Evaluations of BIM: Frameworks and perspectives

Nepal, MP; Jupp, JR; Aibinu, AA

Evaluations of BIM: Frameworks and perspectives

Nepal, MP Jupp, JR

Aibinu, AA

Permalink

Publication Type:: Conference Proceeding
Citation:: Computing in Civil and Building Engineering - Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering, 2014, pp. 769 - 776
Issue Date:: 2014-01-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Accepted Manuscript versionAdobe PDF (1.06 MB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Nepal, MP	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Jupp, JR https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3774-261X	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Aibinu, AA	en_US
dc.date.issued	2014-01-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Computing in Civil and Building Engineering - Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering, 2014, pp. 769 - 776	en_US
dc.identifier.isbn	9780784413616	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/41623
dc.description.abstract	© ASCE 2014. This paper examines the evaluation of BIM-enabled projects. It provides a critical review of the three main areas of measurement, namely: technology, organization/people and process. Using two documented case studies of BIM implementation, the paper illustrates the benefits realized by project owners and contractors, and illustrates a lack of attention relative to contextual factors affecting the adoption and deployment of BIM. The paper has three main contributions. First, it identifies and discusses the lack of and difficulty surrounding standardized assessment methods for evaluating BIM-enabled projects. Second, it proposes a conceptual model that includes contextual attributes and demonstrates how the proposed framework reaches beyond simple evaluation to encompass the documentation of BIM's benefits, lessons learned, challenges and adopted solutions. Third, it shows how the framework can account for existing business processes, organizational process assets, and enterprise level factors. The paper aims to provide a conceptual basis for evaluation and a starting point for benchmarking.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Computing in Civil and Building Engineering - Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1061/9780784413616.096	en_US
dc.title	Evaluations of BIM: Frameworks and perspectives	en_US
dc.type	Conference Proceeding
utslib.for	1202 Building	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/e-Press
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology/School of Professional Practice and Leadership
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CCDP - Contemporary Design Practice
utslib.copyright.status	open_access
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US

Abstract:

© ASCE 2014. This paper examines the evaluation of BIM-enabled projects. It provides a critical review of the three main areas of measurement, namely: technology, organization/people and process. Using two documented case studies of BIM implementation, the paper illustrates the benefits realized by project owners and contractors, and illustrates a lack of attention relative to contextual factors affecting the adoption and deployment of BIM. The paper has three main contributions. First, it identifies and discusses the lack of and difficulty surrounding standardized assessment methods for evaluating BIM-enabled projects. Second, it proposes a conceptual model that includes contextual attributes and demonstrates how the proposed framework reaches beyond simple evaluation to encompass the documentation of BIM's benefits, lessons learned, challenges and adopted solutions. Third, it shows how the framework can account for existing business processes, organizational process assets, and enterprise level factors. The paper aims to provide a conceptual basis for evaluation and a starting point for benchmarking.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/41623