The compatibility of existing BIM maturity models with lean construction and integrated project delivery

Abstract

Building Information Modeling (BIM), Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), and Lean Construction (LC) are individually gaining increasing penetration in the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry. Existing maturity models for each of these areas allow organisations to assess their current capability and guide their future pathways to increasing competence. There are significant mutual dependencies among these approaches; hence it would be useful for organisations to understand how to apply them to maximise the benefits across all three initiatives. An integrated BIM-IPD-LC (BIL) maturity model (MM) would break the silos among the initiatives by supporting this synergy. However, there is no comprehensive study on integrated organisational BIL maturity model design and development. This article presents the analysis of BIM maturity models as the starting point of research toward BIL MM development. BIM MMs are more widely cited and used within the construction industry compared to MMs for LC and IPD. This study uses the compatibility of BIM with IPD and LC in the context of MMs to identify how these three concepts can be synchronised. Comparative analysis is conducted using ten accessible, free, research-based, and frequently cited BIM MMs.They were then compared with a number of existing LC and IPD MMs. The results show that VDC Scorecard and BIM2FR are the most compatible BIM MMs with LC, and both the BIM Maturity Matrix and the VDC Scorecard closely correlate with the IPD characteristics compared with other BIM MMs. The findings of this study can be used as a basis for establishing the structure of a future integrated BIL maturity model.

A review of the interrelationships and characteristics of Building Information Modeling, Integrated Project Delivery and Lean Construction maturity models

“…As a result, too little attention has been paid to integrating BIM-IPC-LC MMs (Rashidian et al. , 2022a, b). The current MMs in the literature can be classified as (a) BIM MMs, (b) LCMMs, (c) BIM-LC MMs and (d) LC-IPD MMs (Figure 5).…”

“…26 BIM MMs have been cited in the literature thus far (Rashidian et al. , 2022a, b), however, the selection criteria for review in this study have been met by 14 MMs and 51 papers.…”

“…Furthermore, the literature review indicates that adopting MMs in the construction industry provides a more robust platform and an action-oriented road map for industry practitioners to reach organizational maturity in a particular approach (Rashidian et al. , 2022a, b).…”

Validating and testing a project delivery success model in construction: a mixed-method approach in Australia

“…However, it is widely noted in the literature (Davis, 2018;Derakhshan et al, 2019;Lehtinen and Aaltonen, 2020;Yang et al, 2021;Rashidian et al, 2022) that stakeholder satisfaction plays a significant role in achieving success. It is undeniably crucial, and all projects may benefit from the concept of customer satisfaction.…”

“…, 2019; Lehtinen and Aaltonen, 2020; Yang et al. , 2021; Rashidian et al. , 2022) that stakeholder satisfaction plays a significant role in achieving success.…”