University of Twente Student Theses
BIM maturity on project level
Meijer, I. (2020) BIM maturity on project level.
|
PDF
4MB |
| Abstract: | Digitization in the construction world is going prosperous and BIM is a central element in this development, it is favored topic in the construction industry (Succar, 2010).The benefits of using BIM are now widely recognized (Kushwaha, 2016; Li et al., 2014), although the speed of implementing BIM at different companies in the industry is low due to various hurdles. Transforming traditional approaches to a BIM approach is not an easy task, it requires collaborative efforts from all parties (Kushwaha, 2016). The use of BIM is currently applied to almost all parties, but not all parties in the construction sector are equally developed. Recent research (Siebelink, Voordijk, & Adriaanse, 2018) shows that Dutch organizations have also recognized that differing levels of BIM readiness within organizations representing the various disciplines within the Dutch construction industry is a serious implementation barrier to BIM supported collaboration between parties. Many companies still experience many differences in the level of working methods by different parties with regard to the use of BIM (Wolf, 2018). Since they have all differences in the level of working, the cooperation becomes difficult. It appears that the inconsistent BIM maturity levels across collaborating parties in a project limit the degree to which BIM goals and accompanying expectations can be realized, especially regarding BIM uses with extensive data exchange between parties (Siebelink et al., 2018). Various studies have been done on the BIM maturity levels at diverse levels. It is applied at the national level as well as to stakeholders, organizational and the renovation sector. Different tools are therefore applied at many levels, but specifically at project level is still a gap. Investigating the potential of the developed BIM maturity model on the project level is particularly relevant because cooperation aspects are expected to be particularly beneficial within a project context. The aim of the research is to gain insight into the differences between the parties' perception of the BIM maturity of the project as a whole on the collaboration on this project. The framework used for this research is based on the maturity model of Siebelink et al. (2018) and linked to the approach of Eisenhardt (1989). The structure of the maturity model is divided into six main criteria namely strategy, organizational structure, people and culture, processes and procedures, IT (infrastructure, and data (structure). The framework was applied in four cases, the framework was used to gain insight into the differences between the parties' perception of BIM maturity and the project as a whole on the BIM collaboration. The results show that the current BIM maturity level on the project differ in some cases by the perceptions of the parties. Some parties are closely connected to the project and do receive certain documentation, which results in a higher perception at the BIM level. Meantime, other parties are less involved in the project which resulted in unknowingness because they have not received information about certain aspects. From the case data, most of the differences in perception between the parties were observed in the following aspects; BIM processes, strategy and organizational and project structure. It is concluded that projects that use a DMS system have a higher maturity on data structure and experience better mutually cooperation because everything is shared with each other and agreements have been made. Some of the individual parties score low on strategy criteria. This is due to the fact the parties do not know anything about agreements or they have not received it because it is a party which is less involved in the project. Motivating the different parties is an important aspect in the success of a BIM project. In some case studies there is given resistance, it is also not clear to a number of parties 6 whether there is education and training. This is due to the fact that communication is lacking among/between the parties and score therefor low on the criteria people and culture. The projects as a whole scored all relatively high on the following criterion; data, strategy and people and culture. The results show that the perceptions of parties of all cases differ sometimes from criteria compared to the project as a whole. Most of the times this is because the agreements are not known by the parties or not shared or set up sufficiently resulting in ignorance. The projects that have established these agreements since the first phase of the project score significantly higher in most aspects, and all parties are more aware of it. It is also turned out that projects with a lower maturity level, the cooperation is experienced as bad because it is unclear which agreements have been made. The parties are either insufficiently or not included in the agreements, which sometimes makes it unclear for the parties. When the perceptions of the parties’ match, the project has a higher maturity level and the cooperation on the project is better as well. The parties are all aligned, resulting in an integral whole. The consequences of differences in perceptions of BIM maturity between the parties are that they have poorer cooperation and experience more problems on the project. Another possible consequence of differences in maturity level is; it can pose a risk for good BIM use. When some people/parties are not aware of the agreements that have been made it will result in unknowingness about certain aspects resulting in a difference in maturity level. Also, the lack of communication during a project will result in bad collaboration and differences in maturity level. The consequence of bad collaboration is misunderstandings and even errors in the project. When the project has a higher maturity level, the experiences of collaboration is better. This is because the parties have coordinated agreements with each other and are all aligned. Projects with a higher maturity level experience fewer problems and the project runs smoothly, resulting in better cooperation. The results also showed that no difference is seen between the type of project in relation to the maturity level. It also appears that the level of maturity could depend on the project phase and the maturity could still develop during the project. Finally, it appears that certain roles or parties score more often higher than other parties. Contractors and engineers often score higher than parties further up the chain; suppliers and subcontractors. The projects can improve on many aspects, but it depends on agreements. It is advised to pay more attention to contractual agreements. By creating clarity through agreements, the motivation within a project can increase and the resistance can decrease. Collaboration can be improved by working at a joint project location, this also improves communication and makes it easier to ask for help which resulted in less errors. |
| Item Type: | Essay (Master) |
| Faculty: | ET: Engineering Technology |
| Programme: | Construction Management and Engineering MSc (60337) |
| Link to this item: | https://purl.utwente.nl/essays/83187 |
| Export this item as: | BibTeX EndNote HTML Citation Reference Manager |
Show download statistics for this publication
Show download statistics for this publicationRepository Staff Only: item control page