Assistant of the Apulian Direction of Antiquities (Italy) and

EXARC member (EU-Netherlands). I am extremely thankful and indebted to him for

sharing expertise, and valuable guidance as well as for encouraging me.

I would also like to express my particular thanks to both of Syed Muzammil Ali, MS in

Electrical Engineering, and Tayyab Zafar, MS in Mechatronics Engineering, from

Pakistan, for providing me with many of the necessary references useful to this

research.

Special thanks should be given to the Department of Architectural Engineering at The

Islamic University of Gaza, in particular for each of them: Prof. Nader J. El-Namara,

Dr. Suhair M. Ammar, Dr. Omar S. Asfour, and Dr. Sanaa Y. Saleh, for their

welcoming and help in the arbitration of the questionnaire. In the same context, special

thanks to Haroun Mousa Bhar, MSc in Statistics, for his help in the statistical arbitration

of the questionnaire.

iii

I‘m particularly grateful for the assistance was given by Malek M. Abuwarda, MSc in

Structural Engineering, Technical Instructor in GTC-UNRWA in Gaza, by sharing his

valuable knowledge about Building Information Modeling (BIM) and Revit. I am also

grateful to all those who participated in response to the questionnaire and all

organizations that cooperated with me.

I want to thank Abdul-Rahman Ayyash, MSc in Civil Engineering, for his help in

understanding factor analysis test. My sincere thanks also extended to all my friends and

colleagues for their support and encouragement to me.

Last but not the least; there are no words to describe how I‘m so grateful to my beloved

Father Engineer/ Ahmed Ata AbuHamra and my beloved Mother Mrs. Rasmia Ali

Qatrawi for the endless encouragement, support and attention throughout all my studies

at university, and especially while writing this research. As well, my profound thanks

must be expressed to my beloved sisters and brothers for everything.

Thank you,


iv

Abstract

Purpose: Building Information Modeling (BIM) has recently attained widespread

attention in the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry. BIM has

been suggested by several professionals and researchers as the universal remedy to

addressing the inefficiencies in the AEC industry. In numerous cases of different

countries, potential benefits and competitive advantages have been reported. However,

in spite of the benefits and potentials of BIM technologies, it is not applied in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip in Palestine just like many other regions of the world. Therefore,

the purpose of this research was to develop a clear understanding about BIM for

identifying the different factors that provide useful information to consider adopting

BIM technology by the practitioners in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. This purpose

has been done by achieving five primary objectives by assessing the awareness level of

BIM by the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip, identifying BIM functions

and BIM benefits that would convince the professionals for adopting BIM in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip, determining barriers to BIM adoption, and by studying some

hypotheses to help to reach to successful BIM-based workflow implementation.

Design/methodology/approach: A quantitative survey was used in the research. Three

main steps were used to reach to the final amendment of the questionnaire: (1) Face

validity by presenting the questionnaire to 12 experts in the fields of the AEC industry

and Statistics (from Gaza city as well as outside Palestine), (2) pre-testing the

questionnaire in two phases with 12 people who represented the target group, which

involved the professionals (Architects, Civil Engineers, Mechanical Engineers,

Electrical Engineers, and any other professional with related specialization) in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip in Palestine, and (3) a Pilot study was conducted by distributing

40 copies of the questionnaire to respondents from the target group and analyzing them

for testing the statistical validity and reliability. After piloting, the questionnaire was

adopted and was distributed to the whole sample (convenience sample) from the target

group. 275 copies of the questionnaire were distributed, and 270 copies of the

questionnaire were received from the respondents with a response rate = 97.8%. To

draw meaningful results, the collected data have been analyzed by using the quantitative

data analysis techniques (which include the Relative important index, Factor analysis,

Pearson correlation analysis, and others) through the Statistical Package for Social

Science (SPSS) IBM version 22.

Findings: The study results indicated that the awareness level of BIM by the

professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip is very low. Findings indicated that BIM

functions are significantly needed and important for the professionals in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip as well as BIM benefits are significantly valuable for them. BIM

function that got the top ranking according to the overall respondents is Interoperability

and translation of information. In addition to that, factor analysis has clustered BIM

functions into three components. The major factor is Data management and utilization

in planning; operation and maintenance. Regarding BIM benefits, the BIM benefit that

got the top ranking according to the overall respondents is: Enhance design team

collaboration (Architectural, Structural, Mechanical, and Electrical Engineers). Results

obtained from factor analysis have clustered BIM benefits in four components, and the

major factor is Controlled whole-life costs and environmental data. On the other hand,

the study findings demonstrated that BIM barriers are greatly affecting the adoption of

v

BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. The top barrier to BIM adoption in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip from the point view of the respondents is the Lack of the

awareness of BIM by stakeholders. Lack of BIM interest was the major factor of BIM

barriers among four factors according to the factor analysis. Finally, Pearson correlation

analysis asserted that there is a negative relationship between the BIM barriers and

between each of the awareness level of BIM and the importance of BIM functions, as

well as the value of BIM benefits. Pearson correlation analysis also asserted that there is

a positive relationship between the awareness level of BIM and between both of the

importance of BIM functions, and the value of BIM benefits.

Theoretical and practical implications of the research: More specific and practical

studies are needed to understand thoroughly all topics that related to BIM. Meanwhile

the awareness level and interest of BIM in Gaza strip in Palestine need to be increased

through the education and the training by the academic institutions and universities, as

well as any bodies that train Architects and Engineers. The AEC organizations must be

patient with the BIM learning process and must act positively toward the necessary

change for the successful BIM adoption. Governmental agencies should also take

progressive steps to apply BIM in the AEC industry by generating a simplified

implementation roadmap for the organizations to be followed gradually with clear legal

benchmarks.

Originality/ value: This study will add to the current body of knowledge about BIM all

over the world. It is the first study that contributes significantly to consider BIM in Gaza

strip in Palestine and investigates into BIM application in the AEC firms to remedy all

of their severe problems. This study can provide a documentation of reference for BIM

situation in Gaza strip. It could be used as a comparative guide for the future

development and broadening understanding to increase knowledge of BIM and create a

creative working environment.

Keywords: Architectural Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry, Building

information modeling (BIM), Organization culture, Awareness level of BIM, BIM

functions, BIM benefits, BIM barriers, Gaza strip, Palestine, Factor analysis test

vi

ملخص البحث

صشاعة الترسيع في الشصاق واسع ا اىتسام األخيخة اآلونة في( BIM) السباني معمػمات نسحجة حققت :الغرض أوجو عمىكعالج شامل لمتغمب والباحثيغ السيشييغ مغ العجيج قبل مغ BIM اقتخاح تع حيث ،(AEC) وتذييج البشاء

في BIMالقيسة لتكشػلػلجيا اإلمكانيات و الفػائج رصج العجيج مغ باإلضافة إلى أنو تع. AEC صشاعة في القرػر غدة قصاع في العجيج مغ السشاشق السختمفة في العالع. ولكغ وبالخغع مغ ذلظ، إال أنو لع يتع تصبيق ىحه التكشػلػجيا

ىحا مغ الغخض كان وبشاء عمى ذلظ،. العالع في األخخى السشاشق مغ العجيج كسا ىػ الحال في ا تسام ،في فمدصيغتػفخ معمػمات مفيجة لمشطخ في التي السختمفة العػامل عمى لمتعخف BIM تكشػلػجيا بمػرة مفيػم واضح عغ البحث: مغ رئيدية أىجاف عجة تحقيق خالل مغ ذلظ تع وقج. السصالب الحالية لرشاعة الترسيع وتذييج البشاء لتمبية هاعتسادغدة، باإلضافة قصاع في AEC صشاعة العامميغ في السيشييغ قبل مغ BIMبتكشػلػجيا السعخفة مدتػى تقييع خالل

العتساده وتصبيقو. السيشييغ أن تقشع شأنيا مغ ، وفػائجه األكثخ قيسة والتيBIMالتي يقػم بيا لتحجيج أىع الػضائف في لمسداعجة الفخضيات بعس دراسة ، تعا وأخيخ . لمتغمب عمييا BIM اعتساد دون ػلتح التي العػائق كسا تع تحجيج

.بشجاح BIM اعتساد إلى الػصػل

ستشاد عمى الجراسات ستبانة التي تع ترسيسيا باإلستخجام اإلإتع اختيار البحث الكسي وذلظ ب: منيجية البحث( 1: )حيث كانت كالتالي ستبانة،اإل مغ األخيخ الذكل إلى لمػصػل رئيدية خصػات ثالث ستخجامإوقج تع . الدابقة

مجال و الترسيع وتذييج البشاء صشاعة مجال في ا خبيخ 12 إلى ستبانةإلا تقجيع خالل اختبار الرالحية مغشخز مسغ 12 مع مخحمتيغ عمى ستبانةإلاختبار ا( 2) .(فمدصيغ خارجمغ وكحلظ غدة مجيشة مغ) اإلحراء

السيشجسػن ): غدة في فمدصيغ وىع قصاع في AEC صشاعة السدتيجفة، والتي تذسل السيشييغ فييسثمػن الفئة ذات األخخى أصحاب التخررات ميشجسػ السجني، والكيخباء، والسيكانيظ، باإلضافة لمسيشجسيغ مغ السعساريػن،

جخاء لمفئة السدتيجفة إل ةستباناإل مغ ندخة 40 وتحميل تػزيع شخيق عغ تجخيبية دراسة أجخيت وقج( 3) الرمة(. وتػزيعيا ستبانةاإل عتسادإ تع نجاح الجراسة التجخيبية، وبعج. حرائي باإلضافة الختبار الثباتاختبار الرالحية اإل

275إجسالي مغ أصل ستبانة كعجدإ 270جسع تع وقج. مغ الفئة السدتيجفة (العيشة السالئسة) كاممة العيشة عمىوذلظ مغدى ذات نتائج ستشباطكسيا إل البيانات تحميل تع ،ا خيخ أو %. 97.8= استبانة، لتكػن بحلظ ندبة اإلستجابة

.(IBM 22 )إصجار SPSSستخجام بخنامج إب

صشاعة في السيشييغ قبل مغ ا مشخفس جج BIMبتكشػلػجيا السعخفة مدتػى إلى أن الجراسة نتائج أشارت :النتائجAEC األىسية والحاجة الكبيخة لػضائف إلى أشارت الشتائج في حيغ. غدة قصاع في BIMوالقيسة الكبيخة لمفػائج ،

ونقل البيشي التذغيل قابمية ىي: لمسدتجيبيغ، األكثخ أىسية وفقا BIMوقج تبيغ أن وضيفة . BIMالشاتجة مغ تصبيق إلى ثالثة عػامل باستخجام BIMالسعمػمات بيغ السدتخجميغ بذكل سمذ. باإلضافة إلى أنو تع تجسيع وضائف

إدارة: ىػ BIMالستغيخات. وكان العامل الخئيدي في وضائف البشػد/ ختبار التحميل العاممي بيجف تقميز وتجسيعإفكانت الفائجة األكثخ قيسة مغ ،BIM بالشدبة لفػائجأما والريانة. ،التذغيل، و في التخصيط واستخجاميا البيانات

أربعة عػامل رئيدية لفػائج ستخخاجإ تع وقج الترسيع. بيغ أعزاء فخيق التعاون وجية نطخ السدتجيبيغ ىي: تعديدBIM والتحكع في السبشى خالل دورة حياتو في تكاليف التحكع: ستخجام التحميل العاممي، وكان العامل الخئيدي ىػإب

تصبيق كبيخ بذكل وجػد حػاجد تعخقل الجراسة، نتائج أضيخت أخخى، ناحية مغ .البيئية الخاصة بالسبشى البيانات

vii

BIM. وكان العائق الخئيدي لتصبيق BIM :السعخفة بتكشػلػجيا عجم ىػBIM كسا تع .السعشية الجيات قبل مغ عجم: التحميل العاممي، وقج كان العامل الخئيدي ىػستخجام إب BIMأربعة عػامل رئيدية لعػائق تصبيق ستخخاجإ

حػاجد بيغ سمبية عالقة ىشاك أن تحميل االرتباط بيخسػن، تبيغ ، ومغ خاللا وأخيخ . BIMىتسام بتكشػلػجيا إ وجػد إلى باإلضافة . وكحلظ قيسة فػائجه وضائفو، وأىسية ،BIMمغ مدتػى السعخفة بتكشػلػجيا كال ، وبيغBIMتصبيق

وقيسة فػائجه. ،BIM وضائف أىسية مغ كال وبيغ ،BIM السعخفة بتكشػلػجيا مدتػى بيغ إيجابية عالقة وجػد

لجسيع لمعسل عمى زيادة الفيع لمسديج مغ البحػث السدتقبمية تػجج حاجة ماسة :النعرية والعملية للبحث اآلثار، بحيث تكػن محجدة بذكل أكبخ، باإلضافة إلجخاء البحػث التصبيقية في مجال BIMالستعمقة بتكشػلػجيا السػاضيع

في قصاع غدة في فمدصيغ BIM. مغ ناحية أخخى، تػجج ضخورة ممحة لديادة االىتسام والسعخفة بتكشػلػجيا BIMال تقػم بتجريب التي الييئات عغ فزال والجامعات، كاديسيةالسؤسدات األ قبل مغ والتجريب التعميع خالل غم

التغييخ نحػ إيجابي بذكل تترخف أن AEC مجال السؤسدات والذخكات العاممة في عمى يجب ،كحلظ. السيشجسيغتجريجية خصػات مغ خالل اتخاذ BIM الحكػمية دعع تصبيق الجيات عمى . كسا يجبBIM اعتساد لشجاح الالزم

الالزمة لحلظ وبذكل القانػنية السعاييخ تػفيخ ضخورةمع ،بذكل تجريجي BIMشخيق لتصبيق خارشة وفعالة كعسل .واضح

الجراسة ىي . كسا تعج ىحهحػل العالع BIM تكشػلػجيا ضافة لمجراسات السػجػدة عغإيعج ىحا البحث :قيمة البحث في ، والتحقيقفي فمدصيغ في قصاع غدة BIMلمشطخ في تكشػلػجيا كبيخ األولى مغ نػعيا التي ستداىع بذكل

التي الرعبة السذاكل جسيع لسعالجة قصاع غدة فيAEC الذخكات والسؤسدات في صشاعة في BIMبيق تصكقاعجة أساسية لمبحػث السدتقبمية بيجف تػسيع الجراسة ىحه ستخجامإ يسكغ ذلظ، عمى عالوة. تػاجييا أثشاء العسل

في العسل اليشجسي في مجال ا وتصػر ا إبجاعأكثخ بيئة أجل إيجاد مغ BIM بتكشػلػجيا السعخفة لديادة السجارك .الترسيع والبشاء

viii

Table of contents

Citing the thesis ............................................................................................................. IV

Dedication ......................................................................................................................... i

Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................... ii

Abstract .......................................................................................................................... iv

ثملخص البح ....................................................................................................................... vi

Table of contents .......................................................................................................... viii

List of tables .................................................................................................................. xii

List of figures ............................................................................................................... xvi

List of abbreviations ................................................................................................... xvii

Chapter 1: Introduction ..................................................................................................2

1.1 Background............................................................................................................. 2

1.2 Problem statement and research justification ......................................................... 3

1.3 Research aim, objectives, questions, and hypotheses ............................................. 4

1.4 Delimitations of the study ...................................................................................... 6

1.5 Research design ...................................................................................................... 7

1.6 Contribution to knowledge ..................................................................................... 7

1.7 Structure of the thesis ............................................................................................. 8

Chapter 2: Literature review........................................................................................10

2.1 Understanding of BIM concept ............................................................................ 10

2.1.1 BIM: Definition and characteristics .............................................................. 10

2.1.2 Types of BIM ................................................................................................. 13

2.1.3 The awareness level of BIM .......................................................................... 13

2.1.4 How is BIM used? ......................................................................................... 14

2.2 Impact of BIM in the AEC/ FM industry ............................................................. 18

2.2.1 Possible benefits of BIM adoption in the AEC/ FM industry ....................... 19

2.2.2 Benefits of BIM during design, construction, facilities and operations, and

maintenance of a building project .......................................................................... 21

2.2.2.1 BIM benefits related to the design phase of a project ............................ 22

2.2.2.2 BIM benefits during the construction phase ........................................... 24

2.2.2.3 BIM benefits during facilities, operations and maintenance of a building

project ................................................................................................................. 26

2.3 Slow adoption of BIM in construction industry ................................................... 29

ix

2.3.1 Barriers and challenges to implementing BIM in construction industry ....... 30

2.3.2 Identified BIM implementation obstacles and their interdependencies ........ 33

2.3.2.1 Barriers linked to the BIM product ........................................................ 34

2.3.2.2 Barriers linked to the BIM process ......................................................... 35

2.3.2.3 Barriers linked to the people using BIM ................................................ 36

2.4 Summary............................................................................................................... 40

Chapter 3: Research methodology ...............................................................................42

3.1 Research aim and objectives ................................................................................ 42

3.2 Research plan/ strategy ......................................................................................... 42

3.3 Research location .................................................................................................. 42

3.4 Target population, sampling of the questionnaire, and data collection ................ 42

3.5 Questionnaire design and development ................................................................ 43

3.6 Face validity ......................................................................................................... 44

3.7 Pre-testing the questionnaire ................................................................................ 46

3.8 Pilot study ............................................................................................................. 48

3.8.1 Statistical validity of the questionnaire ......................................................... 48

3.8.2 Reliability test ................................................................................................ 49

3.9 Final amendment to the questionnaire .................................................................. 51

3.10 Quantitative data analysis ................................................................................... 60

3.11 Measurements ..................................................................................................... 60

3.11.1 Cross-tabulation analysis ............................................................................. 60

3.11.2 Calculating of Relative Importance Index (RII) of Factors ......................... 61

3.11.3 Factor analysis ............................................................................................. 61

3.11.3.1 Type of factor analysis ......................................................................... 61

3.11.3.2 Methods of factoring ............................................................................ 62

3.11.3.3 The distribution of data ........................................................................ 62

3.11.3.4 Validity of sample size ......................................................................... 62

3.11.3.5 Validity of correlation matrix (correlations between variables) ........... 62

3.11.3.6 Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett's Test as a measure of

appropriateness of factor analysis....................................................................... 62

3.11.3.7 Determining the number of factors ....................................................... 63

3.11.3.8 Mathematical validity of factor analysis .............................................. 63

3.11.4 Normal distribution ...................................................................................... 63

3.11.5 Homogeneity of variances (Homoscedasticity) ........................................... 64

x

3.11.6 Parametric tests ............................................................................................ 64

3.11.6.1 Pearson's correlation coefficient ........................................................... 64

3.11.6.2 Independent Samples t-test ................................................................... 65

3.11.6.3 One-way Analysis of Variance (One-way ANOVA)/ (F-test) ............. 65

3.11.6.4 Scheffé's method (Multiple-Comparison procedure) ........................... 65

3.12 Summary............................................................................................................. 65

Chapter 4: Results and discussion ...............................................................................72

4.1 Respondents‘ profiles ........................................................................................... 72

4.2 The way of implementing work by respondents .................................................. 73

4.3 The awareness level of BIM ................................................................................. 75

4.4 The importance of BIM functions ........................................................................ 78

4.4.1 RII of BIM functions ..................................................................................... 78

4.4.2 Factor analysis results of BIM functions ....................................................... 82

4.4.2.1 Appropriateness of factor analysis ......................................................... 82

4.4.2.2 The extracted factors .............................................................................. 89

4.5 The value of BIM benefits .................................................................................... 93

4.5.1 RII of BIM benefits ....................................................................................... 93

4.5.2 Factor analysis results of BIM benefits ......................................................... 98

4.5.2.1 Appropriateness of factor analysis ......................................................... 98

4.5.2.2 The extracted factors ............................................................................ 107

4.6 The strength of BIM barriers .............................................................................. 113

4.6.1 RII of BIM barriers ...................................................................................... 113

4.6.2 Factor analysis results of BIM barriers ........................................................ 117

4.6.2.1 Appropriateness of factor analysis ....................................................... 117

4.6.2.2 The extracted factors ............................................................................ 126

4.7 Test of research hypotheses ................................................................................ 132

4.7.1 The correlation between the awareness level of BIM and BIM barriers ..... 133

4.7.2 The correlation between the importance of BIM functions and BIM barriers

.............................................................................................................................. 134

4.7.3 The correlation between the value of BIM benefits and BIM barriers ........ 135

4.7.4 The correlation between the awareness level of BIM by the professionals and

the importance of BIM functions .......................................................................... 136


the value of BIM benefits ..................................................................................... 137

xi

4.7.6 Hypothesis related to respondents‘ profiles (respondents analysis) ............ 138

4.7.6.1 An analysis taking into account the gender .......................................... 138

4.7.6.2 An analysis taking into account the educational qualification ............. 139

4.7.6.3 An analysis taking into account the study place ................................... 140

4.7.6.4 An analysis taking into account the specialization ............................... 141

4.7.6.5 An analysis taking into account the nature of the workplace ............... 143

4.7.6.6 An analysis taking into account the location of the workplace ............ 145

4.7.6.7 An analysis taking into account the current field/ the present job ........ 147

4.7.6.8 An analysis taking into account the years of the experience ................ 148

Chapter 5: Conclusions and recommendations ........................................................152

5.1 Summary of the research .................................................................................... 152

5.2 Conclusions of the research objectives, questions, and hypotheses ................... 152

5.2.1 Outcomes related to objective one ............................................................... 152

5.2.2 Outcomes related to objective two .............................................................. 153

5.2.3 Outcomes related to objective three ............................................................ 153

5.2.4 Outcomes related to objective four .............................................................. 154

5.2.5 Outcomes related to objective five .............................................................. 154

5.3 Recommendations .............................................................................................. 161

5.3.1 Education and training to increase BIM awareness and interest ................. 161

5.3.2 Change organizational culture ..................................................................... 162

5.3.3 Provide appropriate governmental support .................................................. 163

5.4 Research benefits to knowledge and the AEC industry ..................................... 163

5.5 Limitations and future studies ............................................................................ 164

References ....................................................................................................................166

Appendix A: Questionnaire (English) .......................................................................177

Appendix B: Questionnaire (Arabic) .........................................................................184

Appendix C: Correlation coefficient ..........................................................................192

xii

List of tables

Table (2.1): BIM features ................................................................................................12

Table (2.2): Examples of BIM functions; (Source: Baldwin, 2012) ...............................16

Table (2.3): Summary of BIM functions .........................................................................17

Table (2.4): Benefits of BIM during preconstruction; design; construction; and post

construction of a building project; (Eastman et al., 2008; 2011) ....................................21

Table (2.5): Summary of BIM benefits ...........................................................................26

Table (2.6): Summary of BIM barriers ............................................................................37

Table (3.1): The used quantifiers for the rating scale (the five-point Likert scale) in each

of the second, third, fourth and fifth fields of the questionnaire .....................................44

Table (3.2): Results of the face validity ..........................................................................44

Table (3.3): Results of pre-testing the questionnaire .......................................................47

Table (3.4): Structure validity of the questionnaire .........................................................49

Table (3.5): Split-Half Coefficient method .....................................................................50

Table (3.6): Cronbach‘s Coefficient Alpha for reliability (Cα) ......................................50

Table (3.7): A summary illustrates how items were obtained for each field in the

questionnaire ....................................................................................................................52

Table (3.8): List of the items of BIM functions for the final questionnaire ....................53

Table (3.9): List of the items of BIM benefits for the final questionnaire ......................54

Table (3.10): List of the items of BIM barriers for the final questionnaire .....................56

Table (3.11): Skewness and Kurtosis results ...................................................................64

Table (3.12): The summary of the methodology .............................................................66

Table (4.1): The respondent‘s profile ..............................................................................72

Table (4.2): The awareness level of BIM by the professionals in the AEC industry ......75

Table (4.3): The importance of BIM functions ...............................................................79

Table: (4.4): Correlations between items/ variables of BIM functions ...........................84

Table: (4.5) KMO and Bartlett's test for items/ variables of BIM functions ...................84

Table: (4.6) Communalities of BIM functions ................................................................85

Table (4.7): Total Variance Explained of BIM functions ...............................................86

Table (4.8): Results of factor analysis for BIM functions ...............................................89

Table (4.9): The value of BIM benefits ...........................................................................94

Table: (4.10a): Correlations between items/ variables of BIM benefits........................100

xiii

Table: (4.10b): Correlations between items/ variables of BIM benefits .......................101

Table: (4.11) KMO and Bartlett's test for items of BIM benefits .................................101

Table: (4.12) Communalities of BIM benefits ..............................................................102

Table (4.13): Total variance Explained of BIM benefits ...............................................104

Table (4.14): Results of factor analysis for BIM benefits .............................................106

Table (4.15): The strength of BIM barriers ...................................................................113

Table: (4.16): Correlations between items/ variables of BIM barriers ..........................120

Table: (4.17) KMO and Bartlett's test for items/ variables of BIM barriers .................120

Table: (4.18) Communalities of BIM barriers ...............................................................121

Table (4.19): Total variance Explained of BIM barriers ...............................................123

Table (4.20): Results of factor analysis for BIM barriers ..............................................125

Table (4.21): The correlation coefficient between the awareness level of BIM by the

professionals and BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip ...............................134

Table (4.22): The correlation coefficient between the importance of BIM functions and

BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip ............................................................135

Table (4.23): The correlation coefficient between the value of BIM benefits and BIM

barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip ....................................................................135


professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip and the importance of BIM functions

.......................................................................................................................................136


professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip and the value of BIM benefits ...........137

Table (4.26): Results of Independent samples t-test regarding the gender of the

respondents ....................................................................................................................138

Table (4.27): One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)/ (F-test) results regarding the

educational qualification of the respondents .................................................................139


study place of the respondents .......................................................................................141

Table (4.29): Results of Scheffe test for multiple comparisons due to the study place of

the respondents for the field of ―The importance of BIM functions‖ ...........................141


the respondents for all the fields of ―the investigation into BIM application in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip‖ ...................................................................................................141

xiv


specialization of the respondents ...................................................................................142

Table (4.32): Results of Scheffe test for multiple comparisons due to the specialization

of the respondents for the field of ―The awareness level of BIM by the professionals‖

.......................................................................................................................................143

Table (4.33): Results of Scheffe test for multiple comparisons due to the specialization

of the respondents for all fields of ―The investigation into BIM application in the AEC



nature of the workplace for the respondents ..................................................................144

Table (4.35): Results of Scheffe test for multiple comparisons due to the nature of the

workplace of the respondents for the field of ―The awareness level of BIM by the

professionals‖ ................................................................................................................145


workplace of the respondents for the field of ―The importance of BIM functions‖ .....145


workplace of the respondents for all fields of ―The investigation into BIM application in

the AEC industry in Gaza strip‖ ....................................................................................145


location of the workplace of the respondents ................................................................146

Table (4.39): Results of Scheffe test for multiple comparisons due to the location of the

workplace of the respondents for the field of ―The awareness level of BIM by the

professionals‖ ................................................................................................................147


current field/ present job of the respondents .................................................................147


years of experience of the respondents ..........................................................................149

Table (4.42): Results of Scheffe test for multiple comparisons due to the years of

experience of the respondents for the field of ―The awareness level of BIM by the

professionals‖ ................................................................................................................150


experience of the respondents for the field of ―The importance of BIM functions‖ .....150


experience of the respondents for the field of ―The value of BIM benefits‖ ................150

xv


the respondents for all fields of ―The investigation into BIM application in the AEC


Table (5.1): summary of the findings of the study ........................................................156

Table (C1): The correlation coefficient between each paragraph/ item in the field and

the whole field (The first field is the awareness level of BIM by the professionals) ....193

Table (C2): The correlation coefficient between each paragraph in the field and the

whole field (The second field is the importance of BIM functions) .............................193


whole field (The third field is the value of BIM benefits) ............................................194


whole field (The fourth field is the strength of BIM barriers).......................................195

xvi

List of figures

Figure (1.1): Hypotheses model (Source: The researcher, 2015) ......................................6

Figure (4.1): Percentage of implementation the work by using 3D programs ................74

Figure (4.2): The used software tool by respondents to carry out projects .....................75

Figure (4.3): RII of statements (A1 to A9) used to assess the awareness level of BIM ..76

Figure (4.4): RII of BIM functions (F1 to F16) ...............................................................80

Figure (4.5): The three components (factors) of BIM functions .....................................86

Figure (4.6): Scree plot for factors of BIM functions......................................................87

Figure (4.7): RII of BIM benefits (BE1 to BE 26) ..........................................................96

Figure (4.8): The four components (factors) of BIM benefits .......................................103

Figure (4.9): Scree plot for factors of BIM benefits ......................................................105

Figure (4.10): RII of BIM barriers (BA 1 to BA 18) .....................................................115

Figure (4.11): The four components (factors) of BIM barriers .....................................122

Figure (4.12): Scree plot for factors of BIM barriers ....................................................124

Figure (4.13): Hypotheses model (Source: The researcher, 2015) ................................133

xvii

List of abbreviations

Abbreviation The interpretation of the abbreviation

AEC Architecture, Engineering, and Construction

MEP Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing

BIM Building Information Model/ Modeling/ Management

BIM(M) Building Information Modeling and Management

CAD Computer Aided Design

D Dimensional

2D Two dimensions: x, y

3D Three-dimensional: x, y, z (the height, length, and width)

4D Four-dimensional; 3D model connected to a time line (fourth

dimension)

5D Five-dimensional; 4D model connected to cost estimations (fifth

dimension)

6D Six-dimensional; 6D model which is 5D plus site (sixth

dimension)

7D Seven-dimensional; 7D model: BIM for life cycle facility

management (seventh dimension)

nD A term that covers any other information

GIS Geographic Information System

CM Construction Management

QS Quantity Surveyors

RFI Requests For Information

ILM Infrastructure Lifecycle Management

ICT Information and Communications Technology

CBIMKM Construction BIM-based Knowledge Management

OSHA (in the US) Occupational Safety and Health Administration

USC University of Southern California

IT Information Technology

FM Facilities Management

CSCM Construction Supply Chain Management

UK The United Kingdom

USA The United States of America

US The United States

UAE The United Arab Emirates

SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

Cα Cronbach‘s coefficient alpha

RII Relative Importance Index

EFA Exploratory Factor Analysis

CFA Confirmatory Factor Analysis

PCA Principal Component Analysis

r Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient, or ―Pearson‘s

correlation coefficient‖

N Sample size

DF Degree of Freedom

Chapter 1

2

Chapter 1: Introduction

This chapter is aimed to give an introductory overview of the study that has been made.

The problem statement was presented according to the challenges faced by the

Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry in Gaza strip in Palestine

and also the study was justified. This chapter also included aim, objectives, key research

questions, hypotheses, delimitations of the study, research design, and research

contribution to knowledge as well as the outline of the thesis was included in this

chapter.

1.1 Background

Participants in the building process are constantly challenged to deliver successful

projects despite tight budgets, limited manpower, accelerated schedules, as well as

problems that regarding to the issue of waste, which is happening due to the fragmented

nature of the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry (RCS, 2014;

Man and Machine, 2014).

The AEC industry has long sought to adopt techniques to decrease project cost, increase

productivity and quality, reduce project delivery time, and eliminate waste (Azhar et al.,

2008b). One of these techniques is Building Information Modeling (BIM). Azhar et al.

(2008a) said that BIM has recently attained widespread attention in the AEC industry.

Traditionally, Architectural design, Structural analysis, and construction management

are three separate steps with distinct objectives in building engineering activities. With

the prevalence of information technologies in the building industry, the combination of

design and construction activities can be achieved through the integration of BIM and

four-dimensional (4D) technology (Zhenzhong et al., 2008).

BIM is an inevitable development from 3D CAD (Malleson, 2013). BIM represents the

development and the use of the computer-generated n-dimensional (n-D) model to

simulate the design, construction, and operation of that facility. It is the process and

practice of virtual design and construction throughout its lifecycle (AGC, 2005; Lorch,

2012).

Hergunsel (2011) said that BIM is becoming a better-known established collaboration

process in the construction industry. The construction industry engagement with BIM

has primarily been as a common platform for information exchange between a multitude

of professionals, suppliers, and constructors. It is a platform to share knowledge and

communicate between project participants. This enhances and accelerates the dialogue

between various team members (Lorch, 2012).

Due to the different perceptions, background and experiences of researchers and

professionals in the AEC industry, they can define BIM in different ways

(Khosrowshahi and Arayici, 2012). For example, Gu and London (2010) said that BIM

is an information technology (IT) enabled approach that involves applying and

maintaining an integral digital representation of all building information for different

phases of the project lifecycle in the form of a data repository. On the other hand,

Eastman et al. (2008) emphasized that BIM is not only a tool, but also a process that

allows project team members to have an unprecedented ability to collaborate over the

3

course of a project, from early design to occupancy. Stebbins (2009) agreed that BIM is

a process rather than a piece of software. He clearly identified BIM as a business and

management decision. BIM implementation is strongly related to managerial aspects of

professional practices for different working styles and cultures (cited in Ahmad et al.,

2012).

BIM has a broad range of application cross the design; construction; and operation

process (Baldwin, 2012). BIM is important to develop the design process by managing

the changes in the design. It is efficient in checking and updating all the views (plans,

sections, and elevations) when any changes occur (CRC construction innovation, 2007).

BIM promises exponential improvements in construction quality and efficiency

(Ashcraft, 2008). In general, BIM is transforming the way Architects, Engineers,

contractors, and other building professionals work in the industry today (Mandhar and

Mandhar, 2013). The key benefit of BIM is its accurate geometrical representation of

the parts of a building in an integrated data environment (CRC Construction Innovation,

2007). The use of BIM can increase the value of a building, shorten the project duration,

provide reliable cost estimates, produce market-ready facilities, and optimize facility

management and maintenance (Eastman et al., 2011).

On the other hand, the realization of the benefits of BIM is contingent upon a proper

implementation of BIM at an organizational level and its integration at the industry

level (Khosrowshahi and Arayici, 2012). Previous studies showed that there are several

problems when implementing BIM in the very fragmented AEC industry and this is

connected with many different barriers hindering effective adoption of BIM (Lindblad,

2013; Mandhar and Mandhar, 2013). In general, the barriers for BIM adoption in the

AEC industry may be knowledge barriers, technical barriers, process barriers,

managerial barriers, legal barriers, cultural barriers, as well as barriers to education and

training (Fischer and Kunz, 2004; Becerik-Gerber et al., 2011; Both and Kindsvater,

2012; Khosrowshahi and Arayici, 2012; Löf and Kojadinovic, 2012).

1.2 Problem statement and research justification

The AEC industry is the most important industry in Gaza strip in Palestine due to the

urgent need for reconstruction after the frequent wars suffered by Gaza strip, especially

the recent war in the summer of 2014. In the meanwhile, the AEC industry, in turn,

suffers from many of complex problems even in the case that political outstanding

issues have been resolved. These problems make the achievement of the construction

and reconstruction processes more difficult.

For example, construction projects in Gaza strip suffer from many complex issues due

to the fragmented nature of the AEC industry and a lack of knowledge sharing as well

as a lack of communication between different professionals and stakeholders. These

problems can be observed between members of design teams, or even between

consultants and contractors. In addition, the rising costs of construction projects remain

the greatest problem the construction industry is facing now in Gaza strip. There are

also other factors that affect directly and negatively the AEC industry such as delay,

waste, lack of interest in the maintenance of buildings, and other issues that influence

the quality of the construction projects. Accordingly, there is a need to know how to

overcome these problems.

4

On the other hand, BIM has recently attained widespread attention in the AEC industry,

and its use is growing in this industry. The use of BIM goes beyond the planning and

design phase of the project. It is also important during the construction phase and for

post-construction phases and facility management (Azhar et al., 2008a; Eastman et al.,

2008; Eastman et al., 2011; Hardin, 2009). It promises exponential improvements in

construction quality and efficiency (Ashcraft, 2008). BIM is the collaboration process in

the AEC industry, where it is a platform to share knowledge and to communicate

between a multitude of professionals, suppliers, and constructors. This collaboration

enhances and accelerates the dialogue between various team members (Hergunsel,

2011; Lorch, 2012). Thus, BIM can be the information backbone of the whole AEC

industry and thus increase the value of the workflow processes. BIM controls the

accuracy of project estimates in terms of time and cost (Nassar, 2010). By implementing

BIM: risk is reduced, design is maintained, quality is controlled, the collaboration

between stakeholders is improved, and higher analytic tools are more accessible (CRC

for Construction Innovation, 2007). A growing number of case studies over the world

have shown the benefits of BIM to users who have used a building model to apply BIM

technology.

In spite of that, BIM has not been adopted by the AEC firms in Gaza strip just like

many other regions of the world. This prompts the need for research to identify how the

AEC firms in Gaza strip can adopt and implement BIM into their practices and projects

to have the ability to solve all the challenging problems in the AEC industry. This can

be achieved by a better understanding of BIM concept from the literature review.

Additionally, and through a field survey, it can be obtained by assessing the awareness

level of BIM by the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip and by identifying

BIM functions and BIM benefits that would convince the professionals for adopting

BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. This study is significant to investigate BIM

barriers that face BIM adoption in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

1.3 Research aim, objectives, questions, and hypotheses

The aim of the research is to develop a clear understanding about BIM for identifying

the different factors that provide useful information to consider adopting BIM

technology in projects by practitioners in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. In achieving

this aim, five primary objectives have been outlined as follows:

Research objectives

1. To assess the awareness level of BIM by the professionals in the AEC industry

in Gaza strip.

2. To identify the top BIM functions that would convince the professionals for

adopting BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

3. To identify the top BIM benefits that would convince the professionals for


4. To investigate and rank the top BIM barriers which face the implementation of

BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

5. To study some hypotheses that might help to find solutions to adopting BIM in

the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

5

Key research questions

RQ 1: What is the level of the awareness of BIM by the professionals in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip?

RQ 2: Are the functions of BIM important from the viewpoint of the professionals

(according to the need for these functions) in the AEC industry in Gaza strip?

RQ 3: Are the benefits of BIM valuable from the standpoint of the professionals

(according to the need for these functions) in the AEC industry in Gaza strip?

RQ 4: Are BIM barriers affecting the adoption of BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip?

RQ 5: What is the effect of the awareness level of BIM by the professionals on the

reduction of BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip?

RQ 6: What is the effect of the importance of BIM functions on the reduction of BIM

barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip?

RQ 7: What is the effect of the value of BIM benefits on the reduction of BIM barriers

in the AEC industry in Gaza strip?

RQ 8: What is the effect of the awareness level of BIM by the professionals on

increasing the importance of BIM functions in the AEC industry in Gaza strip?

RQ 9: What is the effect of the awareness level of BIM by the professionals on

increasing the value of BIM benefits in the AEC industry in Gaza strip?

RQ 10: Are there differences in the answers of the respondents depending on the

demographic data of the respondents?

Research hypotheses

According to Figure (1.1), the study contains five hypotheses:

H1: There is an inverse relationship, statistically significant at α ≤ 0.05, between the

awareness level of BIM by the professionals and BIM barriers in the AEC industry in

Gaza strip.


importance of BIM functions and BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.


value of BIM benefits and BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

H4: There is a positive relationship, statistically significant at α ≤ 0.05, between the

awareness level of BIM by the professionals and the value of BIM benefits in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip.


awareness level of BIM by the professionals and the importance of BIM functions in the

AEC industry in Gaza strip.

6

H6: There are statistically significant differences attributed to the demographic data of

the respondents and the way of their work at the level of α ≤ 0.05 between the averages

of their views on the subject of the application of BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip.

Figure (1.1): Hypotheses model (Source: The researcher, 2015)

1.4 Delimitations of the study

The study covers the following central aspects:

Knowledge: the study focuses on BIM adoption in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip in Palestine. It aimed only to develop a clear understanding about BIM for

identifying fundamental factors (the awareness level of BIM, the importance of

BIM functions, the value of BIM benefits, and the BIM barriers) which help to

consider adopting BIM technology in projects by the practitioners in the AEC

industry. According to that, an intensive literature review was conducted to

review the previous studies made in this field and dealt with these factors.

Approach and instrument: the research approach was a quantitative survey

research to measure objectives (Descriptive survey and Analytical survey). The

research technique was shaped as a questionnaire. The questionnaire aimed first

to meet the research objectives, to cover the central questions of the study, and

to collect all the necessary data that can support the results and discussion, as

well as help in putting recommendations.

Geographical: the study covers only the AEC industry in Gaza strip in Palestine.

Gaza strip consists of five governorates: the Northern Governorate, Gaza

Governorate, the Middle Governorate, KhanYounis Governorate and Rafah

Governorate.

BIM barriers

The importance of

BIM functions

The awareness level of BIM by the professionals

The value of

BIM benefits HI

H5 H4

H3 H2

7

Population and Sample: research population includes professionals in the AEC

industry (Architects, Civil Engineers, Mechanical Engineers, Electrical

Engineers, and any other professional with related specialization). 270 out of

275 copies of the questionnaire had been returned from the respondents.

Respondents were selected because of their convenient accessibility and

proximity to the researcher. The sample size was chosen to provide adequate

information on reliability and a certain degree of validity.

Time: The questionnaire survey (distribution and collection) was conducted in

2015 (January). It was terminated in a period not exceeding two weeks, to

remedy the delay that occurred during the preparation of the research. This delay

was due to the difficult circumstances during and after the recent war in the

summer of 2014.

1.5 Research design

To fulfill research objectives the following tasks were done:

It was initiated to identify the problem, define the problem, establish aim,

objectives, hypotheses and key research questions, and develop research

plan/strategy by deciding on the research approach and deciding on the research

technique.

An intensive literature review was conducted to review the previous studies

made in this field. It was performed by reading and note-taking from different

sources.

Based on the extensive literature reviews, a questionnaire was designed.

Face validity was conducted by experts in the fields of the AEC industry and

Statistics to see whether the questionnaire in this study appears to be valid or

not.

Pre-testing the questionnaire was done in two phases to make sure that the

questionnaire is going to deliver the right data and to ensure the quality of the

collected data. Each phase of the pre-testing has been tested with six

professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

A pilot study was conducted by distributing 40 copies of the questionnaire to

respondents from the target group to measure statistical validity and reliability of

the questionnaire.

After the pilot study, the questionnaire was adopted and was distributed to the

whole sample.

The collected data have been analyzed quantitatively by Statistical Package for

Social Science (SPSS) IBM version (22).

Findings were concluded, and appropriate graphical representations and tables

were obtained to understand and analyze results.

Recommendations were suggested through the conclusion of the research.

1.6 Contribution to knowledge

The research will add to the existing knowledge about BIM technology all over the

world. It is the first study that contributes significantly to consider BIM in Gaza strip in

Palestine and investigates into BIM application in the AEC firms to remedy all of their

severe problems. Additionally, this comprehensive study can provide a documentation

of reference for BIM situation in Palestine, especially in Gaza strip. It could be used as a

8

comparative guide for future development and broadening understanding to increase

knowledge of BIM and create a creative working environment.

1.7 Structure of the thesis

The research is divided into five chapters to create a good flow for the information. The

outline of the thesis is as the following:

Chapter 1: Introduction

This chapter explains the background of the research. It provides the introduction to

guide the reader into the research topic. The problem statement and justification of the

study, research aim, objectives, questions, hypotheses, research delimitations, research

design, research limitations, and research contribution to knowledge as well as the

outline of the thesis are included in this chapter.

Chapter 2: Literature review

This chapter discusses BIM with a particular focus on the concept, BIM characteristics,

BIM types, the awareness level and the usage. Besides, the possible benefits of BIM

adoption in the AEC industry in design, construction, operations and maintenance of an

asset. Finally, this chapter showed the different barriers and challenges to implementing

BIM in the AEC industry.

Chapter 3: Research methodology

This chapter presents the detailed research design and the method. The chapter also

explains the used technique in the analysis and issues related to data collection.

Chapter 4: Results and discussions

The findings are shown and discussed in chapter four. After results were analyzed, they

are presented, discussed and linked with the previous studies in this chapter.

Chapter 5: Conclusion and recommendations

According to the final results, recommendations and conclusion of the research are

discussed in chapter five.

References

Appendices

Chapter 2

10

Chapter 2: Literature review

The literature review is aimed to establish a theoretical understanding of the concept of

the Building Information Modeling (BIM) and the barriers limiting its adoption. It has

been used in two stages, first to assure the researcher understanding of the prior

knowledge in the subject, and secondly to be used in comparison with the empirical

data. The areas of interest for literature review are: BIM as a concept (definitions, the

awareness level of BIM, and BIM functions), benefits of BIM, and barriers to BIM

adoption. The sources have mainly been refereed academic research journals, refereed

conferences, dissertation/ theses, reports/ occasional paper/ white papers, government

publications, and books.

2.1 Understanding of BIM concept

BIM has been in use internationally for several years, and its use continues to grow. It is

one of the most promising developments in the Architecture, Engineering, and

Construction (AEC) industry and it has the potential to become the information

backbone of a whole new AEC industry (Eastman et al., 2011; Cheng and Ma, 2013;

Stanley and Thurnell, 2014). BIM is continuously developing as a concept because the

boundaries of its capabilities continue to expand as technological advances are made

(Joannides et al., 2012). BIM is now considered the ultimate in project delivery within

the AEC industry (Azhar et al., 2008a). It is motivating an extraordinary shift in the way

the construction industry functions. This fundamental change involves using digital

modeling software to more effectively design, build and manage projects (Nassar,

2010).

2.1.1 BIM: Definition and characteristics

First of all, it is important to note that the acronym BIM can be used to refer to: a (1)

product (building information model, meaning a structured dataset describing a building

for simulation, automation, and presentation); (2) a building process or activity

(building information modeling, meaning the act of creating a building information

model such as thinking, creating, scheduling and organization); and (3) a system

(building information management, meaning the business structures of work and

communication that increase quality and efficiency such as sharing, preservation,

querying the model, organization and maintaining) (NBIMS-US, 2007; Ahmad et al.,

2012; State of Ohio, 2010).

RIBA (2012) pointed out that BIM should be the abbreviation for ‗building information

management‘ and the term BIM(M) is alluding to ‗building information modeling and

management.‘ On the other hand, it must be known that there is no exact definition of

BIM; rather there are many ways of interpreting what BIM is. Khosrowshahi and

Arayici (2012) agreed with Eastman et al. (2011) and Hardin (2009) that BIM is defined

by various experts and organizations differently due to their perceptions, background,

and experiences. They defined it based on the specific way they work with BIM

(Abbasnejad and Moud, 2013).

BIM can be defined as the development and the use of a computer software model to

simulate the construction and operation of a facility. The resulting building information

11

model is a digital representation of physical and functional characteristics of a facility,

from which views appropriate to various users‘ needs. It serves as a shared knowledge

resource for information about a facility forming a reliable basis for decisions, as well

as supports collaboration between different stakeholders at different phases of the life

cycle (AGC, 2005; Smith, 2007; GSA, 2007; State of Ohio, 2010; NBIMS-US, 2012).

Gu and London (2010) had the same idea, where they said that BIM is an information

technology (IT) enabled approach that involves applying and maintaining an integral

digital representation of all building information for different phases of the project

lifecycle in the form of a data repository.

Dzambazova et al. (2009) defined BIM in a different way, which is the management of

information throughout the entire life cycle of a design process, from early conceptual

design through construction administration, and even into facilities. BIM, for some, is

merely a form of computable three-dimensional (3D) modeling (Ellis, 2006). Eastman

in the BIM Handbook, viewed BIM as more of human activity, i.e., modeling, instead of

seeing it as an object-oriented approach or being a particular software (Eastman et al.,

2011).

Smith et al. (2004) viewed BIM as an integrative process driven by 3D computable

digitized images and linked to Internet-based building cost information services.

Howard and Bjork (2008) emphasized on that by saying that BIM is the ability to

transfer information digitally throughout the construction process. Laiserin (2007)

participated in the same point of view, where Laiserin (2007) (cited in Schade et al.,

2011) defined BIM as a process to support communication (sharing data), collaboration

(acting on shared data), simulation (using data for prediction) and optimization (using

feedback to improve design, documentation and delivery).

From another point of view, Azhar (2011) agreed with Yan and Damin (2008) and

defined BIM as a new powerful technology, which has all the functions of 3D

computer-aided design (CAD) and constructs digitally an accurate virtual model of a

building. BIM has also been identified by the Causeway (2011) as a key component for

achieving the desired step change by transforming the information process right through

the life cycle of the built environment.

BIM can be defined with a more inclusive definition. For example, BIM can be defined

as the process of using information technology for sharing, modeling, evaluation,

collaboration, and management of a virtually building model within a building life cycle

(Ahmad et al., 2012). Hardin (2009) agreed with Smith and Tardiff (2009) and said that

BIM is a revolutionary CAD technology, and building process that has transformed the

way buildings are designed, analyzed, constructed, and managed. BIM model ties all the

components of a building together as objects embedded with information that tracks its

manufacture, cost, delivery, installation methods, labor costs, and maintenance (Smith

and Tardiff, 2009).

Building Smart (2010) defined BIM as a set of information that is structured in a way

that the data can be shared. BIM is a digital model of a building in which information

about a project is stored. It can be 3D; four-dimensional (4D) (integrating time); or even

five-dimensional (5D) (including cost); and right up to (nD) (a term that covers any

other information). Eastman et al. (2011) viewed BIM as a technology that constructs

digitally one or more accurate virtual models of a building to support design through its

12

phases, allowing better analysis and control than manual processes. These computer

generated models contain precise geometry and data needed to support the construction,

fabrication, and procurement activities through which the building is realized. In other

words, BIM, whether building information modeling or building information

management, is a technology that has improved the way structures are designed and

built. BIM, Therefore, for the purpose of this research, BIM can be defined through a

combination of multi-definitions, where it views as a managed process of using

information technology for collection, exploitation, and sharing of information on a

project. At its core is a computer-generated model that contains all the textual, graphical

and tabular data about the design, construction and operation of the facility. It is used

for modeling; simulation the construction; and evaluation. It supports collaboration;

operation of a facility; and management of a virtually building model within a building

life cycle (AGC, 2005; Smith, 2007; GSA, 2007; State of Ohio, 2010; NBIMS-US,

2012; Ahmad et al., 2012).

Features of BIM

Ahmad et al., (2012) identified seven keywords from 15 different definitions of BIM.

These keywords appeared at least three times in all the 15 different definitions of BIM.

The keywords were as follows: (a) Information; (b) Management; (c) Modeling; (d)

Process; (e) Technology; (f) Analysis; and (g) Collaboration. The keywords:

"Information"; "Modeling"; and "Process" had appeared more than any other feature of

BIM from the seven keywords.

Table (2.1) was tabulated by identifying the same previous seven keywords of Ahmad et

al. (2012), in addition to an eighth feature which is: "Simulation," which has appeared

in some BIM definitions as presented above. The total number of the definitions (that

have been shown above) is 16. The keywords appeared at least three times in all the last

16 different definitions of BIM.

Table (2.1): BIM features

BIM features

Reference

Info

rmat

ion

Man

agem

ent

Mo

del

ing

Sim

ula

tion

Pro

cess

Tec

hn

olo

gy

Anal

ysi

s

Coll

abo

rati

on

NBIMS-US (2007) √ √ √ √ √ √

State of Ohio (2010) √ √ √ √ √ √

AGC (2005) √ √ √

Smith (2007) √ √ √

GSA (2007) √ √ √

State of Ohio (2010) √ √ √

NBIMS-US (2012) √ √ √

Gu and London (2010) √ √ √

Dzambazova et al. (2008) √

Ellis (2006) √

Smith et al. (2004) √ √ √

Howard and Bjork (2008) √ √

Laiserin (2007) (cited in Schade et al., 2011) √ √ √

Azhar (2011) √ √ √

13

Table (2.1): BIM features

BIM features

Reference

Info

rmat

ion

Man

agem

ent

Mo

del

ing

Sim

ula

tion

Pro

cess

Tec

hn

olo

gy

Anal

ysi

s

Coll

abo

rati

on

Yan and Damin (2008) √ √ √

Causeway (2011) √ √ √

Ahmad et al. (2012) √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Hardin (2009) √ √ √ √ √

Smith and Tardiff (2009) √ √ √ √ √

Building Smart (2010) √ √ √ √

Eastman et al. (2011) √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Weygant (2011) √ √ √ √ √ √

2.1.2 Types of BIM

Many new terms, concepts and BIM applications have been developed such as 4D; 5D;

six-dimensional (6D); and seven-dimensional (7D). The (D) in the term of 3D BIM

means ―dimensional‖ and it has many different purposes for the construction industry.

Wang (2011) explained BIM types as the following:

3D: three-dimensional means the height, length, and width.

4D: 3D plus time for construction planning and project scheduling.

5D: 4D plus cost estimation.

6D: 5D plus site. This would require the integration of geographic information

system (GIS) and BIM. With the integration of GIS, all the items in the site model

would carry the exact location and elevation information (X, Y, Z) as they are in

the real construction world.

7D: BIM for life-cycle facility management.

Recent advances in BIM have disseminated the utilization of multidimensional nD CAD

information in the construction industry (Eastman et al., 2008; Jung and Joo, 2011). In

addition to the parametric properties of 3D BIM, the technology also has 4D and 5D

capabilities. Recent advancements in software have allowed contractors to add the

parameters of cost and scheduling to models to facilitate value engineering studies;

estimating and quantity take-offs; and even simulate project phasing (Holness, 2006).

2.1.3 The awareness level of BIM

There is a pressing demand for improved knowledge and understanding of BIM across

the AEC industry, according to many studies related to BIM. Lack of knowledge

regarding BIM has led to a slow uptake of this technology and ineffective management

of adoption (Mitchell and Lambert, 2013; NBS, 2013).

In general, many studies, such as Arayici et al. (2009); Khosrowshahi and Arayici

(2012); Elmualim and Gilder (2013); and Aibinu and Venkatesh (2014), concluded that

there is a lack of the awareness of BIM and its benefits in the field of construction

industry. They also found that there is a lack of the awareness of the business value of

BIM from a financial perspective. More precisely, there is a large lack of understanding

14

of BIM (the core concepts of BIM) and its practical applications throughout the life of

projects. There is also a lack of technical skills that professionals need to have for using

the BIM software as well as a lack of knowledge of how to implement the BIM software

to be helpful in construction processes.

In Hong Kong, Tse et al. (2005) revealed by research that BIM benefits were often

misunderstood or not known. Gu et al., (2008) and NBS (2012) said that BIM is quite

misunderstood across the board. Only 54% of the architectural practices are currently

aware of BIM (NBS, 2013). In the South Australian, Newton and Chileshe (2012) found

through their study that a significant proportion of respondents have little or no

understanding of the concept of BIM, and the usage was found to be very low. The

same finding was shown by Mitchell and Lambert (2013), where they said that people

in Australia suffer from a lack of knowledge about BIM and its distinctive capabilities

in the field of construction industry. Löf and Kojadinovic (2012) said that there is a

lack of guidelines on how to use and align BIM in the production phase of construction

projects in Sweden. Kassem et al. (2012) found through their study in the UK that there

is an overall lack of knowledge and understanding of what BIM is. Thurairajah and

Goucher (2013) study in the UK agreed with Kassem et al. (2012), but they found too

that cost consultants in the UK are aware of BIM.

On the contrary, there was an exception in a study conducted in Ireland by Crowley

(2013). It was directly relating to BIM awareness and use by quantity surveyors (QS)

profession. The outcomes of the questionnaire found that 73% of the sample (105

responses) were only aware of BIM without using it; 24% were aware of BIM and using

it in performing their job, and there was only 3% who were not aware of BIM.

2.1.4 How is BIM used?

At its most basic level, BIM provides three-dimensional visualization to owners. It also

used as a marketing tool for potential clients and designers can employ this technology

to demonstrate design ideas (Azhar et al., 2008a). Weygant (2011) viewed BIM as a

tool that is used for model analysis, clash detection, product selection, and whole project

conceptualization. Eastman et al. (2008) described the different uses of BIM in

construction as the followings:

A. 3D model

1. Model walkthroughs for both designers and contractors to identify and

resolve problems with the help of the model before walking on-site.

2. Clash detection; BIM enabled potential problems to be identified early in the

design phase and resolved before construction begins.

3. Project visualization provides a very useful and successful marketing tool by

making a simple schedule simulation of the building, which can show the

owner what the building will look like as construction progresses.

4. Virtual mock-up models; on large projects, BIM modeling enables virtual

mock-ups to be made for the owner for better understanding and making

decisions.

5. Prefabrication can be utilized greater with BIM. As a result, more

construction work can be performed offsite, cost efficiently, in controlled

factory conditions and then efficiently installed.

15

B. 4D time

1. Construction planning and management; BIM tools can be used to enhance

the planning and monitoring of health and safety precautions needed on-site

as the project progresses.

2. Schedule visualization; by watching the schedule visualization, project

members will be able to make decisions based upon multiple sources of

accurate real-time information.

C. 5D cost

1. Quantity take-offs; BIM model includes information that allows a contractor

to accurately and rapidly generate an array of essential estimating

information, such as materials; quantities and costs; size and area estimates.

As changes are made, estimating information automatically adjusts, allowing

greater contractor productivity.

2. Real-time cost estimating; In a BIM model, cost data can be added to each

object enabling the model to automatically calculate a rough estimate of

material costs. This enables designers to conduct value engineering.

D. 6D facilities management (FM)

1. Lifecycle management; BIM model that created by the designer and updated

throughout the construction phase, will have the capacity to become an ―as

built‖ model, which also can be delivered to the owner.

2. Data Capture; sensors can feedback and record data relevant to the

operation phase of a building, enabling BIM to be used to model and

evaluate energy efficiency, monitor a building's life cycle costs and optimize

its cost efficiency.

Likewise, Ashcraft (2008) presented how BIM is being used as follows: (1) single data

entry, multiple uses; (2) design accuracy; (3) consistent design bases (4) 3D modeling;

(5) conflict identification and resolution; (6) take-offs and estimating; (7) shop and

fabrication drawing; (8) visualization of alternative solutions and options; (9) energy

optimization; (10) constructability reviews and 4D simulations; (11) control fabrication

costs and errors; (12) facilities management; and (13) functional simulations.

Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011) assessed the current status of BIM implementation in

facility management (FM), potential applications, and the level of interest in the

utilization of BIM through face-to-face interviews that conducted with the support of

the FM group at the University of Southern California (USC) as well as an online

survey. Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011) recognized the application areas of FM that can be

implemented by BIM and can be beneficial as follow: (1) locating building component;

(2) facilitating real-time data access; (3) visualization and marketing; (4) checking

maintainability, where these maintainability studies can address the following areas:

accessibility, sustainability of materials, and preventive maintenance; (5) creating and

updating digital assets; (6) space management; (7) planning and feasibility studies for

non-capital construction; (8) emergency management; (9) controlling and monitoring

energy; and (10) personnel training and development.

Ku and Taiebat (2011), furthermore, investigated by an online survey among national

and regional U.S. construction companies to establish baseline information of the

16

current level of BIM implementations and capabilities of construction companies. Ku

and Taiebat (2011) found that companies utilize BIM in the following domain areas of

construction management: (1) constructability and visualization (the most used aspects

of BIM in all companies), where constructability tasks included clash detection for trade

coordination; (2) site planning; (3) database information management; (4) model-based

estimating; (5) cost control; and (6) 4D scheduling.

The Pennsylvania State University BIM execution planning guide defined twenty-five

distinct BIM functions. Branching into the specialist areas of BIM, one could argue that

there are much more. Building SMART International currently has over one hundred

BIM activities defined as individual information delivery manuals. Regardless of how

they are defined, BIM functions can be roughly grouped into five categories as shown in

Table (2.2) (Baldwin, 2012).

Table (2.2): Examples of BIM functions; (Source: Baldwin, 2012)

Category Examples of BIM functions

Design existing conditions modeling, spatial programming, model authoring, design

coordination

Analysis structural analysis, energy analysis, lighting analysis, model auditing, code

checking

Construction site utilization, construction sequencing 4D, cost estimation 5D, digital

fabrication, BIM-to-filed

Operation asset and space management, maintenance scheduling, facility expansion

Data

management

collaborative platforms, change management, issue reporting and tracking,

managing metadata, linking databases, interoperability and file exchange.

Gray et al. (2013) reported, through an electronic survey, patterns of BIM usage in

Australia and internationally (Korea, China, Indonesia, the United Kingdom (UK),

Canada, Brazil, India and the United States of America (USA). These patterns included

disciplinary users; project life cycle stages; technology integration including software

compatibility; and organizational issues such as human resources and interoperability.

The list of BIM uses included: (1) design visualization; (2) design assistance and

constructability review; (3) site planning and site utilization; (4) scheduling and

sequencing (4D); (5) cost estimating (5D); (6) integration of subcontractors and supplier

models; (7) systems coordination; (8) layout and fieldwork; (9) prefabrication; and (10)

operations and maintenance (including as-built records).

On the other hand, in Korea, Lee et al. (2014) summarized tasks that grounded under

the construction industry and can utilize BIM as follows: (1) 3D visualization

(Architectural/ Structural/ Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing (MEP)); (2) clash

detection; (3) feasibility studies; (4) model-based quantity take-off and estimation; (5)

visualized scheduling 4D management; (6) environmental analysis or LEED

certification (energy efficiency/ sunshine/ CO2 emission analysis); (7) creation of shop

drawings and schedule management for installation of rebar/steel frame/curtain wall; (8)

visualized constructability review (material lifting operation planning/ temporary

resources installation); (9) visual and geospatial coordination for construction of

atypical shapes; and (10) creation of as-built model for facility management.

Based on the above, it can be said that BIM has a broad range of application: right cross

the design; construction; and operation process. It is often impractical for any single

BIM user to have expertise in all areas; nevertheless, it is important to be aware of the

17

areas of application and thus be able to select which BIM functions are most applicable

to one‘s own business (Baldwin, 2012). BIM is transforming the way that used by

Architects, Engineers, contractors, and other building professionals in the industry today

(Mandhar and Mandhar, 2013). Table (2.3) summarized the BIM functions according to

items that have been presented above.

Table (2.3): Summary of BIM functions

No. BIM Function Authors

A. Design

1 3D modeling Ashcraft (2008); Eastman et al. (2008);

Baldwin (2012)

2

3D model for walkthroughs/

visualization for designers

(Architecture/ Structure/ MEP)

Ashcraft (2008); Eastman et al. (2008);

Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); Ku and Taiebat

(2011); Gray et al. (2013); Lee et al. (2014)

3 Functional simulations Ashcraft (2008)

4 Virtual mock-up models on large

projects

Eastman et al. (2008)

5

Spatial programming/ Visual and

geospatial coordination for construction

of atypical shapes

Baldwin ( 2012); Lee et al. (2014)

6 Creating and updating digital assets Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); Baldwin (2012)

7 Design assistance Gray et al. (2013)

8 Consistent design bases Ashcraft (2008)

9 Feasibility studies/ feasibility studies for

non-capital construction

Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); Lee et al. (2014)

B. Analysis

10 Structural analysis Baldwin ( 2012)

11 Lighting analysis Baldwin ( 2012); Lee et al. (2014)

12

Environmental analysis or LEED

certification (energy efficiency/

sunshine/ CO2 emission analysis)

Baldwin ( 2012); Lee et al. (2014)

13 Model auditing Baldwin ( 2012)

14 Code checking Baldwin ( 2012)

C. Construction

15 3D model walkthroughs/ visualization

for contractors


16

Visualized constructability reviews

(material lifting operation planning/

temporary resources installation)

Ashcraft (2008); Eastman et al. (2008); Ku

and Taiebat (2011); Gray et al. (2013); Lee et

al. (2014)

17 Prefabrication Eastman et al. (2008); Gray et al. (2013)

18

4D scheduling and sequencing (4D

simulations)

Eastman et al. (2008); Ku and Taiebat (2011);

Baldwin ( 2012); Gray et al. (2013); Lee et al.

(2014)

19 Cost estimation 5D Eastman et al. (2008); Baldwin ( 2012); Gray

et al. (2013)

20 Site planning and site utilization/

Layout and fieldwork

Ku and Taiebat (2011); Baldwin ( 2012); Gray

et al. (2013)

21 Planning and monitoring of health and

safety precautions needed on-site


22 Control fabrication costs and errors Ashcraft (2008); Ku and Taiebat (2011)

18

Table (2.3): Summary of BIM functions

No. BIM Function Authors

23

Model-based quantity take-offs

estimating information such as

materials; quantities and costs; size and

area estimates

Ashcraft (2008); Eastman et al. (2008); Ku

and Taiebat (2011); Lee et al. (2014)

24 Clash detection/ conflict identification

and resolution

Ashcraft (2008); Ku and Taiebat (2011); Lee

et al. (2014)

25 Shop and fabrication drawing Ashcraft (2008); Lee et al. (2014)

26 Integration of subcontractors and

supplier models

Gray et al. (2013)

D. Operation

27 Creation of as-built model for facility/

lifecycle management

Ashcraft (2008); Eastman et al. (2008); Lee et

al. (2014)

28 Locating building component Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011)

29 Marketing tool Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011)

30 Asset and space management Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); Baldwin (2012)

31 Facility expansion Baldwin ( 2012)

32 Emergency management Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011)

33

Checking maintainability (accessibility,

sustainability of materials, and

preventive maintenance)/ Maintenance

scheduling

Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); Baldwin (2012);

Gray et al. (2013)

34 Controlling and monitoring energy

efficiency

Ashcraft (2008); Eastman et al. (2008);

Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011)

35 Monitor a building's life cycle costs and

optimize its cost efficiency


36 Coordination of systems Gray et al. (2013)

37 Personnel training and development Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011)

E. Data Management

38 Single data entry multiple uses Ashcraft (2008)

39 Data capture; issue reporting and

tracking

Eastman et al. (2008); Baldwin ( 2012)

40 Database information management Ku and Taiebat (2011); Baldwin ( 2012)

41 Managing metadata Baldwin ( 2012)

42 Interoperability and file exchange Baldwin ( 2012); Gray et al. (2013)

43 Facilitating real-time data access Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011)

44 Collaborative platforms Baldwin ( 2012)

45 Change Management CRC construction innovation (2007); Baldwin

(2012)

2.2 Impact of BIM in the AEC/ FM industry

BIM reflects the current heightened transformation within the AEC industry and the FM

sector, offering a host of benefits from increased efficiency, accuracy, speed,

coordination, consistency, energy analysis, project cost reduction etc., to various

stakeholders from owners to Architects, Engineers, contractors and other built

environment professionals (Mandhar and Mandhar, 2013). BIM has far reaching

benefits in the AEC/FM industry in supporting and improving business practices

compared to traditional practices that are paper-based or two-dimensional (2D) CAD

(Eastman et al., 2011). BIM is becoming more and more necessary to manage complex

communication and information sharing processes in collaborative building projects.

BIM serves all the stakeholders, (e.g.: designer, contractor, owner and facility manager),

19

in designing, constructing, forecasting and budgeting (Weygant, 2011). A growing

number of design, engineering, and construction firms have made attempts to adopt

BIM to enhance their services and products (Sebastian and Berlo, 2010; Aibinu and

Venkatesh, 2013).

The adoption of BIM by the development community indicates an acceptance of its use

and acknowledgment of its potential to improve the integration between procurement

decisions and actual operational issues (Lorch, 2012). BIM comprises collaboration

frameworks and technologies for integrating process and object-oriented information

throughout the life cycle of the building in a multi-dimensional model (Sebastian and

Berlo, 2010). Utilization of BIM requires collaboration among the contracting parties

such as owners, Architects, Engineers, contractors, and facilities managers (Eastman et

al., 2011).

The use of BIM can increase the value of a building, shorten the project duration,

provide reliable cost estimates, produce market-ready facilities, and optimize facility

management and maintenance (Eastman et al., 2011). Sarno (2012) explored in greater

detail how various activities, grouped under the term ‗project lifecycle management‘

can be consistently linked to BIM. By integrating BIM with construction project

management and infrastructure lifecycle management (ILM) solutions, project

stakeholders can gain new efficiencies across the entire project lifecycle. In addition to

that, BIM model helps owners to achieve more control and more savings through the

use of BIM in project design and construction (Eastman et al., 2011).

For the AEC industry, BIM has been one of the most promising developments of our

times as it allows for the creation of an accurate virtual model containing precise

geometry and other relevant information aiding in modeling the entire lifecycle of a

building (Eastman et al., 2011). BIMs contain a rich information model (geometric,

topology and semantic details) related to the life cycle of a facility, and enable enhanced

communication, coordination, analysis, and quality control (McGraw-Hill Construction,

2008). The color of BIM is green, where using it properly will cut project time and

thereby energy use, as well as cost. BIM will reduce the waste of materials during

construction and building management and eventually assist in sustainable demolition.

Energy modeling can also minimize energy use over a building‘s life (Kolpakov, 2012).

BIM models allow for a previously unimaginable array of collaborative activities;

integrated inter-disciplinary design review, multi-model coordination and clash

detection, and real-time integration with other specialist disciplines for cost estimation,

construction management, etc. (Karlshøj, 2012).

2.2.1 Possible benefits of BIM adoption in the AEC/ FM industry

BIM benefits have been the subject of several research studies. The key benefit of BIM

is its accurate geometrical representation of the parts of a building in an integrated data

environment (CRC Construction Innovation, 2007). Barlish and Sullivan (2012)

provided a framework calculation model to determine the value of BIM. The developed

model is applied via three case studies within a large industrial setting where similar

projects are evaluated, some implementing BIM and some with traditional, non-BIM

approaches. Cost or investment metrics were considered along with benefit or return

metrics. The return metrics were: requests for information (RFIs); change orders; and

duration improvements. The investment metrics were: design and construction costs.

20

The findings indicated that there is a high potential for BIM benefits to be realized.

Actual returns and investments will vary with each project.

From their point of view, Azhar et al. (2008a) and Azhar et al. (2008b) represented

benefits of BIM as follows:

1. Faster and more effective processes: information is more easily shared; can be

value-added and reused.

2. Better design: building proposals can be rigorously analyzed; simulations can be

performed quickly and performance benchmarked; enabling improved and

innovative solutions.

3. Controlled whole-life costs and environmental data: environmental performance

is more predictable; lifecycle costs are better understood.

4. Better production quality: documentation output is flexible and exploits

automation.

5. Automated assembly: digital product data can be exploited in downstream

processes and be used for manufacturing/assembling of structural systems.

6. Better customer service: proposals are better understood through accurate

visualization.

7. Lifecycle data: requirements, design, construction and operational information

can be used in facilities management.

Allen Consulting Group (2010) has highlighted the potential benefits to be gained from

the adoption of BIM technology. These included the following: (a) improved

information sharing; (b) enhanced productivity through time and cost savings; (c)

improved quality; (d) increased sustainability; (e) support decision making; and (f) labor

market improvements.

Fast and simple material quantity take-offs represent an efficient method of checks and

balances and often reduce bidding time (Holness, 2006). The BIM users‘ perception

concerning the benefits of BIM features to Quantity Surveyors (QS), (also referred to as

cost consultants or cost Engineers), was investigated in Australia by Aibinu and

Venkatesh (2013). Data collected from a web-based survey of 180 QS firms with 40

responses and two in-depth interviews. Findings from the study showed that: (1) time

savings is the most important perceived benefit nominated by 80% of the respondents. It

reduces labor intensive quantity take-off and increases the ability to identify and advise

the design team on elements exceeding the cost target. Other benefits listed are (2)

increasing visualization (nominated by 40% of respondents), and (3) increasing

productivity (nominated by 20% of the respondents).

Likewise, and based on structured interviews with the quantity surveyors in Auckland,

Stanley and Thurnell (2014) found that 5D BIM provides advantages over traditional

forms of quantity surveying by increasing efficiency, improving visualization of

construction details, and earlier risk identification. More precisely, Stanley and Thurnell

(2014) pointed out that benefits of 5D BIM for quantity surveying can sum up in: (1)

increasing visualization; (2) enhancing collaboration on projects as people need to work

together to make the models effective; (3) improving project quality and BIM data

quality; (4) making project conceptualization easier; (5) increasing analysis capability;

(6) improving efficiency of take-offs during budget estimate stage; (7) improving

efficiency of cost planning during detailed cost plan stage; (8) improving risk

21

identification to be available in earlier stage; (9) increasing ability to resolve requests

for information (RFIs) in real time; and (10) improving estimating and project options.

Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012), in a questionnaire survey amongst the major

contractors in the UK and interviews with high profile organizations in Finland geared

toward establishing issues can be overcome by BIM implementation, recognized the

following eight benefits: (1) reduce error, rework and waste for better sustainability for

design and construction; (2) improve risk management; (3) removal of waste from

process; (4) improve lean construction and design; (5) improve the whole lifecycle asset

management, better facility management/asset management; (6) ability to better deal

with client made changes to the design and the lifecycle implications of these; (7)

gaining supply-chain support in producing documentation and supply-chain skill set;

and (8) construction management appreciation of the use of technology.

Newton and Chileshe (2012) conducted a study to achieve two objectives which are

related to BIM awareness and benefits among the stakeholders of the South Australian

construction industry. A field study was conducted with a randomly selected sample of

twenty-nine construction organizations. Ten of BIM benefits were used, and survey

response data were collected using structured questionnaires. About the awareness and

usage, the findings indicated that a significant proportion of respondents have little or

no understanding of the concept of BIM and the usage was found to be very low. The

benefits summed up in (a) improved constructability; (b) improved visualization; (c)

improved productivity; and (d) reduced clashes as the highly ranked benefits associated

with BIM adoption.

2.2.2 Benefits of BIM during design, construction, facilities and operations, and

maintenance of a building project

This section of exploring the previous studies, which related to BIM, looks at the

various benefits of using BIM and shows how much the various stakeholders can gain

from going beyond the traditional 2D CAD approach throughout the different stages of

construction (preconstruction, design, fabrication and construction, and post

construction as operation and maintenance). Eastman, in the BIM Handbook, described

BIM as an innovative way to preconstruction; design; construction; and post

construction of a building project in comparison to the traditional way of drawing

(Eastman et al., 2008; 2011). Table (2.4) summarized BIM benefits according to

Eastman et al. (2008; 2011).


construction of a building project; (Eastman et al., 2008; 2011)

BIM benefits A. Preconstruction benefits to owner

1. The concept, feasibility, and design benefits

2. Increased building performance and quality

3. Improved collaboration using integrated project delivery

B. Design benefits 1. Earlier and more accurate visualizations of design 2. Automatic low-level corrections when changes are made to design 3. Generation of accurate and consistent 2D drawings at any stage of the design 4. The earlier collaboration of multiple design disciplines 5. Easy verification of consistency to the design intent

22


construction of a building project; (Eastman et al., 2008; 2011)

BIM benefits 6. Extraction of cost estimates during the design stage 7. Improvement of energy efficiency and sustainability

C. Construction and fabrication benefits

1. Use of design model as a basis for fabricated components 2. Quick reaction to design changes 3. Discovery of design errors and omissions before construction 4. Synchronization of design and construction planning 5. Better implementation of lean construction techniques

6. Synchronization of procurement with design and construction

D. Post construction benefits

1. Improved commissioning and handover of facility information

2. Better management and operation of facilities

3. Integration with facility operation and management systems

2.2.2.1 BIM benefits related to the design phase of a project

The construction industry is widely being criticized as a fragmented industry. There are

mounting calls for the industry to change and to use technologies that enable to integrate

processes of design, construction, and across the supply chain. According to that, a

questionnaire survey conducted by Elmualim and Gilder (2013) to ascertain the change

in the construction industry concerning design management, innovation, and the

application of BIM as cutting edge pathways for collaboration. The questionnaire

survey was distributed and answered by respondents in the UK with other respondents

representing Europe, USA, India, Ghana, China, Russia, South Africa, Australia,

Canada, Malaysia and United Arab Emirates (UAE). The respondents to the survey

were from an array of designations across the construction industry such as construction

managers, designers, Engineers, design coordinators, design managers, Architects,

Architectural Technologists, and Surveyors. As a result, there was a general agreement

by most respondents that the design team was responsible for design management in

their organization and BIM technologies provide a new paradigm shift in the way

buildings are designed, constructed, and maintained. This paradigm shift calls for

rethinking the curriculum for educating building professionals, collectively.

With BIM, efficiencies through the design process are becoming clearer. The biggest

single gain would seem to be simple coordination of components using clash detection

software combined with a virtual build, which means mistakes are identified before

work commences on site. BIM will also demand increased attention to the selection of

components at the earliest stage (Lorimer, 2011). The client can get a better scope and

nature of the design and construction with BIM visualization (Ahmad et al., 2012).

Traditionally, quantity take-offs and cost estimating occur late in the design stages. The

use of BIM enables these estimates to occur early on and to be continuously updated as

changes are made to the model (Ashcraft, 2008).

The different stakeholders can find benefits from using BIM. The model developed

using BIM helps owners visualize the spatial organization of the building as well as

understand the sequence of construction activities and project duration (Eastman et al.,

2011). Architects benefit from BIM‘s capability of creating 3D renderings, graphically

accurate models, and sets of construction documents. The use of BIM prevents costly

delays due to inaccurate drawings. The Architects can use the as-built models if they

23

need to work on the renovation, addition, or alteration of a building. BIM is also

beneficial to the design and installation of MEP services on any construction project

systems as well as their coordination with other building systems. The adoption of BIM

can also help Civil Engineers to quickly analyze and compare several design

alternatives (Holness, 2006).

Decisions early in the design process have a significant impact on the life cycle

performance of a building and with the rising cost of energy and growing environmental

concerns; the demand for sustainable buildings with minimal environmental impact is

increasing (Schade et al., 2011; Azhar and Brown, 2009). According to that, Schade et

al. (2011) proposed a decision-making framework using a performance-based design

process in the early design phase. It is developed to support decision-makers to take

informed decisions regarding the life cycle performance of a building. The benefits of

this BIM-based design include that such information as building geometry, structure,

material, installation and functional use is stored in the BIM model. This BIM-based

design reduces time and cost for analysis of energy performance for the building. Upon

to energy savings, Park et al. (2012) in Korea sought to build a BIM-based system that

can assess the energy performance of buildings.

In recent years there is a global trend towards sustainable development in the AEC

industry (Cheng and Ma, 2013). The crossover between sustainability and BIM is

significant. Both seek to reduce waste, optimize building performance, and promote

lean construction and integrate practices. Consequently, there is a tremendous advantage

in the integration of green and BIM processes, however, as both domains are broad

(covering design to operation); complex (engaging virtually every discipline in the

construction process); and continually developing, this is no easy undertaking

(Kolpakov, 2012). The combination of sustainable design strategies and BIM

technology has the potential to change the traditional design practices and to produce a

high-performance facility design (Azhar and Brown, 2009). One such effort on the

Columbia campus of the University of South Carolina resulted in approximately

$900,000 savings over the next ten years at current energy costs (Gleeson, 2008) (cited

in Azhar and Brown, 2009).

Krygiel et al. (2008) indicated that BIM could aid in the following aspects of

sustainable design: (1) building orientation (to select the best building orientation that

results in minimum energy costs); (2) building massing (to analyze building form and

optimize the building envelope); (3) daylighting analysis, water harvesting (to reduce

water needs in a building); (4) energy modeling (to reduce energy needs and analyze

renewable energy options such as solar energy); and (5) sustainable materials (to reduce

material needs and to use recycled materials).

In the same context, Azhar and Brown (2009), through his study, sought to achieve

many objectives. One of them was to determine the current state and benefits of BIM-

based sustainability analyses. Necessary data were collected via a (1) questionnaire

survey, which was distributed via a web-based service; (2) a case study; and (3) semi-

structured interviews. Azhar and Brown (2009) found that the most common analyses

were found to be: (1) energy analysis; (2) daylighting; (3) solar analysis; (4) building

orientation analysis; (5) massing analysis; and (6) site analysis.

24

On the other hand, one of the most important features of the BIM for designers is the

possibility of integration with GIS. Abukhater (2013) summarized benefits of this

integration as follows: (1) manage end-to-end planning and design workflows; (2)

generate, visualize and evaluate planning alternatives in the context of the real world;

and (3) perform what-if analysis integrating 2D and 3D data. In his paper, Irizarry et al.

(2013) presented an integrated BIM-GIS system for visualizing the supply chain process

and the actual status of materials through the supply chain (manifesting the flow of

materials, availability of resources, and ―map‖ of the respective supply chains visually).

BIM has the capability to accurately provide a detailed takeoff in an early phase of the

procurement process, and GIS supports the wide range of spatial analysis that used in

the logistics perspective (warehousing and transportation) of the construction supply

chain management (CSCM).

2.2.2.2 BIM benefits during the construction phase

Although much focus has been given to designer‘s use of BIM, contractors are also

using BIM to support various construction management (CM) functions (Nepal et al.,

2012). Ahmad et al. (2012) said that BIM is used more (higher percentage of use) on the

construction compare to the design phase; perhaps BIM is effective in achieving quality

and efficiency in construction management. Farnsworth et al. (2014) emphasized that

BIM has become an integral part of commercial construction processes in recent years.

Through a survey over the phone with participants for asking them a series of questions

about BIM use within their companies, Farnsworth et al. (2014) explored the

advantages and effects of using BIM within commercial construction by each of the

different employee levels. The top advantages of using BIM were as follows: (1)

improve communication; (2) more accurate scheduling; (3) improve coordination; (4)

improve visualization; (5) clash detection; (6) more accurate cost estimation; and (7)

performing quantity takeoffs accurately.

Regarding the effects of using BIM, companies reported a positive impact on

profitability, time of construction, and marketing. According to a survey conducted by

McGraw-Hill Construction in 2009, BIM enables a transparent, legitimate, and

collaborative process by differentiating competitors, decreasing project duration and

cost, and increasing productivity and return on investment. Seventy-three percent of

users felt that BIM had a positive impact on their companies‘ productivity. The more

experienced the user, the more valuable the BIM process because the company can

efficiently utilize all of the benefits of BIM (McGraw-Hill Construction, 2009). Add to

that, Weygant (2011); Succar (2009); Hardin (2009); Eastman et al. (2008, 2011);

agreed that 4D and 5D modeling help clients and contractors in making informed

decisions, by estimation, coordination and scheduling the construction process.

Holness (2006), furthermore, explained that the use of clash detection through BIM

helps to resolve conflicts early in the design stage, that is, before construction starts. As

a result, change orders due to design errors are virtually avoided. A schedule of

construction activities can be accurately prepared and visualized using BIM. As the

model developed using BIM is up-to-date and limits errors due to miscommunication

between Architects, Engineers, and constructors, cost estimation is also more accurate.

Nassar (2010) examined the effect that BIM can have on the accuracy of project

estimates in terms of time and cost. An analytical approach was taken to quantify the

potential increase in accuracy. The results proved that BIM would increase the precision

25

and accuracy of the quantity aspect of the estimate and it may very well also impact the

precision and accuracy of the productivity aspect.

The construction industry engagement with BIM has primarily been in the use as a

common platform for information exchange between a multitude of professionals,

suppliers, and constructors. This engagement typically involves a shared model for a

proposed design with inputs from various team members. This BIM model enhances

and accelerates the dialogue between various team members (Lorch, 2012). Lin (2014),

in his paper, addressed the application of knowledge management in the construction

phase of construction projects and prepossessed a construction BIM-based knowledge

management (CBIMKM) system for general contractors. The CBIMKM is applied in

selected case studies of a construction building project in Taiwan to demonstrate the

effectiveness of sharing knowledge in the 3D environment. By applying the BIM

approach, all participants in a project can share and reuse explicit and tacit knowledge

through the 3D CAD-based knowledge map.

According to a report conducted in 2009 by McGraw-Hill Construction, 80% of

contractors in the UK believed that sustainable waste management would become an

important practice by 2014; an increase of 19% compared to five years ago (McGraw-

Hill Research and Analytics, 2009). Cheng and Ma (2013) developed a waste estimation

system leveraging the BIM technology. This system can not only serve as a waste

estimation tool before demolition or renovation but also serve as a tool to calculate

waste disposal charging fee and pickup truck requirements.

Furthermore, the growing implementation of BIM in the AEC/FM industry is changing

the way that safety can be approached. Significant time and economic resources are lost

when workers are injured on the job sites (Zhang et al., 2013). Zhang and Hu (2011), in

their study, proposed a new approach for conflict and safety analysis during

construction through the integration of construction simulation, 4D construction

management, and safety analysis. It presented by a 4D structural information model,

which combines the advantages of 4D technology and BIM and it provides an accurate

representation of construction procedure, as well as any changing of the construction

plan. Moreover, all construction activities are involved in the proposed information

model, therefore supporting 4D dynamic structural safety analysis.

Later, Qi et al. (2013) conducted research to explore how BIM technology can be used

to enhance construction worker safety. They were developed using the BIM server and

Solibri model checker software platforms respectively. This research contributed to the

body of knowledge by developing these application tools which can be used to

automatically check for fall hazards in building information models and in providing

design alternatives to users. They can be used by Architects/Engineers during the design

process or by constructors before commencing construction work. In addition to that,

Zhang et al. (2013) outlined a framework for a rule-based checking system for safety

planning and simulation by integrating BIM and safety. It was developed based on

occupational safety and health administration (OSHA)'s fall protection rules and other

construction best practices in safety and health. The automated safety-rule model

checker showed the very good capability of practical applications in building modeling

and planning of work tasks related to fall protection.

26

2.2.2.3 BIM benefits during facilities, operations and maintenance of a building

project

BIM is also used in managing existing facilities, by fully modeling and linking the

structure to the virtual model. By this way, energy consumption and operational faults

can be detected from the model for management purposes. The Sydney-Opera House is

currently managed using a BIM model for FM (Ahmad et al., 2012). BIM holds

promise for creating value for owners and facilities management organizations, where

the information collected through a BIM process and stored in a BIM compliant

database could be beneficial for a variety of FM practices. There is a growing interest in

the use of BIM in FM for coordinated, consistent, and computable building information/

knowledge management from design to construction to maintenance and operation

stages of a building‘s life cycle (Becerik-Gerber et al., 2011). BIFM (2012) reported

some views of some of the experts in the field of construction about the benefits of BIM

for FM. They all agreed that having the building information through BIM model to do

moves and changes is something that would be very useful to a facilities manager. It

would make the maintenance strategy easier, improve collaboration, and save time and

costs.

The advantages of BIM in the construction industry include support for graphic

elements and a data management environment. BIM not only provides information

related to quantity, cost, schedule, and material inventory to aid prompt decision-

making, but also allows data analysis that takes into consideration the specific structure

and environment (Choi, 2010; Lee et al., 2009; Lee et al., 2007; Smart Market Report,

2012) (cited in Lee et al., 2014). BIM applications are being rapidly embraced by the

construction industry to reduce cost, time, and enhance quality as well as environmental

sustainability (Ku and Taiebat, 2011). BIM results in a faster and more cost-effective

project delivery process, and higher quality buildings that perform at reduced costs

(Eastman et al., 2011). Table (2.5) summarized the BIM benefits according to items that

have been presented above.

Table (2.5): Summary of BIM benefits

No. BIM Benefit Authors

A. BIM benefits related to the design phase of a project

1 Concept becomes clearer, and project

conceptualization becomes easier to owner

Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Stanley and

Thurnell (2014)

2 Earlier and more accurate visualizations of

a design to the owner for better

understanding of proposals

Azhar et al. (2008a); Azhar et al. (2008b);

Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Ahmad et al.

(2012); Newton and Chileshe (2012);

Stanley and Thurnell (2014)

3 Support decision making regarding the

design

Allen Consulting Group (2010)

4 Improve feasibility studies Eastman et al. (2008, 2011)

5 Improve simulations (performed quickly ) Azhar et al. (2008a); Azhar et al. (2008b)

6 Improve design quality and verify

consistency to the design intent easily,

which prevents expensive delays

Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Holness

(2006)

7 Improve the design and installation of

MEP services on any construction project

systems as well as their coordination with

other building systems

Holness (2006)

27



8 Increase analysis capability for building

proposals



9 Improve lean design Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012)

10 Improve sustainability: (reduce waste; use

recycled materials; optimize building

performance and quality; promote lean

construction and integrated practices)

Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Krygiel et al.

(2008); (Gleeson, 2008) (cited in Azhar,

2009); Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012);

Park et al. (2012); Kolpakov (2012)

11 Improve energy efficiency and

sustainability analysis such as: energy

analysis; day lighting; solar analysis;

building orientation analysis; massing

analysis (to analyze building form and

optimize the building envelope); water

harvesting; and site analysis

Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Krygiel et al.

(2008); Azhar and Brown (2009); Allen

Consulting Group (2010)

12 Reduce time and cost for analysis of

energy performance for the building due to

the information of the building that stored

in BIM models such as building geometry,

structure, material, installation and

functional use

Gleeson (2008) (cited in Azhar and

Brown, 2009); Schade et al. (2011)

13 Improve the performance of the Architect

and Civil Engineer; enabling improved and

innovative solutions and use the as-built

models for renovation, addition, or

alteration of a building


Allen Consulting Group (2010); Lorimer

(2011); Holness (2006)

14 Integration between BIM and GIS for

managing end-to-end planning and design

workflows; visualizing and evaluating

planning alternatives in the context of the

real world; performing what-if analysis

integrating 2D and 3D data; and support

the wide range of spatial analysis

Abukhater (2013); Irizarry et al. (2013)

15 Improve earlier collaboration of multiple

design disciplines using integrated project

delivery

Eastman et al. (2008, 2011)

16 Save design time and costs Barlish and Sullivan (2012); Aibinu and

Venkatesh (2013)

17 Improve identifying mistakes before work

commences on site, where corrections can

be set automatically when changes are

made to design and coordinate components

simply using clash detection software with

a virtual build

Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Lorimer

(2011)

18 Increase attention to the selection of the

construction components at the earliest

stage

Lorimer (2011)

19 Earlier quantity takeoffs and cost

estimating during the design stages with

continuously updating as changes are

made to the model

Ashcraft (2008); Eastman et al. (2008,

2011)

28



B. BIM benefits during the construction and fabrication phase

20 Improve understanding the sequence of

construction activities and project duration


21 Improve visualization of construction

details

Aibinu and Venkatesh (2013); Farnsworth

et al. (2014)

22 Improve synchronization of design and

construction planning


23 Improve synchronization of procurement

with design and construction


24 Improve supply-chain process Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012)

25 Improve constructability Newton and Chileshe (2012)

26 Improve prefabricated components Eastman et al. (2008, 2011)

27 Improve risk identification (risk

management) to be available in earlier

stage before construction

Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Khosrowshahi

and Arayici (2012); Stanley and Thurnell

(2014)

28 Improve safety Zhang et al. (2013)

29 Improve quality and efficiency in

construction management

Ahmad et al. (2012); Khosrowshahi and

Arayici (2012)

30 Improve project quality and BIM digital

data quality



31 Increase the ability to resolve requests for

information (RFIs) in real time

Barlish and Sullivan (2012); Stanley and

Thurnell (2014)

32 Improve the ability of contractors to make

informed decisions, by estimation,

coordination and scheduling the

construction process

Hardin (2009); Succar (2009); Eastman et

al. (2008, 2011); Weygant (2011)

33 Reduce project duration and cost of

construction

McGraw-Hill Construction (2009);

Eastman et al. (2011); Barlish and Sullivan

(2012); Barlish and Sullivan (2012)

34 Enhance productivity through time and

cost savings

McGraw-Hill Construction (2009); Allen

Consulting Group (2010); Nassar (2010);

Newton and Chileshe (2012); Aibinu and

Venkatesh (2013)

35 More accurate scheduling Holness (2006); Farnsworth et al. (2014)

36 More accurate cost estimation Holness (2006); Farnsworth et al. (2014);


37 Better implementation of lean construction

techniques

Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Khosrowshahi

and Arayici (2012)

38 Reduce error, rework, and waste for better

sustainability for construction

Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012)

39 Improve calculation of waste disposal

before demolition or renovation

Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012);

Kolpakov (2012); Cheng and Ma (2013)

40 Improve communication (information

exchange among stakeholders)

Lin (2012); Lorch (2012); Farnsworth et al.

(2014)

41 Improve coordination and enhance

collaboration on projects as people need to

work together with transparency and

legitimacy to make effective models

McGraw-Hill Construction (2009); Lorch

(2012); Farnsworth et al. (2014); Stanley

and Thurnell (2014)

42 Improve labor market Allen Consulting Group (2010); Aibinu and

Venkatesh (2013)

43 Improve efficiency of quantity take-offs

during budget estimate stage

Nassar (2010); Farnsworth et al. (2014);


29



44 Quick reaction to design changes (change

orders improvement)

Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Barlish and

Sullivan (2012)

45 Clash detection (reduce clashes)

Holness (2006); Newton and Chileshe

(2012); Farnsworth et al. (2014)

C. BIM benefits during facilities, operations, and maintenance of a building project

46 Improve the control of the whole-life

environmental data and make an accurate

geometrical representation of the parts of a

building in an integrated data environment

CRC Construction Innovation (2007);

Azhar et al. (2008a); Azhar et al. (2008b)

47 Information/ knowledge of a building's life

cycle (Design; Construction; Maintenance

and Operation) can be shared more easily


Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Allen

Consulting Group (2010); Becerik-Gerber

et al. (2011)

48 Improve collaboration BIFM (2012)

49 Improve the quality of the whole life cycle

asset/ FM by fully modeling and linking

the structure to the virtual model


Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Becerik-

Gerber et al. (2011); Ahmad et al.(2012);

BIFM (2012); Ku and Taiebat (2011);

Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012);

50 Reduce time and cost of FM operations Eastman et al. (2011); Ku and Taiebat

(2011); BIFM (2012)

51 Support decision-makers in taking prompt

informed decisions regarding the life cycle

performance of a building, where BIM

provides information related to quantity,

cost, schedule, and material inventory

Schade et al. (2011); Lee et al. (2007); Lee

et al. (2009); Choi (2010); Smart Market

Report (2012) (cited in Lee et al., 2014)

52 Enhance environmental sustainability Ku and Taiebat (2011)

53 Make the maintenance strategy of building

easier

Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); BIFM (2012)

54 Improve the control of the whole-life costs CRC Construction Innovation (2007);

Azhar et al. (2008a); Azhar et al. (2008b)

55 Improve emergency management Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011)

2.3 Slow adoption of BIM in construction industry

BIM adoption is much slower than anticipated (Fischer and Kunz, 2004). Even though

the potential benefits are well documented (both in terms of improved productivity,

together with many other potential benefits), but the adoption of the new technology of

BIM is still slow in the AEC industry in different countries (Bernstein and Pittman,

2004; Azhar et al., 2008b; Gu and London, 2010). For example, the implementation of

the BIM method in Germany is still at very early stages. In comparison to the USA and

the Nordic European countries, the German AEC sector still does not internalize the

potentials of BIM method and technology (Both & Kindsvater, 2012). Furthermore,

Sebastian (2011) found, through his research, that the implementation of BIM in

hospital building projects in Netherlands is still limited due to certain commercial and

legal barriers, as well as the fact that integrated collaboration has not yet been

embedded in the real estate strategies of healthcare institutions.

For BIM to be adopted successfully to improve productivity; there is a need to change

the traditional work processes (Kiviniemi, 2013) (cited in Lindblad, 2013). For all

actors at all phases of construction, there are several issues that need to be addressed or

30

to be fixed to gain a smooth implementation. Thus BIM benefits can be gained

(Gökstorp, 2012). Due to the fragmented nature of the AEC industry, changes cannot be

adopted by a single actor. It must affect all involved actors (Kiviniemi, 2013) (cited in

Lindblad, 2013).

2.3.1 Barriers and challenges to implementing BIM in construction industry

There are several problems when implementing BIM in the very fragmented AEC

industry and this is connected with many different barriers hindering effective adoption

of BIM (Lindblad, 2013; Mandhar and Mandhar, 2013). Some of these barriers are quite

simple to be removed, while others could be considered impossible to even mitigate

(Gökstorp, 2012). Many studies were conducted to identify these barriers of BIM

adoption in the construction industry in different countries. The results of some studies

will be presented below.

Yan and Damian (2008) said, according to the results of a questionnaire, that the

barriers to implementing BIM in the UK and the USA are as the following: (1) people

refuse to learn and think current design technology is enough for them to design the

projects; (2) people think that BIM is unsuitable for the projects; (3) about 40% of

respondents from the USA and about 20% respondents from the UK believe that BIM

wastes time and human resources, and their companies have to allocate lots of time and

human resources to the training process; in addition to (4) the cost of copyright and

training.

Howard and Björk (2008) sent emails in 2006 asking questions related to BIM for

Architects, Engineers, contractors and IT specialists in Denmark, Hong Kong, Holland,

Norway, Sweden, the UK and the USA. Howard and Björk (2008) found many

obstacles to implementing BIM in the respondents‘ answers. The barriers were as

follows: (1) the need for education; (2) the need of sharing information; (3) the lack of

standards; and (4) the absence of legal issues to implement BIM.

Likewise, Arayici et al. (2009) investigated, through a survey in the UK and by

interviews carried out in Finland, the primary barriers to implementing BIM in many

UK construction companies. The barriers are listed below according to their weighted

ranks from the respondents as follows: (1) firms are not familiar enough with BIM use;

(2) reluctance to initiate new workflows or train staff; (3) firms do not have enough

opportunity for BIM implementation; (4) benefits from BIM implementation do not

outweigh the costs to implement it; (5) benefits are not tangible enough to warrant its

use; and (6) BIM does not offer enough of a financial gain to warrant its use.

In his master‘s thesis, Keegan (2010) identified several observed barriers to the

utilization of BIM in this regard; namely: (1) the lack of knowledge about BIM by the

owner; (2) the lack of the knowledge of the software; and (3) the cost of implementing

and updating the system. Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011), furthermore, reported two main

groups of challenges to implementing BIM in FM: (i) technology and process

challenges; and (ii) organizational challenges. Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011) detailed

each group as follows: (i) the technology and process challenges: (1) unclear roles and

responsibilities for loading data into the model or databases and maintaining the model;

(2) the lack of effective collaboration between project stakeholders for modeling and

model utilization; and (3) difficulty in software vendors‘ involvement, including

fragmentation among different vendors, competition, and lack of common interests.

31

(ii) The organizational challenges: (1) cultural barriers toward adopting new technology;

(2) organization-wide resistance regarding the need for investment in infrastructure,

training, and new software tools; (3) undefined fee structures for additional scope; (4)

the lack of sufficient legal framework for integrating owners‘ view in design and

construction; and (5) the lack of real-world cases have been implemented by BIM and

proof of positive return on investment.

Later, through the online survey within national and regional U.S. construction

companies; (Ku and Taiebat, 2011) asked questions about the barriers to BIM

implementation. The answers were categorized as follows:

Factors were concerned with internal company resource aspects:

1. Lack of skilled personnel and the learning curve of new tools.

2. The investment cost of BIM in terms of time and resources.

Factors related to sharing BIM with external stakeholders:

1. The difficulty of sharing BIM with external teams/ reluctance of others (e.g.,

Architects, Engineers, owners, and subcontractors).

2. Lack of collaborative work processes with the external team and modeling

standards.

3. Interoperability issues between software programs.

4. The lack of legal and contractual agreements.

Lack of expertise and experience plus cost and time constraints were the two most

mentioned obstacles to BIM implementation (Ku and Taiebat, 2011). In the same

context, Lahdou and Zetterman (2011) have highlighted the challenges for BIM

adoption in the construction project process in Sweden. For their master‘s thesis, data

were collected via semi-structured interviews. In total, twelve separate interviews were

conducted, of which six were with project managers and six with BIM experts.

According to the interviewees, the challenges were as follows: (1) personal opinions

towards BIM; (2) the lack of cohesion among stakeholders in the industry; (3) the

difficulty of finding stakeholders who have the required competence to participate in

BIM projects, where the Swedish construction industry generally is on a beginner level

concerning the implementation of BIM; (4) the difficulties in the implementation of

BIM software; (5) the legal status regarding the combined building information model

which does not have any legal validity; (6) the lack of knowledge in the way of

choosing an appropriate level of detail for the building information model to ensure that

money and time are not wasted on compilation of unnecessary information.

In another master‘s thesis, Kjartansdóttir (2011) executed a survey among organizations

and firms within the Icelandic AEC sector. The research work indicated that regulations

in Iceland lacked to support the implementation of BIM. The adoption rate of BIM was

40%. The results also indicated that BIM was not being used by contractors, which

indicates a low level of BIM maturity. According to the survey results, reasons for not

applying BIM in Iceland were collected as follows: (1) BIM lacks features or flexibility

to create building model/drawing; (2) clients are not requiring BIM; (3) BIM is too

expensive; (4) other project team members are not requiring BIM; (5) the existing CAD

system fulfills the need to design and draft; (6) BIM does not reduce time used on

drafting compared with current drawing approach; (7) no need to produce BIM; and (8)

the lack of training in BIM software.

32

Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012) identified the most significant reasons to failure to

implement BIM in the UK, and Finland as the following: (1) firms are not familiar

enough with BIM use; (2) reluctance to initiate new workflows or train staff; (3)

benefits from BIM implementation do not outweigh the costs to implement it; (4)

advantages of BIM are not tangible enough to warrant its use; (5) BIM does not offer

enough of a financial gain to warrant its use; (6) lack of the capital to invest in having

started with hardware and software; (7) BIM is too risky from a liability standpoint to

warrant its use; (8) resistance to culture change; and (9) no demand for BIM use.

Moreover, Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012) investigated challenges that faced some of

the respondents during their experience in tries to implement BIM. The challenges are

listed below based on their weighted ranks from the respondents as follows: (1) training

staff on new process and workflow; (2) training staff on new software and technology;

(3) effectively implementing the new process and workflow; (4) establishing the new

process, workflow and client expectations; (5) understanding BIM enough to implement

it; (6) realizing the value from a financial perspective; (7) understanding and mitigating

liability; (8) purchasing software and technology; and (9) liability for common data for

subcontractors.

Later, Kassem et al. (2012) investigated the barriers to adopting BIM and 4D through a

web-based questionnaire. It was submitted to a selected sample of 52 consultants and 46

contractors within the UK civil and building industry. The most of the barriers were

non-technical such as (1) the inefficiency in the evaluation of the business value of BIM

and 4D; (2) the shortage of experience within the workforce; and (3) the lack of

awareness by the stakeholders.

Choi (2010); Lee et al. (2009); Lee et al. (2007); Smart Market Report (2012) (cited in

Lee et al., 2014) reported that the application of BIM in the construction industry has

been slow in Korea due to the following obstacles: (1) unclear and invalid benefits of

BIM in ongoing practices; (2) the lack of supporting education and training to use of

BIM; (3) the lack of supporting resources (software, hardware) to use BIM tools; (4) the

lack of effective collaboration between project stakeholders for modeling and model

utilization; (5) unclear roles and responsibilities for loading data into a model or

databases and maintaining the model; and (6) the lack of sufficient legal framework for

integrating owners‘ view in design and construction.

Through their study, Elmualim and Gilder (2013) sought to achieve many objectives.

One of the objectives was to determine the various challenges that are facing the

construction industry in the installation of BIM in the UK, Europe, USA, India, Ghana,

China, Russia, South Africa, Australia, Canada, Malaysia, and UAE. Findings from the

study showed that: 20.4% of the respondents stated that they lack the capital to invest in

getting started with the hardware and software; whereas about 2% stated that BIM is too

risky from a liability standpoint to warrant its use. There were some other prominent

responses such as 15.3% stated that the benefits of BIM do not outweigh the cost to

implement it; while another 15.3% stated that the benefits are not tangible enough to

warrant its use. About 8.2% of the respondents also said that they were reluctant to

initiate new workflows or to train its staff. However, almost 37.8% did not know

themselves as to why they had not implemented BIM as yet.

33

Likewise, Thurairajah and Goucher (2013) conducted research to identify the challenges

and usability of BIM for cost consultants, and its likely impact during cost estimation in

the UK. Data collected through a questionnaire survey and expert interviews. The

respondents were approximately 20% of cost consultants and 40% of general

construction professionals that having previously used BIM. The results showed a low

level of BIM experience amongst the respondents. They mentioned several obstacles to

BIM implementing as the following: (1) overall lack of knowledge and understanding of

what BIM is; (2) a high training requirement associated with BIM implementation to

gain the full advantages from it; and (3) the need for detailed understanding of cost

consultants‘ challenges during the implementation of 5D BIM in construction projects.

Crowley (2013) conducted a questionnaire survey to ascertain the current position of the

QS profession in Ireland directly relating to BIM use and awareness. When asked on a

scale of ―very important‖ to ―not important‖ in relation to the potential barriers to BIM,

the following responses were received (majority response very important): (1) lack of

training/ education; (2) BIM use by Irish designers; (3) lack of client demand; (4) lack

of government lead/ direction; and (5) lack of standards.

Furthermore, Aibinu and Venkatesh (2013) have investigated the progress towards BIM

of QS firms in Australia. They said that the overall level of BIM adoption by QS is low

in Australia. Broadly speaking, it appeared that the barriers to the adoption of BIM by

Australia QS are: (1) the cost of implementation; (2) the lack of awareness of the

benefits from cost-benefit analysis perspective; (3) the lack of demand by clients; (4)

the lack of trust in the integrity of BIM; (5) the lack of a standard for a description of

BIM objects and coding systems; (6) the lack of information on business process

changes and how to change those processes; (7) the contract/ legal issues and

uncertainties; (8) skills shortage; (9) transformation and adaptation issues; and (10) the

technology change and ability of firms to adapt to the change from cultural perspective

and financial perspective.

A similar study was conducted in Auckland in New Zealand by Stanley and Thurnell

(2014) to identify the obstacles to implementing 5D BIM by doing structured interviews

with eight QS. The results were as the following: (1) the lack of software compatibility;

(2) prohibitive set-up costs; (3) the lack of protocols for coding objects within building

information models; (4) the absence of an electronic standard for coding BIM software;

and (5) the lack of integrated models, which are an essential prerequisite for full

interoperability, and hence collaborative working in the industry.

2.3.2 Identified BIM implementation obstacles and their interdependencies

Some researchers tried to classify the barriers to adopting BIM in the construction

industry into groups and link them together to facilitate understanding of the issue of

these obstacles. For example, Fischer and Kunz (2004) reported two main groups of

obstacles, which are: (i) the technical constraints; and (ii) the managerial barriers.

Arayici et al. (2005) said that some of BIM barriers can be grouped into the following

four categories: (1) the legal issues; (2) the cultural issues; (3) the technological issues;

and (4) the fragmented nature of the AEC industry. Likewise, Becerik-Gerber et al.

(2011) reported two main groups of challenges to implementing BIM in FM as follows:

(i) the technology and process challenges; and (ii) the organizational challenges.

Furthermore, Both and Kindsvater (2012) grouped the BIM barriers into the following

34

four categories: (1) the technological issues; (2) normative issues; (3) general issues;

and (4) the education and training.

From another point of view, Löf and Kojadinovic (2012) clustered the obstacles in three

areas, which are internally related to each other. There are also dependencies between

each area. The three areas are as the following:

(i) Area (1)

1. The gap between design and construction process regarding BIM usage.

2. Lack of guidelines of how BIM should be implemented in the production

phase.

3. Not suitable support or training for onsite personnel to use BIM in the

projects.

(ii) Area (2)

1. Lack of knowledge by the production managers in using BIM.

2. Lack of incentives to use BIM in their projects if added values are not

understood.

(iii) Area (3)

1. Interoperability issues/ BIM technology not ―ready packed‖ for production

phase needs.

2. Lack of demands from production on information needs.

3. Lack of incorporation of construction knowledge in the detailed design

Gu et al., (2008) categorized relevant barriers to adopting BIM in the AEC industry.

These categories are regarding: (1) product; (2) process; and (3) people.

2.3.2.1 Barriers linked to the BIM product

1. Interoperability

When moving to adopt BIM, new requirements need to be introduced to ensure

effective interoperability and information exchange. Simply, BIM cannot run on old

machines designed for AutoCAD (BD white paper, 2012). According to that, software

incompatibility is the largest obstacle to interoperability. Costs are another obstacle to

interoperability, with the largest expenditures coming from training and time spent on

translation when switching to programs allowing interoperability (McGraw-Hill

Construction, 2007). Confirmation on that, Broquetas (2010) said that the existence of

certain software issues that seem not to be allowing the use of BIM with all its potential

is a big challenge to adopt BIM. Accordingly, the most discussed issue when it comes

to the technological aspect is the interoperability between the different programs

(Bernstein and Pittman, 2004; RAIC, 2007; Both and Kindsvater, 2012; Wong and Fan,

2013). BIM software vendors have developed proprietary interfaces between design and

analysis tools to facilitate interoperability, but their interfaces for each tool are different,

also often resulting in the need for multiple models (Sanguinetti et al. 2012).

2. Different views on BIM

The lack of a single treatise that instructs on the application of the new 3D collaborative

technology was a significant obstacle to adopting BIM in the construction industry

35

(AGC, 2005; Azhar et al., 2008b). BIM is quite misunderstood across the board (Gu et

al., 2008; NBS, 2012). Only 54% of the architectural practices are currently aware of

BIM suggesting that a lot of work needs to be done in bringing about a wider awareness

of BIM (NBS, 2013).

3. Poor match with the user’s needs

Tse et al. (2005) revealed by research that a large part of the Architects in Hong Kong

did not find the tools in BIM that satisfy their needs, others just stated that BIM is ―not

easy to use.‖ People in Australia displayed a degree of hesitancy in implementing BIM

on a project because of the lack of knowledge about BIM and its distinctive capabilities

in the field of the construction industry (Mitchell and Lambert, 2013).

2.3.2.2 Barriers linked to the BIM process

1. Changing work processes

The construction industry is known for its conflicts regarding change and mistakes,

which often go all the way to court. This fact fosters a culture that is heavily influenced

by traditions where people like to do things according to the way they have worked

before (Arayici et al., 2005). On the contrary, the adoption of BIM requires changing

the traditional work practice (Davidson, 2009; Arayici et al., 2009; Gu and London,

2010). According to research by Bernstein and Pittman (2004), the data of the design

should be computable; in addition to the need for well-developed practical strategies for

the purposeful exchange and integration of the meaningful information among the BIM

model components. Collaboration from all different stakeholders is needed for BIM to

be successful; to insert, extract, update or modify information in the BIM model at the

various stages of the facilities life-cycle (Sebastian, 2011).

2. Risks and challenges with the use of a single model

People in Australia expressed liability concerns when implementing BIM such as: who

bears the risk; who controls the design; and who owns the BIM model (Mitchell and

Lambert, 2013). The responsibility issues are due to that several stakeholders (i.e.

owners, designers, and constructors) can adjust the model and that means revealing

unfinished work, which gives uncertainties from the actors regarding the accuracy of the

BIM model and how should the developmental and operational costs are distributed

(Thomson and Miner, 2006; Azhar et al., 2008b; Gu and London, 2010). Fischer and

Kunz (2004) emphasized on that by saying that the responsibility in BIM is for updating

the model and ensuring that it is accurate.

3. Legal issues

When implementing BIM, one of the first issues needed to be addressed is the

ownership of the model. The project owner, who pays for the design, might feel that he

is entitled to own the model, but other project team members might have provided

property information, and such information needs to be protected as well (Thomson and

Miner, 2006). The perceived legal risks of moving from a 2D to a 3D industry and

absence of standard BIM contract documents are another major stumbling block for

many companies to move aggressively into BIM (Perlberg, 2009; Becerik-Gerber et al.,

2010). The issue of that there are no BIM contracts is preventing people from adopting

36

and utilizing BIM with security in the construction industry (Weygant, 2011; Eastman

et al., 2008; Mitchell and Lambert, 2013).

4. Transactional business process evolution

The designers, developers, contractors, and construction managers all tend to focus on

their area and protect their interests in the building process, which leads to the presence

of a fragmented industry (Johnson and Laepple, 2003). Different roles in the building

supply chain are connected with certain obligations, risks, and rewards. These three

business issues must be addressed and defined in parallel before BIM can be widely

adopted by the AEC industry (Bernstein and Pittman, 2004; Gu and London, 2010).

5. Lack of demand and disinterest

Tse et al. (2005) said that one major reason for why Architects are not changing towards

BIM is the lack of demand from clients and other project team members. Mitchell and

Lambert (2013) said that no many asking for BIM projects in the construction industry

in Australia. Because of the insufficient number of case studies showing the potential

financial benefit of BIM, the AEC industry is not very interested in investing towards

the change in technology (Yan and Damian, 2008).

6. Initial costs

The AEC industry consists of many small companies which have trouble to afford the

high initial investment to purchase the needed software that is required to offer BIM

services (Kaner et al., 2008). When respondents of QS in Australia were asked to list

the barriers to the use of BIM features, the results showed that the cost of

implementation was the most frequently cited (Aibinu and Venkatesh, 2013). There are

several examples of the high costs that are needed to implement BIM, such as: (1)

software licensing; (2) the costs to improve server capacity to suit having such a high IT

requirements; (3) ongoing maintenance fee; (4) the cost of the proper creation of a

building model; and (5) the costs of training (Keegan, 2010; Aibinu and Venkatesh,

2013).

2.3.2.3 Barriers linked to the people using BIM

1. The new role of BIM model manager

Adoption of BIM will affect the roles and relationships of the participating actors, as

well as their work processes (Gu and London, 2010). One new role in construction

project was presented by Sebastian (2011) for BIM adoption is the model manager.

Grys and Westhorpe (2012) said that BIM processes should be defined and monitored

by the BIM manager considering the project life-cycle, for example: (a) design creation

and coordination; (b) quantity take-off; (c) cost estimation; (d) scheduling and progress

monitoring; (e) change management; (f) operation and maintenance; and (g) asset

management.

2. Training of individuals

When adopting BIM, it is vital that the individuals are sufficiently trained in the use of

the new technology for them to be able to contribute to the changing work environment

37

(Arayici et al., 2007; Gu et al., 2008). Yan and Damian (2008) revealed that most

companies in their study who did not use BIM are believed that the training would be

too costly in regard to time and human resource. Many companies have not had

sufficient time to consider and evaluate BIM because they had to focus on their existing

projects (McGraw-Hill Construction, 2009). Löf and Kojadinovic (2012) emphasized

that the time needed for training to work efficiently with BIM is one of the main

challenges to adopting BIM. Kaner et al., (2008); Keegan (2010); and Aibinu and

Venkatesh (2013) agreed that the high initial costs needed for training of the individuals

to be able to deal with BIM are very high, and this is the primary challenge to adopt

BIM in the AEC industry. Table (2.6) summarized BIM barriers according to items that

have been presented above.

Table (2.6): Summary of BIM barriers

No. BIM Barrier Authors

A. Barriers linked to the BIM product

1

Lack of supporting resources (software,

hardware) to use BIM tools

Lee et al. (2007); Lee et al. (2009); Choi

(2010); Smart Market Report (2012) (cited in

Lee et al., 2014)

2

Lack of interoperability due to the

software incompatibility between the

different programs for design and

analysis and hence the lack of integrated

models and collaborative working

Bernstein and Pittman (2004); McGraw-Hill

Construction (2007); Gu et al. (2008); Raic

(2010); Ku and Taiebat (2011); BD white

paper (2012); Both and Kindsvater (2012); Löf

and Kojadinovic (2012); Sanguinetti et al.

(2012); Wong and Fan (2013); Stanley and

Thurnell (2014)

3

Lack of awareness by designers,

Engineers, and other stakeholders about

BIM and its distinctive capabilities in

the field of construction industry

Kassem et al. (2012); Löf and Kojadinovic

(2012); Mitchell and Lambert (2013); NBS

(2013); Thurairajah and Goucher (2013)

4

Different views on BIM, where BIM is

quite misunderstood across the board,

and people think that BIM is unsuitable

for projects

Gu et al. (2008); Yan and Damian (2008);

Lahdou and Zetterman (2011); NBS (2012)

5

Designers/ Engineers think that the

current CAD system fulfills the need to

design and draft for any project

Yan and Damian (2008); Kjartansdóttir (2011)

6

Designers/ Engineers see that BIM does

not reduce time used on drafting

compared with current drawing

approach

Kjartansdóttir (2011)

7

Lack of guidelines of how to implement

BIM in production phase

AGC (2005); Azhar et al. (2008b);

Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012); Löf and

Kojadinovic (2012); Crowley (2013)

8

Normative issues; lack of standards for

description of BIM objects and systems

Howard and Björk (2008); Both and

Kindsvater (2012); Crowley (2013); Aibinu

and Venkatesh (2014); Stanley and Thurnell

(2014)

9 Lack of protocols for coding objects

within BIM models


10 Benefits of BIM are not tangible enough

in ongoing practices to warrant its use/

Lack of incentives to use BIM in

projects

Arayici et al. (2009); Khosrowshahi and

Arayici (2012); Löf and Kojadinovic (2012);

Elmualim and Gilder (2013); Lee et al.(2007);

Lee et al. (2009); Choi (2010);

38



Smart Market Report (2012) (cited in Lee et

al., 2014)

11

Lack of trust in the integrity of BIM;

some organizations see that BIM is poor

in matching with the user‘s needs and

lacking features or flexibility to make a

building model/drawing

Gu et al. (2008); Kjartansdóttir (2011); Aibinu

and Venkatesh (2014)

12

Lack of knowledge of the software,

which leads to the existence of

difficulties in applying BIM software

Keegan (2010); Lahdou and Zetterman (2011);

Kassem et al. (2012)

B. Barriers linked to the BIM process

13

The fragmented nature of the AEC

industry and its conflicts due to the gap

between design and construction

process

Arayici et al. (2005); Löf and Kojadinovic

(2012); Lindblad (2013); Mandhar and

Mandhar (2013)

14

Resistance to culture change toward

adopting new technology/ people refuse

to learn new technology, but the

adoption of BIM requires changing the

traditional work processes

(Davidson (2009); Arayici et al. (2005); Gu et

al., (2008); Yan and Damian (2008); Arayici et

al. (2009); Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); Gu

and London (2010); Khosrowshahi and

Arayici (2012)

15

Reluctance to initiate a new workflow

due to the lack of the ability of firms to

adapt it effectively

Arayici et al. (2009); Khosrowshahi and

Arayici (2012); Elmualim and Gilder (2013);

Thurairajah and Goucher (2013); Aibinu and

Venkatesh (2014)

16

Data of the design should be

computerized; in addition to the need

for well-developed and practical

strategies for sharing the meaningful

information

Bernstein and Pittman (2004); Howard and

Björk (2008)

17

The difficulty of sharing BIM with

external teams and reluctance of others

(e.g., Architect, Engineer, owners, and

subcontractors)

Ku and Taiebat, 2011

18

Lack of effective collaboration between

project stakeholders for modeling and

BIM model utilization

Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); Ku and Taiebat

(2011); Lahdou and Zetterman (2011);

Sebastian (2011); Lee et al. (2007); Lee et al.

(2009); Choi (2010); Smart Market Report

(2012) (cited in Lee et al., 2014)

19

The difficulty of finding the

stakeholders that have the required

competence to participate in BIM

Lahdou and Zetterman (2011)

20

Lack of knowledge about how to choose

an appropriate level of detail for the

BIM model to ensure that money and

time are not wasted on compilation of

unnecessary information


21

BIM is too risky regarding the

responsibility where several

stakeholders can adjust the model and

that means revealing unfinished work

Thomson and Miner (2006); Azhar et al.

(2008b); Gu et al. (2008); Becerik-Gerber et

al. (2011); Gu and London (2010);

Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012); Elmualim

and Gilder (2013); Mitchell and Lambert

(2013); Aibinu and Venkatesh (2014); Lee et

39



al. (2007); Lee et al. (2009); Choi (2010);

Smart Market Report (2012) (cited in Lee et

al., 2014)

22

Lack of knowledge regarding the

liability for common data for

subcontractors

Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012)

23

Lack of legal and contractual

agreements that preserve the rights

when adopting BIM in the construction

industry

Becerik-Gerber et al. (2010); Arayici et al.

(2005); Eastman et al.(2008); Gu et al. (2008);

Howard and Björk (2008); Perlberg (2009); Ku

and Taiebat (2011); Lahdou and Zetterman

(2011); Weygant (2011); Mitchell and

Lambert (2013); Aibinu and Venkatesh (2014)

24

Lack of sufficient legal framework for

integrating owners‘ view in the design

and construction when adopting BIM

Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); Lee et al. (2007);

Lee et al. (2009); Choi (2010); Smart Market


25

Lack of government

regulations/directions to fully support

implementation of BIM

Kjartansdóttir (2011); Crowley (2013)

26

Lack of information on business process

changes and how to change those

processes among the stakeholders

(obligations, risks, and rewards must be

addressed and defined in parallel before

BIM)

Johnson and Laepple (2003);

Bernstein and Pittman (2004); Gu et al.

(2008); Gu and London, (2010); Löf and

Kojadinovic (2012); Aibinu and Venkatesh

(2014)

27 Lack of knowledge about BIM by the

owner

Keegan (2010)

28

Lack of demand and disinterest

regarding BIM from clients and the

other project team members

Tse et al. (2005); Gu et al. (2008);

Kjartansdóttir (2011); Khosrowshahi and

Arayici (2012); Löf and Kojadinovic (2012);

Crowley (2013); Aibinu and Venkatesh (2014)

29

Lack of real-world cases that have

implemented by using BIM and have

proved positive return of investment

Yan and Damian (2008); Becerik-Gerber et al.

(2011)

30

Lack of awareness about the business

value of BIM from a financial

perspective

Arayici et al. (2009); Kassem et al. (2012);


and Gilder (2013); Aibinu and Venkatesh

(2014)

31

Lack of the ability of small firms to

afford the high initial investment to

purchase the needed software and

hardware that are required to offer BIM

services

Gu et al. (2008); Kaner et al. (2008); Yan and

Damian (2008); Arayici et al. (2009); Keegan

(2010); Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011);


and Gilder; Aibinu and Venkatesh (2014);


C. Barriers linked to the people using BIM

32

Adoption of BIM will affect the roles

and relationships of the participating

actors such as the need to the new role

of the "BIM model manager"

Fischer and Kunz (2004); Gu et al. (2008);

(Gu and London, 2010)

33

Companies have no enough time to

consider and evaluate BIM because of

focusing on the existing projects

McGraw-Hill Construction (2009); Löf and

Kojadinovic (2012)

40



34

Lack of skilled personnel and the need

for the education and the training for the

staff to use BIM effectively

Gu et al. (2008); Howard and Björk (2008);

Kjartansdóttir (2011); Ku and Taiebat (2011);

Both and Kindsvater (2012); Khosrowshahi

and Arayici (2012); Crowley (2013);

Thurairajah and Goucher (2013); Aibinu and

Venkatesh (2014); Lee et al. (2007); Lee et al.

(2009); Choi (2010); Smart Market Report

(2012) (cited in Lee et al., 2014)

35

Reluctance to train the staff due to

insufficient time and human resources

as well as the high costs of training

Kaner et al., (2008); Yan and Damian (2008);

Arayici et al. (2009); Becerik-Gerber et al.

(2011); Keegan (2010); Khosrowshahi and

Arayici (2012); Elmualim and Gilder (2013);

Aibinu and Venkatesh (2014)

36

Lack of suitable support or training for

onsite personnel to use BIM in the

projects

Löf and Kojadinovic (2012)

2.4 Summary

Many researchers have been conducted studies to explain the concept of BIM, so the

definition and characteristics of BIM as well as the types of BIM were reviewed in this

study. Researchers have defined BIM in different ways due to their different

perceptions, background, and experiences. All definitions were reviewed.

BIM has many important functions that can be applied in the whole process of

construction (from the beginning of the design phase, during the building phase, as well

as during the operation phase). Most of these functions were reviewed. BIM benefits

which resulting from these functions were reviewed too. Finally, it was necessary to

review barriers to adopting BIM in the AEC industry.

According to the previous studies and for the purpose of this research, BIM can be

defined through a combination of multi-definitions, where it views as a managed

process of using information technology for collection, exploitation, and sharing of

information on a project. At its core is a computer-generated model that contains all the

textual, graphical and tabular data about the design, construction, and operation of the

facility. It is used for modeling; simulation the construction; and evaluation. It supports

collaboration; operation of a facility; and management of a virtually building model

within a building life cycle (AGC, 2005; Smith, 2007; GSA, 2007; State of Ohio, 2010;

NBIMS-US, 2012; Ahmad et al., 2012). In general, BIM promises exponential

improvements in construction quality and efficiency (Ashcraft, 2008). Finally, it was

necessary to review barriers to adopting BIM in the AEC industry.

Chapter 3

42

Chapter 3: Research methodology

This chapter discusses the methodology which was used in this research. The research

methodology was chosen to satisfy the research aim and objectives which help to

accomplish this research study. This chapter included information about the research

plan/ strategy, population, sample size, data collection technique, questionnaire design

and development, face validity of the questionnaire, pre-test the questionnaire, pilot

study, final content of the questionnaire, and analytical methods of data.

3.1 Research aim and objectives

This research was designed to develop a clear understanding about BIM for identifying

the different factors which provide useful information to consider adopting BIM

technology in projects by the practitioners in the Architecture, Engineering, and

Construction (AEC) industry in Gaza strip in Palestine. In achieving this aim, five main

objectives have been outlined which includes:

1. To assess the awareness level of BIM by the professionals in the AEC


2. To identify the top BIM functions that would convince the professionals for


3. To identify the top BIM benefits that would convince the professionals for


4. To investigate and rank the top BIM barriers which face the implementation

of BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

5. To study some hypotheses that might help to find solutions to adopting BIM

in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

3.2 Research plan/ strategy

The research strategy is the general plan for how and what data should be collected and

how the results should be analyzed. The chosen research plan will influence the type

and the quality of the collected data (Ghauri and Grønhaug, 2010). To investigate the

research questions and hypotheses about adopting BIM technology by the practitioners

in the AEC industry in Gaza strip, a quantitative survey approach has been adopted. The

research technique was chosen as a questionnaire research to measure objectives.

3.3 Research location

The research was carried out in Gaza strip in Palestine, which consists of five

governorates: the Northern Governorate, Gaza Governorate, the Middle Governorate,

KhanYounis Governorate, and Rafah Governorate.

3.4 Target population, sampling of the questionnaire, and data collection

The questionnaire survey was conducted in 2015 (January). Research population

includes professionals (Architects, Civil Engineers, Mechanical Engineers, Electrical

Engineers, and any other professional with related specialization) in the AEC industry

in Gaza strip in Palestine as a target group. A convenience sample was chosen as the

43

type of the sample. Convenience sampling is a type of nonprobability sampling in which

respondents are sampled simply because they are ―convenient‖ sources of data for

researchers (Lavrakas, 2008). In other words, they were selected because of their

convenient accessibility and proximity to the researcher (Dillman et al., 2000). The

sample size was chosen to provide adequate information on reliability and a certain

degree of validity. 275 copies of the questionnaire were distributed. Each respondent

took about 6 to 8 minutes to fill out the questionnaire. 270 copies of the questionnaire

were returned from the respondents and completed for quantitative analysis. The totals

of 270 questionnaires were satisfactorily completed, making the total response rate

(270/ 275)*100 = 97.8%. Personal delivery for the whole sample helped to increase the

rate of response, and thus the representation of the sample.

3.5 Questionnaire design and development

A self-administered questionnaire was used for data collection. Three fundamental

stages were taken for constructing the questionnaire:

1. Identifying the first thought questions.

2. Formulating the final questionnaire.

3. The wording of questions.

Identification of items for the study and preparation of questionnaire was a crucial step

for the success of the research. A significant amount of work has already been done on

items of BIM functions, benefits, and barriers and there is a well-documented and peer-

reviewed set of those available items in the literature review in the previous chapter.

According to the review of literature related to BIM in the AEC industry, a well-

designed questionnaire was developed for the study. The questionnaire consisted of

close-ended (multiple choice) questions. Close-ended questions are more difficult to

design than open-ended questions, but they come up with much more efficient data

collection, processing and analysis (Bourque and Fielder, 2003). Bourque and Fielder

(2003) said that ―surveyors should avoid using open-ended questions in the mail and

other self-administered questionnaires.‖ The questionnaire divided into five parts as

follows:

Part one, which is related to the respondent‘s demographic data and the way of

work performance.

Part two: to assess the awareness level of BIM by the professionals in the AEC


Part three: to investigate the importance of BIM functions in the AEC industry

in Gaza strip.

Part four: to investigate the value of BIM benefits in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip.

Part five: to investigate the BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

And of course, the questionnaire was provided with a covering letter explaining the aim

of the research, the security of the information to encourage a high response, and the

way of responding. The variety of the questions aimed first to meet the research

objectives, to cover the main questions of the study, and to collect all the necessary data

that can support the results and discussion, as well as the recommendations in the

research.

44

After answering the first part that related to the respondent‘s demographic data and the

way of work performance, respondents were asked to rate each item in each of the

second, third, fourth, and fifth fields on a rating scale (five-point Likert scale) that

required a ranking (1–5), where 1 represented ―the lowest scale‖ and 5 represented ―the

highest scale‖, as the case might be.

The rating scale (the five-point Likert scale) was chosen to format the questions of the

questionnaire with some common sets of response categories called quantifiers (they

reflect the intensity of the particular judgment involved) (Naoum, 2007). Those

quantifiers were used to facilitate understanding as shown in Table (3.1).

Table (3.1): The used quantifiers for the rating scale (the five-point Likert scale) in each of the

second, third, fourth and fifth fields of the questionnaire

The awareness level of

BIM by professionals

Never

Little

Somewhat

Much

Very much

The importance of BIM

functions Unimportant

Of little

importance

Moderately

important Important

Very

important

The value of BIM

benefits

Extremely

low

beneficial

Low

beneficial

Moderately

beneficial

Highly

beneficial

Extremely

high

beneficial

The strength of BIM

barriers

Very weak

Weak

Average

strength

Strong

Very strong

Scale 1 2 3 4 5

The first draft of the questionnaire was revised through three main stages, which are: the

face validity, pre-testing the questionnaire, and the pilot study. With each stage, the

questionnaire was revised and refined more and more. Regarding details of each stage,

it will be discussed in the following parts.

3.6 Face validity

Face validity was important to see whether the questionnaire appears to be valid or not.

It was a ―common-sense‖ assessment by the experts in the fields of the AEC industry

and Statistics (Salkind, 2010). The questionnaire was presented to 12 experts (from

Gaza city as well as outside Palestine) by hand delivery and by the email at different

periods for assessment the validity of the questionnaire. Many useful and important

modifications have been made for the questionnaire. Those modifications have been

explained in Table (3.2).

Table (3.2): Results of the face validity

Name Country Specialization Outcome

Expert

A

Palestine

(Gaza)

MSc of

Statistics

Corrected the formulation of the questions

(regarding Statistics) in the part #1 of the

questionnaire which was about the respondent

demographic data and the way of work

performance.

Expert

B

Palestine

(Gaza)

Distinguished

Prof. of

Construction

Engineering and

Management

Some of the items in the different fields of the

questionnaire were deleted because it were not

related to the AEC industry in Gaza strip, or it

was not clear or ambiguous such as:

45



Model auditing (BIM functions)

Collaborative platforms (BIM functions)

Improve labor market (BIM benefits)

Adoption of BIM will affect the roles and

relationships of the participating actors

such as the need to the new role of the

"BIM model manager" (BIM barriers)

Some of the items were modified.

Added an item, which was:

Improve safety design (BIM benefits).

Some of the items needed for further

explanation.

Some items were merged.

Advised to clarify any attached shortcuts.

Expert

C

Palestine

(Gaza)

PhD in the

College of

Applied

Engineering &

Urban Planning

Helped in designing the questions for

measuring objective #1, which was about

assessing the awareness level of BIM by the


Some items, in the field of BIM barriers in the

questionnaire, were designed, which are:

Lack of interest in Gaza strip to pursue the

condition of the building over the life after

completion of implementation

Lack of education or training on the use of

BIM, whether in the university or any

governmental or private training centers

Expert

D

Italy MPhil in

Classical

Archaeology

Audited the English language of the first draft

of the questionnaire and modified some words.

Proposed the words of the rating scale (the five-

point Likert scale) for each field.

Expert

E

India PhD in

Chemistry

Audited the cover letter of the questionnaire

and the general structure of the questionnaire.

Expert

F

Palestine

(Gaza)

PhD in

Sustainable

Architecture &

Housing

Had advised shortcutting the questionnaire.

Some of the items in the field of BIM functions

were deleted because they did not relate to the

AEC industry in Gaza strip and they were

ambiguous such as:

Spatial programming/ Visual and

geospatial coordination for construction of

atypical shapes

Virtual mock-up models on large projects

Design assistance

Locating building component

Single data entry multiple

Facilitating real-time data access

Expert

G

Palestine

(Gaza)

PhD in

Renewable

Energy &

Architectural

Design

Had advised shortcutting the questionnaire.

Some of the items in the field of BIM barriers

were deleted because they contained difficult

technical expressions, which were not suitable

for professionals who are non-users of BIM,

such as:

Lack of interoperability due to the software

46



incompatibility between the different

programs for design and analysis and

hence the lack of integrated models and

collaborative working

Normative issues; lack of standards for

description of BIM objects and systems

Designers/ Engineers see that BIM does not

reduce time used on drafting compared

with current drawing approach

Lack of trust in the integrity of BIM; some

organizations see that BIM is poor in

matching with the user’s needs and lacking

features or flexibility to make a building

model/ drawing

Lack of knowledge about how to choose an

appropriate level of detail for the BIM

model to ensure that money and time are

not wasted on compilation of unnecessary

information

Expert

H

Turkey PhD student in

Urban Planning

Reviewed the English language of the

questionnaire and checked the Arabic

translation for the questionnaire.

Expert

I

Palestine

(Gaza)

PhD in Housing Audited the Arabic language of the

questionnaire.

Expert

J

Palestine

(Gaza)

Professor of

Statistics

Proposed a statistical modification for the

questions that related to objective #1 which was

about assessing the awareness level of BIM by


Corrected the statistical formulation of the

hypotheses.

Expert

K

Palestine

(Gaza)

MSc in

Statistics

Helped to design the questions for the second

part: “The awareness level of BIM by

professionals.‖

Expert

L

Palestine

(Gaza)

PhD in

Architectural

Design and

Construction

Technology

Proposed to develop the format of the questions

of the ―Part 1: The respondent demographic

data and the way of work performance.‖

Modified question #8 ―Current field-present

job‖ in ―Part 1: The respondent demographic

data and the way of work performance‖ and the

options of this question.

Deleted two questions were designed for the

field of ―Part 2: The awareness level of BIM

professionals in the AEC in Gaza strip.‖

3.7 Pre-testing the questionnaire

Pre-testing the questionnaire was done to make sure that the questionnaire is going to

deliver the right data and to ensure the quality of the collected data. In other words, pre-

testing the questionnaire was an important and necessary step for finding out if the

survey has any logic problems, if the questions are too hard to be understood, if the

wording of the questions is ambiguous, or if it has any response bias, etc. (Lavrakas,

47

2008). The pre-testing was conducted in two phases with twelve professionals of the

AEC industry in Gaza strip (each phase has been tested with six professionals).

The first phase of the pre-testing resulted with some amendments to the wording of

some words in the questions, and further explanation was added to some items to

facilitate the understanding of the question. The questionnaire was modified based on

the results of the first phase of the pre-testing. After that, the second phase was

conducted with the other six professionals, and it was sufficient to ensure the success of

the questionnaire, where there were no any queries from any professional and

everything was clear. According to that, questions have become clear to be answered in

a way that helps to achieve the target of the study and to start the phase of the pilot

study. For further details, review Table (3.3).

Table (3.3): Results of pre-testing the questionnaire

Name Specialization Outcome

Pre

test

1

A1 MSc in Urban

Planning

Modified an item in the field of BIM barriers (in

English language) to facilitate understanding:

Part 5: BA13: it was as ―Lack of real-world

cases that have implemented by using BIM

and have proved a positive return on

investment.‖ It was in need for further

explanation because it was ambiguous and

not understood, so it became as follow:

―Lack of real cases in Gaza strip or other

nearby areas in the region that have been

implemented by using BIM and have

proved a positive return on investment.‖

B1 MSc in

Construction

Management

Modified some items in the field of BIM functions

(in English language) to be as the following:

Part 3: F11: Future expansion/ extension in

facility and infrastructure

Part 3: F14: Issue Reporting and Data

archiving via a 3D model of the building

C1 MSc student in

Construction

Management

Modified an item in the field of BIM benefits (in

English language), where it was in need for more

explanation as follows:

Part 4: BE 7: “Improve the selection of

construction components carefully in line

with the quality and costs (such as types of

doors and windows, coverage type of the

exterior walls, etc.).”

D1 BSc in

Architecture

Modified the formulation of the central question in

part3, part4, and part 5 to facilitate understanding.

E1 BSc in Civil

Engineering

Modified the wording (in Arabic language) of some

items in the different fields of the questionnaire

(see Appendix B):

Part 3: F 4, F 7, F 10, F 15 (BIM functions)

Part 4: BE 1 (BIM benefits)

F1 PhD in

Architectural

Design and

Construction

Technology

Modified the wording (in Arabic language) of some

questions and items of the different fields of the

questionnaire, where they were in need for more

explanation (see Appendix B):

Part 1: Q4, Q8 (Respondent demographic data)

48

Table (3.3): Results of pre-testing the questionnaire

Name Specialization Outcome

Part 2: A 8 (The awareness level of BIM)

Part 4: BE 1, BE 5 (BIM benefits)

Part5: BA 2, BA 3, BA 4, BA 15, BA 1 (BIM

barriers)

Pre

test

2

A2 BSc in Civil

Engineering

Everything was clear

B2 BSc in

Architecture


C2 BSc in

Architecture


D2 BSc in

Architecture


E2 MSc student in

Construction

Management


F2 PhD in

Architectural

Design and

Construction

Technology


3.8 Pilot study

After the success of the second phase of the pretesting of the questionnaire, a trial run

on the questionnaire was done before circulating it to the whole sample to get valuable

responses and to detect areas of possible shortcomings (Thomas, 2004). Bell (1996)

described the pilot study as: ―getting the bugs out of the instrument (questionnaire) so

that subjects in the primary study will experience no difficulties in completing it and so

that the researcher can carry out a preliminary analysis to see whether the wording and

format of questions will present any difficulties when the main data are analyzed‖ (cited

in Naoum, 2007).

To do a pilot study, the researcher needs to test all the survey steps from start to finish

with a reasonably large sample. The size of the pilot sample depends on how big the

actual sample is. A sample of around 30-50 people is usually enough to identify any

significant bugs in the system (Thomas, 2004; Weiers, 2011). According to that, 40

copies of the questionnaire were distributed conveniently to respondents from the target

group (the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip). All the copies were

collected, coded, and analyzed through Statistical Package for the Social Sciences IBM

(SPSS) version 22. The tests that conducted were as follows:

1. The statistical validity of the questionnaire/ criterion-related validity.

2. Reliability of the questionnaire by Half Split method and the Cronbach‘s

Coefficient Alpha method.

3.8.1 Statistical validity of the questionnaire

In quantitative research, validity is the extent to which a study using particular tool

measures what it sets out to measure. To ensure the validity of the questionnaire, two

statistical tests should be applied. The first test is the criterion-related/ internal validity

test (Pearson test) which measures the correlation coefficient between each item in the

49

field and the whole field. The second test is the structure validity test (Pearson test) that

used to test the validity of the questionnaire structure by testing the validity of each field

and the validity of the whole questionnaire. It measures the correlation coefficient

between one field and all the fields of the questionnaire that have the same level of

similar scale (Weiers, 2011; Garson, 2013).

Internal validity test

Internal consistency of the questionnaire was measured by the scouting sample (the

sample of the pilot study), which consisted of 40 questionnaires. It was done by

measuring the correlation coefficients (Pearson test) between each item in one field and

the whole field (Weiers, 2011; Garson, 2013). Tables in Appendix C from 1 to 4 show

the correlation coefficient P-value for each item in each field. The test applied on the

parts (2: Assessing the awareness level of BIM by the professionals in the AEC industry

in Gaza strip, 3: Investigating the importance of BIM functions in the AEC industry in

Gaza strip, 4: Investigating the value of BIM benefits in the AEC industry in Gaza strip,

and 5: Investigating the BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip) of the

questionnaire. As shown in the Tables C1, C2, C3, and C4, the P-values are less than

0.05, so the correlation coefficients of each field are significant at α = 0.05. Thus, it can

be said that the items of each field are consistent and valid to measure what they were

set out to measure.

Structure validity test

Structure validity is the second statistical test that used to test the validity of the

questionnaire structure by testing the validity of each field and the validity of the whole

questionnaire. It measures the correlation coefficient between one field and all of the

other fields of the questionnaire that have the same level of the rating scale (five-point

Likert scale) (Weiers, 2011; Garson, 2013). As shown in Table (3.4), the significance

values (P-values) are less than 0.05, which indicates that the correlation coefficients of

all the fields are significant at α = 0.05. Thus, it can be said that the fields are valid to

measure what they were set out to measure to achieve the main aim of the study.

Table (3.4): Structure validity of the questionnaire

Fields

Pearson

correlation

coefficient

P-value

The awareness level of BIM by the professionals 0.421 0.01

The importance of BIM functions 0.477 0.00

The value of BIM benefits 0.420 0.01

The strength of BIM barriers 0.380 0.02

3.8.2 Reliability test

Reliability is the degree of consistency or dependability with which an instrument

(questionnaire for this study) measures what it is designed to measure. The test is doing

by repeating the questionnaire to the same sample of the target group in a different time

and comparing the scores that obtained for the first time and for the second time by

computing a reliability coefficient. For the most purposes, it considered satisfactory if

the reliability coefficient is above 0.7. A period of two weeks to a month is

recommended for distributing the questionnaires for the second time (Field, 2009;

50

Weiers, 2011; Garson, 2013). Due to the complicated conditions, it was too difficult to

ask the same sample to respond to the same questionnaire twice within a short period.

Thus, to overcome the distribution of the questionnaire twice to measure the reliability,

Half Split method, and Cronbach‘s alpha coefficient test were used through the SPSS

software to achieve that.

Half Split Method

This method depends on finding Pearson correlation coefficient between the Means of

the questions with the odd rank and the questions with the even rank of each field of the

questionnaire. Then, correcting the Pearson correlation coefficients can be done by

using Spearman-Brown correlation coefficient of correction. The corrected correlation

coefficient (consistency coefficient) is computed according to the following equation:

Consistency coefficient = 2r/(r +1), where r is the Pearson correlation coefficient. The

normal range of corrected correlation coefficient 2r/(r +1) is between 0.0 and + 1.0

(Weiers, 2011; Garson, 2013).

As shown in Table (3.5), all the corrected correlation coefficients values are between

0.82 and 0.88 and the general reliability for all items equals 0.86. The significance

values are less than 0.05, which indicates that the corrected correlation coefficients are

significant at α= 0.05. Thus, it can be said that the studied fields were reliable according

to the Half Split method.

Table (3.5): Split-Half Coefficient method

No. Fields person-

correlation

Spearman-

Brown

Coefficient

Sig.

(2-tailed)

1 The awareness level of BIM by

the professionals 0.75 0.86 0.00*

2 The importance of BIM functions 0.69 0.82 0.00*

3 The value of BIM benefits 0.79 0.88 0.00*

4 The strength of BIM barriers 0.77 0.87 0.00*

All items 0.76 0.86 0.00*

Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha (Cα)

This method is used to measure the reliability of the questionnaire between each field

and the Mean of the whole fields of the questionnaire. The normal range of Cronbach‘s

coefficient alpha (Cα) value is between 0.0 and +1.0, and the higher value reflects a

higher degree of internal consistency (Field, 2009; Weiers, 2011; Garson, 2013). As

shown in Table (3.6), the Cronbach‘s coefficient alpha (Cα) was calculated for four

fields. The results were in the range from 0.84 and 0.92 and the general reliability for all

items equals 0.87. This range is considered high, where it is above 0.7. Thus, the result

ensures the reliability of the questionnaire.

Table (3.6): Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha for reliability (Cα)

No. Fields Cronbach's Alpha

(Cα)

1 The awareness level of BIM by professionals 0.89

2 The importance of BIM functions 0.84

51

Table (3.6): Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha for reliability (Cα)

No. Fields Cronbach's Alpha

(Cα)

3 The value of BIM benefits 0.92

4 The strength of BIM barriers 0.89

All items 0.87

As shown above, results of the statistical validity of the questionnaire (the internal and

the structure of the questionnaire) as well as the results of reliability tests (Half Split

method and the Cronbach‘s coefficient Alpha method) showed the success of the tests

and thus the success of the questionnaire (valid and reliable). Thereby, the questionnaire

was adopted, and the 40 successful copies of the pilot study were included in the whole

sample.

3.9 Final amendment to the questionnaire

After piloting, the questionnaire was adopted and distributed to the whole sample. Each

field was straightforward and short to improve response rates (Dillman et al., 2000).

And as mentioned above, the questionnaire was provided with a covering letter

explaining the aim of the research, the security of the information to encourage a high

response, and the way of responding. The original questionnaire was developed in the

English language. English language questionnaire is attached to (Appendix A). Based

on the belief of the researcher that the questionnaire would be more effective and easier

to be understood for all respondents if it is in Arabic (native language) and thus get

more realistic results, the questionnaire (after final adoption) was translated in the

Arabic language, which is attached to (Appendix B).

Regarding the final content of the questionnaire, as mentioned above in (3.2 Research

design), the researcher summarized a set of items that related to BIM functions, BIM

benefits, and barriers to adopting BIM that were reviewed in the previous chapter

(Literature review) in three tables (2.3), (2.5), (2.6), where the researcher has compiled

and summarized 45 items of BIM functions, 55 items of BIM benefits, and 36 items of

BIM barriers. According to the research objectives, those items were used in the

questionnaire design in three parts (part 3, part 4, and part 5). While all items of part 2

were designed by the researcher as well as questions of part 1.

As it turns out by explaining each step of the process of the questionnaire design and

development and according to the results of each step, some of those items have been

selected, other items have been modified, while others have been merged, as well as

some items have been added. Table (3.7) shows how items were obtained for each field

in the questionnaire. All changes in those items can also be followed through the

following three Tables: (3.8), (3.9), and (3.10). Based on that, the final questionnaire

contains:

Part one: is related to the respondent’s demographic data and the way of work

performance (consists of 11 questions; Q1 to Q11).

Part two: to assess the awareness level of BIM by the professionals in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip (consists of 9 items; A1 to A9).

Part three: to investigate the importance of BIM functions in the AEC industry

in Gaza strip (consists of 16 items; F1 to F16).

52


strip (consists of 26 items; BE 1 to BE 26).

Part five: to investigate the BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip

(consists of 18 items; BA 1 to BA 18).

Table (3.7): A summary illustrates how items were obtained for each field in the

questionnaire

Field

Fro

m

Lit

erat

ure

Rev

iew

Th

e S

elec

ted I

tem

s

Th

e A

dd

ed I

tem

s

Th

e D

elet

ed I

tem

s

Th

e M

erg

ed I

tem

s

Th

e M

odif

ied I

tem

s

Th

e M

erg

ed a

nd

Mod

ifie

d I

tem

s

Th

e F

inal

use

d I

tem

s


BIM by the professionals - - 9 - - - - 9


functions 45

- - 22 1 13 2 16

The value of BIM benefits 55 - 1 10 2 18 5 26

The BIM barriers 36 1 2 10 1 11 3 18

53

Table (3.8): List of the items of BIM functions for the final questionnaire

No. BIM function

Source

The way that

was done to get

the item

F1

Three-dimensional (3D) modeling and visualization Ashcraft (2008); Eastman et al. (2008); Baldwin (2012);

Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); Ku and Taiebat (2011); Gray et

al. (2013); Lee et al. (2014)

Merged

F2 Functional simulations to choose the best solution (such as

Lighting, energy, and any other sustainability information)

Ashcraft (2008); Eastman et al. (2008); Baldwin (2012); Lee et

al. (2014)

Modified and

Merged

F3

Change Management (any modification to the building design

will automatically replicate in each view such as floor plans,

sections, and elevation)

CRC construction innovation (2007); Baldwin (2012)

Modified

F4

Visualized constructability reviews/ Building simulation (a

3D structural model as well as a 3D model of Mechanical,

Electrical, and Plumbing (MEP) services)

Ashcraft (2008); Eastman et al. (2008); Ku and Taiebat

(2011); Gray et al. (2013); Lee et al. (2014) Modified

F5 Four-dimensional (4D) visualized scheduling and construction

sequencing

Eastman et al. (2008); Ku and Taiebat (2011); Baldwin (2012);

Gray et al. (2013); Lee et al. (2014) Modified

F6 Model-based cost estimation (Five-dimensional (5D)) Eastman et al. (2008); Baldwin ( 2012); Gray et al. (2013) Modified

F7 Model-based site planning and site utilization Ku and Taiebat (2011); Baldwin ( 2012); Gray et al. (2013) Modified

F8 Safety planning and monitoring on-site Eastman et al. (2008) Modified

F9 Model-based quantity take-offs of materials and labor Ashcraft (2008); Eastman et al. (2008); Ku and Taiebat (2011);

Lee et al. (2014) Modified

F10 Creation of as-built model that contains all the necessary data

to manage and operate the building (facility management)

Ashcraft (2008); Eastman et al. (2008); Lee et al. (2014)

Modified

F11 Future expansion/ extension in facility and infrastructure Baldwin ( 2012) Modified

F12 Maintenance scheduling via as-built model Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); Baldwin (2012); Gray et al.

(2013) Modified

F13 Energy optimization of the building Ashcraft (2008); Eastman et al. (2008); Becerik-Gerber et al.

(2011) Modified

F14 Issue Reporting and Data archiving via a 3D model of the

building

Eastman et al. (2008); Ku and Taiebat (2011); Baldwin (2012) Merged and

Modified

54

Table (3.8): List of the items of BIM functions for the final questionnaire

No. BIM function

Source

The way that

was done to get

the item

F15 Managing metadata (provide information about an individual

item's content) via a 3D model of the building

Baldwin ( 2012) Modified

F16 Interoperability and translation of information (among the

professionals) within the same system/ program

Baldwin ( 2012); Gray et al. (2013) Modified

Table (3.9): List of the items of BIM benefits for the final questionnaire

No. BIM benefit

Source

The way that

was done to get

the item

BE 1 Improve realization of the idea of a design by the owner via a

3D model of the building

Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Stanley and Thurnell (2014)

Modified

BE 2

Support design decision-making by comparing different design

alternatives on a 3D model

Azhar et al. (2008a); Azhar et al. (2008b); Eastman et al. (2008,

2011); Allen Consulting Group (2010); Ahmad et al. (2012);

Newton and Chileshe (2012); Stanley and Thurnell (2014)

Merged

BE 3 Enhance design team collaboration (Architectural, Structural,

Mechanical, and Electrical Engineers)

Eastman et al. (2008, 2011) Modified

BE 4 Improve design quality (reducing errors/ redesign and

managing design changes)

Holness (2006); Eastman et al. (2008, 2011) Modified

BE 5

Improve sustainable design and lean design


Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); (Gleeson, 2008) (cited in Azhar

and Brown, 2009); Azhar and Brown (2009); Krygiel et al.

(2008); Allen Consulting Group (2010); Schade et al. (2011);

Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012); Kolpakov (2012); Park et al.

(2012); Stanley and Thurnell (2014)

Merged and

Modified

BE 6 Improve safety design Added

55


No. BIM benefit

Source

The way that

was done to get

the item

BE 7

Improve the selection of the construction components carefully

in line with the quality and costs (such as types of doors and

windows, coverage type of the exterior walls, etc.)

Holness (2006); Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Lorimer (2011);

Barlish and Sullivan (2012); Aibinu and Venkatesh (2013)

Merged and

Modified

BE 8 Improve understanding the sequence of the construction

activities

Eastman et al. (2011); Newton and Chileshe (2012); Aibinu and

Venkatesh (2013); Farnsworth et al. (2014) Merged

BE 9

Enhance work coordination with subcontractors and suppliers

(supply chain)

Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Hardin (2009); McGraw-Hill

Construction (2009); Succar (2009); Weygant (2011); Ahmad et

al. (2012); Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012); Lorch (2012);

Farnsworth et al. (2014); Stanley and Thurnell (2014)

Merged and

Modified

BE 10 Increase the quality of prefabricated (digitally fabricated)

components and reduce its costs

Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Gray et al. (2013)

Modified

BE 11 Improve safety planning and monitoring on-site/ reduce risks Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012);

Zhang et al. (2013); Stanley and Thurnell (2014)

Merged and

Modified

BE 12 Increase the accuracy of scheduling and planning Holness (2006); Farnsworth et al. (2014) Modified

BE 13 Increase the accuracy of cost estimation Holness (2006); Nassar (2010); Farnsworth et al. (2014);

Stanley and Thurnell (2014) Modified

BE 14 Improve communication between project parties Lin (2012) ; Lorch (2012); Farnsworth et al. (2014) Modified

BE 15 Reduce change/ variation orders in the construction stage Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Lorimer (2011); Barlish and

Sullivan (2012) Modified

BE 16 Reduce clashes among the stakeholders (clash detection) Holness (2006); Newton and Chileshe (2012); Farnsworth et al.

(2014) Modified

BE 17 Reduce the overall project duration and cost McGraw-Hill Construction (2009); Eastman et al. (2011);

Barlish and Sullivan (2012); Barlish and Sullivan (2012) Modified

BE 18

Improve the implementation of lean construction techniques to

get sustainable solutions for reducing waste of materials during

construction and demolition

Eastman et al. (2008, 2011); Kjartansdóttir (2011);

Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012); Kolpakov (2012); Cheng

and Ma (2013)

Merged and

Modified

56


No. BIM benefit

Source

The way that

was done to get

the item

BE 19

Ease of information retrieval for the entire life of the building

through as-built 3D model

Azhar et al. (2008a); Azhar et al. (2008b); Eastman et al. (2008,

2011); Allen Consulting Group (2010); Becerik-Gerber et al.

(2010); BIFM (2012)

Modified

BE 20

Improve the management and the operation of the building to

maintain its sustainability by supporting decision-making on

matters relating to the building

Schade et al. (2011); Lee et al. (2007); Lee et al. (2009); Choi

(2010); Smart Market Report (2012) (cited in Lee et al., 2014)

Modified

BE 21

Increase coordination between the different operating systems

of the building (such as security and alarm system, lighting, air

conditioning, etc.)

Gray et al. (2013) Modified

BE 22 Enhance energy efficiency and sustainability of the building Ku and Taiebat (2011)

Modified

BE 23 Improve maintenance planning (preventive and curative)/

maintenance strategy of the facility

Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); BIFM (2012) Modified

BE 24

Control the whole-life costs of the asset effectively CRC Construction Innovation (2007); Azhar et al. (2008a);

Azhar et al. (2008b); Eastman et al. (2011); Ku and Taiebat

(2011); BIFM (2012)

Modified

BE 25 Increase profits by marketing for the facility via a 3D model Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011) Modified

BE 26 Improve emergency management (put plans for avoiding

hazards and cope with disasters such as fire, earthquakes, etc.)

Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011) Modified

Table (3.10): List of the items of BIM barriers for the final questionnaire

No. BIM barrier

Source

The way that

was done to

get the item

BA 1

Necessary high costs to buy BIM software and costs of the

necessary hardware updates

Lee et al. (2007); Lee et al. (2009); Choi (2010); Smart Market

Report (2012) (cited in Lee et al., 2014); Aibinu and Venkatesh

(2013)

Modified

57


No. BIM barrier

Source

The way that

was done to

get the item

BA 2 Lack of the awareness of BIM by stakeholders Kassem et al. (2012); Löf and Kojadinovic (2012); Mitchell and

Lambert (2013); NBS (2013); Thurairajah and Goucher (2013)

Modified

BA 3

Lack of knowledge of how to apply BIM software AGC (2005); Azhar et al. (2008b); Keegan (2010); Lahdou and

Zetterman (2011); Kassem et al. (2012); Khosrowshahi and

Arayici (2012); Löf and Kojadinovic (2012); Crowley (2013)

Modified

BA 4

Professionals think that the current CAD system and other

conventional programs satisfy the need of designing and

performing the work and complete the project efficiently

Yan and Damian (2008); Kjartansdóttir (2011)

Modified

BA 5

Lack of the awareness of the benefits that BIM can bring to

Engineering offices, companies, and projects

Arayici et al. (2009); Kassem et al. (2012); Khosrowshahi and

Arayici (2012); Löf and Kojadinovic (2012); Elmualim and

Gilder (2013); Lee et al.(2007); Lee et al. (2009); Choi (2010);

Smart Market Report (2012) (cited in Lee et al., 2014); Aibinu

and Venkatesh (2014)

Modified and

Merged

BA 6

Lack of effective collaboration among project stakeholders to

exchange necessary information for BIM application, due to the

fragmented nature of the AEC industry in Gaza strip

Arayici et al. (2005); Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); Ku and

Taiebat (2011); Lahdou and Zetterman (2011); Sebastian (2011);

Löf and Kojadinovic (2012); Lindblad (2013); Lee et al. (2007);

Lee et al. (2009); Choi (2010); Smart Market Report (2012)

(cited in Lee et al., 2014); Mandhar and Mandhar (2013)

Modified and

Merged

BA 7

Resistance by companies and institutions for any change can

occur in the workflow system and the refusal of adopting a new

technology

(Davidson (2009); Arayici et al. (2005); Gu et al., (2008); Yan

and Damian (2008); Arayici et al. (2009); Becerik-Gerber et al.

(2011); Gu and London (2010); Khosrowshahi and Arayici

(2012)

Modified

BA 8

Lack of the financial ability for the small firms to start a new

workflow that is necessary for the adoption of BIM effectively

Arayici et al. (2009); Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012);

Elmualim and Gilder (2013); Thurairajah and Goucher (2013);


Modified

BA 9

Companies prefer focusing on projects (under working/

construction) rather than considering, evaluating, and

implementing BIM

McGraw-Hill Construction (2009); Löf and Kojadinovic (2012)

Modified

58


No. BIM barrier

Source

The way that

was done to

get the item

BA 10 Difficulty of finding project stakeholders with the required

competence to participate in applying BIM


Selected

BA 11

Lack of the governmental regulations for full support the

implementation of BIM

Becerik-Gerber et al. (n.d.); Arayici et al. (2005); Eastman et

al.(2008); Gu et al. (2008); Howard and Björk (2008); Perlberg

(2009); Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); Kjartansdóttir (2011); Ku

and Taiebat (2011); Lahdou and Zetterman (2011); Weygant

(2011); Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012); Crowley (2013); Lee

et al. (2007); Lee et al. (2009); Choi (2010); Smart Market


Mitchell and Lambert (2013); Aibinu and Venkatesh (2014)

Merged

BA 12

Lack of demand and disinterest from clients regarding with

using BIM technology in design and construction of the project

Tse et al. (2005); Gu et al. (2008); Keegan (2010);

Kjartansdóttir (2011); Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012); Löf

and Kojadinovic (2012); Crowley (2013); Aibinu and Venkatesh

(2014)

Modified and

Merged

BA 13

Lack of the real cases in Gaza strip or other nearby areas in the

region that have been implemented by using BIM and have

proved positive return of investment

Yan and Damian (2008); Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011)

Modified

BA 14 Lack of interest in Gaza strip to pursue the condition of the

building over the life after completion of implementation stage

Added

BA 15

Lack of Architects/ Engineers skilled in the use of BIM

programs

Gu et al. (2008); Howard and Björk (2008); Kjartansdóttir

(2011); Ku and Taiebat (2011); Both and Kindsvater (2012);

Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012); Crowley (2013); Lee et al.

(2007); Lee et al. (2009); Choi (2010); Smart Market Report

(2012) (cited in Lee et al., 2014); Thurairajah and Goucher

(2013); Aibinu and Venkatesh (2014)

Modified

BA 16 Lack of the education or training on the use of BIM, whether in

the university or any governmental or private training centers

Added

59


No. BIM barrier

Source

The way that

was done to

get the item

BA 17

The unwillingness of Architects/ Engineers to learn new

applications because of their educational culture and their bias

toward the programs they are dealing with

Davidson (2009); Arayici et al. (2005); Gu et al. (2008); Yan

and Damian (2008); Arayici et al. (2009); Becerik-Gerber et al.

(2011); Gu and London (2010); Khosrowshahi and Arayici

(2012)

Modified

BA 18

Reluctance to train Architects/ Engineers due to the costly

training requirements in terms of time and money

Kaner et al., (2008); Yan and Damian (2008); Arayici et al.

(2009); Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); Keegan (2010);

Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012); Elmualim and Gilder (2013);


Modified

60

3.10 Quantitative data analysis

A quantitative method was adopted in the current research, where quantitative methods

of data analysis can be of great value to the researcher who is attempting to draw

meaningful results from a large body of qualitative data. The main beneficial aspect is

that quantitative analytical approach provides the Means to separate out the large

number of confounding factors that often obscure the main qualitative findings (Field,

2009; Salkind, 2010, Abeyasekera, 2013). Statistical methods play a prominent role in

most research that dependent on quantitative analysis of data through converting the

ordinal data to numeric data by using the rating scale (the five-point Likert scale) as it

mentioned before. This way helps to conclude better results and to link them and

comparing with the results of previous research to show the contrast and the extent of

progress. Statistical analysis also helps the researcher to identify the degree of accuracy

of data and information of the study. It allows reporting of summary results in

numerical terms to be given with a specified degree of confidence (Field, 2009;

Treiman, 2009; Salkind, 2010).

3.11 Measurements

Analysis of the data was undertaken using IBM SPSS Statistics (Statistical Package for

the Social Sciences) Version 22(IBM). The following quantitative measures were used

for the data analysis:

A. Descriptive Statistics (Naoum, 2007; Salkind, 2010):

1. Frequencies and Percentile.

2. Measures of central tendency (the Mean)

3. Measurement of dispersion based on the Mean (Standard Deviation)

4. Relative Important Index (RII)

5. Factor analysis

6. Normal distribution

7. Homogeneity of variances (Homoscedasticity)

B. The Inferential Statistics (bivariate)/ test of hypotheses (Naoum, 2007; Salkind,

2010):

1. Cross-tabulation analysis

2. Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient/ Pearson's correlation

coefficient )a parametric test)

3. The sample independent t-test to find out whether there is a significant

difference in the Mean between two groups )a parametric test(

4. One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test )a parametric test(

5. Scheffé's method for multiple comparisons

The tabulation, bar chart, pie chart, and graph are the tools which have been used to

present the results.

3.11.1 Cross-tabulation analysis

In Statistics, a cross tabulation (crosstab) is a type of table in a matrix format that

displays the (multivariate) frequency distribution of the variables. They are heavily used

in survey research, business intelligence, Engineering and scientific research. They

provide a basic picture of the interrelation between two variables and can help find

61

interactions between them. In other words, the cross tabulation is a tool that allows a

researcher to compare the relationship between two variables.

3.11.2 Calculating of Relative Importance Index (RII) of Factors

The relative importance index method (RII) was used to determine the ranks of items/

variables as perceived by the respondents in each of part 2, part 3, part 4, and part 5.

The relative importance index was computed as (Sambasivan and Soon, 2007; Field,

2009):

𝑅𝐼𝐼=Σ𝑊/ (𝐴*𝑁)

Where:

W = the weighting given to each factor by the respondents (ranging from 1 to 5)

A = the highest weight (i.e. 5 in this case)

N = the total number of respondents

The RII value had a range of 0 to 1 (0 not inclusive), the higher the value of RII, the

more impact of the attribute. However, RII doesn't reflect the relationship between the

various items.

As such analysis does not provide any meaningful outcomes regarding understanding

the clustering effects of the similar items and the predictive capacity, further analysis is

required using advanced statistical methods. Factor analysis was used to reduce the

items and investigating the clustering effects.

3.11.3 Factor analysis

Factor analysis is a generic term for a family of statistical techniques concerned with the

reduction of a set of observable variables regarding a small number of latent factors. It

has been developed primarily for analyzing relationships among some measurable

entities (such as survey items or test scores). The underlying assumption of factor

analysis is that there exist some unobserved latent variables (or ―factors‖) that account

for the correlations among observed variables. In other words, the latent factors

determine the values of the observed variables (Doloi, 2008; Doloi, 2009; Hardy and

Bryman, 2004; Larose, 2006; Liu and Salvendy, 2008; Field, 2009). The main

applications of factor analytic techniques are:

(1) To reduce the number of variables; and

(2) To detect structure in the relationships between variables, that is to classify

variables.

3.11.3.1 Type of factor analysis

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA), which is used to identify complex

interrelationships among items and group items that are part of unified concepts.

The researcher makes no ―priori‖ assumptions about relationships among

factors.

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), which is a more complex approach that

tests the hypothesis that the items are associated with specific factors.

62

3.11.3.2 Methods of factoring

There are several methods for unearthing factors in data (Field, 2009):

Principal component analysis (PCA): is a widely used method for factor

extraction, which is the first phase of EFA. Factor weights are computed to

extract the maximum possible variance, with successive factoring continuing

until there is no further meaningful variance left. The factor model must then be

rotated for analysis

Canonical factor analysis (also called Rao's canonical factoring)

Image factoring

Alpha factoring

Factor regression model

Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is the preferred method, and thus, it has been

selected for factoring in this research to examine the underlying structure or the

structure of interrelationships among the variables.

3.11.3.3 The distribution of data

The assumption of normality is the essential requirement to generalize the results of

factor analysis test beyond the sample collected (Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014).

3.11.3.4 Validity of sample size

The reliability of factor analysis is dependent on sample size. PCA can be conducted on

a sample that has fewer than 100 respondents, but more than 50 respondents. The

standard rule is to suggest that sample size contains at least 10–15 respondents per item/

variable. In other words, sample size should be at least ten times the number of items/

variables and some even recommend twenty times (Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014).

3.11.3.5 Validity of correlation matrix (correlations between variables)

It is simply a rectangular array of numbers which gives the correlation coefficients

between a single item/ variable and every other item/ variable in the investigation. The

correlation coefficient between a variable and itself is always 1; hence the principal

diagonal of the correlation matrix contains 1s. The correlation coefficients above and

below the principal diagonal are the same. PCA requires that there be some correlations

greater than 0.30 between the items/ variables included in the analysis (Field, 2009;

Zaiontz, 2014).

3.11.3.6 Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett's Test as a measure of

appropriateness of factor analysis

The value of KMO can be calculated for individual and multiple items/ variables and

represents the ratio of squared correlation between items/ variables to the squared partial

correlation between items/ variables. It varies from 0 to 1. Interpretive adjectives for the

Kaiser Meyer Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy are: in the 0.90 as marvelous, in

the 0.80's as meritorious, in the 0.70's as middling, in the 0.60's as mediocre, in the

0.50's as miserable, and below 0.50 as unacceptable. A value close to 1 indicates that

pattern of correlation is relatively compact, and hence factor analysis should give clear

63

and reliable results (Kaiser, 1974; Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). Bartlett's test of

sphericity tests the hypothesis that the correlation matrix is an identity matrix; i.e. all

diagonal elements are 1 and all off-diagonal elements are 0, implying that all of the

items/ variables are uncorrelated. If the significant value for this test is less than alpha

level; researcher must reject the null hypothesis that the correlation matrix is an identity

matrix (Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014).

3.11.3.7 Determining the number of factors

Determining the optimal number of factors to extract is not a straightforward task since

the decision is ultimately subjective. There are several criteria for the number of factors

to be extracted. The ―eigenvalues greater than one‖ rule has been most commonly used

due to its simple nature and availability in various computer packages. The eigenvalue

(variance) criterion stated that each component explained at least one item's/ variable's

worth of the variability, and therefore only components with eigenvalues greater than

one should be retained (Larose, 2006; Field, 2009).

After extraction of factors, table of ―communalities (common variances)‖ should be

examined to know how much of the variance in each of the original items/ variables is

explained by the extracted factors. If the communality for a variable is less than 50%, it

is a candidate for exclusion from the analysis because the factor solution contains less

than half of the variance in the original item/ variable, and the explanatory power of that

variable might be better represented by the individual item/ variable (Field, 2009;

Zaiontz, 2014).

Components are then rotated via varimax rotation approach to assist in the process of

interpretation and to discover the best distribution of the better loading components

regarding the meaning of the components. This does not change the underlying solution

or the relationships among the items/ variables. Rather, it presents the pattern of

loadings in a manner that is easier to interpret factors/ components (Factor loading: the

regression coefficient of an item/ a variable for the linear model that describes a latent

variable or factor in factor analysis). On another hand, the pattern of factor loadings

should be examined to identify variables that have a complex structure (complex

structure occurs when one item/ variable has high loadings or correlations (0.50 or

greater) on more than one factor/ component). If an item/ a variable has a complex

structure, it should be removed from the analysis (Reinard, 2006; Field, 2009; Zaiontz,

2014).

3.11.3.8 Mathematical validity of factor analysis

Once factors have been extracted, it is necessary to cross check if factor analysis

measured what was intended to be measured by using Cronbach's alpha test (Cα). An

alpha of 0.60 or higher is the minimum acceptable level. Preferably, alpha will be 0.70

or higher (Field, 2009; Weiers, 2011; Garson, 2013).

3.11.4 Normal distribution

Normal distribution approximates many natural phenomena so well. It has been

developed into a standard of reference for many probability problems (Field, 2009).

Parametric statistical tests often assume the data has a normal distribution, because

when the data is not normal, it produces unqualified results. Normality was assessed by

64

applying the Central Limit Theorem. The Central Limit Theorem states that when

samples are large (above about 30), the sampling distribution will take the shape of a

normal distribution regardless of the shape of the population from which the sample was

drawn (Field, 2009; Levine et al., 2009). According to that, the collected data of the

research follows the normal distribution, where the sample size is N=270, and so

parametric tests must be used. Besides The Central Limit Theorem, normality was

assessed by conducting Skewness and Kurtosis tests (Hair et al., 2013). The acceptable

range for normality is Skewness and Kurtosis lying between -1 to 1 (Hair et al., 2013).

As shown in Table (3.11), Skewness and Kurtosis values were located in the acceptable

range in the current data set. Due to the large size of the sample (N=270), Skewness and

Kurtosis are decreased and data considered normal. This result supports The Central

Limit Theorem.

Table (3.11): Skewness and Kurtosis results

Fields Skewness Std. Error of

Skewness Kurtosis

Std. Error of

Kurtosis

The awareness level of BIM by the

professionals 0.77 0.15 0.16 0.30

The importance of BIM functions -0.53 0.15 -0.19 0.30

The value of BIM benefits -0.62 0.15 0.04 0.30

The strength of BIM barriers -0.71 0.15 1.08 0.30

All fields -0.51 0.15 -0.04 0.30 Sample size (N) = 270, Missing= 0

3.11.5 Homogeneity of variances (Homoscedasticity)

Equal variances across samples are called Homogeneity of variance. Some statistical

tests, for example, the analysis of variance, assume that variances are equal across

groups or samples. The assumption of Homoscedasticity (Homogeneity of variance)

simplifies mathematical and computational treatment. Levene's test (Levene 1960) is

used to verify the assumption that k samples have equal variances (Field, 2009).

3.11.6 Parametric tests

A parametric test is one that requires data from one of the large catalogue of

distributions that statisticians have described and for data to be parametric certain

assumptions must be true. The assumptions of parametric tests are as follows: Normally

distributed data, Homogeneity of variance, Interval data, and Independence (Field,

2009; Weiers, 2011).

3.11.6.1 Pearson's correlation coefficient

Correlation refers to any of a broad class of statistical relationships involving

dependence. The most familiar measure of dependence between two quantities (two

sets of data or two variables) is the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient, or

―Pearson's correlation coefficient,‖ commonly called just ―the correlation coefficient.‖

It shows the linear relationship between two sets of data. Two letters are used to

represent the Pearson correlation: Greek letter rho (ρ) for a population and the letter (r)

for a sample (Filed, 2009; Treiman, 2009). The Pearson's correlation coefficient

measures the strength and the direction of the relationship between two quantitative

variables. It is used to measure the strength of a linear association between two

65

variables, where the value r = 1 means a perfect positive correlation and the value r = -1

means a perfect negative correlation. The sign of (r) denotes the nature of the

relationship, while the value of (r) denotes the strength of relationship (Filed, 2009;

Treiman, 2009).

Requirements to apply the test

Scale of measurement should be interval or ratio

Variables should be approximately normally distributed

The association should be linear

There should be no outliers in the data

3.11.6.2 Independent Samples t-test

The t-test is a parametric test which helps the researcher to compare whether two groups

have different average (Mean) values (for example, whether men and women have

different average heights). According to the data gathered, the critical value of t = 1.97,

where the degree of freedom (df) = [N-2] = [270-2] = 268 (N is the sample size) at

significance (probability) level (α) = 0.05 (Field, 2009; Weiers, 2011).

3.11.6.3 One-way Analysis of Variance (One-way ANOVA)/ (F-test)

One-way Analysis of Variance (abbreviated one-way ANOVA) provides a parametric

statistical test of whether or not the Means of several groups are equal (by using the F-

ratio), and therefore generalizes the t-test to more than two groups. Critical value of F:

at degree of freedom (df) = [(K-1), (N-K)] at significance (probability) level (α) = 0.05

(Field, 2009; Weiers, 2011).

3.11.6.4 Scheffé's method (Multiple-Comparison procedure)

In Statistics, Scheffé's method, named after the American statistician Henry Scheffé, is a

method for adjusting significance levels in a linear regression analysis to account for

multiple comparisons. It is particularly useful in ANOVA (a special case of regression

analysis), and in constructing simultaneous confidence bands for regressions involving

basis functions (Field, 2009; Weiers, 2011).

3.12 Summary

This chapter described the detailed adopted methodology of the research. It included the

primary design for the research, details of research location, target population, sample

size, and response rate. The questionnaire design was detailed including the types of

questions, question format, the sequence of questions, and the covering letter. Face

validity, pre-testing the questionnaire, and a pilot study were three main steps that were

used to reach to the final amendment of the questionnaire. They all have been illustrated

through this chapter. Quantitative data analysis techniques, which include the Relative

important index, Factor analysis, Pearson correlation analysis, and others, were adopted

to be applied by the instruments of SPSS. For testing the research validity, reliability,

and adequacy of methods used in analysis, different statistical tests were used and

explained in details. The following Table (3.12) summarized the method chart.

66

Table (3.12): The summary of the methodology

Methodology Purpose Outcome

Proposal Identify the problem

Define the problem

Establish aim, objectives,

hypothesis, and key research

questions

Develop research plan/ strategy

(outline methodology)

Deciding on the research

approach

Deciding on the research

technique

Research problem

Non-application of Building Information Modeling (BIM) in the Architecture,

Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry in Gaza strip in Palestine.

Research Aim

To develop a clear understanding about BIM for identifying the different factors which

provide useful information to consider adopting BIM technology in projects by the

practitioners in the AEC industry in Gaza strip in Palestine.

Research Objectives

1. To assess the awareness level of BIM by the professionals in the AEC industry in

Gaza strip.

2. To identify top BIM functions that would convince the professionals for adopting


3. To identify top BIM benefits that would convince the professionals for adopting


4. To investigate and rank top BIM barriers that face the BIM adoption in the AEC


5. To study some hypotheses that might help to find solutions to adopting BIM in


Research plan/ strategy

The research approach was quantitative survey research to measure objectives

(descriptive survey and analytical survey).

The research technique was a questionnaire.

Literature Review Collecting existing knowledge on

the subject, reading and note-taking

from different sources such as

Refereed academic research

journals

Refereed Conferences

The following factors have been compiled and summarized from the previous studies: 45

factors of BIM functions, 55 factors of BIM benefits, and 36 factors of BIM barriers.

They factors were reviewed in Chapter (2) in three Tables (2.3), (2.5), (2.6). Some of

those items have been modified; other items have been merged; or have been deleted

through the process of questionnaire development as well as some items have been added.

67



Dissertations/ Theses

Reports/ occasional papers/

white papers

Government publications

Books Questionnaire

design

Questionnaires have been widely

used for descriptive and analytical

surveys to find out facts, opinions

and views on what is happening,

who, where, how many or how

much (Naoum, 2007).

Identify:

types of questions,

question format,

the sequence of questions, and

the covering letter

Types of questions

Closed-ended (multiple choice) questions and ranking the importance of factors

Question format

Rating scale (five-point Likert scale). The rating scale (five-point Likert scale) was

chosen to format the questions of the questionnaire with some common sets of response

categories called quantifiers (they reflect the intensity of the particular judgment

involved). Those quantifiers were used to facilitate understanding (see Table 3.1).

The sequence of questions

The content of the questionnaire verified the objectives in this research as follows:

Part one, which is related to the respondent‘s demographic data and the way

of work performance.

Part two: to assess the awareness level of BIM by the professionals in the


Part three: to investigate the importance of BIM functions in the AEC


Part four: to investigate the value of BIM benefits in the AEC industry in

Gaza strip.


The covering letter

The questionnaire was provided with a covering letter explaining the aim of the research,

the security of the information to encourage a high response, and the way of responding.

68



Face validity See whether the measurement

procedure (the questionnaire) in the

study appears to be valid or not. It

is a "common-sense" assessment

by the experts in the fields of the

AEC industry and Statistics.

The questionnaire was presented to twelve experts (from Gaza and outside Palestine)

by hand and by email at different periods.

Many useful and important modifications have been made for the questionnaire.

Those modifications have been explained in Table (3.2).

Pre-testing the

questionnaire

To make sure that the questionnaire

is going to deliver the right data

and to ensure the quality of the

collected data.

To find out if the survey has any

logic problems, if the questions are

too hard to understand, if the

wording of the questions is

ambiguous, or if it has any

response bias, etc.

The pre-testing was conducted in two phases, and each phase has been tested with six

people.

The first phase of the pre-testing resulted with some amendments to the wording of

some words in the questions and adding further explanation to some factors to

facilitate the understanding of the questionnaire.

The second phase was sufficient to ensure the success of the questionnaire, where

there were not any queries, and everything was clear.

For further details, review Table (3.3).

Pilot study A trial run on the questionnaire

before circulating it to the whole

sample to get valuable responses

and to detect areas of possible

shortcomings.

Often a sample of 30-50 responses

is obtained, coded, and analyzed.

Questions that are not providing

useful data are discarded, and the

final revisions of the questionnaire

are made.

40 copies of the questionnaire were distributed to respondents from the target group

(The professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip).

All the copies were collected and analyzed through Statistical Package for the Social

Sciences IBM (SPSS) version 22.

The tests that have conducted were as follows:

1. The statistical validity of the questionnaire/ criterion-related validity (the internal

and the structure validity).

2. The reliability of the questionnaire by Half Split method and the Cronbach‘s

Coefficient Alpha method.

The results showed the success of the tests, and thus the success of the questionnaire.

The questionnaire was adopted and was distributed to the whole sample.

The 40 successful copies were included in the whole sample.

69



Sampling the

questionnaire and

data collection

Identify the population from which

the sample is to be drawn, where

the term ―sample‖ means a

specimen or part of a whole

(population) which is drawn to

show what the rest is like

The type of the sample

A convenience sample was chosen as the type of the sample, where convenience sampling

is a non-probability sampling technique.

The population

The population included the professionals (Architects, Civil Engineers, Mechanical

Engineers, Electrical Engineers, and any other professional with a related specialization)

in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

Size sample

275 copies of the questionnaire were distributed, and 270 copies of the questionnaire were

received from the respondents. Thus, the whole sample was 270 (the successful sample of

the pilot study was included, which equals 40).

Response rate

(270/ 275)*100 = 97.8 %

Analysis and

Presentation of

the Results

Analyze the results of the collected

data to determine the direction of

the study

Choose the analysis instrument

Identify the method of the analysis

Present the results

Analysis instrument

IBM (SPSS) version 22

Method of analysis

Quantitative analysis of data by converting the ordinal data to scale data.

The quantitative measures/ analysis

A. Descriptive Statistics:

1. Frequencies and Percentile (results can be presented in the form of tabulation, a

bar chart, a pie chart or a graph).

2. Measures of central tendency (The Mean)

3. Measurement of dispersion based on the Mean (Standard Deviation)

4. Relative Important Index (RII)

5. Factor analysis

6. Normal distribution

70



7. Homogeneity of variances (Homoscedasticity)

B. The Inferential Statistics (bivariate)/ test of hypotheses:

1. Cross-tabulation analysis

2. Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient/ Pearson's correlation coefficient

(a parametric test)

3. Independent samples t-test to find out whether there is a significant difference in

the Mean between two groups (a parametric test)

4. One-way Analysis of Variance (One-way ANOVA)/ (F-test) (a parametric test)

5. Scheffé's method for multiple comparisons

The tabulation, bar chart, pie chart, and graph are the tools which have been used to present

the results.

Chapter 4

72

Chapter 4: Results and discussion

This chapter included analysis and discussion of the results that have been collected

from field surveys. A total of 270 completed copies had been returned, representing a

valid response rate of 97.8%. Data were analyzed quantitatively using IBM (SPSS)

version 22 including Descriptive and Inferential statistical tools. This chapter included

the respondents‘ profiles and the way of implementing their work, quantitative analysis

of the questionnaire, and finally the summary framework of the results.

4.1 Respondents’ profiles

The target respondents of the questionnaire survey were the professionals (Architects,

Civil Engineers, Mechanical Engineers, Electrical Engineers, and other Engineers who

work in design and construction) in the Architectural, Engineering, and Construction

(AEC) industry in Gaza strip. This section analyzed the demographic data of the 270

respondents.

Among the respondents, a large majority had ―less than 5 years‖ of working experience

in the AEC industry, with 35.2%. The experience for the rest of the respondents was

"from 5 to less than 10 years", and "10 years and more‖ with 32.6% and 32.2%,

respectively. With respect to the respondents' specialization, there were 129 Civil

Engineers (47.8%), 83 Architects (30.7%), 41 Electrical Engineers (15.2%), 14

Mechanical Engineers (5.2%) and 3 from other specializations (1.1%) including:

Electromechanical Engineer, Environmental Engineer, and Geographic Information

System (GIS) Engineer.

Respondents for this study had a good understanding of consulting and construction

works in the AEC industry, and could thus provide reliable answers to the

questionnaire. In terms of the nature of their workplace, a majority of the respondents

were working as consultants with 30%, 24.4% were working as contractors, 19.3% of

them were working in the governmental sector, 15.6% of them were working in the

NGOs, and 10.7% were working in other places such as the Engineers Association.

Table (4.1) presents the characteristics of the respondents as follows:

Table (4.1): The respondent’s profile

General

information about

respondents

Categories Frequency Percentage

Gender Male 222 82.2%

Female 48 17.8%

Educational

qualification

Bachelor's 195 72.2%

Master's 71 26.3%

Ph.D. 4 1.5%

Study place Gaza strip 196 72.6%

Outside Palestine 65 24.1%

West Bank 9 3.3%

73

Table (4.1): The respondent’s profile

General

information about

respondents

Categories Frequency Percentage

Specialization

Civil 129 47.8%

Architect 83 30.7%

Electrical 41 15.2%

Mechanical 14 5.2%

Other

(Electromechanical

Engineer,

Environmental

Engineer, and

GIS Engineer)

3 1.1%

Nature of the

Workplace

Consultant 81 30%

Contractor 66 24.4%

Governmental 52 19.3%

NGOs 42 15.6%

Other (the Engineers

Association) 29 10.7%

Location of

workplace

Gaza 204 75.6%

Rafah 23 8.5%

North 21 7.8%

KhanYounis 14 5.2%

Middle 8 3%

Current field -

present job

Designer 73 27%

Supervisor 64 23.7%

Site Engineer 54 20%

Other (office

Engineer) 46 17%

Projects Manager 33 12.2%

Years of

experience

Less than 5 years 95 35.2%

From 5 to less than

10 years 88 32.6%

10 years and more 87 32.2%

4.2 The way of implementing work by respondents

The way of implementing work by the respondents has been assessed through two

questions, one of them was about the use of the three-dimensional (3D) programs in

implementing the work, and the other question was about the software tools that used in

implementing the work in the AEC industry. Results were shown in the Figures (4.1)

and (4.2) respectively.

Percentage of implementation the work by using three-dimensional (3D) programs

Figure (4.1) shows that 65.6% of the respondents are using 3D programs in

implementing of their works by ―less than 25%‖, while 18.9% of the respondents are

using 3D programs ―from 25% to less than 50%‖, 9.3% of the respondents are using 3D

programs ―from 50% to less than 70%‖, and 6.3% of the respondents are using 3D

programs by ―70% and more‖ in performing their works. As shown from the results, the

74

use of the 3D programs in implementing works by the professionals in Gaza strip in the

AEC industry is little. 3D programs are usually used only by Architects for both the

exterior design and the interior design of the building according to the request of the

owner.

Figure (4.1): Percentage of implementation the work by using 3D programs

The used software tool by the respondents to carry out projects

Figure (4.2) illustrates that the more commonly programs used by the respondents to

conduct projects in the AEC industry are ―Excel‖ and ―AutoCAD (2D),‖ where 23.9%

of the respondents use ―Excel,‖ and 23.8% use ―AutoCAD (2D).‖ ―Excel‖ is the most

used program in achieving the Engineering works in Gaza strip, which is often used in

the calculation of quantities and financial matters. In addition to the adoption of

―AutoCAD (2D)‖ software in Engineering drawings and design by all the Engineers of

various specializations, and this result confirms the result in the previous question as it

shows a lack of the use of the (3D) programs.

―MS Project‖ is also an important software tool to carry out projects in the AEC

industry. It is used for planning the schedule. It was found that 18.4% of the respondents

use ―MS Project.‖ On the other hand, 9.5% of the respondents use other programs such

as ―Primavera and Robot.‖ There are also some programs are being used for design but

with small percentages, where 6.1% of the respondents use ―AutoCAD (3D),‖ 3.7% of

the respondents use ―Revit,‖ 3.3% of the respondents use ―3D Max‖, and finally 2.3%

of the respondents are using ―ArchiCAD.‖

Less than 25%

(66%)

From 25% to

less than 50%

(19%)

From 50% to

less than 70%

(9%)

70% and more

(6%)

75

Figure (4.2): The used software tool by respondents to carry out projects

4.3 The awareness level of BIM

There was a field contains nine statements to assess the level of the awareness of BIM

by the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. These statements were subjected

to the views of the respondents, and the outcomes of the analysis were shown in Table

(4.2). The Descriptive statistics, i.e. Means, Standard Deviations (SD), t-value (two-

tailed), probabilities (P-value), Relative Importance Indices (RII), and finally ranks

were established and presented in Table (4.2) as follows:

Table (4.2): The awareness level of BIM by the professionals in the AEC industry

No. The awareness statement

Mea

n

SD

RII

(%

)

t-val

ue

(tw

o-t

aile

d)

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.)

Ran

k

A8 I think that BIM technology is important

for the AEC industry in Gaza strip. 2.60 1.37 52 -4.81 0.00* 1

A9

I think that BIM technology has a

positive impact on the sustainable

environment.

2.59 1.32 51.70 -5.16 0.00* 2

A6

I know that Revit and ArchiCAD

programs are BIM technology

techniques.

1.86 1.11 37.10 -16.99 0.00* 3

A3 I have a good idea about the concept of

BIM technology. 1.85 0.98 36.96 -19.30 0.00* 4

A4

I have a high rate of information

regarding the use of BIM technology in

Engineering project management.

1.75 0.93 34.96 -22.11 0.00* 6

A1 I have read some research and studies

about BIM. 1.75 0.94 35.04 -21.79 0.00* 5

A5 I have an idea about how to use BIM

technology programs. 1.51 0.88 30.26 -27.74 0.00* 7

23.9%

23.8%

18.4%

9.5%

9%

6.1%

3.7%

3.3%

2.3%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Excel

AutoCAD (2D)

MS Project

Other programs such as Primavera and Robot

Sketch up

AutoCAD (3D)

Revit

3D Max

ArchiCAD

76

Table (4.2): The awareness level of BIM by the professionals in the AEC industry

No. The awareness statement

Mea

n

SD

RII

(%

)

t-val

ue

(tw

o-t

aile

d)

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.)

Ran

k

A2 Some of my college courses at University

talked about BIM. 1.31 0.70 26.30 -39.80 0.00* 8

A7 I use BIM technology in my job. 1.23 0.66 24.59 -44.34 0.00* 9

All statements 1.83 0.76 36.57 -25.50 0.00*

Critical value of t: at degree of freedom (df) = [N-1] = [270-1] = 269 and significance (Probability)

level 0.05 equals “1.97”

Figure (4.3): RII of statements (A1 to A9) used to assess the awareness level of BIM

The numerical scores obtained from the questionnaire responses provided an indication

of the awareness level of BIM by the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

To further investigate the collected data, RII is used to rank the used statements (A1 to

A9) to assess the awareness level of BIM by the professionals according to the scores

by the respondents.

Table (4.2) provides RIIs and ranks of the statements, respectively. It worth mentioning

that ranking of the statements was based on the highest Mean, RII, and the lowest SD. If

some statements have similar Means and RIIs, as in the case of A1 and A4, the ranking

will depend on the lowest SD. For example; although A1 and A4 have the same Mean

and RIIs, A4 is ranked higher than the A1 because it has a lower SD. Statements were

categorized with ratings from 24.59 % to 52% (Figure 4.3).

The findings indicated that “I think that BIM technology is important for the AEC

industry in Gaza strip” (A8) with (RII =52 %; P-value = 0.00*) got the highest rank

according to the overall respondents. This result is consistent with the result of

researchers who found that BIM has recently obtained widespread attention in the AEC

industry (Azhar et al., 2008a).

52

51.70

37.10

36.96

35.04 34.96

30.26

26.30

24.59

0

10

20

30

40

50

60A8

A9

A6

A3

A1A4

A5

A2

A7

77

“I think that BIM technology has a positive impact on the sustainable environment”

(A9) with (RII = 51.70%; P-value = 0.00*) got the second rank. It supports the first

result. Since respondents have a sense of the importance of BIM in the AEC industry,

this sense must be reflected on thoughts about BIM benefits for sustainability

improvement. The crossover between sustainability and BIM is significant (Kolpakov,

2012).

“Some of my college courses at University talked about BIM” (A2) was ranked as the

8th position with (RII of 26.30%; P-value = 0.00*). Regarding this statement, there

were some interesting results which found when cross-tabulations were done between

this statement and question #3 about the study place in the profile data. Findings show

that the study place affects the degree of the knowledge of BIM. As found, an enormous

percentage of the total respondents who studied in Gaza strip (80%) had never taken

courses about BIM in their universities. 77% of the total respondents who had studied in

the West Bank had the same answer. The lowest ratio was for the respondents who

studied outside Palestine with 75% of the total of them whose had never taken courses

about BIM in their universities. Based on this result, it can be observed the absence of

interest of educating BIM through courses in universities. Thus, the lack of the

awareness of BIM is logical and expected result.

Lastly, and “I use BIM technology in my job" (A7) was ranked in the 9th position as the

least statement of the field of “the awareness level of BIM by the professionals in the

AEC industry in Gaza strip” with (RII = 24.59%; P-value = 0.00*) according to the all

respondents. It is a meaningful and realistic result about the current situation in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip. According to the respondents, BIM is used individually and with

the level of negligible, but not on companies‘ level. In addition to that, BIM does not be

applied professionally, and thus the professionals do not get the full benefits of BIM,

where they are only using some advantages of BIM software (such as the advantages of

Revit program) in the design phase.

The overall results for the field of “the awareness level of BIM by professionals in the

AEC industry in Gaza strip” show that the Mean for all statements equals 1.83. The

total RII equals 36.57% and for evaluating this result, it was important to calculate the

neutral value of RII and compare the total RII with the neutral value of RII. Based on

that, the average of the five-point scale that was used for rating the items has an average

of (3). Consequently, the neutral value of RII is (3/5)*100 = 60%, where (5) refers to

the rating scale that was used and (3) refers to the average of that rating scale as

mentioned before. Based on all of that, and as shown, the total RII 36.57% is less than

the neutral value of RII 60%. In addition, ―critical value‖ of t (tabulated t), at degree of

freedom (df) ―[N (the whole sample) -1] = [270-1] = 269‖ and at ―significance level =

0.05‖, equals 1.97, while the value of t-test equals 25.50. As shown, the value of t-test

(25.50) is greater than the critical value of t (1.97). The total P-value of all items also

equals 0.00*, which is less than the significance level 0.05.

Based on the previous results, the awareness level of BIM by the professionals in the

AEC industry in Gaza strip is too low. These results also agree with the results obtained

by Keegan (2010) through information from the interviews and the meetings that

conducted in the United Kingdom (UK), where he confirmed that general knowledge of

BIM and its benefits was little, and only 42% of the respondents were familiar with it.

Thurairajah and Goucher (2013) also claimed that there is an overall lack of the

78

knowledge and the understanding of what BIM is in the UK despite there are some

destinations have adopted BIM in their work.

Newton and Chileshe (2012) conducted a field study in the South Australian

construction industry about the awareness and usage of BIM. The findings indicated

that a significant proportion of the respondents have little or no understanding of the

concept of BIM and the usage was found to be very low. The same result was shown by

Mitchell and Lambert (2013), where they said that people in Australia suffer from a lack

of the knowledge about BIM and its distinctive capabilities in the field of the

construction industry. In addition to the presence of other studies and reports that

support this result, where Gu et al., (2008) and NBS (2012) said that BIM is entirely

misunderstood across the board. Only 54% of the Architectural practices are currently

aware of BIM (NBS, 2013). In general, many studies, such as Arayici et al. (2009);

Kassem et al. (2012); Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012); Löf and Kojadinovic (2012);

Elmualim and Gilder (2013); and Aibinu and Venkatesh (2014), concluded that there

are a lack of the awareness of BIM and its benefits in the field of the construction

industry as well as the business value of BIM from a financial perspective.

On the contrary, there was an exception in a study conducted in Ireland by Crowley

(2013). It was directly relating to the awareness and the use of BIM by the Quantity

Surveyors (QS) profession. The outcomes of the questionnaire found that 73% of the

sample (105 responses) were only aware of BIM without using it; 24% were aware of

BIM and using it in performing their job, while, there was only 3% who not aware of

BIM.

4.4 The importance of BIM functions

There was a field contains 16 items of BIM functions, and this list of the 16 items was

taken from the literature review and adapted by modifying or merging according to the

results of the face validity and the pretesting of the questionnaire as shown in Chapter 3.

These items were subjected to the views of the respondents and were analyzed. The

Descriptive Statistics, i.e. Means, Standard Deviations (SD), t-value (two-tailed),

probabilities (P-value), Relative Importance Indices (RII), and finally ranks were

established and presented in Table (4.3).

4.4.1 RII of BIM functions

RII was calculated to weight each function of BIM (from F1 to F16) according to the

numerical scores obtained from the questionnaire responses by the professionals in the

AEC industry in Gaza strip and the results have been ranked from the highest degree

(the most important BIM function) to the least degree (the lowest important BIM

function). Table (4.3) provides RIIs and ranks of the items of BIM functions,

respectively. The numbers in the ―rank‖ column represent the sequential ranking. It

worth mentioning that ranking of BIM functions was based on the highest Mean, RII,

and the lowest SD. If some items have similar Means and RIIs, as in the case of (F2 and

F1); and (F12 and F13), the ranking will depend on the lowest SD. More precisely,

although F2 and F1 have the same Mean and RIIs, F2 is ranked higher than the F1

because it has a lower SD. The same thing was done for F12 and F13, where F12 has

taken the higher rank than F13. Items were categorized with ratings from 77.19 % to

68.44 % (Figure 4.4).

79

Table (4.3): The importance of BIM functions

No. BIM function

Mea

n

SD

RII

(%

)

t-val

ue

(tw

o-t

aile

d)

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.)

Ran

k

F16

Interoperability and translation of

information (among the professionals)

within the same system/ program

3.86 1.01 77.19 14.02 0.00* 1

F3

Change Management (any modification to

the building design will automatically

replicate in each view such as floor plans,

sections, and elevation)

3.81 0.90 76.22 14.83 0.00* 2

F2

Functional simulations to choose the best

solution (such as Lighting, energy, and any

other sustainability information)

3.74 0.91 74.89 13.48 0.00* 3

F1 Three-dimensional (3D) modeling and

visualization 3.74 0.93 74.89 13.13 0.00* 4

F8 Safety planning and monitoring on-site 3.73 1.03 74.59 11.68 0.00* 5

F4

Visualized constructability reviews/

Building simulation (a 3D structural

model as well as a 3D model of

Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing

(MEP) services)

3.67 0.97 73.33 11.32 0.00* 6

F7 Model-based site planning and site

utilization 3.66 1.04 73.19 10.46 0.00* 7

F11 Future expansion/ extension in facility and

infrastructure 3.62 0.94 72.44 10.93 0.00* 8

F15

Managing metadata (provide information

about an individual item's content) via a

3D model of the building

3.59 0.92 71.85 10.55 0.00* 9

F12 Maintenance scheduling via as-built model 3.57 0.98 71.48 9.63 0.00* 10

F13 Energy optimization of the building 3.57 1.04 71.48 8.97 0.00* 11

F11

Creation of as-built model that contains all

the necessary data to manage and operate

the building (facility management)

3.56 0.88 71.26 10.46 0.00* 12

F5 Four-dimensional (4D) visualized

scheduling and construction sequencing 3.54 1.00 70.81 8.85 0.00* 13

F6 Model-based cost estimation (Five-

dimensional (5D)) 3.53 0.99 70.64 8.82 0.00* 14

F14 Issue Reporting and Data archiving via a

3D model of the building 3.48 0.97 69.67 8.19 0.00* 15

F9 Model-based quantity take-offs of

materials and labor 3.42 0.98 68.44 7.06 0.00* 16

All functions 3.63 0.70 72.64 14.92 0.00* Critical value of t: at degree of freedom (df) = [N-1] = [270-1] = 269 and significance (Probability)

level 0.05 equals “1.97”

80

Figure (4.4): RII of BIM functions (F1 to F16)

The findings indicated that “Interoperability and translation of information (among the

professionals) within the same system/ program” (F16) is the most important function

that would convince non-users of BIM for adopting BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip. It has been ranked as the first position with (RII =77.19%) and (P-value = 0.00*)

according to the overall respondents. This result is in line with the studies of Baldwin

(2012) and Gray et al. (2013). It is also consistent with which has been talked about by

Bernstein and Pittman (2004), RAIC (2007), Both and Kindsvater (2012) and Wong and

Fan (2013). They said that insurance of effective interoperability and information

exchange between the different programs is the most important thing and necessary

when thinking about the adoption of BIM. It is facilitating accurate information

mobility among all the parties as well as the collaborative working in the AEC industry.

“Change Management (any modification to the building design will automatically

replicate in each view such as floor plans, sections, and elevation)” (F3) was ranked as

the second most important function of BIM with (RII = 76.22%; P-value = 0.00*). It

contributes to the improvement of design phase by checking and updating the design. It

updates the building design according to any modification, where it will automatically

replicate in each view such as floor plans, sections, and elevation. This result is

consistent with which has been reported by CRC construction innovation (2007) and

Baldwin (2012). They emphasized that the “design change management” through BIM

is important for saving time, reducing rework, preserving design intent, and accelerating

project delivery. With BIM, the overall impact of change can be assessed. BIM plans

and manages change. Consequently, BIM lowers risk associated with change.

“Functional simulations to choose the best solution (such as Lighting, energy, and any

other sustainability information)” (F2) was ranked as the third position with (RII of

74.89%; SD = 0.91; P-value = 0.00*). This function of BIM would be critical for the

AEC industry in Gaza strip. The simulations of each of lighting, energy, and any other

sustainability information would affect the strength and the quality of the design, and

77.19

76.22

74.89

74.89

74.59

73.33

73.19

72.44 71.85 71.48

71.48

71.26

70.81

70.64

69.67

68.44

64

66

68

70

72

74

76

78F16

F3

F2

F1

F8

F4

F7

F11

F15

F12

F13

F10

F5

F6

F14

F9

81

hence the operation of the building positively. The result is agreed with which was

written about the sustainable design and its great impact on the overall quality of the

work. According to that, Architects, Engineers, and even owners need for additional

types of simulations for assessing the appropriate take-offs when considering the use of

day lighting and the mitigation of glare and solar heat gain, as compared with the

project cost and the overall project requirements. BIM technologies provide

stakeholders with the required tools for ensuring doing this effectively (Ashcraft, 2008;

Eastman et al., 2008; Baldwin, 2012; Lee et al., 2014).

“Three-dimensional (3D) modeling and visualization” (F1) was ranked as the fourth

position with (RII of 74.89%; SD = 0.93; P-value = 0.00*). It is indicating the

importance of this function. This function is useful for all parties in all phases of the

AEC industry. The function of “3D modeling and visualization” is important for both

designers and contractors to identify and resolve problems with the help of the model

before working on-site. This function of BIM enabled potential problems to be

identified early in the design phase and resolved before construction begins. “3D

modeling and visualization” is also important for owners of projects for better

understanding and making decisions. This function can be used as very useful and

successful marketing tool for the building. Choosing this function as an important

function for the AEC industry in Gaza strip is an acceptable outcome, where this

function can affect the AEC industry positively in Gaza strip according to the above

results, and hence encouraging the adoption of BIM. This result is consistent with those

reported by Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011), Ku and Taiebat (2011), Gray et al. (2013) and

Lee et al. (2014), whose research studies determined this function as the most important

function of BIM for the construction companies in Southern California, the U.S.,

Australia, and Korea, respectively. In addition to that, this outcome corroborates the

findings of the studies of Ashcraft (2008), Eastman et al. (2008) and Baldwin (2012).

Finally, ―Model-based quantity take-offs of materials and labor” (F9) was ranked as the

lowest function in the 15th position with (RII = 68.44%; P-value = 0.00*) as per

perceptions of all the respondents. This result means that the respondents do not know

the importance of this function for the AEC industry in Gaza strip. On the contrary of

the result of the analysis, for each of Ashcraft (2008); Ku and Taiebat (2011); Lee et al.

(2014) have proved in their studies the importance of the function of the quantity take-

offs of materials and labor through BIM model. It is significantly reducing the time

required in the traditional approach as well as lessen the cost of this process. Fast and

simple material quantity take-offs represent an efficient method of checks and balances

and often reduce bidding time (Holness, 2006). Aibinu and Venkatesh (2013)

investigated how much BIM is essential for Quantity Surveyors (QS) in Australia.

Findings from the study showed that “Model-based quantity take-offs of materials and

labor” leads to time savings, where it reduces labor intensive quantity take-off and

increases the ability to identify and advise the design team on elements exceeding the

cost target. It is also growing productivity. BIM improves the efficiency of the quantity

take-offs during the budget estimating stage (Eastman et al., 2008). BIM model ensures

speed, simplicity, and accuracy of quantity take-offs.

The top four functions of BIM, which were rated by the respondents, are logical and

acceptable to be the essential functions of BIM that would convince the professionals to

adopt it in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. Regarding results for all items of the part of

BIM functions, it is shown that the Mean for all those items equals 3.63, and the total

RII equals 72.64%, which is greater than 60% (the neutral value of RII (3/5)*100 =

82

60%). The value of t-test equals 14.92, which is higher than the critical value of t that

equals 1.97. As well as the total P-value of all items equals 0.00* and it is less than the

significance level of 0.05. Based on all the previous results, BIM functions are

significantly necessary for the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

4.4.2 Factor analysis results of BIM functions

RII analysis did not provide any meaningful outcomes regarding understanding the

clustering effect of the similar items/ variables, and thus further analysis was required

using advanced statistical methods such as factor analysis. The use of factor analysis is

purely exploratory. Factor analysis was used to examine the pattern of intercorrelations

between the 16 items/ variables of the field of BIM functions in an attempt to reduce the

number of them. It also used to group items/ variables with similar characteristics

together. In other words, it identified subsets of items/ variables that correlate highly

with each other, which called factors or components. Factor analysis was conducted for

this study using the Principal Component Analysis (PCA).

4.4.2.1 Appropriateness of factor analysis

The data was first assessed for its suitability to the factor analysis application. There

were many stages of that assessment:

The distribution of data


factor analysis test beyond the sample collected (Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). As shown

in Chapter 3, the received data of the research follows the normal distribution. The

result has been satisfied with this requirement.

Validity of sample size

The reliability of factor analysis is dependent on sample size. Factor analysis/ PCA can

be conducted on a sample that has fewer than 100 respondents, but more than 50

respondents. The sample size for this study was 270. Further, the standard rule is to

suggest that sample size contains at least 10–15 respondents per item/ variable. In other

words, sample size should be at least ten times the number of items/ variables and some

even recommend 20 times (Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). Fortunately, for this field of

BIM functions, the condition was verified. This field contains 16 items/ variables, and

the sample size was 270. With 270 respondents and 16 items/ variables (BIM

functions), the ratio of respondents to items/ variables are 17: 1, which exceeds the

requirement for the ratio of respondents to items/ variables.

Validity of Correlation matrix (Correlations between items/ variables)

Table (4.4) illustrates the correlation matrix for the 16 items/ variables of BIM

functions. It is simply a rectangular array of numbers which gives the correlation

coefficients between a single item/ variable and every other item/ variable in the

investigation (Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). As shown in Table (4.4), the correlation

coefficient between an item/ a variable and itself is always 1; hence the principal


83


greater than 0.30 between the items/ variables included in the analysis. For this set of

items/ variables, that most of the correlations in the matrix are strong and greater than

0.30. Correlations have been satisfied with this requirement.

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett's test

The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) sampling adequacy test and Bartlett's test of Sphericity

were carried out. The results of these tests are reported in Table (4.5). The value of the

KMO measure of sampling adequacy was 0.92 (close to 1) and was considered

acceptable and marvelous because it exceeds the minimum requirement of 0.50 and it is

above 0.90 (‗superb‘ according to Kaiser, 1974; Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). Moreover,

the Bartlett test of sphericity was another indication of the strength of the relationship

among items/ variables. The Bartlett test of sphericity was 2707.30, and the associated

significance level was 0.00. The probability value (Sig.) associated with the Bartlett test

is less than 0.01, which satisfies the PCA requirement. This result indicated that the

correlation matrix was not an identity matrix and all of the items/ variables are

correlated (Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). According to the results of these two tests, the

sample data of BIM functions were appropriated for factor analysis.

Measures of reliability for the whole items/variables

Cronbach's alpha test was performed on the items/ variables in the field of BIM

functions. The value of Cronbach‘s alpha (Cα) could be anywhere in the range of 0 to 1,

where a higher value denotes the greater internal consistency and vice versa. An alpha

of 0.60 or higher is the minimum acceptable level. Preferably, alpha will be 0.70 or

higher (Field, 2009; Weiers, 2011; Garson, 2013). As shown in Table (4.5), the value of

the calculated Cα for all items/ variables in the field of BIM functions is 0.94 which is

considered to be marvelous.

84

Table: (4.4): Correlations between items/ variables of BIM functions

F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 F10 F11 F12 F13 F14 F15 F16

F1 1

F2 0.72** 1

F3 0.62** 0.69** 1

F4 0.52** 0.57** 0.62** 1

F5 0.48** 0.46** 0.47** 0.56** 1

F6 0.43** 0.46** 0.48** 0.51** 0.74** 1

F7 0.49** 0.51** 0.47** 0.46** 0.54** 0.54** 1

F8 0.53** 0.45** 0.56** 0.45** 0.47** 0.48** 0.74** 1

F9 0.38** 0.39** 0.35** 0.42** 0.49** 0.56** 0.37** 0.33** 1

F10 0.48** 0.52** 0.43** 0.44** 0.52** 0.54** 0.56** 0.50** 0.60** 1

F11 0.46** 0.48** 0.51** 0.45** 0.46** 0.41** 0.50** 0.53** 0.39** 0.66** 1

F12 0.46** 0.44** 0.48** 0.43** 0.46** 0.47** 0.54** 0.56** 0.33** 0.56** 0.63** 1

F13 0.50** 0.48** 0.50** 0.38** 0.39** 0.39** 0.54** 0.60** 0.28** 0.48** 0.63** 0.66** 1

F14 0.40** 0.41** 0.39** 0.44** 0.54** 0.55** 0.50** 0.48** 0.42** 0.42** 0.43** 0.56** 0.48** 1

F15 0.40** 0.44** 0.47** 0.44** 0.47** 0.47** 0.53** 0.60** 0.36** 0.48** 0.53** 0.59** 0.58** 0.66** 1

F16 0.48** 0.47** 0.49** 0.44** 0.43** 0.37** 0.51** 0.50** 0.38** 0.47** 0.49** 0.51** 0.48** 0.49** 0.62** 1

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (1-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (1-tailed).

Table: (4.5) KMO and Bartlett's test for items/ variables of BIM functions

KMO and Bartlett's test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy 0.92

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity

Approx. Chi-Square 2707.30

df 120

Sig. 0.00

Cronbach's Alpha (Cα) 0.94

85

Communalities (common variance)

The next part of the output was a Table of communalities. Communalities represent the

proportion of the variance in the original items/ variables that is accounted for by the

factor solution. The factor solution should explain at least half of each original item's/

variable's variance, so the communality value for each item/ variable should be 0.50 or

higher (Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). Table (4.6) shows that all of the communalities for

all items/ variables satisfy the minimum requirement of being larger than 0.50, and

therefore was not to exclude any of these items/ variables on the basis of low

communalities. Thus, all of the 16 items/ variables of this field (BIM functions) were

used in this analysis.

Table: (4.6) Communalities of BIM functions

No. BIM function

Init

ial

Ex

trac

tion

F1 Three-dimensional (3D) modeling and visualization 1 0.73

F2 Functional simulations to choose the best solution (such as Lighting,

energy, and any other sustainability information) 1 0.78

F3

Change Management (any modification to the building design will

automatically replicate in each view such as floor plans, sections, and

elevation)

1 0.75

F4

Visualized constructability reviews/ Building simulation (a 3D

structural model as well as a 3D model of Mechanical, Electrical, and

Plumbing (MEP) services)

1 0.63


sequencing 1 0.71

F6 Model-based cost estimation (Five-dimensional (5D)) 1 0.76

F7 Model-based site planning and site utilization 1 0.60

F8 Safety planning and monitoring on-site 1 0.65

F9 Model-based quantity take-offs of materials and labor 1 0.66

F10 Creation of as-built model that contains all the necessary data to manage

and operate the building (facility management) 1 0.59

F11 Future expansion/ extension in facility and infrastructure 1 0.60

F12 Maintenance scheduling via as-built model 1 0.69

F13 Energy optimization of the building 1 0.71

F14 Issue Reporting and Data archiving via a 3D model of the building 1 0.62

F15 Managing metadata (provide information about an individual item's

content) via a 3D model of the building 1 0.69

F16 Interoperability and translation of information (among the professionals)

within the same system/ program 1 0.53

Total Variance Explained

By using the output from iteration 1, there were three eigenvalues greater than 1 (Figure

4.5). The eigenvalue criterion stated that each component explained at least one item's/

variable's worth of the variability, and therefore only components with eigenvalues

greater than one should be retained (Larose, 2006; Field, 2009). The latent root criterion

for some factors to be derived would indicate that there were three components (factors)

to be extracted for these items/ variables. Results were tabulated in Table (4.7). The

three components solution explained a sum of the variance with component 1

86

contributing 52.60%; component 2 contributing 7.41%; and component 3 contributing

6.77%. All the remaining factors are not significant.

Figure (4.5): The three components (factors) of BIM functions

The three components were then rotated via varimax (orthogonal) rotation approach.

This approach does not change the underlying solution or the relationships among the

items/ variables. Rather, it presents the pattern of loadings in a manner that is easier to

interpret factors (components) (Reinard, 2006; Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). The rotated

solution revealed that the three components solution explained a sum of the variance

with component 1 contributing 28.21%; component 2 contributing 19.36%; and

component 3 contributing 19.20%. These three components (factors) explained 66.77%

of total variance for the varimax rotation.

Table (4.7): Total Variance Explained of BIM functions

Co

mp

on

ent

Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of

Squared Loadings

Rotation Sums of

Squared Loadings

To

tal

% o

f V

aria

nce

Cu

mu

lati

ve

%

To

tal

% o

f V

aria

nce

Cu

mu

lati

ve

%

To

tal

% o

f V

aria

nce

Cu

mu

lati

ve

%

1 8.42 52.60 52.60 8.42 52.60 52.60 4.51 28.21 28.21

2 1.19 7.41 60.01 1.19 7.41 60.01 3.10 19.36 47.57

3 1.08 6.77 66.77 1.08 6.77 66.77 3.07 19.20 66.77

4 0.81 5.04 71.82

5 0.69 4.29 76.11

6 0.60 3.72 79.83

The importance of

BIM functions

Factor 1: Data management and utilization in planning, operation,

and maintenance

"eigenvalue = 8.42"

Factor 2: Visualized design and analysis

"eigenvalue = 1.19"

Factor 3: Construction and operation

"eigenvalue = 1.08"

87

Table (4.7): Total Variance Explained of BIM functions

Com

pon

ent


Squared Loadings

Rotation Sums of

Squared Loadings

To

tal

% o

f V

aria

nce

Cum

ula

tiv

e %

To

tal

% o

f V

aria

nce

Cum

ula

tiv

e %

To

tal

% o

f V

aria

nce

Cum

ula

tiv

e %

7 0.51 3.20 83.03

8 0.43 2.70 85.73

9 0.39 2.44 88.16

10 0.36 2.24 90.40

11 0.34 2.12 92.52

12 0.31 1.92 94.44

13 0.28 1.75 96.19

14 0.22 1.39 97.59

15 0.21 1.33 98.91

16 0.17 1.09 100

Scree Plot

The scree plot below in Figure (4.6) is a graph of the eigenvalues against all the factors.

This graph can also be used to decide on some factors that can be derived. The point of

interest is where the curve starts to flatten. It can be seen that the curve begins to flatten

between factors 3 and 4. Note also that factor 4 has an eigenvalue of less than 1, so only

three factors have been retained to be extracted.

Figure (4.6): Scree plot for factors of BIM functions

88

Rotated Component (Factor) Matrix

Table (4.8) shows the factor loadings after rotation of 15 items/ variables (from the

original 16 items/ variables) on the three factors extracted and rotated. The pattern of

factor loadings should be examined to identify items/ variables that have complex

structures (Complex structure occurs when one item/ variable has high loadings or

correlations (0.50 or greater) onto more than one factor/ component). If an item/ a

variable has a complex structure, it should be removed from the analysis (Reinard,

2006; Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). According to that, it was necessary to remove the

item/ variable “Issue Reporting and data archiving via a 3D model of the building”

(F14) because it demonstrated a complex structure. It was loading onto two components

(component 1 and component 3) at the same time with a factor loading of 0.60 onto

component 1 and a factor loading of 0.51 onto component 3. As shown in Table (4.8),

the factor loading for each remaining item/ variable is above 0.50 and all items/

variables had simple structures. The items/ variables are listed in order of the size of

their factor loadings.

Naming the Factors

Once an interpretable pattern of loadings is made, the factors or components should be

named according to their substantive content or core. The factors should have

conceptually distinct names and content. Items/ Variables with higher loadings on a

factor should play more important role in naming the factor. The three components

(factors) were named as the following:

Factor 1: ―Data management and utilization in planning, operation, and maintenance.‖

Factor 2: ―Visualized design and analysis.‖

Factor 3: ―Construction and operation.‖

Measures of reliability for each factor (component)

Once factors have been extracted and rotated, it was necessary to cross checking if the

items/ variables in each factor formed collectively explain the same measure within

target dimensions (Doloi, 2009). If items/ variables indeed form the identified factor

(component), it is understood that they should reasonably correlate with one another,

but not the perfect correlation though. Cronbach's alpha (Cα) test was conducted for

each component (factor) as follows:

Factor 1 ―Data management and utilization in planning, operation, and maintenance‖

with items/ variables: F13, F12, F15, F8, F11, F7, and F16.

Factor 2 ―Visualized design and analysis‖ with items/ variables: F2, F3, F1, and F4.

Factor 3 ―Construction and operation‖ with items/ variables: F6, F9, F5, and F10.

The higher value of Cα denotes the greater internal consistency and vice versa. An alpha


higher (Field, 2009; Weiers, 2011; Garson, 2013). According to the results which were

tabulated in Table (4.8), Cα for factor 1 is 0.90; Cα for factor 2 is 0.86; and Cα for

factor 3 is 0.84. They are considered to be excellent.

89

Table (4.8): Results of factor analysis for BIM functions

No. Factors/ Components of BIM function

Fac

tor

load

ing

Eig

env

alues

%var

ian

ce

exp

lain

ed

Cro

nbac

h's

Alp

ha

(Cα

)

Component/ Factor One: Data management and utilization in planning, operation, and

maintenance

F13 Energy optimization of the building 0.78

8.42

52.60 0.90

F12 Maintenance scheduling via as-built model 0.76

F15 Managing metadata (provide information about an

individual item's content) via a 3D model of the

building

0.76

F8 Safety planning and monitoring on-site 0.69

F11 Future expansion/ extension in facility and

infrastructure

0.66

F7 Model-based site planning and site utilization 0.61

F16 Interoperability and translation of information (among

the professionals) within the same system/ program

0.61

Component/ Factor Two: Visualized design and analysis

F2 Functional simulations to choose the best solution

(such as Lighting, energy, and any other sustainability

information)

0.80

1.19

7.41 0.86

F3 Change Management (any modification to the building

design will automatically replicate in each view such

as floor plans, sections, and elevation)

0.77

F1 Three-dimensional (3D) modeling and visualization 0.77

F4 Visualized constructability reviews/ Building

simulation (a 3D structural model as well as a 3D

model of Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing (MEP)

services)

0.62

Component/ Factor Three: Construction and operation

F6 Model-based cost estimation (Five-dimensional (5D)) 0.79

1.08 6.74 0.84

F9 Model-based quantity take-offs of materials and labor 0.78

F5 Four-dimensional (4D) visualized scheduling and

construction sequencing

0.74

F10 Creation of as-built model that contains all the

necessary data to manage and operate the building

(facility management)

0.53

4.4.2.2 The extracted factors

The next section will interpret and discuss each of the extracted components (factors) as

follows:

Factor 1: Data management and utilization in planning, operation, and maintenance

The first factor named Data management and utilization in the planning, operation, and

maintenance explains 52.60 % of the total variance and contains seven items/ variables.

The majority of items/ variables had relatively high factor loadings (≥ 0.61). The seven

items/ variables are as follows:

90

1. Energy optimization of the building (F13), with a factor loading = 0.78.

2. Maintenance scheduling via as-built model (F12), with a factor loading = 0.76.

3. Managing metadata (provide information about an individual item's content) via

a 3D model of the building (F15), with a factor loading = 0.76.

4. Safety planning and monitoring on-site (F8), with a factor loading = 0.69.

5. Future expansion/ extension in facility and infrastructure (F11), with a factor

loading = 0.66.

6. Model-based site planning and site utilization (F7), with a factor loading = 0.61.

7. Interoperability and translation of information (among professionals) within the

same system/ program (F16), with a factor loading = 0.61.

The name of this factor has been chosen according to the correlations between these

seven items/ variables. Data management is the process of controlling the information

generated during a project. Throughout the lifecycle of a project or asset (from design,

construction, and handover to operations) the number of assets that need to be

documented, exchanged, and referenced is enormous. Finding the right solution that can

help to improve secure collaboration and control among all stakeholders, while

increasing compliance, mitigating risk, and integrating with core processes can be a

challenge (Eastman et al., 2011; Baldwin, 2012). And with BIM, data management

solutions have proved great ability for maintaining data consistency and context as well

as supporting more efficient processes across the project lifecycle (Choi, 2010; Lee et

al., 2009; Lee et al., 2007; Smart Market Report, 2012) (cited in Lee et al., 2014). As

shown from results, the item/ variable with the highest loading onto this first factor

(component) is ―Energy optimization of the building‖ (F13), and the item/ variable with

the lowest loading onto this first factor (component) is ―Interoperability and translation

of information (among professionals) within the same system/ program‖ (F16).

―Energy optimization of the building‖ (F13) is the highest item/ variable of factor 1 of

BIM functions with a factor loading of 0.78. It is an important function of BIM, where

the demand for sustainable buildings with minimal environmental impact and efficient

energy use is increasing. Energy modeling can minimize energy use over a building‘s

life (Kolpakov, 2012). From a cost perspective, designing a building for efficient energy

usage is more expensive in the early design and construction phases, but it reduces

building costs over the entire lifecycle. BIM model monitors building's life cycle costs

and optimizes cost efficiency. BIM model incorporates a large part of what facilities

management (FM) would require to operate and maintain the building from the energy

usage perspective. Sensors can feedback and record data relevant to the operation phase

of a building, enabling BIM to be used to model, evaluate, control, and monitor energy

efficiency (Ashcraft, 2008; Eastman et al., 2008; Becerik-Gerber et al., 2011; Ku and

Taiebat, 2011). Upon to energy savings, Park et al. (2012) in Korea sought to build a

BIM-based system that can assess the energy performance of buildings. It is strongly

required to enhance the energy efficiency through an intelligent operation and/ or

management of Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) system by dealing

with the BIM-based energy performance analysis.

“Interoperability and translation of information (among the professionals) within the

same system/ program” (F16) is the lowest item/ variable of factor 1 of BIM functions

with a factor loading of 0.61. This function of BIM can facilitate the collaborative

working in the AEC industry. This function was mentioned in the literature review as an

important function of BIM according to the studies of Baldwin (2012) and Gray et al.

91

(2013). ―Interoperability and translation of information” is an important thing when

adopting BIM in work, where it facilitates accurate information mobility among all

parties in the AEC industry.

Factor 2: Visualized design and analysis

The second factor named Visualized design and analysis explains 7.41% of the total

variance and contains four items/ variables. The majority of items/ variables had

relatively high factor loadings (≥ 0.62). The four items/ variables are as follows:

1. Functional simulations to choose the best solution (such as Lighting, energy,

and any other sustainability information) (F2), with a factor loading = 0.80.

2. Change Management (any modification to the building design will automatically

replicate in each view such as floor plans, sections, and elevation) (F3), with a

factor loading = 0.77.

3. Three-dimensional (3D) modeling and visualization (F1), with a factor loading =

0.77.

4. Visualized constructability reviews/ Building simulation (a 3D structural model

as well as a 3D model of Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing (MEP) services)

(F4), with a factor loading = 0.62.


four items/ variables. In design phase and through BIM, collaboration takes place

among all design consultants from the beginning of a project so every aspect of the

design can be coordinated whether it is Architectural, Structural, Engineering, etc.

Because the model is linked to a database, any change to one design is reflected

throughout the model; thus, eliminating oversights and saving time changing design

models and drawings. BIM can also be employed on projects of any size and portions of

projects. The 3D depiction/ visualization helps the owner and the entire team in

visualizing the project which makes design decisions easier. It is easier to do complex

design in BIM because Architects/ Engineers can document the complexity better in the

drawings. Errors/ clashes in the design among the disciplines can be spotted and

resolved easily (Ashcraft, 2008; Eastman et al., 2008; Becerik-Gerber et al., 2011; Ku

and Taiebat, 2011; Baldwin, 2012; Gray et al., 2013; Lee et al., 2014). BIM can also be

used for improving analysis, where BIM model is used for determining the most

effective Engineering method based on design specifications. Development of

information is the basis for what will be passed on to the owner and/ or operator for use

in the building's systems (i.e. energy analysis, structural analysis, emergency evacuation

planning, etc.). These analysis tools and performance simulations can significantly

improve the design of the facility and its energy consumption during its lifecycle in the

future (Baldwin, 2012; Lee et al., 2014). As shown from results, the item/ variable with

the highest loading onto this first factor (component) is ―Functional simulations to

choose the best solution (such as Lighting, energy, and any other sustainability

information)‖ (F2), and the item/ variable with the lowest loading onto this first factor

(component) is ―Visualized constructability reviews/ Building simulation (a 3D

structural model as well as a 3D model of Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing (MEP)

services)‖ (F4).

“Functional simulations to choose the best solution (such as lighting, energy, and any

other sustainability information)” (F2) is the highest item/ variable of factor 2 of BIM

functions with a factor loading of 0.80. It is an important BIM function, where

92

extending BIM to analysis can help in identifying ways to reduce resource consumption,

increase on-site renewable opportunities, increase investor confidence, improve

employee morale, and meet requirements for sustainable design and energy efficiency.

As passed in the previous studies, Ashcraft (2008), Eastman et al. (2008), Baldwin

(2012), and Lee et al. (2014) pointed to the importance of this function. Simulations of

lighting, energy, and any other sustainability information would affect the strength and

the quality of the design and hence the operation of the building effectively.

“Visualized constructability reviews/ Building simulation (a 3D structural model as

well as a 3D model of Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing (MEP) services)” (F4) is

the lowest item/ variable of factor 2 of BIM functions with a factor loading of 0.62. This

function of BIM can assist in completing building at the optimal level through a

practical understanding of the design and hence choosing the best method for the

construction. In other words, understanding the significance of quality design and

completing a project efficiently leads to the use of BIM to manage the coordination of

MEP/ Architectural design on renovation and new construction projects. This function

of BIM can effectively integrate the construction knowledge into the conceptual

planning, design, construction, and field operations of a project to achieve the overall

project objectives in the best possible time and accuracy at the most cost-effective levels

(Ashcraft, 2008; Eastman et al., 2008; Ku and Taiebat, 2011; Gray et al., 2013; Lee et

al., 2014).

Factor 3: Construction and operation

The third factor named Construction and operation explains 6.77 % of the total variance

and contains four items/ variables. The majority of items/ variables had relatively high

factor loadings (≥ 0.53). The four items/ variables are as follows:

1. Model-based cost estimation (Five-dimensional (5D)) (F6), with a factor loading

= 0.79.

2. Model-based quantity take-offs of materials and labor (F9), with a factor

loading = 0.78.

3. Four-dimensional (4D) visualized scheduling and construction sequencing (F5),

with a factor loading = 0.74.

4. Creation of as-built model that contains all the necessary data to manage and

operate the building (facility management) (F10), with a factor loading = 0.53.


four items/ variables. Moving beyond design, BIM models can facilitate materials

purchasing, the bidding process, and the construction stage of the project. Linking the

contractor‘s model to the design model can allow the stakeholders to pre-build the

project before the actual construction and provide information for better staging and

scheduling. On the other hand; BIM supports the collaboration, the operation of a

facility, and the management of a virtually building model within a building life cycle

(AGC, 2005; Smith, 2007; GSA, 2007; State of Ohio, 2010; NBIMS-US, 2012; Ahmad

et al., 2012). BIM is the future of the construction and the long-term facility

management, where BIM controls time and operation and maintenance costs. It

optimizes facility management and maintenance strategy (Ashcraft, 2008; Eastman et

al., 2008; Becerik-Gerber et al., 2011; Ku and Taiebat, 2011; Baldwin, 2012; Gray et

al., 2013; Lee et al., 2014). As shown from results, the item/ variable with the highest

loading onto this first factor (component) is ―Model-based cost estimation (5D)‖ (F6),

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost-effectiveness_analysis

93

and the item/ variable with the lowest loading onto this first factor (component) is

―Creation of as-built model that contains all the necessary data to manage and operate

the building (facility management)‖ (F10).

“Model-based cost estimation (5D)” (F6) is the highest item/ variable of factor 3 of

BIM functions with a factor loading of 0.79. It is a very important function of BIM for

the professionals in the AEC industry. This function was mentioned in the literature

review as an important function of BIM according to the studies of Eastman et al.

(2008), Baldwin (2012), and Gray et al. (2013). Nassar (2010) examined the effect that

BIM can have on the accuracy of project estimates in terms of time and cost. Results

proved that BIM would increase the precision and the accuracy of the quantity aspect of

the estimate. Cost estimating, 5D in BIM supports the entire lifecycle of a facility from

the cradle to the grave. By using a building information model instead of the drawings;

the takeoffs, the counts, and the measurements can be generated directly from the

underlying model. Therefore the information is always consistent with the design. And

when a change is made in the design (a smaller window size, for example), the change

automatically ripples to the all construction related documentations and schedules, as

well as all the takeoffs, the counts, and the measurements that are used by the estimator.

Cost estimating, 5D via BIM can save time, cost, and reduces the potential for human

error.

“Creation of as-built model that contains all the necessary data to manage and operate

the building (facility management)” (F10) is the lowest item/ variable of factor 3 of

BIM functions with a factor loading of 0.53. This function was mentioned in the

literature review as an important function of BIM according to the studies of Ashcraft

(2008), Eastman et al. (2008), and Lee et al. (2014). BIM model that created by

designers and updated throughout the construction phase, can have the capacity to

become an “as built” model, which can also be delivered to the owner or facility

manager. It serves as a shared knowledge resource for information about a facility

forming a reliable basis for decisions regarding the operation and the maintenance of the

building.

4.5 The value of BIM benefits

There was a field contains 26 items of BIM benefits, and this list of the 26 items was


results of face validity and pretesting of the questionnaire as shown in Chapter 3. These

items were subjected to the views of respondents and were analyzed. The Descriptive

Statistics, i.e. Means, Standard Deviations (SD), t-value (two-tailed), probabilities (P-

value), Relative Importance Indices (RII), and finally ranks were established and

presented in Table (4.9).

4.5.1 RII of BIM benefits

RII was calculated to weight each benefit of BIM (from BE 1 to BE 26) according to the

numerical scores obtained from the questionnaire responses by the professionals in the

AEC industry in Gaza strip and results have been ranked from the highest degree (the

most valuable benefit of BIM) to the least degree (the lowest valuable benefit of BIM).

Table (4.9) provides RIIs and ranks of BIM benefits, respectively. The numbers in the

―rank‖ column represent the sequential ranking. It worth mentioning that ranking of

BIM benefits was based on the highest Mean, RII, and the lowest SD. If some items

94

have similar Means and RIIs, as in the case of (BE 2 and BE 1); (BE 13 and BE 8); (BE

21 and BE 25); (BE 24 and BE 14); (BE 11 and BE 22); (BE 10 and BE 20); and (BE 9

and BE 17) ranking will depend on the lowest SD. For example, although BE 2 and BE

1 have the same Mean and RIIs, BE 2 is ranked higher than the BE 1 because it has

lower SD. The same thing was done for BE 13 and BE 8, where BE 13 has taken the

higher rank than BE 8. Items were categorized with ratings from 77.70 % to 68.62%

(Figure 4.7).

Table (4.9): The value of BIM benefits

No. BIM benefit

Mea

n

SD

RII

(%

)

t-val

ue

(tw

o-t

aile

d)

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.)

Ran

k

BE 3

Enhance design team collaboration

(Architectural, Structural, Mechanical,

and Electrical Engineers)

3.89 0.93 77.70 15.61 0.00* 1

BE 4 Improve design quality (reducing errors/

redesign and managing design changes) 3.87 0.93 77.48 15.48 0.00* 2

BE 5 Improve sustainable design and lean

design 3.73 0.94 74.52 12.64 0.00* 3

BE 2

Support design decision-making by

comparing different design alternatives

on a 3D model

3.72 0.83 74.44 14.18 0.00* 4

BE 1

Improve realization of the idea of a

design by the owner via a 3D model of

the building

3.72 0.95 74.44 12.46 0.00* 5

BE 6 Improve safety design 3.70 0.99 74.07 11.66 0.00* 6

BE 19

Ease of information retrieval for the

entire life of the building through as-

built 3D model

3.65 0.98 72.96 10.88 0.00* 7

BE 7

Improve the selection of the construction

components carefully in line with the

quality and costs (such as types of doors

and windows, coverage type of the

exterior walls, etc.)

3.63 0.98 72.52 10.48 0.00* 8

BE 26

Improve emergency management (put

plans for avoiding hazards and cope

with disasters such as fire, earthquakes,

etc.)

3.62 1.05 72.37 9.73 0.00* 9

BE 12 Increase the accuracy of scheduling and

planning 3.61 0.92 72.22 10.95 0.00* 10

BE 13 Increase the accuracy of cost estimation 3.60 0.88 72.04 11.12 0.00* 11

BE 8 Improve understanding the sequence of

the construction activities 3.60 0.90 72.04 10.99 0.00* 12

BE 21

Increase coordination between the

different operating systems of the

building (such as security and alarm

system, lighting, air conditioning, etc.)

3.58 0.92 71.56 10.32 0.00* 13

BE 25 Increase profits by marketing for the

facility via a 3D model 3.58 1.03 71.56 9.21 0.00* 14

95

Table (4.9): The value of BIM benefits

No. BIM benefit

Mea

n

SD

RII

(%

)

t-val

ue

(tw

o-t

aile

d)

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.)

Ran

k

18 BE

Improve the implementation of lean

construction techniques to get

sustainable solutions for reducing waste

of materials during construction and

demolition

3.57 0.95 71.41 9.92 0.00* 15

24 BE Control the whole-life costs of the asset

effectively 3.56 0.93 71.33 10.02 0.00* 16

14 BE Improve communication between project

parties 3.56 0.96 71.33 9.73 0.00* 17

BE 23

Improve maintenance planning

(preventive and curative)/ maintenance

strategy of the facility

3.55 0.96 70.96 9.40 0.00* 18

BE 11 Improve safety planning and monitoring

on-site/ reduce risks 3.54 0.91 70.81 9.76 0.00* 19

BE 22 Enhance energy efficiency and

sustainability of the building 3.54 0.94 70.81 9.40 0.00* 20

BE 15 Reduce change/ variation orders in the

construction stage 3.53 0.96 70.60 9.02 0.00* 21

BE 16 Reduce clashes among the stakeholders

(clash detection) 3.51 1.05 70.19 7.96 0.00* 22

BE 11

Increase the quality of prefabricated

(digitally fabricated) components and

reduce its costs

3.50 0.86 70 9.54 0.00* 23

BE 21

Improve the management and the

operation of the building to maintain its

sustainability by supporting decision-

making on matters relating to the

building

3.50 0.95 70 8.64 0.00* 24

BE 9

Enhance work coordination with

subcontractors and suppliers (supply

chain)

3.43 0.96 68.62 7.35 0.00* 25

BE 17 Reduce the overall project duration and

cost 3.43 1.06 68.62 6.68 0.00* 26

All benefits 3.60 0.67 72.10 14.82 0.00* Critical value of t: at degree of freedom (df) = [N-1] = [270-1] = 269 and significance (Probability) level

0.05 equals “1.97”

96

Figure (4.7): RII of BIM benefits (BE1 to BE 26)

The findings indicated that “Enhance design team collaboration (Architectural,

Structural, Mechanical, and Electrical Engineers)” (BE 3) is the most valuable BIM

benefit that would convince the professionals for adopting BIM in the AEC industry in

Gaza strip. It has been ranked as the first position with (RII = 77.70%) and (P-value =

0.00*) according to the overall respondents. This result is consistent with which has

been talked about by Eastman et al. (2008, 2011). They said that BIM is an enabling

platform that provides the opportunity to facilitate collaboration and information sharing

in design and construction. For example, changes to the Architectural model will

generate changes to the Structural model, and vice versa.

“Improve design quality (reducing errors/ redesign and managing design changes)”

(BE 4) was ranked as the second most valuable BIM benefit with (RII = 77.48%; P-

value = 0.00*). Successful implementation of BIM would result in a better quality

design. BIM provides a much more robust design environment, which is fully integrated

between all of the design disciplines, saving time and money in both the design and

construction phases of the project. BIM eliminates the need to translate or transfer

information, thereby, reducing errors, redesign, time and cost while increasing accuracy

and quality. In other words, this benefit of BIM ensures verifying consistency to the

design intent easily, which prevents costly delays and eliminates conflicts (Holness,

2006; Eastman et al., 2008; Eastman et al., 2011).

77.7

77.48 74.52

74.44

74.44

74.07

72.96

72.52

72.37

72.22

72.04 72.04

71.56 71.56

71.41 71.33

71.33

70.96

70.81

70.81

70.6

70.19

70

70 68.62

68.62

64

66

68

70

72

74

76

78BE 3

BE 4BE 5

BE 2

BE 1

BE 6

BE 19

BE 7

BE 26

BE 12

BE 13

BE 8BE 21

BE 25BE 18

BE 24

BE 14

BE 23

BE 11

BE 22

BE 15

BE 16

BE 10

BE 20

BE 9BE 17

97

“Improve sustainable design and lean design” (BE 5) was ranked as the third position

with (RII of 74.52%; P-value = 0.00*). This benefit of BIM would be precious for the

AEC industry in Gaza strip. The color of BIM is green, where BIM enables Architects

to create an accurate virtual or prototype of a sustainable building project before the

actual construction commences. As such, the most effective decisions related to the

sustainable design of a building can be made in the early design and preconstruction

stages (Azhar et al., 2008a; Azhar et al., 2008b; Krygiel et al., 2008; Azhar and Brown,

2009; Allen Consulting Group, 2010; Schade et al., 2011; and Kolpakov, 2012). The

combination of sustainable design strategies and BIM technology has the potential to

change the traditional design practices and to produce a high-performance facility

design. On the other hand, lean design and BIM theme focuses on developing solutions

to support the generation of better value to clients and users of the built environment

through improved processes with the use of the supporting BIM technologies. Its core is

in extending design thinking into strategies and methods to support innovation and

improve the efficiency of the design and construction industry (Eastman et al., 2008,

Eastman et al., 2011; Khosrowshahi and Arayici, 2012). This result is consistent with

those reported by Azhar and Brown (2009); Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012); Park et

al. (2012); and Stanley and Thurnell (2014), whose research studies determined this

benefit as most valuable benefit of BIM for the AEC companies in the United States, the

United Kingdom, Korea, and New Zealand, respectively.

“Enhance work coordination with subcontractors and suppliers (supply chain)” (BE 9)

was ranked in the 25th

position with (RII of 68.62%; SD = 0.96; P-value = 0.00*). It is

very low rank. On the contrary of the result of the analysis, studies of Eastman et al.

(2008, 2011); Hardin (2009); McGraw-Hill Construction (2009); Succar (2009);

Weygant (2011); Ahmad et al. (2012); Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012); Lorch (2012);

Farnsworth et al. (2014); and Stanley and Thurnell (2014) emphasized on the value of

adopting BIM to the supply chain in the construction industry. BIM is a collaborative

approach that improves communication means between client, design professionals,

contractors, suppliers, and subcontractors. Subcontractors can adopt BIM and stop

suffering from additional expenses for having to use various models. The adoption of

BIM can quickly clarify the complexity of some components. Coordinating the

assembly of materials on-site can save cost, increase productivity, improve quality, save

time, and minimize risks. In his paper, Irizarry et al. (2013) presented an integrated

BIM-GIS system for visualizing the supply chain process and the actual status of

materials through the supply chain (manifesting the flow of materials, availability of

resources, and ―map‖ of the respective supply chains visually). BIM is interconnected

with all the parties, and once a change occurred, it is automatically changed and

communicated with the whole group of model users. Consultants, contractors, suppliers,

and subcontractors all benefit from sharing project information through BIM model.

Finally, ―Reduce the overall project duration and cost” (BE 17) was ranked as the

lowest valuable BIM benefit in the 26th position with (RII of 68.62%; SD = 1.06; P-

value = 0.00*) as per perceptions of all the respondents. On the contrary of the result of

the analysis, McGraw-Hill Construction (2009); Eastman et al. (2011); Barlish and

Sullivan (2012); and Barlish and Sullivan (2012) said that BIM has risen as a very

effective tool, which has been proven to lower costs and time considerably. BIM helps

for reducing time and cost for data input, where the BIM model stores all the

information relating to the building‘s design and all other related information about the

project, including scheduling and cost, and allowing the same information to be used in

98

multiple documents and places, without having to recreate or re-input that information.

Further, BIM improves productivity within the Architectural and Engineering team as

well as reduces design rework and construction changes; and increases communication

among the individual specialists through the BIM model, and thus eliminating conflicts

and delays.

The top three benefits of BIM, which were rated by the respondents, are logical and

acceptable to be the most valuable benefits of BIM that would convince the

professionals for adopting it in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. Regarding results for all

items of the part of BIM benefits, they show that the Mean for all those items equals

3.60, and the total RII equals 72.10%, which is greater than 60% (the neutral value of

RII (3/5)*100 = 60%). The value of t-test equals 14.82, which is higher than the critical

value of t that equals 1.97. As well as the total P-value of all the items equals 0.00 and

it is less than the significance level of 0.05. Based on all previous results, BIM benefits

are significantly valuable for the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

4.5.2 Factor analysis results of BIM benefits

RII analysis did not provide any meaningful outcomes in terms of understanding the

clustering effects of the similar items/ variables and thus further analysis was required



between the 26 items/ variables of the field of BIM benefits in attempt to reduce the

number of them. It used also to group items/ variables with similar characteristics










in Ch3, the received data of the research follows the normal distribution. The result has

been satisfied with this requirement.




respondents. The sample size for this study was 270. On the other hand, the standard

rule is to suggest that sample size contains at least 10–15 respondents per item/ variable.

In other words, sample size should be at least ten times the number of items/ variables

and some even recommend 20 times (Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). Fortunately, for this

field of BIM benefits, the condition was verified. This field contains 26 items/ variables,

and the sample size was 270. With 270 respondents and 26 items/ variables (BIM

99

benefits), the ratio of respondents to items/ variables are 10: 1, which is suitable for the

requirement for the ratio of respondents to items/ variables.


Tables (4.10a) and (4.10b) show the correlation matrix for the 26 items/ variables of

BIM benefits. It is simply a rectangular array of numbers which gives the correlation


investigation (Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). As shown in Tables (4.10a) and (4.10b), the

correlation coefficient between an item/ a variable and itself is always 1; hence the

principal diagonal of the correlation matrix contains 1s. The correlation coefficients

above and below the principal diagonal are the same. PCA requires that there be some

correlations greater than 0.30 between the items/ variables included in the analysis. For

this set of items/ variables, that most of the correlations in the matrix are strong and

greater than 0.30. Correlations have been satisfied with this requirement.

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett's test



KMO measure of sampling adequacy was 0.95 (close to 1) and was considered

acceptable and marvelous because it exceeds the minimum requirement of 0.50 and it is

above 0.90 (‗superb‘ according to Kaiser, 1974; Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). Moreover,

the Bartlett test of sphericity was another indication of the strength of the relationship






sample data of (BIM benefits) were appropriated for factor analysis.

Measures of reliability for the whole items/ variables

Cronbach's alpha test was performed on the items/ variables in the field of (BIM

benefits). The value of Cronbach‘s alpha (Cα) could be anywhere in the range of 0 to 1,



higher (Field, 2009; Weiers, 2011; Garson, 2013). As shown in Table (4.11), the value

of the calculated Cα for all items/ variables in the field of (BIM benefits) is 0.96 which

is considered to be marvelous.

100

Table: (4.10a): Correlations between items/ variables of BIM benefits

BE 1 BE 2 BE 3 BE 4 BE 5 BE 6 BE 7 BE 8 BE 9 BE 10 BE 11 BE 12 BE 13

BE 1 1

BE 2 0.72** 1

BE 3 0.56** 0.62** 1

BE 4 0.51** 0.60** 0.70** 1

BE 5 0.45** 0.51** 0.61** 0.67** 1

BE 6 0.41** 0.42** 0.54** 0.53** 0.60** 1

BE 7 0.47** 0.48** 0.52** 0.50** 0.53** 0.60** 1

BE 8 0.52** 0.48** 0.52** 0.51** 0.44** 0.49** 0.66** 1

BE 9 0.39** 0.38** 0.46** 0.50** 0.46** 0.57** 0.58** 0.63** 1

BE 10 0.40** 0.43** 0.46** 0.50** 0.51** 0.39** 0.43** 0.51** 0.51** 1

BE 11 0.36** 0.38** 0.53** 0.53** 0.56** 0.59** 0.54** 0.47** 0.55** 0.57** 1

BE 12 0.41** 0.43** 0.52** 0.56** 0.57** 0.40** 0.48** 0.53** 0.50** 0.64** 0.61** 1

BE 13 0.32** 0.36** 0.50** 0.48** 0.50** 0.47** 0.51** 0.46** 0.49** 0.45** 0.49** 0.69** 1

BE 14 0.30** 0.39** 0.45** 0.49** 0.54** 0.48** 0.48** 0.42** 0.49** 0.48** 0.51** 0.58** 0.60**

BE 15 0.31** 0.44** 0.46** 0.46** 0.51** 0.40** 0.43** 0.45** 0.43** 0.46** 0.42** 0.55** 0.57**

BE 16 0.25** 0.32** 0.33** 0.35** 0.40** 0.47** 0.44** 0.40** 0.44** 0.35** 0.52** 0.47** 0.53**

BE 17 0.28** 0.36** 0.34** 0.37** 0.38** 0.41** 0.47** 0.45** 0.53** 0.41** 0.48** 0.46** 0.45**

BE 18 0.32** 0.35** 0.41** 0.46** 0.53** 0.43** 0.53** 0.51** 0.48** 0.47** 0.51** 0.59** 0.51**

BE 19 0.30** 0.44** 0.44** 0.45** 0.48** 0.36** 0.40** 0.40** 0.36** 0.41** 0.35** 0.44** 0.47**

BE 20 0.40** 0.44** 0.47** 0.48** 0.49** 0.46** 0.52** 0.47** 0.48** 0.53** 0.53* 0.55** 0.58**

BE 21 0.36** 0.44** 0.47** 0.47** 0.46** 0.44** 0.54** 0.48** 0.51** 0.45** 0.48** 0.53** 0.53**

BE 22 0.38** 0.46** 0.41** 0.46** 0.54** 0.50** 0.52** 0.44** 0.53** 0.53** 0.55** 0.57** 0.46**

BE 23 0.35** 0.36** 0.41** 0.45** 0.50** 0.42** 0.48** 0.43** 0.44** 0.49** 0.49** 0.55** 0.52**

BE 24 0.32** 0.38** 0.42** 0.45** 0.42** 0.37** 0.44** 0.46** 0.46** 0.55** 0.51** 0.60** 0.57**

BE 25 0.48** 0.52** 0.42** 0.37** 0.37** 0.42** 0.45** 0.44** 0.32** 0.42** 0.35** 0.40** 0.36**

BE 26 0.37** 0.38** 0.41** 0.40** 0.46** 0.51** 0.61** 0.53** 0.51** 0.38** 0.53** 0.47** 0.41** **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (1-tailed).


101

Table: (4.10b): Correlations between items/ variables of BIM benefits

BE 14 BE 15 BE 16 BE 17 BE 18 BE 19 BE 20 BE 21 BE 22 BE 23 BE 24 BE 25 BE 26

BE 14 1

BE 15 0.64** 1

BE 16 0.56** 0.55** 1

BE 17 0.48** 0.57** 0.65** 1

BE 18 0.50** 0.50** 0.52** 0.65** 1

BE 19 0.51** 0.62** 0.40** 0.43** 0.51** 1

BE 20 0.54** 0.58** 0.51** 0.53** 0.55** 0.64** 1

BE 21 0.51** 0.56** 0.50** 0.53** 0.57** 0.58** 0.70** 1

BE 22 0.50** 0.48** 0.49** 0.54** 0.56** 0.48** 0.65** 0.61** 1

BE 23 0.47** 0.49** 0.49** 0.43** 0.49** 0.49** 0.60** 0.56** 0.65** 1

BE 24 0.56** 0.55** 0.53** 0.50** 0.49** 0.50** 0.63** 0.54** 0.62** 0.63** 1

BE 25 0.36** 0.43** 0.44** 0.43** 0.41** 0.42** 0.47** 0.47** 0.50** 0.39** 0.52** 1

BE 26 0.48** 0.50** 0.56** 0.53** 0.56** 0.47** 0.53** 0.59** 0.54** 0.53** 0.53** 0.54** 1



Table: (4.11) KMO and Bartlett's test for items of BIM benefits

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling

Adequacy.

0.95

Bartlett's Test of

Sphericity

Approx. Chi-Square 4754.45

df 325

Sig. 0.00


102


The next part from the output was a Table of communalities. Communalities represent

the proportion of the variance in the original items/ variables that is accounted for by the



higher (Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). Table (4.12) shows that all of the communalities for

all items/ variables satisfy the minimum requirement of being larger than 0.50, and

therefore was not to exclude any of these items/ variables on the basis of low

communalities. Thus, all of the 26 items/ variables of this field (BIM benefits) were

used in this analysis.

Table: (4.12) Communalities of BIM benefits

No. BIM Benefit

Init

ial

Ex

trac

tion

BE 1 Improve realization of the idea of a design by the owner via a 3D

model of the building

1 0.75

BE 2 Support design decision-making by comparing different design

alternatives on a 3D model

1 0.79


Mechanical, and Electrical Engineers)

1 0.72

BE 4 Improve design quality (reducing errors/ redesign and managing

design changes)

1 0.72

BE 5 Improve sustainable design and lean design 1 0.66

BE 6 Improve safety design 1 0.65

BE 7 Improve the selection of the construction components carefully in

line with the quality and costs (such as types of doors and windows,

coverage type of the exterior walls, etc.)

1

0.69

BE 8 Improve understanding the sequence of the construction activities 1 0.62

BE 9 Enhance work coordination with subcontractors and suppliers

(supply chain) 1 0.66


components and reduce its costs 1 0.54

BE 11 Improve safety planning and monitoring on-site/ reduce risks 1 0.67

BE 12 Increase the accuracy of scheduling and planning 1 0.70

BE 13 Increase the accuracy of cost estimation 1 0.63

BE 14 Improve communication between project parties 1 0.62

BE 15 Reduce change/ variation orders in the construction stage 1 0.63

BE 16 Reduce clashes among the stakeholders (clash detection) 1 0.62

BE 17 Reduce the overall project duration and cost 1 0.65

BE 18 Improve the implementation of lean construction techniques to get

sustainable solutions for reducing waste of materials during


1 0.59

BE 19 Ease of information retrieval for the entire life of the building

through as-built 3D model 1 0.64

BE 20 Improve the management and the operation of the building to

maintain its sustainability by supporting decision-making on matters

relating to the building

1 0.69

103

Table: (4.12) Communalities of BIM benefits

No. BIM Benefit

Init

ial

Ex

trac

tion

BE 21 Increase coordination between the different operating systems of the

building (such as security and alarm system, lighting, air

conditioning, etc.)

1 0.63

BE 22 Enhance energy efficiency and sustainability of the building 1 0.61



1 0.56

BE 24 Control the whole-life costs of the asset effectively 1 0.65

BE 25 Increase profits by marketing for the facility via a 3D model 1 0.67

BE 26 Improve emergency management (put plans for avoiding hazards

and cope with disasters such as fire, earthquakes, etc.)

1 0.69


By using the output from iteration 1, there were four eigenvalues greater than 1 (Figure




for some factors to be derived would indicate that there were four components (factors)

to be extracted for these items/ variables. Results were tabulated in Table (4.13). The

four components solution explained a sum of the variance with component 1

contributing 50.48%; component 2 contributing 6.50 %; component 3 contributing

4.27% and component 4 contributing 4.22%. All the remaining factors are not

significant.

Figure (4.8): The four components (factors) of BIM benefits

The four components were then rotated via varimax (orthogonal) rotation approach.

This approach does not change the underlying solution or the relationships among the

items/variables. Rather, it presents the pattern of loadings in a manner that is easier to

Value of

BIM benefits

Factor 1: Controlled whole-life costs and environmental data

"eigenvalue = 13.13"

Factor 2: More effective processes

"eigenvalue = 1.69"

Factor 3: Design and quality improvement

"eigenvalue = 1.11"

Factor 4: Decision-making support/ Better customer service

"eigenvalue = 1.10"

104


solution revealed that the four components solution explained a sum of the variance

with component 1 contributing 23.20%; component 2 contributing 15.23 %; component

3 contributing 14.92%; and component 4 contributing 12.12%. These four components

(factors) explained 65.47 % of total variance for the varimax rotation.

Table (4.13): Total variance Explained of BIM benefits

Com

pon

ent


Squared Loadings

Rotation Sums of

Squared Loadings

To

tal

% o

f V

aria

nce

Cum

ula

tiv

e %

To

tal

% o

f V

aria

nce

Cum

ula

tiv

e %

To

tal

% o

f V

aria

nce

Cum

ula

tiv

e %

1 13.13 50.48 50.48 13.13 50.48 50.48 6.03 23.19 23.19

2 1.69 6.50 56.98 1.69 6.50 56.98 3.96 15.23 38.42

3 1.11 4.27 61.25 1.11 4.27 61.25 3.88 14.92 53.35

4 1.10 4.22 65.47 1.10 4.22 65.47 3.15 12.12 65.47

5 0.87 3.33 68.80

6 0.75 2.90 71.70

7 0.71 2.75 74.45

8 0.64 2.48 76.93

9 0.55 2.12 79.05

10 0.54 2.06 81.10

11 0.48 1.86 82.96

12 0.46 1.75 84.71

13 0.43 1.65 86.36

14 0.39 1.50 87.87

15 0.36 1.39 89.25

16 0.34 1.31 90.56

17 0.33 1.25 91.81

18 0.29 1.13 92.94

19 0.29 1.10 94.05

20 0.27 1.05 95.09

21 0.25 0.96 96.06

22 0.23 0.88 96.94

23 0.22 0.86 97.80

24 0.20 0.78 98.58

25 0.19 0.75 99.33

26 0.17 0.67 100

Scree Plot

The scree plot below in Figure (4.9) is a graph of the eigenvalues against all the factors.

This graph can also be used to decide on some factors that can be derived. The point of

105

interest is where the curve starts to flatten. It can be seen that the curve begins to flatten

between factors 4 and 5. Note also that factor 5 has an eigenvalue of less than 1, so only

four factors have been retained to be extracted.

Figure (4.9): Scree plot for factors of BIM benefits



original 26 items/ variables) on the four factors extracted and rotated. The pattern of



correlations (0.50 or greater) on more than one factor/ component). If an item/ a


2006; Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). According to that, it was necessary to remove seven

items/ variables because they demonstrated complex structures. Each item/ variable of

the removed items/ variables was loaded onto two components at the same time with

factor loadings exceed of 0.5. Items/ Variables that have been removed are BE 16, BE

17, BE 26, BE 11, BE 3, BE 13, and BE 25. As shown in Table (4.14), the factor

loading for each remaining item/ variable is above 0.5 and all items/ variables had

simple structures. The items/ variables are listed in order of the size of their factor

loadings.

Naming the Factors

Once an interpretable pattern of loadings is made, the factors or components should be



106

factor should play more important role in naming the factor. The four components


Factor 1: ―Controlled whole-life costs and environmental data.‖

Factor 2: ―More effective processes.‖

Factor 3: ―Design and quality improvement.‖

Factor 4: ―Decision making support/ Better customer service.‖

Measures of reliability for each factor


items/variables in each factor formed collectively explain the same measure within

target dimensions (Doloi, 2009). If items/ variables truly form the identified factor




Factor 1 “Controlled whole-life costs and environmental data” with items/ variables:

BE 20, BE 24, BE 19, BE15, BE 21, BE 23, BE 22, BE 14, and BE 18.

Factor 2 “More effective processes” with items/ variables: BE 9, BE 7, BE 6, and BE 8.

Factor 3 “Design and quality improvement” with items/ variables: BE 4, BE 5, BE 12,

and

BE 10.

Factor 4 ―Decision-making support/ Better customer service‖ with items/ variables: BE

2, and

BE 1.




tabulated in Table (4.14), Cα for factor 1 is 0.92; Cα for factor 2 is 0.85; Cα for factor 3

is 0.84; and Cα for factor 4 is 0.83. They are considered to be excellent.

Table (4.14): Results of factor analysis for BIM benefits

No. BIM benefit factors (Components)

Fac

tor

load

ing

Eig

env

alues

%v

aria

nce

exp

lain

ed

Cro

nbac

h's

Alp

ha

(Cα

)

Component/ Factor One: Controlled whole-life costs and environmental data

BE 20 Improve the management and the operation of

the building to maintain its sustainability by

supporting decision-making on matters relating

to the building

0.70

13.13

50.48

0.92

BE 24 Control the whole-life costs of the asset

effectively

0.70

BE 19 Ease of information retrieval for the entire life of

the building through as-built 3D model

0.70


construction stage

0.69

107

Table (4.14): Results of factor analysis for BIM benefits

No. BIM benefit factors (Components)

Fac

tor

load

ing

Eig

env

alues

%var

ian

ce

exp

lain

ed

Cro

nbac

h's

Alp

ha

(Cα

)

BE 21 Increase coordination between the different

operating systems of the building (such as

security and alarm system, lighting, air

conditioning, etc.)

0.65

BE 23 Improve maintenance planning (preventive and

curative)/ maintenance strategy of the facility

0.60

BE22 Enhance energy efficiency and sustainability of

the building

0.59

BE14 Improve communication between project parties 0.55

BE18 Improve the implementation of lean construction

techniques to get sustainable solutions for

reducing waste of materials during construction

and demolition

0.55

Component/ Factor Two: More effective processes

BE 9 Enhance work coordination with subcontractors

and suppliers (supply chain)

0.66

1.69

6.50

0.85

BE 7 Improve the selection of the construction

components carefully in line with the quality and

costs (such as types of doors and windows,


0.66

BE 6 Improve safety design 0.63

BE 8 Improve understanding the sequence of the

construction activities

0.57

Component/ Factor Three: Design and quality improvement

BE 4 Improve design quality (reducing errors/ redesign

and managing design changes)

0.64

1.11

4.27

0.84 BE 5 Improve sustainable design and lean design 0.64

BE 12 Increase the accuracy of scheduling and planning 0.62

BE 10 Increase the quality of prefabricated (digitally

fabricated) components and reduce its costs

0.54

Component/ Factor Four: Decision-making support/ Better customer service

BE 2 Support design decision-making by comparing

different design alternatives on a 3D model

0.80

1.10 4.22 0.83 BE 1 Improve realization of the idea of a design by the

owner via a 3D model of the building

0.80



follows:

Factor 1: Controlled whole-life costs and environmental data

The first factor named Controlled whole-life costs and environmental data explains

50.48% of the total variance and contains nine items/ variables. The majority of items/

variables had relatively high factor loadings (≥ 0.55). The nine items/ variables are as

follows:

108

1. Improve the management and the operation of the building to maintain its

sustainability by supporting decision-making on matters relating to the building

(BE 20), with a factor loading = 0.70.

2. Control the whole-life costs of the asset effectively (BE 24), with a factor loading

= 0.70.

3. Ease of information retrieval for the entire life of the building through as-built

3D model (BE 19), with a factor loading = 0.70.

4. Reduce change/ variation orders in the construction stage (BE 15), with a factor

loading = 0.69.

5. Increase coordination between the different operating systems of the building

(such as security and alarm system, lighting, air conditioning, etc.) (BE 21),

with a factor loading = 0.65.

6. Improve maintenance planning (preventive and curative)/ maintenance strategy

of the facility (BE 23), with a factor loading = 0.60.

7. Enhance energy efficiency and sustainability of the building (BE 22), with a


8. Improve communication between project parties (BE 14), with a factor loading

= 0.55.

9. Improve the implementation of lean construction techniques to get sustainable

solutions for reducing waste of materials during construction and demolition

(BE18), with a factor loading = 0.55.


nine items/ variables. Whole-life cost refers to the total cost of the ownership over the

life of an asset (cradle to grave costs). The costs include the financial cost which is

relatively simple to be calculated and also the environmental and social costs which are

harder to be quantified and assigned in numerical values. Typical areas of expenditure

in a building project are included in computing the whole-life costs of planning, design,

construction, operations, maintenance, rehabilitation, and the cost of finance and

replacement or disposal. Lifecycle data of a project (requirements, design, construction

and operational information) can be used in facilities management through the BIM

model. The BIM model can be used to understand and predict the environmental

performance of a building and its lifecycle costs during the management period of the

facility. BIM data can be exploited during facilities management, ensuring that

procurement decisions depend on the whole-life costs and cultural fit, and not solely on

short-term financial criteria (CRC Construction Innovation, 2007; Azhar et al., 2008a;

Azhar et al., 2008b; Eastman et al., 2011; Ku and Taiebat, 2011; BIFM, 2012). As

shown from results, the item/ variable with the highest loading of this first factor

(component) is ―Improve the management and the operation of the building to maintain

its sustainability by supporting decision-making on matters relating to the building‖

(BE 20) and the item/ variable with the lowest loading of this first factor (component) is

―Improve the implementation of lean construction techniques to get sustainable

solutions for reducing waste of materials during construction and demolition‖ (BE 18).

―Improve the management and the operation of the building to maintain its

sustainability by supporting decision-making on matters relating to the building,‖ (BE

20) is the highest item/ variable of factor 1 of BIM benefits with a factor loading of

0.70. Decisions early in the design process have a significant impact on the life cycle

performance of a building and with the rising cost of energy and growing environmental

concerns; the demand for sustainable buildings with minimal environmental impact is

109

increasing (Schade et al., 2011; Azhar and Brown, 2009). On the other hand, there is a

tremendous advantage in the integration of green (sustainability) and BIM processes

(Kolpakov, 2012). The BIM model can be used as a decision-making framework in the

early design phase. It supports decision-makers to take informed decisions regarding the

life cycle performance of a building (Schade et al., 2011). This saves time and cost of

the management and operation of the building in a green way (Lee et al., 2007; Lee et

al., 2009; Choi, 2010; Smart Market Report, 2012) (cited in Lee et al., 2014).

“Improve the implementation of lean construction techniques to get sustainable

solutions for reducing waste of materials during construction and demolition” (BE 18)

is the lowest item/ variable of factor 1 of BIM benefits with a factor loading of 0.55.

This BIM benefit was mentioned in the literature review as a valuable benefit of BIM

according to the studies of Kjartansdóttir (2011); Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012);

Kolpakov (2012); and Cheng and Ma (2013). Lean construction techniques are

incorporated throughout the BIM workflow. In other words, BIM applications enable

the full effect of lean principles. Value maximization and waste reduction (benefits of

BIM) are in line with the benefits which lean construction promises. When BIM and

lean construction principles are used together, the construction process becomes even

more enhanced. The project team becomes more able to tackle complex dynamic and

challenging target goals to deliver a project (Eastman et al., 2008; Eastman et al., 2011;

Kjartansdóttir, 2011).

Factor 2: More effective processes

The second factor named More effective processes explains 6.50% of the total variance

and contains four items/ variables. The majority of items/ variables had relatively high

factor loadings (≥ 0.57). The four items/ variables are as follows:

1. Enhance work coordination with subcontractors and suppliers (supply chain)

(BE 9), with a factor loading = 0.66.

2. Improve the selection of the construction components carefully in line with the

quality and costs (such as types of doors and windows, coverage type of the

exterior walls, etc.) (BE7), with a factor loading = 0.66.

3. Improve safety design (BE 6), with a factor loading = 0.63.

4. Improve understanding the sequence of the construction activities (BE 8), with a



four items/ variables. Throughout the asset life-cycle, BIM helps people save time and

money. It enables more effective integrated through-life information management, as

well as stronger business continuity. BIM is a coordinated set of processes, supported

by technology, which adds value by creating, managing and sharing the properties of an

asset throughout its life cycle. BIM models incorporate graphic, physical, commercial,

environmental and operational data (Sebastian and Berlo, 2010; Aibinu and Venkatesh,

2013). BIM models allow for a previously incredible array of collaborative activities;

integrated inter-disciplinary design review, multi-model coordination and clash

detection, real-time integration with other specialist disciplines for cost estimation, and

construction management. BIM ensures more controlled conditions for weather, quality,

improved supervision of labor and fewer material deliveries. BIM can also increase

worker safety through reduced exposure to inclement weather and better of working

conditions (Karlshøj, 2012). As shown from results, the item/ variable with the highest

loading of this first factor (component) is ―Enhance work coordination with

110

subcontractors and suppliers (supply chain)‖ (BE 9) and the item/ variable with the

lowest loading of this first factor (component) is ―Improve understanding the sequence

of the construction activities‖ (BE 8).

“Enhance work coordination with subcontractors and suppliers (supply chain)” (BE 9)

is the highest item/ variable of factor 2 of BIM benefits with a factor loading of 0.66. It

is a valuable BIM benefit, where BIM is a collaborative approach that improves

communication means among the client, design professionals, contractors, suppliers,

and subcontractors. Consultants, contractors, suppliers, and subcontractors all benefit

from sharing project information through BIM model. Subcontractors can adopt BIM

and stop suffering from the additional expenses for having to use various models. BIM

promises significant costs savings for subcontractors and suppliers (Eastman et al.,

2008; Eastman et al., 2011; Hardin, 2009; McGraw-Hill Construction, 2009; Succar,

2009; Weygant, 2011; Ahmad et al., 2012; Khosrowshahi and Arayici, 2012; Lorch,

2012; Farnsworth et al., 2014; Stanley and Thurnell, 2014).

“Improve understanding the sequence of the construction activities” (BE 8) is the

lowest item/ variable of factor 2 of BIM benefits with a factor loading of 0.57. BIM

assists in completing building at the optimal level through a practical understanding of

the sequence of the construction activities. 4D BIM modeling provides a powerful

visualization and communication tool that gives project teams a better understanding of

project milestones and construction plans. 4D simulation can help teams in identifying

problems well in advance of construction activities when they are much easier and less

costly to resolve. BIM models can be linked with construction activity schedules to

explore space and sequencing requirements. Additional information describing

equipment locations and materials staging areas can be integrated into the project model

to facilitate and support site management decisions, enabling project teams to

effectively generate and evaluate layouts for temporary facilities, assembly areas, and

material deliveries for all the phases of construction (Eastman et al., 2011; Newton and

Chileshe, 2012; Aibinu and Venkatesh, 2013; Farnsworth et al., 2014).

Factor 3: Design and quality improvement

The third factor named Design and quality improvement explains 4.27% of the total

variance and contains four items/ variables. The majority of items/ variables had


1. Improve design quality (reducing errors/ redesign and managing design

changes) (BE 4), with a factor loading = 0.64.

2. Improve sustainable design and lean design (BE 5), with a factor loading = 0.64.

3. Increase the accuracy of scheduling and planning (BE 12), with a factor loading

= 0.62.

4. Increase the quality of prefabricated (digitally fabricated) components and

reduce its costs (BE 10), with a factor loading = 0.54.


four items/ variables. Early evaluation of design alternatives using analysis/ simulation

tools increases the overall quality of the building. The use of BIM to support digital

prototyping has spurred a design revolution allowing for innovations in the

Architectural industry. By applying BIM models to buildings, project teams can

understand a project digitally before being built. BIM delivers high-quality designs.

Making changes or adjustments to a virtual model can be accomplished more quickly,

111

more easily and exponentially more cost effectively than waiting until a fully mobilized

workforce is involved. BIM allows models to be tested for clashes and conflicts

throughout the development of the design. By integrating fabrication level model

information, the shop drawing process can be streamlined or eliminated. BIM digital

model resolves coordination issues and increases the use of pre-fabricated components,

and thus improves quality as well as reduces material and labor waste (Eastman et al.,

2008; Eastman et al. 2011; Lorimer, 2011; Elmualim and Gilder, 2013). As shown from

results, the item/ variable with the highest loading of this first factor (component) is

―Improve design quality (reducing errors/ redesign and managing design changes)‖

(BE 4), and the item/ variable with the lowest loading of this first factor (component) is

―Increase the quality of prefabricated (digitally fabricated) components and reduce its

costs‖ (BE 10).

“Improve design quality (reducing errors/ redesign and managing design changes)”

(BE 4) is the highest item/ variable of factor 3 of BIM benefits with a factor loading of

0.64. Successful implementation of BIM would result in a better quality design.

Architects benefit from BIM‘s capability of creating 3D renderings, graphically

accurate models, and sets of construction documents. The use of BIM prevents costly

delays due to inaccurate drawings. BIM is also beneficial to the design and installation

of MEP services on any construction project systems as well as their coordination with

other building systems. The adoption of BIM can also help Civil Engineers in analyzing

and comparing several design alternatives quickly. BIM model is linked to a database,

and any change to one design is reflected throughout the model; thus, eliminating

oversights and changing design models and drawings. BIM facilitates doing complex

design and can resolve errors/ clashes in the design among the disciplines easily. BIM

ensures verifying consistency to the design intent easily, which prevents costly delays

and eliminates conflicts (Holness, 2006; Eastman et al., 2008; Eastman et al., 2011).

“Increase the quality of prefabricated (digitally fabricated) components and reduce its

costs” (BE 10) is the lowest item/ variable of factor 3 of BIM benefits with a factor

loading of 0.54. Prefabrication is the practice of assembling components of a structure

in a factory or other manufacturing site, and transporting complete assemblies or sub-

assemblies to the construction site where the structure is to be located. BIM allows for

fabrication to occur efficiently offsite of many types of building components. These

building components include steel framing, curtain walls, facades, and building

envelope designs as well as mechanical and piping assemblies. These precisions of

building components reduce waste and condense construction time as well as save costs.

The reduction in labor schedules due to the offsite prefabrication diminishes onsite

interferences, as well as decreases, lead times; facilitating faster erection and placement

of building components on a project. Furthermore, prefabricated (digitally fabricated)

components allow for an improved quality via information extracted directly from the

BIM project model, reducing errors caused by miscommunication or misinterpretation

of the design. The quality of fabricated components generated in controlled settings is

superior to those generated onsite. Moreover, the use of digitally fabricated components

allows for enhanced coordination amongst Architects, fabricators, and contractors

allowing for the theory of the BIM model to be achieved successfully (Eastman et al.,

2008; Eastman et al. 2011; Gray et al., 2013).

112

Factor 4: Decision-making support/ Better customer service

The fourth factor named Decision-making support/ Better customer service explains

4.22% of the total variance and contains two items. The two items/ variables have the

same factor loading, which is 0.80. It is a high value. The two items/ variables are as

follows:

1. Support design decision-making by comparing different design alternatives on a

3D model (BE 2), with a factor loading = 0.80.

2. Improve realization of the idea of a design by the owner via a 3D model of the

building (BE 1), with a factor loading = 0.80.

The name of the factor has been chosen according to the correlations between these two

items/ variables on this factor. BIM is used to generate and manage information about a

building or piece of infrastructure over its entire lifespan. At every stage of the project

lifecycle, from design through to decommissioning, BIM provides information that help

owners of the construction projects in making informed choices. It makes the design,

construction, operation, and decommissioning process more efficient. Stebbins (2009)

agreed that BIM is a process rather than a piece of software. He clearly identified BIM

as a business and management decision. BIM implementation is strongly related to

managerial aspects of professional practices for different working styles and cultures

(cited in Ahmad et al., 2012). More precisely, BIM is a mechanism to share knowledge

among design professionals for the purpose of improving decision-making through

better project understanding (Schade et al., 2011). The building information models

become shared knowledge resources to support decision-making about a facility from

the earliest conceptual stages, through design, construction, operational life, and

eventually, demolition (Lee et al., 2007; Lee et al., 2009; Choi, 2010; Smart Market

Report, 2012) (cited in Lee et al., 2014). As shown from the results, the item/ variable

with the higher loading of this first factor (component) is ―Support design decision-

making by comparing different design alternatives on a 3D model‖ (BE 2), and the

item/ variable with the lower loading of this first factor (component) is ―Improve

realization of the idea of a design by the owner via a 3D model of the building‖ (BE 1).

“Support design decision-making by comparing different design alternatives on a 3D

model” (BE 2) is the higher item/ variable of factor 4 of BIM benefits with a factor

loading of 0.80. Decisions early in the design process have a significant impact on the

life cycle performance of a building. The outcome of a construction project can be

improved if different design options can rapidly be analyzed to assist the client and

design team in making informed decisions in the design process. As the 3D model is

created, real-time information associated with the cost database becomes available. This

type of information provides the designer with estimated costs for the current design

alternative and gives the ability to associate costs with specific design features (Eastman

et al., 2008; Thurairajah & Goucher, 2013; Stanley and Thurnell, 2014). The time saved

through enhanced information management is also likely to generate productivity and

efficiency gains, and also improve design outcomes through better understanding of

design alternatives by clients and designers (CRC for Construction Innovation, 2007;

Azhar et al., 2008a; Azhar et al., 2008b; Eastman et al., 2008; Eastman et al., 2011;

Allen Consulting Group, 2010; Ahmad et al., 2012; Newton and Chileshe, 2012;

Stanley and Thurnell, 2014).

113

“Improve realization of the idea of a design by the owner via a 3D model of the

building” (BE 1) is the lower item/ variable of factor 4 of BIM benefits with a factor

loading of 0.80. The different stakeholders can find benefits from using BIM. The

model developed using BIM helps owners in visualizing the spatial organization of the

building as well as understanding the sequence of construction activities and project

duration (Eastman et al., 2011). The owners must be able to manage and evaluate the

scope of the design against their requirements at every phase of a project. BIM provides

3D visualization to the owners and thus, project conceptualization is perceived to be

made easier with BIM. BIM provides the ability to check each part of the project about

each of the projects options (Azhar et al., 2008a; Stanley and Thurnell, 2014).

4.6 The strength of BIM barriers

There was a field contains 18 items of BIM barriers, and this list of the 18 items was


results of the face validity and the pretesting of the questionnaire as shown in Chapter 3.

These items were subjected to the views of respondents and were analyzed. The

Descriptive Statistics, i.e. Means, Standard Deviations (SD), t-value (two-tailed),

probabilities (P-value), Relative Importance Indices (RII), and finally ranks were

established and presented in Table (4.15).

4.6.1 RII of BIM barriers

RII was calculated to weight each barrier of BIM (from BA 1 to BA 18) according to

the numerical scores obtained from the questionnaire responses by the professionals in

the AEC industry in Gaza strip and the results have been ranked from the highest degree

(The strongest BIM barrier) to the least degree (The most vulnerable BIM barrier).

Table (4.15) provides RIIs and ranks of BIM barriers, respectively. The numbers in the

―rank‖ column represent the sequential ranking. It worth mentioning that ranking of

BIM barriers was based on the highest Mean, RII, and the lowest SD. If some items/

variables have similar Means and RIIs, as in the case of (BA 4 and BA 13); and (BA 10

and BA 7), the ranking will depend on the lowest SD. More precisely, although BA 4

and BA 13 have the same Mean and RIIs, BA 4 is ranked higher than the BA 13

because it has a lower SD. The same thing was done for BA 10 and BA 7, where BA 10

has taken the higher rank than BA 7. Items/ Variables were categorized with ratings

from 77.33 % to 66 % (Figure 4.10).

Table (4.15): The strength of BIM barriers

No. BIM barrier

Mea

n

SD

RII

(%

)

t-v

alu

e

(tw

o-t

aile

d)

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.)

Ran

k

BA 2 Lack of the awareness of BIM by

stakeholders 3.87 0.99 77.33 14.34 0.00* 1

BA 3 Lack of knowledge of how to apply BIM

software 3.84 0.95 76.80 14.50 0.00* 2

BA 5

Lack of the awareness of the benefits that

BIM can bring to Engineering offices,

companies, and projects 3.81 0.98 76.22 13.63 0.00*

3

114


No. BIM barrier

Mea

n

SD

RII

(%

)

t-val

ue

(tw

o-t

aile

d)

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.)

Ran

k

BA 14

Lack of interest in Gaza strip to pursue

the condition of the building over the life

after completion of implementation stage

3.75 1.10 75.04 11.29 0.00* 4

BA 15 Lack of Architects/ Engineers skilled in

the use of BIM programs 3.71 1.11 74.15 10.47 0.00* 5

BA 16

Lack of the education or training on the

use of BIM, whether in the university or

any governmental or private training

centers

3.69 1.02 73.78 11.14 0.00* 6

BA 12

Lack of demand and disinterest from

clients regarding with using BIM

technology in design and construction of

the project

3.69 1.11 73.78 10.22 0.00* 7

BA 11 Lack of the governmental regulations for

full support the implementation of BIM 3.68 1.14 73.68 9.82 0.00* 8

BA 4

Professionals think that the current CAD

system and other conventional programs

satisfy the need of designing and

performing the work and complete the

project efficiently

3.67 1.01 73.46 10.97 0.00* 9

BA 13

Lack of the real cases in Gaza strip or

other nearby areas in the region that have

been implemented by using BIM and

have proved positive return of investment

3.67 1.12 73.46 9.74 0.00* 10

BA 6

Lack of effective collaboration among

project stakeholders to exchange

necessary information for BIM

application, due to the fragmented nature

of the AEC industry in Gaza strip

3.57 0.98 71.41 9.57 0.00* 11

BA 18

Reluctance to train Architects/ Engineers

due to the costly training requirements in

terms of time and money

3.51 1.08 70.30 7.81 0.00* 12

BA 8

Lack of the financial ability for the small

firms to start a new workflow that is

necessary for the adoption of BIM

effectively

3.42 1.17 68.43 5.90 0.00* 13

BA 9

Companies prefer focusing on projects

(under working/ construction) rather than

considering, evaluating, and

implementing BIM

3.40 1.07 67.93 6.08 0.00* 14

BA 11

Difficulty of finding project stakeholders

with the required competence to

participate in applying BIM

3.36 1.03 67.21 5.75 0.00* 15

BA 7

Resistance by companies and institutions

for any change can occur in the workflow

system and the refusal of adopting a new

technology

3.36 1.08 67.21 5.41 0.00* 16

115


No. BIM barrier

Mea

n

SD

RII

(%

)

t-val

ue

(tw

o-t

aile

d)

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.)

Ran

k

BA 17

The unwillingness of Architects/

Engineers to learn new applications

because of their educational culture and

their bias toward the programs they are

dealing with

3.33 1.10 66.54 4.90 0.00* 17

BA 1

Necessary high costs to buy BIM

software and costs of the necessary

hardware updates

3.30 1.12 66 4.41 0.00* 18

All barriers 3.59 0.67 71.80 14.54 0.00* Critical value of t: at degree of freedom (df) = [N-1] = [270-1] = 269 and significance (Probability) level

0.05 equals “1.97”

Figure (4.10): RII of BIM barriers (BA 1 to BA 18)

The findings indicated that “Lack of the awareness of BIM by stakeholders” (BA 2) is

the strongest barrier to BIM adopting in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. It has been

ranked as the first position with (RII = 77.33%) and (P-value = 0.00*) according to the

overall respondents. This result indicates that a significant proportion of respondents

have little or no understanding of the concept of BIM. This finding is consistent with

the result which has been found by Kassem et al. (2012). According to their studies,

lack of the awareness of BIM was recognized by the professionals in the construction

industry as the primary barrier to BIM and 4D adoption in the UK. This result is also in

line with the research of Thurairajah and Goucher (2013), where it has shown that while

77.33 76.80

76.22

75.04

74.15

73.78

73.7

73.68

73.46 73.33

71.41

70.30

68.43

67.93

67.21

67.14

66.54

66

60

65

70

75

80BA 2

BA 3

BA 5

BA 14

BA 15

BA 16

BA 12

BA 11

BA 4

BA 13

BA 6

BA 18

BA 8

BA 9

BA 10

BA 7

BA 17

BA 1

116

the cost consultants in the UK are aware of BIM, there is an overall lack of knowledge

and understanding of what it is. According to the study of Löf and Kojadinovic (2012)

in Sweden, the reason for the lack of knowledge of BIM is the lack of guidelines on

how to use and align BIM in the production phase of the construction projects. The lack

of knowledge regarding BIM has led to a slow uptake of this technology and ineffective

management of adoption (Mitchell and Lambert, 2013; NBS, 2013).

“Lack of knowledge of how to apply BIM software” (BA 3) (RII = 76.80 %; P-value =

0.00*) was ranked as the second strongest barrier to BIM adopting in the AEC industry

in Gaza strip. Due to the complexity of gathering all the relevant information when

working with BIM on a building project some companies have developed, software

designed specifically to work in a BIM framework. New BIM software makes massive

projects doable (3D Visualization, Quantity Takeoff, Lean Scheduling, Cost Planning

and other processes). There are some BIM software applications available in the market.

The top three software are as follows: Autodesk® Revit™; Graphisoft® Constructor™;

and Bentley® Architecture™ (Azhar et al., 2008b). The result of the analysis is

consistent with which has been revealed by research in Hong Kong by Tse et al. (2005).

They found that a large part of the Architects stated that BIM is ―not easy to use.‖ This

result is also in line with which has been found in Sweden by Lahdou and Zetterman

(2011). They found that project managers in the construction projects claimed that the

implementation of BIM is not always as easy as software developers suggest. A usual

problem is getting different file formats to function properly when creating a combined

building information model. In general, there is a knowledge gap regarding BIM

software and how to use it efficiently (AGC, 2005; Keegan, 2010; Kassem et al., 2012;

Khosrowshahi and Arayici, 2012; Löf and Kojadinovic, 2012; Crowley, 2013).

“Lack of the awareness of the benefits that BIM can bring to Engineering offices,

companies and projects” (BA 5) was ranked as the third position with (RII of 76.22 %;

P-value = 0.00*). This barrier to BIM adopting would be a very logical choice from the

respondents in the AEC industry in Gaza strip, which is because of the knowledge gap

regarding BIM. The result is agreed with those reported about barriers to BIM adoption

in the UK by Arayici et al. (2009), and Kassem et al. (2012). This outcome also

corroborates the findings of the studies of Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012), Aibinu

and Venkatesh (2013), and Elmualim and Gilder (2013). Their research determined the

lack of the awareness of the BIM benefits as one of the substantial barriers associated

with BIM implementation in the AEC industries in (the UK and Finland), Australia, and

(the UK, Europe, the USA, India, Ghana, China, Russia, South Africa, Australia,

Canada, Malaysia and the UAE), respectively. People in Australia also displayed a

degree of hesitancy in implementing BIM on a project because of the lack of knowledge

about BIM and its distinctive capabilities in the field of the construction industry

(Mitchell and Lambert, 2013). In Hong Kong, Tse et al. (2005) revealed by research

that a large part of the Architects did not find the tools in BIM to satisfy their needs.

Thus, BIM benefits are still often misunderstood or not known to those do not use it in

their works (Löf and Kojadinovic, 2012).

Finally, ―Necessary high costs to buy BIM software and costs of the necessary

hardware updates” (BA 1) was ranked as the lowest barrier to BIM adoption in the 18th

position with (RII = 66 %; P-value = 0.00*) as per perceptions of all the respondents.

This view has more than one interpretation such as they do not know the real amount of

the cost they need to adopt BIM. Some respondents who are working in consulting

117

offices also said that the initial costs that must be spent in the beginning would not

affect financially on the organization as long as there are significant benefits will be

gained from BIM adoption in the long run, and thus costs are not a barrier to adopting

BIM. On the contrary of the result of the analysis, when the respondents of QS in

Australia were asked to list the barriers to the use of BIM features, the results showed

that the cost of implementation was the most frequently cited barrier by the respondents

(Aibinu and Venkatesh, 2013). There are several examples of the high costs that are

required to implement BIM, such as (1) software licensing; (2) the costs to improve

server capacity to suit having such a high IT requirements; (3) ongoing maintenance

fee; (4) the cost of the proper creation of a building model; and (5) the costs of the

training (Keegan, 2010; Aibinu and Venkatesh, 2013; and (Lee et al., 2007; Lee et al.,

2009; Choi, 2010; Smart Market Report, 2012) (cited in Lee et al., 2014)).

The top three barriers to BIM adoption, which were rated by the respondents, are logical

and acceptable to be the strongest barriers to BIM adoption in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip. Regarding results for all items of the part of BIM barriers, they show that the

Mean for all those items equals 3.59 and the total RII equals 71.80 %, which is greater

than 60% (the neutral value of RII (3/5)*100 = 60%). The value of t-test equals 14.54,

which is higher than the critical value of t that equals 1.97. As well as, the total P-value

of all the items equals 0.00, and it is less than the significance level of 0.05. Based on all

the previous results, BIM barriers are substantially affecting the adoption of BIM in the


4.6.2 Factor analysis results of BIM barriers

RII analysis did not provide any meaningful outcomes regarding understanding the

clustering effect of the similar items/ variables, and thus further analysis was required



between the 18 items/ variables of the field of BIM barriers in an attempt to reduce the

number of them. It also used to group items/ variables with similar characteristics










in Ch3, the received data of the research follows the normal distribution. The result has

been satisfied with this requirement.

118




respondents. The sample size for this study was 270. Further, the standard rule is to

suggest that sample size contains at least 10–15 respondents per item/ variable. In other

words, sample size should be at least ten times the number of variables and some even

recommend 20 times (Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). Fortunately, for this field of BIM

barriers, the condition was verified. This field contains 18 barriers, and the sample size

was 270. With 270 respondents and 18 items/ variables (BIM barriers), the ratio of

respondents to items/ variables are 15: 1, which exceeds the requirement for the ratio of

respondents to items/ variables.


Table (4.16) illustrates the correlation matrix for the 18 items/ variables of BIM

barriers. It is simply a rectangular array of numbers which gives the correlation


investigation (Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). As shown in Table (4.16), the correlation

coefficient between an item/ a variable and itself is always 1; hence the principal



greater than 0.30 between the items/ variables included in the analysis. For this set of

items/ variables, that most of the correlations in the matrix are strong and greater than

0.30. Correlations have been satisfied with this requirement.

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett's Test



KMO measure of sampling adequacy was 0.89 (close to 1). It was considered

acceptable and meritorious because it exceeds the minimum requirement of 0.50 and it

is above 0.80 (according to Kaiser, 1974; Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). Moreover, the

Bartlett test of sphericity was another indication of the strength of the relationship






sample data of (BIM barriers) were appropriated for factor analysis.

Measures of reliability for the whole items/ variables

Cronbach's alpha test was performed on the items/ variables in the field of (BIM

barriers). The value of Cronbach‘s alpha (Cα) could be anywhere in the range of 0 to 1,



higher (Field, 2009; Weiers, 2011; Garson, 2013). As shown in Table (4.17), the value

of the calculated Cα for 16 items/ variables of the field of (BIM barriers) is 0.90 which

is considered to be marvelous. Cronbach's alpha test was applied only to the 16 items/

119

variables (from the original 18 variables) of the field because the remaining two items/

variables were failed according to the Communalities Table and thus were deleted from

the analysis as it will be shown below.

120

Table: (4.17) KMO and Bartlett's test for items/ variables of BIM barriers

KMO and Bartlett's test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. 0.89

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 2167.89

df 120

Sig. 0.00*


Table: (4.16): Correlations between items/ variables of BIM barriers

BA 1 BA 2 BA 3 BA 5 BA 7 BA 8 BA 9 BA 10 BA 11 BA 12 BA 13 BA 14 BA 15 BA 16 BA 17 BA 18

BA 1 1

BA 2 0.50** 1

BA 3 0.39** 0.76** 1

BA 5 0.29** 0.55** 0.56** 1

BA 7 0.23** 0.22** 0.17** 0.28**

BA 8 0.42** 0.28** 0.23** 0.30** 0.50** 1

BA 9 0.28** 0.30** 0.24** 0.32** 0.53** 0.61** 1

BA 10 0.29** 0.30** 0.24** 0.34** 0.45** 0.52** 0.59** 1

BA 11 0.24** 0.42** 0.36** 0.36** 0.24** 0.40** 0.47** 0.60** 1

BA 12 0.22** 0.33** 0.33** 0.38** 0.25** 0.34** 0.34** 0.52** 0.69** 1

BA 13 0.13** 0.31** 0.33** 0.34** 0.28** 0.32** 0.39** 0.45** 0.59** 0.63** 1

BA 14 0.07** 0.29** 0.27** 0.41** 0.29** 0.29** 0.40** 0.37** 0.50** 0.52** 0.63** 1

BA 15 0.15** 0.38** 0.45** 0.40** 0.21** 0.28** 0.40** 0.42** 0.56** 0.57** 0.54** 0.60** 1

BA 16 0.19** 0.41** 0.39** 0.43** 0.20** 0.26** 0.39** 0.42** 0.50** 0.50** 0.47** 0.53** 0.72** 1

BA 17 0.18** 0.26** 0.26** 0.25** 0.27** 0.14** 0.30** 0.29** 0.24** 0.18** 0.27** 0.34** 0.41** 0.45** 1

BA 18 0.27** 0.37** 0.33** 0.35** 0.27** 0.29** 0.35** 0.37** 0.33** 0.27** 0.31** 0.37** 0.41** 0.46** 0.54** 1



121


The next part of the output was a Table of communalities. Communalities represent the

proportion of the variance in the original items/ variables that is accounted for by the



higher (Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). On iteration 1 of factor analysis test, the

communality for the variable BA 4: “Professionals think that the current CAD system

and other conventional programs satisfy the need of designing and performing the work

and complete the project efficiently‖ was 0.46; and the communality for the variable BA

6: “Lack of effective collaboration among project stakeholders to exchange necessary

information for BIM application, due to the fragmented nature of the AEC industry in

Gaza strip‖ was 0.42. Since they were less than 0.50, the variables had to be removed,

and the PCA was computed again (new iteration). Table (4.18) shows that all of the

communalities for all the remaining items/ variables satisfy the minimum requirement

of being larger than 0.50, and therefore was not to exclude any of these items/ variables

on the basis of low communalities. Thus, all of the remaining 16 items/ variables (from

the original 18 items/ variables) of this field (BIM barriers) were used in this analysis.

Table: (4.18) Communalities of BIM barriers

No. BIM Barrier

Init

ial

Ex

trac

tion

BA 1 Necessary high costs to buy BIM software and costs of the necessary

hardware updates 1 0.61

BA 2 Lack of the awareness of BIM by stakeholders 1 0.81

BA 3 Lack of knowledge of how to apply BIM software 1 0.79

BA 5 Lack of the awareness of the benefits that BIM can bring to

Engineering offices, companies, and projects 1 0.54

BA 7 Resistance by companies and institutions for any change can occur in

the workflow system and the refusal of adopting a new technology 1 0.62

BA 8 Lack of the financial ability for the small firms to start a new

workflow that is necessary for the adoption of BIM effectively 1 0.72

BA 9 Companies prefer focusing on projects (under working/ construction)

rather than considering, evaluating, and implementing BIM 1 0.70


competence to participate in applying BIM 1 0.66

BA 11 Lack of the governmental regulations for full support the

implementation of BIM 1 0.71

BA 12 Lack of demand and disinterest from clients regarding with using BIM

technology in design and construction of the project 1 0.74

BA 13 Lack of the real cases in Gaza strip or other nearby areas in the region

that have been implemented by using BIM and have proved positive

return of investment

1 0.67

BA 14 Lack of interest in Gaza strip to pursue the condition of the building

over the life after completion of implementation stage 1 0.64

BA 15 Lack of Architects/ Engineers skilled in the use of BIM programs 1 0.72

BA 16 Lack of the education or training on the use of BIM, whether in the

university or any governmental or private training centers

1 0.68

122

Table: (4.18) Communalities of BIM barriers

No. BIM Barrier

Init

ial

Ex

trac

tion

BA 17 The unwillingness of Architects/ Engineers to learn new applications

because of their educational culture and their bias toward the programs

they are dealing with

1 0.77

BA 18 Reluctance to train Architects/ Engineers due to the costly training

requirements in terms of time and money 1 0.66


By using the output from iteration 2, there were four eigenvalues greater than 1 (Figure




for some factors to derive would indicate that there were four components (factors) to

be extracted for these variables. Results were tabulated in Table (4.19). The four

components solution explained a sum of the variance with component 1 contributing

41.70 %; component 2 contributing 9.95 %; component 3 contributing 9.78 %; and

component 4 contributing 7.40 %. All the remaining factors are not significant.

Figure (4.11): The four components (factors) of BIM barriers

The four components were then rotated via varimax (orthogonal) rotation approach.

This does not change the underlying solution or the relationships among the items/

variables. Rather, it presents the pattern of loadings in a manner that is easier to


solution revealed that the four components solution explained a sum of the variance

BIM barriers

Factor 1: Lack of BIM interest

"eigenvalue = 6.67"

Factor 2: Organization-wide resistance to change workflows

"eigenvalue = 1.59"

Factor 3: Lack of knowledge about BIM and cost of implementing

"eigenvalue = 1.57"

Factor 4: Cultural barriers toward adopting new technology and training requirements

"eigenvalue = 1.18"

123

with component 1 contributing 23.90 %; component 2 contributing 16.59 %; component

3 contributing 16.25 %; and component 4 contributing 12.08 %. These four components

(factors) explained 68.83 % of total variance for the varimax rotation.

Table (4.19): Total variance Explained of BIM barriers

Com

pon

ent


Squared Loadings

Rotation Sums of

Squared Loadings T

ota

l

% o

f V

aria

nce

Cum

ula

tiv

e %

To

tal

% o

f V

aria

nce

Cum

ula

tiv

e %

To

tal

% o

f V

aria

nce

Cum

ula

tiv

e %

1 6.67 41.70 41.70 6.67 41.70 41.70 3.82 23.90 23.90

2 1.59 9.95 51.65 1.59 9.95 51.65 2.65 16.59 40.50

3 1.56 9.78 61.43 1.56 9.78 61.43 2.60 16.25 56.75

4 1.18 7.40 68.83 1.18 7.40 68.83 1.93 12.08 68.83

5 0.77 4.79 73.62

6 0.58 3.63 77.25

7 0.55 3.46 80.71

8 0.51 3.16 83.87

9 0.47 2.92 86.79

10 0.41 2.58 89.37

11 0.36 2.25 91.62

12 0.32 2.02 93.64

13 0.30 1.90 95.54

14 0.28 1.77 97.31

15 0.24 1.52 98.82

16 0.19 1.18 100

Scree Plot

The scree plot below in Figure (4.12) is a graph of the eigenvalues against all the

factors. This graph can also be used to decide on some factors that can be derived. The

point of interest is where the curve starts to flatten. It can be seen that the curve begins

to flatten between factors 4 and 5. Note also that factor 5 has an eigenvalue of less than

1, so only four factors have been retained to be extracted.

124

Figure (4.12): Scree plot for factors of BIM barriers



original 18 items/ variables) on the four factors extracted and rotated. The pattern of



correlations (0.50 or greater) on more than one factor/ component). If an item/ a


2006; Field, 2009; Zaiontz, 2014). According to the results of iteration 2, none of the

items/ variables demonstrated a complex structure and as shown in Table (4.20), the

factor loading for each item/ variable is above 0.5. The items/ variables are listed in the

order of the size of their factor loadings.

Naming the Factors

Once an interpretable pattern of loadings is done, the factors or components should be



factor should play more important role in naming the factor. The four components


Factor 1: ―Lack of BIM interest.”

Factor 2: ―Organization-wide resistance to change workflows.‖

Factor 3: ―Lack of knowledge about BIM and cost of implementing.‖

Factor4: Cultural barriers toward adopting new technology and training requirements.‖

125

Measures of reliability for each factor


items/ variables in each factor formed collectively explain the same measure within

target dimensions (Doloi, 2009). If items/ variables truly form the identified factor




Factor 1 ―Lack of BIM interest‖ with items/ variables: BA 12, BA 13, BA 11, BA 14,

BA 15, and BA 16.

Factor 2 ―Organization-wide resistance to change workflows‖ with items/ variables: BA

8, BA 7, BA 9, and BA 10.

Factor 3 ―Lack of knowledge about BIM and cost of implementing‖ with items/

variables: BA 2, BA 3, BA 1, and BA 5.

Factor 4: ―Cultural barriers toward adopting new technology and training

requirements‖ with items/ variables: BA 17, and BA 18.




tabulated in Table (4.20), Cα for factor 1 is 0.87; Cα for factor 2 is 0.82; Cα for factor 3

is 0.80 and Cα for factor 4 is 0.69. They are considered to be acceptable.

Table (4.20): Results of factor analysis for BIM barriers

No. BIM barrier factors (Components)

Fac

tor

load

ing

Eig

env

alues

%var

ian

ce

exp

lain

ed

Cro

nbac

h's

Alp

ha

(Cα

)

Component/ Factor One : Lack of BIM interest

BA 12 Lack of demand and disinterest from clients

regarding with using BIM technology in design

and construction of the project

0.81

6.67

41.70

0.87

BA 13 Lack of the real cases in Gaza strip or other

nearby areas in the region that have been

implemented by using BIM and have proved

positive return of investment

0.78

BA 11 Lack of the governmental regulations for full

support the implementation of BIM

0.74

BA 14 Lack of interest in Gaza strip to pursue the

condition of the building over the life after

completion of implementation stage

0.72

BA 15 Lack of Architects/ Engineers skilled in the use

of BIM programs

0.72

BA 16 Lack of the education or training on the use of

BIM, whether in the university or any

governmental or private training centers

0.61

Component/ Factor Two: Organization-wide resistance to change workflows

BA 8 Lack of the financial ability for the small firms

to start a new workflow that is necessary for

the adoption of BIM effectively

0.80

126

Table (4.20): Results of factor analysis for BIM barriers

No. BIM barrier factors (Components)

Fac

tor

load

ing

Eig

env

alues

%var

ian

ce

exp

lain

ed

Cro

nbac

h's

Alp

ha

(Cα

)

BA 7 Resistance by companies and institutions for

any change can occur in the workflow system

and the refusal of adopting a new technology

0.75

1.59

9.95

0.82

BA 9 Companies prefer focusing on projects (under

working/ construction) rather than considering,

evaluating, and implementing BIM

0.74

BA 10 Difficulty of finding project stakeholders with

the required competence to participate in

applying BIM

0.65

Component/ Factor Three: Lack of knowledge about BIM and cost of implementing

BA 2 Lack of the awareness of BIM by stakeholders 0.85

1.57

9.78

0.80

BA 3 Lack of knowledge of how to apply BIM

software

0.83

BA 1 Necessary high costs to buy BIM software and

costs of the necessary hardware updates

0.66

BA 5 Lack of the awareness of the benefits that BIM

can bring to Engineering offices, companies,

and projects

0.61

Component/ Factor Four: Cultural barriers toward adopting new technology and training

requirements

BA 17 The unwillingness of Architects/ Engineers to

learn new applications because of their

educational culture and their bias toward the

programs they are dealing with

0.85

1.18

7.40 0.69

BA 18 Reluctance to train Architects/ Engineers due

to the costly training requirements in terms of

time and money

0.72



follows:

Factor 1: Lack of BIM interest

The first factor named Lack of BIM interest explains 41.70% of the total variance and

contains six items/ variables. The majority of items/ variables had relatively high factor

loadings (≥ 0.61). The six items/ variables are as follows:

1. Lack of demand and disinterest from clients regarding with using BIM

technology in design and construction of the project (BA 12), with a factor

loading = 0.81.

2. Lack of the real cases in Gaza strip or other nearby areas in the region that

have been implemented by using BIM and have proved positive return of

investment (BA 13), with a factor loading = 0.78.

3. Lack of the governmental regulations for full support the implementation of BIM

(BA 11), with a factor loading = 0.74.

127

4. Lack of interest in Gaza strip to pursue the condition of the building over the life

after completion of implementation stage (BA 14), with a factor loading = 0.72.

5. Lack of Architects/ Engineers skilled in the use of BIM programs (BA 15), with

a factor loading = 0.72.

6. Lack of the education or training on the use of BIM, whether in the university or

any governmental or private training centers (BA 16), with a factor loading =

0.61.

The name of this factor has been chosen according to the correlations between these six

items/ variables. Interest is a feeling that causes attention to focus on an object, event, or

process. The absence of interest in BIM has a powerful effect on non-adoption it in the

AEC industry in Gaza strip. The adoption of BIM has been tightly connected with the

interested individuals (Lindblad, 2013). Thus; the primary reason for not using BIM is

the fact that clients and other project team members did not request to use BIM.

Moreover, if one member of a project team is using BIM while the others continue

doing things the old way, there will be a limited benefit (Khosrowshahi and Arayici,

2012; Löf and Kojadinovic, 2012; Crowley, 2013; Aibinu and Venkatesh, 2014). To

make the investment worthwhile, someone has to break the stalemate. That someone is

often the government. But there is an apparent absence of the government lead and

direction to promote the use of BIM and develop the appropriate technical skills

amongst firms of the AEC industry in Gaza strip. Studies of Ku and Taiebat (2011);

Lahdou and Zetterman (2011); Weygant (2011); Mitchell and Lambert (2013); Aibinu

and Venkatesh (2014) pointed out to the Lack of the governmental regulations to fully

support the implementation of BIM as a substantial barrier to BIM adoption. The lack of

the real cases that have been implemented by using BIM in Gaza strip or other nearby

areas in the region is also an important reason for the lack of encouragement to adopt

BIM. As shown from the results, the item/ variable with the highest loading of this first

factor (component) is ―Lack of demand and disinterest from clients regarding with

using BIM technology in design and construction of the project‖ (BA 12), and the item/

variable with the lowest loading of this first factor (component) is “Lack of the

education or training on the use of BIM, whether in the university or any governmental

or private training centers‖ (BA 16).

―Lack of demand and disinterest from clients regarding with using BIM technology in

design and construction of the project‖ (BA 12), the highest item/ variable, with a factor

loading of 0.81 can be a high barrier to BIM adoption in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

One of the problems in developing BIM models is the client. The project owner/ client

might be not interested in BIM, or not aware of BIM, or not capable of handling BIM

models. Clients demand can play a vital role in driving practices to make progress

towards BIM. Low client demand is a result of the lack of knowledge of BIM or even

uncertainties regarding BIM for certain benefits. Clients are missing out on the benefits

of BIM (Tse et al., 2005; Gu et al., 2008; Keegan, 2010; Kjartansdóttir, 2011;

Khosrowshahi and Arayici, 2012; Löf and Kojadinovic, 2012; Crowley, 2013;

Lindblad, 2013; Aibinu and Venkatesh, 2014). Some respondents stated that they will

use BIM if there is a requirement from clients (especially clients of huge projects). The

NBS National BIM Report 2013 identified the top five reasons cited by those

organizations that haven‘t yet made the move to adopt BIM, and the first barrier was

that there is no client demand (NBS, 2013).

128

“Lack of the education or training on the use of BIM, whether in the university or any

governmental or private training centers” (BA 16), the lowest item/ variable, with a

factor loading of 0.61 can play a fundamental role in not adopting BIM in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip. There is a lack of BIM integration within the existing education

and training services in Gaza strip, while some universities around the world are

offering courses for various BIM applications. The Architectural and Engineering

education usually reflects the needs of the work market. BIM is not just another CAD; it

is the shift from presenting information about the building to representing this

information. Crowley (2013) pointed out in his study to the importance of the education

and training of BIM for AEC industry.

Factor 2: Organization-wide resistance to change workflows

The second factor named Organization-wide resistance to change workflows explains

9.95% of the total variance and contains four items/ variables. The majority of items/

variables had relatively high factor loadings (≥ 0.65). The four items/ variables are as

follows:

1. Lack of the financial ability for the small firms to start a new workflow that is

necessary for the adoption of BIM effectively (BA 8), with a factor loading =

0.80.

2. Resistance by companies and institutions for any change can occur in the

workflow system and the refusal of adopting a new technology (BA 7), with a


3. Companies prefer focusing on projects (under working/ construction) rather

than considering, evaluating, and implementing BIM (BA 9), with a factor

loading = 0.74.

4. Difficulty of finding project stakeholders with the required competence to

participate in applying BIM (BA 10), with a factor loading = 0.65.


four items/ variables. Adoption of BIM requires changing the traditional work practice

(Davidson, 2009; Arayici et al., 2009; Gu and London, 2010). In contrast, organization-

wide resistance regarding the need for investment in infrastructure, training, and new

software tools would be a major factor that affects BIM adoption in the AEC industry in

Gaza strip. Designers, developers, contractors and construction managers all also tend to

focus on their area and protect their interests in the building process, which leads to the

presence of a fragmented industry (Johnson and Laepple, 2003). The culture of

implementation decides the effectiveness of a new concept. For incorporating BIM, an

open-minded culture is required. In the construction industry, where project managers

spend most of the time on-site, they have the liberty to work in their way. In the case of

BIM, however, these project managers need to adhere to strict guidelines and processes.

Therefore, there is resistance to change. Successful BIM adoption is not all about

software; it‘s also about organizational change. In other words, for successful BIM

adoption, organizations must develop and manage their workflows for different tasks

during all phases of the project lifecycle. An organization must look internally to

understand their operating systems and identify how BIM can add value to their daily

activities (Davidson, 2009; Arayici et al., 2005; Gu et al., 2008; Yan and Damian, 2008;

Arayici et al., 2009; Becerik-Gerber et al., 2011; Gu and London, 2010; Khosrowshahi

and Arayici, 2012). As shown from the results, the item/ variable with the highest

loading of this first factor (component) is ―Lack of the financial ability for the small

firms to start a new workflow that is necessary for the adoption of BIM effectively‖ (BA

129

8), and the item/ variable with the lowest loading of this first factor (component) is

―Difficulty of finding project stakeholders with the required competence to participate

in applying BIM‖ (BA 10).

“Lack of the financial ability for the small firms to start a new workflow that is

necessary for the adoption of BIM effectively” (BA 8), the highest item/ variable, with a

factor loading of 0.80 is a roadblock in BIM adoption in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

And what proves to be a barrier to BIM adoption is the price of the software and

incompatibility with other software. As passed in the previous studies, Arayici et al.

(2009); Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012); Elmualim and Gilder (2013); Thurairajah

and Goucher (2013); and Aibinu and Venkatesh (2014) pointed to the strength of this

barrier to BIM adoption. Last but not the least, the company that is implementing BIM

has to change the work process. For making necessary changes in the process, a cost

will be incurred. So, companies (especially, small companies) are more worried about

the expenses that follow after the implementation of BIM. But, BIM needs to be seen

from the perspective of the value added. The implementation of BIM software can cause

a sea change in the way the AEC firm functions, but the long term benefits are

irrefutable.

“Difficulty of finding project stakeholders with the required competence to participate

in applying BIM” (BA 10), the lowest item/ variable, with a factor loading of 0.65 can

be a roadblock in BIM adoption in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. As it turns out

previously, the results of objective 1 of the study indicated that the level of knowledge

regarding BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza strip is very low; and the lack of cohesion

among stakeholders makes it difficult to improve the knowledge level. Firms and

disciplines are also working separately and interacting only through the exchange of

construction documents. If one member of a project team is using BIM while the others

continue doing things the old way, there will be a limited benefit. BIM both enables and

requires tighter integration among disciplines and companies. They must work together

as one. Lahdou and Zetterman (2011) said that the utilization of BIM goes hand in hand

with a new method that allows more partnering like relationships among stakeholders.

These collaborative relationships can create more cohesion among stakeholders, thus

making it easier to work together towards a common goal of implementing BIM. In

other words, collaboration from all different stakeholders needs for BIM to be

successful; to insert, extract, update or modify information in the BIM model at the

various stages of the facilities life-cycle (Sebastian, 2011).

Factor 3: Lack of knowledge about BIM and cost of implementing

The third factor named Lack of knowledge about BIM and cost of implementing explains

9.78% of the total variance and contains four items. The majority of items/ variables had


1. Lack of the awareness of BIM by stakeholders (BA 2), with a factor loading =

0.85.

2. Lack of knowledge of how to apply BIM software (BA 3), with a factor loading =

0.83.

3. Necessary high costs to buy BIM software and costs of the necessary hardware

updates (BA 1), with a factor loading = 0.66.

4. Lack of the awareness of the benefits that BIM can bring to Engineering offices,

companies, and projects (BA 5), with a factor loading = 0.61.

130


four items/ variables. There is a pressing demand for improved awareness and

understanding of BIM across the AEC industry, according to many studies related to

BIM. Lack of knowledge regarding BIM has led to a slow uptake of this technology and

ineffective management of adoption (Mitchell and Lambert, 2013; NBS, 2013). There is

a significant lack of understanding of BIM (the core concepts of BIM) and its practical

applications throughout the life of projects. There is also a lack of technical skills that

professionals need to have for using the BIM software as well as the lack of knowledge

of how to implement the BIM software to be helpful in construction processes.

According to that, it is clear that there is a significant need for BIM education and

training. On the other hand; companies are worried about the costs of implementation of

BIM. There are several examples of the high costs that are required to implement BIM,

such as (1) software licensing; (2) the costs to improve server capacity to suit having

such a high IT requirements; (3) ongoing maintenance fee; (4) the cost of the proper

creation of a building model; and (5) the costs of training (Keegan, 2010; Aibinu and

Venkatesh, 2013). As shown from the results, the item/ variable with the highest loading

of this first factor (component) is ―Lack of the awareness of BIM by stakeholders‖ (BA

2), and the item/ variable with the lowest loading of this first factor (component) is

―Lack of the awareness of the benefits that BIM can bring to Engineering offices,

companies, and projects‖ (BA 5).

“Lack of the awareness of BIM by stakeholders” (BA 2), the highest item/ variable,

with a factor loading of 0.85 is an adamant barrier to adopting BIM in the AEC industry

in Gaza strip. As it turns out previously, the results of objective 1 indicated that the level

of knowledge regarding BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza strip is very low. This barrier

was mentioned in the literature review as a very high barrier to BIM adoption according

to the studies of Kassem et al. (2012), and Löf and Kojadinovic (2012) in the UK and

Sweden. Thurairajah and Goucher (2013) also claimed that there is an overall lack of

knowledge and understanding of what BIM is in the UK despite there are some

destinations have adopted BIM in their work. The same result was shown in Australia

by Newton and Chileshe (2012), and Mitchell and Lambert (2013), where they said that

people in Australia suffer from a lack of knowledge about BIM and its distinctive

capabilities in the field of construction industry.

“Lack of the awareness of the benefits that BIM can bring to Engineering offices,

companies, and projects” (BA 5), the lowest item/ variable, with a factor loading of

0.61 can be a roadblock in BIM adoption in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. This

barrier was mentioned in the literature review as a strong BIM barrier according to the

studies of Arayici et al. (2009), Kassem et al. (2012), Khosrowshahi and Arayici

(2012), Aibinu and Venkatesh (2013), and Elmualim and Gilder (2013). The

professionals in the AEC industry display a degree of hesitancy in implementing BIM

on a project because of the lack of knowledge about BIM and its distinctive capabilities

in the field of construction industry, where BIM benefits are still often misunderstood or

not known to those not use it in their works (Löf and Kojadinovic, 2012; Mitchell and

Lambert, 2013).

131

Factor 4: Cultural barriers toward adopting new technology and training

requirements

The fourth factor named Cultural barriers toward adopting new technology and

training requirements explains 7.40 % of the total variance and contains two items/

variables. The two items/ variables had relatively high factor loadings (≥ 0.72).

1. The unwillingness of Architects/ Engineers to learn new applications because of

their educational culture and their bias toward the programs they are dealing

with (BA 17), with a factor loading = 0.85.

2. Reluctance to train Architects/ Engineers due to the costly training requirements

in terms of time and money (BA 18), with a factor loading = 0.72.

The name of the factor has been chosen according to the correlations between these two

items/ variables under this factor. As mentioned before, the culture of implementation

decides the effectiveness of a new concept. For incorporating BIM, an open-minded

culture is required. In the AEC industry, Architects/ Engineers used to the use of certain

programs, and they have the liberty to work in their way. In the case of BIM, however,

these Architects/ Engineers need to learn new programs regarding BIM software and

adhere to strict guidelines and hence, there is a resistance to change their way of

working (Arayici et al., 2005; Yan and Damian, 2008; Arayici et al., 2009; Becerik-

Gerber et al., 2011; Gu and London, 2010; Khosrowshahi and Arayici, 2012). On the

other hand, most companies are believed that the training for BIM would be too costly

and needs much time. Therefore, there is a reluctance to train the Architects and

Engineers (Arayici et al., 2009; Becerik-Gerber et al., 2011; Khosrowshahi and Arayici,

2012; Elmualim and Gilder, 2013). As shown from results, the item/ variable with the

higher loading of this first factor (component) is ―The unwillingness of Architects/

Engineers to learn new applications because of their educational culture and their bias

toward the programs they are dealing with” (BA 17), and the item/ variable with the

lower loading of this first factor (component) is “Reluctance to train Architects/

Engineers due to the costly training requirements in terms of time and money” (BA 18).

“The unwillingness of Architects/ Engineers to learn new applications because of their

educational culture and their bias toward the programs they are dealing with” (BA 17)

is the higher item/ variable of factor 4 with a factor loading of 0.85. When adopting

BIM, it is vital that the individuals are sufficiently trained in the use of the new

technology for them to be able to contribute to the changing work environment

(Aranda-Mena et al., 2007; Gu et al., 2008). The unwillingness to learn BIM may be

due to several reasons, including (1) Architects and Engineers think that BIM is a

complex and delicate system; (2) Architects and Engineers prefer to keep using the

traditional programs and refuse to learn any new programs, especially if they use those

traditional programs for a long time; (3) in sometimes, the age of the Architects and

Engineers plays a role regarding their acceptance to learn new applications; or (4)

maybe they don‘t have enough time to learn new applications. This barrier was

mentioned in the literature review as one of the significant barriers to BIM adoption

according to the studies of Davidson (2009); Arayici et al. (2005); Gu et al. (2008); Yan

and Damian (2008); Arayici et al. (2009); Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011); Gu and London

(2010); Khosrowshahi and Arayici (2012).

132

“Reluctance to train Architects/ Engineers due to the costly training requirements in

terms of time and money” (BA 18) is the lower item/ variable of factor 4 with a factor

loading of 0.72. Yan and Damian (2008) revealed that most companies in their study

who did not use BIM are believed that the training for BIM would be too costly in terms

of time and money. McGraw-Hill Construction (2009) and Löf and Kojadinovic (2012)

emphasized that the required time for training to work efficiently with BIM is one of the

main challenges to adopting BIM. While, Kaner et al., (2008); Keegan (2010); and

Aibinu and Venkatesh (2013) agreed that the required initial costs for training of the

individuals to be able to deal with BIM are very high, and this is the primary challenge

to adopt BIM in the AEC industry.

4.7 Test of research hypotheses

Some hypotheses have been put to study relations between some variables to support

BIM adoption in the AEC industry in Gaza Strip. According to Figure (4.13), five

hypotheses were tested through applying the Pearson product-moment correlation

coefficient (Pearson's correlation coefficient). The Pearson's correlation coefficient was

used to measure the strength and direction of the relationship (linear association/

correlation) between two quantitative variables, where the value (r = 1) means a perfect

positive correlation and the value (r = -1) means a perfect negative correlation. Each

hypothesis was tested separately. The four variables in Figure (4.13) represent parts of

the questionnaire, where the questionnaire was built from the following five parts:

Part one: is related to the respondent’s demographic data and the way of work

performance.

Part two: to assess the awareness level of BIM by professionals in the AEC industry

in Gaza strip.

Part three: to investigate the importance of BIM functions in the AEC industry in

Gaza strip.


strip.


133

Figure (4.13): Hypotheses model (Source: The researcher, 2015)

4.7.1 The correlation between the awareness level of BIM and BIM barriers

To test the hypothesis, the Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to measure the

strength and the direction of the relationship (linear association/ correlation) between

“The awareness level of BIM by the professionals” and “BIM barriers in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip.” According to the results of the test that shown in Table (4.21),

―The awareness level of BIM by the professionals‖ is negatively related to ―BIM

barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip‖, with a Pearson correlation coefficient of (r

= -0.79) and the significance value is less than 0.05 (P-value < 0.05), and thus the

relationship is statistically significant at α ≤ 0.05 (as indicated by the double asterisk

after the coefficient). Consequently, the hypothesis H1 is accepted.

The closer (r) is to +1, the stronger the positive correlation, while the closer (r) is to -1,

the stronger the negative correlation. According to that, it can be said that the

relationship between ―The awareness level of BIM by the professionals‖ and ―BIM

barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip‖ is a strong negative relationship because (r

= -0.79). This result means, when one variable increases in the value, the second

variable decreases in the value. In other words, increasing the awareness level of BIM

by the professionals will reduce BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

BIM barriers

The importance of BIM functions

The awareness level of BIM by the professionals

The value of

BIM benefits


awareness level of BIM by the professionals and BIM barriers in the AEC industry in

Gaza strip.

HI

H5 H4

H3 H2

134

As it turns out previously in this chapter, the results indicated that the level of

knowledge regarding BIM by the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip is very

low. The results also showed that the lack of knowledge of BIM is a strong BIM barrier

in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. The lack of knowledge regarding BIM has led to a

slow uptake of this technology and ineffective management of adoption (Mitchell and

Lambert, 2013; NBS, 2013).

Table (4.21): The correlation coefficient between the awareness level of

BIM by the professionals and BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip

Field Statistic

BIM barriers

in the AEC

industry in Gaza

strip


BIM by the professionals

in the AEC industry in

Gaza strip

Pearson correlation (r) -0.79**

P-value

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00

N 270


4.7.2 The correlation between the importance of BIM functions and BIM barriers



―the importance of BIM functions‖ and ―BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip.‖ According to the results of the test that shown in Table (4.22), ―the importance of

BIM functions‖ is negatively related to ―BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip‖ with a Pearson correlation coefficient of (r = -0.36) and the significance value is

less than 0.05 (P-value < 0.05), and thus the relationship is statistically significant at α ≤

0.05 (as indicated by the double asterisk after the coefficient). Consequently, the

hypothesis H2 is accepted.



relationship between ―the importance of BIM functions‖ and ―BIM barriers in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip‖ is an intermediate negative relationship because (r = -0.36). This

result means, when one variable increases in the value, the second variable decreases in

the value. In other words, when the importance as well the need of BIM functions

increases for the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip, this will reduce

barriers to BIM adoption in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

As it turns out previously in this chapter, the results indicated that the BIM functions are

significantly important for the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. BIM has

a broad range of the application in the design; construction; and operation process. BIM

is transforming the way Architects, Engineers, contractors, and other building

professionals work in the industry today (Baldwin, 2012; Mandhar and Mandhar, 2013).


importance of BIM functions and BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

135

Table (4.22): The correlation coefficient between the importance of

BIM functions and BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip

Field Statistic

BIM barriers

in the AEC industry

in Gaza strip

The importance

of BIM functions


P-value

(Sig.) (2-tailed) 0.00

Sample size (N) 270 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

4.7.3 The correlation between the value of BIM benefits and BIM barriers



―The value of BIM benefits‖ and ―BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.‖ According to the results of the test that shown in Table (4.23), ―The value of BIM

benefits‖ is negatively related to ―BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip‖, with

a Pearson correlation coefficient of (r = -0.34) and the significance value is less than

0.05 (P-value < 0.05), and thus the relationship is statistically significant at α ≤ 0.05 (as

indicated by the double asterisk after the coefficient). Consequently, the hypothesis H3

is accepted.



relationship between ―the value of BIM benefits‖ and ―BIM barriers in the AEC industry

in Gaza strip‖ is an intermediate negative relationship because (r = -0.34). This result

means, when one variable increases in the value, the second variable decreases in the

value. In other words, when the value of BIM benefits increases for the professionals in

the AEC industry in Gaza strip, this will reduce barriers to BIM adoption in the AEC


As it turns out previously in this chapter, the results indicated that the BIM benefits are

significantly valuable for the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. The use of

BIM can increase the value of a building, shorten the project duration, provide reliable

cost estimates, produce market-ready facilities, and optimize facility management and

maintenance (Eastman et al., 2011; Aibinu and Venkatesh, 2013).

Table (4.23): The correlation coefficient between the value of BIM

benefits and BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip

Field Statistic

BIM barriers in the

AEC industry

in Gaza strip

The value of

BIM benefits


P-value




value of BIM benefits and BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

136


the importance of BIM functions



―the awareness level of BIM by the professionals‖ and ―the importance of BIM

functions.‖ According to the results of the test that shown in Table (4.24), ―the

awareness level of BIM by the professionals‖ is positively related to ―the importance of

BIM functions”, with a Pearson correlation coefficient of (r = 0.58) and the significance

value is less than 0.05 (P-value < 0.05), and thus the relationship is statistically

significant at α ≤ 0.05 (as indicated by the double asterisk after the coefficient).

Consequently, the hypothesis H4 is accepted.



relationship between ―the awareness level of BIM by the professionals‖ and ―the

importance of BIM functions‖ is an intermediate positive relationship because (r =

0.58). This result means, when one variable increases in the value, the second variable

also increases in the value.

In other words, increasing the awareness level of BIM by the professionals will increase

the importance of BIM functions for the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip. As it turns out in the previous results in this chapter, there is a large lack of

understanding of BIM (the core concepts of BIM) and its practical applications

throughout the lifecycle of projects by the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip.

Table (4.24): The correlation coefficient between the awareness level of BIM

by the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip and the importance of

BIM functions

Field Statistic Importance of BIM

functions


BIM by the professionals

in the AEC industry in

Gaza strip

Pearson correlation (r) 0.58**

P-value




awareness level of BIM by the professionals and the importance of BIM functions in


137


the value of BIM benefits



―the awareness level of BIM by the professionals‖ and ―the value of BIM benefits.‖

According to the results of the test that shown in Table (4.25), ―the awareness level of

BIM by the professionals‖ is positively related to ―the value of BIM benefits”, with a

Pearson correlation coefficient of r = 0.52 and the significance value is less than 0.05

(P-value < 0.05), and thus the relationship is statistically significant at α ≤ 0.05 (as

indicated by the double asterisk after the coefficient). Consequently, the hypothesis H5

is accepted.



relationship between ―the awareness level of BIM by the professionals‖ and ―the value

of BIM benefits‖ is an intermediate positive correlation because (r = 0.52). This result

means, when one variable increases in the value, the second variable also increases in

the value.

In other words, increasing the awareness level of BIM by the professionals will enhance

the value of BIM benefits for the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. As it

turns out in the previous results in this chapter, there is a tremendous lack of knowledge

about BIM and its unique capabilities by the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip.

Table (4.25): The correlation coefficient between the awareness level

of BIM by the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip and the

value of BIM benefits

Field Statistic Value of

BIM benefits

The awareness level

of BIM by the

professionals in the

AEC industry in Gaza

strip

Pearson correlation (r) 0.52**

P-value

(Sig.) (2-tailed)

0.00

Sample size (N) 270



awareness level of BIM by the professionals and the value of BIM benefits in the


138

4.7.6 Hypothesis related to respondents’ profiles (respondents analysis)

This hypothesis was to analyze the differences in the opinions of the respondents toward

the investigation into BIM application in the AEC industry in Gaza strip due to many

things. These things are (1) the gender, (2) the educational qualification, (3) the study

place, (4) the specialization, (5) the nature of the workplace, (6) the location of the

workplace, (7) the current field/ the present job, and (8) the years of the experience.

Independent samples t-test and One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test were used

to find whether there were statistically significant differences between opinions of

respondents or not. Scheffé's method (multiple-comparison procedure) was also used.

All used tests are parametric tests based on the normal distribution.

4.7.6.1 An analysis taking into account the gender

Independent samples t-test provides a statistical test of whether the Means of two

groups are equal or not. The critical value of t = 1.97, where the degree of freedom (df)

= [N-2] = [270-2] = 268 (N is the sample size) at significance (probability) level (α) =

0.05 (Field, 2009; Weiers, 2011). And therefore, Independent samples t-test was used to

test the differences among the opinions of the respondents taking into account their

gender (male, and female).

As shown in Table (4.26), the P-value for the Levene‘s test is greater than 0.05 in each

field and all fields together. Thus, the variances of the two groups (male, and female)

are not significantly different (the groups are homogeneous). In addition, according to

the results of the Independent samples t-test as shown in Table (4.26), the significance

values for each field and all fields together are not significant (P-value > 0.05). The

absolute values of t-test for each field and all fields together are also less than the

critical value of t (1.97).

Thus, there are no statistically significant differences attributed to the gender of the

respondents at the level of α ≤ 0.05 between the Means of their views on the subject of

the investigation into BIM application in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.


respondents

Field

Levene's test for

equality of

variances

t- t

est

P-v

alu

e

Mean

F P-value

(Sig.)

Male

(N=222)

Female

(N=48)


BIM by the professionals 3.11 0.08 -0.31 0.76 1.82 1.86


functions 0.04 0.84 -1.04 0.30 3.61 3.73

H6: There are statistically significant differences attributed to the demographic data

of the respondents and the way of their work at the level of α ≤ 0.05 between the

averages of their views on the subject of the application of BIM in the AEC industry

in Gaza strip.

139


respondents

Field

Levene's test for

equality of

variances

t- t

est

P-v

alu

e

Mean

F P-value

(Sig.)

Male

(N=222)

Female

(N=48)

The value of BIM benefits 0.03 0.86

-1.35 0.18 3.58 3.72

The strength of BIM barriers 0.28 0.60

-1.10 0.27 3.57 3.69

All fields 0.07 0.80 -1.41 0.16 3.35 3.47

Critical value of t: at degree of freedom (df) = [N-2] = [270-2] = 268 and at significance

(Probability) level 0.05 equals “1.97”.

*. The Mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level

4.7.6.2 An analysis taking into account the educational qualification

One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)/ (F-test) provides a parametric statistical test

of whether the Means of several groups (more than two) are equal or not (by using the

F-ratio). The critical value of F at degree of freedom (df) = [(K-1), (N-K)] at the

significance (probability) level (α) = 0.05 (Field, 2009; Weiers, 2011). And therefore,

One-way ANOVA was used to test the differences among the opinions of the

respondents taking into account their educational qualification (Bachelor, Master, or

PhD).

According to the results of the test, as shown in Table (4.27), the P-value for the

Levene‘s test is greater than 0.05 in each field of the four fields as well as all fields

together. Thus, the variances of the groups are not significantly different (the groups are

homogeneous). Regarding F-test, the significance values for each field of the four fields

as well as all fields together are not significant (P-value > 0.05). The values of F-test in

each field of the four fields as well as all fields together are also less than the critical

value of F (3.03).

Thus, there are no statistically significant differences attributed to the educational

qualification of the respondents at the level of α ≤ 0.05 between the Means of their

views on the subject of the investigation into BIM application in the AEC industry in

Gaza strip.


educational qualification of the respondents

Field

Test of

homogeneity of

variances

F-

test

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.)

Mean

Levene

Statistic

P-

value

(Sig.)

Bachelor

(N=195)

Master

(N=71)

PhD

(N=4)


BIM by the professionals 2.17 0.12 1.62 0.20 1.78 1.97 1.86


functions 0.30 0.74 2.32 0.10 3.58 3.78 3.70

140


educational qualification of the respondents

Field

Test of

homogeneity of

variances

F-

test

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.)

Mean

Levene

Statistic

P-

value

(Sig.)

Bachelor

(N=195)

Master

(N=71)

PhD

(N=4)

The value of BIM

benefits 0.91 0.40 1.27 0.28 3.57 3.69 3.88

The strength of BIM

barriers 0.87 0.42 0.41 0.66 3.57 3.64 3.43

All fields 0.76 0.47 1.93 0.15 3.34 3.48 3.46

Critical value of F: at degree of freedom (df) = [(K-1), (N-K)] = [(3-1), (270-2)] = [2,267] and at

significance (Probability) level 0.05 equals “3.03”.

*. The Mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

4.7.6.3 An analysis taking into account the study place



F-ratio). The critical value of F at degree of freedom (df) = [(K-1), (N-K)] at the



respondents taking into account their study place (Gaza strip, the West Bank, or outside

Palestine).




homogeneous). Regarding F-test, the significance values for the second field (the

importance of BIM functions), as well as all fields together, are significant (P-value <

0.05). The values of F-test for the second field and all fields together are also greater

than the critical value of F (3.03).

Thus, there are statistically significant differences attributed to the study place of the

respondents at the level of α ≤ 0.05 between the Means of their views on the subject of

―the importance of BIM functions‖ as well as the subject of ―the investigation into BIM

application in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.‖

And therefore, Scheffe test was used for multiple comparisons between the Means of

the opinions of the respondents taking into account their study place (Field, 2009;

Weiers, 2011). According to the results of the test as shown in Table (4.29), there is a

difference between the averages of the opinions of the respondents who studied ―outside

Palestine,‖ and the respondents who studied in ―Gaza strip‖ about the field of ―the

importance of BIM functions‖ in favor of the respondents who studied ―outside

Palestine.‖

Table (4.30) shows that there is a difference in all fields of the subject of ―the

investigation into BIM application in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.‖ The difference

here is also between the Means of the opinions of the respondents who studied in

141

―outside Palestine,‖ and the respondents who studied in ―Gaza strip‖ in favor of the

respondents who studied in ―outside Palestine.‖

Table (4.28): One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)/ (F-test) results regarding the study

place of the respondents

Field

Test of

homogeneity of

variances

F -

tes

t P

-val

ue

(Sig

.)

Mean

Levene

statistic

P-value

(Sig.)

Gaza

strip

(N=196)

The

West

Bank

(N=9)

Outside

Palestine

(N=65)


BIM by the professionals 0.81 0.45

2.73 0.07 1.77 2.15 1.97


functions 1.57 0.21 3.46 0.03 3.57 3.69 3.82

The value of BIM benefits 1.67 0.19 2.10 0.12 3.55 3.71 3.74

The strength of BIM

barriers 0.34 0.71 0.93 0.39 3.56 3.74 3.67

All fields 0.76 0.47 3.63 0.03 3.32 3.51 3.51




Table (4.29): Results of Scheffe test for multiple comparisons due to the

study place of the respondents for the field of “The importance of BIM

functions”

Mean difference Gaza strip The West Bank Outside

Palestine

Gaza strip -0.13 -0.26*

The West Bank 0.13 -0.13

Outside Palestine 0.26* 0.13


study place of the respondents for all the fields of “the investigation into

BIM application in the AEC industry in Gaza strip”

Mean difference Gaza strip The West Bank Outside

Palestine

Gaza strip -0.19 -0.19*

The West Bank 0.19 0.00

Outside Palestine 0.19* 0.00

4.7.6.4 An analysis taking into account the specialization



F-ratio). The critical value of F at degree of freedom (df) = [(K-1), (N-K)] at



respondents taking into account their specialization (Architect, Civil Engineer,

142

Electrical Engineer, Mechanical Engineer, or any other related specialization in the

AEC industry).




homogeneous). Regarding F-test, the significance values for the first field (the

awareness level of BIM by the professionals) as well as the fields together are

significant (P-value < 0.05). The values of F-test for the first field and all fields together

are also greater than the critical value of F (2.41).

Thus, there are statistically significant differences attributed to the study place of the

respondents at the level of α ≤ 0.05 between the Means of their views about ―the

awareness level of BIM by the professionals‖ as well as the subject of ―the investigation

into BIM application in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.‖


the opinions of the respondents taking into account their specialization (Field, 2009;


difference between the averages of the opinions of the respondents who are ―Civil

Engineers,‖ and the respondents who are ―Electrical Engineers‖ about the field of ―the

awareness level of BIM by the professionals‖ in favor of the respondents who are ―Civil

Engineers.‖

Table (4.33) shows that there is a difference between the averages of the opinions of the

respondents about all fields of ―the investigation into BIM application in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip.‖ The difference is between the Means of the opinions of the

respondents who are ―Architects,‖ and the respondents who are ―Electrical Engineers‖

in favor of the respondents who are ―Architects.‖ There is also a difference between the

Means of the opinions of the respondents who are ―Civil Engineers,‖ and the

respondents who are ―Electrical Engineers‖ in favor of the respondents who are ―Civil

Engineers.‖


specialization of the respondents

Field

Test of

homogeneity of

variances

F-

test

P-v

alu

e

Mean

Lev

ene

stat

isti

c

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.) Arc

hit

ect

(N=

83

)

Civ

il

(N=

12

9)

Ele

ctri

cal

(N=

41

)

Mec

han

ical

(N=

14

)

Oth

er

(N=

3)


BIM by the professionals 0.92 0.45 4.01 0.00 1.80 1.97 1.45 1.79 1.85


functions 3.18 0.10

1.75 0.14 3.62 3.72 3.42 3.46 3.77

The value of BIM

benefits 1.03 0.39

1.90 0.11 3.64 3.64 3.40 3.54 4.28

The strength of BIM

barriers 1.71 0.15

1.30 0.27 3.66 3.62 3.46 3.31 3.61

143


specialization of the respondents

Field

Test of

homogeneity of

variances

F-

test

P-v

alu

e

Mean

Lev

ene

stat

isti

c

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.) Arc

hit

ect

(N=

83

)

Civ

il

(N=

12

9)

Ele

ctri

cal

(N=

41

)

Mec

han

ical

(N=

14

)

Oth

er

(N=

3)

All fields 1.83 0.12 2.73 0.03 3.40 3.44 3.17 3.23 3.67





specialization of the respondents for the field of “The awareness level of BIM by the

professionals”

Mean difference Architect Civil Electrical Mechanical Other

Architect -0.17 0.35 0.00 -0.05

Civil 0.17 0.53* 0.18 0.12

Electrical -0.35 -0.53* -0.35 -0.40

Mechanical 0.00 -0.18 0.35 -0.06

Other 0.05 -0.12 0.40 0.06


specialization of the respondents for all fields of “The investigation into BIM

application in the AEC industry in Gaza strip”

Mean difference Architect Civil Electrical Mechanical Other

Architect -0.04 0.23* 0.16 -0.27

Civil 0.04 0.27* 0.20 -0.24

Electrical -0.23* -0.27* -0.07 -0.51

Mechanical -0.16 -0.20 0.07 -0.44

Other -0.16 0.24 0.51 0.44

4.7.6.5 An analysis taking into account the nature of the workplace





One-way ANOVA was used to test the differences among opinions of respondents

taking into account the nature of their workplace (Consultant, NGOs, Contractor,

Governmental, or other workplaces).




homogeneous). Regarding F-test, the significance values for the first field ―the

awareness level of BIM by the professionals,‖ the second filed ―the importance of BIM

functions,‖ and all fields together are significant (P-value < 0.05). The value of F-test

144

for the first field, the second field, and all fields together are also greater than the

critical value of F (2.41).

Thus, there are statistically significant differences attributed to the nature of the

workplace of the respondents at the level of α ≤ 0.05 between the Means of their views

about ―the awareness level of BIM by the professionals,‖ ―the importance of BIM

functions,‖ and the subject of ―the investigation into BIM application in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip.‖


the opinions of the respondents taking into account their specializations (Field, 2009;


difference between the averages of the opinions of the respondents who are working for

―NGOs,‖ and the respondents who are working for ―other‖ workplaces (according to

Table (4.1) of the respondent‘s demographic data, the ―other‖ workplace was the

Engineers Association) about the field of ―the awareness level of BIM by the

professionals‖ in favor of the respondents who are working for ―NGOs.‖

According to the results of the test as shown in Table (4.36), there is also a difference

between the averages of the opinions of the respondents who are working for ―NGOs,‖

and the respondents who are working for each of contractor, governmental, and other

workplaces (Engineers Association) about the field of ―the importance of BIM

functions‖ in favor of the respondents who are working for ―NGOs.‖




respondents who are working for ―NGOs,‖ and the respondents who are working for

each of the governmental, and other workplaces (Engineers Association) in favor of

respondents who are working for ―NGOs.‖


nature of the workplace for the respondents

Field

Test of

homogeneity

of variances

F-

test

P-v

alu

e

Mean

Lev

ene

stat

isti

c

P-v

alu

e (S

ig.)

Co

nsu

ltan

t

(N=

81

)

NG

Os

(N=

42

)

Co

ntr

acto

r

(N=

66

)

Go

ver

nm

enta

l

(N=

52

)

Oth

er (

N=

29

)

The awareness level of BIM

by the professionals 0.17 0.95 3.60 0.01 1.90 2.12 1.80 1.71 1.49


functions 1.35 0.25 2.69 0.03 3.66 3.91 3.60 3.48 3.50

The value of BIM benefits 2.04 0.09 2.12 0.08 3.65 3.79 3.62 3.51 3.36

The strength of BIM

barriers

0.70 0.59 2.14 0.08 3.64 3.82 3.53 3.50 3.44

145


nature of the workplace for the respondents

Field

Test of

homogeneity

of variances

F-

test

P-v

alu

e

Mean

Lev

ene

stat

isti

c

P-v

alu

e (S

ig.)

Con

sult

ant

(N=

81

)

NG

Os

(N=

42

)

Con

trac

tor

(N=

66

)

Gov

ernm

enta

l

(N=

52

)

Oth

er (

N=

29

)

All fields 2.95 0.20 4.21 0.00 3.42 3.61 3.35 3.26 3.17




Table (4.35): Results of Scheffe test for multiple comparisons due to the nature of

the workplace of the respondents for the field of “The awareness level of BIM by the

professionals”

Mean difference Consultant NGOs Contractor Governmental Other

Consultant -0.22 0.09 0.19 0.40

NGOs 0.22 0.31 0.41 0.62*

Contractor -0.09 -0.31 0.10 0.31

Governmental -0.19 -0.41 -0.10 0.21

Other -0.40 -0.62* -0.31 -0.21


the workplace of the respondents for the field of “The importance of BIM

functions”


Consultant -0.25 0.06 0.18 0.16

NGOs 0.25 0.31* 0.43* 0.41*

Contractor -0.06 -0.31* 0.12 0.10

Governmental -0.18 -0.43* -0.12 -0.02

Other -0.16 -0.41* -0.10 0.02


the workplace of the respondents for all fields of “The investigation into BIM



Consultant -0.19 0.07 0.16 0.25

NGOs 0.19 0.25 0.34* 0.44*

Contractor -0.07 -0.25 0.09 0.18

Governmental -0.16 -0.34* -0.09 0.09

Other -0.25 -0.44* -0.18 -0.09

4.7.6.6 An analysis taking into account the location of the workplace



F-ratio). The critical value of F: at degree of freedom (df) = [(K-1), (N-K)] at


146


respondents taking into account the location of their workplace (North, Gaza, Middle,

KhanYounis, and Rafah).




homogeneous). Regarding F-test, the significance value for the first field ―the

awareness level of BIM by the professionals‖ is significant (P-value < 0.05). The value

of F-test for the first field is also greater than the critical value of F (2.41).

Thus, there are statistically significant differences attributed to the location of the

workplace of the respondents at the level of α ≤ 0.05 between the Means of their views

about ―the awareness level of BIM by the professionals.‖ And therefore, Scheffe test

was used for multiple comparisons between the Means of the opinions of the

respondents taking into account their location of the workplace (Field, 2009; Weiers,

2011).

According to the results of the test as shown in Table (4.39), there is a difference

between the averages of the opinions of the respondents who are working in ―Gaza,‖

and the respondents who are working in ―Rafah‖ about the field of ―the awareness level

of BIM by the professionals‖ in favor of the respondents who are working in ―Gaza.‖


location of the workplace of the respondents

Field

Test of

homogeneity

of variances

F-

test

P-v

alu

e

Mean

Lev

ene

stat

isti

c

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.)

Nort

h

(N=

21

)

Gaz

a

(N=

20

4)

Mid

dle

(N=

8)

Khan

You

nis

(N=

14

)

Raf

ah

(N=

23

)


BIM by the professionals 2.92 0.20 2.64 0.03 1.84 1.89 1.46 1.83 1.41


functions 0.48 0.75 1.38 0.24 3.74 3.66 3.62 3.54 3.33

The value of BIM

benefits 0.04 1.00 0.98 0.42 3.73 3.62 3.63 3.53 3.37

The strength of BIM

barriers 2.29 0.06 1.73 0.14 3.72 3.57 3.81 3.28 3.79

All fields 0.19 0.94 1.06 0.38 3.48 3.39 3.39 3.25 3.21




147

Table (4.39): Results of Scheffe test for multiple comparisons due to the location of the

workplace of the respondents for the field of “The awareness level of BIM by the

professionals”

Mean difference North Gaza Middle KhanYounis Rafah

North -0.05 0.38 0.01 0.42

Gaza 0.05 0.43 0.06 0.48*

Middle -0.38 -0.43 -0.37 0.05

KhanYounis -0.01 -0.06 0.37 0.41

Rafah -0.42 -0. 48* -0.05 -0.41

4.7.6.7 An analysis taking into account the current field/ the present job






respondents taking into account their current field/ present job (Designer, Supervisor,

Site Engineer, Projects Manager, or other related jobs such as office Engineer).




homogeneous). Regarding F-test, the significance values for each field of the four

fields, as well as all fields together, are not significant (P-value > 0.05). The values of

F-test in each field of the four fields as well as all fields together are also less than the

critical value of F (2.41).

Thus, there are no statistically significant differences attributed to the current field/

present job of the respondents at the level of α ≤ 0.05 between the Means of their views

about the subject of ―the investigation into BIM application in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip.‖


current field/ present job of the respondents

Field

Test of

homogeneity

of variances

F-

test

P-v

alu

e

Mean

Lev

ene

Sta

tist

ic

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.) D

esig

ner

(N=

73

)

Su

per

vis

or

(N=

64

)

Sit

e

En

gin

eer

(N=

54

)

Pro

ject

s

Man

ager

(N=

33

)

Oth

er

(N=

46

)

The awareness level

of BIM by

professionals

1.77 0.14 2.20 0.07 1.75 1.99 1.92 1.85 1.60

The importance of

BIM functions 1.63 0.17 2.26 0.06 3.59 3.72 3.61 3.87 3.43

The value of BIM

benefits 3.63 0.10 0.74 0.57 3.60 3.66 3.59 3.71 3.48

The strength of BIM

barriers 0.71 0.58 0.92 0.45 3.67 3.58 3.52 3.70 3.49

148


current field/ present job of the respondents

Field

Test of

homogeneity

of variances

F-

test

P-v

alu

e

Mean

Lev

ene

Sta

tist

ic

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.) D

esig

ner

(N=

73

)

Su

per

vis

or

(N=

64

)

Sit

e

Eng

inee

r

(N=

54

)

Pro

ject

s

Man

ager

(N=

33

)

Oth

er

(N=

46

)

All fields 2.33 0.06

1.72 0.15 3.37 3.43 3.36 3.50 3.22




4.7.6.8 An analysis taking into account the years of the experience



F-ratio). The critical value of F: at degree of freedom (df) = [(K-1), (N-K)] at



respondents taking into account their years of experience (Less than 5 years, From 5 to

less than 10 years, and 10 years and more).




homogeneous). Regarding F-test, the significance values for the first field (the

awareness level of BIM by the professionals), the second field (the importance of BIM

functions), the third field (the value of BIM benefits) and also all fields together are

significant (P-value < 0.05). The value of F-test for each of the first field, the second

and the third fields as well as all fields together are also greater than the critical value of

F (3.03).

Thus, there are statistically significant differences attributed to the years of the

experience of the respondents at the level of α ≤ 0.05 between the Means of their views

on ―the awareness level of BIM by the professionals‖, ―the importance of BIM

functions‖, ―the value of BIM benefits‖, and the subject of ―the investigation into BIM

application in the AEC industry in Gaza strip‖.


the opinions of the respondents taking into account their years of experience (Field,

2009; Weiers, 2011). According to the results of the test as shown in Table (4.42), there

is a difference between the averages of the opinions of the respondents who have

experience ranging ―From 5 to less than 10 years‘ experience,‖ and the respondents who

have ―Less than 5 years‘ experience‖ about the field of ―the awareness level of BIM by

the professionals‖ in favor of the respondents who have experience ranging ―From 5 to

less than 10 years.‖ There is also a difference between the Means of the opinions of the

respondents who have ―10 years‘ experience and more,‖ and the respondents who have

149

―Less than 5 years‘ experience‖ in favor of the respondents who have ―10 years‘

experience and more.‖

Regarding the field of ―the importance of BIM functions, ‖ Table (4.43) shows that

there is a difference between the averages of the opinions of the respondents who have

―10 years‘ experience and more,‖ and the respondents who have ―Less than 5 years‘

experience ‖ in favor of the respondents who have ―10 years‘ experience and more.‖


respondents who have ―10 years‘ experience and more‖, and the respondents who have

―Less than 5 years‘ experience‖ about the field of ―the value of BIM benefits‖ in favor

of the respondents who have ―10 years‘ experience and more.‖




respondents who have ―10 years‘ experience and more,‖ and the respondents who have

―Less than 5 years‘ experience‖ in favor of the respondents who have ―10 years‘

experience and more.‖

Table (4.41): One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)/ (F-test) results regarding the years

of experience of the respondents

Field

Test of

homogeneity of

variances

F-

test

P-v

alu

e

Mean

Lev

ene

stat

isti

c

P-v

alu

e

(Sig

.)

Less than

5 years

(N=95)

From 5 to

less than

10 years

(N=88)

10 years

and

more

(N=87)

The awareness level

of BIM by the

professionals

1.23 0.29 6.62 0.00 1.61 1.99 1.91

The importance of

BIM functions 1.26 0.29

5.95 0.00 3.48 3.60 3.83

The value of BIM

benefits 4.51 0.10

6.18 0.00 3.45 3.58 3.79

The strength of BIM

barriers 0.62 0.54

1.05 0.35 3.51 3.61 3.65

All fields 2.63 0.07 7.16

0.00 3.23 3.39 3.52




150


years of experience of the respondents for the field of “The importance of

BIM functions”

Mean difference Less than

5 years

From 5 to less

than 10 years

10 years

and more

Less than 5 years -0.12 -0.35*

From 5 to less than 10 years 0.12 -0.22

10 years and more 0.35* 0.22


years of experience of the respondents for the field of “The value of BIM

benefits”


5 years

From 5 to less

than 10 years

10 years

and more





study place of the respondents for all fields of “The investigation into BIM



5 years

From 5 to less

than 10 years

10 years

and more




Based on the previous findings of the sixth hypothesis (which has been broken down

into eight sections), it has appeared that the hypothesis has been rejected in respect of

three sections (the gender, the educational qualification, and the current field/ the

present job of the respondents). The same hypothesis has been accepted in respect of the

rest five sections (the study place, the specialization, the nature of the workplace, the

location of the workplace, and the years of experience of the respondents).


years of experience of the respondents for the field of “The awareness

level of BIM by the professionals”


5 years

From 5 to less

than 10 years

10 years

and more

Less than 5 years -0.38* -0.30*

From 5 to less than 10 years 0.38* 0.08

10 years and more 0.30* -0.08

Chapter 5

152

Chapter 5: Conclusions and recommendations

This chapter summarizes the study and aims to provide recommendations and

conclusions for the adoption of Building Information Modeling (BIM) in the

Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry in Gaza strip. This chapter

also includes research benefits to the knowledge as well the AEC industry and suggests

areas of future research after a review of the limitations of this study. By revisiting the

research objectives and key findings, an overview discussed to assess the extent to

which the research objectives were met.

5.1 Summary of the research

An investigation into the prospects, benefits and barriers to successful BIM-based

workflow adoption in the AEC industry in Gaza strip was conducted. An extensive

review of the literature was carried out to achieve the aim of the study. The purpose of

the research was to develop a clear understanding about BIM for identifying the

different factors which provide useful information to consider adopting BIM technology

in projects by the practitioners in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. The results of 270

collected questionnaires were analyzed quantitatively and then presented by using an

―interpretive-descriptive‖ method for qualitative data analysis, which contains

tabulation, bar chart, pie chart, and graph.

5.2 Conclusions of the research objectives, questions, and hypotheses

In achieving the aim of the research, five primary objectives have been outlined and

made through the findings of the analyzed collected questionnaires. These objectives

are related to the research questions that were developed to increase one‘s knowledge

and familiarity with the subject. The outcomes were found as following:

5.2.1 Outcomes related to objective one

The objective was: To assess the awareness level of BIM by the professionals in

the AEC industry in Gaza strip. This objective is related to the following

research question:

The first research question: What is the level of the awareness of BIM by

the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip?

The study findings of RII test indicated that the awareness level of BIM by the

professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip is very low. Most of the practitioners of

the AEC industry have not heard about BIM and did not realize the concept of it. The

findings showed that the study place affects the degree of the knowledge of BIM. An

enormous percentage of the total respondents who had studied in Gaza strip (80%) had

never taken courses about BIM in their universities. 77% of the total respondents who

had studied in the West Bank had the same answer. The lowest ratio was for the

respondents who had studied outside Palestine with 75% of the total of them whose had

never taken courses about BIM in their universities. There is an absence of interest of

educating BIM through courses in universities.

153

Furthermore, according to the respondents, BIM is used individually in a level of

negligible, but not on companies‘ level. It does not be applied professionally, and thus,

the professionals do not get the full benefits of BIM, where they are only using some

advantages of BIM software such as the advantages of Revit in the design phase.

When the respondents were asked about their way of implementing work in the first part

of the questionnaire, results proved that the use of the 3D programs in performing works

by the professionals is very little. 3D programs are usually used only by Architects for

the purpose of the exterior design of the building or the purpose of the interior design of

the building and according to the request of the owner. It was found from results that the

more commonly programs used by the respondents to carry out projects in the AEC

industry are ―Excel‖ and ―AutoCAD (2D)‖, which confirms the result in the previous

question as it shows a lack of the use of the (3D) programs.

5.2.2 Outcomes related to objective two

The objective was: To identify the top BIM functions that would convince the

professionals for adopting BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. This objective

is related to the following research question:

The second research question: Are the functions of BIM important from the

viewpoint of professionals (according to the need for these functions) in the

AEC industry in Gaza strip?

The study findings of RII test indicated that BIM functions are significantly required

and necessary for the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. Some functions

of BIM were more important than others for the professionals. BIM functions that got

top ranking according to the overall respondents are as follow: (1) Interoperability and

translation of information (F16); (2) Change Management (F3); (3) Functional

simulations to choose the best solution (F2); (4) Three-dimensional (3D) modeling and

visualization (F1); and (5) Safety planning and monitoring on-site (F8).

In addition to that, factor analysis has compiled BIM functions in three components,

which are: (1) Data management and utilization in planning; operation, and

maintenance; (2) Visualized design and analysis; and (3) Construction and operation.

5.2.3 Outcomes related to objective three

The objective was: To identify the top BIM benefits that would convince the

professionals for adopting BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. This objective

is related to the following research question:

The third research question: Are the benefits of BIM valuable from the

standpoint of the professionals (according to the need for these functions) in

the AEC industry in Gaza strip?

The study findings of RII test indicated that BIM benefits are significantly valuable for

the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. Some benefits of BIM were more

valuable than others for the professionals. BIM benefits that got top ranking according

to the overall respondents are as follow: (1) Enhance design team collaboration

154

(Architectural, Structural, Mechanical, and Electrical Engineers) (BE 3); (2) Improve

design quality (BE 4); and (3) Improve sustainable design and lean design (BE 5).

Factor analysis has also compiled BIM benefits in four components, which are: (1)

Controlled whole-life costs and environmental data; (2) More effective processes; (3)

Design and quality improvement; and (4) Decision-making support/ Better customer

service.

5.2.4 Outcomes related to objective four

The objective was: To investigate and rank the top BIM barriers which face the

adoption of BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. This objective is related to

the following research question:

The fourth research question: Are BIM barriers affecting the adoption of

BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza strip?

The study findings of RII test demonstrated that BIM barriers are substantially affecting

the adoption of BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. The top barriers to BIM

adoption, which got top ranking according to the overall respondents are as follow: (1)

Lack of the awareness of BIM by stakeholders (BA 2); (2) Lack of knowledge of how to

apply BIM software (BA 3); and (3) Lack of the awareness of the benefits that BIM can

bring to Engineering offices, companies, and projects (BA 5).

Factor analysis has also compiled BIM barriers in four components, which are: (1) Lack

of BIM interest; (2) Organization-wide resistance to change workflows; (3) Lack of

knowledge about BIM and cost of implementing; and (4) Cultural barriers toward

adopting new technology and training requirements.

5.2.5 Outcomes related to objective five

The objective was: To study some hypotheses that might help to find solutions

for adopting BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. This objective is related to

the following research questions:

The fifth research question: What is the effect of the awareness level of BIM

by the professionals on the reduction of BIM barriers in the AEC industry in

Gaza strip?

The sixth research question: What is the effect of the importance of BIM

functions on the reduction of BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip?

The seventh research question: What is the effect of the value of BIM

benefits on the reduction of BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip?

The eighth research question: What is the effect of the awareness level of

BIM by the professionals on increasing the importance of BIM functions in

the AEC industry in Gaza strip?

The ninth research question: What is the effect of the awareness level of

BIM by the professionals on increasing the value of BIM benefits in the AEC


155

The tenth research question: Are there differences in the answers of the

respondents depending on the demographic data of the respondents?

To achieve this objective, five hypotheses were tested through applying the Pearson

product-moment correlation coefficient (Pearson's correlation coefficient). They all

have been accepted. As for the sixth and last hypothesis, it was divided into eight parts.

The findings of the hypotheses were as follow:

At first (for H1), Pearson correlation analysis asserted that there is a strong negative

relationship between ―the awareness level of BIM by the professionals‖ and ―BIM

barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.‖ Thus, the increasing the awareness level of

BIM by the professionals will reduce BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

For (H2 and H3), Pearson correlation analysis proved that there is an intermediate

negative relationship between ―the importance of BIM functions‖ and ―BIM barriers in

the AEC industry in Gaza strip.‖ The same relationship is also between ―the value of

BIM benefits,‖ and ―BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.‖ Accordingly,

increasing the importance of BIM functions reduces barriers to BIM adoption in the

AEC industry in Gaza strip. The same thing will happen when increasing the value of

BIM benefits.

Finally (for H4 and H5), Pearson correlation analysis substantiated that there is an

intermediate positive relationship between ―the awareness level of BIM by

professionals‖ and both of ―the importance of BIM functions,‖ and ―the value of BIM

benefits.‖ Accordingly, increasing the awareness level of BIM by the professionals will

increase the importance of BIM functions and the value of BIM benefits for the


The (H6) was about the differences in the opinions of the respondents toward the

investigation into BIM application in the AEC industry in Gaza strip due to the gender,

the educational qualification, the study place, the specialization, the nature of the

workplace, the location of the workplace, the current field/ the present job, and the

years of the experience. The outcomes were as follow:

The Independent samples t-test proved that there are no statistically significant

differences attributed to the gender of the respondents at the level of α ≤ 0.05

between the Means of their views on the subject of the application of BIM in the

AEC industry in Gaza strip. In the same context, One-way ANOVA confirmed that

there are no statistically significant differences associated to each of the educational

qualification and the current field/ the present job of the respondents at the level of

α ≤ 0.05 between the Means of their views on the same subject. According to that,

the hypothesis has been rejected regarding these four parts.

In contrast, One-way ANOVA asserted that there are significant differences

attributed to each of the study place, the specialization, the nature of the workplace,

the location of the workplace, and the years of the experience of the respondents at

the level of α ≤ 0.05 between the Means of their views on the subject of the

application of BIM in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. Accordingly, Scheffe test was

used for multiple comparisons between the Means of the opinions of the respondents

taking into account this information related to them. As a result, the hypothesis has

been accepted regarding these five parts.

156

Table (5.1) summarized the findings of the study according to the research objectives, the key research questions, and the research hypotheses as

represented above.

Table (5.1): summary of the findings of the study

Research objectives Key research questions Research hypotheses Findings

1. To assess the

awareness level of

BIM by the

professionals in the

AEC industry in

Gaza strip.

RQ1: What is the level of

the awareness of BIM by the

professionals in the AEC


- The study findings of RII test indicated that the

awareness level of BIM by the professionals in the

AEC industry in Gaza strip is very low. Most of the

practitioners of the AEC industry have not heard

about BIM and did not realize the concept of it.

2. To identify the top

BIM functions that

would convince the

professionals for

adopting BIM in

the AEC industry in

Gaza strip.

RQ2: Are the functions of

BIM important from the

viewpoint of the

professionals (according to

the need for these functions)

in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip?

- The study findings of RII test indicated that BIM

functions are significantly required and necessary for

the professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.

BIM functions that got top ranking according to the

overall respondents are as follow:

1) Interoperability and translation of information

(F16);

2) Change Management (F3);

3) Functional simulations to choose the best solution

(F2);

4) Three-dimensional (3D) modeling and

visualization (F1); and

5) Safety planning and monitoring on-site (F8).

In addition to that, factor analysis has compiled BIM

functions in three components, which are:

1) Data management and utilization in planning;

operation, and maintenance;

2) Visualized design and analysis; and

3) Construction and operation.

157



3. To identify the top

BIM benefits that

would convince the

professionals for

adopting BIM in

the AEC industry in

Gaza strip.

RQ3: Are the benefits of

BIM valuable from the

standpoint of the

professionals (according to

the need for these functions)

in the AEC industry in Gaza

strip?

- The study findings of RII test indicated that BIM

benefits are significantly valuable for the

professionals in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. Some

benefits of BIM were more valuable than others for

the professionals.

BIM benefits that got top ranking according to the

overall respondents are as follow:

(1) Enhance design team collaboration (Architectural,

Structural, Mechanical, and Electrical Engineers)

(BE 3);

(2) Improve design quality (BE 4); and

(3) Improve sustainable design and lean design (BE

5).

Factor analysis has compiled BIM benefits in four

components, which are:

1) Controlled whole-life costs and environmental

data;

2) More effective processes;

3) Design and quality improvement; and

4) Decision-making support/ Better customer

service.

4. To investigate and

rank the top BIM

barriers which face

the implementation

of BIM in the AEC

industry in Gaza

strip.

RQ4: Are BIM barriers

affecting the adoption of

BIM in the AEC industry in

Gaza strip?

- The study findings of RII test demonstrated that BIM

barriers are substantially affecting the adoption of


The top barriers to BIM adoption, which got top

ranking according to the overall respondents are as

follow:

1) Lack of the awareness of BIM by stakeholders

(BA 2);

2) Lack of knowledge of how to apply BIM software

(BA 3); and

158



3) Lack of the awareness of the benefits that BIM

can bring to Engineering offices, companies, and

projects (BA 5).

Factor analysis has compiled BIM barriers in four

components, which are:

1) Lack of BIM interest;

2) Organization-wide resistance to change

workflows;

3) Lack of knowledge about BIM and cost of

implementing; and

4) Cultural barriers toward adopting new

technology and training requirements.

5. To study some

hypotheses that

might help to find

solutions to

adopting BIM in

the AEC industry in

Gaza strip.

RQ5: What is the effect of

the awareness level of BIM

by the professionals on the

reduction of BIM barriers in

the AEC industry in Gaza

strip?

RQ6: What is the effect of

the importance of BIM

functions on the reduction of

BIM barriers in the AEC


RQ 7: What is the effect of

the value of BIM benefits on

the reduction of BIM

barriers in the AEC industry

in Gaza strip?

H1: There is an inverse

relationship, statistically

significant at α ≤ 0.05,

between the awareness level of

BIM by the professionals and

BIM barriers in the AEC





between the importance of

BIM functions and BIM

barriers in the AEC industry in

Gaza strip.




(For H1), Pearson correlation analysis asserted that

there is a strong negative relationship between “the

awareness level of BIM by the professionals” and

“BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.”

Thus, the increasing the awareness level of BIM by

the professionals will reduce BIM barriers in the AEC


(For H2 and H3), Pearson correlation analysis proved

that there is an intermediate negative relationship

between “the importance of BIM functions” and

“BIM barriers in the AEC industry in Gaza strip.”

The same relationship is aslo between ―the value of

BIM benefits,” and “BIM barriers in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip.” Accordingly, increasing the

importance of BIM functions reduces barriers to BIM

adoption in the AEC industry in Gaza strip. The same

thing will happen when increasing the value of BIM

benefits.

159





by the professionals on

increasing the importance of

BIM functions in the AEC




by the professionals on

increasing the value of BIM

benefits in the AEC industry

in Gaza strip?

RQ 10: Are there differences

in the answers of the

respondents depending on

the demographic data of the

respondents?

between the value of BIM

benefits and BIM barriers in


strip.

H4: There is a positive





the value of BIM benefits in


strip.

H5: There is a positive





the importance of BIM

functions in the AEC industry

in Gaza strip.

H6: There is a statistically

significant differences

attributed to the demographic

data of the respondents and the

way of their work at the level

of α ≤ 0.05 between the

averages of their views on the

subject of the application of

(For H4 and H5), Pearson correlation analysis

substantiated that there is an intermediate positive

relationship between “the awareness level of BIM by

professionals” and both of “the importance of BIM

functions,” and “the value of BIM benefits.”

Accordingly, increasing the awareness level of BIM

by the professionals will increase the importance of

BIM functions and the value of BIM benefits for the


The (H6) was about the differences in the opinions of

the respondents toward the investigation into BIM

application in the AEC industry in Gaza strip due to

the gender, the educational qualification, the study

place, the specialization, the nature of the workplace,

the location of the workplace, the current field/ the

present job, and the years of the experience. The

outcomes were as follow:

The Independent samples t-test proved that there

are no statistically significant differences

attributed to the gender of the respondents at the

level of α ≤ 0.05 between the Means of their

views on the subject of the application of BIM in

the AEC industry in Gaza strip. In the same

context, One-way ANOVA confirmed that there

are no statistically significant differences

associated to each of the educational qualification

and the current field/ the present job of the

respondents at the level of α ≤ 0.05 between the

Means of their views on the same subject.

160



BIM in the AEC industry in

Gaza strip.

According to that, the hypothesis has been

rejected regarding these four parts.

In contrast, One-way ANOVA asserted that there

are significant differences attributed to each of the

study place, the specialization, the nature of the

workplace, the location of the workplace, and the

years of the experience of the respondents at the

level of α ≤ 0.05 between the Means of their

views on the subject of the application of BIM in

the AEC industry in Gaza strip. Accordingly,

Scheffe test was used for multiple comparisons

between the Means of the opinions of the

respondents taking into account this information

related to them. As a result, the hypothesis has

been accepted regarding these five parts.

161

5.3 Recommendations

Based on the achieved objectives of this research as stated earlier, the recommendations

below were drawn as a result of the research findings. The recommendations are as

follow:

5.3.1 Education and training to increase BIM awareness and interest

The key to any successful change program is the supporting by experts or any bodies

that train Architects and Engineers such as the Engineers Association or any specialized

training centers during the process of change. Initial vocational training should be done

by an expert, a trainer, or even a BIM guru or a training center that specializes in BIM

adoption as well as in implementation.

Companies involved in the development of BIM technology provide online courses

through its websites. These online courses keen to provide the technical training support

and provide the necessary explanation to use BIM efficiently. These websites also keep

publishing periodic reports for explaining what's new of BIM technology and show how

much it is useful for the AEC industry. It is a guaranteed way to make sure learning use

BIM tools properly and correctly. By so doing, the professionals in the AEC industry

can derive the maximum benefits from using BIM tools.

Engineers Association has to play a role to identify the concept of BIM, its functions,

and benefits, as well as promote the adoption of BIM. It can be done through doing

different workshops and by providing technical training courses in applying BIM

correctly.

Academic institutions and universities must take the lead to highlight new ways to

engage BIM in the AEC industry. The recommended solution is an actively drawing on

the educational and research expertise of universities. This approach will not only

accelerate the competency and the adoption of BIM but also will align the level and the

calibration of the future industry professionals emerging from universities and provide a

structure for lifelong development learning around BIM. There are different experiences

of universities around the world for the attention of BIM, including:

Some universities and academies in each of Qatar, the United States, the United

Kingdom, Australia, Denmark, Singapore, Hong Kong, China, and others started

to offer courses of BIM for students of Bachelor and postgraduate in

Architectural and Engineering (BD white paper, 2012; NBIMS-US, 2012; CIC,

2012; China BIM Union, 2013; NBS, 2013; BIM User Day, 2015).

Qatar University has taken the initiative to facilitate modern and innovative

methods in the Gulf construction industry by establishing a knowledge platform

about BIM with the government, research, and industry experts. Their major

activities are the Qatar BIM User Days, a series of one-day workshops hosted by

Qatar University periodically and focused on the four major components of

BIM: process, technology, people, and policy. Each day provided expert

presentations on one component, allowing in-depth audience discussions and

participation. The audience includes (Architectural and Engineering faculties,

consultants, contractors, the governmental agencies, NGOs, clients, and any one

of the stakeholders in any construction project) (BIM User Day, 2015).

162

Alumni Association of the Faculty of Architecture of Khartoum University made

a week of BIM with Sudan Architecture Forum (SAF) at the beginning of the

current year (2015). It was aimed to shed light on the field of BIM and the

possibility of its application in Sudan and included some events and workshops.

This week activated the relations between the academia and the professional

practice in the field of Architecture through the establishment of dialogue, which

encouraged the exchange of knowledge, experiences, and ideas. The program

hosted a lecturer at the University of Florida, which holds the experience of

more than twenty years in the field of BIM. It also applied three training

workshops aimed to insert BIM in the professional practice and the development

of the construction industry in Sudan (SAF, 2015).

5.3.2 Change organizational culture

Successful BIM adoption is not all about software; it‘s also about the organizational

change. For successful BIM adoption, organizations must act positively toward the

necessary changing.

Adopt first, then implement

Be willing to change: one of the first recommended steps towards adopting BIM is to

embrace change and learn new methods of doing projects. Firms should decide and pick

a date to switch from CAD to BIM and never look back as well as establish a vision that

embraces BIM concept. They must ensure that all necessary requirements for BIM

adoption are ready. It is imperative that the attitude to change is adopted by all, from top

level management, down to the entire members of staff in practice.

Managing change and transition

Transitioning to BIM workflow is not a process that should be quick and sudden.

Implementing BIM approach should be slow and steady to avoid negative impacts to the

already existing workflow processes. In other words clearer, the change should be

gradual and steady by adopting BIM on a project- by-a project basis (as an example, but

not as a limitation). Thus, it would be easier breaking down any psychological, social,

and financial barriers to BIM adoption.

Investment in training

Regarding technology, it is critical to choose the appropriate BIM tools that suit the

practice‘s way of work. It is recommended to test out trial versions of vendors and

subject them to several functions to evaluate the appropriateness of the tools before

making a final decision on which to use. Hardware requirements must also be suitable

for new software. Train the right professionals and assign them to tasks, roles, and

responsibilities in line with the new BIM workflow implementation and be patient with

the learning process. A user cannot suddenly become advanced and proficient; the user

requires experience and continuous exposure to the new tools to become an expert.

163

5.3.3 Provide appropriate governmental support

The government agencies must take progressive steps to apply BIM in the AEC industry

in Gaza strip. For example:

Generate a clear implementation roadmap/ plan for the implementation of BIM

entailing issues that require consideration for the organizations to progress on

the BIM maturity ladder.

Identify incrementally and possible steps between major stages.

Provide legal benchmarks for business improvement, where the absence of

standard BIM contract documents is preventing people from adopting and

utilizing BIM with security in the construction industry (Weygant, 2011;

Eastman et al., 2008; Mitchell and Lambert, 2013).

There are different examples of strategies and plans by the governments of various

countries over the world, such as:

The UK government in 2011 published a BIM mandate in the

―Government Construction Strategy‖ stating that ―Fully collaborative 3D

BIM will be a minimum requirement‖ by 2016 (BD white paper, 2012;

Khosrowshahi and Arayici, 2012).

Dubai Municipality has decided from the date of the first of January of

2014 to apply BIM in the Architectural as well as Mechanical, Electrical,

and Plumbing (MEP) work, where the consulting offices are legally

responsible for the application process (Dubai Municipality, 2014). The

BIM application will be in stages, where the first stage includes (Dubai

Municipality, 2013):

a. The buildings those are higher than 40 floors.

b. Buildings area of more than 300, 000 sc. Ft.

c. Specialized buildings such as hospitals, universities, and the like.

d. All buildings provided through a foreign branch office.

5.4 Research benefits to knowledge and the AEC industry

The novelty of this research lies in highlighting into BIM application in Gaza strip in

Palestine. The research has contributed to the AEC industry, simplified as following:

a) The research will add to the existing knowledge on BIM by developing a clear

understanding of BIM adoption in Gaza strip in Palestine.

b) The study has presented noteworthy findings in the investigation into BIM

application in the AEC industry. The research has identified the awareness level

of BIM by the professionals in the industry, the most important functions, and

the most valuable benefits of BIM for the AEC industry in Gaza strip as well as

barriers to the implementation of BIM in the AEC industry.

c) The study has established a good platform for future researchers to identify

meaningful ways of providing solutions to the identified challenges and facilitate

a smoother and more successful transition in the adoption of BIM technologies

and innovations in the AEC industry.

164

d) Research findings could help the AEC industry to understand the BIM

implementation issue. It will assist the companies and the policy makers,

especially the government, in identifying the future of BIM adoption and policy

in Gaza strip in Palestine.

e) The outcomes of this research could also be used for the appropriate education

and awareness purposes. It could be integrated into the education programs of

the AEC related disciplines. This benefit would improve students' understanding

of BIM and BIM implementation.

5.5 Limitations and future studies

Although the research was carefully prepared and has reached its aim, there were some

certain limitations.

First of all, because of the geographical limit, this research was conducted only

on a population who is living in Gaza strip in Palestine. It was hard to think

about a sample from the same population in West Bank. Because of the time

limit, it was also hard to think about using e-mail for sending and receiving

questionnaires. The involving population of other areas in Palestine would help

more to generalize the findings.

Second, the lack of studies related to BIM in Palestine and the surrounding

region had limited somehow the discussion of the results.

Finally, the study has taken the concept of BIM comprehensively. It has

included all parties who participate in the AEC industry as well as it has studied

BIM at all stages of the lifecycle of the facility. The researcher had to do this

because this research is the first step in studies about BIM in the area. However,

it would be better to allocate the study at a certain stage of the construction

project or to be dealt with BIM subject from a perspective of a particular group.

Therefore, it is recommended that future researchers should study BIM application in

other areas in Palestine. They should also specify more their studies, such as studying

the subject of BIM adoption from consultant‘s perspective or contractor‘s perspective.

The study can also be conducted about using BIM in a defined phase of the AEC

industry such as the Design phase. Furthermore, as a part of any future research, it is

suggested to create a BIM model for any construction project that constructed with the

traditional way (without BIM). After that, the researcher can study a defined step (such

as cost estimation or quantity take-offs of materials) for making a comparison between

the results in both cases (before and after BIM).

References

166

References

Abbasnejad, B., & Moud, H. I. (2013). BIM and basic challenges associated with its

definitions, interpretations, and expectations. International Journal of

Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA), Vol. 3: No. 2, pp. 287-294.

Abeyasekera, S. (2013). Quantitative analysis approaches to qualitative data: why,

when, and how. The UK: Statistical services centre, University of Reading.

Abukhater, A. (2013). Ahmed Abukhater. GIS meets BIM: delivering end-to-end

solutions for government and infrastructure:

http://www.ahmedabukhater.com/#!GIS-Meets-BIM-Delivering-End-to-End-

Solutions-for-Government-and-Infrastructure/cqis/AB92C669-6C91-47B6-

845C-177F3D543F97 (Accessed on March 30, 2014).

AGC. (2005). The contractors' guide to BIM. Available at: www.agc.org.

http://www.tpm.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/AGC_Guide_to_BIM.pdf

(Accessed on March 27, 2014).

Ahmad, A. M., Demian, P., & Price, A. D. (2012). BIM implementation plans: a

comparative analysis. Smith, S. Proceedings of 28th Annual ARCOM.

Edinburgh, UK: Association of Researchers in Construction, pp. 33-42.

Aibinu, A., & Venkatesh, S. (2013). Status of BIM adoption and the bim experience of

cost consultants in Australia. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Vol.

140: No. 3, pp. 1-10.

Allen Consulting Group. (2010). Productivity in the buildings network: assessing the

impacts of building information models. Sydney: The Built Environment

Innovation and Industry Council.

Aranda-Mena, G., Fraser, J., Chevez, A., Crawford, J., Kumar, A., Froese, T., et al.

(2007). Final Report / Business Drivers for BIM. Australia: Cooperative

Research Centre for Construction Innovation.

Arayici, Y., Aouad, G., & Ahmed, V. (2005). Requirements engineering for innovative

integrated ICT systems for the construction industry. Construction Innovation,

Vol. 5: No. 3, pp.179 - 200.

Arayici, Y., Khosrowshahi, F., Ponting, A. M., & Mihindu, S. (2009). Towards

implementation of building information modelling in the construction industry.

Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Construction in the 21st

Century “collaboration and integration in Engineering, Management and

Technology.” Istanbul, Turkey: Middle East Technical University and Florida

International University, pp. 1342-1351.

Ashcraft, H. W. (2008). Building Information Modeling: a framework for collaboration.

Construction Lawyer, Vol. 28: No. 3, pp. 1-14.

Azhar, S., & Brown, J. (2009). BIM for sustainability analyses. International Journal of

Construction Education and Research, Vol. 5: No. 4, pp: 276-292.

http://www.ahmedabukhater.com/#!GIS-Meets-BIM-Delivering-End-to-End-Solutions-for-Government-and-Infrastructure/cqis/AB92C669-6C91-47B6-845C-177F3D543F97



http://www.agc.org/

http://www.tpm.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/AGC_Guide_to_BIM.pdf

167

Azhar, S. (2011). Building Information Modeling (BIM): trends, benefits, risks, and

challenges for the AEC industry. Leadership and Management in Engineering,

Vol. 11: No. 3, pp. 241-252.

Azhar, S., Hein, M., & Sketo, B. (2008a). Building Information Modeling (BIM):

benefits, risks, and challenges. Proceedings of the 43rd ASC National Annual

Conference, Flagstaff, AZ. Auburn, Alabama: The Associated Schools of

Construction (ASC), pp. 1-11.

Azhar, S., Nadeem, A., Mok, J. Y., & Leung, B. H. (2008b). Building Information

Modeling (BIM): a new paradigm for visual interactive modeling and simulation

for construction projects. First International Conference on Construction in

Developing Countries (ICCIDC–I). Karachi, Pakistan: Advancing and

Integrating Construction Education, Research & Practice, pp. 435-446.

Baldwin, M. (2012). BIM implementation & execution plans. BIM Journal, Vol. 3: No.

35, pp. 73-76.

Barlish, K., & Sullivan, K. (2012). How to measure the benefits of BIM — A case study

approach. Automation in Construction, Vol. 24, pp. 149-159.

BD white paper. (2012). Investing in BIM: a guide for architects; BD white paper. The

UK: Building design white papers.

Becerik-Gerber, B., DDes, & Kent, D. (2010). Implementation of integrated project

delivery and building information modeling on a small commercial project.

Associated Schools of Construction Annual International, e CIB Workgroup, 89.

Boston, Massachusetts: Wentworth Institute of Technology, pp. 1-6.

Becerik-Gerber, B., Jazizadeh, F., Li, N., & Calis, G. (2011). Application areas and data

requirements for BIM-enabled facilities management. Journal of Construction

Engineering and Management, Vol. 138: No. 3, pp. 431-442.

Bernstein, P. G., & Pittman, J. H. (2004). Barriers to the adoption of building

information modeling in the building industry, Autodesk building solutions,

white paper. USA: Autodesk, Inc.

BIFM. (2012). BIM and FM: bridging the gap for success. The UK: The British

Institute of facilities management.

BIM User Day. (2015). “BIM Implementation – People, Process, Technology, Policy.”

The 5th Qatar BIM User Day. Available at: http://www.bimuserday.com/

(Accessed on March 1, 2015).

Both, P., & Kindsvater, A. (2012). Potentials and barriers for implementing BIM in the

German AEC market: results of a current market analysis. Proceedings of the

30th eCAADe Conference. Moscow, Russia: ISCCBE, pp. 151-158.

Bourque, L., & Fielder, E. P. (2003). How to conduct self-administered and mail

surveys, 2nd Edition. California: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Broquetas, M. (2010). Using BIM as a project management tool / how can BIM improve

the delivery of complex construction projects?, MSc Thesis, International

Project Management, University of Applied Sciences, Stuttgart.

http://www.bimuserday.com/

168

Building smart. (2010). Constructing the business case building information modelling.

London, the UK: British Standards Institution.

Causeway. (2011). Meeting the UK BIM challenge, transforming construction processes

with causeway. BIM Journal, Vol. 3, pp. 11-12.

Cheng, J. C., & Ma, L. Y. (2013). A BIM-based system for demolition and renovation

waste estimation and planning. Waste Management, Vol. 33: No. 6, pp. 1539-

1551.

China BIM Union . (2013). China industry technology innovation strategic alliance on

building information model. China Academy of Building Research. Available at:

http://www.bimunion.org/html/yw/index.html (Accessed on May 1, 2015).

CIC. (2012). BIM in Hong Kong. Construction Industry Council (CIC). Available at:

http://www.hkcic.org/eng/SearchResults.aspx?QueryExpr=BIM&ResultsPage=1

&langType=1033 (Accessed on May 15, 2015).

CRC for Construction Innovation. (2007). Adopting BIM for facilities management:

solutions for managing the Sydney opera house. Brisbane, Australia:

Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation, Icon.Net Pty Ltd.

Crowley, C. (2013). Identifying opportunities for quantity surveyors to enhance and

expand the traditional quantity surveying role by adopting building information

modelling. CITA BIM Gathering. Ireland: The Construction IT Alliance, pp. 71-

77.

Davidson, A. R. (2009). A study of the deployment and impact of Building Information

Modelling software in the construction industry. e-Engineering – Journal of

Undergraduate Research (University of Leeds). London: Available at:

http://www.engineering.leeds.ac.uk/e-

engineering/documents/AndrewDavidson.pdf (Accessed on Oct. 15, 2014).

Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2000). Mail and internet surveys: the

tailored design method, 2nd Edition. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Doloi, H. (2008). Analysing the novated design and construct contract from the client's,

design team's and contractor's perspectives. Construction Management and

Economics, Vol. 26: No. 11, pp. 1181-1196.

Doloi, H. (2009). Analysis of pre‐qualification criteria in contractor selection and their

impacts on project success. Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 27:

No. 12, pp. 1245-1263.

Dubai Municipality. (2013). Municipality Business/ Planning and Construction/

Circulars of Constructions. Dubai Municipality. Available at:

http://www.dm.gov.ae/ (Accessed on March 1, 2015).

Dzambazova, T., Krygiel, E., & Demchak, G. (2009). Introducing Revit Architecture

2010 "BIM for beginners," 1st Edition. Indianapolis, Indiana: Wiley Publishing,

Inc.

http://www.bimunion.org/html/yw/index.html

http://www.hkcic.org/eng/SearchResults.aspx?QueryExpr=BIM&ResultsPage=1&langType=1033

http://www.hkcic.org/eng/SearchResults.aspx?QueryExpr=BIM&ResultsPage=1&langType=1033

http://www.engineering.leeds.ac.uk/e-engineering/documents/AndrewDavidson.pdf

http://www.engineering.leeds.ac.uk/e-engineering/documents/AndrewDavidson.pdf

http://www.dm.gov.ae/

169

Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., & Liston, K. (2008). BIM Handbook " a guide to

Building Information Modeling for owners, managers, designers, Engineers,

and contractors." Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., & Liston, K. (2011). BIM Handbook " a guide to

Building Information Modeling for owners, managers, designers, Engineers,

and contractors," 2nd Edition. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Ellis, B. A. (2006). Building Information Modeling: an informational tool for

stakeholders. Washington: Society of American Military Engineers (SAME).

Elmualim, A., & Gilder, J. (2013). BIM: innovation in design management, influence,

and challenges of implementation. Architectural Engineering and Design

Management, Vol. 10: No. 1080, pp. 1745-2007.

Farnsworth, C. B., Beveridge, S., Miller, K. R., & Christofferson, J. P. (2014).

Application, advantages, and methods associated with using BIM in commercial

construction. International Journal of Construction Education and Research,

Vol. 10: No. 1080, pp. 1557- 8771.

Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS, 3rd Edition. London: SAGE

Publications Ltd.

Fischer, M., & Kunz, J. (2004). CIFE Technical report #156 "the scope and role of

information technology in construction." Stanford: CIFE center for integrated

facility Engineering/ Stanford University.

Garson, G. D. (2013). Validity and Reliability (Statistical Associates Blue Book Series

12), Kindle Edition. USA: Statistical Associates Publishers.

Ghauri, P. N., & Grønhaug, K. (2010). Research methods in business studies, 4th

Edition. New York: Financial Times Prentice Hall.

Gökstorp, M. (2012). BIM implementation and potential benefits for the facility

managers. MSc Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,

Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden.

Gray, M., Gray, J., Teo, M., Chi, S., & Cheung, Y. (2013). Building Information

Modelling: an international survey. WBC13 "World Building Congress" (pp. 1-

15). Australia: Brisbane, Queensland University of Technolgy (QLD).

Grys, R., & Westhorpe, M. (2012). The BIM manager. BIM Journal, Vol. 3: No. 33, pp.

63-68.

GSA. (2007). GSA building information modeling guide series 01 – overview.

Washington: The National 3D-4D-BIM program- General services

administration.

Gu, N., & London, K. (2010). Understanding and facilitating BIM adoption in the AEC

industry. Automation in Construction, Vol. 19: No. 8, pp. 988-999.

170

Gu, N., Singh, V., London, K., & Brankovic, L. (2008). BIM: expectations and a reality

check. Proceedings of 12th International Conference on Computing in Civil and

Building Engineering & 2008 International Conference on Information

Technology in Construction (pp. 1-6). Beijing, China: QUT Digital Repository,

Icon.Net Pty Ltd.

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). A primer on partial least

squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), 1st Edition. Los Angeles:

SAGE Publications, Inc.

Hardin, B. (2009). BIM and construction management: proven tools, methods, and

workflows, 1st Edition. Indiana: Wiley publishing, Inc.

Hardy, M. A., & Bryman, A. (2009). The handbook of data analysis, Paperback

Edition. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Hergunsel, M. F. (2011). Benefits of Building Information Modeling for construction

managers and BIM based scheduling. MSc Thesis, Civil Engineering, Worcester

Polytechnic Institute (WPI), U.S.A.

Holness, G. V. (2006). Future direction of the design and construction industry "

Building inform". ASHRAE Journal, Vol. 48: No. 8, pp. 38 - 46.

Howard, R., & Bjo¨rk, B.-C. (2008). Building Information Modelling – Experts‘ views

on standardisation and industry deployment. Advanced Engineering Informatics,

Vol. 22: No. 2, pp. 271–280.

Irizarry, J., Karan, E. P., & Jalaei, F. (2013). Integrating BIM and GIS to improve the

visual monitoring of construction supply chain management. Automation in

Construction, Vol. 31, pp. 241–254.

Joannides, M. M., Olbina, S., & Issa, R. R. (2012). Implementation of Building

Information Modeling into accredited programs in Architecture and construction

education. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, Vol.

8: No. 2, pp. 83-100.

Johnson, R. E., & Laepple, E. S. (2003). Digital innovation and organizational change

in design practice. Texas: CRS Center, Texas A & M University.

Jung, Y., & Joo, M. (2011). Building Information Modelling (BIM) framework for

practical implementation. Automation in Construction, Vol. 20: No. 2, pp. 126-

133.

Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, Vol. 39: No. 1,

pp. 31-36.

Kaner, I., Sacks, R., Kassian, W., & Quitt, T. (2008). Case studies of BIM adoption for

precast concrete design by mid-sized structural engineering firms. ITcon, Vol.

13: special issue case studies of BIM use, pp. 303-323.

Karlshøj, J. (2012). Not just CAD ++. BIM Journal, Vol. 3: No. 28, pp. 39- 42.

171

Kassem, M., Brogden, T., & Dawood, N. (2012). BIM and 4D planning: a holistic study

of the barriers and drivers to widespread adoption. KICEM Journal of

Construction Engineering and Project Management, Vol. 2: No. 4, pp: 1-10.

Keegan, C. J. (2010). Building information modeling in support of space planning and

renovation in colleges and universities. MSc Thesis, Construction Project

Management, Faculty of Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), U.S.A.

Khosrowshahi, F., & Arayici, Y. (2012). Roadmap for implementation of BIM in the

UK construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural

Management, Vol. 19: No. 6, pp. 610-635.

Kjartansdóttir, I. B. (2011). BIM adoption in Iceland and its relation to lean

construction. MSc Thesis, Construction Management, The School of Science

and Engineering, Reykjavík University, Iceland.

Kolpakov, A. (2012). Green is good. BIM Journal, Vol. 3: No. 30, pp. 49- 54.

Krygiel, E., Nies, B., & McDowell, S. (2008). Green BIM: Successful sustainable

design with building information modeling, 1st Edition. Indianapolis: John

Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Ku, K., & Taiebat, M. (2011). BIM experiences and expectations: the constructors'

perspective. International Journal of Construction Education and Research,

Vol. 7: No. 3, pp. 175-197.

Lahdou, R., & Zetterman, D. (2011). BIM for project managers; How project managers

can utilize BIM in construction projects. MSc Thesis, Division of Construction

Management, Visualization Technology, Department of Civil and

Environmental Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg,

Sweden.

Larose, D. T. (2006). Data mining methods and models, 1st Edition. Hoboken, New

Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Lavrakas, P. J. (2008). Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods. United States: SAGE

Publications, Inc.

Lee, S., Yu, J., & Jeong, D. (2014). BIM acceptance model in construction

organizations. Journal of Management in Engineering, Vol. 31: No. 3, pp. 1- 13.

Levine, D. M., Krehbiel, T. C., & Berenson, M. L. (2009). Business statistics: a first

course, 5th Edition. Boston: Pearson.

Lin, Y.-C. (2014). Construction 3D BIM-based knowledge management system: a case

study. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, Vol. 20: No. 2, pp. 186-

200.

172

Lindblad, H. (2013). Study of the implementation process of BIM in construction

projects/ analysis of the barriers limiting BIM adoption in the AEC-industry.

MSc Thesis, Department of Real Estate and Construction Management,

Architecture and Build Environment, ABE, Architectural Design and

Construction Project Management, KTH Architecture and Build Environment,

Stockholm.

Liu, Y., & Salvendy, G. (2009). Effects of measurement errors on psychometric

measurements in ergonomics studies: Implications for correlations, ANOVA,

linear regression, factor analysis, and linear discriminant analysis. Ergonomics,

Vol. 52: No. 5, pp. 499-511.

Löf, M. B., & Kojadionovic, I. (2012). Possible utilization of BIM in the production

phase of construction projects. MSc Thesis, Department of Real Estate and

Construction Management, Architecture and Build Environment, ABE,

Architectural Design and Construction Project Management, Skanska, Sweden.

Lorch, R. (2012). BIM and the public interest. Building Research & Information, Vol.

40: No. 6, pp. 643–644.

Lorimer, J. (2011). Building information modelling : Why do we need BIM? From NBS.

Available at:

http://www.thenbs.com/topics/bim/articles/whyDoWeNeedBIM.asp (Accessed

on April 12, 2014).

Man and Machine. (2014). Collaborate effectively and deliver better design,

construction and operational models (white paper.) The UK: Man and Machine

white papers/ Autodesk.

Malleson, A. (2013). BIM survey: summary of findings (National BIM report). The UK:

NBS and RIBA Enterprises.

Mandhar, M., & Mandhar, M. (2013). Biming the Architectural curricula – integrating

building information modelling (BIM) in Architectural education. International

Journal of Architecture (IJA), Vol. 1: No. 1, pp. 1-20.

McGraw-Hill Construction. (2007). Interoperability in the construction industry; smart

market report. New York: McGraw-Hill.

McGraw-Hill Construction. (2008). Building Information Modeling: transforming

design and construction to achieve greater industry productivity; smart market

report. New York: McGraw-Hill.

McGraw-Hill Construction. (2009). The business value of BIM: Getting building

information modeling to the bottom line; smart market report. New York:

McGraw-Hill.

McGraw-Hill Research and Analytics. (2009). Sustainable construction waste

management: creating value in the built environment; smart market report.

North America: McGraw-Hill.

Mitchell, D., & Lambert, S. (2013). BIM: rules of engagement. CIB World Building

Congress (Cib Bc13). Brisbane, Australia: Cibwbc, pp. 1-5.

http://www.thenbs.com/topics/bim/articles/whyDoWeNeedBIM.asp

173

Naoum, S. G. (2007). Dissertation research and writing for construction students, 2nd

Edition. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Nassar, K. (2010). The Effect of Building Information Modeling on the Accuracy of

Estimates. The sixth annual AUC research conference. Cairo: The American

University, Available at:

http://ascpro.ascweb.org/chair/paper/CPRT155002010.pdf (Accessed on

February 10, 2014).

NBIMS-US. (2007). National BIM Standard – the United States™ version 1

"Transforming the building supply chain through open and interoperable

information exchanges." The United States: National Institute of Building

sciences, building SMART alliance™.

NBIMS-US. (2012). National BIM Standard - United States™ version 2 "Omniclass, A

strategy for Classifying the Built Environment." The United States: National

Institute of Building Sciences, building SMART alliance™.

NBS. (2012). NBS International BIM report. The UK: The national BIM library.

NBS. (2013). NBS International BIM report. The UK: The national BIM library.

Nepal, M., Staub-French, S., & Pottinger, R. (2012). Providing query support to

leverage BIM for construction. The construction research congress 2012. West

Lafayette, Indiana, the United States: American Society of Civil Engineers

(ASCE), pp. 767-777.

Newton, K., & Chileshe, N. (2012). Awareness, usage, and benefits of building

information modelling (BIM) adoption – the case of the South Australian

construction organisations. Proceedings of the 28th Annual ARCOM

Conference. Edinburgh, The UK: Association of Researchers in Construction

Management, pp. 3-12.

Park, J., Park, J., Kim, J., & Kim, J. (2012). Building Information Modelling based

energy performance assessment system (An assessment of the Energy

Performance Index in Korea). Construction Innovation, Vol. 12: No. 3, pp.

1471-4175.

Qi, J., Issa, R. R., Olbina, S., & Hinze, J. (2013). Use of BIM in design to prevent

construction worker falls. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, Vol. 10:

No. 1061, pp. 1943-5487.

RAIC. (2007). Building Information Modeling (BIM). Canada: RAIC practice builder/

Autodesk.

RCS. (2014). Engineering design and project risk : do more of the first to take on less of

the second (RCS - Rapid Construction Solutions). Baku, Azerbaijan: MacKay

Group.

Reinard, J. C. (2006). Communication Research Statistics. USA: SAGE Publications,

Inc.

RIBA. (2012). BIM overlay to the RIBA outline plan of work. London: Royal Institute

of British Architects.

http://ascpro.ascweb.org/chair/paper/CPRT155002010.pdf

174

SAF5. (2015). Making a case for Building Information Modeling (BIM). Sudan

Architecture Forum. Available at: http://www.saf.com.sd/ (Accessed on May 1,

2015).

Salkind, N. J. (2010). Encyclopedia of research design (hardcover). London, the UK:

SAGE Publications, Inc.

Sambasivan, M., & Soon, Y. W. (2007). Causes and effects of delays in Malaysian

construction industry. International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 25:

No. 5, pp.517–526.

Sanguinetti, P., Abdelmohsen, S., Lee, J., Lee, J., Sheward, H., & Eastman, C. (2012).

General system Architecture for BIM: An integrated approach for design and

analysis. Advanced Engineering Informatics, Vol. 26: No. 2, pp. 317-333.

Sarno, F. (2012). BIM integrated lifecycle management. BIM Journal, Vol. 3: No. 29,

pp. 43-48.

Schade, J., Olofsson, T., & Schreyer, M. (2011). Decision‐making in a model‐based

design process. Construction Management and Economics, Vol.29: No. 4, pp.

371-382.

Sebastian, R. (2011). Changing roles of the clients, Architects and contractors through

BIM. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 18: No.2,

pp. 176-187.

Sebastian, R., & Berlo, L. v. (2010). Tool for benchmarking BIM performance of

design, engineering and construction firms in the Netherlands. Architectural

Engineering and Design Management, Vol. 6: No. 4, pp. 254-263.

Smith, D. (2007). An introduction to Building Information Modeling (BIM). Journal of

Building Information Modeling (JBIM), pp. 12-14.

Smith, D. K., & Tardif, M. (2009). Building Information Modeling: a strategic

implementation guide for Architects, Engineers, constructors, and real estate

asset managers. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Smith, J., O‘Keeffe, N., Georgiou, J., & Love, P. E. (2004). Auditing construction costs

during building design: a case study of cost planning in action. Managerial

Auditing Journal, Vol. 19: No. 2, pp. 259-271.

Stanley, R., & Thurnell, D. (2014). The benefits of, and barriers to, implementation of

5d BIM for quantity surveying in New Zealand. Australasian Journal of

Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 14: No. 1, pp. 105-117.

State of Ohio. (2010). State of Ohio Building Information Modeling protocol. Ohio:

Ohio department of administrative services.

Succar, B. (2009). Building Information Modelling framework: A research and delivery

foundation for industry stakeholders. Automation in Construction, Vol. 18: No.

3, pp. 357–375.

Thomas, S. J. (2004). Using web and paper questionnaires for data-based decision

making from design to interpretation of the results. Mumbai, India: Corwin.

http://www.saf.com.sd/

175

Thomson, D. B., & Miner, R. G. (2006). BIM: Contractual risks are changing with

technology. Consulting-Specifying Engineer, Vol. 40: No. 2, pp. 54–66.

Thurairajah, N., & Goucher, D. (2013). Advantages and challenges of using BIM: a cost

consultant‘s perspective. 49th ASC Annual International Conference

Proceedings. Birmingham, the UK: Associated Schools of Construction, pp. 1-8.

Treiman, D. J. (2009). Quantitative data analysis: doing social research to test ideas,

1st Edition. United States of America: Jossey-Bass (a Wiley imprint).

Tse, T.-c. K., Wong, K.-d. A., & Wong, K.-w. F. (2005 ). The utilization of building

information models in nd modeling: a study of data interfacing and adoption

barriers. ITcon, Vol. 10: Special issue from 3D to nD modelling, pp. 85-110.

Wang, M. (2011). Building Information Modeling (BIM): site-building interoperability

methods. MSc Thesis, Interdisciplinary Construction Project Management,

Faculty of the Worcester Polytechnic Institute, U.S.A.

Weygant, R. S. (2011). BIM content development: standards, strategies, and best

practices. New Jersy, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Wong, K.-d., & Fan, Q. (2013). Building Information Modelling (BIM) for sustainable

building design. Facilities, Vol. 31: No. 3/4, pp. 138-157.

Yan, H., & Damian, P. (2008). Benefits and Barriers of Building Information

Modelling. The 12th International Conference on Computing in Civil and

Building (INCITE 2008) (pp. 1-5). Beijing, China: ITconEvents.

Zaiontz, C. (2014). Factor analysis. Real statistics using Excel. Available at:

http://www.real-statistics.com/multivariate-statistics/factor-analysis/ (Accessed

on March 20, 2015).

Zhang, J., & Hu, Z. (2011). BIM- and 4D-based integrated solution of analysis and

management for conflicts and structural safety problems during construction: 1.

Principles and methodologies. Automation in Construction, Vol. 20: No. 2, pp.

155-166.

Zhang, S., Teizer, J., Lee, J.-K., Eastman, C. M., & Venugopal, M. (2013). Building

Information Modeling (BIM) and safety: automatic safety checking of

construction models and schedules. Automation in Construction, Vol. 29, pp.

183–195.

Zhenzhong, H., Jianping, Z., & Ziyin, D. (2008). Construction process simulation and

safety analysis based on building information model and 4D technology.

Tsinghua Science and Technology, Vol. 13: No. S1, pp. 266-272.

http://www.real-statistics.com/multivariate-statistics/factor-analysis/

Appendices

177

Appendix A: Questionnaire (English)

178

Subject: a Questionnaire Survey about: ―An investigation into Building Information

Modeling (BIM) application in Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC)

industry in Gaza strip”; a Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for

Master's Degree in Construction Project Management, Civil Engineering

Research aim: to develop a clear understanding about BIM for identifying the

different factors that provide useful information to consider adopting BIM technology in

projects by the practitioners in the AEC industry in Gaza strip in Palestine.

Target group: Engineers who work in the field of building design, supervision,

construction, and maintenance (Architects, Civil Engineers, Mechanical Engineers,

Electrical Engineers, and any other professional with related specialization).

The questionnaire consists of five main sections. Filling in the questionnaire does not

require prior knowledge about BIM. The required thing from you is the answer and the

evaluation of certain points with precision and objectivity according to your perspective

and expertise in the field of the Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC)

industry in the light of the actual reality in Gaza strip. The validity of the questionnaire

results entirely depends on your answer accuracy. Thank you in advance for your

valuable time and contribution to this research work.

Kind Regards,

Lina Ahmed Ata AbuHamra,

MSc Candidate in Construction Project Management, Civil Engineering, The

Islamic University of Gaza (IUG)

(January, 2015)

Please tick (√) the appropriate option in the following questions:

Name

(optional)

……………………………………………………………………

1. Gender Male Female

2. Educational

qualification Bachelor Master PhD

3. Study place Gaza strip West

Bank Outside Palestine

4. Specialization Architect Civil Electrical Mechanical Other

(…..)

5. Nature of the

workplace Consultant NGOs Contractor Contractor Other

(…..)

6. Location of

the workplace North Gaza Middle Khan

Younis

Rafah

7. Current field

-present job Designer Super-

visor

Site

Engineer

Project

manager

Other

(…..)

8. Years of

experience Less than 5

years

From 5 to less than 10

years

10 years and more

Part 1: Respondent’s demographic data and the way of implementing their work

179

9.

Percentage of

implementati-

on the work

by using 3D

programs

Less than

25%

From 25% to less than

50%

From

50% to

less than

70%

70% and

more

10.

Which

software tool

do you use to

carry out

projects?

(You can choose more than one answer)

AutoCAD

(2D)

Sketch up Revit Excel MS

Project

AutoCAD

(3D)

3D Max ArchiCAD Other (………..)

To which degree you consistent with the following items? Please tick (√) in

front of the number that reflects your point of view.

Nu

mb

er

Item

1. N

ever

2. L

ittl

e

3. S

om

ewh

at

4. M

uch

5. V

ery m

uch

A1 I have read some research and studies about BIM.

A2 Some of my college courses at University talked about BIM.

A3 I have a good idea about the concept of BIM technology.

A4 I have a high rate of information regarding the use of BIM

technology in Engineering project management.

A5 I have an idea about how to use BIM technology programs.

A6 I know that Revit and ArchiCAD programs are BIM

technology techniques.

A7 I use BIM technology in my job.

A8 I think that BIM technology is important for the AEC industry

in Gaza strip.

A9 I think that BIM technology has a positive impact on the

sustainable environment.

How would you rate the following items in terms of their importance and

the need for them in the AEC in Gaza strip? Please tick (√) in front of the

number that reflects your point of view.

Nu

mb

er

Item

1. U

nim

po

rta

nt

2.

Of

Lit

tle

imp

ort

an

ce

3.

Mo

der

ate

ly

imp

ort

an

t 4.

Imp

ort

an

t 5.

Ver

y

Imp

ort

an

t

F1 Three-dimensional (3D) modeling and visualization

F2 Functional simulations to choose the best solution (such as

Lighting, energy, and any other sustainability information)

Part 3

Part 2: The awareness level of BIM by the professionals in the AEC industry

180

Nu

mb

er

Item

1. U

nim

port

an

t

2.

Of

Lit

tle

imp

ort

an

ce

3.

Mo

der

ate

ly

imp

ort

an

t 4.

Imp

ort

an

t 5.

Ver

y

Imp

ort

an

t

F3 Change Management (any modification to the building design will

automatically replicate in each view such as floor plans, sections,

and elevation)

F4 Visualized constructability reviews/ Building simulation (a 3D

structural model as well as a 3D model of Mechanical, Electrical,

and Plumbing (MEP) services)


sequencing

F6 Model-based cost estimation (Five-dimensional (5D))

F7 Model-based site planning and site utilization

F8 Safety planning and monitoring on-site

F9 Model-based quantity take-offs of materials and labor

F10 Creation of as-built model that contains all the necessary data to

manage and operate the building (facility management)

F11 Future expansion/ extension in facility and infrastructure

F12 Maintenance scheduling via as-built model

F13 Energy optimization of the building

F14 Issue Reporting and Data archiving via a 3D model of the building

F15 Managing metadata (provide information about an individual

item's content) via a 3D model of the building


professionals) within the same system/ program

How would you rate the following items regarding their benefit in the AEC

industry in Gaza strip? Please tick (√) in front of the number that reflects

your point of view.

Nu

mb

er

Items

1.E

xtr

emel

y l

ow

Ben

efic

ial

2

. L

ow

ben

efic

ial

3

.Mo

der

ate

ly

ben

efic

ial

4

.Hig

hly

ben

efic

ial

5

.Ex

trem

ely

hig

h b

enef

icia

l

BE 1 Improve realization of the idea of a design by

the owner via a 3D model of the building

BE 2 Support design decision-making by comparing

different design alternatives on a 3D model

BE 3 Enhance design team collaboration

(Architectural, Structural, Mechanical, and

Electrical Engineers)

BE 4 Improve design quality (reducing errors/

redesign and managing design changes)

Part 4

181

Nu

mb

er

Items

1.E

xtr

emel

y l

ow

Ben

efic

ial

2.

Lo

w b

enef

icia

l

3.M

od

erate

ly

ben

efic

ial

4.H

igh

ly

ben

efic

ial

5.E

xtr

emel

y

hig

h b

enef

icia

l

BE 5 Improve sustainable design and lean design

BE 6 Improve safety design

BE 7 Improve the selection of the construction

components carefully in line with the quality

and costs (such as types of doors and windows,


BE 8 Improve understanding the sequence of the

construction activities

BE 9 Enhance work coordination with subcontractors

and suppliers (supply chain)

BE 10 Increase the quality of prefabricated (digitally

fabricated) components and reduce its costs

BE 11 Improve safety planning and monitoring on-

site/ reduce risks

BE 12 Increase the accuracy of scheduling and

planning

BE 13 Increase the accuracy of cost estimation

BE 14 Improve communication between project

parties


construction stage

BE 16 Reduce clashes among the stakeholders (clash

detection)

BE 17 Reduce the overall project duration and cost

BE 18 Improve the implementation of lean

construction techniques to get sustainable

solutions for reducing waste of materials during


BE 19 Ease of information retrieval for the entire life

of the building through as-built 3D model

BE 20 Improve the management and the operation of

the building to maintain its sustainability by

supporting decision-making on matters relating

to the building

BE 21 Increase coordination between the different

operating systems of the building (such as

security and alarm system, lighting, air

conditioning, etc.)

BE 22 Enhance energy efficiency and sustainability of

the building

BE 23 Improve maintenance planning (preventive and

curative)/ maintenance strategy of the facility

BE 24 Control the whole-life costs of the asset

effectively

BE 25 Increase profits by marketing for the facility via

a 3D model

182

Nu

mb

er

Items

1.E

xtr

emel

y l

ow

Ben

efic

ial

2.

Lo

w b

enef

icia

l

3.M

od

erate

ly

ben

efic

ial

4.H

igh

ly

ben

efic

ial

5.E

xtr

emel

y

hig

h b

enef

icia

l

BE 26 Improve emergency management (put plans for

avoiding hazards and cope with disasters such

as fire, earthquakes, etc.)

The greatest feature of BIM is creating a single integrated database through a virtual 3D

model of the building where all the design and the construction decisions can be

recorded. All project teams can access all contents of the database according to their

authority. On the other hand, the application of BIM needs many things to obtain

the feature mentioned above, such as:

(New programs are required for BIM application, necessary arrangements in the

workplace to adopt this new technology, as well as the need for the cooperation among

all parties involved in the project and other requirements). Consequently, and according

to your knowledge of the current situation of the AEC industry in Gaza strip:

How would you rate the following barriers in front of BIM application?

Please tick (√) in front of the number that reflects your point of view.

Nu

mb

er

BIM barrier

1. V

ery w

eak

2.

Wea

k

3.

Av

erage

stre

ng

th

3

. S

tro

ng

5.

Ver

y s

tron

g

BA 1 Necessary high costs to buy BIM software and costs of

the necessary hardware updates

BA 2 Lack of the awareness of BIM by stakeholders

BA 3 Lack of knowledge of how to apply BIM software

BA 4 Professionals think that the current CAD system and

other conventional programs satisfy the need of

designing and performing the work and complete the

project efficiently

BA 5 Lack of the awareness of the benefits that BIM can

bring to Engineering offices, companies, and projects

BA 6 Lack of effective collaboration among project

stakeholders to exchange necessary information for

BIM application, due to the fragmented nature of the

AEC industry in Gaza strip

BA 7 Resistance by companies and institutions for any

change can occur in the workflow system and the

refusal of adopting a new technology

Part 5

183

Nu

mb

er

BIM barrier

1. V

ery w

eak

2.

Wea

k

3.

Av

erage

stre

ng

th

3

. S

tro

ng

5.

Ver

y s

tron

g

BA 8 Lack of the financial ability for the small firms to start

a new workflow that is necessary for the adoption of

BIM effectively

BA 9 Companies prefer focusing on projects (under working/

construction) rather than considering, evaluating, and

implementing BIM

BA 10 Difficulty of finding project stakeholders with the

required competence to participate in applying BIM

BA 11 Lack of the governmental regulations for full support

the implementation of BIM

BA 12 Lack of demand and disinterest from clients regarding

with using BIM technology in design and construction

of the project

BA 13 Lack of the real cases in Gaza strip or other nearby

areas in the region that have been implemented by

using BIM and have proved positive return of

investment

BA 14 Lack of interest in Gaza strip to pursue the condition of

the building over the life after completion of

implementation stage

BA 15 Lack of Architects/ Engineers skilled in the use of BIM

programs

BA 16 Lack of the education or training on the use of BIM,

whether in the university or any governmental or

private training centers

BA 17 The unwillingness of Architects/ Engineers to learn

new applications because of their educational culture

and their bias toward the programs they are dealing

with

BA 18 Reluctance to train Architects/ Engineers due to the

costly training requirements in terms of time and

money

Thank you very much for your valuable time and effort on this survey

184

Appendix B: Questionnaire (Arabic)

185

في صناعة التصميم (BIM) "البحث في تطبيق تكنولوجيا نمذجة معلومات البناء: استبانة حؽل المؽضؽع

.استكماال لمتطلبات الحرؽل على درجة الماجدتير في إدارة المذاريع اليندسية في قطاع غزة" وتشييد البناء

اعتساد تكشػلػجيا حػل واضح فيع تصػيخ البحث:الرئيدي مؼ يدف ال BIM لتحجيج نطخي نسػذج وبشاء السذاريع في السيشجسيغ قبل ىحه التكشػلػجيا مغ اعتساد في لمشطخ مفيجة معمػمات تػفخ التي السختمفة العػامل

.في فمدصيغ قصاع غدة في والتذييج الترسيع في صشاعة السباني، واإلشخاف، والتشفيح، والريانة السيشجسػن الحي يعسمػن في مجال ترسيع : الفئة المدتيدفة

(.المعماري، والمدني، والكيربائي، والميكانيكي، وأي تخرص ذو عالقة) :عؼ مدبقة معرفة االستبانة تتطلب تعبئة الأقدام رئيدية، ةتتكػن االستبانة مغ خسد ماىية اإلستبانة

قة ومػضػعية وفقا لػجية نطخك، والخبخة في التقييع لشقاط معيشة بكل د ، وإنسا السصمػب ىػBIMتكنؽلؽجيا مجى صحة مجال العسل اليشجسي الخاص بالترسيع وتذييج البشاء في ضػء الػاقع الفعمي في قصاع غدة.

العسل ىحا في السداىسة عمى مقجما إجابتظ. لكع كل الذكخ دقة عمى كميا اعتسادا يعتسج االستبانة نتائج .البحثي

أطيب التحيات،

حمرة، مهندسة معمارية/ وباحثة للحصول على درجة الماجستير في إدارة المشاريع أبوعطا لينا أحمد 5102 ،يناير قطاع غزة، فلسطين، غزة، –الجامعة اإلسالمية )الهندسة المدنية(، الهندسية

التالية. األسئلة في المناسب الخيار أمام (√) عالمة وضع يرجى

................................................. )اختياري( اإلسػ أنثى ذكخ الجنس .1 دكتػراه ماجدتيخ بكالػريػس المؤىل العلمي .2بلد الحرؽل .3

على المؤىل العلمي

قصاع غدة الزفة الغخبية ).......( الخارج

التخرص .4

ميشجس معساري

ميشجس مجني

ميشجس كيخبائي

ميشجس ميكانيكي

أخخى)........(

طبيعة مكان .5 العمل

استذارات ىشجسية

مؤسدات دولية

مقاوالت قصاع حكػمي

أخخى)........(

رفح خانيػنذ الػسصى غدة الذسال مؽقع العمل .6مجال وظيفتغ .7

الحالية

مرسع ميشجس مذخف

ميشجس مػقع

مجيخ مذاريع أخخى(.....)....

للعملالجزء األول: معلؽمات خاصة بالميندس الذي يقؽم بتعبئة اإلستبانة وطريقة أدائو

186

سنؽات الخبرة .8

5أقل مغ سشػات

01مغ إلى أقل 5مغ ػاتــــــسش

01 ثخـــــسشػات فأك

ندبة أداءك .9لعملغ باستخدام

برامج النعام األبعاد الثالثي

(3D؟)

أقل مغ25%

إلى أقل 55مغ %51مغ

إلى أقل 51مغ %55مغ

55فأكثــــــــــخ %

البرامج التي .10تدتخدميا في عملغ إلنجاز

المذاريع؟

البخامج السدتخجمة(: جسيع تحجيج يخجى)

أوتػكاد ثشائي األبعاد

( (2D

اسكتر أب ريفيتRevit

إكدل MS بخوجكيت

أوتػكاد ثالثي

األبعاد ((3D

3D ماكذ

أرشيكاد )أركيكاد(

أخخى ).................(

مناسبا تراه الذي الرقػ أمام( √) عالمة وضع يرجى إلى أي درجة تتفق مع البنؽد التالية؟.

رقػال

البند

1القا

.إط

2يلة

قلرجة

.بد

3طة

ؽس مت

رجة.بد

4بيرة

ة كدرج

. ب

5رة

كبيجة

بدر . جدا

نسحجـــة بتكشػلػجيـــاقـــخأت قبـــل ذلـــظ بعـــس األبحـــاث والجراســـات الخاصـــة 1 (BIM) البشاء معمػمات

نسحجـــة تكشػلػجيـــاتشاولـــت بعـــس مدـــاقات دراســـتي فـــي الجامعـــة مػضـــػع 2 (BIM)البشاء معمػمات

BIMلجي فكخة جيجة حػل مفيػم تكشػلػجيا 3إدارة فــــي BIMمعــــجل معمػمــــاتي عــــالي بخرــــػص اســــتخجام تكشػلػجيــــا 4

السذاريع اليشجسية

BIM بخامج تكشػلػجياوتصبيق لجي فكخة حػل كيفية استخجام 5أرشـــــــيكاد ، وبخنـــــــامج Revitلـــــــجي عمـــــــع مدـــــــبق بـــــــأن بخنـــــــامج ريفيـــــــت 6

ArchiCAD تكشػلػجيا بخامجىسا مغBIM

في العسلBIM أستخجم بخامج تكشػلػجيا 7

( وتطبيقو في العمل في قطاع غزةBIMالجزء الثاني: درجة المعرفة بتكنؽلؽجيا نمذجة معلؽمات البناء )

األقل

187

رقػال

البند

1القا

.إط

2يلة

قلرجة

.بد

3طة

ؽس مت

رجة.بد

4بيرة

ة كدرج

. ب

5رة

كبيجة

بدر . جدا

رـــشاعة الترـــسيع وتذـــييج البشـــاء فـــي أىسيـــة ل BIMتكشػلػجيـــا أعتقـــج بـــأن ل 8 قصاع غدة

تأثيخ إيجابي عمى البيئة السدتجامة BIMتكشػلػجيا لأعتقج أن 9

غزة؟ قطاع في البناء وتذييد الترميػ صناعة في ليا والحاجة أىميتيا حيث مؼ التالية للبنؽد تقييمغ ما

.مناسبا تراه الذي الرقػ أمام( √) عالمة وضع يرجى

رقػال

البند

1يػ

ر م.غي

2ية

ىم األ

ليل. ق

3مية

ألىل ا

عتد.م

4ميػ

.

5دا

جىام

.

نسحجة وترػر السبشى بذكل ثالثي األبعاد 1السحاكاة ألمػر معيشة تؤثخ عمى السبشى السخاد إنذاؤه مغ خالل نسػذج 2

إفتخاضي ثالثي األبعاد ، وذلظ بيجف اختيار الحل األفزل. مثل محاكاة اإلضاءة، والصاقة وغيخىا

إدارة التغييخ في الترسيع )في حال حجث تغييخ عمى ترسيع السبشى، فإن 3 في كال مغ: السداقط، والػاجيات، والسقاشع( التعجيل سيطيخ تمقائيا

محاكاة البشاء بغخض فيع كيفية البشاء والتشفيح مغ خالل نسػذج افتخاضي 4 لمسبشى السخاد تشفيحهثالثي األبعاد )إنذائي، وميكانيكي، وكيخبائي(

عسل ججول زمشي مرػر لسخاحل البشاء وذلظ بخبط الججول الدمشي 5 بشسػذج افتخاضي ثالثي األبعاد لمسبشى

ت السبشى وعسمية البشاء باالعتساد عمى نسػذج ػناتقجيخ التكاليف لسك 6 افتخاضي ثالثي األبعاد

وتشطيع وتختيب أماكغ السعجات ومػاد تخصيط مػقع البشاء بذكل سميع 7 البشاء

التخصيط لألمغ والدالمة ومخاقبة ذلظ في مػقع البشاء 8حداب الكسيات الالزمة مغ مػاد البشاء وحداب عجد العسال الالزم إلتسام 9

العسل وذلظ باالعتساد عمى نسػذج افتخاضي ثالثي األبعاد لمسبشى

ة ف )مصابق لمػاقع( يحتػي عمى كا نسػذج ثالثي األبعاد لمسبشىاستخجام 10 البيانات الالزمة بيجف إدارة وتذغيل السبشى

لثالجزء الثا

188

رقػال

البند

1يػ

ر م.غي

2ية

ىم األ

ليل. ق

3مية

ألىل ا

عتد.م

4ميػ

.

5دا

جىام

.

عمى سبيل السثال إدارة ة بذكل سميع )إدارة التػسع السدتقبمي لمسشذأ 11تػسيع السبشى وتصػيخه ، ة في حال مجروسالتسجيج في البشية التحتية بذكل

(ىلغيخىا مغ السخافق الخاصة بالسبشباإلضافة

جسيع البيانات الخاصة تػفيخ ججولة الريانة الالزمة لمسبشى مغ خالل 12 بسكػنات السبشى

تخشيج استيالك الصاقة لمسبشى 13كتابة التقاريخ وأرشفة البيانات في قاعجة بيانات واحجة متكاممة مغ خالل 14

لمسبشى نسػذج ثالثي األبعاد

تػفيخ معمػمات تفريمية حػل أي بشج يخز السبشى في جسيع مخاحل 15 دورة حياتو

،واإلنذائي ،نقل البيانات دون فقج أي مشيا ما بيغ السيشجسيغ )السعساري 16 والسيكانيكي( الحيغ يدتخجمػن نطام بخامج واحج ،والكيخبائي

في صناعة الترميػ والبناء في قطاع غزة؟ يرجى وضع عالمة مؼ حيث فائدتياما تقييمغ للبنؽد التالية ( أمام الرقػ الذي تراه مناسبا.√)

رقػال

البند

1جدا

لة قلي

رجة بد

فيد.م

2لة

قليرجة

بدفيد

.م

3طة

ؽس مت

رجة بد

فيد.م

4بيرة

ة كدرج

د بمفي

.

5جدا

رة كبي

جة بدر

يد .مف

إدراك السالظ لفكخة الترسيع مغ خالل نسػذج افتخاضي ثالثي قػيةت 1 األبعاد لمسبشى

دعع اتخاذ القخار لمسيشجسيغ والسالظ بذأن خيارات الترسيع مغ خالل 2الترسيع السختمفة باالعتساد عمى نسػذج افتخاضي السقارنة بيغ بجائل ثالثي األبعاد لمسبشى

،واإلنذائي ،تعديد التعاون ما بيغ أعزاء فخيق الترسيع )السعساري 3 والكيخبائي( ،والسيكانيكي

تقميل إعادة الترسيع، وإدارة / تحديغ جػدة الترسيع )تقميل األخصاء 4 التغييخات في الترسيع(

ويديج مغ قيسة السبشى تحديغ الترسيع السدتجام الحي يقمل مغ الفػاقج 5 تحديغ الترسيع الحي يجعع األمغ والدالمة 6

رابعالجزء ال

189

رقػال

البند

1جدا

لة قلي

رجة بد

فيد.م

2لة

قليرجة

بدفيد

.م

3طة

ؽس مت

رجة بد

فيد.م

4بيرة

ة كدرج

د بمفي

.

5جدا

رة كبي

جة بدر

يد .مف

مثل ) بسا يتالئع مع الجػدة والتكاليف تحديغ اختيار مكػنات البشاء بعشاية 7 أنػع األبػاب والذبابيظ، نػع تكدية الججران الخارجية، وغيخىا(

فيع تدمدل أعسال التذييج لمسبشىالقجرة عمى زيادة 8 تعديد تشديق العسل مع مقاولي الباشغ/ والسػرديغ لمسػاد الالزمة لمبشاء 9

نات السبشى السدبقة الرشع والجاىدة لمتخكيب في ػ زيادة جػدة ترسيع مك 10 السػقع وتقميل تكاليفيا

والدالمة والسخاقبة في السػقع/ الحج مغ السخاشخ تحديغ تخصيط األمغ 11 في السػقع

زيادة دقة الججولة الدمشية والتخصيط ألعسال تذييج البشاء 12 ة تقجيخ تكاليف تذييج البشاءق زيادة د 13 تحديغ االترال بيغ األشخاف السذاركة في السذخوع 14 في مخحمة البشاء (Change/ Variation orders)تقميل أوامخ التغييخ 15 األشخاف السذاركة في السذخوعتقميل الشداعات بيغ 16 ة اإلجسالية والتكمفة اإلجسالية لمسذخوعج تقميل الس 17تحديغ استخجام وتصبيق تقشيات البشاء التي تزسغ الحرػل عمى حمػل 18

أثشاء البشاء واليجممدتجامة لمحج مغ ىجر السػاد

خالل نسػذج مغ السعمػمات الخاصة بكامل حياة السبشى سيػلة استخجاع 19 مصابق لمسبشىثالثي األبعاد

اتخاذ دعع خالل مغ استجامتو عمى لمحفاظ السبشى وتذغيل إدارة تحديغ 20 بالسبشى الستعمقة السدائل بذأن (عغ السبشى لمسدؤوليغالقخارات )

زيادة التشديق بيغ أنطسة التذغيل السختمفة السدتخجمة في السبشى مثل: 21 )الشطام األمشي واإلنحار، اإلضاءة، التكييف، وغيخىا(

تعديد كفاءة استجامة السبشى 22 لمسشذأة بذكل دائع )الػقائية، والعالجية( تحديغ التخصيط لمريانة 23 الع التكاليف الكاممة لمسشذأة وإدارتيا عمى نحػ فالديصخة عمى 24زيادة األرباح مغ خالل التدػيق لمسبشى باستخجام نسػذج ثالثي األبعاد 25

عمى البيانات الالزمة الخاصة بو و ويحتػي مصابق ل

تحديغ إدارة الصػارئ )وضع خصط لتجشب السخاشخ والتعامل مع 26 والدالزل، وغيخىا(الكػارث مثل الحخائق،

190

ىػ عسل قاعجة بيانات واحجة متكاممة مغ خالل نسػذج ( BIMأكثخ ما يسيد تكشػلػجيا نسحجة معمػمات البشاء )الترسيع واإلنذاء. ويسكغ الػصػل إلى كل محتػياتيا مغ افتخاضي ثالثي األبعاد لمسبشى يدجل فييا كافة قخارات

.كافة فخق العسل في السذخوع كل حدب صالحياتو، ومغ ىحه أعاله السحكػرة السيدة عمى الحرػل بيجف األمػر مغ لمعجيج BIM تصبيق يحتاج ،أخخى جية مغ

الجديدة الالزمة لتطبيقو، والترتيبات الالزم إعدادىا داخل مكان العمل لتبني ىذه التكنؽلؽجيا ج)البرام األمػر: (.حتياجاتالجديدة، باإلضافة إلى ضرورة التعاون بيؼ كافة األطراف المذاركة في المذروع، وغيرىا مؼ اال

ء في قطاع غزة: رناعة الترميػ وتذييد البناالحالي لؽضع لمعرفتغ ل بحدب، و ذلغبناء على و رقػ الذي تراه مناسبا.( أمام ال√عالمة )وضع ؟ يرجى BIMالتالية أمام تطبيق تكنؽلؽجيا للعؽائق ما تقييمغ

رقػال

العائق

1جدا

ف ضعي

.

2يف

ضع.

3قؽة

ط الؽس

.مت

4ي ؽ

.ق

5دا

جي ؽ

.ق

فزال عغ تكاليف تحجيثات ،BIMالتكاليف الالزمة لذخاء بخامج ارتفاع 1 لتتشاسب مع ىحه البخامجاألجيدة الالزمة

مغ قبل أصحاب السرمحة في السذخوع BIM تكشػلػجياب عجم السعخفة 2 BIMعجم السعخفة بكيفية تصبيق بخامج 3السدتخجمة حاليا ىي بخامج تفي بحاجة التقميجية االعتقاد بأن البخامج 4

وال تػجج حاجة لبخامج ،بكفاءة وإنجاز السذخوع ألداء العسلالسيشجسيغ BIMل بخامج ثججيجة م

سكاتب اليشجسية التي يسكغ أن تعػد عمى ال BIMبفػائج عجم السعخفة 5 والسذاريع والذخكات

ال بيغ أصحاب السرمحة في السذخوع لتبادلفع عجم وجػد تعاون 6نطخا لمصبيعة السجدأة لرشاعة الترسيع BIMالسعمػمات الالزمة لتصبيق وتذييج البشاء في قصاع غدة

مقاومة الذخكات والسؤسدات ألي تغييخ يسكغ أن يصخأ عمى نطام سيخ 7 ي أي تكشػلػجيا ججيجةش العسل فييا، ورفس تب

نقز القجرة السالية لمذخكات الرغيخة الالزمة لبجء سيخ العسل الججيج 8 الع عمى نحػ ف BIM الالزم لتصبيق تكشػلػجيا

متخكيد عمى مذاريع قيج العسل )تحت اإلنذاء( بجال مغ لتفزيل الذخكات 9 وتقييسو وتصبيقو BIMبحل الػقت لمشطخ في أمخ

صعػبة العثػر عمى أشخاف مذاركة في السذخوع تكػن لجييا الكفاءة 10 BIMالسصمػبة لمسذاركة في تصبيق تكشػلػجيا

بذكل كامل BIMعجم وجػد أنطسة حكػمية تجعع تصبيق 11

خامسالجزء ال

191

رقػال

العائق

1جدا

ف ضعي

.

2يف

ضع.

3قؽة

ط الؽس

.مت

4ي ؽ

.ق

5دا

جي ؽ

.ق

في ترسيع وتشفيح السذخوع BIM سالظ استخجام تكشػلػجياالب شم عجم 12 وبالتالي ال يػجج دافع لمتفكيخ باعتساده في العسل

بشاء حقيقي في قصاع غدة أو في أماكغ مجاورة في السشصقة تع عجم وجػد 13 وأثبت عائجا إيجابيا لالستثسار BIMتكشػلػجيا ػاسصةتشفيحه ب

السبشى عمى مجى الحياة بعج عجم االىتسام في قصاع غدة بستابعة حالة 14 االنتياء مغ مخحمة تشفيحه

BIMفي استخجام بخامج تخرريغ ذوي خبخةعجم وجػد ميشجسيغ م 15سػاء بالجامعة أو أي مخاكد BIMتجريب عمى استخجام عجم التعميع أو ال 16

حكػمية أو خاصة تجريبية

،ججيجة بدبب ثقافتيع التعميسيةعجم رغبة السيشجسيغ لتعمع تصبيقات 17 السألػفة لجييع البخامج تجاه وتحيدىع

التخدد في تجريب السيشجسيغ نطخا لستصمبات التجريب السكمفة مغ ناحية 18 الػقت والسال

شكخا جديال عمى وقتظ الثسيغ والجيج السبحول في ىحا االستصالع

192

Appendix C: Correlation coefficient

193

Table (C1): The correlation coefficient between each paragraph/ item in the field and the whole

field (The first field is the awareness level of BIM by the professionals) N

um

ber

Item

Pea

rson

coef

fici

ent

P-v

alu

e

A1 I have read some research and studies about BIM. 0.83 0.00*

A2 Some of my college courses at University talked about BIM. 0.68 0.00*

A3 I have a good idea about the concept of BIM technology. 0.89 0.00*

A4 I have a high rate of information regarding the use of BIM technology

in Engineering project management.

0.83 0.00*

A5 I have an idea about how to use BIM technology programs. 0.89 0.00*

A6 I know that Revit and ArchiCAD programs are BIM technology

techniques.

0.81 0.00*

A7 I use BIM technology in my job. 0.69 0.00*

A8 I think that BIM technology is important for the AEC industry in Gaza

strip.

0.87 0.00*

A9 I think that BIM technology has a positive impact on the sustainable

environment.

0.89 0.00*

Table (C2): The correlation coefficient between each paragraph in the field and the whole field

(The second field is the importance of BIM functions)

Num

ber

Items

Pea

rson

coef

fici

ent

P-v

alu

e

F1 Three-dimensional (3D) modeling and visualization 0.71 0.00*

F2 Functional simulations to choose the best solution (such as Lighting,

energy, and any other sustainability information) 0.49 0.00*

F3 Change Management (any modification to the building design will

automatically replicate in each view such as floor plans, sections, and

elevation)

0.65 0.00*

F4 Visualized constructability reviews/ Building simulation (a 3D

structural model as well as a 3D model of Mechanical, Electrical,

and Plumbing (MEP) services)

0.63 0.00*


sequencing 0.73 0.00*

F6 Model-based cost estimation (Five-dimensional (5D)) 0.50 0.00*

F7 Model-based site planning and site utilization 0.59 0.00*

F8 Safety planning and monitoring on-site 0.65 0.00*

F9 Model-based quantity take-offs of materials and labor 0.60 0.00*

F10 Creation of as-built model that contains all the necessary data to

manage and operate the building (facility management) 0.68 0.00*

F11 Future expansion/ extension in facility and infrastructure 0.68 0.00*

F12 Maintenance scheduling via as-built model 0.70 0.00*

F13 Energy optimization of the building 0.60 0.00*

F14 Issue Reporting and Data archiving via a 3D model of the building 0.72 0.00*

F15 Managing metadata (provide information about an individual item's

content) via a 3D model of the building 0.82 0.00*


professionals) within the same system/ program 0.71 0.00*

194


(The third field is the value of BIM benefits) N

um

ber

Items

Pea

rson

coef

fici

ent

P-v

alu

e

BE 1 Improve realization of the idea of a design by the owner via a 3D

model of the building 0.58 0.00*

BE 2 Support design decision-making by comparing different design

alternatives on a 3D model 0.54 0.00*


Mechanical, and Electrical Engineers) 0.67 0.00*

BE 4 Improve design quality (reducing errors/ redesign and managing

design changes) 0.52 0.00*

BE 5 Improve sustainable design and lean design 0.76 0.00*

BE 6 Improve safety design 0.56 0.00*

BE 7

Improve the selection of the construction components carefully in

line with the quality and costs (such as types of doors and windows,


0.69 0.00*

BE 8 Improve understanding the sequence of the construction activities 0.68 0.00*

BE 9 Enhance work coordination with subcontractors and suppliers

(supply chain)

0.62 0.00*


components and reduce its costs

0.55 0.00*

BE 11 Improve safety planning and monitoring on-site/ reduce risks 0.68 0.00*

BE 12 Increase the accuracy of scheduling and planning 0.79 0.00*

BE 13 Increase the accuracy of cost estimation 0.76 0.00*

BE 14 Improve communication between project parties 0.73 0.00*

BE 15 Reduce change/ variation orders in the construction stage 0.73 0.00*

BE 16 Reduce clashes among the stakeholders (clash detection) 0.78 0.00*

BE 17 Reduce the overall project duration and cost 0.72 0.00*

BE 18 Improve the implementation of lean construction techniques to get

sustainable solutions for reducing waste of materials during


0.75 0.00*

BE 19 Ease of information retrieval for the entire life of the building

through as-built 3D model

0.69 0.00*

BE 20 Improve the management and the operation of the building to

maintain its sustainability by supporting decision-making on matters

relating to the building

0.75 0.00*

BE 21 Increase coordination between the different operating systems of the

building (such as security and alarm system, lighting, air

conditioning, etc.)

0.76 0.00*

BE 22 Enhance energy efficiency and sustainability of the building 0.63 0.00*



0.72 0.00*

BE 24 Control the whole-life costs of the asset effectively 0.71 0.00*

BE 25 Increase profits by marketing for the facility via a 3D model 0.49 0.00*

BE 26 Improve emergency management (put plans for avoiding hazards

and cope with disasters such as fire, earthquakes, etc.)

0.77 0.00*

195


(The fourth field is the strength of BIM barriers) um

ber

BIM barrier

Pea

rson

coef

fici

ent

P-v

alu

e

BA 1 Necessary high costs to buy BIM software and costs of the

necessary hardware updates 0.35 0.03

BA 2 Lack of the awareness of BIM by stakeholders 0.57 0.00*

BA 3 Lack of knowledge of how to apply BIM software 0.63 0.00*

BA 4 Professionals think that the current CAD system and other

conventional programs satisfy the need of designing and performing

the work and complete the project efficiently

0.54 0.00*

BA 5 Lack of the awareness of the benefits that BIM can bring to

Engineering offices, companies, and projects 0.57 0.00*

BA 6 Lack of effective collaboration among project stakeholders to

exchange necessary information for BIM application, due to the

fragmented nature of the AEC industry in Gaza strip

0.50 0.00*

BA 7 Resistance by companies and institutions for any change can occur

in the workflow system and the refusal of adopting a new

technology

0.47 0.00*

BA 8 Lack of the financial ability for the small firms to start a new

workflow that is necessary for the adoption of BIM effectively 0.45 0.00*

BA 9 Companies prefer focusing on projects (under working/

construction) rather than considering, evaluating, and implementing

BIM

0.52 0.001


competence to participate in applying BIM 0.52 0.00*

BA 11 Lack of the governmental regulations for full support the

implementation of BIM 0.61 0.00*

BA 12 Lack of demand and disinterest from clients regarding with using

BIM technology in design and construction of the project 0.48 0.00*

BA 13 Lack of the real cases in Gaza strip or other nearby areas in the

region that have been implemented by using BIM and have proved

positive return of investment

0.63 0.000

BA 14 Lack of interest in Gaza strip to pursue the condition of the building

over the life after completion of implementation stage 0.66 0.00*

BA 15 Lack of Architects/ Engineers skilled in the use of BIM programs 0.74 0.00*

BA 16 Lack of the education or training on the use of BIM, whether in the

university or any governmental or private training centers 0.76 0.00*

BA 17 The unwillingness of Architects/ Engineers to learn new

applications because of their educational culture and their bias

toward the programs they are dealing with

0.52 0.00*

BA 18 Reluctance to train Architects/ Engineers due to the costly training

requirements in terms of time and money 0.47 0.00*

All thanks and praise are due to

ALLAH

“Alhamdulillah”

Documents

Islamic University of Gaza (IUG) - غزةlibrary.iugaza.edu.ps/thesis/116796.pdf · A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of Requirements for Master's ... The Islamic University