Bridging the gap between theory and practice for adopting meaningful collaborative BIM processes in infrastructure projects, utilising multi-criteria decision making (MCDM)

Abstract

Existing research spanning academic and industrial literature shows that due to the ever-increasing number of descriptions of BIM on top of a saturation of standards methods and procedures, with little evidence on how to achieve goals for truly collaborative BIM, a gap is forming between theoretical and applied BIM, and thusly reducing the potential advantages and benefits of implemented BIM. Objectives set as part of this research, post systematic review of both academic and industrial literature were to firstly define a common meaning of what collaborative BIM is through the development of a syntax to support a hypothetical infrastructure project utilising academic and industry BIM experts. This was then followed by bringing to the front the inefficiencies in their current form and define how the fundamental parts of BIM are assigned and then prioritised both qualitatively and quantitively, in order to enhance information clarity (goals and objective achievement) and inconsistency reduction towards better ways of implementation. Conclusive findings derived from this research states that information management was determined by the focus group in being the key and top-level component in achieving collaborative BIM, which was determined via the contribution and development of an objective focused implementation framework adapted from the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). This methodology increases the certainty of goal attainment for project team members, by presenting them with a dynamic qualitative and quantitative methodology that guides, determines and agrees the objective focus in an adaptable method through focal clarity of the intended use and what is required to be achieved through the adoption of collaborative BIM for a range of stakeholders. In summary, the research findings herein assert the need and benefit of objectifying collectively agreed focus on the desire of collaborative BIM including a range of stakeholders. Furthermore, inconsistencies towards agreements of standardisation and quality assurance are revealed, which is countered and supported by the developed novel methodology, in order to reduce the impact of such lack of consensus going forwards towards seeking better understanding and thus implementation of collaborative BIM.