台灣營建專案導入BIM 技術專案管理常見執行窒礙之研究

Analysis of common implementation barriers for building information modeling (BIM) project management in Taiwan: empirical study

簡國峯(Kuo-Feng Chien)

指導教授 ： 黃世昌

國立交通大學/工學院/土木工程系所/博士(2014年)

https://doi.org/10.6842/NCTU.2014.00488

摘要

BIM技術為營建產業近期新興資訊技術，透過該視覺化技術可有效提升建築生命週期各項作業效率。然而導入新技術也同步產生許多專案執行上的挑戰，根據本研究針對台灣營建產業BIM導入應用調查，目前仍有6成BIM從業人員有專案管理執行窒礙，分別為專案導入評選、技術服務廠商評選、風險評估與績效評估等執行窒礙。本研究透過文獻回顧與專家調查，藉由使用DEMATEL（決策實驗室法）與DEA（資料包絡分析法）等研究方法，針對前述執行窒礙進行研究與分析後，具體研究成果有:提出選擇專案導入與技術服務廠商評選因子及其相關屬性、營建產業各層面風險因子、 BIM專案績效評估架構及實際案例分析。

關鍵字

建築資訊模型 ； 專案管理 ； 執行窒礙 ； 導入專案評選 ； 技術服務供應商評選 ； 風險評估 ； 績效評估

並列摘要

Building information modeling (BIM) is an emerging technology that uses digital
information models in a virtual space to achieve high-quality and efficient construction
and management throughout the lifecycle of a facility. Several international construction
projects have been successfully completed by implementing BIM technology.
Unfortunately, not much sufficient, effective research has been conducted on BIM project
management issues, and hence the envisaged results have not been achieved. Because the
cost of implementing a BIM project is relatively high, it is critical for an organization to
make a project a success and begin obtaining benefits from the project as fast as possible.
According to a BIM implementation survey in this study, nearly 60% of respondents
reported that they struggled with four BIM implementation barriers in project
management; such as BIM project selection, BIM service provider selection, risk
assessment, and performance evaluation during different BIM project process. Neither
successful implementation nor implementation problems can be objectively identified
without benchmarking firms that apply BIM. To address these issues, we propose the
following research questions:
 Which of the factors identified in the literature or by industry practitioners are
applicable to select suitable project for BIM implementation in Taiwan?
 Which of the factors identified in the literature or by industry practitioners are
applicable to select suitable BIM service providers in Taiwan?
 Which of the risk factors identified in the literature or from industry practitioners are
applicable to risk assessment of BIM projects in Taiwan?
 What is the practical framework for BIM project performance evaluation?
Based on extensive literature review of BIM research and studies, a theoretical framework
II
was developed to aid the research process of the questions. To accomplish the aims of
this research, we adopt decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) and
data envelopment analysis (DEA) methods. After conducting the survey and empirical
case analysis, the research results are summarized as follows:
 A total of 24 criteria relevant to BIM project selection were surveyed and identified.
The 11 potential factors that were influential to BIM project selection are suggested
to assist organizations to consider when facing the decision which project is
appropriate for BIM implementation.
 A total of 28 criteria relevant to BIM service providers were surveyed and identified.
The 16 potential factors that were influential to BIM service provider selection are
suggested to assist decision makers to select potential suppliers.
 A total of 13 risk factors relevant to BIM adoption in construction projects were
surveyed and identified. The BIM project potential risk factors were identified at
various levels, including the industry level, market level, and organizational level.
 A comprehensive performance evaluation model for BIM construction projects is
proposed. A set of key performance indicators (KPIs) for the performance evaluation
model is proposed.

並列關鍵字

BIM ； project management ； common implementation barrier ； project selection ； service provider selection ； risk assessment ； performance evaluation

參考文獻

42. Chang, A. S., & Ibbs, C. W. (1998). Development of consultant performance measures

1. Aaker, D. A., & Tyebjee, T. T. (1978). A model for the selection of interdependent

(Accessed December 2013)

3. Agrell, P. J., & Martin West, B. (2001). A caveat on the measurement of productive

supplier evaluation using analytical hierarchy process. Journal of the Operational