This article was downloaded by: [University of Glasgow]

On: 24 July 2013, At: 06:59

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Construction

Education and Research
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uice20

BIM Experiences and Expectations: The

Constructors' Perspective
a

Kihong Ku DDES & Mojtaba Taiebat M.SC.

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg,

Virginia
Published online: 26 Aug 2011.

To cite this article: Kihong Ku DDES & Mojtaba Taiebat M.SC. (2011) BIM Experiences and
Expectations: The Constructors' Perspective, International Journal of Construction Education and
Research, 7:3, 175-197, DOI: 10.1080/15578771.2010.544155
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15578771.2010.544155

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions

International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 7:175197, 2011

Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1557-8771 print=1550-3984 online
DOI: 10.1080/15578771.2010.544155

BIM Experiences and Expectations:

The Constructors Perspective
KIHONG KU, DDES AND MOJTABA TAIEBAT, M.SC.

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia

Building Information Modeling (BIM) applications are being rapidly embraced
by the construction industry to reduce cost, time, and enhance quality as well as
environmental sustainability. As a result many construction firms are gaining experience with these new tools and processes and changing their expectations from
university graduates. As many construction programs strive to deliver curriculum
and research that is relevant to the industry, it is essential to accurately understand
the impact of BIM on the operations and practice of construction companies.
Accordingly, this study benchmarks the current status of BIM implementations,
organizational structures, training requirements, and strategies of construction
companies and examines their expectations from university construction graduates
in regard to BIM knowledge and skills. An online survey was devised to understand
the current level of BIM expertise and strategies of construction companies and their
expectations. The survey invited national and regional U.S. construction companies
with a presence in the mid-Atlantic area. The findings of this study support the fact
that BIM is growing as an important component of construction operations and provide a benchmark to measure the evolution of BIM practice in construction firms
over time and across different sectors. The study provides important insights that
inform university construction curricular efforts.
Keywords BIM, BIM competency, BIM education, BIM tools, contractors BIM
experience

Introduction
The operating environment of the architecture, engineering, construction, and
operation (AECO) industry is undergoing rapid changes reinforced by globalization,
information technology advancements, and the imperative of environmental sustainability (Newton et al., 2009). Specifically, Building Information Modeling (BIM) is
one of the technologies that has gained momentum in this industry (Johnson &
Gunderson, 2009) and interoperable technology applications (National Research
Council, 2009) have received much attention as one of the opportunities for breakthrough improvement of productivity. Almost fifty percent of the AEC industry is
now using BIM and twenty percent of non-users are planning to adopt it within
This is an original paper. Preliminary findings were presented at the 46th Annual ASC
International Conference, Boston, MA, April 710, 2010.
Address correspondence to Kihong Ku, Doctor of Design, Assistant Professor, Virginia
Tech, Department of Building Construction (0156), Blacksburg, VA 24061. E-mail: kku@
vt.edu

175

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

176

K. Ku and M. Taiebat

two years and fifty percent of contractors report using BIM or BIM-related tools
(McGraw-Hill, 2009). Large owners, including the General Services Administration
(GSA), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), require BIM deliverables on
all major projects (GSA, 2006).
BIM is considered both a modeling technology and associated set of processes to
produce, communicate, and analyze building models (Eastman et al., 2008). Jones
(2009) describes some of the benefits of these models are better data for real-time
decision making, improved design quality, shorter delivery times, and the reduction
or elimination of rework after assembly has begun. In order to achieve most of these
benefits close collaboration between the primary stakeholders including the owner,
architect, engineer, general contractor, trade contractor, manufacturer, etc., is
required which fundamentally impacts the role and responsibilities of the participants and also how information is shared (Ku et al., 2008; Ku & Pollalis, 2009).
The shift towards an integrated design approach demands all stakeholders to rethink
the way they work and structure design agreements (AIA, 2007; Bedrick, 2006; Ku &
Pollalis, 2009). While a growing number of owners are beginning to require BIM
deliverables (McGraw-Hill, 2009) oftentimes it is not clear what deliverables to
request from the project team because of the lack of contractual or modeling standards (Ku & Pollalis, 2009). Considering such changes of the construction business
environment, it is important to benchmark the current state of BIM implementations
by the various stakeholders and to further focus on the needs of individual disciplines to successfully participate in the industry transformation (Taiebat & Ku,
2010). This study focuses on the contractors perspective and attempts to understand
the industry trends to provide a benchmark for higher education construction
programs to facilitate integration between practice and education needs. This article
presents the survey instrument and the results of an industry survey on BIM implementations by contractors and the expectations from construction program graduates.

Background
Many professional and trade organizations including the American Institute of
Architects (AIA), Associated General Contractors (AGC), buildingSMART alliance
(bSa) have made various efforts in supporting industry training and initiatives to
bridge the gap between academia and practice. Activities include educational
initiatives supported by professional knowledge communities such as the AIA
TAP (Technology in Architectural Practice), AGC BIM Forum (http://bimforum.
org/), bSA interest groups, or events including the AIA TAP BIM Awards. In
addition, a growing number of owner driven organizations such as the Construction
User Roundtable (CURT) or Campus FM Technology Association, advocate
integrated practice and BIM practices (CURT, 2009). According to the 2009 SmartMarket Report (McGraw-Hill, 2009), BIM has quickly gained momentum with a
75% increase in usage between 2007 and 2009, and 93% of BIM users believe that
there is potential to gain more value from BIM in the future. Becerik-Gerber and
Rice (2010) studied the perceived benefits and costs of BIM by U.S. AECO firms
at the project level. The study primarily presented the perspective of U.S. architectural firms who indicated a 0.2 to 25% cost and schedule reduction. Suermann
and Issa (2009) measured the impacts of BIM on the construction industry utilizing
six common construction key performance indicators (KPIs). The results showed
that BIM was perceived to contribute to positive jobsite performance in terms of

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

BIM Experiences and Expectations: The Constructors Perspective

177

quality control (rework), on-time completion, cost, safety (lost man-hours), dollars=
unit (square feet) performed, and units (square feet) per man hour. Considering the
growing embracement of BIM it is important to assess the current level of BIM
implementations in the construction industry to understand the changing perspective
of practitioners.
However, the ASCE Policy 465 Body of Knowledge (BOK2, 2008) emphasizes the disconnection between the AEC academic curriculum and practice needs.
Similarly, Sacks and Barak (2009) point out that despite the positive impacts of
BIM, lack of adequately trained personnel in BIM is a significant constraint hindering the use and adoption of the technology in industry. A few studies have conducted
industry surveys to examine BIM curriculum developments in higher education construction programs. Johnson and Gunderson (2009) studied the activities of ASC
members of construction programs relative to BIM, lean construction, jobsite field
management, sustainability, and specialty contracting and surveyed 126 ASC administrators of member schools. The study found that BIM was not sufficiently
addressed by many programs yet and discussed the lack of standardized adoption
approaches. Becerik-Gerber et al. (forthcoming) examined 101 U.S. AEC educational programs and found that each discipline is facing challenges in incorporating
BIM, sustainability, and other emerging knowledge areas, and emphasized that the
three disciplines need realignment amongst them to meet the changing industry needs
of integration. Both studies provided a high level view of BIM curriculum structures
but did not address the BIM knowledge and skill competence required of students.
Taylor et al. (2008) studied several courses in which BIM was an introduction to
CAD and 3D modeling. Taylor et al. believed that integration of BIM into academic
construction programs should not be a discrete approach into an already packed
curriculum but rather adopt broader diffusion to all the related courses. The study
did not explain how those courses were designed or how the courses incorporated
industry perspectives.
Relatively few studies have examined the changing perceptions of AECO industry practitioners such as green building practices (Ahn, Pearce, and Ku, 2009). In
particular, studies of emerging BIM technologies and practices and the changing
expectations from university construction graduates have been limited. Considering
the close relationships of construction programs and construction companies in the
U.S., it is important to understand the impact of BIM on practice and what the
expectations of construction professionals are from construction program graduates
in respect to BIM competencies.

Research Goal and Method

The purpose of the investigation was to establish baseline information of the current
level of BIM implementations and capabilities of construction companies and their
expectations for BIM knowledge and skills of new hires. Specifically, three research
questions about the construction companies approach to BIM were asked in this study:
1. In which domain areas of construction management do companies utilize BIM
and what are the challenges and obstacles?
2. What is the companys philosophy to embrace BIM and what type of support
structure is available?
3. What is expected of new hires in respect to BIM competencies?

178

K. Ku and M. Taiebat

Data were collected from general contractors and subcontractors via an online
survey.

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

Sample Selection
The population being studied was primarily general and sub-contractors who have
ongoing relationships with the School of Construction at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech). The majority of the respondents were
mainly based in the business units that focus their business in the Commonwealth
of Virginia, the State of Florida, States of North and South Carolina, State of
Maryland, and the District of Columbia. While the locations of the respondents
are near Virginia Tech, the sampled companies are a mix of international, national,
and regional companies that conduct business in multiple states including, the States
of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, New York, Connecticut, Delaware, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, West Virginia, California, New
Jersey, Kentucky, Texas, etc. Many of these companies keep relationships with
Virginia Tech because they are interested in industryacademia partnerships that
have impacts on university construction curricula and the knowledge of graduating
students who will become their future employees. The authors assume that the perspective and knowledge of the respondent is representative of his=her company
philosophy and goals, and that the respondents survey answers represent their
organizations viewpoint.
Instrument
The developed online instrument was posted between August 31, 2009 and September
10, 2009. The survey was sent to 180 contacts of the companies that were maintained
in the Schools industry member database and the first recipients were asked to forward the email to BIM experienced personnel at the executive level, BIM department
director level or project manager level or above. Finding experienced BIM personnel
in the respective companies was important to make sure that the individuals viewpoint accurately represented the companys philosophy and approaches.
The instrument developed by the authors for the survey was divided into four
subsections including: (1) demographic data of the company; (2) profile and BIM
experience of the interviewee; (3) BIM experience of the company; and (4) expectations of companies when hiring new employees. The instrument was first tested
within the School with faculty members and revised based on the pilot study feedback. The final survey draft was approved by the Institutional Review Board
(IRB) of the university (See Appendix).
Data Collection
Among the 180 companies 50 companies participated in the survey. However, eight
of the submissions were only partially entered and an additional eleven only completed the questions up to the demographic section and part of the BIM experience
section. These 19 submissions were excluded from the analysis. It was speculated that
one of the reasons the eleven companies withdrew was due to their lack of experience
in BIM. The final response rate of this survey was 17.2% and the 31 complete submissions were analyzed in this study.

BIM Experiences and Expectations: The Constructors Perspective

179

Analysis of Survey Response

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

Section I and II: Demographics

The first two sections of the analysis started with the demographic information of the
company and respondent. The survey questions avoided the use of marginal questions
such as genre, age, etc. (Suermann & Issa, 2009). One of the first questions asked about
the companys primary contractual roles. The majority of respondents (70%) performed
work as general contractors, construction managers, and design-builders with a smaller
number of subcontractors, consultants including architecture and service & maintenance.
Thus the results of this survey primarily represent the contractors perspective on BIM.
A second demographic was the project types of the companies. This data helped
to understand the perspective of companies based on the project types. The majority
of the respondents project groups were in commercial and office projects (48%) followed by industrial and retail project (25%). Thus the sample primarily represents
the perspective of building contractors.
Another demographic was the revenue and the number of employees of companies to understand the size of the participating organizations. The majority of the
company employee numbers were in the range of 101 to 500 with 15 respondents.
Companies with less than 100 employees and those with more than 1,000 employees
were equally indicated by 8 respondents. The major respondent group in regard to
the annual business volume was in the range of $1 million to $500 million (53%).
However, there were six companies whose revenue was above $1 billion.
Following the company demographic, in the next section, the respondents profile
was asked to qualify whether the respondents perspective could be assumed to represent
the companys philosophy and approach. With 49% of the respondents being high level
executives including presidents, senior vice presidents, vice presidents, etc. and 27%
being directors, 76% of the respondents were in high level positions, and the other
groups were project managers or BIM managers within the companies. Thus the sample
provided a pool of respondents that reasonably represent the companys position.
To understand the respondents level of involvement with BIM, the individuals
role related to BIM and the number of years of experience with BIM was asked. 19
of the 31 respondents (61%) oversaw, supervised or led the companys BIM
implementation. Four indicated they had a basic understanding of BIM and seven
had no exposure to or very limited involvement with BIM (see Figure 1).
The respondents also described the number of years of their personal BIM experience. The respondents had various years of experience across all position levels within
their respective companies. From Figure 2, seven respondents (22%) indicated that they
had less than a year of experience with BIM which corresponds to their previous
answers of limited experience with BIM. Fifty-five percent of the respondents indicated
that they had more than 2 years of experience with BIM. This result indicates that the
respondents sample reflects a diverse perspective of beginners, moderate and advanced
users although the majority of the respondents were familiar with the BIM concept.

Section III: Status of BIM Experience and Implementations of Construction

Companies
The third section of the survey was related to the companys experience and expertise
with BIM practices. Following the demographic of the individuals BIM experience,

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

180

K. Ku and M. Taiebat

Figure 1. Respondents personal involvement with BIM. (Color figure available online.)

this section asked about the respondents companys BIM implementation record.
Twenty-seven of the 31 respondents answered this question and 63% indicated that
their company had practiced BIM for more than two years (see Figure 3). Six
respondents indicated that their company had used BIM for more than five years
which illustrates the diversity of the companies perspectives ranging from new adopters to early and pioneering adopters. The number of years of experience informed
the subsequent analysis of the companys specific areas of BIM implementations,
strategies and knowledge levels. The analysis stratifies the different perspectives into
beginners, moderate and advanced users to understand how the pioneering companies positions differ from the new adopters. The responses were compared between
companies with more than two years of experience (i.e., defined as moderate=
advanced users in this study) against companies with less than two years of experience (i.e., defined as beginners in this study).

Figure 2. Respondents individual years of experience with BIM. (Color figure available
online.)

BIM Experiences and Expectations: The Constructors Perspective

181

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

Figure 3. Companies years of experience with BIM. (Color figure available online.)

Areas of BIM Implementation

One of the first questions was about which areas the company implemented BIM.
Figure 4 shows that constructability and visualization are the most used aspects of
BIM in all companies. In this survey, constructability tasks included clash detection
for trade coordination. Site planning, database information management,
model-based estimating, cost control, and 4D scheduling were the next frequently
indicated areas. A closer look revealed that advanced=moderate users selected 4D
scheduling and database information management as the second most used areas,

Figure 4. Areas of BIM Implementation in the companies. (Color figure available online.)

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

182

K. Ku and M. Taiebat

followed by model-based estimating, and cost control (Figure 5). The beginners
group mentioned model based estimating, cost control, and site planning as the
second most used areas, followed by alternative development and database information management. In general, the larger companies implemented BIM in more
areas in comparison with the smaller companies.
The same question also asked whether the specified BIM areas were performed
in-house or outsourced (see Figure 4). Those that indicated that their BIM tasks
were handled in-house were asked in the next question to describe the software tools
and the processes they used for the respective tasks.
Overall, companies with more than 5 years of BIM experience provided more
details about area specific tools and processes in comparison to the firms with less
experience. This may indicate that it takes time for an organization to properly internalize specific tools into the companys practice and work processes. It can be speculated that the respondents of firms with less experience (beginners) who did not
describe their tools and processes, are still experimenting with various tools and thus
consider BIM from a rather conceptual perspective as opposed to specific tools
based viewpoint. Nevertheless, the most frequently identified areas of constructability and visualization were being described by more than 88% of the respondents.
Table 1 shows the variety of software tools and processes that were identified by
the respondents. Revit and Navisworks appear to be the most popular tools being
used by many contractors including both general and subcontractors. However, a
variety of other tools are reported, including Tekla, DProfiler, Synchro, FormZ,
Photoshop, and specialty contractor tools such as AutoCAD=Quick Pen Pipe which
illustrates that company specific processes tend to evolve and become customized.
Barriers to BIM Implementation
The next two questions were open text questions and asked about the barriers for
BIM implementation. The first question asked about barriers in the areas the company was already implementing BIM. The answers are categorized into six groups:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Learning curve and lack of skilled personnel

Cost=lack of company investment
Reluctance of others (e.g., architect, engineer, subcontractors)
Lack of collaborative work processes and modeling standards
Interoperability
Lack of legal=contractual agreements

Figure 5. Comparison of implementation areas of moderate=advanced companies (left) versus beginners (right). (adapted from Taiebat & Ku, 2010b) (Color figure available online.)

183

Tekla, DProfiler, Revit, Excel,

Timberline, Revit, Navisworks,
Innovaya, QTO
Tekla, Revit, Excel, AutoCAD=
QuickPen, Navisworks, RAM

Estimating

Alternative
development
Constructability

Environmental
analysis
Safety

Nawisworks, Tekla, Revit, Synchro,

AutoCAD

DProfiler, Revit, Navisworks, RAM

Navisworks, Vela, Revit, Sketchup

DProfiler, IES, EcoTech

Revit, Navisworks, RAM

Performance
optimization

Productivity
optimization

Navisworks, Synchro, P3 & P6, Tekla

Software

4D Scheduling

Task

Table 1. BIM software and processes used for task areas

Process

(Continued )

Vela with Tekla

Naviswork for visual workthrough
Sketchup for visualization of safety conditions
Naviswork (visual walkthroughs and alternative comparisons)
Revit=RAM (design alternatives)
Nawisworks (clash detection, coordination and visual
walkthroughs)
Revit (quality control)
Navisworks (review for detailing=installation)

Excel (engineering manpower review)

Navisworks (for field team model review=prefabrication from
coordinate models)
Revit=RAM (for design and drawing creation)

Navisworks with Primavera

3D conversion to 4D
Navisworks (for field team model review=prefabrication from
coordinate models)
Revit=RAM (for design and quality control)
Excel (engineering manpower review)

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

184

Other

Site Planning

Facility
Management

Cost Control

Database
information
management
Sustainability

Visualization

Task

Table 1. Continued

Tekla, AutoCAD=Quick Pen Pipe,

AutoCAD=TSI Duct, Revit=CAD,
Revit=Navisworks

Vela used with Tekla

Navisworks (completed as-built models with catalogued locations)
Revit=OPS=TOKMO (not implemented yet)
Revit with Powerpoint
Navisworks with Google Earth and Revit
Navisworks for architecture=structure=mechanical reviews
Navisworks=Revit to model site conditions, site logistics,
sequences, etc.
Tekla for supply chain management
AutoCAD=Quick Pen Pipe for 3D pipe drafting
AutoCAD=TSI Duct for Ductwork
Revit for program information for owner review=approval (visualization during design and program=design validation)

Revit (work with design team to calculate=track LEED

requirements. New process in development)

DProfiler, GBS, Revit

DProfiler, Quest, Revit, Timberline,

TSI Primavera, Innovaya
Vela, FIMS Holder Custom Program,
Excel, Navisworks=ArTra,
Navisworks, Revit=OPS=TOKMO
Revit, DProfiler, Sketchup,
Navisworks, Civil 3D, AutoCAD

Navisworks (for presentations)

AutoCAD MEP=Navisworks (for visual walkthroughs)
Revit=Navisworks (for design=marketing)
Revit=Navisworks (for mock-up modeling)
Timberline (for cost tracking)
Revit (for design)

Process

Navisworks, Revit, DProfiler,

Sketchup, Synchro, AutoCAD=
QuickPen, FormZ=Photoshop,
AutoCAD MEP
DProfiler, Revit, Excel, Navisworks,
Timberline

Software

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

BIM Experiences and Expectations: The Constructors Perspective

185

Figure 6 shows that the most often mentioned barrier was the lack of skilled personnel and the learning curve of new tools. The investment cost of BIM in terms of
time and resources were listed most often next. While these two factors were concerned with internal company resource aspects, the remaining four items were related
to sharing BIM with external stakeholders. The difficulty of sharing BIMs with
external teams such as the architects, engineers, owners, and subcontractors was
mentioned as an important obstacle to BIM implementation, either because the
external members would not share their models or could not utilize the contractors
models. The lack of standardized work procedures for collaboration with external
team members or the lack of companywide modeling standards were also mentioned
as important obstacles. In parallel with the lack of standardized work processes for
model sharing, interoperability issues between software programs were mentioned.
Lastly, the lack of legal and contractual agreements that allow the sharing of digital
models in addition to traditional drawings was mentioned.
The second question asked about barriers to implementing BIM in future areas.
The answers were slightly different from the first responses and are grouped into the
following six categories:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Cost=time constraints
Lack of experienced and skilled personnel
Overall understanding of BIM
Lack of data on Return on Investment of BIM
Others capability to collaborate
Software related issues
Contract and standards related

Similarly to the first question, lack of expertise and experience and cost and time
constraints are the two most mentioned obstacles to BIM implementation (see
Figure 7). One of the reasons why these two categories were mentioned more than
others is because both beginners and moderate=advanced users mentioned this as
a barrier. While advanced users may have already invested in certain tools and processes, new investment is required to continue training and to implement new areas
and technologies.

Figure 6. Barriers to BIM in already implemented areas. (Color figure available online.)

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

186

K. Ku and M. Taiebat

Figure 7. Barriers to BIM in new areas. (Color figure available online.)

The moderate=advanced users indicated several unique factors that were not discussed by the beginners. Six respondents brought up the lack of historic data of
Return on Investment (ROI) which was important to determine the right areas for
BIM implementation that fit into their business model. For example, one mechanical
contractor mentioned that some of the areas that were listed in the questionnaire
were not applicable to their business. Another mechanical subcontractor mentioned
that they had experienced major cost and time improvements from their investment
and they wanted to make sure they keep moving in the right direction. While the first
investment is a significant barrier for many beginners, the ROI is as important to
many moderate=advanced users who need to make sure their investment is justified.
This is an important fact because users who formally measure their ROI report
better returns than those who estimate ROI based on perception (McGraw-Hill,
2009). Four moderate=advanced users also mentioned that the architect, engineer,
owner, or subcontractor were not knowledgeable enough to issue their model or
use the contractors model. This indicates that as contractors are expanding their
BIM usage for their internal operations, they are looking into possibilities to share
models with external stakeholders. Accordingly, three respondents pointed out the
technical challenges of integrating their BIM models with others systems such as
the owners facility management system. Two of the advanced respondents also
explained the lack of contractual and legal standards as obstacles to collaborating
on BIMs. One respondent described that because modeling standards do not exist
for new BIM software the owners do not know how to correctly ask for information
in their Request for Proposals. The three respondents that indicated the lack of an
overall understanding of BIM as a barrier were representing companies with less
than a year experience in BIM.

BIM Support Structure and Training Strategy

The next group of questions targeted the organizational structure for BIM
implementation and the training and support structure within the company. The
number of BIM specialists in each company ranged from one to 25 with the majority

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

BIM Experiences and Expectations: The Constructors Perspective

187

of respondents indicating 1to10 people. A number of firms which are known as BIM
pioneers indicated their number of BIM specialists between 17 to 25 people. One of
the larger pioneering construction companies indicated to have one to two people
per business unit. A related question asked about the companys strategy to handle
BIM tasks. The question asked whether the company had a dedicated BIM department or required all project personnel to become BIM competent. From Figure 8,
40% of the respondents required or planned to have their general project personnel
become BIM capable. Six of the respondents representing the larger firms with more
than 5 years of BIM experience and two companies with experience in the range of
one to two years indicated that they had both a specialized BIM department and
aimed to have all job personnel become BIM competent. One of the larger advanced
companies respondents who indicated both options explained that in the interim
they focus on specific individuals on each project to use the tools and understand
the processes while their long term goal is to make the majority of the company
to become knowledgeable of BIM tools and processes. Their BIM department will
continue to develop their processes, training, and serve as a central knowledge base
for BIM at each division. Another respondent mentioned they will need a separate
BIM manager on more complex and larger projects (above $200 million) but their
goal is to make BIM a common vocabulary of all job staff similar to CPM scheduling. Overall, the companies seem to follow a common trajectory of starting with a
few specialized staff members that work on specific projects or administer a central
BIM unit and in the long term gradually train more job personnel to become BIM
capable rather than depending on a few specialists. This result indicates the growing
need for general BIM capable personnel in construction companies and also the
continuing need to a few BIM specialists.
To understand if the company had a formal steering group, a related question
asked if the company had a BIM committee and asked about the committee structure. Nine respondents answered positively and the committee size ranged between
two to 21 people. Seven out of the nine respondents indicated that a higher level
executive (e.g., Executive Vice President, CEO, Senior Vice President, Vice President,

Figure 8. Type of BIM organizational strategy. (Color figure available online.)

188

K. Ku and M. Taiebat

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

Director, etc.) was involved in the committee. Six of these companies had experience
with BIM for more than 5 years and the other respondent was a company with one
year of experience who was proactively investing in BIM. The composition of the
committee members varied. Some companies had formal job positions such as
National BIM Manager and Regional BIM Manager, others included Senior
Engineers, Regional Coordinators, Group Coordinators, Project Managers, Project
Engineers, Preconstruction Director, BIM Manager, BIM Director, Vice President
of Corporate Communications, and IT Director.
The next question was an open text question which asked about the ways their
employees learned about BIM. The answers are categorized in four groups although
most of them explained more than one mechanism:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Self-learning
Seminar=workshop=webinar=industry presentations=conferences=etc.
In-house training sessions
Hiring experienced=skilled personnel.

Twenty-one respondents filled out this question. Figure 9 shows that most of the
answers (14 respondents) fell into utilizing workshops, seminars, conferences, webinars, etc., followed by in-house training offered by in-house specialists who were
trained externally (10 respondents). When this question was cross referenced with
the experiences of the companies with BIM, almost all of the more experienced companies selected both of these options for their training. This indicates a pattern of the
diffusion of knowledge for teaching BIM in a company. Another observation was
that highly experienced companies also indicated people teach peer-to-peer, learn
by trial-and-error on actual projects, or through technical journals and magazines
(9 respondents). The advanced users of BIM utilize a combination of informal
self-driven and formal teaching mechanisms. Only one company indicated that they
hired an external experienced staff as a method for learning BIM. This was a small
company with $45 million annual revenue. The respondents seem to primarily invest
in expanding the BIM knowledge base of their existing personnel.

Figure 9. BIM training mechanisms. (Color figure available online.)

BIM Experiences and Expectations: The Constructors Perspective

189

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

Section IV: Company Expectations of New Hires

The last section of the survey asked about the companys expectation when hiring
graduates. The first question asked to rank five functional areas of BIM knowledge
(see Table 2) according to their importance. Model specification which refers to
defining modeling standards for shared collaboration was valued important by the
majority of respondents (80% thought it was important or more than important).
Model validation which refers to making sure that the model received from others
is correct or that the model created by the contractor is ready to be used by others,
was also rated as important or more than important by 74% of respondents,
although more respondents (21%) thought it was unimportant. That may be because
model sharing with external stakeholders is currently limited due to practice conventions and contractual, legal issues. Model access management and interoperability
was also considered important by many respondents but less important than the first
two domains. Interoperability was not considered important by the majority of
respondents (55%). While interoperability is a significant issue to share models
between different software tools, the majority of the respondents may have
considered this a software developer issue rather than a contractors knowledge
domain. Model version control was the least important area to the majority of the
respondents (67%) which may reflect that contractors generally do not create multiple version models. It is speculated that this area is a relatively straightforward task
that the respondents did not see as important.
The next question targeted the expected knowledge and competence from construction program graduates and asked to prioritize them by immediate, near future,
and far future needs. The BIM knowledge areas choices used the same categories
that were asked to the respondents about their current BIM application areas in
Section 3.
Figure 10 shows that constructability and visualization were the most immediate
BIM knowledge demand areas from construction graduates. Cost control and model
based estimating were most demanded for the near future and facility management
and environmental analysis were long term expectations from new hires. This result
indicates the general knowledge needs of contractors. These answers were further cross referenced to the companies profiles to validate the responses. Under

Table 2. Importance of BIM knowledge domains expected from construction

graduates
BIM domain
Model
specification
Model
validation
Model access
management
Model version
control
Interoperability

Extremely
Very
Very
Highly
important important Important Unimportant unimportant unimportant
23%

23%

36%

9%

5%

5%

16%

37%

21%

21%

5%

0%

28%

17%

17%

17%

17%

6%

5%

14%

14%

14%

43%

10%

23%

18%

5%

23%

23%

9%

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

190

K. Ku and M. Taiebat

Figure 10. Expected BIM knowledge competencies and skills from new hires. (adapted from
Taiebat & Ku, 2010b) (Color figure available online.)

immediate needs, 18 respondents voted for constructability and 20 for visualization,

among which 16 voted for both. The companies ranged from very large companies to
very small ones and national to regional companies with a variety of annual business
volume. The only respondent who indicated both of these areas as far future needs
had little company experience with BIM and the respondents exposure to BIM was
limited. Fourteen companies among these 16 performed both of these tasks in-house.
The result of this question is coherent with their earlier answers about current BIM
implementation areas. The near future expectations of cost control and model based
estimating are both related to project cost. Those who mentioned at least one of
these two areas as near future needs had mentioned also constructability or visualization as their immediate needs. Those who mentioned both cost control and model
based estimating as immediate needs mentioned both constructability and visualization as immediate needs as well. These companies were the more advanced companies
in the sample. For far future needs, 13 respondents indicated facility management and
17 selected environmental analyses. Ten out of these respondents chose in accordance with the most popular immediate and near future needs. The cross references
validated that the results reasonably reflect the common vision of the survey pool.
The next question asked how they evaluated the BIM knowledge of job applicants. Each respondent chose more than one method and 19 of the respondents
asked technical questions. Following this option, 13 respondents relied on students

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

BIM Experiences and Expectations: The Constructors Perspective

191

resumes. All of the companies that chose either one of those two methods had more
than two years of experience with BIM while most of them selected both methods
together. One of the advanced companies respondents explained that they ask applicants to describe the processes of implementing specific BIM workflows they are
experienced with. Two of the respondents explained that they had not hired new staff
for BIM yet and not established formal hiring protocols.
One of the pedagogical questions of incorporating BIM into the construction
curriculum is about what to teach. BIM is more than just a tool which fundamentally
impacts the communication during design and construction and also changes the
way project teams collaborate. Thus, it is important to understand the underlying
concepts of BIM processes and also the underlying concepts of specific tools.
Because the learning curve of specific tools is significant, it is impossible to learn
all new tools and thus it is important to understand the concepts of the functional
software products that perform similar functions. To better understand what industry expects from new hires, the next question asked whether the respondents
expected new hires to come equipped with a conceptual understanding of BIM tools
and processes or be proficient in specific BIM software skills. Because the respondents represented a heterogeneous group with diverse levels of BIM experience, this
question was cross referenced with the BIM experience level of the respondents.
From Figure 11, 13 respondents indicated that they look for conceptual knowledge and understanding of BIM tools and processes and 11 answered they look for
both conceptual knowledge and proficient skills in BIM software. Only three respondents indicated that they look for proficiency in BIM software skills alone. The reason
why the majority focuses on the conceptual understanding of BIM tools and processes
is because each company has particular BIM processes and tools that they use and
thus it is rather advantageous to bring on new staff that has a broad conceptual
understanding of tools and processes. Figure 11 stratifies the respondents into groups
based on their BIM experience level to further understand the distribution of preferences. Because of the limited sample size it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions
about the respondents preferences but is it obvious that both conceptual knowledge
and software skills are required by the contractors. For example, the groups with 12
years experience show that conceptual knowledge is mostly desired from future applicants in comparison to other groups with different levels of experience.

Figure 11. Construction companies expectations (stratified by respondents companies BIM

experience) of their future applicants. (adapted from Taiebat & Ku, 2010b)

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

192

K. Ku and M. Taiebat

Figure 12. Specific software knowledge expected from new hires. (adapted from Taiebat &
Ku, 2010a) (Color figure available online.)

Subsequently to find out which specific BIM software skills contractors were
looking for from new hires, the last question asked to identify specific software tools
that they would want future applicants to be familiar with. Figure 12 summarizes
that Revit and Navisworks were the two most demanded applications skills. One
of the advanced construction companies respondent emphasized that they are not
looking for specific software skills but prefer good knowledge of BIM rather than
proficiency in specific packages because there are many products in the market. This
company did not list any software. Three other companies indicated a similar
philosophy but named a few applications while adding that being proficient in these
software tools would not determine their hiring. Six other companies that did not
respond to this question (or answered none) answered that they prefer conceptual
knowledge rather than proficiency in software.
In addition, some respondents mentioned AutoCAD as part of their expected
BIM software knowledge. Some of the respondents were mechanical, electrical,
plumbing contractors who use AutoCAD based custom manufacturing tools
such as Quick Pen Pipe or TSI Duct, and others were Revit users who simultaneously use AutoCAD to collaborate with architect, engineers, subcontractors
who work with 2D drawings. AutoCAD seems to be recognized to be a general
complementary tool with BIM tools. It seems necessary to continue to equip construction students with CAD skills while teaching new BIM tools. Other software
that were mentioned included Innovaya, Vela, Timberline, Revit MEP, Inventor,
RAM, Staad, etc.

Conclusions
This study provided insights into the current status of how construction companies
are implementing BIM in their operations and also measured their expectations from
higher education construction program graduates. First, the sample confirmed
results of previous studies (McGraw-Hill, 2009) that BIM is gaining momentum in
construction companies. While the sample size of 180 companies and response rate
of 17.2% limits statistical generalization, the survey sample represents the viewpoint

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

BIM Experiences and Expectations: The Constructors Perspective

193

of a specific sector of construction companies which are located primarily in the

mid-Atlantic region and focusing on building projects.
Second, 63% of the companies had more than two years of experience with BIM
and the sample included a variety of companies ranging from beginners with less
than a year of experience to advanced BIM users with more than five years of experience. Due to the diverse level of BIM experiences, several patterns of implementation
strategies emerged.
Third, the two most mentioned barriers to BIM implementation are the learning
curve and lack of skilled personnel and the cost or lack of company investment. The
initial cost of investing in new technology and time of training their personnel is
considered significant and highlights the need for BIM competent graduates. The
perceived obstacles also listed the lack of capable external stakeholders and collaborative work processes which emphasizes the need for multi-disciplinary efforts
to address this problem. As a general pattern, the respondents explained that they
started the initial implementation with investing in a few staff members and with
the ultimate goal to have all job personnel become BIM competent. Advanced
BIM users mentioned that BIM departments were necessary to act as central knowledge locations that capture lessons, develop strategies and arrange training.
Fourth, the respondents indicated that professionals obtain training via formal
industry workshops, seminars, and training sessions, or in-house training program.
Advanced users also exhibited a trend towards self-learning via studying of technical
journals or magazine and learning by trial-and-error and peer-to-peer teaching.
Thus, it seems that companies gradually transition from formal external training
for the initial adoption of BIM towards customized learning approaches to address
company specific processes and skills on projects.
Fifth, the construction companies expect construction graduates to bring knowledge in the areas of constructability and visualization at this point. As near term competencies, model-based estimating and cost control are expected and in the long term
competencies in facility management and energy analysis are expected. While the sample size is statistically not large enough to definitively conclude this pattern, it is clear
that these areas are perceived as beneficial BIM application areas by the contractors.
Lastly, the majority of the respondents indicated that they want to hire construction graduates who have knowledge of specifying model requirements which involves
managing and defining levels of details of models and model validation skills to
share models with other participants and also use models provided by others. The
respondents indicated that they prefer graduates who have a conceptual understanding and knowledge of BIM tools and processes. Many companies also consider
having specific BIM skills is advantageous but not mandatory.

Future Research
This study captured an important picture of the current state of BIM implementations of and beliefs among construction companies, their organizational structures,
and their expectations from university construction graduates. The study surveyed a
strong pool of respondents who interview at Virginia Tech for recruiting students
and it represents the perspectives of recent adopters, early adopters (Rogers, 2003)
and pioneers of BIM. This study establishes a benchmark for future studies to study
the trajectory of BIM practices and how company expectations may change in respect to BIM knowledge of construction graduates. Similar studies can be replicated

194

K. Ku and M. Taiebat

and expanded to measure the transformation of the construction industry across

time and different regions to understand the characteristics of broader samples.
To effectively bridge the gap between academia and the changing practice environment, parallel studies have been conducted to evaluate how AEC academia is collaboratively addressing the integration needs of BIM practices (Becerik-Gerber et al.
2011). A third component of brigging the gap between academia and practice
is understanding the perception of construction students and a study has been
developed to assess what the student needs are and how effectively BIM
competencies are developed (Taiebat et al., 2010).

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

References
Ahn, Y., Pearce, A. & Ku, K. (2009). Green construction: U.S. Contractors status and
perception. Proceedings of the International Conference on Construction Engineering
and Management= Construction Project Management ICCEM=ICCPM 2009, Jeju, Korea,
May 2730, 2009.
AIA CC. (2007). Integrated Project Delivery, The American Institute of Architects California
Council. http://www.aia.org/ipdg#ipdguide
ASCE Body of Knowledge (BOK2). (2008). Civil Engineering body of knowledge for the 21st
century: preparing the civil engineer for the future. Second Edition, American Society of
Civil Engineers, 2008. www.asce.org/bookstore/book.cfm?book=8241
Becerik-Gerber, B., Gerber, D., & Ku, K. (2011). Keeping architecture, engineering, and construction education in line with the needs of industry and the pace of technological innovation: integrating recent trends into the curricula, ITcon, 16, 411432.
Becerik-Gerber, B. & Rice, S. (2010). The perceived value of building information modeling in
the U.S. building industry. ITcon, 15, 185201. http://www.itcon.org/2010/15.
Bedrick, J. (2006). Virtual design and construction: New opportunities for leadership.
In Demkin, J. (Ed.) The Architects handbook of professional practice (pp. 3345).
Hoboken, NJ. John Wiley & Sons.
CURT. (2009). Collaboration, Integrated Information, and the Project Lifecycle in Building
Design, Construction and Operation. http://www.leanconstruction.org/files/Forum_
Meetings/Design_Forum_4-1Jun06/doc/CurtCollaboration.pdf
Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., & Liston, K. (2008). BIM handbook: A guide to building
information modeling for owners, managers, designers, engineers, and contractors.
Hoboken, N.J: Wiley.
GSA. (2006). GSA BIM Guide for Spatial Program Validation. Version 0.90.
Johnson, B. & Gunderson, D. (2009). Educating students concerning recent trends in AEC: A
survey of ASC member programs. Proceedings of the 45th ASC Annual Conference,
Gainesville, Florida, April 14, 2009.
Jones, S. (2009). Introduction to BIM: Special Section. SmartMarket Report: Building Information Modeling (BIM): Transforming design and construction to achieve greater industry
productivity (pp. 2124). New York City: McGraw-Hill Construction.
Ku, K. & Pollalis, S. (2009). Contractual Standards for Effective Geometry Control in Modelbased Collaboration. ITcon Special Issue, 14, 366384. http://www.itcon.org/2009/24
Ku, K., Pollalis, S., Fischer, M., & Shelden, D. (2008). 3D model-based collaboration in
design development and construction of complex shaped buildings. ITcon (Special Issue),
13, 258285, http://www.itcon.org/2008/19
McGraw-Hill. (2009). SmartMarket Report., The business value of building information
modeling: getting building information modeling to the bottom line. http://www.bim.
construction.com/research/FreeReport/default.asp
National Research Council. (2009). Advancing the competitiveness and efficiency of the U.S.
construction industry. Committee on Advancing the Competitiveness and Productivity

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

BIM Experiences and Expectations: The Constructors Perspective

195

of the U.S. Construction Industry. http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=

12717&page=R1
Newton, P., Hampson, K., & Drogemuller, R. (2009). Introduction. In Newton, P., Hampson,
K., & Drogemuller, R. (Eds.) Technology, design and process innovation in the built
environment (pp. 328). New York: Taylor and Francis.
Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
Sacks, R. & Barak, R. (2009). Teaching building information modeling as an integral part of
civil engineering in freshman year. ASCE Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering
Education and Practice, 136(1), 3038.
Suermann, P. & Issa, R. (2009). Evaluating industry perceptions of building information
modeling (BIM) impact on construction. ITCon, 14, 574594.
Taiebat, M. & Ku, K. (2010a). Industry expectations of construction school graduates BIM
skills. Proceedings of the 46th ASC Annual Conference. Boston, MA, April 710, 2010.
Taiebat, M. & Ku, K. (2010b). Discussion of the construction industrys evaluation survey.
Proceedings of the 46th ASC Annual Conference. Boston, MA, April 710, 2010.
Taiebat, M., Ku, K., & McCoy, A. (2010). ICT in integrated learning environments for construction. Ecobuild America 2010 Conference, Washington, D.C., Dec. 610, 2010. (accepted).
Taylor, J., Liu, J., & Hein, M. (2008). Integration of Building Information Modeling (BIM)
into an ACCE Accredited Construction Management Curriculum. Proceedings of the
44th ASC Annual Conference. Auburn, Alabama, April 25, 2008.

Appendix (Taiebat & Ku, 2010a)

Section One: Demographic Data of the Company
1. Company Name:
2. What are (is) the primary type of projects that your company delivers? (select all
that apply)
Residential Commercial Buildings Office Civil=Infra- Industrial Retail Others
structure

3. What are your companys primary contractual roles? (select all that apply)
General
Contractor

SubContractor

Consultant

Construction
Manager

Design-Build

Others

4. Total volume of contract per year (Annual revenue):

5. Geographical spread of the company (Please list states for domestic work, and
countries for International work):
6. Number of employees:
Section Two: Position of the Interviewee
7. Your position in the company:
8. How exposed are you to and what is your involvement with BIM in your position?
9. How long have you been working with or in the areas related to BIM?
10. What are your work experiences in the industry=academia generally (positions,
years)?
11. What is your educational background?

196

K. Ku and M. Taiebat

Section Three: Companys Exposure to BIM and Its Experience with BIM
12. For how many years has your company implemented BIM?
13. Please specify for the areas you use BIM, which one you implement In-House,
Out-Source them, or do not implement them.
Performance
Model
Productivity
Environmental Safety
Alternative
Optimization
based
Optimization
analysis
development
estimating
Constructability Visualization
Database
Sustainability
Cost
Facility
Site
(clash
information
control
management
planning
detection)
management

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

4D
scheduling

14. Which software packages do you use in each area? And what are the processes
for implementing each area?
4D
scheduling

Performance
Model
Productivity
Environmental Safety
Alternative
Optimization
based
Optimization
analysis
development
estimating
Constructability Visualization
Database
Sustainability
Cost
Facility
Site
(clash
information
control
management
planning
detection)
management

15. What are the barriers of implementing BIM in the areas you are using BIM now?
16. What are the barriers of implementing BIM in the areas you have not yet used BIM?
17. How many employees specialize in BIM?
18. How do your employees learn about BIM (select all that apply):
19. Do you have a BIM committee (a group who steers the BIM activities of the
company)? If you have one, please explain positions of the members of the committee, along with how many members they are. If you have employees who are
semi-involved with BIM, please explain what their primary job function is.
20. Do you have a dedicated BIM department that handles=supports all BIM
requests in your company or do you require=plan having all your employees
to become BIM capable?
Section Four: Expectations From Students upon Hiring
21. Please rank the areas of BIM knowledge that you think is most important.
Model
specification

Model
validation

Model access
management

Model version
control

Interoperability

22. Which BIM skills are you looking for when you consider students for hiring?
Please specify if you expect those skills immediately (1), in the near future(2),
or in the far future(3)
4D
Performance
Model based
Productivity
Environmental Safety
Alternative
scheduling
Optimization
estimating
Optimization
analysis
development
Constructability Visualization
Database
Sustainability
Cost
Facility
Site
(clash
information
control
management
planning
detection)
management

BIM Experiences and Expectations: The Constructors Perspective

197

23. How do you evaluate the BIM knowledge of the current applicants of your company? (select all that apply)
Perform a
test

Recommendation
letters on
BIM skills

Rely on
students
resume

Ask
technical
questions

Other
assessment
methods

24. What is your primary expectation regarding BIM knowledge from your current=
future employees?

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 07:00 24 July 2013

Conceptual knowledge and understanding

of BIM tools and processes

Proficient skills with

BIM software

Both

25. Which specific software packages do you expect your job applicant to know at
the time of applying for the job?