Performance-based identity in a BIM environment: an architect's perceptions and experiences

Abstract

PurposeInterpreting the meaning structure of architects' actions, behaviours and performances enacted in a building information modelling (BIM) environment is implausible by returning to the classic and ideal imagery of an architect as a natural leader. Yet, little has been empirically explored on how architects perceive their identity and most critically, how they act, behave and perform their way into it in such an environment. Consequently, architects' failing to adapt their core identity to the varying circumstances may lead to their irrelevance and being side-lined merely as aesthetic building surgeons. The current study therefore seeks a better understanding of their perceptions and experiences in manifesting their identities in the phenomenon.Design/methodology/approachDrawing upon the interpretive phenomenological approach, ten architectural trained individuals were selected for in-depth, semi-structured interviews, and written accounts exercise to disclose their lived experience. The study was conducted in a Malaysian architectural consultancy practice (ACP) setting.FindingsThe data analysis resulted in the following five performance identity themes that revolve around the core identity of a successful designer: “performing as a design strategist”, “performing as a design translator”, “performing as a design facilitator”, “reinstating the identity of a design coordinator” and “performing as a design innovator”.Practical implicationsThe study serves as groundwork for professional institutional bodies to further reconstruct a career road map alongside the professional development framework towards elevating, developing and facilitating the hybridity of architects' performance identities in such environment.Social implicationsThe study serves as a groundwork for professional institutional bodies to reconstruct the existing continuing professional development (CPD) programmes, materials and framework so that they reflect the performances of future architects practicing in a BIM environment. The elicited experiences may also inform architectural curriculum designers of the appropriate approaches of teaching and learning in architecture that could promote the hybridity of architects' performance identities in such an environment.Originality/valueThe study contributes to the identity literature by yielding valuable new insights about the experiences and behaviour of architects practicing in a BIM environment. Understanding such complexity would not be possible merely based on the theoretical lenses of professional identity and organisational identification as adopted in previous studies.

Contract administration practices on building information modelling (BIM)-based construction project – an exploratory study

“…This finding is consistent with Ibrahim et al (2019), who found that 70.4% of local construction players in Malaysia have struggled to understand the actual processes of BIM. In this regard, Shahruddin et al (2022) argued that individuals working in a BIM environment must show their strong analytical skills when working in a collaborative culture. Such a capability would be necessary to improve their performances when leveraging their expertise, particularly during the initial stage.…”

Root factors limiting BIM implementation in developing countries: sampling the Turkish AEC industry

“…Studies have also been conducted to investigate the critical success factors of BIM implementation and adoption (Tsai et al, 2014;Morlhon et al, 2014;Ozorhon and Karahan, 2016;Antwi-Afari et al, 2018;Amuda-Yusuf, 2018;Olawumi and Chan, 2018;Chan et al, 2019b;Dao et al, 2021), critical risk factors (Chien et al, 2014;Khoshfetrat et al, 2020), and drivers (Olanrewaju et al, 2021) related to the use of BIM/BIM implementation in developed countries. Shahruddin et al (2022) interpreted the meaning structure of architects' actions, behaviours, and performances in a building information modelling (BIM) environment. Elgewely et al (2021) proposed a virtual reality (VR) platform for construction detailing that provides experiential learning in a zero-risk environment.…”

“…, 2021) related to the use of BIM/BIM implementation in developed countries. Shahruddin et al. (2022) interpreted the meaning structure of architects' actions, behaviours, and performances in a building information modelling (BIM) environment.…”

“…According to Antwi-Afari et al (2018), developing countries, such as India (Nanajkar, 2014;Ahuja et al, 2016), Singapore (Liao and Teo, 2017), Nigeria (Amuda-Yusuf, 2018; Olanrewaju et al, 2020;Olugboyega and Windapo, 2021), Iraq (Hatem et al, 2018), China (Zhang et al, 2020;Tu et al, 2021;Zhao and Wu, 2017;Zhou et al, 2019), Iran (Hosseini et al, 2016), Jordan (Btoush and Haron, 2017), and Malaysia (Rogers et al, 2015;Yaakob et al, 2016;Sinoh et al, 2020), the implementation of BIM is lagging. However, significant attempts have been made to investigate the limiting causes of BIM implementation and how BIM can be adapted to the construction industries in developing countries (Shahruddin et al, 2022;Sinoh et al, 2020).…”

“…, 2020), the implementation of BIM is lagging. However, significant attempts have been made to investigate the limiting causes of BIM implementation and how BIM can be adapted to the construction industries in developing countries (Shahruddin et al. , 2022; Sinoh et al.…”