Submitted:
12 July 2024
Posted:
12 July 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
1.1. Research Objective
1.2. Novelty and Significance
1.2.1. Innovative Framework for BEP Standardization
1.2.2. Scientometric Analysis of BEP Literature
1.2.3. Empirical Validation through Industry Survey
1.2.4. Addressing Regional and Project-Specific Challenges
1.2.5. Integration of Emerging Technologies
2. Methodology
- Literature Review: An exhaustive literature review was undertaken, leveraging databases such as Web of Science and Scopus to identify pertinent publications from 2018 to 2024. The objective was to delineate prevailing trends and foundational concepts within the realm of BIM Execution Plans, ensuring a comprehensive and globally representative analysis.
- Document Analysis: The research critically examined 36 BEP documents, chosen for their pivotal contributions to the domain. These documents, sourced from diverse global entities, were evaluated against international standards and guidelines. The analysis concentrated on aspects such as content structure, practice methods, contractual stipulations, and project-specific characteristics.
- Scientometric Analysis: This component included citation and keyword analysis to delineate the intellectual terrain of BEP research. This analysis was instrumental in identifying key authors, institutions, and seminal publications, thereby shedding light on the evolution of the field and its key scholarly contributions.
- (1)
- Mapping Research Trends: Scientometric analysis helps in identifying the most influential works, key research themes, and leading authors and institutions in the field of BEPs. This provides a comprehensive understanding of the intellectual landscape and highlights the evolution of research trends from 2020 to 2024.
- (2)
- Objective Assessment: By analyzing citation data and keyword co-occurrences, scientometric analysis provides an objective assessment of the research impact and the relative importance of different studies. This helps in distinguishing foundational works from less influential ones, ensuring that the proposed framework is built on a robust foundation of significant contributions.
- (3)
- Identifying Gaps: The analysis reveals gaps in the current literature and research, guiding the focus of this study towards underexplored areas. By identifying these gaps, this research can address specific deficiencies and contribute novel insights to the field.
- Factor Frequency Analysis: This analysis was employed to scrutinize the fundamental and ancillary elements of BEPs, identifying both commonalities and discrepancies across various documents. This approach facilitated a nuanced understanding of the standardization efforts within the field.
- Data Collection: Comprehensive data collection was conducted from many sources, including academic institutions, governmental agencies, national standard bodies, and industry professionals. This extensive gathering of data was crucial for capturing the varied methodologies and practices employed in BEP implementation.
- Comparative Analysis: An in-depth comparative analysis was performed, which synthesized the insights garnered and was discussed extensively in the results section of the study.
- Practical Relevance: Surveys capture the practical experiences and challenges faced by industry professionals in implementing BEPs. This ensures that the proposed framework is grounded in real-world practices and addresses the actual needs of stakeholders.
- Broad Perspective: By surveying 87 industry professionals from various fields within the construction industry, the study gathers a wide range of viewpoints. This diversity enhances the generalizability of the findings and ensures that the framework is applicable across different contexts and project types.
- Validation of Framework: The survey data provides a means to validate the proposed BEP framework. By comparing the theoretical insights gained from document analysis and scientometric analysis with empirical data, the study can refine and adjust the framework to better align with industry practices and expectations.
- Enhancing Reliability and Applicability
- (1)
- Robust Data Foundation: Scientometric analysis offers a robust, data-driven foundation by highlighting influential studies and key themes. This ensures that the proposed framework is supported by the most relevant and impactful research in the field.
- (2)
- Empirical Validation: The industry surveys provide empirical validation, ensuring that the theoretical framework is relevant and applicable. This dual approach bridges the gap between theory and practice, making the findings more reliable and actionable.
- (3)
- Comprehensive Understanding: By integrating both quantitative and qualitative data, the study achieves a comprehensive understanding of BEPs. The scientometric analysis provides a macro-level view of research trends, while the surveys offer micro-level insights into practical challenges and needs.
- (4)
- Addressing Practical Challenges: The empirical data from industry professionals highlight specific areas where BEPs currently fall short. This direct feedback informs the refinement of the framework, ensuring that it addresses real-world challenges and enhances project outcomes.
2.1. Literature Review
2.2. Document Analysis
2.3. Scientometric Analysis
2.3.1. Analysis of the Simultaneous Presence of the Most Important Keywords
2.3.2. Pareto Analysis
| Sub-elements | Number of Sub-elements | percentage | percent 80% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | BIM Use | 29 | 7% | 80% |
| 2 | BIM Model and Level of Development | 26 | 14% | 80% |
| 3 | Project information | 25 | 20% | 80% |
| 4 | Model Coordination Procedures | 25 | 26% | 80% |
| 5 | Project Goals and Objectives | 23 | 32% | 80% |
| 6 | Collaboration procedures | 20 | 37% | 80% |
| 7 | Roles and Responsibility | 20 | 42% | 80% |
| 8 | Common Data Environment | 20 | 47% | 80% |
| 9 | BIM Project Execution Plan Overview | 20 | 51% | 80% |
| 10 | Master information delivery plan | 20 | 56% | 80% |
| 11 | Model structure | 19 | 61% | 80% |
| 12 | Software requirements | 19 | 66% | 80% |
| 13 | Project deliverables | 19 | 71% | 80% |
| 14 | Project Phases / Milestones | 19 | 75% | 80% |
| 15 | File Naming Conventions | 18 | 80% | 80% |
| 16 | Measurement and coordinate systems | 18 | 84% | 80% |
| 17 | Key project contacts | 16 | 88% | 80% |
| 18 | Quality Management | 16 | 92% | 80% |
| 19 | Methods & Procedure | 16 | 96% | 80% |
| 20 | Hardware | 16 | 100% | 80% |
| Total | 404 |
| Document Release History | |
|---|---|
| Definition | Abbreviation |
| Other Definitions | |
| BIM Project Execution Plan Overview | Executive Summary |
| Vision Statement | |
| References | |
| Project information | Project Description |
| Project Stakeholders | |
| Project Scope of Work in details | |
| Project Masterplan | |
| Buildings Key plan | |
| Key Project Contacts | |
| Key Project BIM Management | |
| Management | Project Phases/ Milestones |
| Key Roles and Responsibilities | |
| Project Deliverables | |
| Project Information Model Delivery Strategy | |
| Task information delivery plan (TIDP) | |
| Master information delivery plan (MIDP) | |
| Project Goals / BIM Uses | Major BIM Uses |
| BIM Workflow | |
| Level of Development (LOD) | |
| Level of Development Matrix | |
| Technical Requirements | Exchange Formats |
| Software Needs / Scope | |
| Hardware Needs | |
| Data Security | |
| IT Upgrades | |
| Training | |
| Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan. | Quality Assurance / Quality Control |
| Design content Check | |
| Visual / Coordination Check | |
| Standards Check | |
| Interference Check | |
| Clash Criteria | |
| Model Size | |
| Model Warnings | |
| Information exchange | |
| Coordination Process | |
| Clash Matrix |
2.4. Validation of the Proposed BEP Framework
2.5. Data Collection
3. Results
3.1. Descriptive Statistics
| Survey questions | N | Mean | SD | Variance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| How important do you think the Definition Section in the Proposed BEP Framework is? | 87 | 4.45 | .818 | .669 |
| How important do you think the BIM Project Execution Plan Overview Section in the Proposed BEP Framework is? | 87 | 4.51 | .713 | .509 |
| How important do you think the Project Information Section in the Proposed BEP Framework is? | 87 | 4.55 | .695 | .483 |
| How important do you think the Management Section in the Proposed BEP Framework is? | 87 | 4.67 | .604 | .364 |
| How important do you think the Project Goals/BIM Uses Section in the Proposed BEP Framework is? | 87 | 4.67 | .604 | .364 |
| How important do you think the Technical Requirements Section in the Proposed BEP Framework is? | 87 | 4.63 | .649 | .421 |
| How important do you think the Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan Section in the Proposed BEP Framework is? | 87 | 4.64 | .647 | .418 |
| At what stages of the project lifecycle do you integrate BIM Execution Plans? | 87 | 1.64 | 1.023 | 1.046 |
| Have you ever worked on a mega construction project in Egypt that used BIM? | 87 | 1.30 | .460 | .212 |
| How familiar are you with BIM Execution Plans (BEPs)? | 87 | 3.92 | .930 | .866 |
| How important do you think standardization of BIM Execution Plans is for mega construction projects? | 87 | 4.68 | .707 | .500 |
| How often do you refer to a BIM Execution Plan during the construction process? | 87 | 3.89 | 1.028 | 1.056 |
| How satisfied are you with the proposed BIM Execution Plan workflow for implementation in BIM mega projects? | 87 | 4.14 | 1.091 | 1.190 |
| How well does the proposed BIM Execution Plan align with the current BIM standards and Workflow? | 87 | 3.71 | 1.247 | 1.556 |
| In which sector do you describe your company? | 87 | 2.11 | .599 | .359 |
| In which sector does your company seek construction work? | 87 | 2.61 | .653 | .427 |
| In your experience, does the outlined workflow address the unique challenges of BIM mega projects? | 87 | 4.13 | 1.065 | 1.135 |
| What is the category of your current organization? | 87 | 3.40 | 2.037 | 4.150 |
| What is the level of your current occupation? | 87 | 4.60 | 2.099 | 4.406 |
| What is your highest level of education? | 87 | 1.49 | .663 | .439 |
| What type of mega construction do you have experience in? | 87 | 3.16 | 2.332 | 5.439 |
| Which of the following best describes your role in the construction industry? | 87 | 2.24 | 1.303 | 1.697 |
| Years of experience in the construction sector? | 87 | 3.07 | 1.159 | 1.344 |
| Your Company Size | 87 | 4.01 | 1.688 | 2.849 |
| Valid N (list-wise) | 87 |
| Proposed Framework for BIM Executive Plans (BEPs) | RII |
| How important do you think the Definition Section in the Proposed BEP Framework is? | 68 |
| How important do you think the BIM Project Execution Plan Overview Section in the Proposed BEP Framework is? | 69.2 |
| How important do you think the Project Information Section in the Proposed BEP Framework is? | 93.2 |
| How important do you think the Management Section in the Proposed BEP Framework is? | 94 |
| How important do you think the Project Goals/BIM Uses Section in the Proposed BEP Framework is? | 89.2 |
| How important do you think the Technical Requirements Section in the Proposed BEP Framework is? | 87.6 |
| How important do you think the Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan Section in the Proposed BEP Framework is? | 85.2 |
| Categories | Frequency | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Role in the construction industry | ||
| Architect | 31 | 35.6 |
| Civil Engineer | 30 | 34.5 |
| Electrical Engineer | 8 | 9.2 |
| Mechanical Engineer | 10 | 11.5 |
| Other | 8 | 9.2 |
| Years of experience in the construction industry | ||
| 0-5 Years | 10 | 11.5 |
| 5-10 Years | 15 | 17.2 |
| 10-15 Years | 31 | 35.6 |
| 15-20 Years | 21 | 24.1 |
| >20 Years | 10 | 11.5 |
| Category of the organization | ||
| General engineering consultants | 26 | 29.9 |
| Project management consultants | 3 | 3.4 |
| General contractor | 24 | 27.6 |
| Specialized contractor | 4 | 4.6 |
| Owner | 9 | 10.3 |
| BIM Services | 16 | 18.4 |
| Other | 5 | 5.7 |
| Education | ||
| Bachelor's degree | 52 | 59.8 |
| Master's degree | 27 | 31.0 |
| PhD | 8 | 9.2 |
| In which sector does your company operate? | ||
| Public | 11 | 12.6 |
| Private | 55 | 63.2 |
| Both | 21 | 24.1 |
| In which sector does your company seek construction work? | ||
| Public | 7 | 8.0 |
| Private | 21 | 24.1 |
| Both | 58 | 66.7 |
| Company size | ||
| 1-10 | 3 | 3.4 |
| 10-50 | 21 | 24.1 |
| 50-100 | 15 | 17.2 |
| 100-250 | 7 | 8.0 |
| 250-1000 | 15 | 17.2 |
| >1000 | 26 | 29.9 |
| Level of occupation | ||
| Junior level | 4 | 4.6 |
| Senior level | 22 | 25.3 |
| Project Engineer | 1 | 1.1 |
| Projects Manager | 13 | 14.9 |
| BIM Coordinator | 9 | 10.3 |
| BIM Manager | 16 | 18.4 |
| Top management | 20 | 23.0 |
| Other | 2 | 2.3 |
| Mega construction experience | ||
| Residential | 34 | 39.1 |
| Commercial | 10 | 11.5 |
| Infrastructure | 10 | 11.5 |
| Mixed-use | 11 | 12.6 |
| Complex | 2 | 2.3 |
| Hospital | 6 | 6.9 |
| Educational Building | 11 | 12.6 |
| Other | 3 | 3.4 |
| Familiarity with BIM Execution Plans (BEPs) | ||
| Not familiar at all | 1 | 1.1 |
| Familiar | 6 | 6.9 |
| Moderately familiar | 17 | 19.5 |
| Very familiar | 38 | 43.7 |
| Extremely familiar | 25 | 28.7 |
| At what stages of the project lifecycle do you integrate BIM Execution Plans? | ||
| Design Stage | 59 | 67.8 |
| Tender Stage | 6 | 6.9 |
| Construction Stage | 17 | 19.5 |
| Operation Stage | 4 | 4.6 |
| Have you ever worked on a mega construction project that used BIM? | ||
| Yes | 61 | 70.1 |
| No | 26 | 29.9 |
| How often do you refer to a BIM Execution Plan during the construction process? | ||
| Never | 3 | 3.4 |
| Rarely | 6 | 6.9 |
| Occasionally | 15 | 17.2 |
| Frequently | 37 | 42.5 |
| Always | 26 | 29.9 |
| How important do you think standardization of BIM Execution Plans is for mega construction projects? | ||
| Important | 2 | 2.3 |
| Moderately important | 6 | 6.9 |
| Very important | 10 | 11.5 |
| Extremely important | 69 | 79.3 |
| In your experience, does the outlined workflow address the unique challenges of BIM mega projects? | ||
| No, not at all | 2 | 2.3 |
| Not Sure | 4 | 4.6 |
| Partially | 20 | 23.0 |
| Often | 16 | 18.4 |
| Completely | 45 | 51.7 |
3.2. Classification According to the Experience
3.2.1. Interpretation of Significance Values
- All sections that were tested yielded significant values (p-values) greater than 0.05, with a range from 0.189 to 0.692. This suggests that there are no statistically significant disparities in how individuals with varying levels of experience perceive the significance of BEP sections.
- The absence of substantial disparities implies that the perceived significance of BEP sections is uniformly acknowledged among individuals with various levels of experience, indicating a widespread agreement among professionals irrespective of their tenure in the field.
3.3. Reliability
| Cronbach's Alpha | Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items | Number of Items |
|---|---|---|
| .935 | .941 | 7 |
3.4. Qualitative Feedback about BIM Execution Plans (BEPs)
4. Discussion
4.1. Analysis within the Framework of Prior Research
4.2. Proposed Hypotheses for Investigation
4.3. Significance of Results
4.5. The Developed Framework
4.5.1. Definition
- Abbreviations: Lists standard abbreviations used within the plan.
- Other Definitions: Provides definitions of key terms relevant to the project.
4.5.2. BIM Project Execution Plan Overview
- Executive Summary: Brief overview of the BIM execution strategy.
- Vision Statement: Outlines the project’s vision and strategic goals.
- References: Lists documents, standards, and resources referenced in the BEP.
4.5.3. Project Information
- Project Description: General description of the project.
- Project Stakeholders: Identification of all parties involved in the project.
- Project Scope of Work in Details: Detailed scope including tasks and deliverables.
- Project Masterplan, Buildings Key Plan, Key Project Contacts, Key Project
- BIM Management: Layouts and contact information essential for project management.
4.5.4. Management
- Project Phases/Milestones, Key Roles and Responsibilities, Project Deliverables, Project Information Model Delivery Strategy, Task Information Delivery Plan (TIDP), Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP): Detailed management plans outlining the project timeline, responsibilities, deliverables, and information delivery strategies
4.5.5. Project Goals / BIM Uses
- Major BIM Uses, Level of Information Needed (LOIN), Level of Development (LOD), Level of Information (LOI): Specifies the BIM usage goals and the required levels of information and development.
4.5.6. Model Process & Project Standards (Methods & Procedure)
- Volume Strategy, Project Models Breakdown, Naming Conventions, Annotations, Dimensions, Abbreviations and Symbols “Drawing Standards”, Project Units and Datum, Model Authoring: Standards and procedures for model creation and management.
4.5.7. Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan
- Detailed QA/QC processes like design content check, visual/coordination check, standards check, interference check, clash criteria, model size, model warnings, information exchange, coordination process, and clash matrix.
4.5.8. Collaborations
- Collaboration Strategy, Schedule of Information Exchange, Schedule of Meetings, Common Data Environment (CDE): Framework for collaboration among stakeholders, including schedules and data sharing environments.
4.5.9. Technical Requirements
- Exchange Formats, Software Needs/Scope, Hardware Needs, Data Security, IT Upgrades, Training: Specifies the technical requirements including software, hardware, data security measures, and necessary training.
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Yang, J.-B.; Chou, H.-Y. Mixed approach to government BIM implementation policy: An empirical study of Taiwan. Journal of Building Engineering 2018, 20, 337–343. [CrossRef]
- Shawky, K. A., Abdelalim, A. M., & Sherif, A. G. Standardization of BIM Execution Plans (BEP) for Mega Construction Projects: A Comparative and Scientometric Study. Technology and Engineering 2024. [CrossRef]
- Olbina, S., & Elliott, J. W. Contributing Project Characteristics and Realized Benefits of Successful BIM Implementation: A Comparison of Complex and Simple Buildings. Buildings 2019, 9, 175. [CrossRef]
- Çekin, E., & Seyis, S. BIM Execution Plan based on BS EN ISO 19650-1 and BS EN ISO 19650-2 Standards. In Proceedings of the 6th International Project and Construction Management Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, 2020.
- Galitskaya, V. Building Information Modeling Execution Plans: Implementation and Challenges. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 2019, 145(3), 04019012. [CrossRef]
- Abu Bakar, A. R., Haron, A. T., & Rahman, R. A. Building Information Modelling Execution Plan (BEP): A Comparison of Global Practice. Sciences 2021. [CrossRef]
- George, D.; Mallery, P. SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference. 11.0 Update (4th ed.); Allyn & Bacon: Boston, MA, USA, 2003.
- Chan, D. W.; Kumaraswamy, M. M. An evaluation of construction time performance in the building industry. Building and Environment 1996, 31(6), 569-578.
- Alarcon, L. F.; Ashley, D. B. Project Management Decision Making using the Relative Importance Index. In Proceedings of the CIB W-65, the Organization and Management of Construction Symposium, Glasgow, Scotland, 1996.
- Synek, J. (CTU Prague, Department of Building Technology, Thakurova 7, 160 59 Praha 6, Czechia; Metrostav, a.s., Koželužská 2450, 180 00 Praha 8, Czechia). Personal communication, 2012.
- Khedr, R.; Abdelalim, A. M. The Impact of Strategic Management on project performance of Construction Firms in Egypt. International Journal of Management and Commerce Innovations 2022, 9(2), 202-211. Available at: www.researchpublish.com.
- Bain, D. UK BIM survey 2019 findings. National BIM Report. Available online: https://www.thenbs.com/knowledge/national-bim-report-2019 (accessed on 5 January 2020).
- Akinradewo, O.; Aigbavboa, C.; Ikuabe, M.; Adekunle, S.; Adeniyi, A. Unmanned aerial vehicles usage on South African construction projects: Perceived benefits. Modular and Offsite Construction (MOC) Summit Proceedings 2022, 146-153.
- Barker, P. From UK to the world – Making BIM work internationally. National BIM Report. Available online: https://www.thenbs.com/knowledge/the-national-bim-report-2018 (accessed on 3 February 2019).
- Cao, H., & Huang, M. Building Information Modeling Technology Capabilities: Operationalizing the Multidimensional Construct. Sustainability 2023, 15(20). [CrossRef]
- Building Information Modeling (BIM), Blockchain, and LiDAR Applications in Construction Lifecycle. Buildings 2024, 14(4). [CrossRef]
- Besné, A., Pérez, M. Á., Necchi, S., Peña, E., Fonseca, D., Navarro, I., & Redondo, E. A Systematic Review of Current Strategies and Methods for BIM Implementation in the Academic Field. Applied Sciences 2021, 11(12), 5530. [CrossRef]
- Panagiotidou, N., Pitt, M., & Lu, Q. Building information modelling execution plans: a global review. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Smart Infrastructure and Construction 2022. [CrossRef]
- Abdelalim, A.M. Risks Affecting the Delivery of Construction Projects in Egypt: Identifying, Assessing and Response. In Project Management and BIM for Sustainable Modern Cities; Proceedings of the 2nd GeoMEast International Congress and Exhibition on Sustainable Civil Infrastructures, Egypt 2018–The Official International Congress of the Soil-Structure Interaction Group in Egypt (SSIGE); Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 125–154. [CrossRef]
- Abdelalim, A. M., Said, S. O., Alnaser, A. A., Sharaf, A., ElSamadony, A., Kontoni, D.-P. N., & Tantawy, M. Agent-Based Modeling for Construction Resource Positioning Using Digital Twin and BLE Technologies. Buildings 2024, 14(6), 1788. [CrossRef]
- Panagiotidou, N., Pitt, M., & Lu, Q. (2022). Building information modelling execution plans: a global review. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Smart Infrastructure and Construction. [CrossRef]
- Wu, W., & Issa, R. R. A. Development of a BIM-based automated construction safety checking system. Procedia Engineering 2013, 85, 107–113. [CrossRef]
- Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. International Journal of Medical Education 2011, 2, 53–55. [CrossRef]
- National Institute of Building Sciences. Project BIM Execution Plan (BEP) Standard. 2022. Retrieved from NIBS.
- Liu, Z., Gong, S., Tan, Z., & Demian, P. Immersive technologies-driven building information modeling (BIM) in the context of the metaverse. Buildings 2023, 13(6), 1559. [CrossRef]
- Babatunde, S. O., Ekundayo, D., Adekunle, A. O., & Bello, W. Comparative analysis of drivers to BIM adoption among AEC firms in developing countries. Journal of Engineering Design and Technology 2021.
- Abdelalim, A.M. and Abo. Elsaud, Y., 2019. “Integrating BIM-based simulation technique for sustainable building design”. In Project Management and BIM for Sustainable Modern Cities Issue : Proceedings of the 2nd GeoMEast International Congress and Exhibition on Sustainable Civil Infrastructures, Egypt 2018–The Official International Congress of the Soil-Structure Interaction Group in Egypt (SSIGE) (pp. 209-238). Springer International Publishing. [CrossRef]






| BIM Project Execution Plan Overview | Project Goals and Objectives |
| Project information | BIM Team |
| Task information delivery plan (TIDP) | Project Phases / Milestones |
| Responsible Parties | Detailed Modeling Plan |
| Project deliverables | Document Management |
| BIM Uses | Roles and Responsibility |
| BIM Model and Level of Development | Information Management Risk Register |
| Collaboration procedures | Master information delivery plan |
| Common Data Environment “CDE” | Key project contacts |
| Software requirements | Measurement and coordination systems |
| Hardware | Modeling Information |
| Data Validation and Verification | Model Ownership of Elements |
| Review and Approval Processes | Health and safety |
| Audit and Continuous Improvement | Survey strategy |
| Volume Strategy | File Naming Conventions |
| Model Coordination Procedures | Federated Model Color Scheme |
| Version Control | Model structure |
| Models Coordination | Coordination Approach |
| Tolerance Strategy | Quality Management |
| (Methods & Procedure) | Compliance plan |
| # | Section | Mean (0-5 Years) | Mean (5-10 Years) | Mean (10-15 Years) | Mean (15-20 Years) | Mean (>20 Years) | Mean (Total) | Std. Deviation | ANOVA F-value | ANOVA Sig. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Definition Section | 4.60 | 4.67 | 4.19 | 4.48 | 4.70 | 4.45 | 0.818 | 1.372 | 0.251 |
| 2 | BIM Project Execution Plan Overview Section | 4.60 | 4.73 | 4.32 | 4.48 | 4.70 | 4.51 | 0.713 | 1.138 | 0.344 |
| 3 | Project Information Section | 4.40 | 4.73 | 4.52 | 4.48 | 4.70 | 4.55 | 0.695 | 0.560 | 0.692 |
| 4 | Management Section | 4.80 | 4.73 | 4.55 | 4.62 | 4.90 | 4.67 | 0.604 | 0.866 | 0.488 |
| 5 | Project Goals/BIM Uses Section | 4.80 | 4.87 | 4.52 | 4.57 | 4.90 | 4.67 | 0.604 | 1.560 | 0.193 |
| 6 | Technical Requirements Section | 4.60 | 4.87 | 4.48 | 4.62 | 4.80 | 4.63 | 0.649 | 1.073 | 0.375 |
| 7 | Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan Section | 4.70 | 4.93 | 4.55 | 4.48 | 4.80 | 4.64 | 0.647 | 1.470 | 0.219 |
| No. | Questions | Findings | Main Themes & Sub-Themes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Are there specific areas of the plan that you believe require adjustments to comply with Egyptian BIM standards? | Management adjustments are needed, with emphasis on Document ownership, COBie compliance, Collaboration, interoperability, VDC/BIM adjustments, and BIM workflow adjustments. | Management Adjustments, Document Ownership, Standards Compliance |
| 2 | Are there components or processes in the workflow that you believe are unnecessary or overly complex for BIM mega projects in Egypt? | I am admirable by project, emphasizing the need for flexible standards, collaboration, tailored training, and effective change management. | Workflow Complexity, Training, and Change Management |
| 3 | What recommendations would you make to improve the BIM Execution Plan workflow for better suitability and efficiency in the context of Egyptian/ MENA-region BIM mega projects? | Follow international standards, ensure LOD and stakeholder inclusion, simplify for easier implementation, standardize nationally, and include facility management early. | Standards & Stakeholder Engagement, Implementation Simplicity, National Standardization |
| 4 | Do you think the two subsections in the definition section of the proposed BEP Framework are sufficient? | Suggested additions include subsections on Technology Requirements, Stakeholder Roles and Responsibilities, and Data Management and Exchange Protocols. | Framework Comprehensiveness: Technology, Stakeholder Roles, Data Management |
| 5 | Do you think the three subsections in the BIM Project Execution Plan Overview section of the proposed BEP Framework are sufficient? | Suggested additions include Implementation Timeline, Performance Metrics, and Continuous Improvement Processes. | Framework Detailing: Implementation Schedule, Performance Evaluation, Improvement Processes |
| 6 | Do you think the seven subsections in the Project Information section of the proposed BEP Framework are sufficient? | Suggested additions include Sustainability Goals, Risk Management Strategies, and Change Management Procedures. | Information Sufficiency: Environmental, Risk, Change Management |
| 7 | Do you think the six subsections in the Management section of the proposed BEP Framework are sufficient? | Suggested additions include Quality Assurance/Quality Control Procedures, Stakeholder Communication Plans, and Technology Integration Strategies. | Management Robustness: QA/QC, Communication, Technology Integration |
| 8 | Do you think the four subsections in the Project Goals/BIM Uses section of the proposed BEP Framework are sufficient? | Suggested additions include Environmental Sustainability, Lifecycle Management, and Stakeholder Engagement Objectives. | Project Goals Depth: Sustainability, Lifecycle, Stakeholder Engagement |
| 9 | Do you think the six subsections in the Technical Requirements section of the proposed BEP Framework are sufficient? | Suggested additions include Cybersecurity Measures, Interoperability Standards, and Data Archiving and Retrieval Procedures. | Technical Adequacy: Cybersecurity, Interoperability, Data Management |
| 10 | Do you think the eleven subsections in the Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan section of the proposed BEP Framework are sufficient? | Suggested additions include Continuous Improvement Mechanisms, Stakeholder Feedback Loops, and Compliance with International Standards. | QA/QC Expansion: Continuous Improvement, Stakeholder Feedback, Standards Compliance |
| 11 | Please provide any additional comments or suggestions regarding the BIM Execution Plan workflow. | Suggestions for the BEP to become a pivotal document in Egypt, with calls for specific sections and emphasis on adaptability, collaboration, and integration with contracts. | BEP as Pivotal Document: Specific Sections, Adaptability, Stakeholder Collaboration |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).