Case study of the collaborative design of an integrated BIM, IPD and Lean university education program

References

• Abdirad H, Dossick CS. 2016. BIM curriculum design in architecture, engineering and construction education: a systematic review. J Inf Technol Constr. 21:250–271. https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/48775575/2016_17.content.03896-with-cover-page-v2.pdf?Expires=1647656922&Signature=Z0ZilXzCJ3ivUj4zgwXXzlGUO534sMdlv9jcLiSHt2YGzOiYE10oEd7mvjfRSrUbZD8iUW3shijh0vYnLR∼h-ApEjGyZI3f-JHNb3Fd07YPYIilikcAg4SQKzHN-c6LVFBKFAtbRkh3m5GzanbAl76LRFw8JFZbpuyun7yLBWDKSJkCpo5nim3K9oq4eI76HKl8bE9TK-AKs∼g2HfmEJ9kkghpxo∼ONxm55MZZQYHzFSNfKZr2VSPlu8yP2gQh4S∼r62q2MHNvwQiZa∼6Llz-CLLgopz5AIBfelBzNxu4H47Fu3AEwO9CzQeEEf7s0Iyow4m2JNKOTy8J4CH5LbqqA__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AIA (American Institute of Architects). 2007. Integrated project delivery; a guide. New York (NY): AIA. Available from: https://zdassets.aiacontracts.org/ctrzdweb02/zdpdfs/ipd_guide.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• AIA (American Institute of Architects). 2010. Integrated project delivery (IPD) family. New York (NY): AIA. Available from: http://www.Aia.Org/Contractdocs/AIAS076706.
   Google Scholar
• AIA and Consult Australia. 2012. BIM in practice. Available from: https://wp.architecture.com.au/Bim/Wp-Content/Uploads/Sites/40/2014/08/L_All_Documents.Pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Al Hattab M, Hamzeh F. 2013. Information flow comparison between traditional and BIM-based projects in the design phase. In: Proceedings of IGLC-21st July 2013, Fortalaga, Brazil. Researchgate. Net/Profile/Farook_Hamzeh/Publication/258885932_Informationflow_Comparison_Between_Traditional_And_BIM-Based_Projects_In_The-Design_Phase/Links/)C9605295adae05664000000/Information-And-Flow-Comparison-Between-Traditional-AndBIM-Based-Projects-In-The-Design-Phase.Pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Al Hattab M, Hamzeh F. 2015. Using social network theory and simulation to compare traditional versus BIM-lean practices for design error management. Autom Constr. 52:59–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al Hattab M, Hamzeh F. 2017. A process-social perspective for understanding design information flow. Lean Constr J. 1–11. Available from: https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/54948320/A_Process-Social_Perspective_for_Understanding_Design_Information_Flow-with-cover-page-v2.pdf?Expires=1647652142&Signature=P59byDzkApfopNWWPFq8his3eWRnjZT5iwazr3∼ezDrJsvHz1nRS0ClSirkUBsLsp6HEteXFWO0sbYn-LCM22UavDIDKBSNoF3QLGrWBsGt84nLSSaGSBYvJ2eQi2sQE5Uxn1C8VtSt0kj2xn0g8wpebzU0PbNUW91rQLnlir∼gtNE1Jj3ycxaTA0FdmbMmR796xiZOVG3QriD5U6gipca5JXYkuVtQ5BHbTUHUjL6∼QEsaBcO9S9qZF-9gQzrqPR3B-a3Rx0ruT7A1sFpSc∼vudkmxyL1EL7CvYKVSKTUoF7wDDcdlicZKLjkF9RoITIoT-UBCO7yIwn6MBepV0AQ__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA.
   Google Scholar
• Al Subaih A. 2015. Integrated project delivery: a paradigm shift for oil and gas projects in the UAE and Middle East region. Oil Gas Facil. 4(4):064–077.
   Google Scholar
• Alves T, Da C, Milberg C, Walsh K. 2012. Exploring lean construction practice, research and education. Eng Constr Archit Manage. 19(5):512–525.
   Google Scholar
• Ashcraft H. 2014. Integrated project delivery: optimizing project performance. Available from: https://www.hansonbridgett.com/-/Media/Files/Publications/HA_IPD.Pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Azhar S. 2011. Building information modelling (BIM): trends, benefits, risks and challenges for the AEC industry. Leadership Manage Eng. 11(3):241–252.
   Google Scholar
• Baiden B, Price A, Dainty A. 2006. The extent of team integration within construction projects. Int J Project Manage. 24(1):13–23.
   Google Scholar
• Ballard G. 2008. The lean project delivery system: an update. Lean Constr J. 1–19. Available from: https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/4862598/lcj_08_001-with-cover-page-v2.pdf?Expires=1647652662&Signature=W3JlMsRkO8g5bcU5CCx61OGncFOHhwT7YcW128NXrk-2RulTtpu6UcSRTa2HTWRYOZI57∼dWlEMSqEyQrSsb3aonSRx3677Osw4NmIDKC7tzz0ogxXLfV6ayuuHr1me3r2XJTtQwfYf3cwTfkNKkCf-KEklMD7HbNmPTI7at9sgw71uBKr7WKaSmLqTQ5uD459zWsQVLFgT8-LhCdxSNWrZ9ucWkM5vjkODBZAEaWTjEbSnCfuYB9GOdMgVB∼cYfmutaFJlK0g9wdxMY4Ejb4akykSkw∼T7rQ6QA45HzbUKOKnM1ZiOYhcgzbC0-zzClIKK3nLsu9gfoYarGtoDtqA__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA.
   Google Scholar
• Bashir AM, Suresh S, Proverbs DG, Gameson R. 2010 Jun 25. Barriers towards the sustainable implementation of lean construction in the United Kingdom. In: ARCOM Doctoral Workshop. Vol. 1, University of Wolverhampton. Available from: https://www.arcom.ac.uk/-docs/workshops/2010-Wolverhampton.pdf#page=4.
   Google Scholar
• Becerik-Gerber B, Gerber D, Ku K. 2011. The pace of technological innovation in architecture, engineering, and construction education: integrating recent trends into the curricula. J Inf Technol Constr. 16:411–432. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/10919/92598.
   Google Scholar
• Bradley A, Hyatt P, Leed A. 2011. A case study in integrating lean, green and BIM into an undergraduate construction management scheduling course. In: Proceedings of the 47th Annual International Associated Schools of Construction Conference, Lincoln, Omaha, Ascpro. Available from: http://ascpro0.ascweb.org/archives/cd/2011/paper/CEUE304002011.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Brookshier K. 2018. Method vs methodology: understanding the difference. Uzdesign.Cc/Method-Versus-Methodology-Whats-The-Difference-9cc755c2e69d.
   Google Scholar
• BuildingSMART Australasia. n.d.a. What is IFC? Available from: Buildingsmart.Org.Au/Agoutis/What-Is-IFC/.
   Google Scholar
• BuildingSMART Australasia. n.d.b. What is Openbim? Available from: Buildingsmart.Org.Au/Aboutus/What-Is-Open-BIM/.
   Google Scholar
• Chen K, Lu W, Wang J. 2020. University–industry collaboration for BIM education: lessons learned from a case study. Ind Higher Educ. 34(6):401–409.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dakhil AJ, Underwood J, Alshawi M. 2019. Critical success competencies for the BIM implementation process: UK construction clients. J Inf Technol Constr (ITcon). 24:80–94. Available from: https://www.itcon.org/paper/2019/5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denzer A, Hedges K. 2008 Sept 24–27. From CAD to BIM: education challenges for the coming paradigm shift. In: Proceedings from the 2008 Architectural Engineering National Conference, in Ettourney (Ed), the Architectural Engineering Institute (AEI) of the ASCE, Denver (CO).
   Google Scholar
• Eastman C, Eastman C, Teicholz P, Sacks R. 2011. BIM handbook – a guide to building information modelling for owners, managers, designers, engineers and contractors. Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley and Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Gier D, Loftin E, Coogan K. 2006 Jul 20–22. Are building information models effective for teaching productivity analysis? In: Sulbaran, T Brana, M, Corage, S, editors. Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Conference by the Associated Schools of Construction. Fort Collins (CO): Colorado State University. Available from: http://Ascpro).Ascweb.Org/Archives/2006/CEUE02_Gier06_300.Htm.
   Google Scholar
• Hanks N. 2015. An investigation into the effects of project delivery method on LEED target Masters Project Thesis 1-45. San Francisco (CA): University of San Francisco.
   Google Scholar
• Hardin B, McCool D. 2015. BIM and construction management: proven tools, methods and workflows (E-Book). Wiley. Available from Wiley.Com/En-Gb/BIM+And+Construction+Management%3A+Proven+Tools%2C+Methods%2C+And+Workflows%2C+2nd+Edition-P-9781118942765.
   Google Scholar
• Huang Y. 2018. A review of approaches and challenges of BIM education construction management. J Civ Eng Archit. 12:401–407.
   Google Scholar
• Kahvandi Z, Saghatfaroush E, Alinezhad M, Preece C. 2016. Analysis of research trends on benefits of implementing integrated project delivery (IPD). In: Proceedings of International Conference on Civil, Mechanical Construction Engineering and Construction Management (CMC 2016). Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mahdi-Alinezhad/publication/318788803_ANALYSIS_OF_RESEARCH_TRENDS_ON_BENEFITS_OF_IMPLEMENTING_INTEGRATED_PROJECT_DELIVERY_IPD/links/597f0b28a6fdcc1a9acd69e0/ANALYSIS-OF-RESEARCH-TRENDS-ON-BENEFITS-OF-IMPLEMENTING-INTEGRATED-PROJECT-DELIVERY-IPD.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Kahvandi Z, Saghatforoush E, Alinezhad M, Noghli F. 2017. Integrated project delivery (IPD) research trends. EPPM-J. 7(2):99–114. Available from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/62e5/ef05663ac7220845e58eb624a1f3d3882512.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Kezar A, Eckel P. 2002. The effect of institutional culture on change strategies in higher education: universal principles on culturally responsive concepts. J Higher Educ. 73(4):435–460.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koskela L, Howell G, Ballard G, Tommelein I. 2002. The foundations of lean construction. In: R. Bestand, G. de Valence, editors. Design and construction: building in value. 1st ed. eBook ISBN9780080491080. Butterworth-Heinemann; p. 211–226.
   Google Scholar
• Kymmell W. 2008. Building information modelling: planning and managing construction projects With 4D, CAD and simulations. New York (NY): McGraw-Hill Professional. Available from https://www.accessengineeringlibrary.com/content/book/9780071494533.
   Google Scholar
• Lee HW, Anderson SM, Kim Y-W, Ballard G. 2014. Advancing impact of education, training and professional experience on integrated project delivery. Pract Period Struct Des Constr. 19(1):8–14.
   Google Scholar
• Matthew S, Howell G. 2005. Integrated project delivery – an example of relational contracting. Lean Constr J. 2(1):46–61. Available from: https://leanconstruction.org/uploads/wp/media/docs/ktll-add-read/Integrated_Project_Delivery_An_Example_Of_Relational_Contracting.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Ogunbiyi O, Olodapo A, Goulding J. 2013. A review of lean concept and its application to sustainable construction in the UK. Int J Sustainable Constr Eng Technol. 4(2):82–92. Available from: https://publisher.uthm.edu.my/ojs/index.php/IJSCET/article/view/687.
   Google Scholar
• Patching A, Waitley D. 1996. The futureproof corporation. Singapore: Butterworth Heinemann (Reed Academic) Asia.
   Google Scholar
• Patching A. 2018. Notes from a confidential interview with a presenter at the Future Infrastructure Summit, Brisbane, Buildingsmart Australia and the Lean Construction Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks R, Barak R. 2010. Teaching building information modeling as an integral part of freshman year civil engineering education. J Prof Issues Eng Educ Pract. 136(1):30–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sacks R, Pikas E. 2013. BIM education for construction engineering and management: i: industry requirements, state of the art and gap analysis. J Constr Eng Manage. 139(11):14013016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarham S, Fox A. 2013. Barriers to implementing lean construction in the UK construction industry. Built Hum Environ Rev. 6:1–17. http://eprints.lincoln.ac.uk/id/eprint/28877/1/81-233-1-PB.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Tezel A. 2016. Implementing Lean construction: the major pitfalls. Available from: https://leanconstructionblog.com/Implementing-Lean-Construction-The-Major-Pitfalls.html.
   Google Scholar
• Thomsen C, Dorrington J, Dunne D, Lichtig W. 2009. Managing integrated project delivery. Mclean (VA): Construction Management Association of America.
   Google Scholar
• Turk Z, Starčič A. 2020. Towards deep impacts of BIM on education. Front Eng Manage. 7(1):81–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong K, Wong K, Nadeem A. 2011. Building information modelling for tertiary construction education in Hong Kong. J Inf Technol Constr. 16:467–476. https://www.itcon.org/paper/2011/27.
   Google Scholar
• Wu W, Issa R. 2014. BIM education and recruiting: survey based comparative analysis of issues, perceptions and collaboration opportunities. J Prof Issues Eng Educ Pract. 140(2):04013014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young N, Jones S, Bernstein H, Gudgel J. 2009. The business value of BIM: getting building information modeling to the bottom line (a smart market report). McGraw-Hill Construction, Images. Available from: Autodesk.Com/Adsk/Files/Final_2009_Bim_Smartmarket_Report.Pdf.
   Google Scholar