Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 1 results ...
Aibinu, A and Papadonikolaki, E (2016) BIM Implementation and Project Coordination in Design-Build Procurement . In: Chan, P W and Neilson, C J (Eds.), Proceedings 32nd Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2016, Manchester UK. Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 15–24.
- Type: Conference Proceedings
- Keywords: building information modelling, coordination, procurement.
- ISBN/ISSN: 978-0-9955463-0-1
- URL: http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-docs/proceedings/0204e3c91ac6efe09999d1b04e2b9f29.pdf
Comparative case studies of BIM implementation could help reduce the uncertainties around BIM adoption over time. The BIM management structure, BIM deployment activities, roles of parties, BIM processes, challenges and outcomes in two Dutch projects were examined and compared. Data were obtained via project documents and in-depth interviews with those involved. The findings showed that BIM implementation needs to be systematic comprising a set of interrelated activities, processes, and technologies. The aim of this paper is to showcase lessons learned from BIM implementation to engage actively and improve the BIM processes within organizations.
The two cases used Design and Build procurement, but they presented opposite approaches to BIM deployment: case A involved the specialist BIM consultant, thus it was “centrally controlled” whereas, in case B, BIM was performed by in-house BIM-knowledgeable personnel of the parties. In case A, BIM use was top-down, driven solely by the contractor as a means of delivering a better building at the lowest cost. In case B, BIM use was ground-up as a common strategic decision by the contractor and the sub-contractors to deliver “as-built” drawings and potentially master the use of BIM in their future projects.
Case B was more ‘distributed’ and the organizations involved were more empowered to use BIM. The more ‘centralized’ but inclusive approach towards BIM in case A implied a demand for high-quality standards that challenged any ad-hoc approaches. In case B, BIM was used from the project initiation phases (LoD 100) until the hand-over (as-built BIM), presenting a higher level of BIM use when compared with case A, where BIM was used from schematic design (LOD300) to construction preparation phase (LOD400). The engagement of organizations in both ‘distributed’ and ‘centrally’ controlled BIM adoption environments could potentially contribute to effective diffusion and development of BIM knowledge and higher BIM maturity.