“Why is Germany behind the UK, US and Finland in BIM and how can Germany catch up again?”
Over the years of the rise of BIM, numerous scientific papers have been written in various countries about structural barriers to BIM. Sometimes about structural barriers that exist in certain countries, like Becerik-Gerber / Rice’s (2010) “The perceived value of building Information Modeling in the U.S. Building Industry”, structural barriers that exist in certain areas, like Jeong et al.’s (2015) “BIM acceptance model in construction organisations”, or general investigations in structural barriers to BIM, like Azahr et al.’s (2017) “Building Information Modelling (BIM) uptake: Clear benefits, understanding its implementation, risks and challenges”. Scientific papers about structural barriers to BIM in Germany are, however, still rare and mostly in form of statistics, such as Braun et al. (2015).
To conduct a comprehensive search for structural barriers to BIM and corresponding solutions in Germany, an individual approach is hence chosen. In a broad international literature review, potential structural barriers to BIM are identified from different sources, such as the ones named above. On the basis of such possible barriers to BIM, a comparison of Germany with the BIM leading countries, UK, US and Finland is conducted. This shall reveal what structural barriers are in effect in Germany that are non-existent or already overcome in the other countries, to derive corresponding suggestions for Germany. Where a differentiation between market participants is necessary in this work, the focus is put on contractors.
To conduct this research, the course of this work is chosen as the following. It starts in the second chapter with a roundup about BIM and its potential, to provide a common information base for this work. In the third chapter, it is then documented how the UK, US and Finland are ahead of Germany with regard to BIM. As the reasons for these countries’ advantage are to be found in a comparison with Germany, the methodology for such case study analysis is developed in the fourth chapter. Following this methodology, possible structural barriers to BIM of a countries AEC industry are identified in the fifth chapter. In the sixth chapter, the UK, US and Finland are compared with Germany according to these identified structural barriers, to find out where significant differences exist. [...]
Table of contents
1 Introduction
2 Building Information Modeling Roundup
2.1 Principles of the BIM methodology
2.2 BIM project lifecycle
2.2.1 Preliminary Planning with BIM
2.2.2 Planning with BIM
2.2.3 Construction with BIM
2.2.4 Operation with BIM
2.3 Structural barriers to BIM
2.4 Resume
3 Research basis of the work
3.1 Resume
4 Methodology of the work
4.1.1 Development of the research question
4.1.2 Examination of background aspects
4.1.3 Analysis of the cases
4.1.4 Results of the analysis
4.1.5 Verification of results
4.1.6 Criticism of case study research
4.2 Resume
5 Structural barriers to BIM
5.1 Market conditions’ influence on BIM
5.1.1 General requirements for economic activity
5.1.2 Market conditions in the AEC industry
5.1.3 Dependencies between stakeholders in the AEC industry
5.2 Market participants’ characteristics regarding BIM
5.2.1 Innovativeness of market participants
5.2.2 Certainty of return on BIM investments
5.2.3 Financial feasibility of BIM investments
5.2.4 Sizes of market participants
5.2.5 BIM use cases
5.3 Project delivery with BIM
5.3.1 BIM Standards
5.3.2 Contractual points of BIM
5.4 Institutions‘ roles in BIM developments
5.4.1 Level of BIM Education
5.4.2 Structure and elements of the BIM initiative
5.5 Resume
6 Comparison of Cases
6.1 Market conditions’ influence on BIM
6.1.1 General requirements for economic activity
6.1.2 Market conditions in the AEC industry
6.1.3 Dependencies between stakeholders in the AEC industry
6.2 Market participants’ characteristics regarding BIM
6.2.1 Innovativeness of market participants
6.2.2 Certainty of return on BIM investments
6.2.3 Financial feasibility of BIM investments
6.2.4 Sizes of market participants
6.2.5 BIM use Cases
6.3 Project delivery with BIM
6.3.1 BIM Standards
6.3.2 Contractual points of BIM
6.4 Institutions‘ roles in BIM developments
6.4.1 Level of BIM Education
6.4.2 Structure and elements of the BIM initiative
6.5 Resume
7 Results and Discussion
7.1 Results
7.2 Conclusions for the German AEC industry
7.3 Conclusions for German AEC companies
7.4 Resume
8 Summary
Research Objectives and Topics
The primary research objective of this thesis is to identify the structural reasons for the slower adoption of Building Information Modeling (BIM) in the German Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry compared to the leading markets of the UK, the US, and Finland, and to develop actionable recommendations for bridging this gap.
- Comparison of national AEC market structures and their influence on BIM diffusion.
- Evaluation of the role of institutions, BIM initiatives, and governmental mandates.
- Analysis of market participant characteristics, including size, innovation capacity, and financial feasibility.
- Assessment of project delivery frameworks, specifically regarding contractual standards and digital interoperability.
Excerpt from the book
1 Introduction
The fourth industrial revolution (Industry 4.0) is heralded. Digitisation is promising to interconnect the value chain and deliver higher quality and productivity for the whole industry. The stationary industry drives forward digitisation already for a significant time and achieved steep productivity increases over the years. In the AEC industry, productivity is, however, declining and digitisation is only starting out. In the form of Building Information Modeling (BIM), a new drive of digitisation is now expected to turn this around and lead to a higher quality in project delivery in shorter time and with fewer costs.
The initial position, and in many cases still the status quo, in the AEC industry is the exchange of two dimensional (2D) plans for information exchange at very limited points in time and with very limited information content. BIM is a concept of technology and methodology, that overarches the whole value chain of the AEC industry, including planning, construction, operation and more. It serves as a platform to digitally share information across this building lifecycle, illustrated in Figure 1.1 below. Different stakeholders of the value chain optimising the project across these new channels and deriving the optimal data stock for their contribution at every point in time increases quality and productivity.
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: This chapter introduces the status of digitisation in the AEC industry and highlights the potential of BIM to overcome productivity declines, while stating the core research question regarding Germany's international performance gap.
2 Building Information Modeling Roundup: This chapter provides a foundational overview of BIM, detailing its evolution, principles like integration and agility, and its potential to transform the project lifecycle across planning, construction, and operation.
3 Research basis of the work: This chapter identifies the UK, the US, and Finland as leading nations in BIM implementation through a compilation of international statistics that demonstrate the performance gap compared to the German market.
4 Methodology of the work: This chapter justifies the choice of the case study method for analyzing structural barriers and outlines the systematic research strategy, including data collection via documents and expert interviews.
5 Structural barriers to BIM: This chapter conducts a comprehensive literature review to categorize structural influence factors on BIM diffusion, specifically focusing on market conditions, participant characteristics, project delivery, and the role of institutions.
6 Comparison of Cases: This chapter executes an in-depth comparative analysis of Germany against the UK, the US, and Finland, examining how market conditions, organizational structures, and institutional initiatives drive or hinder BIM adoption.
7 Results and Discussion: This chapter synthesizes the findings to pinpoint specific structural deficits in Germany and provides targeted recommendations for the government, industry initiatives, and individual AEC companies to improve BIM adoption.
8 Summary: This final chapter restates the research question and summarizes the main conclusions and strategic implications derived from the comparison of the studied international AEC markets.
Keywords
Building Information Modeling, BIM, AEC industry, Germany, UK, US, Finland, structural barriers, digitisation, market structure, government mandate, construction management, project delivery, innovation, procurement
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this master thesis?
The work investigates why the German AEC industry lags behind the UK, the US, and Finland in the adoption of BIM and provides strategies to catch up.
Which countries serve as benchmarks?
The study uses the UK, the US, and Finland as primary international benchmarks due to their advanced status in BIM implementation.
What research methodology is employed?
The author uses a qualitative case study approach, backed by a comprehensive international literature review and expert interviews with industry specialists from the involved countries.
What are the key structural barriers identified?
Key barriers include the lack of client demand, fragmented procurement processes, insufficient standardized contractual templates, and the specific challenges faced by small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
Does the thesis address the role of government?
Yes, it emphasizes the importance of governmental support, specifically through BIM mandates, standardized guidelines, and the fostering of innovation within national BIM initiatives.
What specific role does the 'HOAI' play in the German context?
The thesis identifies the German fee regulation (HOAI) as a source of legal ambiguity that complicates the fair remuneration of BIM-related services, thereby acting as a structural barrier.
Are SMEs significantly disadvantaged regarding BIM?
Yes, SMEs are often constrained by limited financial resources, a lack of specialized BIM expertise, and less influence in project-wide information flows compared to large enterprises.
Is digital interoperability a major hurdle?
The study finds that while IFC is an available non-proprietary format, the practical implementation of digital interoperability remains challenged by technical limitations and inconsistent use of open standards.
- Citation du texte
- Esra Korff (Auteur), 2019, The importance of the structures of the construction market for the implementation of the BIM method in an international comparison, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/494150
