Edinburgh Napier University, UK

School of Engineering and the Built Environment

Methodology for BIM implementation

in KSA in AEC industry
By

Ashraf Ibrahim Nasr Elhendawi

Supervisors

Dr. Andrew Smith

School of Engineering and the Built Environment

Edinburgh Napier University, UK

Prof. Dr. Emad Elbeltagi

Construction Management and Structural Engineering

Mansoura University, Egypt

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree in Master of Science

MSc in Construction Project Management

January 2018
i
Abstract
Recently, the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry is
considered the most effective contributor to development in the Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia (KSA). However, the AEC industry is facing myriads challenges
due to the vast construction development required for the KSA 2030 vision.
Many issues are raised such as failure to meet the client requirement, delay in
delivering projects in time, cost overrun, low quality, conflicts among parties,
shortage of qualified workers, safety issues, increasing requests of change
order, increasing in material wastes and project complexity. Developed countries
are using Building Information Modeling (BIM) to mitigate these challenges and
reap the benefits from implementing BIM to improve the performance of the AEC
industry profoundly.

BIM is rapidly growing worldwide as a viable tool for improving the efficiency of
(AEC) industry. However, BIM is rarely used in the KSA. The proved benefits of
implementing BIM in the developed countries, gave evidence that, BIM requires
drastic change and there is no recognized methodology to solicit companies to
use BIM. However, from these countries, experience BIM must be mandated.
There are some timid attempts to decree BIM in the Gulf Council Countries
(GCC) region, whereas in 2014, Dubai Municipality mandate BIM in the large
projects.

This study aims to develop a methodology to implement BIM in the KSA by

exploring the stockholders’ perception of BIM benefits, barriers, and factors
affecting the adaption. Accordingly, a questionnaire has been sent to many BIM
users and non-users. In addition to, structured interviews were carried out with
BIM users and non-users. In the efforts to validate the proposed methodology,
another survey sent to BIM experts and structured interviews have been
organized with BIM professionals. SPSS 23 software used to analyze
quantitative data and NVivo 10 used to analyze qualitative data.

The key findings of this study are: (1) Identifying the six steps of the
methodology in details in its order to implement BIM; (2) Raising awareness; (3)
Perceived benefits of BIM; (4) AEC industry readiness and organizations
capability; (5) identifying the barriers; (6) Removing the barriers; and (7) Defining
the key factors influencing the implementation. The results of this research are
expected to assist all projects participants in KSA to implement BIM to solve the
current AEC industry projects issues, improve the performance of the project and
reap the benefits of implementing BIM. This study is the first research to make a
crucial and novel contribution by providing a methodology to implement BIM in
KSA. Future studies can validate the methodology for each project parties.

Keywords: BIM, KSA, AEC, Barriers, Benefits, Adoption, implementation

ii
Table of Contents
Abstract..............................................................................................................ii
List of tables..................................................................................................... vi
List of Figures..................................................................................................vii
Dedication......................................................................................................... ix
Acknowledgment...............................................................................................x
List of Abbreviations........................................................................................xi
List of Symbols.................................................................................................xi
Chapter 1: Introduction...................................................................................12
1.1 Introduction............................................................................................12
1.2 Research motivations............................................................................13
1.3 The Problem statement..........................................................................13
1.4 Aim and Objectives................................................................................14
1.5 Dissertation Questions...........................................................................15
1.6 Scope of research..................................................................................15
1.7 Research methodology..........................................................................15
1.8 Key findings and Contributions..............................................................16
1.9 Structure of the research.......................................................................16
Chapter 2: Literature Review..........................................................................17
2.1 Overview................................................................................................17
2.1.1 AEC Industry in KSA.......................................................................19
2.1.2 Challenges for construction industry in KSA...................................21
2.2 Raising the BIM awareness...................................................................22
2.2.1 BIM definitions:................................................................................22
2.2.2 Comparison between the traditional method process and the main
concept of the BIM process:............................................................24
2.2.3 BIM deliverables:.............................................................................26
2.2.2 BIM Dimensions:.............................................................................27
2.2.5 BIM Maturity....................................................................................29
2.2.6 How BIM works...............................................................................32
2.2.7 BIM applications:.............................................................................34
2.2.8 Integration with BIM.........................................................................38
2.2.9 BIM Status Globally and future trends.............................................40
2.2.10 BIM Tools.....................................................................................42
2.2.11 Roles and responsibilities of BIM Specialist.................................44
2.2.12 Organizations can use BIM..........................................................46
2.16 The benefits of BIM................................................................................46
2.17 BIM Barriers...........................................................................................51
2.18 Removing barriers to BIM adoption.......................................................56
2.18.1 Top management support............................................................56
2.18.2 Resistance to change..................................................................56
2.18.3 Lack of sufficient Education and training......................................59
2.18.4 Interoperability..............................................................................60
2.18.5 Difficulties of managing BIM Model..............................................60

iii
 2.18.6 Lack of skilled resources and complexity of BIM software...........60
2.18.7 Financial Issues:..........................................................................60
2.18.8 Unclear Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)...................................61
2.18.9 AEC Traditional procurement methodology.................................61
2.18.10 Doubts about Return on Investment............................................61
2.18.11 Legal (or contractual) issues........................................................62
2.19 Motivations for BIM implementation in KSA...........................................62
2.20 Key factors influence BIM implementation.............................................62
2.21 AEC industry and organizational internal readiness..............................66
2.22 Suggested strategies and Methodologies for BIM implementation........66
2.23 The future of BIM in the KSA.................................................................67
2.24 Knowledge Gaps...................................................................................67
Chapter 3: Research Methodology and Data Collection..............................69
3.1 Method of data collection.......................................................................69
3.1.1 The Population and Sample Size....................................................72
3.2 Reliability and testing the questionnaire data........................................73
3.2.1 Reliability.........................................................................................73
3.2.2 Correlation.......................................................................................74
3.3 Respondents General information.........................................................75
Chapter 4: Results analysis............................................................................80
4.1 Questionnaire.........................................................................................80
4.1.1 Respondents information about BIM...............................................81
4.1.2 Perceived benefits of BIM...............................................................83
4.1.3 Identified the Barriers......................................................................94
4.1.4 Key Factors influence the adoption...............................................108
4.2 Interviews.............................................................................................117
4.2.1 Raising the awareness about BIM.................................................117
4.2.2 Perceived benefits of BIM.............................................................119
4.2.3 Identifying the barriers...................................................................121
4.2.4 Removing barriers.........................................................................123
4.2.5 Key Factors influence BIM implementation...................................123
4.2.6 AEC industry readiness and organizations capability....................125
Chapter 5: Proposed model for BIM implementation.................................126
5.1 Developing the hypothesizes...............................................................131
5.1.1 Raising awareness (independent variable):..................................131
5.1.2 The perceived benefits of BIM (independent variable):.................131
5.1.3 Barriers to implementing BIM (independent variable):..................132
5.1.4 Remove the barriers to implementing BIM (independent
variable):........................................................................................132
5.1.5 Key factors influence the BIM adoption (independent variable):.. .132
5.1.6 The KSA AEC industry readiness and organisations capability
(independent variable):.................................................................132
5.1.7 Implementation of BIM in the KSA AEC industry (The dependent
variable):........................................................................................133
5.2 Model validation...................................................................................133
iv
 5.2.1 Questionnaire................................................................................133
5.2.2 Interviews......................................................................................141
Chapter 6: Conclusions.................................................................................144
6.1 Raising BIM awareness.......................................................................144
6.1.1 BIM definition.................................................................................144
6.1.2 Comparison among BIM and traditional methods.........................145
6.1.3 BIM deliverables............................................................................145
6.1.4 BIM dimensions.............................................................................145
6.1.5 BIM maturity levels........................................................................145
6.1.6 How BIM works.............................................................................145
6.1.7 BIM applications............................................................................145
6.1.8 Integration with BIM.......................................................................146
6.1.9 BIM status globally and lessons learned from countries using BIM
…………………………………………………………………………..146
6.1.10 BIM software..............................................................................146
6.1.11 Roles and responsibilities of BIM specialist...............................147
6.1.12 BIM SWOT analysis...................................................................147
6.2 Perceived benefits of BIM....................................................................147
6.2.1 Client perspective..........................................................................147
6.2.2 Designer perspective.....................................................................147
6.2.3 Contractor perspective..................................................................147
6.2.4 Shared benefits (to all participants)...............................................148
6.3 the AEC industry readiness and organizations capabilities..................148
6.4 Identification of the barriers:.................................................................148
6.4.1 Personal barriers...........................................................................148
6.4.2 Process barriers............................................................................148
6.4.3 Business barriers...........................................................................149
6.4.4 Technical barriers..........................................................................149
6.4.5 Organization barriers.....................................................................149
6.4.6 Market barriers..............................................................................149
6.5 Removing the barriers..........................................................................149
6.6 Key factors influence the adoption.......................................................149
6.6.1 External push................................................................................150
6.6.2 Internal push..................................................................................150
6.7 Final methodology for implementing BIM.............................................150
Limitation and assumptions of research..............................................152
Bibliography...................................................................................................153
Appendix 1: Developing the Model Questionnaire survey........................187
Appendix 2 Developing the Model Interviews.............................................196
Appendix 3: Model validation Questionnaire survey.................................207
Appendix 4 Model validation Interviews......................................................208
Appendix 5 Different between user and not use BIM perspective............210

v
List of tables
Table 1: Mega projects under execution in Saudi Arabia (MEED Projects)..................................20
Table 2: BIM applications in a construction project (Furneaux & Kivvits, 2008; Latiffi, et al., 2013)
.................................................................................................................................................... 38
Table 3: BIM Software (Computer Integrated Construction Research Program (CICRP), 2012;
Olugboyega, 2017)....................................................................................................................... 43
Table 4: Literature review for Perceived benefits of BIM..............................................................47
Table 5: Recognised Barriers of BIM within the AEC industry......................................................53
Table 6: Literature review Key factors influence the Adoption of BIM..........................................64
Table 7: The BIM implementation framework (Jung & Joo, 2011)...............................................67
Table 8: Reliability Statistics......................................................................................................... 74
Table 9: Correlations.................................................................................................................... 74
Table 10: Coding respondents’ reasons why they do not have interest in BIM................................75
Table 11: Organization specialization........................................................................................... 76
Table 12: Organization size.......................................................................................................... 76
Table 13: BIM software................................................................................................................ 80
Table 14: BIM Applications........................................................................................................... 81
Table 15: Integration with BIM...................................................................................................... 81
Table 16: Benefits of BIM from Client perspective........................................................................84
Table 17: Benefits of BIM from Designer perspective..................................................................86
Table 18: Benefits of BIM from Contractor perspective................................................................88
Table 19: Benefits of BIM to all participants (shared between client, designer and contractor)....91
Table 20: Personal Barriers.......................................................................................................... 95
Table 21: BIM Process Barriers................................................................................................... 98
Table 22: Business Barriers....................................................................................................... 100
Table 23: Technical Barriers...................................................................................................... 102
Table 24: Organization Barriers................................................................................................. 104
Table 25: Market Barriers........................................................................................................... 106
Table 26: External Push for Implementing BIM in KSA..............................................................109
Table 27: Internal Push for Implementing BIM in KSA...............................................................113
Table 28: Key Factors influence the implementation of BIM......................................................116
Table 29: Coding the responses why BIM non-users intend to use...........................................117
Table 30: Coding for benefits of BIM from Client perspective....................................................119
Table 31: Coding for benefits of BIM from Designer perspective...............................................120
Table 32: Coding for benefits of BIM from Contractor perspective.............................................120
Table 33: Coding for benefits of BIM from all participants’ perspective...........................................121
Table 34: Coding of Personal Barriers.......................................................................................121
Table 35: Coding of Process Barriers......................................................................................... 122
Table 36: Coding of Business Barriers.......................................................................................122
Table 37: Coding of Technical Barriers......................................................................................122
Table 38: Coding of Organization Barriers.................................................................................123
Table 39: Coding of Market Barriers...........................................................................................123
Table 40: Coding of External Push............................................................................................. 124
Table 41: Coding of Internal Push.............................................................................................. 125
Table 42: Coding of AEC industry readiness and organizations capability.................................125
Table 43: Project budget............................................................................................................ 134
Table 44: respondents Position in their Company......................................................................135
Table 45: respondents’ Education Level...............................................................................................136
Table 46: respondents’ years of experience........................................................................................136
Table 47: Models Validation Reliability.......................................................................................137
Table 48: Correlations................................................................................................................ 137
Table 49: independent variables impact the BIM implementation in KSA..................................140
Table 50: Coding of variables impact BIM implementation.........................................................141

vi
 List of Figures

Figure 1: Construction & non-farm labor productivity index (McGraw-Hill, 2012).........................17

Figure 2: Fragmented nature of the construction industry (Hore, 2006).......................................18
Figure 3: the forecasted Value of different types of projects for the period from 2014 to 2020 in
the Middle East countries (Deloitte, 2014)....................................................................................19
Figure 4: What is BIM? (Abas, 2016)...........................................................................................23
Figure 5: The value of BIM for the design process (Almutiri, 2016).............................................24
Figure 6: The difference between BIM and traditional method of sharing data (Duell, et al., 2013)
.................................................................................................................................................... 25
Figure 7: BIM Deliverables (Abas, 2016)......................................................................................27
Figure 8: BIM nD Process and Technology (Almutiri, 2016).........................................................27
Figure 9: BIM Dimensions applications (BIMtalk, 2012)...............................................................29
Figure 10: BIM maturity levels in the UK (BIS, 2011)...................................................................31
Figure 11: Point of Adoption model (Succar & Kassem, 2015)....................................................31
Figure 12: Diffusion Areas Model (Succar & Kassem, 2015).......................................................32
Figure 13: Communication, collaboration, and Visualization with BIM model (Jordani, 2008).....32
Figure 14: Develop an engaged team (Spehar, 2016).................................................................33
Figure 15: Tasks assignment (Spehar, 2016)...............................................................................33
Figure 16: BIM execution plan (Spehar, 2016).............................................................................34
Figure 17: BIM applications (Bim Dimension, 2013)....................................................................35
Figure 18: Use of 4D BIM for optimizing construction site logistics at HOAR Construction
Company (Sattineni & Macdonald, 2014).....................................................................................37
Figure 19: BIM applications through project lifecycle (Deshmukh, 2016).....................................38
Figure 20: the construction companies in ten developed countries have highly adopted BIM
within their system (McGrawHillConstruction, 2014)....................................................................42
Figure 21: BIM tools suggested by PWD (Latiffi, et al., 2013)......................................................43
Figure 22: BIM Corporate Support Team Ladder (Joseph, 2011)................................................45
Figure 23: People in change management (Abas, 2016).............................................................58
Figure 24: Overcoming Resistance to change (Riley, 2015)........................................................58
Figure 25: BIM Users Acceptance Model (Wang, et al., 2013)....................................................66
Figure 26: Research Methodology flow chart...............................................................................72
Figure 27: Respondents knowledge about BIM............................................................................75
Figure 28: Responses’ Organization type....................................................................................76
Figure 29: project budget............................................................................................................. 77
Figure 30: Respondents Position................................................................................................. 77
Figure 31: Respondents Role....................................................................................................... 78
Figure 32: Respondents Education Level.....................................................................................78
Figure 33: Respondents years of experience...............................................................................79
Figure 34: Responses' projects located in KSA...........................................................................79
Figure 35: Awareness about BIM................................................................................................. 80
Figure 36: BIM maturity levels...................................................................................................... 82
Figure 37: The current implementing Dimension of BIM in respondents’ projects..........................82
Figure 38: The future of BIM........................................................................................................ 83
Figure 39: Benefits of BIM from Client perspective......................................................................83
Figure 40: Benefits of BIM from Designer perspective.................................................................85
Figure 41: Benefits of BIM from Contractor perspective...............................................................87
Figure 42: Benefits of BIM to all participants (shared between client, designer and contractor). .93
Figure 43: Perceived benefits of BIM........................................................................................... 94
Figure 44: Personal Barriers........................................................................................................ 96
Figure 45: BIM Process Barriers.................................................................................................. 97
Figure 46: Business Barriers........................................................................................................ 99
Figure 47: Technical Barriers..................................................................................................... 101
Figure 48: Organization Barriers................................................................................................ 103
vii
Figure 49: Market Barriers.......................................................................................................... 105
Figure 50: The barriers to implementing BIM in KSA.................................................................107
Figure 51: External Push for Implementing BIM in KSA.............................................................111
Figure 52: Internal Push for Implementing BIM in KSA..............................................................115
Figure 53: Key Factors influence the implementation of BIM.....................................................116
Figure 54: Factors influence the BIM implementation.................................................................116
Figure 55: Implementation of BIM in the UAE AEC industry Model (Omar, 2015).....................126
Figure 56: Conceptual Model for implementing BIM in KSA.......................................................127
Figure 57: Raising awareness conceptual model.......................................................................127
Figure 58: Perceived benefits of BIM conceptual model............................................................129
Figure 59: Identified the Barriers conceptual model...................................................................130
Figure 60: Main Factors Influencing the Adoption of BIM conceptual model..............................130
Figure 61: Organizations capability conceptual model...............................................................131
Figure 62: Organization Sector................................................................................................... 133
Figure 63: organization size....................................................................................................... 134
Figure 64: Project budget........................................................................................................... 135
Figure 65: respondents Position in their Company.........................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 66: independent variables impact the BIM implementation in KSA.................................139
Figure 67: Suggested Methodology for implementing BIM in KSA.............................................141
Figure 68: Final Methodology for implementing BIM..................................................................151

viii
 Dedication

“And say, oh my Lord increase my knowledge”

I dedicate this dissertation

To my Mother, “Eman Abo EL fadl”

,
To my Father, “Ibrahim El hendawi”

“Our Lord, have mercy on our parents, even as they had mercy on us,
while we were little!”

To my wife “Fatma Motawee”

And

To my daughters “Farida and Alia Ashraf Nasr”

Ashraf Nasr Elhendawi

ix
Acknowledgment

In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful and the Most Gracious, I give praise and
thanks to Him for supporting me with the strength to complete this research and for
providing me the knowledgeable and caring individuals during the study process.

I would like to express my deepest appreciation and gratitude to the research

supervisors, Dr. Andrew Smith and Prof. Dr. Emad Elbeltagi , for their
encouragement, guidance, great feedbacks, and support from the initial to the final
level. They enabled me to develop an understanding of the subject and carry out the
research.

My heartfelt appreciation also goes out to my wife for being very supportive, caring
and well understanding, family and friends for their continued support and
standing by me through all this time.

Dr. Mosbeh Kaloop, Eng. Engy Fouda, Dr. Ibrahim Salama, Dr. Waleed
Mahfouz, Dr. Mohamed Elhoseny, Dr. Hany Omar, and Eng. Mohamed
Elsaadany for their feedback.

Also, I like to thank Eng. Ibrahim Nasr for his support and facilitating many
interviews with highly appreciated BIM professionals.

Saudi Council of Engineers for their support and publishing the questionnaires.

And finally to all the participants who took time from their busy days to complete
the online questionnaire. Also, I would like to thank all the interviewees who
provided their knowledge which in turn help to develop and validate the models
and the suggested methodology.

x
List of Abbreviations

AEC: Architecture, Engineering, and Construction

AIA: American Institute of Architects
BIM: Building Information Modeling
BREEAM: Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method
CRC: The Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation
CAD: Computer Assisted Design/Computer Aided Drafting
DM: Dubai Municipality
FM: Facility Management
GDP: Gross Domestic Products
IPR: Intellectual Property
Rights IFC: Industry Foundation
Class
ICT: Information and Communication Technology
IFC: Industry Foundation Classes
Imp: Impact
IAI: International Alliance for Interoperability
IPD: Integrated Project Delivery
JIT: Just In Time
KSA: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
KPI: Key Performance Indicator(s)
LEED: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
MENA: Middle East and North Africa
M: Mean
MEP: Mechanical, Electrical, and
Plumbing n-D: number-Dimensions
NBIMS: National Building Information Modeling Standards
O&M: Operation and Maintenance
PPP: Public-Private Partnership
PWA: Public Work Authorities
Prob: Probability
RFID: Radio Frequency Identification
ROI: Return on Investment
SD: Standard Deviation
VDC Virtual Design and Construction
2D: Two dimensions: x, y
3D: Three dimensions: x, y, and z
4D: Three Dimensions plus Time Information
5D: Four Dimensions plus Cost Information

List of Symbols
%......................Percent

xi
 Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Introduction

The AEC industry is considered the backbone of the economy for nations
(Eastman, 1975). Consequently, the AEC industry impacts severely the nations’
growth (Adams, 2004; Giang & Pheng, 2011).

For decades, the AEC industry has been suffering from a plethora of problems
and stay lagging behind other industries. Clients’ requirements are not achieved,
usually, projects are delivered beyond schedule, over budget with low quality
(Latham, 1994; Egan, 1998). AEC suffering less productivity, poor efficiency,
ineffective performance, low support to sustainability (Azhar, et al., 2015),
insufficient environment protection, poor working conditions and inefficient safety
management (Latiffi, et al., 2013).

Recently, the construction industry has become more complex to be managed.

This is due to technical complexity, various data to be managed, supply chain
problems, contractual provision (Hyari, 2005), and demand to a smart and green
building (Marzouk, et al., 2014).

Last century witnessed increasing of the population worldwide, accordingly,

infrastructure, environmental, residential, commercial, industrial and health‐care
projects are crucially required. Therefore, the traditional methods fail to respond
to these needs and project objectives tend to fail (Alshehri, 2013). The
convention construction methods cause losing data, misunderstanding, and
slippage in projects durations and budgets (Azhar, et al., 2015). So, to achieve
projects’ objectives (i.e. time, cost, quality, client satisfaction, sustainability, etc.),
the collaboration between all projects stockholders should be enhanced (Krygiel
& Nies, 2008; Grilo & Jardim-Goncalves, 2010; Latiffi, et al., 2013). Many
researchers investigated feasible solutions of the aforementioned (Latham,
1994; Egan, 1998).

Latham (1994) concluded that, due to the lack of communication and poor
collaboration between the AEC industries key players, accordingly, the
innovative solutions cannot be adopted. in the last decade, AEC industry players
have been clinging to the old ways of working, consequently, that resulted in less
responsive to new technologies (National Research Council (US), 1988; Dulaimi,
et al., 2002).

Thus, all parties must integrate with each other to work collaboratively to adopt a
creative and innovative solution and rethinks to abandon the old methods that
are no longer the best ways and Keep up with the latest technologies. Moreover,
this will help achieve the projects’ aims and objectives in order to meet the client

12
and user satisfaction (Love, et al., 2013; Jernigan, 2014).

13
Several researchers introduce BIM as a valuable tool to enhance the
communication and collaboration between the AEC industries key players
(McGrawHillConstruction ،2014 ‫؛‬Gerges, M, et al. ،2017 ‫؛‬Matarneh & Hamed ،
2017).

Roots of BIM back to the parametric modeling produced in the USA in the 1970s
and the parametric modeling conducted in Europe in 1980s, however, the AEC
industry started to use BIM in its projects on 2000s. Since then many companies
and governments all over the world have been trying to find ways to adapt and
reap BIM benefits (Eastman, et al., 2011).

Developed countries have recognized the benefits of BIM and considered BIM
as the AEC’s future language that all the AEC organizations worldwide have to
implement. This is evident from the rapid growth of BIM and mandates being
issued in several countries such as the UK, where government planned on 2011
to mandate BIM in its AEC industry by 2016, similarly USA, and Europe (Cabinet
Office and The Rt Hon Lord Maude of Horsham, 2012; Eadie, et al., 2013).
However, developing countries are still in the early stages to explore BIM and try
to find appropriate practical strategies for adoption (Chan, 2014).

1.2 Research motivations

Research motivation can be summarized as searching for solving some of the

problems facing the AEC industry in KSA through applying BIM. Furthermore, as
a technology expert, Stewart Brand mentioned that “Once a new technology rolls
over you, if you are not part of the steamroller, you are part of the road” (Brand,
1987). As such, KSA must keep up with the new technology.

Personal motivation is exploiting the new technology which achieved impressive

results in the same field in other countries and to develop my skills and keep up
with the latest technology.

1.3 The Problem statement

The AEC industry is facing myriads of functional gaps among its parties. This
starts with the client’s early perception passing to predesign and the design
stages, construction, Operation, and Maintenance (O&M) until the demolishing of
the building.

Researchers and management professionals tried to bridge the recognized gaps

of the AEC industry such as teamwork fragmentations, ineffective coordination,
poor communications, buildings low performance, energy overconsumption,
unsustainable buildings (Latham, 1994; Egan, 1998). In addition to design errors
and clashes, project overrun, low productivity, low building quality, the poor
satisfaction of stakeholders /client/users and shortage or unauthenticated data

14
for

15
Facility Management (FM) during maintenance stage (Eastman, et al., 2008;
Arayici, et al., 2012).

Boom in the KSA applied tremendous pressures on its AEC industry. Therefore,
there is an urgent need to adopt the latest technologies and management
strategies to eradicate the recognised problems and to improve the performance
of the AEC industry (Alhumayn, et al., 2017). In addition to responding to the
increasing demands for smart buildings and government’s concerns of the
continuous developments.

The AEC industry in many developing countries still facing lack of attention from
the decision makers concerning the implementation of BIM. Projects’ parties in
KSA think that BIM benefits are not clear because of the limited researching on
BIM in KSA (Almutiri, 2016).

1.4 Aim and Objectives

This dissertation aims to find a methodology to implement BIM in KSA trying to

solve the current KSA AEC industry projects salient issues to improve the
performance of the projects and reap the benefits from BIM. To achieve this aim,
the following objectives are identified:

1. Explore the level of awareness about BIM in the KSA AEC industry and
Propose solutions to raise awareness about BIM in the KSA AEC industry.
2. Investigate the perceived benefits of BIM in the KSA AEC industry.
3. Determine the barriers deterring BIM implementation in the KSA AEC
industry.
4. Propose solutions to overcome the barriers that diminishing BIM
implementation.
5. Explore the main driving forces and the external pressures pushing the
implementation of BIM in the KSA AEC industry.
6. Identify the main internal forces influencing BIM implementation in KSA
AEC industry.
7. Investigate the AEC industry readiness, and the organization's capabilities
to implement BIM.
8. Propose a solution to KSA government to enable the mandate of BIM.

16
1.5 Dissertation Questions

The research questions addressed in the study were shaped by the gaps
identified in the extant literature and can be broadly categorised as follows:

Q1: What is the level of awareness about BIM in KSA AEC industry?
Q2: How can the awareness about BIM be raised in KSA AEC
industry?
Q3: What are the perceptions of the KSA AEC industry professionals for the
benefits of BIM?
Q4: What are the main barriers hinder the BIM implementation in KSA AEC
industry?
Q5: How can the project participants overcome the main barriers that block the
BIM implementation?
Q6: What are the main driving forces and the main external pressures pushing
the implementation of BIM in the KSA AEC industry?
Q7: What are the main internal pushes to facilitate the implementation of BIM in
the KSA AEC industry?
Q8: What is the AEC industry readiness, and the organization's capabilities to
implement BIM?
1.6 Scope of research

The scope of this research limited to exploring and investigating the awareness
about BIM in KSA AEC industry, benefits that gained from implementing BIM,
barriers that hinder the BIM implementation, the main factors expediting the BIM
implementation and the readiness of the AEC industry organizations to
implement BIM.

1.7 Research methodology

The research methodology consists of three phases:

First phase: an extensive literature review to build a broad understanding to

cover the stipulated research scope.

Second phase: questionnaire survey to collect the BIM user and non-user
perceptions about each step that produces the suggested methodology to
implement BIM in KSA.

Third phase: questionnaire survey and structured interviews to validate the

proposed methodology to implement BIM in KSA AEC industry projects from
only BIM user’s perspectives. The quantitative data (from the two
questionnaires) analyse by SPSS 23 software, and a qualitative one (some from
developed models questionnaire and the other from the interviews) analyse by
NVivo 10.
17
1.8 Key findings and Contributions

This study is the first research to provide a novel contribution to investigate the
key factors influencing and expediting the BIM implementation in KSA AEC
industry and provide a suggested methodology for implementing BIM in KSA.

1.9 Structure of the research

The study was divided into six chapters followed by appendices. Chapter one
includes an introduction, the problem statement, aim and objectives, research
motivation, the scope of research, research methodology, key findings and
contributions, and structure of research. Chapter two encompasses literature
review of previous studies in BIM. Chapter three describes research
methodology and data collection. Chapter four includes the results and its
analysis. Chapter five describes proposed model for BIM implementation and its
validation. Finally, chapter six provides conclusion and recommendations,
summarising results and main findings, research limitations, and
recommendations for further researches.

18
 Chapter 2: Literature Review
2.1 Overview

For decades the AEC industry has been suffering from its inefficiency, poor
productivity and low performance (Egan, 1998; Leeds, 2016). (McGraw-Hill,
2012) Has compared the productivity between the construction industry and the
non- farm industries from1964 till 2004 in the USA. Figure (1), illustrates the
discrepancy between the AEC and the non-farm labor productivity.

Figure 1: Construction & non-farm labor productivity index (McGraw-Hill, 2012)

Therefore, there is a crucial need to steer the AEC industry towards a real
paradigm shift to increase the efficiency, productivity, enhance money value,
improve quality, and promote the sustainability (Latham, 1994; Egan, 1998;
Baiden & Price, 2011; Baiden, et al., 2006).

The current conventional practices in the AEC industry usually create different
interests among the project parties. On one hand, governments and clients are
usually concerned about quality improvement with reducing construction time,
cost, and increasing the quality. However, contractors and architects are
interested in business improvements to increase their profits, promote their

19
competitive advantages and meeting client satisfaction to get sustained in the
rival markets (Azhar, 2011).

The nature of the construction industry is different from other industries, such as
the manufacturing, the temporary nature, and uniqueness of construction
projects is reflected in one-off nature for locations, designs solutions and project
teams (Hore, 2006). Accordingly, poor management within AEC industry leads to
a fragmented communication, as shown in Figure (2).

Figure 2: Fragmented nature of the construction industry (Hore, 2006)

Traditionally, the AEC industry projects became more complex to manage,

because of its fragmented nature and its resistance to change (Latham, 1994;
Egan, 1998; Williams, 2002; Alshawi & Ingirige, 2002; Hardin, 2009; Love, et al.,
2013). Additionally, (Ofori, 2000) claimed that the main Challenges of AEC
industry in developing countries include construction industry development,
globalization, culture, the environment.

Enhancing the AEC industry was the prominent concern for various
governments, entities, and academics (Almualim & Gilder, 2010). Many
researchers and professionals have the consensus that the fragmented and
conservative nature of the AEC industry hampered expedite responses to
innovative technologies and minified the chances for improvements (Latham,
1994; Egan, 1998; Aouad & Sun, 1999; Dulaimi, et al., 2002; Carmona & Irwin,
2007; Barrett, 2008; Hardin, 2009; Baiden & Price, 2011).

Many researchers suggested improving the construction industry through

continuous improvements and raising the capacity of people (the team),
20
technology and processes (Latham, 1994; Egan, 1998; Hardin, 2009; Love, et
al., 2013). However, (McKenna, 2006) claimed that people are the most critical
factor for any successful improvement in the industry because people are the
decision makers and highly influence the other two areas i.e. the technology and
the processes.

Currently, BIM proves its competency to improve AEC industry performance and
enhance the coordination and collaboration between various project parties. BIM
is considered a revolutionary technology and process management, proposed as
the potential solution for the current issues in the AEC industry (Azhar, et al.,
2008; Hardin, 2009; Liu, et al., 2010; Arayici, et al., 2011; Azhar, et al., 2011;
Azhar, 2011; Azhar, et al., 2015; Bryde, et al., 2013; Love, et al., 2013; Love, et
al., 2014).

2.1.1 AEC Industry in KSA.

In the last decade, there has been a significant growth within the Saudi Arabian
construction sector which appears to be the second economic boom (Alhowaish,
2015; Banawi, 2017). KSA is one of the biggest and leading countries in the
Middle East (ME) ahead of Turkey, Iran and neighboring Gulf countries. The
construction sector is ranked second after oil in the Kingdom's economy and
contributes approximately 8% of total Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (The
Canadian Trade Commissioner Service, 2014; Deloitte, 2014). The value of its
projects is more than one trillion US Dollars in residential, healthcare, education,
and transportation (Deloitte, 2014). The recent 2030 vision plan that announced
by KSA government, in 2016, forced all AEC sectors to be creative, efficient, and
environmentally responsible.

Figure 3: the forecasted Value of different types of projects for the period
from 2014 to 2020 in the Middle East countries (Deloitte, 2014)

As shown in Figure (3), Saudi Arabia’s market share in construction industry

21
consider as the highest with 43% within Gulf Countries Council (GCC) (Deloitte,

22
2015). According to report published by Deloitte in 2013, new contracts awarded
in 2012 were worth about $24bn and are expected to go up to $52bn in 2015,
which represents about 10% of Saudi Arabia’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
According to market research, 75% of waste in the KSA comes from
construction, and buildings are responsible for 40% of carbon emissions
(Initiative, 2009). Therefore, a slight improvement in this sector could have a
considerable impact on capital expenditure and environment (Banawi, 2017).

The housing sector, in particular, is likely to grow, as SA population is rising at a

rate of 2.5 % a year. Construction will also play a large role in the SA’s massive
industrial expansion through the National Industrial Cluster Development
Program as well as in the completion of six economic cities (COUNCIL,
U.S.A.B., 2011).

Sample of mega projects in KSA are The Kingdom Tower project in Jeddah, The
King Abdullah City for Atomic and Renewable Energy (KACARE) in Riyadh, The
Saudi Green Building Council in Riyadh, Saudi Public Pension Agency or PPA,
Jeddah Development and Urban Regeneration Company (JDURC), Arriyadh
Development Authority (ADA) in Riyadh and Colleges of Excellence (CoE) in
Saudi Arabia (The Canadian Trade Commissioner Service, 2014). Table (1) lists
a number of mega projects under execution in KSA.

Table 1: Mega projects under execution in Saudi Arabia (MEED Projects)

Estimated value
Project Client
($m)
King Abdullah Economic City Emaar, The Economic City 93,000
Saudi housing program Housing Ministry 70,000
Sudair Industrial City Saudi Industrial Property Authority (MODON) 40,000
Saudi Arabian General Investment Authority
Jizan Economic City 40,000
(SAGIA)
Riyadh Metro Arriyadh Development Authority 22,480
Sadara chemical complex,
Sadara Chemical Company 20,000
Jubail
Kingdom City Kingdom Holding 20,000
Haramain high-speed rail
Saudi Railways Organization 13,743
network
Security compounds Interior Ministry 13,000
Yanbu Aramco Sinopec
Yanbu Aramco Sinopec Refining Company 10,000
refinery
Maaden/Alcoa aluminium
Saudi Arabian Mining Company (Maaden) 9,900
complex
Manifa Arabian heavy crude
Saudi Aramco 9,280
program
King Abdulaziz International
General Authority of Civil Aviation 8,172
Airport
Knowledge Economic City in
Knowledge Economic City Company 8,000
Medina

23
 Sipchem complex phase 3, Saudi International Petrochemical
7,860
Jubail Company(Sipchem)
Waad al-Shamal Phosphate Mosaic/Saudi Basic Industries Corporation
7,225
City) (SABIC
King Abdullah Financial
Rayadah Investment Company 7,000
District
Rabigh Refining and Petrochemical Company
PetroRabigh phase 2 7,000
(PetroRabigh)
Wasit Gas Development Saudi Aramco 5,000
Abdul Latif Jameel Real Estate Investment
Jabal al-Kaaba 2,666
Company

Neum project according to KSA vision 2030 is a private zone that includes land
within the Egyptian and Jordanian borders. It will exceed $ 500 billion, sharing
between local and international investors. The largest part of the project is
located in the northwest of the KSA, covering an area of 26,500 km2, overlooking
the North and West on the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aqaba with a length of 468
km. (Alarabiya News, 2017).

2.1.2 Challenges for construction industry in KSA

As one of the world’s largest producers and exporters of oil, and a fast
expanding and diverse economy, KSA earns a global focus and how it is likely to
perform under the recent drastic falling of oil prices hitting $50 per barrel in
January 2015, the lowest since 2009. (Ventures Middle East, 2015) This has
caused many problems to the KSA government’s projects. The rapidly growing
population in KSA is tremendous applying pressures on existing infrastructure.

(Alsalim, 2013) claimed that KSA construction industry has been struggling from
ineffective management and low organizational performance. As a result of the
number of projects suffering from remarkable delays increased from 700 projects
in 2009 to 3000 projects in 2013. Statistical studies in KSA showed that during
the period between 1992 and 2009, 850 projects out of 1035 were experiencing
delays and cost overruns, where, 41% exceeded the cost and 82% exceeded
their delivery date (Al Riyadh newspaper, 2102). A large number of projects
being put on hold, because of errors in projects’ design, and ineffective
supervision of all the parties in the projects (Alsalim, 2013). One main reason
can be attributed to the lack of planning and design, this planning laxity is due to
the poor management and inability to foresee the project buildability (Althynian,
2010). (Alshehri, 2013) explored that disputes concerning construction
contracts, procurement, and design change orders are considered to be main
causes of project conflict in AEC projects in Saudi Arabia. (Abdul‐Hadi, et al.,
2005) identified many inefficiencies in the Saudi construction industry,
accordingly, he called for re-engineering the Saudi construction industry.

The KSA government has spent more money on their projects, sometime ten
times of the estimated cost (Alhowaish, 2015). In addition to construction sector
24
issues,

25
it has been stated that most of the local construction companies have a lack of
knowledge, management, and experience in the project lifecycle (Jannadi,
1997).

Reasons for construction industry failures in Saudi Arabia are summarized as,
bad judgment concerning project time and cost, lack of integration amongst
project stakeholders, lack of management experience, low profit margins, lack of
communication within companies, national downturns in the economy, poor
management for disaster and unexpected bad weather (Jannadi, 1997;
(Sobolewski, et al., 2016).

Construction projects are incorporating systems of digital sensors, intelligent

machines, mobile devices and new software applicants that can be increasingly
integrated with a central platform in a digitalized technology such as BIM. Hence,
the outlook is an almost 20% reduction in total life-cycle costs of a project, as
well as substantial improvements in completion time, quality, and safety
(Castagnino, et al., 2016).

Many executives, as well as research institutions, confirmed that the use of BIM
is of particular importance in the countries experiencing construction boom to
improve the construction performance (Eastman, et al., 2011). KSA deemed one
of those countries due to its huge number of projects. However, the number,
size, cost, and complexity of projects in KSA which have suffered from many
issues such as cost control, delays, lack of experts and discontinued projects are
worthy for motivating the Saudi Government and construction companies to
implement BIM (Almutiri, 2016).

2.2 Raising the BIM awareness

It is crucial for construction players to be aware of the importance of BIM in

construction projects. This is because BIM can be one of the conditions required
of a company to qualify for government and private projects (Latiffi, et al., 2013).

The following subsections enlighten the BIM definitions, comparing BIM against
traditional method, introduce BIM deliverables, BIM Dimensions, BIM maturity,
BIM applications, BIM status globally and future trends and what the lesson learn
from the advanced BIM users, BIM tools, roles and responsibilities of BIM users,
which organizations can use BIM and BIM SWOT analysis to raise the
awareness of BIM.

2.2.1 BIM definitions:

BIM has been defined in various ways due to the area of expertise or to serve
the definer’s aim (Aranda-Mena, et al., 2009; Abbasnejad & Moud, 2013;
Almutiri, 2016).

26
However, (Penttilä, 2006; Ernstrom, et al., 2006; Eastman, et al., 2008; Gerber,

27
et al., 2010; Sacks, et al., 2010; Azhar, 2011; Jung & Joo, 2011; Barlish &
Sullivan, 2012) defined BIM as a group of interacting policies, software,
processes and technologies, (Associated General Contractors of America
(AGC), 2005; Succar, 2009; Sacks, et al., 2010; Gu & London, 2010; Arayici &
Aouad, 2010; Azhar, et al., 2015) claimed that BIM focuses on applying
information technology (IT).

Whereas, (Hardin, 2009; Building SMART, 2010; Eastman, et al., 2011; Omar,
2015) defined BIM as a process that digitally manages the design, construction,
and O&M, (Barlish & Sullivan, 2012; Azhar, et al., 2015). (Azhar, 2011) Defined
BIM as a virtual process that involves all aspects, disciplines, and systems of a
facility within a single model that is shared with all stakeholders across the
project lifecycle. (Sabol, 2008) Defined BIM as a sophisticated software tool that
helps to record information and to assist with its components.

While, (NBIMS, 2007; Lee, 2008; Sebastian, 2011; BIM Industry Working Group,
2011; Chen & Qu, 2011; Teicholz, 2013; Nagalingam, et al., 2013; Sattineni &
Macdonald, 2014) emphasis that BIM is an integrated model in which process
and product information are combined, stored elaborated and interactively
distributed to all relevant building participants.

As stipulated in Figure 4 (Abas, 2016) summarized the BIM as new technology,

intelligent design information in 3D model-based process can demonstrate the
entire building lifecycle that provides coordination source of structured
information and presentation of the actual parts and places.

Figure 4: What is BIM? (Abas, 2016)

28
2.2.2 Comparison between the traditional method process and the
main concept of the BIM process:

The transition from the traditional method to the BIM concept requires dramatic
changes in many disciplines such as software and hardware upgrade, changes
in processes, and changing the organisational culture to reap BIM benefits.
Figure (5), illustrates the comparison between the conventional method process
and the main concept of the BIM process through different project phases. In the
traditional methods, the considerable impact occurs in the construction
documentation phases which in turn cause several issues to arise, delaying the
project delivery and increasing the overall project cost. However, BIM process
solves these issues at an early stage (Almutiri, 2016).

Figure 5: The value of BIM for the design process (Almutiri, 2016)
(Almutiri, 2016) claimed that the traditional methods suffer from many issues
such as lack of project understanding, poor communication and data loss,
problems in sharing information and poor collaboration between team members.
(Duell, et al., 2013) illustrated in Figure (6) the difference between the BIM and
traditional methods in sharing data.

29
 Figure 6: The difference between BIM and traditional method of sharing data
(Duell, et al., 2013)

While the traditional 2D CAD program relies on sharing data in the form of
paper- based practices, BIM shares the data in 3D environmental (Almutiri,
2016).Computer Aided Design (CAD) is no longer just about drafting. According
to (LONG, et al., 2009) CAD is the greatest advancement in the construction
industry in recent decades. Many BIM based-software solutions allow you to
explore and evaluate project’s constructability before it’s built, improve cost
reliability, visualise construction processes through 4D simulation and clash
detection, increase coordination between stakeholders throughout the design
and construction process, and better predict, manage and communicate project
outcomes (Autodesk Design Academy, 2017).

The AEC traditional method that is using 2D CAD is a linear process, where the
architect finishes the conceptual design then other disciplines finished the final
design after collecting the required approvals from different stakeholders. The
main constructor receives this final design to starts the construction and when
the construction is completed, and the constructor has handed over the as-built
to the client who in turn should deliver it to FM team. In this liner process, the
next stage cannot commence unless the previous is finished, which requires
close following up to deliver the task from one party to another. These linear
processes hinder the collaboration between various project teams and require
the client to be the project champion to pursue the successful delivery of each
process (Love, et al., 2014), however, BIM provides cycle and overlap process.

In the conventional method, most clashes are determined at construction stage.

However, BIM identifies clashes among various designs, early in the conceptual
design phase, and before construction gets started that save time and money
besides promoting the money value and efficiency (Abbasnejad & Moud, 2013).

30
Therefore, there is a crucial need to change to adopt a technology that can
overcome all the aforementioned weaknesses during the design stages. That is
directly steering to the implementation of BIM, to produce an error-free design.
The BIM model is replete with electronic information that is ready to be
transferred between the project players in an open platform. Project teams such
as architects, designers (structural and MEP), sustainable analysts, contractors,
and suppliers can extract and reuse the data and modify it to form the BIM model
(Porwal & Hewage, 2013; New Zealand, B.I.M, 2014).

2.2.3 BIM deliverables:

(Gerges, M, et al., 2017) summarized BIM functions and duties as; (1) Models
analysis for coordination, safety, clash detection and environmental concerns
(energy, day lighting etc.); (2) Training others on BIM usage (colleagues,
subordinates, subcontractors, owners etc.); (3) Extracting estimates from BIM
models; (4) Creating 2D plans using CAD-Drafting; (5) Creating 4D schedule
sequencing; (6) Creating site logistics plans and/or models; (7) Assisting in
making decisions about new hardware, software or processes; (8) Testing new
software;
(9) creating marketing materials related to BIM (includes visuals, animations,
written response to RFPs etc.); (10) Setting up jobsites with BIM; (11) prepare
facilities management ready model.

(Abas, 2016) concluded that BIM deliverables are creating 3D modeling, clash
analysis and detection, construction simulation, as built model and FM
management (Figure 7).

(NBS, 2016) concluded the Key BIM deliverables for Level 2 that a contractor
would be expected to produce include compliance with Employers Information
Requirements (EIR), BIM Execution Plan (BEP), Common Data Environment
(CDE), BS (PAS) 1192 - parts 1 to 5, classification (through Uniclass 2015),
digital plan of work (describing Level of Detail – LoD / CIC Work Stages),
intelligent 3D libraries, intelligent 3D models, 3D based collaboration, 3D digital
survey, asset performance optimization and Construction Operations Building
Information Exchange (COBie). Furthermore, additional deliverables that are not
as part of BIM Level 2 but will become increasingly included contractor's
information requirements, clash prevention, 3D model validation, 3D model take-
off, 3D model based meetings and 4D/ 5D modeling.

31
 Figure 7: BIM Deliverables (Abas, 2016)
2.2.4 BIM Dimensions:
BIM is not just defined as a 3D model; it also includes the capability of
transmitting plus reusing of the information embedded in it (Almutiri, 2016).

Adding more 'dimensions' of data to the information models (3D) enhance clear
understanding of the construction phase: the durations concerns 4D model, cost
5D, sustainability 6D, and Operation and maintenance/Facility Management
(FM) 7D model. Adding extra information can make more timely decisions and,
ultimately, better buildings (McPartland, 2017). Until now researchers and
professionals ensure that BIM provides 7D, as illustrated in Figure (8), as
following:

Figure 8: BIM nD Process and Technology (Almutiri, 2016)

 3D (The shared information model):

It is BIM model visualization and simulation tool enables the team to visualize the
building’s details in physical environment which include graphical and non-
32
 graphical information and sharing this information in a Common Data
Environment (CDE) (Hardin, 2009; Grilo & Jardim-Goncalves, 2010; Sebastian,
2011; Azhar, 2011; Abbasnejad & Moud, 2013; Azhar, et al., 2015; McPartland,
2017).

 4D (Construction sequencing):

It is a BIM model scheduling data tool with the dimension of time sequencing
which enables the team to visually check the progress of the project and identify
the critical activities resulting in enhancing enhance response appropriately to
any risk (Dawood & Sikka, 2008; Kymmell, 2008; Eastman, et al., 2011;
Abbasnejad & Moud, 2013; McPartland, 2017).

 5D (Cost):

It is BIM model tool, enables the team to extract accurate cost information and
provide a take-off of material quantities (Eastman, et al., 2011; Bryde, et al.,
2013; Khosrowshahi & Arayici, 2012; Abbasnejad & Moud, 2013; McPartland,
2017).

 6D BIM (Project lifecycle information (sustainability):

6D-BIM is a virtual model tool for the logistics of the construction site, to visualize
the project sequential activities to prepare the safety analyses and safety plans.
Additionally, it enables selection of the locations for material procurements,
machinery and equipment suitable for the site (Hardin, 2009; Eastman, et al., 2011;
Abbasnejad & Moud, 2013; McPartland, 2017).

 7D facility management:
BIM 7D is used in processing object management in the stage of its operation.
7D allows extracting and storing data assets, such as the state of the
object/component, technical specifications, required maintenance schedule and
technical reviews, manuals or applicable warranty period. Such an approach to
the facility management process not only improves the whole process but also
improves the quality of services (Bim Estimate, 2016)

Each tool of the abovementioned used in one or more of BIM applications as

illustrated in Figure (9).

33
 Figure 9: BIM Dimensions applications (BIMtalk, 2012)
2.2.5 BIM Maturity:

BIM has been categorized into various levels and while continuing increasing
BIM adoption and implementation the movement from one level to another is
referred to as 'BIM Maturity'. (Barnes & Davies, 2014)

BIM maturity levels can be summarized as follows:

Level 0: unmanaged CAD in 2D, with paper or electronic data exchange. Thus,
this is not BIM and uses 2D CAD files for design and production information
(Brewer, et al., 2012; Porwal & Hewage, 2013; Eadie, et al., 2013; Abbasnejad &
Moud, 2013; Barnes & Davies, 2014). This level produces 25% increased cost
through waste and rework (Barnes & Davies, 2014)

Level 1: Managed CAD in 2D or 3D with a collaboration tool providing common

data environment. This level can be considered the first step to true BIM this
may include 2D information and 3D information such as visualizations or concept
development models. It can be described as 'Lonely BIM' as models are not
shared between project team members (Brewer, et al., 2012; Porwal & Hewage,
2013; Eadie, et al., 2013; Abbasnejad & Moud, 2013; Barnes & Davies, 2014)

Level 2 (collaborative BIM environment): Managed 3D via implementation of

BIM and deployment of BIM tools such as 3D, 4D, and 5D. This level completed
in 2016 in the UK and any organization not complying with the level 2
requirements, the UK government decided not to include them in forthcoming
government contracts. (Brewer, et al., 2012; Porwal & Hewage, 2013; Eadie, et
al., 2013; Abbasnejad & Moud, 2013; Barnes & Davies, 2014).(Barnes & Davies,
2014) argued that this level provides waste reduction by 50%
34
Level 3: Full open process and data integration using all BIM tools and
exploiting all BIM benefits, here BIM is considered to be fully integrated with the
entire construction process. This level is empowered by “web services”, is
usually compliant with emerging Industry Foundation Class (IFC) standards, and
BIM will utilize 4D construction sequencing, 5D cost information and 6D project
lifecycle management information. (Brewer, et al., 2012; Porwal & Hewage,
2013; Eadie, et al., 2013; Abbasnejad & Moud, 2013; Barnes & Davies, 2014).
(Barnes & Davies, 2014) argued that this level provides increasing profit by 2%
through a collaborative process.

Level 4: introduces the concepts of improved social outcomes and wellbeing

(Barnes & Davies, 2014; SINGHAL, 2017).

Currently, in developing countries majority of BIM usage is at level 0 or level 1

and bridge between level 1 and 3 is getting wider (Gerges, M, et al., 2017). The
AEC industry in a crucial need to upgrade to Level 2 to see the significant
advantages of BIM and get out of 'Lonely BIM' (SINGHAL, 2017). In the UK, the
Department of Business Innovations and Skills (BIS) has a significant effort in
developing their BIM roadmap as illustrated in Figure (10). Their roadmap has
helped to classify the maturity level of each UK companies and outline what they
need to reach the government aim by 2016 and think about BIM future. Most of
the UK construction companies are in level 1 and the best in class are
experiencing significant benefits in level 2 (Porwal & Hewage, 2013).

BIM implementation is introduced as a three-phased approach separating as

shown in Figure (11): an organization’s readiness to adopt (pre-implementation
status); capability to perform (the willful implementation of BIM tools, workflows
and protocols); and its performance maturity (post-implementation) (Succar &
Kassem, 2015).

BIM maturity is the gradual and continual improvement in quality, repeatability,

and predictability within available capabilities. BIM maturity is expressed as
maturity levels (or performance improvement milestones) that organizations,
teams and whole markets aspire to. There are five maturity levels: [a] Ad-hoc or
low maturity; [b] Defined or medium-low maturity; [c] Managed or medium
maturity;
[d] Integrated or medium-high maturity; and [e] Optimized or high maturity
(Succar, 2010).

35
 Figure 10: BIM maturity levels in the UK (BIS, 2011)

Figure 11: Point of Adoption model (Succar & Kassem, 2015)

Diffusion areas model, as shown in Figure (12), clarifies how BIM field types
(technology, process, and policy) interact with BIM capability stages (modeling,
collaboration and integration) to generate nine areas for targeted BIM diffusion
analysis and BIM diffusion planning.

36
 Figure 12: Diffusion Areas Model (Succar & Kassem, 2015)

2.2.6 How BIM works

The main essential duty of BIM is to have a central database for all the project
parties seeking an integrated process through the AEC project lifecycle with an
easy access enhancing making a significant decision, design and improving
facility management (Almutiri, 2016).

BIM incorporates a methodology based on the notion of collaboration between

stakeholders using ICT to exchange valuable information throughout the lifecycle
(Figure 13). Such collaboration is seen as the answer to the fragmentation that
exists within the building industry, which has caused various inefficiencies.
Although BIM is not the salvation of the construction industry, much effort has
gone into addressing those issues that have remained unattended for far too
long (Jordani, 2008).

Figure 13: Communication, collaboration, and Visualization with BIM model

(Jordani, 2008)

37
 (Spehar, 2016) suggested that there are four steps for managing BIM projects:

1- Develop an engaged team

To deliver a successful project, the project, design and BIM management teams
should be engaged as evidenced in Figure (14).

Figure 14: Develop an engaged team (Spehar, 2016)

2. Tasks assignment

Different tools were developed for managing various BIM task assignments from
building models to managing data and creating drawings as a figure (15)
illustrates.

Figure 15: Tasks assignment (Spehar, 2016)

38
3. Enhance Collaboration:

The project manager should encourage collaboration between both design and
project managers within the modelling team (Spehar, 2016).
4. The BIM execution plan:

A BIM execution plan (BEP) has to be a crucial part of the overall project plan to
act as a resource for all stakeholders and to help the project manager to handle
all changes in the process. Figure 16 explains that BEP requires inputs from all
project, design and BIM managers (Spehar, 2016).

Figure 16: BIM execution plan (Spehar, 2016)

2.2.7 BIM applications:
BIM was suggested as a tool that will support the pre-design phase (Ham, et al.,
2008). (Forbes & Ahmed, 2011) argued that BIM can be used for visualization
interference and collision detection, construction sequencing, and conflict, cost
estimating, fabrication/shop drawings, automated fabrication, code reviews, data
analysis, facilities management. Moreover, (Arayici, et al., 2012; Memon, et al.,
2014; Autodesk Design Academy, 2017) confirmed that BIM models used to
support construction planning, constructability and analysis, cost and quantity
feedback, construction techniques, fabrication, and facilities management.
enterprise resource planning (Charles, 2017), Virtual Reality (VR) (Advenser,
2016), facility maintenance (Selezan & Mao, 2016), project management
(Realcomm Staff Writer, 2011), Augmented Reality (AR) for interactive
architectural visualization (Wang, et al., 2014), construction Management
Education (Abbas, et al., 2016).
39
(Sacks, et al., 2010) provided a detailed description of the uses of BIM in
construction. This includes visualization of form, collaboration in design and
construction, Mechanical Electrical Plumbing (MEP), clash detection, and the
rapid generation and evaluation of construction drawings, while (Hannele, et al.,
2014) emphasized that the first use of BIM should be in the design and planning
phase of the construction project. During the planning phase, different
professional groups use BIM in architectural design, HPAC (heating, plumbing,
and air-conditioning), electricity planning and structural design. (Succar, 2009)
argued that the most “mature” application of BIM is seen to involve
collaboratively created, shared, and maintained models across the project
lifecycle. BIM can be implemented in various tendering routes in order to
improve the overall process (Elbeltagi & Dawood, 2011)(Bolpagni, 2013)
(Ciribini, et al., 2015). Many governments such as the UK, USA (Wong, et al.,
2009), and Australia (Building SMART, 2012) have set implementations
strategies for the use of BIM on construction projects. Figure (17), illustrates BIM
applications through project life cycle.

Figure 17: BIM applications (Bim Dimension, 2013)

 Clash detection:

It is a 3D visualization application that can detect any clashes or undesirable

interferences between the project elements, especially when there are several
inputs of BIM models from different design teams i.e. Architect, structural,
sustainable and MEP designers to be unified in a single model (Kunz & Gilligan,
2007; Sebastian, 2011; Eadie, et al., 2013; Omar, 2015; Saleh, 2015).

40
 Project planning and construction monitoring:

It is an application based on a 4D tool that accurately visualizes and simulates

the construction sequences. This also enables the client and contractor to
monitor the construction activities and automatically compare the actual progress
against the planned to find out where and why the delay occurs (Grilo & Jardim-
Goncalves, 2010; Azhar, 2011; Eastman, et al., 2011).

 Cost estimating:

It is an application depends on 5D BIM tool to estimate the cost in a very short

time with great reliable accuracy at any time of the project, to enable decision
makers to take the appropriate decisions on time (Sebastian, 2011; Jernigan,
2014; Love, et al., 2014; Harrison & Thurnell, 2014).

 Material take-off:

It is an application that depends on a 5D tool to determine the precise material

quantities (material take-off) and correlates placing orders for the materials with
the delivery dates based on site needs. The accuracy of the 5D take-off
estimates is highly reliable and can be conducted at any time of the project, this
application contributes to avoiding material waste and fosters lean construction
principle (Azhar, et al., 2015; Moreno, et al., 2013).

 Sustainability analysis:

BIM application tools such as 3D simulation and visualization are used to

determine and evaluate the building future performance with a reliable accuracy.
BIM simulation tool demonstrates the best orientation for the building to save the
energy based on the sun direction, sound levels, wind speed and direction, light
affection, spatial performance and the building envelope (Azhar, et al., 2015).In
addition to, the ability of BIM to compare and simulate the sustainability
measures in terms of internal energy performance such as MEP details. Different
options according to the specifications that are uploaded to BIM software, all
these comparisons are implemented in no time to select the best option that is
appropriate for the building throughout its life-cycle in terms of energy saving and
sustainable principles (Kymmell, 2008; Azhar, et al., 2015; Nawari, 2012).

 Data transfer to facility management:

3D model is a platform that is very rich with detailed information. This

information includes the infinitesimal details for each and every item in the
building with a unique barcode that carries a unique name, installation data, and
the required maintenance date including manufacturer and suppliers contact
details (Newton, 2004; Kymmell, 2008; Jordani, 2010; Eastman, et al., 2011;
Moreno, et al., 2013). (Sabol, 2008) reported that BIM was used to aid facility
management on the Sydney Opera House.

41
 Site logistics and safety management:

It is an application based on 6D BIM tool that visualizes the arrangements

required for the site logistics i.e. the best locations for cranes, store yards, and
site offices and so forth. In addition to its ability to visualize the project activities
to precisely evaluate the safety hazards to be ready for the appropriate
responses. 6D tool enables health and safety specialists to train the staff and
employees for the best practices based on the visualization and simulations of
the project activities offered by BIM model (Hardin, 2009; Zhang & Hu, 2011;
Eastman, et al., 2011; Sebastian, 2011; Barlish & Sullivan, 2012; Bhat & Gowda,
2013).figure (19) show how can BIM use in Site logistics.

 Build-in code and specifications:

BIM software models are developed to include the required codes, standards
and project specifications which can run automatic checking to verify the
compliance with the uploaded codes, standards and project specifications to
alert and notify any deviation in the drawings and submittals (Hardin, 2009;
Eastman, et al., 2011).

Figure 18: Use of 4D BIM for optimizing construction site logistics at HOAR
Construction Company (Sattineni & Macdonald, 2014)
(Kunz & Gilligan, 2007; Itech, 2017) concluded that BIM can be used in pre-
construction, construction, disaster management and life-cycle management.
Table (2), summarized the use of BIM through the project life cycle. Figure (19),
shows that BIM can be used in various project phases.

42
 Table 2: BIM applications in a construction project (Furneaux & Kivvits, 2008;
Latiffi, et al., 2013)
Phase Stage Uses of BIM
Existing conditions
- Enhances accuracy of existing conditions documentation
modeling
Planning - Identifies schedule sequencing or phasing issues
- Facilitates better communication and faster design decision.
Pre-construction

Design - Perform clash detection and clash analysis.

- Increases design effectiveness.
- Enables project manager and contractor to see construction
Scheduling work sequence, equipment, materials and track progress against
logistics and timelines established.
- Enables generation of takeoffs, counts, and measurements directly
Estimate
from a 3-Dimensional (3D) project model.
Site analysis - Decreases costs of utility demand and demolition.
- Enables demonstration of the construction process, including
construction Construction

access and exit roads, traffic flows, site materials and machinery.
Construction - Provides better tracking of cost control and cash flow.
- Enables tracking of work in real time, faster flow of resources and
better site management.
- Keeps track of built asset.
Operation / Facilities - Manages facilities proactively.
Post

management - Enables scheduled maintenance and provides a review of

maintenance history.

Figure 19: BIM applications through project lifecycle (Deshmukh, 2016)

2.2.8 Integration with BIM
In last two decades, BIM proved its competencies to integrate with various
concepts and new knowledge which resulted in enhancing its efficiency and
performance and provide new alternative solutions and outcomes. BIM can be
integrated with Computer-aided facility management (CAFM) (Service Works

43
Group, 2015), health and safety (Ganah & John, 2015). Some other suggested
integrations with BIM as following:

Integrated Project Delivery (IPD):

The implementation of BIM supports the concept of Integrated Project Delivery

(IPD) which is a novel project delivery approach to integrate people, systems,
business structures and practices into a collaborative process to reduce waste
(of time, resources, money) and optimise efficiency through all phases of the
project lifecycle (Glick & Guggemos, 2009).

Geography information system (GIS):

The integration of 3D BIM model with GIS can provide quick and accurate
identification of the construction, semantically rich models, and get the benefits
from both systems to help documenting and analyzing cultural heritage sites. (El
Meouche, et al., 2013; Baik, et al., 2015; Zlatanova, 2016).

Green Building:

Construction is a major consumer of nonrenewable resources. In addition, it is

responsible for a huge portion of waste production and CO2 emissions
(Bakhoum & Brown, 2011). Saudi Arabia Green Building Rating System
(SAGRS) would be integrated into a framework that is dedicated for selecting
optimum sustainable building materials that were developed, expanding the
features of BIM technology (Marzouk, et al., 2014). Resources limitations and
serious environmental impacts lead to increase the importance of adoption of
more sustainable lifestyle (Ljungberg, 2007). The expanded features of BIM
technology integrate with especially designed green building rating system for
Saudi Arabia (Marzouk, et al., 2014; Amor, et al., 214).

Lean construction:

(Brown, 2017; Zewein, 2017) argued that “Combining lean construction

thinking (in the shape of last planner approaches) and BIM on construction
projects can enhance big reductions on time, cost, waste and stress, and
promote profits, capability, staff wellbeing, and reputation”

Health and safety:

BIM can be used in worker safety training and education, design for safety,
safety planning (job hazard analysis and pre-task planning), accident
investigation, and facility and maintenance phase safety (Rajendran & Clarke,
2011; Alomari, et al., 2017; Mordue, et al., 2017).

44
2.2.9 BIM Status Globally and future trends

(Jung & Lee, 2015) brought light to BIM status on the level of the six continents
which are set forth below:

- North America comes at the first place ahead of other continents in each
approach.
- Oceania and Europe are ranked secondly, but get distinguished in the
design phase.
- Asia is identified on the same line with advanced continents in BIM
adoption despite being ranked the 5th in the engagement level.
- Middle East/Africa come the third in the BIM adoption, still stuck in the
beginner phase.
- At last, South America is the lowest.

Many developed countries such as (USA, Canada, UK, Germany France

Finland, Singapore, Norway, Denmark, South Korea Australia, Hong Kong,
Netherlands) mandated BIM in their public AEC industry projects motivated by its
benefits, while others adopted strategic plans for mandating BIM (Mihindu &
Arayici, 2008; Takim, et al., 2013; Zeiss, 2013; Lee, et al., 2014). However,
almost all developing countries did not mandate BIM yet, but they are on the
road too. In GCC region, in 2014, Dubai municipality Mandate BIM in their large
projects. BIM market is currently worth around $2.6bn (Construction Work team,
2014).

Countries of the advanced world have been preceding in BIM adoption rate
which serves experience level of users, North America has remarkable increase
from 2007 to 2012 steeply rising from 28% up to 71 %, also, South Korea and
Oceania are on the same path (McGrawHillConstruction, 2014).

UK has also achieved a steady increase in adoption from 31.0% in 2010 when
UK announced BIM requirements to 39% in 2012 (National Building
Specification, 2014) and 54.0% in 2013 then actually mandated BIM in public
sector in 2016 to level 2 (Porwal & Hewage, 2013). Onwards till the kingdom
become the current world leader in BIM adoption speed (The National BIM
Survey, 2014; McGrawHillConstruction, 2014). Although, Finland was ahead in
early researching and adopting BIM (Kiviniemi, 2015).

In South Asia, Singapore shows rapid adoption rate, since 1997 when the
country started promoting BIM, in 2011 the country issued a nationwide roadmap
for BIM implementation so that BIM started to be used for various aspects in
construction such as building plan approvals and fire safety certifications. From
2015 onwards, the government mandated the use of BIM in public sector
projects for new building projects over 5000 m2. While BIM has been globally
45
expanding in a colossal

46
speed, a significant difference in experience appeared among construction
companies according to various regional business benefits (Chan, 2014).

A wide concern has been paid from researchers to market-scale of BIM and
diffusion worldwide. Several studies covers multiple countries such as those for
US (Giligan & Kunz, 2007; Liu, et al., 2010), UK (Khosrowshahi & Arayici,
2012),Australia (Gu & London, 2010), China (Cao, et al., 2014), Finland
(Lehtinen, 2010), Iceland (Kjartansdóttir, 2011), India (Luthra, 2010), South
Africa (Froise & Shakantu, 2014), Sweden (Samuelson & Björk, 2013), Taiwan
(Mom, et al., 2011), and multiple markets (Smith, 2014; Panuwatwanich &
Peansupap, 2013; Wong, et al., 2010; Bin Zakaria, et al., 2013).

Several researchers made to cover Western Europe such as Germany, France,

Austria, Finland, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden revealed that a little over one-
third of the industry (36%) has adopted BIM by 2010 (Construction, M.H, 2010).

In some regions, BIM is getting established by contractors, for instance, Japan,

South Korea, and Austria/New Zealand represent the next tier of maturity. In
East Asia, for example, South Korea, a 65% BIM adoption rate in 2012 was
represented by contractors (Chan, 2014). Figure (20), demonstrated that the
countries adopted BIM lately show a slow limited spread of BIM (Mehran, 2016).
In the Middle East, only 10% of construction projects are using BIM (CW Staff,
2014).

Since AEC industry players in both UK and USA have well-recognized merits of
BIM, both countries were the earlier to mandate BIM in high profile and large
projects, such as London 2012 Olympics, Veldodrome cycle track and the 48
floor Leaden hall building “The Cheesegrater” which is one of the London’s
tallest buildings (Bryde, et al., 2013). BIM also utilized for complex projects such
as EMP museum at Seattle Center, Washington national park, Walt Disney
Concert Hall (Chien, et al., 2014).

47
 Figure 20: the construction companies in ten developed countries have highly
adopted BIM within their system (McGrawHillConstruction, 2014)
2.2.9.1.1 BIM in KSA
However, BIM is rarely used in KSA (Construction Work team, 2014; Almutiri,
2016), recently, construction companies in KSA: local and international, are
seeking BIM expertise to work in KSA (Glass Door, 2017; LinkedIn, 2017).

The adoption of BIM has seen a slow but gradual upward trend within SA in
recent years (Alhumayn, et al., 2017).

In 2014, Anwar Al Qasmi from Tekla as software provider reported that they
participate in prominent projects in SA using BIM such as the Capital Market
Authority Headquarters, King Abdullah Financial District, and the King Abdulaziz
Center for World Culture, 11 world-class stadiums, and King Abdullah Sports
City complex in Jeddah, (Saudi Gazette, 2014; Construction Work team, 2014).

2.2.10 BIM Tools

Recently, several BIM tools used to enhance the BIM concept including Revit
Architecture, Revit Structural, Revit MEP, Navisworks and Cost-X (Latiffi, et al.,
2013; Chan, 2014; Rodriguez, 2014), Micro-station and ArchiCAD (Chan, 2014;
Rodriguez, 2014), and Tekla & Solibri’ (Rodriguez, 2014).
In the last 5 years, the most BIM tools used in the Middle East was Revit
followed by AutoCAD (Gerges, M, et al., 2017). Other software and BIM
technologies such as Navisworks was identified to be used essentially for
construction schedule simulation, While Solibri, StaadPro, Civil 3D, and Robot
structure were scarily used. Even though on-site professionals still use 2D
drawings for erection and placement (Gerges, M, et al., 2017).
Moreover, the Autodesk software “Revit Architecture” has been used widely within
universities in the United States to teach undergraduate architecture programme

48
(Alshanbari, et al., 2014; Aly, 2014; Joannides, et al., 2012; Rodriguez, 2014;
Sabongi & Arch, 2009). More than 70% of universities use Revit Architecture and
the other 30% use other software including ArchiCAD and Bentley (Joannides, et
al., 2012). In the UK, more than 79% adopted Revit (Architecture – Structure –
MEP), and 45.6% used Navisworks followed by 42.1% who used Sketch Up
(Underwood, et al., 2015). Figure (21), shows the most used of BIM tools. Table
(3), illustrate the software used to every model.

Figure 21: BIM tools suggested by PWD (Latiffi, et al., 2013)

Table 3: BIM Software (Computer Integrated Construction Research Program
(CICRP), 2012; Olugboyega, 2017)
Model Software
. Architectural Desktop, Bentley Architecture, V8, Vectorworks, Revit
Architectural model
Architecture
X Steel, SDS/2, QuickPen, CADPIPE, SOFTEK, Revit Structure, CSC, Tekla
Structural model
Structure, ETABS, RISA, SoFiSTiK, Bentley Structure, Orion

Mechanical, Electrical Revit MEP, Bentley Mechanical, Hevacomp Mechanical designer, 3D pipe
and Plumbing (MEP) designer, AutoCAD MEP, CADPIPE electrical, HVAC System design,
model CADMECH, CAMduct, Multi-pipe, Bentley Electrical, Autopipe
Schedule and time MS Project, Primavera, Bentley Schedule Simulator, Jet-Stream timeliner,
model Ebuilder, Newforma
Resources and cost MS Project, IES, Autodesk QTO, Cost X, Ideate BIM link, Sefaira, Planswift,
model Timberline, Vico Cost Planner, Innovaya Visual Estimating
Construction and site model Unity 3D game engine, AutoCAD Civil 3D, Power Civil, InRoads Site,
utilization Hevacomp Simulator, Bentley Simulator
Operation and CMMS, IBM Maximo, Bentley facilities, Autodesk FM desktop, One Tool,
maintenance model Geospatial and facilities
Sustainability model IESVE, Autodesk Green Building Studio

49
2.2.11 Roles and responsibilities of BIM Specialist
BIM Modeler

The Functions of a BIM Modeler is to create and develop 3D BIM models and to
extract 2D documentation from Models (General Services Administration, 2009).
BIM Modeler can also be called BIM Operator (Kymmell, 2008).

BIM Analyst

The function of the BIM Analyst is to perform analysis and simulations based
on the BIM model (General Services Administration, 2009).

BIM Application Developer or BIM Software Developer

A BIM Application/Software Developer is a specialist that develops and

customizes the software to support integration and the BIM process (Abdulkader,
2013).

Modelling Specialist

Modelling Specialists are IT professionals who contribute, along with experts in

different areas of the AEC/FM industry, to the IFC standard, from initial
requirements to the final characteristics of a software product (Barison & Santos,
2010; Abdulkader, 2013).

BIM Facilitator

The function of a BIM Facilitator is to assist other professionals, not yet skilled in
operating BIM software, in visualizing the model information. He usually works
with who is going to physically construct the building, assisting the engineer's
work to communicate with foremen or contractors (Kymmell, 2008; General
Services Administration, 2009; Barison & Santos, 2010; Abdulkader, 2013).

BIM Consultant

Large and medium-sized companies that have adopted or are going to adopt
BIM, and do not have an experienced expert to be part of the project team, can
hire a BIM consultant to guide project designers, developers, and builders in the
BIM implementation. There may be three types of BIM Consultants: Strategic
Consultant, Functional Consultant and Operational Consultant (Barison &
Santos, 2010).

BIM Researcher

BIM Researcher is the expert who works in universities, research institutes or

governmental organizations, teaching, coordinating and developing researches

50
on BIM. They will be leaders in the creation of new knowledge to benefit the
industry, the community and the environment (Barison & Santos, 2010).

BIM manager

BIM manager should be responsible for coordination, control, development and

updating BIM model (Gu & London, 2010; Sebastian, 2011).He/she should
possess Information and Communication Technology (ICT) experience,
construction experience, excellent experience of BIM software and
communication management skills because he/she is dealing with the BIM
system and project actors (InPro, 2009). He/she receives BIM models in various
software format from different teams and converts it to a single master BIM
model, running the clash detection for these models, delivering the electronic
drawings and specifications to the contractor for implementation, preparing the
as-built BIM files to be used by FM (Hardin, 2009; Eastman, et al., 2011;
Sebastian, 2011; Brewer, et al., 2012; New Zealand, B.I.M, 2014).

There are three Specializations of BIM manager: the first project model
manager, modeling manager or model manager the second BIM manager at
design firms or chief BIM-officer And the third one is BIM manager at general
construction and subcontractor firms - BIM construction officer (Barison &
Santos, 2010).

(Joseph, 2011) Pointed out, in Figure (22), that the placement of corporate staff
is the most critical to the success of BIM Implementation across the organization
that includes the cultural and human resource shift. BIM corporate staff are
responsible for the education, deployment, and standards of a solid BIM
strategy. Their skills are in place to expand the services the firm offers and will
touch all areas in a firm including overheads, marketing material and billable
project aspects of the business.

Figure 22: BIM Corporate Support Team Ladder (Joseph, 2011)

51
2.2.12 Organizations can use BIM

Adopting a multidisciplinary BIM approach can lead to major benefits for

architecture firms and construction companies (Coates, et al., 2010; Arayici, et
al., 2012).

2.16 The benefits of BIM

Like other industry reaping the benefits of information and communication

technology (ICT), AEC industry can gain features from ICT (Latiffi, et al., 2013).
The adoption of new technology has many common benefits (Gudgel, 2008).
BIM is rapidly growing as the latest advanced technology in the AEC industry.
BIM has modified the way construction projects are designed, constructed and
operated (Azhar, et al., 2015). Features of BIM could be predestined in different
ways depending on how far users have experienced either beginners or experts
(McGraw-Hill, 2009). Several researchers considered the benefits of BIM as
following:

(Latiffi, et al., 2013) reported that BIM can overcome construction project
problems such as delay, construction cost overrun and the clash of design by
different specialties (Architecture, structure, MEP and etc.). Due to the powerful
data-based modeling, visualization, analysis and simulation capabilities of BIM, it
has the potential to significantly impact the Saudi construction industry by
dealing with issues pertaining to estimating, scheduling and design coordination
(Almutiri, 2016). Moreover (Succar, 2009) claimed that the main benefits of
implementing BIM is the visual coordination of the building systems such as
MEP systems and it also identifies the possible conflicts between these. By
detecting the conflicts, problems can be resolved before actual construction
which in turn saving project time and cost (Building SMART, 2010; Institute for
BIM in Canada (IBC), 2011).

Furthermore, according to Tekla BIMsight solution, BIM enables architects,

engineers, and project managers to deliver projects on time and within budget,
providing reliable feasibility studies for the design, building, and operating
phases. (Saudi Gazette, 2014). Additionally, (Building SMART, 2012) argued
that BIM enhances quality control, productivity, and emphasise design errors
reduction.

Whereas, (Harrison & Thurnell, 2014) concluded the benefits of BIM as: (1)
Enhances decision making,(2) Mitigates inaccurate interpretation, (3) Facilitates
efficient estimates, (4) Enhances efficient cost plans, (5) Enables efficient
scheduling quantities, (6) Automatic quantities generation save time, (7)
Expedite and easily Design changes, (8) Automatic quantities generation
eliminate human error, (9) Enhances the accuracy of estimates, (10) Improves
communication among the project team ,(11) Facilitates access to the data base,
52
(12) Provides early construction schedule details, (13) Enhances the
competitive

53
advantages,(14) Improves coordination through integration of specifications, and
(15) Clash detection.

However, (Salla, 2014) summarized the top fifteen benefits gained from using
BIM in its order as: (1) Reduce errors and omissions in the design phase, (2)
Improve collaboration with owner/design firms during the construction phase, (3)
Enhances organizational image, (4) Reduce rework, (5) Lowering construction
cost, (6) Better cost control and predictability, (7) Reducing the overall project
duration, (8) Marketing new business, (9) Offering new services, (10) Increasing
profits, (11) Maintaining repeat business, (12) Reducing cycle time of workflows,
(13) Faster client approval cycles, (14) Improved safety, (15) Faster regulatory
approval cycles.

Based on an extensive literature review. Table (4), summarizes the most

recognized benefits of BIM and the beneficiary party.

Client: C, Architect/Engineer: A/E, Contractor/Subcontractor: C/SC, Supplier: S

Other Stakeholders: OS, Facility Management: FM

Table 4: Literature review for Perceived benefits of BIM

Stakeholders
No. Benefits of BIM Authors
C A/E C/SC S OS FM
(Howard & Björk, 2008;
Time savings (duration
Hardin, 2009; Sebastian,
improvements, reduces the
2011; Barlish & Sullivan,
time spent on project
2012; Construction, M.H,
1 documentation and √ √ √ × √ ×
2012; Bryde, et al., 2013;
communication, and
Chan, 2014; Doumbouya, et
comparing between different
al., 2016; Matarneh &
options in a very short time.)
Hamed, 2017)
(Howard & Björk, 2008;
Hardin, 2009; Sebastian,
The cost reduction
2011; Barlish & Sullivan,
(lowers the project whole
2012; Construction, M.H,
2 cost, design and construction √ √ √ × √ ×
2012; Bryde, et al., 2013;
costs, reduced
Chan, 2014; Doumbouya, et
communication cost)
al., 2016; Matarneh &
Hamed, 2017)
(Azhar, 2011; Elbeltagi &
Improved Budget and Cost Dawood, 2011; Ma, et al.,
3 √ √ √ × √ ×
Estimating Capabilities 2011; Construction, M.H,
2012; Chan, 2014)
(Nour, 2007; Yan & Demian,
2008; Liu, et al., 2010;
Azhar, 2011; Arayici, et al.,
Improving the
2012; Construction, M.H,
quality(Reduced Rework,
4 √ √ √ √ √ √ 2012;
reduction of design errors,
McGrawHillConstruction,
Better design)
2014; Autodesk, 2015;
Doumbouya, et al., 2016;
Gerges, M, et al., 2017)

54
 (Kymmell, 2008; Jernigan,
Quick and right decisions
5 √ √ √ √ √ √ 2014; Harrison & Thurnell,
based on authenticated data
2014; Love, et al., 2014)
Clash detection(reduced (McCartney, 2010; Liu, et
coordination problems, al., 2010; Lu & Korman,
eliminating the risk of 2010; Forgues, et al., 2011;
duplication, checks design Construction, M.H, 2012;
6 non-conformities during pre- √ √ √ √ √ √ Chan, 2014; Autodesk,
construction stage, resolve 2015; Doumbouya, et al.,
physical conflicts between 2016; Matarneh & Hamed,
different disciplines, and 2017; Gerges, M, et al.,
Integrated work progress) 2017)
(Innovation, C.C., 2007;
Improves
McCartney, 2010; Sacks, et
visualization(Simulation,
al., 2010; Arayici, et al.,
representation of the parts of
2011; Azhar, 2011; Chan,
7 a building in an integrated √ √ √ √ √ √
2014; Harrison & Thurnell,
data environment, eliminating
2014; Autodesk, 2015;
the risk of misinterpretation of
Advenser, 2016; Gerges, M,
design, and capture reality )
et al., 2017)
Enhance collaboration &
(Anumba, et al., 2008;
communication between all
McCartney, 2010; Grilo &
parties ( Minimizing conflicts,
Jardim-Goncalves, 2010;
8 Simultaneous work by √ √ √ √ √ √
Roh, et al., 2011; Shen, et
multiple disciplines, Improved
al., 2012; Autodesk, 2015;
Coordination, Teamwork
Matarneh & Hamed, 2017)
Integration)
(Lu & Korman, 2010;
Arayici, et al., 2011; Azhar,
Maintain Control through 2011; Bryde, et al., 2013;
9 √ √ √ √ √ √
the project life cycle Harrison & Thurnell, 2014;
Autodesk, 2015; Matarneh &
Hamed, 2017)
(Ghayamghamian &
Khanzade, 2008; Hardin,
2009; Eastman, et al., 2011;
10 Reduce risks √ √ √ √ √ √
Barlish & Sullivan, 2012;
Porwal & Hewage, 2013;
Jernigan, 2014)
(Babič, et al., 2010; Grilo &
Supporting construction
Jardim-Goncalves, 2010;
and project management
Sacks, et al., 2010; Zhou, et
(executive, communication,
al., 2011; Realcomm Staff
11 strategic planning, and site √ √ √ √ √ √
Writer, 2011; Latiffi, et al.,
planning, risk, change,
2013; Chan, 2014; Gerges,
safety, value, and facility
et al., 2016; Matarneh &
management,)
Hamed, 2017)
(Samuelson & Björk, 2013;
12 Error-free design √ √ √ √ √ √ Omar, 2015; Dey, 2015;
Tekla BIMsight, 2016)
Reduced requests for
information ( RFIs’) (Arayici, et al., 2011; Azhar,
13 (promote project √ √ √ √ √ √ et al., 2011; Abbasnejad &
understanding and Moud, 2013)
eradicates
any ambiguity)

55
 (Manning & Messner, 2008;
Eastman, et al., 2011;
14 Client early involvement √ √ √ √ √ √
Jernigan, 2014; Omar,
2015)
Promotes the client and (Yang & Peng, 2008; Karna,
15 √ √ √ √ √ √
customer satisfactions et al., 2009)
(Hardin, 2009; Liu, et al.,
2010; Eastman, et al., 2011;
Keep the stakeholders
16 √ √ √ √ √ √ Azhar, 2011; Elmualim &
informed and satisfied.
Gilder, 2014; Jernigan,
2014)
(Kaner, et al., 2008; Liu, et
al., 2010; Eastman, et al.,
2011; Olatunji, 2011; Barlish
17 Maximizing productivity √ √ √ √ √ √ & Sullivan, 2012; McGraw-
Hill, 2012; Doumbouya, et
al., 2016; Matarneh &
Hamed, 2017)
(Glick & Guggemos, 2009;
Popov, et al., 2010;
Gecevska, et al., 2010;
Azhar, 2011; Arayici, et al.,
18 Lifecycle data √ √ √ √ √ √
2012; Abbasnejad & Moud,
2013; Chan, 2014;
Doumbouya, et al., 2016;
Gerges, M, et al., 2017),
(McCartney, 2010;
Eastman, et al., 2011;
Reduced Document Errors Arayici, et al., 2011;
19 √ √ √ √ √ √
and omissions Construction, M.H, 2012;
Moreno, et al., 2013;
Autodesk, 2015)
Minimizing Changes(reduce (Barlish & Sullivan, 2012;
20 √ √ √ √ √ ×
or eliminate change orders) Matarneh & Hamed, 2017).
(Zhang & Hu, 2011;
Reduce accidents by Eastman, et al., 2011;
21 √ × √ × √ ×
Promoting safety plans Barlish & Sullivan, 2012;
Moreno, et al., 2013)
(Sebastian, 2011;
Enhance site logistics
22 √ × √ √ √ √ Abbasnejad & Moud, 2013;
plans
Saleh, 2015)
(Howard & Björk, 2008;
Enhance the lean
Sebastian, 2011; Alwan, et
23 construction principle and √ √ √ √ √ √
al., 2015; Zewein, 2017;
value engineering
Khalil, 2017)
(Barrett, 2008; Elmualim &
24 Promotes the money value √ √ √ √ √ √
Gilder, 2014)
(Glick & Guggemos, 2009;
increasing efficiency (faster
Harrison & Thurnell, 2014;
25 and more effective processes √ √ √ √ √ √
Doumbouya, et al., 2016;
and method)
Matarneh & Hamed, 2017)
(Azhar, et al., 2011;
Eastman, et al., 2011;
Improve the building
26 √ √ √ √ √ √ Porwal & Hewage, 2013;
sustainability analyses
Eadie, et al., 2013;
Doumbouya, et al., 2016)

56
 (Yan & Demian, 2008;
Creativity and innovative Popov, et al., 2010; Sacks,
27 √ √ √ √ √ √
solutions et al., 2010; Azhar, 2011;
Chan, 2014)
(Azhar, 2011; Arayici, et al.,
28 Automated assembly √ × √ √ √ √
2012; Milender White, 2016)
(Glick & Guggemos, 2009;
Reduce Waste( the Arayici, et al., 2011; Azhar,
29 elimination of wastes and √ √ √ √ √ √ 2011; Eastman, et al., 2011;
value generation) Omar & Dulaimi, 2014;
Autodesk, 2015)
(Liu, et al., 2010; Sebastian,
Enhance Competitiveness
2011; National Building
30 (Promotes the company’s √ √ √ √ √ √
Specification, 2014; Azhar,
competitive advantages)
et al., 2015)
31 Facility Management √ √ √ √ √ √ (Sabol, 2008; Omar, 2015)
(Carmona & Irwin, 2007;
Facility Maintenance (easy
Kymmell, 2008; Arayici &
32 access to data for efficient √ √ √ √ √ √
Aouad, 2010; Azhar, 2011;
O&M.)
Selezan & Mao, 2016)
Reduced claim and law
(Liu, et al., 2010;
33 issues (reduced litigation √ √ √ √ √ √
Construction, M.H, 2012)
and insurance claims)

34 Improved Accuracy √ √ √ √ √ √ (Liu, et al., 2010)

(Liu, et al., 2010;
35 Increased Profits √ √ √ √ √ √
Construction, M.H, 2012)
(Glick & Guggemos, 2009;
Helps procurement Moreno, et al., 2013; Love,
36 √ √ √ √ √ √
et al., 2014; Chan,
2014;
Gerges, et al., 2016)
Promotes the
prefabrications for better
(Elbeltagi & Dawood, 2011;
quality ( reduce the inventory
37 √ ˣ √ √ √ √ Eastman, et al., 2011;
duration and order
Bryde, et al., 2013)
materials using Just In Time
(JIT)).
Designers becoming more
38 knowledgeable in the √ √ √ √ √ √ (McCartney, 2010)
construction process.
39 Maintain Repeat Business √ √ √ √ √ √ (Construction, M.H, 2012)
Market New Business (Offer (Construction, M.H, 2012)
40 √ √ √ √ √ √
New Services)
(Forgues, et al., 2011;
41 Present Perfectly √ √ √ √ √ √ Arayici, et al., 2012; Chan,
2014; Autodesk, 2015)
42 More Owner Demand √ √ √ √ √ √ (Construction, M.H, 2012)
Reduce human resource (Yan & Demian, 2008; Glick
(reduce the amount of staff in & Guggemos, 2009;
43 √ √ √ √ √ √
the long run, and Staff Construction, M.H, 2012;
Recruitment and Retention) Chan, 2014)
44 Dive into Detail √ √ √ √ √ √ (Autodesk, 2015)
Quickly and easily
(Jernigan, 2014)
45 Integrate new team √ √ √ √ √ √
member

57
 Overcoming distance (Hardin, 2009; Eastman, et
46 √ √ √ √ √ √
barriers. al., 2011)
Promote the
(Eastman, et al., 2011;
designers’ capacity
47 √ √ √ √ √ √ Samuelson & Björk, 2013)
and increases the
competition
Bridge the capacity
gaps with the (Eastman, et al., 2011)
48 √ √ √ √ √ √
international AEC
professionals
As-built drawings (laser
(Kymmell, 2008; Jernigan,
scanning for existing
2014; Love, et al., 2014;
49 properties/services and √ √ √ ˣ √ √
Volk, et al., 2014)
(RFID) to automatically
produce)
Computer-aided facility (Service Works Group,
52 √ √ √ √ √ √
management (CAFM) 2015)
Take it with you; access to
the model and project details (Autodesk, 2015)
53 √ √ √ √ √ √
from anywhere, on any
device.
Augmented reality for
(Wang, et al., 2014; Omar,
54 interactive architectural √ √ √ √ √ √
2015)
visualization
(El Meouche, et al., 2013;
Irizarry, et al., 2013;
55 GIS integrated with BIM √ √ √ × √ × Mignard & Nicolle, 2014;
Rafiee, et al., 2014; Baik, et
al., 2015; Zlatanova, 2016)
56 Health and Safety √ × √ √ √ √ (Ganah & John, 2015)
Improve energy saving and
provide healthy
57 √ √ √ √ √ √ (Amor, et al., 214)
environment by integrated
Green Building with BIM
Improve Enterprise
Resource Planning by
58 √ √ √ √ √ √ (Charles, 2017)
integrated with
BIM
Conformity with (Howard & Björk, 2008;
59 specifications, √ √ √ √ √ √ Hardin, 2009; Eastman, et
standards and codes al., 2011; Sebastian, 2011)

Eastman et al. (2008) observed that client is the only party reaping the full
benefits of BIM. This conclusion aligns with the findings in Table (4), which
explicitly demonstrates that the client is the most benefit from the implementation
of BIM with the highest score of benefits i.e. 59 out of 59. However, each party
acquires the benefits of BIM-based on his/her business function.

2.17 BIM Barriers

(Azhar, et al., 2015) reported that despite the advantages of implementing BIM in
construction projects and the growing adoption of BIM in the developed
countries such as UK, USA, Europe. Many stakeholders in developing

58
countries are

59
reporting specific barriers that hinder BIM implementation which resulted in BIM
is growing slowly. Barriers of BIM have a different perception from a different
point of views i.e. BIM users and non-users (Eadie, et al., 2014; Harty & Laing,
2010).

Several researchers summarized the barriers to implementing BIM as following:

(Panuwatwanich, et al., 2013; Omar, 2015) reported the top barriers to BIM
implementation are lack of management commitment to implement BIM” and
“the resistance to change, and clinging to the old ways of working. The notable
lack of know-how to manage the hindrances for the implementation BIM is the
major reason for the modest use of BIM in the AEC industry in MENA area.

(McGraw-Hill, 2012) respectively ordered the top seven barriers that hinder BIM
implementation; interoperability, functionality, unidentified BIM deliverables
between parties, clients asking for BIM, shortage in staff skilled with BIM, and
the need for 3D building product manufacturer. (Lymath, 2014; McGraw-Hill,
2012) concluded that non-BIM users summarized the issues of implementing
BIM within AEC Industry firms as there is not enough demand from clients, there
hasn’t been sufficient time to evaluate BIM, Software, and hardware upgrades
are too expensive, Functionality does not apply very well to what we do and
there is insufficient BIM-compatible content available for industry needs.

These barriers are caused by a number of technical and human obstacles, which
can be classified as either internal or external barriers. The main obstacles are
the cost and human-related barriers, primarily the learning of new tools and
processes (Kiani, et al., 2015). (Bernstein & Pittman, 2005) emphasised that the
major barriers to the full adoption of BIM were transactional to the business
process evolution: computability of the digital design information and meaningful
data interoperability. In the same vein, (Baba, 2010) grouped the barriers into
cost, lack of training, lack of client demand, resistance to change and cultural
issues, and interoperable.

Preparing employees and the cost of adopting BIM are some of the problems
which shareholders face (Eadie, et al., 2014; Harty & Laing, 2010; McGraw-Hill,
2012).(Eastman, et al., 2011; Hardin & McCool, 2015) claimed that
interoperability, cost of hardware and software, and lack of BIM expertise
(Eastman, et al., 2011; Hardin & McCool, 2015).One of the most important
barriers is the lack of BIM users within the AEC Industry (McGraw-Hill, 2012).
(Almutiri, 2016) concluded the main barriers to implement BIM are the lack of
experts in BIM, resources, hardware, and software identifying educational gaps
for utilizing BIM in architectural programmers. Misunderstanding BIM, the lack of
development within architecture education sector in KSA and unacceptable
output for AEC industry.(Banawi, 2017) reported that designers or architectural
60
engineering firms

61
do not usually prove empirically the benefits of BIM to the customer in turn that
creates barrier to implement BIM.

(Chan, 2014) claimed the top three barriers to implement BIM are respectively,
clients and other project team members did not require BIM, the project parties’
belief that 2D CAD systems are enough and the lack of training.

(Mehran, 2016) concluded that the main barriers to implement BIM are Lack of
BIM Standards, Lack of BIM Awareness and Resistance to change. (Gerges, M,
et al., 2017) Pointed that BIM introduced by software developers one of the
considerable barriers to implementing BIM.

Furthermore, the main barriers can be summered as getting seniors to adopt the
new methods, changing the organization of staff to suit particular skills
(Eastman, et al., 2008; Eastman, et al., 2011), cost of implementation (software
and training)
, lack of senior management support , scale of culture change required , lack of
supply chain buy-in , staff resistance and ICT literacy and legal uncertainties
(Eadie, et al., 2014; Eastman, et al., 2008; Eastman, et al., 2011).

Based on conducting an extensive literature review, Table (5), recognised the

challenges and obstacles that diminish the chances of implementation of BIM
and classified them into five categories as follows:

1. Personal Barriers
2. BIM Process Barriers
3. Business Barriers
4. Technical Barriers
5. Organization Barriers
6. Market Barriers

Table 5: Recognised Barriers of BIM within the AEC industry

No. The barriers Authors

Personal Barriers
(Tse, et al., 2005; Yan & Demian, 2008;
McCartney, 2010; Baba, 2010; Forgues, et al.,
1 Lack of insufficient education and training
2011; Bryde, et al., 2013; Banawi, 2017;
Matarneh & Hamed, 2017)
Lack of understanding of BIM and its
2 (Bryde, et al., 2013; Alhumayn, et al., 2017)
benefits
(Baba, 2010) (Yan & Demian, 2008; Arayici, et
al., 2009; Baba, 2010; Forgues, et al., 2011;
Culture issues/resistance to change/ Lack
3 Construction, M.H, 2012; Awwad, 2013; Ahmed,
of skills development
et al., 2014; Omar, 2015; Almutiri, 2016; Gerges,
M, et al., 2017)

62
 Lack of BIM knowledge in applying current
4 (Saleh, 2015)
technologies

BIM Process Barriers

(Arayici, et al., 2009; Baba, 2010; Forgues, et al.,

The required collaboration, integration, and
1 2011; Sattineni & Macdonald, 2014; Banawi,
interoperability
2017)
(Liu, et al., 2010; Linderoth, 2010; Elmualim &
2 Not all stakeholders are using BIM Gilder, 2014) (Eastman, et al., 2011; Ku &
Taiebat, 2011)
(Ku & Taiebat, 2011; Sebastian, 2011;
Legal and contractual challenges
Elmualim & Gilder, 2014; Migilinskas, et al.,
3 (ownership of data, traditional procurement
2013; Chien, et al., 2014; Eadie, et al., 2014;
methodology)
Azhar, et al.,
2015).
Risks and challenges with the use of a
4 (Saleh, 2015; Banawi, 2017)
single model (BIM)
Changing work processes (Lack of
5 effective collaboration among project (Saleh, 2015)
participants)
Business Barriers
(Sattineni & Macdonald, 2014; Gerges, et al.,
1 Time and cost required to train new users
2016)
Cost/benefit analysis (High Cost of (Yan & Demian, 2008; Lu & Korman, 2010;
2 implementation (software, hardware upgrade, Baba, 2010; Porwal & Hewage, 2013; Memon,
training, and time), low return-on investment, et al., 2014; Gerges, et al., 2016; Gerges, M, et
and expensive upfront costs) al.,
2017; Matarneh & Hamed, 2017)
3 (Forgues, et al., 2011; Construction, M.H, 2012;
Unclear benefits
Saleh, 2015)
4 Complicated and time-consuming (Yan & Demian, 2008; Alhumayn, et al., 2017;
modelling process Gerges, M, et al., 2017)
5
Have not had sufficient time to Evaluate (Construction, M.H, 2012)
6
Doubts about Return on Investment (ROI) (Azhar, 2011; Saleh, 2015)
(Arayici, et al., 2009; Liu, et al., 2010; Eastman,
7 Lack of contractual arrangements
et al., 2011; Forgues, et al., 2011; Ahmed, et al.,
2014; Harrison & Thurnell, 2014; Banawi, 2017)
Technical barriers
(Bernstein & Pittman, 2005; Forgues, et al.,
2011; Bryde, et al., 2013; Chan, 2014; Memon,
1 Lack of a BIM specialist
et al., 2014; Bui, et al., 2016; Gerges, M, et al.,
2017)
(McCartney, 2010; Construction, M.H, 2012;
Migilinskas, et al., 2013; Chan, 2014; Harrison &
2 Absence of standards and clear guidelines
Thurnell, 2014; Volk, et al., 2014; Matarneh &
Hamed, 2017)
Difficulty of updating the information in
3 (Chan, 2014; Volk, et al., 2014)
BIM (time consuming)
(Lu & Korman, 2010; Chan, 2014; Bui, et al.,
4 Insufficient technology infrastructure
2016)
(Yan & Demian, 2008; Forgues, et al., 2011;
Functionality not Sufficiently(added value of
5 Construction, M.H, 2012; Banawi, 2017; Gerges,
BIM is not clear)
M, et al., 2017)

63
 (Baba, 2010; Lu & Korman, 2010; Forgues, et
6 Inefficient Interoperability al., 2011; Porwal & Hewage, 2013; Chan, 2014;
Sattineni & Macdonald, 2014)

BIM file sizes are too large. Transporting,

7 manipulating, storing or sharing these large (Liu, et al., 2010)
files is difficult
8 Updating of information (Chan, 2014; Volk, et al., 2014)
9 Current technology is enough (Saleh, 2015; Gerges, M, et al., 2017)
Organization Barriers
(Liu, et al., 2010; Chan, 2014; Harrison &
1
The lack of government support Thurnell, 2014; Bui, et al., 2016; Matarneh &
Hamed, 2017)
(Eastman, et al., 2011; Chien, et al., 2014;
2 Difficulties in managing the impacts of BIM
Azhar, et al., 2015)
3 Absence of other competing initiatives (Saleh, 2015; Omar, 2015)
(Sutevski, 2010; Arayici, et al., 2011; Simona,
4 Resistance to change unwillingness to change
2012; Jernigan, 2014; Omar, 2015)
BIM requires radical changes in the workflow,
(Yan & Demian, 2008; Arayici, et al., 2009;
practices, and procedures (magnitude of
5 Garies, 2010; McCartney, 2010; Memon, et al.,
change, and lack of BIM experience (know-
2014; Volk, et al., 2014; Gerges, M, et al., 2017)
how) to change)
6 Required hardware upgrades and software (Arayici, et al., 2009; Construction, M.H, 2012)
Financial Issue (Thompson & Miner, 2007; Bryde, et al., 2013;
7
Chien, et al., 2014; Azhar, et al., 2015)
Current professional indemnity and
8 (Chan, 2014; Banawi, 2017)
insurance terms
Market Barriers
(Tse, et al., 2005; Arayici, et al., 2011; Forgues,
et al., 2011; Bryde, et al., 2013; Ahmed, et al.,
1 Lack of awareness about BIM
2014; Memon, et al., 2014; Gerges, et al., 2016;
Matarneh & Hamed, 2017)
2 The market is not ready yet (Porwal & Hewage, 2013; Banawi, 2017)
(Tse, et al., 2005; Baba, 2010; Porwal &
Hewage, 2013; Chan, 2014; Gerges, et al.,
3 Lack of client/government demand
2016; Gerges, M, et al., 2017) (Chan, 2014)
(Porwal &
Hewage, 2013)
Firms do not convince the client about the
4 (Banawi, 2017)
benefits of BIM
5 BIM introduced by software developers (Gerges, M, et al., 2017)

The lack of BIM training, the lack of knowledge of the BIM adoption process, lack
of support from managers to accept changing current practices, cost of software,
the lack of demand and lack of BIM expertise, and lack of practical standards
and guidelines, policymakers and the government support were identified as
some of the barriers to the adoption of BIM in Saudi Arabia (Alhumayn, et al.,
2017; Matarneh & Hamed, 2017).

(Mehran, 2016) categorised the BIM barriers into a technological dimension

which includes the interoperability between applications, software compatibility,
authorising and monitoring of the quality and progress of construction, design
clash detection and visualization and BIM standard and protocols. (Eadie, et al.,
2013). An organizational dimension which includes BIM professionals, BIM
64
vendors, professional training of BIM technologies, and support of senior
management and clients (Eadie, et al., 2013). An attitude factor which includes

65
interest in learning BIM, BIM awareness, willingness to use BIM, and perceived
cost of BIM technology and platform (Pikas, et al., 2013).

(Nawar, 2014) summarised the barriers as misunderstanding of BIM: People are

still comparing BIM to CAD, BIM introduced to Middle East region by BIM's
software developers who interlaced BIM to software only, Resistance to change,
Lack of BIM specialists in the region, The variety of international BIM protocols
and standards, Absence of certified BIM educational and consultancy
institutes, Being conservative towards information sharing, Treating BIM as a
mandatory requirement, None unified standards for BIM practice across the
world and The need for industry culture change.

2.18 Removing barriers to BIM adoption

Cost/benefit analysis, raising awareness and BIM education and training are the
headline challenges of using BIM (Bryde, et al., 2013). (Eastman, et al., 2011;
Hardin & McCool, 2015) reported that the following barriers: (1) Interoperability,
(2) cost of hardware and software, (3) lack of BIM expertise, (4) Shortage of
client’s demand, (5) No sufficient time to evaluate BIM, (6) Software and
hardware upgrades are too expensive, (7) functionality is not applicable, and (8)
Insufficient BIM-compatible content available for industry needs. Represent the
major barriers to implementing BIM in AEC industry. These issues could be
addressed by software developers or changing the mechanism of projects’
process within construction companies and firms, but this process is likely to
take time.

In parallel, (Almutiri, 2016) reported that to solve KSA construction companies’

cultural issues and leverage their knowledge about BIM, local companies could
seek partnerships with international construction companies that accomplish
projects in major construction work using BIM based technologies and
processes.

2.18.1 Top management support

Top management has an indispensable role in leading the organisational change
to BIM (Herold, et al., 2008), so they should be fully aware of organizational
benefits of BIM to improve its performance adding competitive advantages and
increasing the profits (Ruikar, et al., 2005; Azhar, et al., 2015). Therefore, top
management should be convinced to support this change to take the decision of
making BIM as obligatory (Linderoth, 2010).

(Garies, 2010) claimed that due to limited experience and competence to

manage BIM implementation, organizational decision makers can learn from
advanced BIM-users’ previous experiences.

2.18.2 Resistance to change

66
Resistance to change is one of the mean obstacles impeding BIM
implementation (Yan & Demian, 2008; Sebastian, 2011; Elmualim & Gilder,
2014; Eadie, et al.,

67
2014). (Recardo, 1995) tried to remove this barrier by assuming that data
collection serves to identify relative strength of each resistance factors and how
it varies by stakeholder group. Also, he reported that if organizations do not
provide timely and targeted education, employees will become apprehensive
regarding their future job security or job competency.

In parallel, (Kotter & Schlesinger, 1989) suggested that the successful change
can be established through two steps: Understanding the need for change and
recognizing the benefits than getting ready for the change which involves the
people, processes, and technology.

However, other researcher argued that for successful change management and
dealing with the resistance to change, two major measures are featured:

1- Bottom-up and top-down approaches should be adopted concurrently

(Arayici, et al., 2011).

(Arayici, et al., 2011) mentioned that effective change starts at the

employees’ level supported by top management. Communicating and
convincing the employees by the top management with their vision of
change, serve swift change into BIM, because the change will be bottom-up
(Waddell & Sohal, 1998).

Convincing employees would be through demonstrating the importance of

change for them not only for the company, besides illuminating the quite
relation between responding to the market changes including changes
adoption and acquiring competitive advantages to be sustainable in the
market (Ruikar, et al., 2005; Garies, 2010; Arayici, et al., 2011).

2- Applying successful strategies for change management to eliminate any

potential change resistance (Arayici, et al., 2009; Eastman, et al., 2011;
Arayici, et al., 2011).
(Waziri, et al., 2014) stated that, the successful organizational change
requires systematic and proactive management related to the resistance from
people involved in the change. Moreover, (Jung & Joo, 2011) claimed that
segregation of change strategy into specific levels of adoption ensures rapid
and easy control of the successful implementation of BIM.
(Kotter, 1996) suggested one of the most successful models for BIM
implementation segregated into several steps in which: (1) Promoting sense of
urgency for the change and transmit it to the employees, (2) Establishing a
guiding coalition for the change, (3) Developing an appropriate vision and
strategy suitable for the employees and the organization according to its
situation,(4) Change should be communicated to all employees to empower
others to act on the vision,(5) Creating short win plans, consolidating
improvements and sharing the
68
success with employees, and (6) Anchoring the new approaches to prevent
employees from “slipping to the old ways”.

Figure 23: People in change management (Abas, 2016)

Furthermore, (Abas, 2016) illustrated in Figure 23, how organizations, team and
individual might deal with change.

(Kotter & Schlesinger, 1989) suggested that there are six ways of overcoming
the resistance to change (Figure 24) Illustrated as following:

Figure 24: Overcoming Resistance to change (Riley, 2015)

Education and communication
Education and honest Communication about proposed measures for the change,
help to convince all participants about the logic of changing and clarifying
misconceptions including misinformation or inaccuracies. For effective
education, it should be delivered consistently and over a long-period for
maximum effect.

Participation and involvement

69
All participants should be involved in a change programme which in turn
encourages people especially who would resist. Such programme requires
commitment rather than compliance.

Facilitation and support

Kotter & Schlesinger identified “adjustment problems” during change programs.
Facilitation and support include further training, counseling, mentoring in addition
to listening to participants’ fears and concerns, such measures are in favor of
them to efficiently cope with change.
Co-option and manipulation

Co-option includes bringing specific individuals into roles that are part of change
management (perhaps managers who are likely to be otherwise resistant to
change). Manipulation involves the selective use of information to encourage
people to behave in a particular way. Whilst the use of manipulation might be
seen as unethical, it might be the only option if other methods of overcoming
resistance to change prove ineffective.

Negotiation and bargaining

Negotiation and bargaining might be through offering administrative or financial
rewarding for those discouraged to be part of the change process. Negotiation is
a common conventional approach in restructuring an organization.
Explicit and implicit coercion

However, coercion might inevitably cause loss of trust between people in a

business, this approach can be the last resort for overcoming the problem of
resistance to change. Explicit coercion might be through threatening people
resisting change virtually, while implicit coercion involves telling those the likely
negative consequences for the business as a result of failing change.

2.18.3 Lack of sufficient Education and training

According to (Becerik-Gerber & Rice, 2010) the lack of BIM users within the AEC
Industry can be overcome by training the employees. Software providers can
provide education and training such as Tekla, one of the international
construction companies and software developers, has started to introduce BIM
Architectural schools in order to fill a need in the private sector for BIM users.
Autodesk works with a local company “Dar Al Riyadh” to leverage the knowledge of
students in BIM (Construction Work team, 2014).

The AEC educational sector must be involved to help in graduating AEC

professionals well-known about BIM process and technology (Aly, 2014;
Vinšová, et al., 2014; Woo, 2006).

70
2.18.4 Interoperability
IFC is defined as an international public standard schema collectively developed
by BIM software vendors. IFC enables the opening or importing BIM files to
reuse the created data in other applications using different software; IFC
schemes can overcome the conflicts that may appear of using different software
of BIM models. (McGraw-Hill, 2009; Smith & Tardif, M, 2009; Liu, et al., 2010;
Eastman, et al., 2011; Ku & Taiebat, 2011).

2.18.5 Difficulties of managing BIM Model

Assigning a model manager or as called BIM manager is essential to eliminate
the BIM model-related risks who is authorized to edit data for the master
federated BIM model (Thompson & Miner, 2007). By controlling the flow of data
from or to the BIM model, the BIM manager will be the sole person authorized to
enter the data for the master BIM model to develop the BIM final model
(Thompson & Miner, 2007). The master BIM model is a collection of several BIM
models from different teams to have a final model free of any errors or clashes
and ready for the use by the constructor (Hardin, 2009; Eastman, et al., 2011).

2.18.6 Lack of skilled resources and complexity of BIM software

The AEC executives and researchers found that the limited availability of BIM
capabilities in AEC market to the lengthy time required for training considering
the complexity of BIM software (Liu, et al., 2010; Linderoth, 2010; Ku & Taiebat,
2011; Eadie, et al., 2013; Migilinskas, et al., 2013).

For the sake of providing the market with BIM skilled resources, governments
support AEC university students’ curriculum with integrated guidelines for BIM
training programs in addition to the help of BIM software vendors to enable the
the trainees to keep up with the latest BIM skills in the shortest time (Gu &
London, 2010; Azhar, et al., 2011; Hore, 2006; Chan, 2014).

2.18.7 Financial Issues:

(Chan, 2014) suggested that “Governments can play a significant role to
facilitate the implementation of BIM in the AEC industry, by providing training
programs to educate organizations’ staff on how to implement and use BIM,
governments should offer awareness sessions through professional institutes
and academia to promote the organizations’ awareness of the significance and
benefits of BIM, to encourage them for investing in BIM.” (Hore, 2006) suggested
that, government’s collaboration with software vendors to make training
programs.

Singapore Building and Construction Authority (SBCA) fully subsidized training

programs to assist organizations to educate their employees on BIM; the goal of
SBCA was to mandate BIM by 2015 for all its public projects (Brewer, et al.,

71
2012).

72
2.18.8 Unclear Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)
Several professional executives and researchers reported that the IPR detailed
with responsibilities and rights of all parties and level of data transfer (LOD)
should be submitted in a contract document by the government in standard
document or by the client. (Gu & London, 2010).

(Bryde, et al., 2013; New Zealand, B.I.M, 2014) proposed practical solutions for
IPR problems should guarantee an unrestricted free license to use the model for
both parties to maintain the intellectual advantages for designers in parallel to
enable the client to get benefit from the BIM model during the project entire
lifecycle.

2.18.9 AEC Traditional procurement methodology:

There is a crucial need to change from the traditional to an integrated
procurement strategy, which requires a paradigm shift of mindset to accept the
changes and reshaping roles and responsibilities, sharing the risks and rewards
among the construction players (Hardin, 2009; Sebastian, 2011; Porwal &
Hewage, 2013; Love, et al., 2014).

IPD was proposed to be the appropriate construction procurement strategy

suitable for BIM, where IPD is defined as a “project delivery approach that
integrates people, system, business structures and practices into a process that
collaboratively harnesses the talents and insights of all participants to optimize
project results, increase value of owner, reduce waste, and maximize efficiency
through phases of design, fabrication and construction” (AGC, 2010)

Based on BIM core values and IPD definition it is clear that there is mutual
synergy between BIM and IPD, where BIM supports the concept of IPD to
integrate people and processes, IPD and BIM are built on collaboration principle
to optimize the efficiency (AGC, 2010; Glick & Guggemos, 2009; Moreno, et al.,
2013; Love, et al., 2014).

Several researchers and professional executives concluded that, the most

suitable project delivery method for BIM is the integrated project delivery
approach, where all BIM benefits can be reaped such as reducing waste,
optimizing productivity, sharing risks and rewards, integrating the fragmented
teams and responding to client needs (Hardin, 2009; Azhar, et al., 2011;
Eastman, et al., 2011; Moreno, et al., 2013; Jernigan, 2014; Omar, 2015).
However, still, the traditional procurement strategies are dominating the AEC
industry which creates obstacles to reap the full benefits of BIM (Hardin, 2009).

2.18.10 Doubts about Return on Investment

ROI is not supposed to be measured when BIM is still underdeveloped, its
retuning advantages (collaboration, visualization, etc…) should be taken as an
overall ROI (Poirier, et al., 2015).
73
2.18.11 Legal (or contractual) issues

Both Azhar (2011) and (Sai Evuri & Amiri-Arshad, 2015) considered data
ownership is one of BIM risks but could be handled with contracts.
2.19 Motivations for BIM implementation in KSA

Some companies in AEC are always seeking for adopting new innovations such
as BIM for continuous improvement to stay on the top of the competitive game in
the market ( (Moore, 2003; Liu, et al., 2010; Eadie, et al., 2013; Omar, 2015).
Majority of construction companies in KSA are international with excellent
experience in BIM paving the way for a suitable environment to smoothly transit
into BIM (Alhumayn, et al., 2017).
Because the main leverage of implementing BIM is achieving the highest
utilization, clients have put a lot of pressure on designers and contractor to
rapidly transit to mandate BIM to meet their demands (Almutiri, 2016), (Monko,
et al., 2017). The main reasons for adopting BIM in the company are client's
requirement, for improvement, competitors are using it, other project parties are
using it, Advances in an increased use of information technologies, increased
competition due to globalization, and changes in workplace practices and
organizational structures (Matarneh & Hamed, 2017).

UK government has already used BIM in governmental project by 2016 which

represented a real push for contractors to adopt BIM (Constructing Excellence,
2008) which has reflected on the whole area of Middle East , with the close
economic relationship between the UK and the Middle East, which is reflected in
the local dominance of British architects and contractors (Gerges, M, et al.,
2017).The rapid growth of mega projects in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Qatar
and Kuwait, unified language, undifferentiated cultures and using similar
standards (mostly American or British) and protocols motivated a wider adoption
of BIM in construction processes across the Middle East (Gerges, M, et al.,
2017).
The unified language (Arabic), the similarity of Arab cultures, and construction
practices within the Middle East use similar standards (mostly American or
British) and protocols, motivate the need for a holistic investigation of current
BIM practices from different Middle Eastern countries. (Gerges, M, et al., 2017).

(Liu, et al., 2010) categorised the main motivators of BIM implementation are:
perceived benefit, external forces, and internal readiness.

2.20 Key factors influence BIM implementation

According to (Chwelos, et al., 2001) study, the adoption of a new technology is

affected heavily by three factors: perceived benefit, external forces and internal
readiness. Internal readiness mainly includes IT sophistication and top
management support.
74
The implementation of BIM is a relatively long process that requires long
duration to reap its real benefits. For example, the UK and Australia planned to
mandate BIM in more than four years 2011 to 2016 (Cabinet Office and The Rt
Hon Lord Maude of Horsham, 2012; McGrawHillConstruction, 2014)

Several researchers argued that the main factors leverage the BIM
implementation are recognising the benefits of BIM and driving forces. Those are
the external pressures/forces imposed from externals and/or the surrounding
environment (Omar, 2015; Saleh, 2015) such as competitors to adopt the new
change to BIM (Liu, et al., 2010; Eadie, et al., 2013).

BIM was stimulated by a number of factors including the need for integrated data
management, drive towards whole project lifecycle data management and
political pressures calling for effective collaboration between different
stakeholders to enhance the quality of the construction industry and cost
reduction (McGrawHillConstruction, 2014; Sabol, 2008; Shahrin, et al., 2010;
Yan & Demian, 2008).

(Elmualim & Gilder, 2014) (Love, et al., 2014) Argued that traditionally adoption
of BIM starts with the recognition of the benefits of BIM and how these benefits
can promote the organization’s competitive advantage, increase ROI and
eradicate the majority of the traditional AEC problems.

(Alhumayn, et al., 2017) suggested strategies for implementing BIM in KSA

include providing legislation and a supportive regulatory environment, the
government assists funding, more educated key players and gaining the
experience from advanced countries use BIM. The successful implementation
of BIM in Saudi Arabia requires a top-down strategy that facilitates the smooth
flow of information. As the main challenges of adopting and implementing BIM
include government and top management support. The successful
implementation of BIM for construction in KSA motivated transformation from
previous methodologies characterised by the physical movement of paper-
based designs and written communication from government officials to more
electronic communication via a standard platform.

(Construction, M.H, 2012) concluded the most important factors for Increasing
BIM benefits are: improved interoperability between software applications,
improved BIM software functionality, more clearly-defined BIM deliverables
between parties, more owners asking for BIM, more 3D building product
manufacturer content, reduced cost of BIM software, more internal staff with BIM
skills, more use of contracts to support BIM, more external firms with BIM skills
and more entry-level staff with BIM skills.

(Mehran, 2015) Argued that the main factors influencing BIM implementation;
government support, BIM contract, standards and protocols, develop BIM
75
performance matrix and industry collaboration. (Won, et al., 2013) Identified five
factors for collaboration and integration within BIM as (Product information
sharing, Organizational roles synergy, Work process coordination-Environment
for teamwork, Reference data consolidation).

Suitable directions can be suggested for the government, professional bodies

and BIM vendors to foster the local use of BIM (Mehran, 2015).

However (Arayici, et al., 2011) suggested that Approaches Adoption should be

undertaken with a bottom-up approach rather than top-down approach, (Omar,
2015; Alhumayn, et al., 2017) Claimed that to rapid the BIM implementation the
government has to mandate BIM which represents top-down approach.

After an extensive literature review, Table (6), illustrate the main factors
influencing the BIM implementation.

Table 6: Literature review Key factors influence the Adoption of BIM

No. Key factors influence the Adoption Authors

External Push for Implementing BIM

Government pressure (Intervention in (Eadie, et al., 2013; Porwal & Hewage, 2013;
1
mandating BIM) Omar, 2015; Saleh, 2015; Willis & Regmi, 2016)
Client pressure and demand the
2 (Saleh, 2015; Almutiri, 2016)
application of BIM in their projects
3 Government support
(Arayici, et al., 2011; Chan, 2014; Smith, 2014;
Coordinated government support and leadership
McPartland, 2017)
Developing industry-accepted BIM standards, best (Construction, M.H, 2012; Chan, 2014; Smith,
practices, and legal protocols 2014; Willis & Regmi, 2016; McPartland, 2017)
The government collaborate with the industry,
professional bodies and education institutes to
establish standards, guidance, to provide training
(Chan, 2014; Smith, 2014; McPartland, 2017)
to practitioners and future students and Defining
levels of BIM working for reference in professional
services agreement
Set realistic goals , not to make things too
complicated, Plan for the worst, Find a partner and
Provide high-end hardware resources and (McPartland, 2016)
networking facilities to run BIM applications and
tools efficiently
A structured set of BIM competencies (Succar, et al., 2013)
Having established industry-wide rules and
( Willis & Regmi, 2016)
protocols governing accessing and updating.
Developing suitable contractual arrangements (Arayici, et al., 2011; Migilinskas, et al., 2013)
4-other external pushes
(Succar, 2009; Azhar, 2011; BIM Academic
Raising awareness (promotion and awareness of
Fourm, 2013; Kocaturk & Kiviniemi, 2013;
BIM)
Almutiri, 2016; Gerges, M, et al., 2017)
(Tzonis, 2014; Omar, 2015; Saleh, 2015;
Provide education at university level
Almutiri, 2016)
Developing BIM data exchange standards, rules
(Chan, 2014; Saleh, 2015; Mehran, 2016)
and regulations

76
 (Gu & London, 2010; Saleh, 2015; Mehran,
Providing guidance on use of BIM
2016)
contractual arrangements (Deloitte, 2016; Mehran, 2016)
BIM required by other project parties (Construction Work team, 2014; Saleh, 2015)
(Azhar, 2011; Gu & London, 2010) (Liu, et al.,
Competitive pressure
2010; Eadie, et al., 2013)
Clients provide pilot project for BIM (Saleh, 2015)
Collaboration with universities (Research
(Saleh, 2015; Almutiri, 2016)
collaboration and curriculum design for students)
Perceived benefits from BIM to client (Gu & London, 2010; Azhar, 2011)
Availability of appropriate software and hardware
(Gu & London, 2010; Azhar, 2011)
tools
Internal Push for Implementing BIM
(Rainer & Hall, 2002; O’Connor & Basri, 2012;
Top Management support Herranz, et al., 2013; Gerges, et al., 2016;
McPartland, 2017)
(Chwelos, et al., 2001; Hardin, 2009; Liu, et al.,
Cultural change (resistance to change)
2010; Gerges, et al., 2016)
(Arayici, et al., 2011; Migilinskas, et al., 2013;
Collaboration between all project participants
Gerges, et al., 2016; Willis & Regmi, 2016)
Improving built output quality (McCartney, 2010; Saleh, 2015)
(Sebastian, 2011; Azhar, 2011; Eastman, et al.,
Perceived benefits from BIM (concerted efforts to
2011; Elmualim & Gilder, 2014; Omar, 2015;
make clients demanding BIM)
Saleh, 2015)
(Arayici, et al., 2009; Saleh, 2015; McPartland,
Technical competence of staff
2017)
Financial resources of organization (Liu, et al., 2010; Eastman, et al., 2011; Succar
& Kassem, 2015; Omar, 2015; Saleh, 2015)
The desire for innovation with competitive (Omar, 2015; Saleh, 2015)
advantages and differentiation in the market.
Improving the capacity to provide whole-life value to
(Omar, 2015; Saleh, 2015; Gerges, et al., 2016)
client
Safety into the construction process (reduce risk of (Omar, 2015; Saleh, 2015)
accident)
(Arayici, et al., 2011; Eastman, et al., 2011;
BIM training program to staff Smith, 2014; Gerges, et al., 2016; Willis &
Regmi, 2016; Gerges, M, et al., 2017)
Adapting existing workflows to lean oriented (Arayici, et al., 2009; Arayici, et al., 2011;
processes Eastman, et al., 2011)
Decide which tools you will use (McPartland, 2016)
apply successful change management strategies to (Arayici, et al., 2009; Arayici, et al., 2011;
diminish any potential resistance to change Eastman, et al., 2011)
(Arayici, et al., 2009; Eastman, et al., 2011;
Collaboration between all stakeholders
Gerges, et al., 2016; Willis & Regmi, 2016)
Continuous investment in BIM (Ding, et al., 2015; Saleh, 2015)
(McGraw-Hill, 2009; Elmualim & Gilder, 2014;
Projects complexity and profit declination Jernigan, 2014; Azhar, et al., 2015; Omar, 2015;
Almutiri, 2016; Ball, 2017)
Approaches Adoption should be undertaken with a
bottom-up approach to successful change
(Arayici, et al., 2011)
management and deal with the resistance to
change.

(Liu, et al., 2010; Eadie, et al., 2013) concluded that the driving forces for the
implementation of BIM classified to the government and client pressure,

77
surrounding environment, pressure from competitors and the complexity of
projects and profit declination.
2.21 AEC industry and organizational internal readiness

Organisational internal readiness is mainly affected by four factors: (1)

Organisational decision, (2) Attitude of top management towards BIM
implementation, (3) Flexibility level of organisations to change, (4) Financial
readiness for funding. (Mitropoulos & Tatum, 2000; Ruikar, et al., 2005; Liu, et
al., 2010; Eadie, et al., 2013; Omar, 2015; Saleh, 2015). (Gu & London, 2010)
suggested evaluation and proper assessment of these factors to assure the
internal readiness of organisations.
Furthermore, (Gu & London, 2010) claimed that people, process, and product
are the essential controllers for organisational readiness.
2.22 Suggested strategies and Methodologies for BIM implementation

(Arayici, et al., 2011) claimed that setting a clear guidance and methodology
guarantees to achieve the ultimate benefits of BIM.

Several researchers developed frameworks, models, and methodologies to

implement BIM as follows:
(Olugboyega, 2017) Suggested framework to create a BIM environment (he
claimed that it can be created when BIM has been adopted or implemented) as
follows: (1) Acquiring BIM software technologies (according to the project goals)
and BIM hardware, (2) Developing BIM contents library, (3) Developing a BIM
standard, and (4) Setting up a BIM platform (interoperability tools, Collaboration
tools, integration tools, coordination/ clash detection tool and Communication
tools) according to the types of BIM software and BIM hardware.
In figure 30, (Wang, et al., 2013) developed a BIM user acceptance model
applying technology acceptance model (TAM) and relevant theories.

Figure 25: BIM Users Acceptance Model (Wang, et al., 2013)

78
 (Courtesy of Adam Matthews, Chair, EU BIM Task group) suggested another
strategic framework for public sector BIM adoption: growing capability, pilot
projects, measuring and monitoring, case studies and embedding change.

(Jung & Joo, 2011) proposed BIM implementation framework (Table 7).

Table 7: The BIM implementation framework (Jung & Joo, 2011)

Technical (T) Perspective (P) Construction Business Function (C)
1. Data Property 1. Industry 1. R&D 6. Quality Mgt. 11. Estimating
2. Relation 2. Organization 2. General Admin. 7. Cost control 12. Design
3. Standards 3. Project 3. Finance 8. Contracting 13. Sales
4. Utilization 4. HR. mgt. 9. Materials Mgt. 14. Planning
5. Safety Mgt. 10. Scheduling

2.23 The future of BIM in the KSA

According to (Jernigan, 2014), the worldwide change into BIM is inevitable,

therefore, countries who are not keeping up with that new innovative transit will
be soon out of competition game

Following the promising steps (due to the government’s efforts) of Malaysian

construction industry in promoting BIM (Latiffi, et al., 2013), could be beneficial
for KSA such as using data of a self-assembly 3D printer; which will be in level 5
after 2030 (BIM2050group, 2014).

The partnership between Tekla’s parent company Trimble, and Gehry

Technologies (the technology company created by the world-renowned architect
Frank Gehry) is considered a real step on the road of enhancing BIM adoption in
the kingdom (Saudi Gazette, 2014).
A further increase adoption of BIM in construction across KSA can be expected,
due to various international companies firms have multiple offices across KSA
which executing mega and complex (Gerges, et al., 2016).

(Construction Work team, 2014) predicted a 17.8% growth in the market value of
BIM rising from $2.6bn up to $6.5bn by 2020 stimulated by the general recovery
of construction markets worldwide and raised recognition of BIM benefits. Also
predicted further growth will be motivated by companies using the data for
building maintenance and operations, and that integration with building energy
management systems represents the next major step in its growth.

2.24 Knowledge Gaps

There is a need for further studies on BIM awareness, BIM definitions, changes,
and how these challenges should be addressed. A common and agreed upon
definition of BIM needs to be developed, as well as a methodology to evaluate
BIM benefits from a business perspective. An accepted and validated baselines
and/or benchmarks are needed (Mehran, 2016).

79
There is a little research on BIM in KSA. Almost no research on BIM in
developing countries exists prior to 2013, and the focus of the present
researches is limited to the three countries of China, India, and Malaysia. (Bui, et
al., 2016).

The study is trying to cover six knowledge gaps: raising BIM awareness, Barriers
diminishes implementation of BIM in KSA, ways to overcome these barriers, BIM
Benefits, key factors influencing the implementation of BIM, and Methodology to
implement BIM in KSA.

However (Farah, 2014) discussed the BIM awareness in KSA, benefits can gain
from implementing BIM, barriers and key factor influencing the adoption, his
study rely only quantitative data also his findings missed many points which
already stipulated in many literature reviews such as his result about the benefits
of BIM are only Collaboration and Coordination, Productivity, Changes in
workflows and processes And Market Opportunities however in section 2.16
illustrate many key additional benefits.

Despite (Banawi, 2017) investigate the barriers to BIM implementation in KSA ,

the study limited to the public projects, he rely on a case study which explore
one project in Rabigh , from the extensive exploring the literature review it
obvious that most of the barrier is considered as a barrier or not the main
barriers and can be secondary ones, for example, the barrier of the market is not
ready (Gerges, M, et al., 2017) confirmed that in Saudi Arabia market due to
the rapid growth of mega and complex projects the market imposes the
organizations to adopt and implement BIM. And section 2.17 in this study
illustrate many other key barriers that Badawi's research doesn’t deal with.

In spite of (Alhumayn, et al., 2017) concluded the barriers and strategies of

implementing BIM in KSA his study rely on only quantitative data as distributing
questionnaire which this method has its disadvantages and limitations also after
an extensive literature review his research missed many key barriers and
strategies.

Based on the extensive literature survey, it was found that there is no specific
research investigated the KSA AEC industry to propose solution packages for
the government to implement BIM. In order to fill this knowledge gap, this
research prudently investigated all these gaps and proposed efficient solutions
that assist KSA government to implement BIM smoothly and swiftly.

80
 Chapter 3: Research Methodology and Data Collection
3.1 Method of data collection

The literature review developed a profound understanding for the six

independent variables: raising awareness about BIM, the perceived benefits,
barriers hinder the implementation, removing the barriers, key factors influencing
the adaption and the internal readiness and of AEC industry and organizations
capability for implementing BIM.
Due to the quantitative research methods limitations and weakness; improper
representation of the target population, lack of resources for data collection,
inability to control the environment, limited outcomes, expensive and time
consuming, difficultly in data analysis and requirement of extra resources to
analyses the results (Sudeshna & Datt , 2016),and limitations of qualitative
research; findings cannot be extended to wider populations with the same
degree of certainty that quantitative analysis can, Ambiguities, which are
inherent in human language, can be recognized in the analysis and The aim of
qualitative analysis is a complete, detailed description. No attempt is made to
assign frequencies to the linguistic features which are identified in the data, and
rare phenomena receive (or should receive) the same amount of attention as
more frequent phenomena (Atieno, 2009). The mixed methods selected to
conduct this research to reap the benefits of all methods and overcome the
limitations and weakness of each method.

The research methodology consists of three phases (Figure 26):

First phase: an extensive literature review to build a deep understanding to

cover the stipulated research scope.

Second phase: the aim of the second phase is to explore each point and
contents or steps to develop a suggested methodology. The second phase
consisted of two steps the first is a questionnaire and the second is interviews to
collect the BIM user and non-user perceptions about each step that produces the
suggested methodology to implement BIM in KSA.

First step: Prepare a structured questionnaire survey which extracted from an

understanding of the literature review to be distributed via mail, professional’s
websites groups like LinkedIn, social media professionals’ groups like Facebook
and tweeter. Also, the questionnaire link distributed to the organizations that are
registered as members of Saudi Chambers which includes the entire KSA AEC
industry players. In addition to organizations that are registered in Ministry of
Municipal and Rural Affairs and municipalities for each region, avoiding
duplications was considered. Additionally, Saudi Council of Engineers published
the questionnaire in its monthly magazine.

81
 In addition to that structured interviews to fill the questionnaire via telephone
and face to face interviews. The questionnaire includes quantitative and
qualitative data so the two approaches were taken into consideration.

A pilot sample: Prior to finalizing the questionnaire, in October 2017 a pilot

sample of a carefully selected 12 professionals with average experience of 8
years in the KSA AEC industry. Where six of them represent BIM users and the
others six represent BIM non-users. These veteran professionals were selected
from local and multinational AEC organizations in the KSA market. The initial
questionnaire was refined based on the feedback received from the pilot sample
of the 12 professionals.

Afterwards, the final questionnaire was developed to collect the data, and hence
the final questionnaire was accessible via online survey platform dubbed
“Google form”. This platform enabled easy and swift filling of the survey via the
internet and then the responses were gathered automatically to save and store
them via an online database.

There are three different types of the data collection techniques under the self-
completed method: internet /intranet, post and delivery, and collection. The use
of the internet to distribute and collect data will help to cover a large sample in a
short period of time compared with other techniques. Using the internet
technique has a high confident that the right person will respond to the
questionnaire. However, if the respondent has not got it through a direct link by
his/her personal email the rate will be negatively affected.

On the other hand, the response rate in using the internet techniques is the
lowest rate compared with other techniques by 11% (Saunders, et al., 2012).
Avoiding time-consuming this study, use a multi-method quantitative data which
are an online questionnaire and structured interviews. The link to an online
questionnaire was sent by email to increase the confidentiality. The
questionnaire was available from 28th September 2017 till 20th December 2017
(about three months).

The questionnaire survey consists of eleven sections. Section 1 consists of

general information, respondents’ personal information and demographics such
as profession, years of experience in KSA, academic qualifications. Section 2
consists of respondents’ awareness of BIM, BIM user or non-user, BIM Software
that his/her Company use, BIM applications, beneficial integrating with BIM, BIM
Maturity Levels, the future of BIM …. etc. In section 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 each
respondent was asked to rate to what extent he/she agree/disagree with each of
the perceived benefits of BIM, barriers for the implementation of BIM, main
factors Influencing the adoption of BIM in KSA and the AEC organizations
capability to implement BIM, on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5,
where 5 represents ‘Strongly agree’, and 1 represents “Strongly disagree”.
82
The questionnaire was developed to collect the data from two groups (BIM users
and BIM non-users) who work in the KSA AEC industry. Both groups responded
to the same questionnaire.

The questionnaire survey was sent to 689 AEC medium to big organizations in
the KSA, however, the returned responses were 275 responses (13.0 %), the
uncompleted responses were 27 (9.7%) of the returned responses. Therefore,
the number of true responses were 248 (90.18%) of the returned responses.

Second step: Prepared structured interviews with AEC industry professionals

whether using BIM or not from deferent organizations and different sizes small
medium and large organizations.

Third phase: the third phase consisted of two steps the first is an online
questionnaire and the second is interviews to validate the suggested
methodology to implement BIM in KSA AEC industry projects from only BIM
user’s perspectives.

As the first step for the third phase, we collected the maximum number of
responses to the selected quantitative approach to understanding the impact of
the six independent variables on the implementation of BIM in the KSA AEC
industry (the dependent variable). Therefore, the quantitative approach was
found as a reliable methodology to test the hypotheses composed of variables
derived from the first and the second phases (Naoum, 2012).

As the second step for the third phase, structured interviews with focus groups,
who are BIM expert and BIM researchers, were used to validate the developed
model.

83
 Literature Review

Collect data

Interviews Questionnaire

Developing model

Model validation

Interviews Online questionnaire

Final model

Figure 26: Research Methodology flow chart

3.1.1 The Population and Sample Size

It was possible to collect data from the entire population. However, that would
have been time-consuming and it would have affected the budget (Saunders, et
al., 2012).Therefore, using the sample size helped to get the required result with
the right budget within the time given.

The sample is a small proportion that acts as a representation of the total

targeted population. The target research sample for this research study included
all professionals whether they have a good knowledge and experience about
BIM technology or not and whether they have a working specialization related to
the AEC industry (Civil Engineers, Architects, Electrical Engineers, Mechanical
Engineers, etc.) in the KSA market or not. It is almost impossible to calculate the
exact number of the total targeted population as the number of engineers in
Saudi Arabia according to Saudi Council Engineer (Aleqt, 2017) is 230943. Also
for more accuracy and as an extra reference, the website (www.linkedin.com)
was checked for the total number of engineers who has the location KSA. At the
time of the research, they were 211340. For more accurate estimates, we have
taken the largest number, which resulted 231000 as the target research
population. Statistical equations were used to calculate the sample size required.
Three different statistical equations were used and the equation resulting in the
largest sample size was used.

84
Equation 1 – Cochran Formula

𝑧2 ∗ 𝑝 ∗ 𝑞
𝑛
= 𝑐2

Z = Z value, taken as 1.96 for 95% confidence level.

P = Percentage picking a choice, expressed as a decimal, taken as 0.5.
q = 1 – P.
C = margin of error, taken as 9% = 0.09.
N= Total population, taken as 231,000.
n= Sample size.
2
∗0.50∗(1−0.50)
Applying the equation: 𝑛 = 1.96 =118.57 ≈ 119
0.092

Equation 2 – Slovin’s Formula

𝑁
𝑛=
1 + 𝑁 (𝑐2)
C = margin of error, taken as 9% =
0.09. N= Total population, taken as
231,000. n = Sample size.
Applying the equation: 𝑛 = 231000
=123.39 ≈124
1+231000 (0.09 2 )

Equation 3

(𝑧2 ∗ 𝑝 ∗ 𝑞) + 𝑐2
𝑛 𝑧2 ∗ 𝑝 ∗ 𝑞
=
𝑐2 +
𝑁
Z = Z value, taken as 1.96 for 95% confidence level.
P = Percentage picking a choice, expressed as a decimal, taken as 0.5.
q = 1 – P.
C = margin of error, taken as 9% =
0.09. N= Total population, taken as
231,000. n = Sample size. 2
∗0.50∗(1−0.50))+0.092
Applying the equation: 𝑛 = (1.96 1.962∗0.50∗(1−0.50)
= 119.50 ≈ 120
0.092+
231000
Thus the result of Equation 2 = 124 was chosen to be the required sample size
of this research study.

3.2 Reliability and testing the questionnaire data

3.2.1 Reliability

Reliability is the overall consistency of a measure. The acceptance value for

alpha if it equals to 0.70 or higher (Mirghani, 2016).
85
 Table 8: Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

.984 85

Cronbach's Alpha equals to 0.984 that means the data collected from the
questionnaire with highly reliable as shown in Table (8).

3.2.2 Correlation
This is a technique that can show whether and, how strongly pairs of variables
are related. P-values are often coupled to a significance or alpha (α) level, which
is also set ahead of time, usually at 0.05 (5%). Thus, if a p-value was found to be
less than 0.05, then the result would be considered statistically significant and
the null hypothesis would be rejected. However, other significance levels, such
as 0.1 or 0.01, are also used; depending on the field of study (Mirghani, 2016).

Table 9: Correlations
Enabling Evaluating
Ensuring several project Reducing
Project marketin performance & financial Information
Requirements g maintenance risk Model
techniques
Ensuring Project Pearson
1 .666** .628** .629** .703**
Requirements Correlation
Sig. (2-
.000 .000 .000 .000
tailed)
N 98 98 98 98 98
Enabling several Pearson
.666** 1 .564** .544** .536**
marketing Correlation
techniques Sig. (2-
.000 .000 .000 .000
tailed)
N 98 98 98 98 98
Evaluating Pearson
.628** .564** 1 .580** .587**
project Correlation
performance & Sig. (2-
.000 .000 .000 .000
maintenance tailed)
N 98 98 98 98 98
Reducing Pearson
.629** .544** .580** 1 .752**
financial risk Correlation
Sig. (2-
.000 .000 .000 .000
tailed)
N 98 98 98 98 98
Information Pearson
.703** .536** .587** .752** 1
Model Correlation
Sig. (2-
.000 .000 .000 .000
tailed)
N 98 98 98 98 98
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

86
The value was found to be less than 0.05, then the result would be considered
statistically significant (Table 9).

3.3 Respondents General information

The received responses are 272 while 63.1 % selected No and, finish the
questionnaire because they do not have enough knowledge to continue.
However,
36.9 % selected “Yes, and continued answering the questions” as shown in Figure
(27). This percentage means that there is lack of awareness about BIM
Knowledge in KSA. In spite of what literature stated according to (Farah, 2014)
reported that there is a high level of awareness of BIM technology in KSA AEC
industry.

Figure 27: Respondents knowledge about BIM

As shown in Table (10), the reasons that some respondents provided for not
being interested in BIM.

Table 10: Coding respondents’ reasons why they do not have interest in BIM
Reasons Frequencies Percent
CAD is enough 3 9.09%
Don’t know what BIM is 10 30.30%
Depends on customer 3 9.09%
have no time 4 12.12%
it is out of my scope 10 30.30%
Not needed in my work 3 9.09%
Total 33 100 %

The largest percent reported, ”Don’t Know what BIM is and it is out of my scope.”
Hence, this percentage implies raising the BIM awareness influence the BIM
adoption.

Figure (28), dissected the completed responses represent 25.4 % public sector

87
organizations and 74.6 % private sector organizations. This result means that
the public sector is less interesting in BIM than the private sector.

88
 Figure 28: Responses’ Organization type
Table (11), concludes that residential buildings represent 38.6% of the largest
percentage of respondents’ specializations.

Table 11: Organization specialization

Responses
Organization specialization N Percent
Residential 105 38.60294
Commercial 94 34.55882
Industrial 72 26.47059
Health‐care 53 19.48529
Environmental 48 17.64706
infrastructure 104 38.23529
Academic 62 22.79412
Other Specializes 9 3.308824
Total 272 100

As shown in Table (12), the highest organization size 64.0% are over 200
employees; it means that large companies are interested in BIM while the small
and medium have less interest.
Table 12: Organization size

Organization size Frequency Percent

1-30 33 12.1
31-60 33 12.1
61-100 12 4.4
101-200 20 7.4
Over 200 Employees 174 64.0
Total 272 100.0

89
A large percentage of respondents’ organizations (35.52%) are working on big
size projects (501M -1Billion), as shown in Figure (29).

Figure 29: project budget

The largest percentage of the respondents (36.76%) are project/section manager
(Figure 30). This means that managers are more interested in using BIM.

Figure 30: Respondents Position

90
As shown in Figure (31), most respondents (29.36%) reported that they
represent a Designer / Architect / Engineer. This means that designers are more
aware of BIM.

Figure 31: Respondents Role

Most of the respondents’ educational level is B.Sc. (69.85%), as shown in Figure
(32). This indicates that the first tangibles with the BIM are whose educational
degree is BSc.

Figure 32: Respondents Education Level

The most of respondent’s years of experience are 5-10 years (37%) as shown in
Figure (33). This is referred that there is lack of BIM education and training for
fresh graduates and the university students, which stated as a barrier to BIM
implementation.

91
 Figure 33: Respondents years of experience
The randomly tested sample covered all the KSA as shown in Figure (34),
however the received responses mostly from Riyadh 41.2%, Makka al-
Mukarama 13.2%, Eastern Province 6.3 %, Madinah 4.8%, Najran 2.9%, Tabuk
1.8%, Qassim 1.8%, Asir and Jazan 1.8 %, Northern Borders 0.7%, Jawf 0.70%,
Ha’il 0.4%, Bahah 0.4%.

Figure 34: Responses' projects located in KSA

92
 Chapter 4: Results analysis

This study tried to compare between BIM users and non-BIM user’s perspectives
of BIM awareness level in KSA, perceived BIM benefits, barriers to BIM
implementation, the solution to overcome the barriers, the key factors influencing
the BIM implementation, the AEC industry, and internal readiness, find
suggested methodology to implement BIM in KSA.

4.1 Questionnaire

Figure (35), reflects the limited awareness about BIM representing 60% of the
whole returned responses, whereas 15.6% are not interested, 44.4% not using
BIM. While 17.8 % BIM user, 12.2 % as BIM experts and 9.3% as BIM
researcher, this means that only 40% are aware of BIM in KSA. Therefore, the
critical success factors are related to raising the awareness of the AEC industry
key players and decision makers about BIM. This result contradicts with what
(Farah, 2014) found.

Figure 35: Awareness about BIM

A large percentage of respondents (71.90%) uses the Revit software as shown
in Table (13). This result is similar to that reported in the literature (Gerges, M,
et al., 2017).

Table 13: BIM software

Responses
BIM software
N Percent
Revit 87 71.9%
Archi CAD 5 4.1%
Vico 1 0.8%
Bentley 5 4.1%
Vector Works 1 0.8%
Naviswork 17 14.0%
Tekla Structures 5 4.1%

93
Total 121 100.0%

94
4.1.1 Respondents information about BIM
The respondents’ answers about the different areas of BIM application are
reported in Table (14). This result confirms with that reported in the literature.

Table 14: BIM Applications

Responses
BIM Applications
N Percent
Interaction with non-professionals 38 6.8%
Design analysis 62 11.2%
Drawing production 71 12.8%
Project scheduling programming 52 9.4%
Cost Estimating 60 10.8%
Tendering 53 9.5%
Quantity Surveying 66 11.9%
Site layout planning 42 7.6%
Support constructability and analysis 42 7.6%
Collaboratively 47 8.5%
Safety 23 4.1%
Total 556 100.0%

Table (15), presents the different areas that can be integrated with BIM as per
the respondents’ answers. The project management comes as the first area that
is usually integrated with BIM. These results are in line with the literature.

Table 15: Integration with BIM

Integration with BIM Responses
N Percent
Lean Construction 50 8.7%
Geography information system (GIS) 41 7.1%
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) 39 6.8%
Virtual Reality 57 9.9%
Facility Maintenance 45 7.8%
Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) 48 8.4%
Project Management 77 13.4%
Augmented reality 38 6.6%
Computer-aided facility management (CAFM) 39 6.8%
Health and Safety 37 6.4%
Green Building 54 9.4%
Construction Management Education 49 8.5%
total 574 100.0%

The major maturity level in level 1 with a percentage of 35.51% as shown in

Figure
(36). This result is close to other studies in the literature.

95
 Figure 36: BIM maturity levels
The current implementing dimension of BIM is 3D, as shown in Figure (37),
(69.29%).

Figure 37: The current implementing Dimension of BIM in respondents’ projects

Most of the respondents (70.48%), as shown in Figure (38), expected that there
will be increasing use of BIM in the future. This result is in-line with the literature
in KSA. However, in the other countries, the literature expected that BIM become
a mandate from the governments.

96
 Figure 38: The future of BIM
4.1.2 Perceived benefits of BIM

4.1.2.1 Client perspective

The respondents ranked the benefits of BIM from a client perspective as
illustrated in Figure (39) and Table (16).

4.4
4.32
4.3

4.19
4.2
4.12 4.14
4.1

4 3.97

3.9

3.8

3.7
Ensuring Enabling Evaluating Reducing Information
Project several project financial risk Model
Requirements marketing performance &
techniques maintenance

Figure 39: Benefits of BIM from Client perspective

97
 Table 16: Benefits of BIM from Client perspective
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Neutral Agree Total The
disagree agree Weighted Std.
Benefits Ranking general
Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency mean Deviation
trend
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent
Ensuring Project 3 3 14 37 41 98 .977
4.12 4 Agree
Requirements 3.1 % 3.1 % 14.3 % 37.8 % 41.8 % 100 %
Enabling several 2 4 22 37 33 98
.957
marketing 3.97 5 Agree
2% 4.1 % 22.4 % 37.8 % 33.7 % 100 %
techniques
Evaluating project 2 4 15 34 43 98
4.14 .963
performance & 3 Agree
2% 4.1 % 15.3 % 34.7 % 43.9 % 100 %
maintenance
Reducing financial 2 6 11 31 48 98
4.19 1.002 2 Agree
risk 2.0 % 6.1 % 11.2 % 31.6 % 49.0 % 100 %
1 5 8 32 52 98 4.32 Strongly
Information Model .904 1
1.0 % 5.1 % 8.2 % 32.7 % 53.1 % 100 % agree
Weighted mean 4.148 Agree

84
Respondents reported the following benefits of BIM from clients’ perspectives:
time-saving, complete on time, minimizing coordination problems, improve
quality, assure comparing apple to apple during the tender stage, well organize
and systematic, improve company strategy, earlier involvement of client in the
design stage, reducing cost.

Furthermore, one respondent reported that BIM from the client perspective is
very necessary for the planning and implementation of projects, but from the
beginning of the project and not after the start of implementation because it is
impeding the progress of the project.

4.1.2.2 Designer perspective

The respondents claimed the benefits of BIM from designer perspective are
facilitating visual evacuation plans, enabling sustainable analysis, producing
various design options and extracting fast IFC drawings respectively (Figure 40
and Table 17).

Respondents reported, also, other Benefits of BIM from the designer perspective
as follows: increase experience, quick review, and changes at the perfect time,
coordination, avoid clashes and errors, sharing information, quick quantities take
off. Those benefits are stipulated in literature but are not classified under
designer perspective. The literature mentioned these benefits in general for all
project parties.

4.08
4.06
4.06

4.04

4.02

4
3.98
3.98 3.97 3.97
3.96

3.94

3.92
Producing Various Facilitating visual Enabling Extracting fast IFC
design options evacuation plans Sustainable analysis drawings

Figure 40: Benefits of BIM from Designer perspective

85
 Table 17: Benefits of BIM from Designer perspective
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Neutral Agree Total The
disagree agree Weighted Std.
Benefits Ranking general
Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency mean Deviation
trend
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent
Producing Various 2 14 18 47 48 129 3.97 1.045
3 Agree
design options 1.6 % 10.9 % 14.0 % 36.4 % 37.2 % 100 %
Facilitating visual 2 4 20 61 42 129
4.06 .864 1 Agree
evacuation plans 1.6 % 3.1 % 15.5 % 47.3 % 32.6 % 100 %
Enabling 3 5 30 45 46 129 3.98
Sustainable .980 2 Agree
analysis 2.3 % 3.9 % 23.3 % 34.9 % 35.7 % 100 %
Extracting fast IFC 2 3 17 49 58 129 1.045
3.97 3 Agree
drawings 1.6 % 2.3 % 13.2 % 38.0 % 45 % 100 %
Weighted mean 3.995 Agree

86
4.1.2.3 Contractor perspective

The respondents ordered the benefits from the contractor perspective as enable
3D coordination, information integration, accurate BOQ & cost estimation,
supporting construction and project management, site utilizing planning, monitor
& control progress, enhanced ability to compete, automated assembly, increase
health & safety, and staff recruitment and retention (Figure 41 and Table 18).

5 4.33
4.5 4.04 4.04 4.16 4.21 4.12 3.94 3.9
4 3.61 3.42
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

Figure 41: Benefits of BIM from Contractor perspective

87
 Table 18: Benefits of BIM from Contractor perspective
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Neutral Agree Total The
disagree agree Weighted Std.
Benefits Ranking general
Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency mean Deviation
trend
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent
Enable 3D 3 6 18 37 89 153 4.33 Strongly
.965 1
Coordination 2% 3.9 % 11.8 % 24.2 % 58.2 % 100 % agree
3 8 30 51 61 153 4.04
Site Utilizing Planning .993 5 Agree
2 5.2 % 19.6 % 33.3 % 39.9 % 100 %
Monitor & Control 3 3 36 54 57 153 4.04
Progress
.931 5 Agree
2% 2% 23.5 % 35.3 % 37.3 % 100 %
Increase Health & 5 14 54 42 38 153
3.61 1.058 8 Agree
Safety 3.3 % 9.2 % 35.3 % 27.5 % 24.8 % 100 %
Accurate BOQ & Cost 4 8 20 49 72 153
4.16 1.014 3 Agree
Estimation 2.6 % 5.2 % 13.1 % 32.0 % 47.1 % 100 %
5 6 17 49 76 153 Strongly
Information Integration 4.21 1.011 2
3.3 % 3.9 % 11.1 % 32.0 % 49.7 % 100 % agree
Supporting 3 9 24 47 70 153
construction and 4.12 1.009 4 Agree
project management
2% 5.9 % 15.7 % 30.7 % 45.8 % 100 %

88
 Table 18 continue: Benefits of BIM from Contractor Perspective

Strongly Strongly
Disagree Neutral Agree Total The
disagree agree Weighted Std.
Benefits Ranking general
Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency mean Deviation
trend
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent

Staff recruitment 10 18 55 37 33 153 3.42 1.145

9 Agree
and retention 6.5 % 11.80 % 35.9 % 24.2 % 21.60 % 100 %
Enhanced ability 5 10 27 58 53 153
3.94 1.040 6 Agree
to compete 3.3 % 6.5 % 17.6 % 37.9 % 34.60 % 100 %

Automated 5 9 33 56 50 153 3.90

1.033 7 Agree
assembly 3.3 % 5.9 % 21.6 % 36.6 % 32.7 % 100 %
Weighted mean 3.977 Agree

89
Respondents reported other benefits of BIM from contractors’ perspective:
advanced coordination, cost savings, gives a clear vision help in planning,
control of cost and budget, discover conflicts and detect clashes, accurate
inventory, fewer clashes on site, facility management, increase productivity and
collaboration of all stakeholders.

One respondent concluded that BIM provides excellent coordination, good

presentation, predict issues before the occurrence. Furthermore, another
respondent pointed that BIM enhances bid accuracy with model-based
estimation and improved coordination with schedule visualization. Comparing
this result against the literature shows that they are similar.

4.1.2.4 Shared benefits (to all participants)

The respondents ordered the shared BIM benefits as: clash detection, time
savings, improving the quality and reduced rework, increasing efficiency,
enhance collaboration & communication, cost reduction, creation and sharing of
information ability, data lifecycle, reduced document errors and omissions,
improves visualization, reduced number of requests for information, reduced
change orders, reduce waste and value generation, reduced claim and law
issues (Table 19 and Figure 42).

90
 Table 19: Benefits of BIM to all participants (shared between client, designer and contractor)
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Neutral Agree Total The
disagree agree Weighted Std.
Benefits order general
Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency mean Deviation
trend
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent
5 9 12 51 76 153
Time savings 4.20 1.035 2 Agree
3.3 % 5.90 % 7.80 % 33.3 % 49.7 % 100 %
6 10 15 51 71 153
The cost reduction 4.12 1.082 5 Agree
3.90 % 6.50 % 9.80 % 33.3 % 46.4 % 100 %
Improving the quality 8 4 14 52 75 153
and Reduced Rework
4.19 1.062 3 Agree
5.2 % 2.60 % 9.20 % 34.0 % 49 % 100 %
6 9 12 33 93 153 Strongly
Clash detection 4.29 1.094 1
3.90 % 5.90 % 7.80 % 21.6 % 60.8 % 100 % agree
7 10 15 56 65 153
Improves visualization 4.06 1.096 7 Agree
4.6 % 6.50 % 9.8 % 36.6 % 42.5 % 100 %
Reduced Number of 7 10 15 56 65 153
requests for 4.06 1.096 7 Agree
information
4.6 % 6.50 % 9.8 % 36.6 % 42.5 % 100 %
Reduced change 7 10 15 56 65 153
4.06 1.096 7 Agree
orders 4.6 % 6.50 % 9.8 % 36.6 % 42.5 % 100 %

91
 Table 19 continue: Benefits of BIM to all participants (shared between client, designer and contractor)

Strongly Strongly
Disagree Neutral Agree Total The
disagree agree Weighted Std.
Benefits order general
Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency mean Deviation
trend
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent
Enhance collaboration & 5 8 17 50 73 153
communication
4.16 1.035 4 Agree
3.3 % 5.2 % 11.1 % 32.7 % 47.7 % 100 %
Reduced Document Errors 6 8 17 55 67 153
and omissions
4.10 1.052 6 Agree
3.9 % 5.2 % 11.1 % 35.9 % 43.8 % 100 %
Reduced claim and law 4 12 33 51 53 153
issues
3.90 1.052 9 Agree
2.6 % 7.8 % 21.8 % 33.3 % 34.60 % 100 %
Reduce Waste and value 6 11 24 51 61 153
3.98 1.097 8 Agree
generation 3.9 % 7.2 % 15.7 % 33.3 % 39.9 % 100 %
4 12 12 48 77 153
Increasing efficiency 4.19 1.050 3 Agree
2.6 % 7.8 % 7.8 % 31.4 % 50.3 % 100 %
Creation and sharing of
7 7 21 44 74 153
information ability: Life 4.12 1.100 5 Agree
cycle data 4.6 % 4.6 % 13.7 % 28.8 % 48.4 % 100 %
Weighted mean 4.11 Agree

92
4.4
4.29
4.3
4.2 4.19 4.19
4.2 4.16
4.12 4.12
4.1
4.1 4.06 4.06 4.06

3.98
4
3.9
3.9

3.8

3.7

Figure 42: Benefits of BIM to all participants (shared between client, designer and contractor)

93
Figure (43), shows the benefits to all project parties with the highest benefit is
reported to the client. This result is closed to what (Eastman, et al., 2008)
claimed.

4.2
4.148
4.15
4.11
4.1

4.05

3.995
4 3.977

3.95

3.9

3.85
Benefits of BIM Benefits of BIM Benefits of BIM Benefits of BIM to
from Client from Designer from Contractor all participants
perspective perspective perspective

Figure 43: Perceived benefits of BIM

4.1.3 Identified the Barriers
Respondents reported that change management is the primary issue/barrier as
well as the lack of competency. However, another said that the major barrier is
lack of people convincing the client about it. On the other hand, one respondent
claimed that the main barrier is the government did not impose to use BIM as
mandatory.

4.1.3.1 Personal Barriers

The respondents ordered the personal barriers as lack of understanding of BIM
and its benefits, resistance to change, lack of skills development, lack of BIM
education and lack of insufficient training (Table 20 and Figure 44).

94
 Table 20: Personal Barriers
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Neutral Agree Total The
disagree agree Weighted Std.
Barriers Ranking general
Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency mean Deviation
trend
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent
6 11 27 50 59 153
Lack of insufficient training 3.95 1.099 4 Agree
3.9 % 7.2 % 17.6 % 32.7 % 38.6 % 100 %
Lack of understanding of 5 9 22 50 67 153
4.08 1.055 1 Agree
BIM and its benefits 3.3 % 5.9 % 14.4 % 32.7 % 43.8 % 100 %

Resistance to change: 5 7 17 65 59 153

4.08 .986 1 Agree
Lack of skills development 3.3 % 4.6 % 11.1 % 42.5 % 38.6 % 100 %
6 13 22 51 61 153
Lack of BIM education 3.97 1.115 3 Agree
3.3 % 8.5 % 14.4 % 33.3 % 39.9 % 100 %
Lack of BIM knowledge in 6 8 24 48 67 153
applying current 4.06 1.077 2 Agree
3.9 % 5.2 % 15.7 % 31.4 % 43.8 % 100 %
technologies
Weighted mean 4.028 Agree

95
 4.1 4.08 4.08
4.06
4.05

4
3.97
3.95
3.95

3.9

3.85
Lack of insufficient Lack of understanding Resistance to change: Lack of BIM education Lack of BIM
training of BIM and its benefits Lack of skills knowledge in applying
development current technologies

Figure 44: Personal Barriers

96
 Also respondents reported that the personal barriers could be cultural issues,
most of the people are involved in a construction area are afraid to share their
data for lack of mutual trust and other reasons, lack of advertisement in
magazine and news on TV, insufficient fund, shared risk-reward, and lack of
conduct long-term relationships.

One respondent reported that “I am concerned that BIM designers do not have
enough real field experience to be able to design in a way that can be built cost
effectively and safely. Explained another way just because it can be built on a
computer screen does not mean it can be built in the field.”

4.1.3.2 Process Barriers

The respondents claimed the ordered of process barriers as changing work
processes, lack of effective collaboration among project participants, risks, and
challenges with the use of a single model BIM, legal issues (Figure 45 and Table
21).

Also, respondents reported that the process barriers can be of low maturity level,
software licenses cost, confidential information. Literature does not mention
these results.

3.85
3.8 3.78 3.78
3.75
3.7
3.65
3.6 3.57
3.55 3.51
3.5
3.45
3.4
3.35
Legal issues (ownership of Risks and challenges with Changing work processes Lack of effective
data) the use of a single model collaboration among
(BIM) project participants

Figure 45: BIM Process Barriers

97
 Table 21: BIM Process Barriers
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Neutral Agree The
disagree agree Total
Weighted Std. Ranking general
Barriers Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency mean Deviation
trend
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent

Legal issues (ownership 6 15 56 47 29 153 Agree

3.51 1.033 3
of data) 3.9 % 9.8 % 36.6 % 30.7 % 19 % 100 %
Risks and challenges
5 17 47 54 30 153
with the use of a single 3.57 1.031
Agree
2
model (BIM) 3.3 % 11.1 % 30.7 % 35.3 % 19.6 % 100 %

Changing work 5 11 38 57 42 153 Agree

3.78 1.032 1
processes 3.3 % 7.2 % 24.8 % 37.3 % 27.5 % 100 %
Lack of effective 5 11 38 57 42 153
collaboration among 3.78 1.032
Agree
1
3.3 % 7.2 % 24.8 % 37.3 % 27.5 % 100 %
project participants
Weighted mean Agree
3.66

98
4.1.3.3 Business Barriers
Time and cost of training, lack of contractual arrangements, complicated and
time- consuming modelling process, doubts about return on investment, the high
cost of implementation, and unclear benefits reported as respondents’ business
barriers (Figure 46 and Table 22).

3.9
3.76 3.78
3.8
3.7
3.7 3.64 3.66
3.6
3.5 3.44
3.4
3.3
3.2

Figure 46: Business Barriers

99
 Table 22: Business Barriers
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Neutral Agree The
disagree agree Total
Weighted Std. Ranking general
Barriers Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency mean Deviation
trend
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent

High Cost of 8 18 27 68 32 153 Agree

3.64 1.098 5
implementation 5.2 % 11.8 % 17.6 % 44.4 % 20.9 % 100 %
Unclear benefits 8 27 38 50 30 153
3.44 1.146
Agree
6
5.2 % 17.6 % 24.8 % 32.7 % 19.0 % 100 %
Doubts about Return on
5 14 40 63 31 153 Agree
Investment 3.66 1.008 4
3.3 % 9.2 % 26.1 % 41.2 % 20.3 % 100 %
Lack of contractual 6 8 42 58 39 153
3.76 1.020
Agree
arrangements 2
3.9 % 5.2 % 27.5 % 37.9 % 25.5 % 100 %
Time and Cost of 8 7 34 65 39 153
3.78 1.045
Agree
training 1
5.2 % 4.6 % 22.2 % 42.5 % 25.5 % 100 %
Complicated and time- 8 19 26 58 42 153
consuming modelling 3.70 1.153
Agree
3
process 5.2 % 12.4 % 17 % 37.9 % 27.5 % 100 %
Weighted mean Agree
3.663

100
4.1.3.4 Technical Barriers
The respondents concluded technical barriers as the lack of BIM technical
experts, the absence of standards and clear guidelines, insufficient technology
infrastructure, insufficient interoperability, and the belief that current technology
is enough (Figure 47 and Table 23).

Also respondents reported that technical barriers can be unfamiliar software,

lack of technical support, unreachable growth, different standards from one
region to another may cause difficulties when a person moves from one country
to another, lack of using technology and Lack of globally standardized coding
structures (i.e. Omniclass or Norsok Z-014) to enable the 3D, 4D and 5D
databases to exchange data. This result does not found in the literature.

3.9 3.85
3.78
3.8
3.66 3.69
3.7
3.6
3.5
3.4 3.33
3.3
3.2
3.1
3
Lack of BIM Interoperability Absence of Insufficient Current
technical experts standards and technology technology is
clear guidelines infrastructure enough

Figure 47: Technical Barriers

101
 Table 23: Technical Barriers
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Neutral Agree Total
disagree agree The general
Weighted Std. Ranking
barriers Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency trend
mean Deviation
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent

Lack of BIM technical 9 8 28 60 48 153 Agree

3.85 1.105 1
experts 5.9 % 5.2 % 18.3 % 39.2 % 31.4 % 100 %
Interoperability 8 5 52 54 34 153
3.66 1.027
Agree
4
5.2 % 3.3 % 34 % 35.3 % 22.2 % 100 %
Absence of standards
8 9 33 61 42 153 Agree
and clear guidelines 3.78 1.076 2
5.2 % 5.9 % 21.6 % 39.9 % 27.5 % 100 %
Insufficient 8 14 34 59 38 153
technology 3.69 1.103
Agree
3
5.2 % 9.2 % 22.2 % 38.6 % 24.8 % 100 %
infrastructure
Current technology is 14 28 35 46 30 153
3.33 1.240
Neutral
enough 5
9.2 % 18.3 % 22.9 % 30.1 % 19.60 % 100 %
Weighted mean Agree
3.662

102
4.1.3.5 Organization Barriers
The respondents reported the order of organization barriers as the lack of senior
management support, unwillingness to change, difficulties in managing the
impacts of BIM, the magnitude of change/staff turnover, the absence of other
competing initiatives, and construction insurance (figure 48 and table 24).

Also, respondents reported that the organization barriers can be company policy,
coordination is in futile, top management experience, competency, and
leadership.

4 3.94
3.9
3.9

3.8

3.7 3.67 3.65

3.64 3.62
3.6

3.5

3.4
Lack of Senior Difficulties in Absence of Other Unwillingness to Magnitude of Construction
Management managing the Competing change Change / Staff Insurance
support. impacts of BIM Initiatives turnover

Figure 48: Organization Barriers

103
 Table 24: Organization Barriers
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Neutral Agree Total The
disagree agree Weighted Std.
Barriers Ranking general
Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency mean Deviation
trend
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent
Lack of Senior 8 8 27 52 58 153
3.94 1.114 1 Agree
Management support 5.2 % 5..2 % 17.6 % 34.0 % 37.9 100 %
Difficulties in 8 12 41 54 38 153
managing the impacts 3.67 1.094 3 Agree
of BIM 5.2 % 7.8 % 26.8 % 35.3 % 24.8 % 100 %
Absence of Other
6 9 57 43 38 153
Competing Initiatives 3.64 1.043 5 Agree
3.9 % 5.9 % 37.3 % 28.1 % 24.8 % 100 %
Unwillingness to 6 12 29 51 55 153
change 3.90 1.101 2 Agree
3.90 % 7.8 % 19 % 33.3 % 35.9 % 100 %
Magnitude of Change 9 12 43 49 40 153
/ Staff turnover 3.65 1.127 4 Agree
5.9 % 7.8 % 28.1 % 32 % 26.1 % 100 %
Construction
Insurance
9 14 46 41 43 153
3.62 1.159 6 Agree
5.9 % 9.2 % 30.1 % 26.8 % 28.1 % 100 %
Weighted mean 3.7366 Agree

104
4.1.3.6 Market Barrier
The respondents reported that market barriers included lack of publicity and
awareness and lack of client/government demand (Figure 49 and Table 25). The
literature added the market is not ready yet, however, the respondents claimed
that the market is ready.

Also, respondents reported that the market barriers can be low realized benefits,
understanding the importance of BIM, and competency as well as lack of
stewardship.

One respondent reported that “no incentive for anyone to deal with life-cycle as
people will be dead! And Attention must be paid to marketing BIM. There are no
market barriers if management, marketing, and good publicity are available.

Figure (50), shows that the most frequent barriers come from the personal side.

5
4.5 4.3
4
3.5
3.5
3
2.5
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Lack of The market is not Lack of publicity and
client/government ready yet awareness
demand

Figure 49: Market Barriers

105
 Table 25: Market Barriers
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Neutral Agree The
disagree agree Total
Weighted Std. Ranking general
Barriers Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency mean Deviation
trend
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent

Lack of
8 16 27 49 53 153
client/government 3.80 1.176 1
Agree
demand 5.2 % 10.5 % 17.6 % 32.0 % 34.6 % 100 %
The market is not 12 32 38 37 34 153
3.32 1.249
Neutral
ready yet 0
7.8 % 20.9 % 24.8 % 24.2 % 22.2 % 100 %
Lack of publicity and
7 16 23 65 42 153 Agree
awareness 3.78 1.102 2
4.6 % 10.5 % 15.0 % 42.5 % 27.5 % 100 %
Weighted mean Agree
3.633

106
4.1
4.028
4

3.9

3.8
3.7366

3.7 3.66 3.663 3.662

3.633

3.6

3.5

3.4
Personal Barriers BIM Process Barriers Business Barriers Technical Barriers Organisation Barriers Market Barriers

Figure 50: The barriers to implementing BIM in KSA

107
4.1.4 Key Factors influence the adoption

4.1.4.1 External Push

The respondents claimed that in order to push implementing BIM; the following
are required: (1) providing guidance on use of BIM,(2) government support and
pressure in the implementation of BIM, (3) provide education at university level,
(4) developing BIM data exchange standards, (5) rules and regulations, (6)
perceived benefits from BIM to client, (7) collaboration with universities (research
collaboration and curriculum design for students), (8) BIM required by other
project parties, (9) client pressure and demand the application of BIM in their
projects,
(10) clients provide pilot project for BIM, (10) contractual arrangements, (11)
promotion and awareness of BIM, and (12) competitive pressure (Table 26 and
Figure 51). Additionally, one of the respondents said that other external push can
sponsor events like BIM Saudi day.

108
 Table 26: External Push for Implementing BIM in KSA
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Neutral Agree Total The
disagree agree Weighted Std.
Key Factors Ranking general
Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency mean Deviation
trend
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent
Government support and 10 14 17 40 72 153
pressure in the 3.98 1.243 2 Agree
implementation of BIM 6.5 % 9.2 % 11.1 % 26.1 % 47.1 % 100 %
Client pressure and 9 10 23 50 62 153
demand the application 3.95 1.160 5 Agree
of BIM in their projects 5.9 % 6.5 % 14.4 % 32.7 % 40.5 % 100 %

Provide education at 6 8 30 48 61 153

university level
3.98 1.079 2 Agree
3.9 % 5.2 % 19.6 % 31.4 % 39.9 % 100 %
Developing BIM data 8 5 32 47 61 153
exchange standards, 3.97 1.103 3 Agree
rules and regulations
5.2 % 3.3 % 20.9 % 30.7 % 39.9 % 100 %
Providing guidance on 9 5 20 60 59 153
4.01 1.088 1 Agree
use of BIM 5.9 % 3.3 % 13.1 % 39.2 % 38.6 % 100 %
contractual 9 3 30 60 51 153
arrangements
3.92 1.067 7 Agree
5.9 % 2% 19.6 % 39.2 % 33.3 % 100 %

109
 Table 26 continues: External Push for Implementing BIM in KSA

Strongly Strongly
Disagree Neutral Agree Total The
disagree agree Weighted Std.
Key Factors Ranking general
Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency mean Deviation
trend
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent
BIM required by other 8 4 31 53 57 153
project parties
3.96 1.075 4 Agree
5.2 % 2.6 % 20.3 % 34.6 % 37.3 % 100 %
10 4 34 57 48 153
Competitive pressure 3.84 1.101 9 Agree
6.5 % 2.6 % 22.2 % 37.3 % 31.4 % 100 %
Promotion and awareness 7 5 37 51 53 153
3.90 1.062 8 Agree
of BIM 4.6 % 3.3 % 24.2 % 33.3 % 34.6 % 100 %
Clients provide pilot project 7 5 30 60 51 153
3.93 1.037 6 Agree
for BIM 4.6 % 3.3 % 19.6 % 39.2 % 33.3 % 100 %
Collaboration with
8 5 30 52 58 153
universities (Research
collaboration and 3.96 1.088 4 Agree
curriculum design for 5.2 % 3.3 % 19.6 % 34.0 % 37.9 % 100 %
students)

Perceived benefits from 8 2 33 54 56 153

BIM to client
3.97 1.054 3 Agree
5.3 % 1.3 % 21.6 % 35.3 % 36.6 % 100 %
Weighted mean 3.9475 Agree

110