Suggestions abound for successful adoption of building information modeling (BIM); however, a company with limited resources cannot adopt them all. The factors that have top management priority for successful accomplishment of a task are termed critical success factors (CSFs). This paper aims to derive the CSFs for four questions commonly asked by companies in the first wave of BIM adoption: (1) What are the CSFs for adopting BIM in a company? (2) What are the CSFs for selecting projects to deploy BIM? (3) What are the CSFs for selecting BIM services? (4) What are the CSFs for selecting company-appropriate BIM software applications? A list of consideration factors was collected for each question, based on a literature review, and then refined through face-to-face interviews based on experiences of BIM experts. An international survey was conducted with leading BIM experts. From the 206 distributed surveys, 52 responses from four continents were collected. This study used quantitative data analysis to derive a manageable number (4-10) of CSFs for each category from dozens of anecdotal consideration factors. The derived CSFs are expected to be used as efficient metrics for evaluating and managing the level of BIM adoption and as a basis for developing BIM evaluation models in the future.

is currently a PhD Candidate in the Architectural Engineering Department at Penn State. Robert's research focuses on the improvement of team collaboration while leveraging advanced data modeling and visualization technologies for building design and construction. Robert earned his Masters in Architectural Engineering at Penn State, as well as having a background in the construction industry. In addition, Robert has also spend time working with VTT, the Technical Research Center of Finland, as a visiting scholar with their Building Informatics team. Robert's interest in Multi-Media educational methods has grown through his research into improving team collaboration through improved communication technology. He can be reached at

No abstract

The design-build delivery method is increasingly used due to the numerous advantages it can offer to a project. An important issue associated with design-build delivery is the procurement method used to select the design-build team. It is a critical decision that involves several key project team members and requires the owner to carefully select the design-build team expected to successfully deliver the project. This research quantitatively studies the correlation between the design-build procurement method and the performance of the design-build project with regard to cost, time and quality. The procurement methods studied are: sole source, qualifications-based, fixed budget/best design, best value, and low bid selection.Procurement definitions are presented based on a literature review. Data was collected through a survey from 76 U.S. design-build projects. A careful review and categorization process followed the data collection phase. Various statistical tests were performed to analyze the data. The cost growth metric relationship with the procurement methods was statistically verified, showing projects procured using low bid selection incurred a higher cost growth than projects procured using other methods. Several other trends illustrating the effect of adopting each procurement method on project performance were identified. Design-build projects procured using the sole source selection method seemed to result in the highest project intensity. Also, the lowest schedule growth appeared to be associated with the best value procurement method.Based on the patterns and relationships identified, a better understanding of the procurement process and how it may affect the project performance is achieved. The impact of project-specific factors, such as the level of project complexity and the level of design completed at the time of the procurement, on the design-build project performance were examined. Guidelines are defined to assist owners in selecting the design-build team procurement method that responds to their project goals. Guided by these recommendations, owners can improve their selection decision process for design-build projects.iv

No abstract