Public clients ability to drive industry change: the case of implementing BIM

References

• Adam, A. and Lindahl, G., 2017. Applying the dynamic capabilities framework in the case of a large public construction client. Construction management and economics, 35 (7), 420–431.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahankoob, A., et al., 2018. The impact of building information modelling (BIM) maturity and experience on contractor absoptive capacity. Architectural engineering and design management, 14 (5), 363–380.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alvesson, M. and Kärreman, D., 2007. Constructing mystery: Empirical matters in theory development. Academy of management review, 32 (4), 1265–1281.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anumba, C. J., Egbu, C. O., and Carrillo, P., 2005. Knowledge management in construction. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Azhar, S., 2011. Building information modeling (BIM): trends, benefits, risks, and challenges for the AEC industry. Leadership and management in engineering, 11 (3), 241–252.
   Google Scholar
• BIM Alliance (2018). Strategi för BIM I förvaltning och projekt. Akademiska Hus, Fortifikationsverket, Statens Fastighetsverk, Specialfastigheter och Sveriges Riksdag. Retrieved 181118 https://www.bimalliance.se/utveckling-av-bim/initiativ-i-sektorn/bim-i-staten/
   Google Scholar
• Bin Zakaria, Z., et al., 2013. Exploring the adoption of Building Information Modelling (BIM) in the Malaysian construction industry: a qualitative approach. International journal of research in engineering and technology, 2 (8), 384–395.
   Google Scholar
• Blayse, A.M. and Manley, K., 2004. Key influences on construction innovation. Construction innovation, 4 (3), 143–154.
   Google Scholar
• Bosch-Sijtsema, P., et al., 2017. Barriers and facilitators for BIM use among Swedish medium-sied contractors – “We wait until someone tells us to use it”. Visualization in engineering, 5 (3), 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Bresnen, M., Goussevskaia, A., and Swan, J., 2005. Implementing change in construction project organizations: exploring the interplay between structure and agency. Building research & information, 33, 547–560.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buć, S and Divjak, B, 2018. Key factors of an organization’s environment for the acquisition and assimilation of an innovation. Journal of Information and Organizational Sciences, 42 (1), 17–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cao, D., et al., 2017. Identifying and contextualising the motivations for BIM implementation in construction projects: an empirical study in China. International Journal of project management, 35 (4), 658–669.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan, C.T., 2014. Barriers of implementing BIM in construction industry from the designers’ perspective: a Hong Kong experience. Journal of system and management sciences, 4 (2), 24–40.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, Y., Yin, Y., Browne, G. J., and Li, D., 2019. Adoption of building information modeling in Chinese construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26 (9).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cherns, A. and Bryant, D., 1984. Studying the client’s role in construction management. Construction management and economics, 2 (2), 177–184.
   Google Scholar
• Ciribini, A.L.C., Masterolembo Ventura, S., and Paneroni, M., 2016. Implementation of an interoperable process to optimise design and construction phases of a residential builing: a BIM Pilot Project. Automation in construction, 71, 62–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, W.M. and Levinthal, D.A., 1990. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative science quarterly, 35 (1), 128–152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dainty, A., et al., 2015., Don’t believe the (BIM) hype: the unexpected corollaries of the UK ‘BIM revolution’. In: Working paper proceedings of engineering project organization conference, 24–26 June. Scotland: University of Edinburgh.
   Google Scholar
• Dir. 2009:92 2009. Uppföljning och analys av de statliga upphandlarnas åtgärder för att förbättra produktiviteten och innovationsgraden inom anläggningsbranschen. Swedish governmental directive, Dir. 2009:92.
   Google Scholar
• Eastman, C., et al., 2008. BIM handbook— a guide to building information modeling for owners, managers, designers, engineers, and contractors. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K., 1989. Building theories from case study research. Academy of management review, 14 (4), 532–550.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K.M. and Graebner, M.E., 2007. Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Academy of management journal, 50 (1), 25–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eriksson, P.E. and Laan, A., 2007. Procurement effects on trust and control in client-contractor relationships. Engineering, construction and architectural management, 14, 387–399.
   Google Scholar
• Eriksson, P.E., Nilsson, T., and Atkin, B., 2008. Client perceptions of barriers to partnering. Engineering, construction and architectural management, 15, 527–539.
   Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B., 2006. Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative inquiry, 12 (2), 219–245.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, S., 2014. Getting real about BIM. International journal of managing projects in business, 7, 405–422.
   Google Scholar
• Gann, D., 2001. Putting academic ideas into practice: technological progress and the absorptive capacity of construction organizations. Construction management and economics, 19 (3), 321–330.
   Google Scholar
• GSA 2007. GSA’s national 3D-4D BIM program, US general services administration [online]. Available from: www.gsa.gov/bim
   Google Scholar
• Halvorsen, T., et al., 2005. On the differences between public and private sector innovation. Publin Report No. D9. Innovation in the public sector. Oslo: NIFU STEP.
   Google Scholar
• Hansson, N. R., 1958. Patterns of discovery, an inquiry into the foundations of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hartmann, A., Reymen, I.M.M.J., and van Oosterom, G., 2008. Factors constituting the innovation adoption environment of public clients. Building research & information, 36 (5), 436–449.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harty, C., 2008. Implementing innovation in construction: contexts, relative boundedness and actor‐network theory. Construction management and economics, 26 (10), 1029–1041.
   Google Scholar
• Haugbölle, K., Pihl, D., and Gottlieb, S.C., 2015. Competitive dialogue: driving innovation through procurement? Procedia economics and finance, 21, 555–562.
   Google Scholar
• Havenvid, M.I., et al., 2016. Renewal in construction projects: tracing effects of client requirements. Construction management and economics, 34 (11), 790–807.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HKCIC 2014., Final draft report of the roadmap for BIM strategic implementation in Hong Kong’s construction industry [online]. Hong Kong Construction Industry Council. Available from: http://bimsg.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/HKCIC-BIMin-Singapore-Govt-Symposium_20141010.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hobday, M., Rush, H., and Tidd, J., 2000. Innovation in complex products and systems. Research policy, 29 (7/8), 793–804.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ivory, C., 2005. The cult of customer responsiveness: is design innovation the price of a client-focused construction industry? Construction management and economics, 23, 861–870.
   Google Scholar
• Kassem, M. and Succar, B., 2017. Macro BIM adoption: comparative market analysis. Automation in construction, 81, 286–299.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, D., and Ilozor, B., 2019. A quantitative study of the relationship between project performance and BIM use on commercial construction projects in the USA. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 15 (1), 3–8.
   Google Scholar
• Khosrowshahi, F. and Arayici, Y., 2012. Roadmap for implementation of BIM in the UK construction industry. Engineering, construction and architectural management, 19 (6), 610–635.
   Google Scholar
• Kostopoulus, K., et al., 2011. Absorptive capacity, innovation and financial performance. Journal of business research, 64, 1335–1343.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulatunga, K., et al., 2011. Client’s championing characteristics that promote construction innovation. Construction innovation, 11 (4), 380–398.
   Google Scholar
• Leal-Rodriguez, A.L., et al., 2014. From potential absorptive capacity to innovation outcomes in project teams: the conditional mediating role of the realized absorptive capacity in a relational learning context. International journal of project management, 32 (6), 894–907.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, S. and Yu, J., 2015. Comparative study of BIM acceptance between Korea and the United States. Journal of construction engineering and management, 142 (3), 05015016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lev, S., Fiegenbaum, A., and Shoham, A., 2009. Managing absorptive capacity stocks to improve performance: empirical evidence from the turbulent environment of Israeli hospitals. European management journal, 27 (1), 13–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindblad, H., 2018. Black boxing BIM: the public client’s strategy in BIM implementation. Construction management and economics, 37 (1), 1–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linderoth, H.C., 2010. Understanding adoption and use of BIM as the creation of actor networks. Automation in construction, 19 (1), 66–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matarneh, R. and Hamed, S., 2017. Barriers to the adoption of building information modeling in the Jordanian building industry. Open journal of civil engineering, 7 (03), 325.
   Google Scholar
• Midgley, G. and Lindhult, E., 2017. What is Systemic Innovation? New Research Memorandum from the Centre for Systems Studies, Hull University Business School, UK. ISBN 978-1-906422-36-3.
   Google Scholar
• Mäki, T. and Kerosuo, H., 2015. Site managers’ daily work and the uses of building information modelling in construction site management. Construction management and economics, 33 (3), 163–175.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nam, C.B. and Tatum, C.B., 1997. Leaders and champions for construction innovation. Construction management and economics, 15, 259–270.
   Google Scholar
• Newcombe, R., 2003. From client to project stakeholders: a stakeholder mapping approach. Construction management and economics, 21 (8), 841–848.
   Google Scholar
• Onkelink, J., Manolova, T., and Edelman, L., 2016. The human factor: investments in employee human capital, productivity, and SME internationalization. Journal of international management, 22 (4), 351–364.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pettigrew, A.M., 1985. Contextualist research and the study of organizational change processes. Research methods in information systems, 1, 53–78.
   Google Scholar
• Porwal, A. and Hewage, K.N., 2013. Building Information Modeling (BIM) partnering framework for public construction projects. Automation in construction, 31, 204–214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pries, F. and Janszen, F., 1995. Innovation in the construction industry: the dominant role of the environment. Construction management and economics, 13, 43–51.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, N., et al., 2012. Absorptive capacity and information system research: review, synthesis and directions for future research. Information systems, 6, 25–40.
   Google Scholar
• Sexton, M., Abbott, C., and Lu, S.-L., 2008. Challenging the illusion of the all powerful clients’ role in driving innovation. In: P. Brandon and Lu. Shu-Ling, ed. Clients driving innovation. Oxford: Blackwell, 43–48.
   Google Scholar
• SFS 2014. 362. Förordning med instruktion för Trafikverket. Swedish Government Official directive for the STA SFS 2014:362.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, P., 2014. BIM implementation - global strategies. Procedia engineering, 85, 482–492.
   Google Scholar
• Smits, W., van Buiten, M., and Hartmann, T., 2016. Yield-to-BIM: impacts of BIM maturity on project performance. Building research & information, 45 (3), 336–346.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SOU 2012. 39. Vägar till förbättrad produktivitet och innovationsgrad i anläggningsbranschen. Stockholm: Swedish Government Official Report SOU 2012:39.
   Google Scholar
• Succar, B., 2009. Building information modelling framework: a research and delivery foundation for industry stakeholders. Automation in construction, 18 (3), 357–375.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Takim, R., Harris, M., and Nawawi, A.H., 2013. Building Information Modeling (BIM): a new paradigm for quality of life within Architectural, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry. Procedia – social and behavioral sciences, 101, 23–32.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, J. and Levitt, R., 2004. Understanding and managing systemic innovation in project-based industries. In: D. Slevin, D. Cleland, and J. Pinto, Eds. Innovations: Project Management Research, pp. 83-99. Project Management Institute, Newton Square Pennsylvania.
   Google Scholar
• TDOK 2013. 0688. Strategi för BIM I Trafikverket (Internal strategy document)
   Google Scholar
• Vass, S. and Karrbom Gustavsson, T., 2017. Challenges when implementing BIM for industry change. Construction management and economics, 35 (10), 597–610.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vennström, A. and Eriksson, P.-E., 2010. Client perceived barriers to change of the construction process. Construction innovation, 10 (2), 126–137.
   Google Scholar
• Weick, K.E., 1995. Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Whyte, J.K. and Hartmann, T., 2017. How digitizing building information transforms the built environment. Building research & information, 45 (6), 591–595.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winch, G., 1998. Zephyrs of creative destruction: understanding the management of innovation in construction. Building research & information, 26 (5), 268–279.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winch, G.M., 2010. Managing construction projects, 2nd Edition. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Wong, A.K., Wong, F.K., and Nadeem, A., 2010. Attributes of building information modelling implementations in various countries. Architectural engineering and design management, 6 (4), 288–302.
   Google Scholar
• Wong, A.K., Wong, F.K., and Nadeem, A., 2011. Government roles in implementing building information modelling systems: comparison between Hong Kong and the United States. Construction innovation, 11 (1), 61–76.
   Google Scholar
• Zahra, S.A. and George, G., 2002. Absorptive capacity: a review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of management review, 27 (2), 185–203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar