BIM-Based Research Framework for Sustainable Building Projects: A Strategy for Mitigating BIM Implementation Barriers

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Authors should improve the structure of the work. It is not clear and it is not understood. To do this, they are encouraged to review the authors' guide and other examples of work (critical review + analysis of a certain topic).

Although there is a great defense of scientific work, that scientific work is not new. A set of surveys does not contribute anything if the analysis and the questions are incomplete.

The key to BIM is the energy evaluation and the future management of the building. Nothing has been commented on the BEM or the digital twin. Work has been done on an outdated BIM concept. BIM has evolved to become a digital twin of the building that receives measured values ​​from it, stores them in its structure and allows the calculation of a series of indicators.

I think the work has an interesting base, but it is not well structured or executed. You have to go back to who is leading the BIM movement. The BIM movement is not being moved by developers or constructors, but by entities concerned with the energy component. We must work on the subject of the IFC database, its limitations and the elements that have not been developed. In addition to this, people's opinions are interesting but useless. People are totally unaware of the IFC standard and what is behind BIM in its current state of development.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Point 1: Authors should improve the structure of the work. It is not clear and it is not understood. To do this, they are encouraged to review the authors' guide and other examples of work (critical review + analysis of a certain topic).

Response 1: According to the reviewer’s comments, the authors’ guide has been reviewed.

To follow this guidelines, our manuscript comprises of following sections.

            Abstract

1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Background and Research Gaps
3. Related Work

      3.1. BIM Implementation Barriers in Global Context

                        3.2. BIM Implementation Barriers in Malaysian Context

4. Research Methodology

                        4.1. Data Collection

                                     4.1.1. Literature Search Parameters

                                    4.1.2. Questionnaire Survey

                                   4.1.3. Interview Session

                       4.2. Data Analysis

                                4.2.1. Quantitative Analysis

                                4.2.2. Qualitative Analysis

5. Results and Discussion

                      5.1. Ranking of BIM Implementation Barriers

                     5.2. Kendall’s coefficient of concordance (Kendall’s W)

                     5.3. Chi-square test

                    5.4. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient

                   5.5. Results of Factor Analysis

6. Results Comparison with Other Countries
7. BIM-based Research Framework
8. Conclusions, Limitation and Future Directions

 

Point 2: Although there is a great defense of scientific work, that scientific work is not new. A set of surveys does not contribute anything if the analysis and the questions are incomplete.

Response 2: Thank you for your comment. This work is more emphasised on the sustainable building projects of Malaysia. As indicated in introduction, that few studies have been conducted on barriers to the implementation of BIM in sustainable building projects. Memon et al. [4] used a survey of sample size questionnaires (n=95) to report the barriers and found that BIM adoption in Malaysian construction was very low. However the current analysis expands the scale of the study by increasing the number of survey respondents (n=185). In addition, Zahrizan at al. [18] have used the quantitative analysis approach through questionnaire survey to identify barriers and to report that the lack of BIM awareness is a crucial barrier to the implementation of BIM. Subsequently, Hamid et al. [19] performed a report on barriers, but limited to establishing only nine barriers. Wong et al. [20] conducted a recent study that emphasized the importance of transitioning from outdated approaches to sophisticated methodologies such as BIM in order to merge design and construction workflows with the goal of enhancing productivity. Therefore, strategies are needed to make the project success and help construction stakeholders to perform effectively in order to achieve the sustainable goals. As far as the analysis is concerned, this study emphasis both types of analysis i.e., quantitative analysis and qualitative analysis. The SPSS software was used to analysis the values of Cronbach's alpha coefficient, Kendall's coefficient of concordance (Kendall's W), Chi-square analysis and Mean score analysis, while NVivo software was used in qualitative analysis to analyse the data collected from interviews.

 

Point 3: The key to BIM is the energy evaluation and the future management of the building. Nothing has been commented on the BEM or the digital twin. Work has been done on an outdated BIM concept. BIM has evolved to become a digital twin of the building that receives measured values from it, stores them in its structure and allows the calculation of a series of indicators.

Response 3: The main objective of this paper is to “A Strategy for Mitigating BIM Implementation Barriers”, thus the barriers in different geographical have been identified and analysed via different analysis methods. However, the paper also revolved around “Sustainable Building Projects” as stated “high economic value and have a major effect on the environment” in other location “Malaysia has taken major steps to encourage and boost construction efficiency at the national level” that requires to elaborate on the BEM “Building Energy Model” within this context as highlighted by the reviewer.

As far as digital twin is concerned. Yes, we agree with the reviewer’s point that BIM has evolved to become a digital twin of the building. However, this research has been done in the developing country like Malaysia, where implementation of BIM is still in early stages. Although BIM has become a popular tool in many developed countries to address construction problems in sustainable building projects, similar attention still needs to be paid to most developing nations, including Malaysia. Hence, BIM standards need to be implemented in the Malaysian construction industry due to the significant importance of sustainable environmental policies, numerous standards and initiatives over the years. In addition, the Malaysian government plans to make Malaysia a nation that achieves sustainable growth by 2030. In the last year, another study was conducted to explore the level of adoption of BIM in Malaysia. This study found that only 13% of government and private participants use the BIM in their organization, which is negative evidence that Malaysia remains a long way from the role it should play in implementing the BIM. Therefore, it is recommended to implement BIM by eliminating barriers and providing the strategies for sustainable building projects. The valuable comments of the respected reviewer, regarding digital twin have added a further genuine guideline for future directions of the study. Authors are thankful for this guidance.

 

Point 4: I think the work has an interesting base, but it is not well structured or executed. You have to go back to who is leading the BIM movement. The BIM movement is not being moved by developers or constructors, but by entities concerned with the energy component. We must work on the subject of the IFC database, its limitations and the elements that have not been developed. In addition to this, people's opinions are interesting but useless. People are totally unaware of the IFC standard and what is behind BIM in its current state of development.

Response 4: Regarding the comments about IFC, the authors already mentioned this as barrier in table (1): Incompatibility and interoperability problems. IFC as we all aware is an open standard developed to solve/deal with incompatibility and interoperability.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This is an interesting study, and the authors have collected a unique dataset by using the mixed method and triangulation techniques for developing a BIM-based Research Framework for Sustainable Building Projects. However, the manuscript generally needs significant modifications to deliver concise and well-structured content. There are some comments for further improvement:

Introduction

Line 57-67; Authors may add the recent work related to the impact of BIM in the Malaysian construction industry as part of this section; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings10040066

Section 2. Is there any reference for the BIM definition? It is required proper citation if it is coming from any resources. BIM in this study defined as a Process or Technology? It would be good to clarify it in this section.

Line 104, Autodesk is the trademark. It is highly recommended to use the commercial brand with the proper format by using TM/®/©.

Research Methodology

In this section, there is no discussion on the method related to the Interview and any further analysis of results which will be used specific techniques in Nvivo software. There are missing elaboration statements that related to Phase 2&3, as is demonstrated in Fig 1

Line 185. The SPSS software is the application to run the statistical analysis. It is good to highlight briefly what type of statistical analysis will be implemented on this software related to questionnaire survey results.

Line 211. It is good to have a short discussion on the primary delivery of Table 1 and how these factors will be used in this study before jumping to section 4.1.2.

Line 234. Again it is good to discuss the main takeaways of those graphs in short rather than leave them without any critical discussion (similar to section 4.1.3. line256-262).

Table 3. Row 2 and 6 repeated, and it seems they are delivering the same coding theme. Please clarify and do the necessary revision. What is that number (#) under each category??? Please elaborate in your paper to give a better understanding to your readers. It is not elaborated how those sub-categories are extracted along with categories in the coding system.

Table 5. it is good to add those 5 groups if they are pre-defined in the earlier stage of this study into Table 1 for further clarification. Please clarify the definition of those groups are extracted from factor analysis or already defined by the LR study.

The External and Internal Validity of this study not discussed in this paper. Please do proper elaboration on the Trainagulation technique and validation of results by using Qualitative and Quantitative techniques. It would be good to discuss the proposed grouping in the Quantitative method compared to the main themes (categories) that achieved in the qualitative method as part of triangulation to wrap up with a clear ranking of factors impacting BIM implementation.

Reference:

Overall, the References are well structured.

Summary and overall Format:

The format of the manuscript has some errors.
It is good to add overall intro statements in each section to highlight the main covering parts before jumping to the sub-headings.

The manuscript, in some paragraphs, requires significant proofreading and revision to improve the quality of English.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Point 1: This is an interesting study, and the authors have collected a unique dataset by using the mixed method and triangulation techniques for developing a BIM-based Research Framework for Sustainable Building Projects. However, the manuscript generally needs significant modifications to deliver concise and well-structured content. There are some comments for further improvement:

Introduction

Line 57-67; Authors may add the recent work related to the impact of BIM in the Malaysian construction industry as part of this section; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings10040066

Response 1: Thank you for your kind comments and helping to strengthen the quality of manuscript. According to your comment, the recent work related to the impact of BIM in the Malaysian construction industry as part of this section;

https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings10040066 has been now added and highlighted for your kind consideration.

 

Point 2: Section 2. Is there any reference for the BIM definition? It is required proper citation if it is coming from any resources. BIM in this study defined as a Process or Technology? It would be good to clarify it in this section.

Response 2: In section 2, according to reviewer’s comment, proper citation has been added for the BIM definition. The term "BIM" has several contradictory and misleading interpretations. Definitions may differ for different people in distinct organizations, depending on their point of view, work type, and function. From a design perspective, for example, BIM is described as the digital representation of a project's physical and functional qualities [9], which relates to the methodology and technologies required to generate a model. In the construction industry, BIM is defined as the creation and application of a computer software model to simulate the construction and operation of a facility.

 

Point 3: Line 104, Autodesk is the trademark. It is highly recommended to use the commercial brand with the proper format by using TM/®/©.

Response 3: According to reviewer’s comment, the line 104 has been modified and highlighted for your kind consideration.

 

Point 4: Research Methodology

In this section, there is no discussion on the method related to the Interview and any further analysis of results which will be used specific techniques in NVivo software. There are missing elaboration statements that related to Phase 2&3, as is demonstrated in Fig 1

Response 4: The detailed description of method related to interview and techniques of NVivo software had been elaborated in sub section of research methodology 4.1.3. Interview session and 4.2.2            Qualitative analysis.

 

Point 5: Line 185. The SPSS software is the application to run the statistical analysis. It is good to highlight briefly what type of statistical analysis will be implemented on this software related to questionnaire survey results.

Response 5: According to review’s comment, it has been added in line 185 “In quantitative analysis, the SPSS software package was used to assess the feed- back of the respondents. The SPSS software was used to analysis the values of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, Kendall’s coefficient of concordance (Kendall's W), chi-square analysis and mean score analysis”.

 

Point 6: Line 211. It is good to have a short discussion on the primary delivery of Table 1 and how these factors will be used in this study before jumping to section 4.1.2.

Response 6: According to reviewer’s comment, short discussion has been added and highlighted.

 

Point 7: Line 234. Again it is good to discuss the main takeaways of those graphs in short rather than leave them without any critical discussion (similar to section 4.1.3. line256-262).

Response 7: According to reviewer’s comment, a brief discussion has been added and highlighted after the graphs.

 

Point 8: Table 3. Row 2 and 6 repeated, and it seems they are delivering the same coding theme. Please clarify and do the necessary revision. What is that number (#) under each category??? Please elaborate in your paper to give a better understanding to your readers. It is not elaborated how those sub-categories are extracted along with categories in the coding system.

Response 8: Thank you very much to highlight such an important point. The repetition of row 2 and 6 has been modified.

To comprehend the many view points, a qualitative approach like as interviews are regarded valuable. It not only helps to gather people's ideas, opinions, attitudes, experiences, predictions, and behaviors, but it also provides insights into how people see the world. The coding scheme, such as open coding, has been introduced in the qualitative study. After evaluating the data of the interviews, it was sorted into themes of concepts and assigned specific codes in open coding. For example, data “to promote and adopt BIM in sustainable construction projects, necessary BIM standards have been introduced”. This subject and idea has been assigned a category “Development BIM guidelines” which was divided into sub categories: 'positive attitude' and 'appropriate learning environment.' Furthermore, the "government must establish BIM cell unit and allocate defined budget for BIM implementation." This theme and concept was broken down into subcategory "government policies". The details of the coding theme are shown in Table 3. It is also used to collect information from previous codes and break it into categories and sub-categories. Several scholars have presented data to support the usage of the open coding theme.[1], [2], [3].

[1]      D.-G.J. Opoku, J. Ayarkwa, K. Agyekum, Barriers to environmental sustainability of construction projects, Smart Sustain. Built Environ. (2019).

[2]      P.X.W. Zou, D. Wagle, M. Alam, Strategies for minimizing building energy performance gaps between the design intend and the reality, Energy Build. 191 (2019) 31–41.

[3]      S. Sohu, A.F. Chandio, Identification of causes and minimization of delays in highway projects of Pakistan, Mehran Univ. Res. J. Eng. Technol. 38 (2019) 103–112.

Point 9: Table 5. it is good to add those 5 groups if they are pre-defined in the earlier stage of this study into Table 1 for further clarification. Please clarify the definition of those groups are extracted from factor analysis or already defined by the LR study.

Response 9: The factor study of BIM implementation barriers in sustainable building projects yielded five groupings. Group 1 was for government-related barriers, Group 2 was for market-related barriers, Group 3 was for personal-related barriers, Group 4 was for construction environment-related barriers, and Group 5 was for cost–risk barriers. Because these groups are formed based on the outcomes of factor loadings, it is more appropriate to include them in table 5 rather than table 1. Because the obstacles in table 1 were identified from the LR study, these groups had the right place in the shape of group creation following the factor analysis.

 

Point 10: The External and Internal Validity of this study not discussed in this paper. Please do proper elaboration on the Triangulation technique and validation of results by using Qualitative and Quantitative techniques. It would be good to discuss the proposed grouping in the Quantitative method compared to the main themes (categories) that achieved in the qualitative method as part of triangulation to wrap up with a clear ranking of factors impacting BIM implementation.

Response 10: The validity of an item tells us whether it measures or describes what it is designed to measure or describe. There were two forms of validity investigated in this study: (1) internal validity and (2) external validity. The degree to which a researcher draws accurate conclusions from the results is referred to as internal validity. The degree to which the findings of one study can be repeated or extrapolated to different samples, research locations, and methodologies is referred to as external validity. Internal and external validity were assessed subjectively by the researchers rather than statistically. The 20 variables are judged to have internal and external validity since they were based on an extensive examination of the literature, thorough design of the research methodology, and rigorous reviews by the 5 senior professional practitioners. The final questionnaire was designed after careful consideration of existing literature in the domain of BIM implementation barriers. Prior to the final questionnaire survey, a semi-structured interview was arranged to ensure the potential and appropriateness of the questionnaire in the context of the BIM implementation barriers. In the pilot study, the feedback from five participants was used to further improve the questions prior to the actual questionnaire survey. The pilot survey consisted of two professors, two assistant professors and one postgraduate researcher. The questionnaire was finalized based on feedback from the pilot study.

 

Point 11: Summary and overall Format:

The format of the manuscript has some errors.

It is good to add overall intro statements in each section to highlight the main covering parts before jumping to the sub-headings.

Response 11: According to reviewer’s comment, an overall introduction statements have been added to highlight the main covering parts.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

-