buildings

Article
Assessment of Adoption and Acceptance of Building Information
Modeling for Building Construction among Industries in Qatar
Louiesito S. Vitente 1,2 , Ardvin Kester S. Ong 1,3, * and Josephine D. German 1

1 School of Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Mapúa University, 658 Muralla St.,
Intramuros, Manila 1002, Philippines
2 School of Graduate Studies, Mapúa University, 658 Muralla St., Intramuros, Manila 1002, Philippines
3 E.T. Yuchengco School of Business, Mapúa University, 1191 Pablo Ocampo Sr. Ext., Makati 1204, Philippines
* Correspondence: aksong@mapua.edu.ph; Tel.: +63-(2)8247-5000 (ext. 6202)

Abstract: Building information modeling (BIM) has become a vital tool in the construction industry,
especially in Qatar, where remarkable infrastructural growth and innovation have taken place. This
study looked into the factors influencing the adoption and acceptability of BIM in the Qatari con-
struction industry using the Information System Success Model (ISSM), the Technology Acceptability
Model (TAM), and structural equation modeling (SEM). Survey information gathered from project
managers, contractors, engineers, architects, suppliers, and BIM specialists with direct BIM expertise
was examined. The results showed that intentions to adopt BIM have a significant influence on its
Perceived Usefulness and ease of use. The adoption of BIM is also significantly impacted by ISSM
elements, including the Total Quality, Organizational Efficiency, Innovativeness, and Financial As-
pects. This study illustrates the complex interactions between organizational influences and personal
perspectives by demonstrating the direct and indirect effects of these factors on BIM adoption. These
results provide a complete picture of the dynamics influencing BIM adoption in Qatar’s construction
sector. As a result, this study makes connections between individual technology acceptance and
the larger socio-technical environment of BIM implementation, providing essential information for
building sector stakeholders, policymakers, and industry leaders. By using these insights to create
strategies to boost BIM’s adoption and acceptability, the construction industries may be further
aligned with global best practices in project management and delivery.
Citation: Vitente, L.S.; Ong, A.K.S.;
German, J.D. Assessment of Adoption
and Acceptance of Building
Keywords: building information modeling (BIM); construction industry; IS success model; technology
Information Modeling for Building acceptance model; structural equation modeling
Construction among Industries in
Qatar. Buildings 2024, 14, 1433.
https://doi.org/10.3390/
buildings14051433 1. Introduction
Academic Editor: Peter Johansson Building information modeling (BIM) is a modern digital technology that has com-
pletely changed the global building industry. A collaborative process known as building
Received: 21 March 2024 information modeling (BIM) is used to design and manage the structural and functional
Revised: 22 April 2024
components of a building or infrastructure project as digital representations. In their
Accepted: 13 May 2024
2011 book, Eastman et al. [1] referred to BIM as a digital representation of the physical
Published: 16 May 2024
and functional characteristics of a facility. Moreover, Succar [2] explained how BIM is
an approach using digital models to represent and manage both building construction
and ongoing facility operations. By adding data, geometry, and relationships between
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
architectural components, BIM, which goes beyond traditional Computer-Aided Design
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. (CAD), facilitates better decision-making throughout a project’s lifecycle.
This article is an open access article Information creation and management of a built asset are carried out holistically
distributed under the terms and through the use of BIM. Digital asset lifecycle management (BIM) generates a digital
conditions of the Creative Commons representation of an asset from planning and design through construction and operations
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// by integrating structured, multidisciplinary data, facilitated by a cloud platform and an
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ intelligent model [3]. It offers a lot of potential benefits, but before it can fully achieve its
4.0/). potential, the construction sector must properly adapt to and adopt it.

Buildings 2024, 14, 1433. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14051433 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings

Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 2 of 17

The literature highlights a number of objectives for and benefits of BIM. Using BIM
to facilitate energy analysis and performance evaluation, Farooqui [4] examined how
sustainable design may be supported. Making environmentally friendly choices during
the design phase is made easier by BIM’s capacity to simulate and optimize a building’s
performance. The key benefits of BIM include increased collaboration, improved communi-
cation, reduced redundancy, and cost savings, according to Barlish and Sullivan [5]. Drew
Eager [6] emphasized the advantages of BIM in terms of enhanced design visualization,
clash detection, and performance analysis, all of which help make better decisions and
produce more successful projects. Despite its advantages, BIM adoption in the construction
industry faces difficulties. Specialized training requirements, uneven practices, problems
with interoperability, and resistance to change are the key difficulties [7]. It is possible for
barriers to stand in the way of successful BIM deployment, according to [8].
The Public Works Authority of Qatar has established and published the Ashghal BIM
Standards (ABIMSs), which are a collection of specifications, templates, and guides, based
on the adoption of and adherence to recognized standards. The current code of practice
for the cooperative creation of architectural, engineering, and construction information is
expanded upon by these standards (ISO-19650: 2018) [9]. The development of a corporate
BIM policy is a crucial step towards the adoption of BIM across an enterprise and the indus-
try. This policy builds governance around a unique idea, known as the four components
of BIM implementation, which are technology, organization, foundation, and operation.
The interoperability and efficacy of BIM adoption across projects in Qatar can be greatly
impacted [10].
Moreover, providing concrete proof of the technology’s effectiveness in practical
applications is achieved by showcasing successful BIM projects in Qatar. The imple-
mentation of BIM in the coordination process has been shown to reduce conflicts and
enhance work progress during the building phase in projects like Qatar’s Lusail Plaza [11].
These projects are prime examples of the transformational power of BIM in the country’s
construction industry.
On the adoption and application of BIM in the construction industry, several interna-
tional studies and research projects have been carried out. Research has been conducted
on how the characteristics of organizations affect the acceptance of BIM [12]. It helped in
identifying corporate culture, senior management support, and enough training as essential
components of successful BIM deployment. The study focused on the potential benefits of
inviting environments and transparent leadership in fostering adoption and acceptance
of BIM at the organizational level. Contractors, engineers, and architects all embrace BIM
to varying degrees, as presented by Rokooei [13]. Understanding diverse stakeholder
perspectives is crucial for advancing widespread BIM adoption and enabling seamless
cross-disciplinary collaboration, which is essential for its integration and development.
In order to analyze the evolution and phases of BIM adoption in organizations, Sun
et al. [14] developed a BIM Maturity Model. A higher level of BIM maturity is associated
with better project outcomes, cost savings, and enhanced teamwork, according to the
survey. Despite its advantages, BIM adoption faces a number of challenges. According to
Liu et al. [15], the key challenges were interoperability issues, the absence of BIM standards,
and the BIM software’s high initial cost. Along with their resistance to change, the incapacity
of construction specialists to effectively use BIM was cited as an obstacle. How BIM impacts
project success has been studied by researchers. According to Wong et al.’s [16] meta-
analysis of BIM case studies, adopting BIM improved project outcomes like schedule
performance and cost control and reduced rework. The study underlines how BIM could
increase the efficiency of building projects. BIM should be commended for encouraging
better communication between project partners. The effects of BIM on interdisciplinary
collaboration were studied by Cheng et al. [17], who discovered that it improved project
coordination, decreased information exchange delays, and improved communication.
The construction industry in Qatar, a rapidly developing nation in the Middle East,
has seen tremendous growth as a result of an increase in infrastructure projects, brought
Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 3 of 17

on by its preparations for large international events like the Federation International
Football Association (FIFA) World Cup [18]. The adoption and implementation of cutting-
edge technologies like BIM are of great interest to industry players, policymakers, and
researchers, because the construction sector is crucial to the expansion of the nation’s
economy. Although the potential advantages of BIM have been acknowledged, there are
still several difficulties in deploying and using this technology in the construction sector.
These problems could be typified by an enterprise’s lack of technical expertise, adaptability,
literacy, and a clear BIM strategy [3]. It is, therefore, crucial to understand all the variables
impacting stakeholders’ attitudes to BIM adoption in the context of the Qatari building
industry in order to overcome these issues and improve BIM adoption [10]. Even though
there have been studies on the adoption of BIM in many different countries, regional studies
are still necessary in order to consider the unique contextual factors and cultural effects
that influence the adoption of technology.
The perceived advantages and usability had a big impact on stakeholders’ acceptance
of and motivation to use BIM, which was discovered by Delone and McLean using the
Davies Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Information System Success Model
(ISSM). Research has been carried out regarding the application of BIM in the building
sector. According to Shareef et al. [19], a framework known as the TAM is used to study
the connections between a system’s utility, comfort, user attitude, and actual usage behav-
ior [20]. Investigating the numerous factors that influence how new IS technologies are
adopted is the TAM model’s primary objective. The system, information, and service qual-
ity were heavily weighted in ISSM in order to evaluate the information system’s intended
use, user satisfaction constructs, and overall advantages [21,22].
The main objective of this study was to evaluate the acceptance and adoption of BIM
in Qatar’s construction sector through the application of structural equation modeling
(SEM). The subsequent research aims are meant to support this foundational purpose. How
much is BIM now being used in Qatar’s construction industry? Finding out how much BIM
is being used in Qatari construction projects at the moment is essential to achieving this. To
achieve this, a theoretical framework incorporated relevant concepts, such as the Davies
Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and the Information System Success Model (ISSM)
by Delone and McLean [20–22]. This addressed the primary goal of this study, which was
to develop a comprehensive SEM model for assessing the uptake and acceptance of BIM in
the construction sector in Qatar. The relationships between the listed components will be
looked into to fully understand the adoption and acceptance of BIM in Qatar.
The current study will provide illuminating perspectives and suggestions in an effort
to promote BIM adoption in Qatar’s construction sector. In order to help professionals in
the construction industry, legislators, and organizations who wish to enhance their BIM
strategies and promote successful implementation in Qatar, the study’s findings may con-
tribute to the body of knowledge on BIM adoption and acceptance. It will offer a thorough
overview of the current adoption rate and pinpoint the elements affecting stakeholders’
opinions about the use of BIM in Qatar. This objective looks at the influences and elements
that shape how BIM is perceived and used by professionals in the construction sector.

2. Conceptual Framework
Understanding the perceived benefits and ease of use of BIM can significantly influence
stakeholders’ willingness to adopt and engage with it. This study utilized both the TAM
and ISSM frameworks to explore this aspect. The conceptual framework used is presented
in Figure 1. Moreover, Table 1 presents the suggested hypotheses that were generated by the
researchers to examine the conceptual model that was proposed. Since TAM and ISSM are
multidimensional and interdependent constructs, it is necessary to study the relationships
among, or to control for, those dimensions according to Delone and McLean [20–22]. As a
result, the following 14 hypotheses were investigated.
 TAM and ISSM frameworks to explore this aspect. The conceptual framework used is pre-
sented in Figure 1. Moreover, Table 1 presents the suggested hypotheses that were gener-
ated by the researchers to examine the conceptual model that was proposed. Since TAM
and ISSM are multidimensional and interdependent constructs, it is necessary to study
Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 the relationships among, or to control for, those dimensions according to Delone and 4 of 17
McLean [20–22]. As a result, the following 14 hypotheses were investigated.

Figure 1. Conceptual framework of research.

Figure 1. Conceptual framework of research.

Table
Table 1. 1. Research
Research hypotheses.
hypotheses.

Hypotheses
Hypotheses Definition
Definition
H1a
H1a There is aissignificant,
There positive
a significant, relationship
positive between
relationship Total
between Quality
Total and
Quality andPerceived
PerceivedUsefulness
Usefulness
H1b There is a significant, positive relationship between Total Quality and Perceived Ease of Use
H1b There is a significant, positive relationship between Total Quality and Perceived Ease of Use
H2a There is a significant, positive relationship between Operational Efficiency and Perceived Usefulness
H2a
H2b There
There is aissignificant,
a significant, positive
positive relationship
relationship between
between Operational
Operational Efficiency
Efficiency and
and Perceived
Perceived Usefulness
Ease of Use
H2b
H3a There
There is aissignificant,
a significant, positive
positive relationship
relationship between
between Operational Efficiency
Innovativeness and Perceived
and Perceived UsefulnessEase of Use
H3b
H3a There is aissignificant,
There positive
a significant, relationship
positive between
relationship Innovativeness
between Innovativenessand Perceived
and Ease
Perceived of Use
Usefulness
H4a There is a significant, positive relationship between Organizational Efficiency and Perceived Usefulness
H3b There is a significant, positive relationship between Innovativeness and Perceived Ease of Use
H4b There is a significant, positive relationship between Organizational Efficiency and Perceived Ease of Use
H4a
H5a There
There is aissignificant,
a significant, positive
positive relationship
relationship between
between Organizational
Financial AspectsEfficiency and Perceived
and Perceived UsefulnessUsefulness
H4b
H5b There
There is aissignificant,
a significant, positive
positive relationship
relationship between
between Organizational
Financial AspectsEfficiency and Perceived
and Perceived Ease of Use
Ease of Use
H6
H5a There is a significant, positive relationship between Perceived Usefulness and Individual Usage
There is a significant, positive relationship between Financial Aspects and Perceived Usefulness Acceptance
H7 There is a significant, positive relationship between Perceived Usefulness and Organizational Usage Acceptance
H5b There is a significant, positive relationship between Financial Aspects and Perceived Ease of Use
H8 There is a significant, positive relationship between Perceived Ease of Use and Individual Usage Acceptance
H6
H9 There
There is aissignificant,
a significant, positive
positive relationship
relationship between
between Perceived
Perceived Usefulness
Ease andOrganizational
of Use and Individual Usage Acceptance
Usage Acceptance
H7 There is a significant, positive relationship between Perceived Usefulness and Organizational Usage Acceptance
H8 Hypotheses
There is a significant, positive relationship between Perceived Ease of Use and Individual Usage Acceptance
H9 The
There is a significant, adoption
positive and acceptance
relationship of BIM Ease
between Perceived in the
of construction industry Usage
Use and Organizational were Acceptance
assessed in
this study using the ISSM and TAM. Specifically, every quality dimension from the TAM
and IS success model was adopted by the suggested model, as well as Total Quality, Op-
Hypotheses
erational Efficiency, Innovativeness, Organizational Efficiency, Financial Aspects,
The adoption and acceptance of BIM in the construction industry were assessed in this
study using the ISSM and TAM. Specifically, every quality dimension from the TAM and IS
success model was adopted by the suggested model, as well as Total Quality, Operational
Efficiency, Innovativeness, Organizational Efficiency, Financial Aspects, Perceived Ease of
Use and usefulness, and Individual and Organizational Usage Acceptance of the deploy-
ment and adoption of BIM in the construction industry in the State of Qatar. Because it is the
most complete model that is utilized as a theoretical framework to investigate information
Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 5 of 17

systems, this paper selected the TAM and IS success model to assess the acceptance and
adoption of BIM in the construction sector in Qatar.
Building from related studies and the adopted definition, the hypotheses build-up
is presented to justify why there is a focus on establishing the relationship between the
variables considered in this study.
Total Quality: All design and construction projects benefit from BIM’s quality assur-
ance. The BIM’s quality is regarded as a crucial component in enhancing a design’s quality,
since it minimizes conflicts and lowers rework. The potential of BIM implementation
in quality management is found in its capacity to deliver multidimensional data, which
include time sequence and design data. This is because construction and quality control
processes are consistent, and quality and design data are consistent with one another [23].
This way, we build up the relationship that we established for both H1a and H1b. The same
goes for other relationships presented.
Organizational Efficiency: This is a benefit that BIM software has over other conven-
tional techniques. Ensuring the timely completion of a project is crucial for enhancing an
organization’s standing and fortifying its competitive benefits. By using BIM tools, data
may be accessed more quickly and readily by all engineering stakeholders, facilitating the
greatest possible progress towards project objectives. This cuts down on the time needed
for clients and designers to communicate complex visual information [24].
Financial Aspects: A study by Alothman et al. [25] evaluated the application of BIM in
affordable home development and maintenance in South Korea. According to the research,
BIM increased the project’s efficiency and sustainability while reducing waste and costs
associated with construction.
Innovativeness: This describes a person’s psychological disposition or aptitude for
introducing novel information technology. Technology utilization was assessed using
personal innovativeness as an external variable [26]. Additionally, it was projected that
over time, the use of such integration would spread throughout the construction sector,
increasing job productivity, efficiency, and safety [27].
Operational Efficiency: Knowledge management is made simpler by the BIM tech-
nology’ speedy evolution. Continuous project data collection, storage, and maintenance
are required throughout the construction lifecycle in order to monitor and analyze project
features. The speed of BIM tools enables the rapid and precise comparison of a large num-
ber of design possibilities, leading to the development of more economical, ecologically
friendly, and efficient solutions. The speed of BIM technologies can help facility managers
significantly reduce emissions into the environment and operating expenses by facilitating
the investigation and comparison of alternative energy performance solutions [28].
Perceived Usefulness: This is defined as the user’s goals and assumptions when
using a technology. This element is essential when implementing BIM. The results are
consistent with previous studies [29–31], which discovered that the most significant factor
influencing the behavioral intention to use BIM is Perceived Usefulness. Respondents’
attitudes regarding utilizing BIM increased as they realized its benefits, and they reported
a stronger desire to do so [29].
Perceived Ease of Use: The organization sees several benefits of BIM, including
enhanced quality and accuracy, better information access and communication, enhanced
competitiveness, an integrated work progress, increased profitability, time savings, fewer
claims and legal issues, and lower communication costs [32]. Should Perceived Usefulness
be regarded as a necessary condition for users to embrace BIM tools, the perceived benefits
of BIM for organizations are believed to be the main element influencing an organization’s
choice to integrate BIM technology.
Individual Usage Acceptance: Using SEM, Lee and Jeong [26] suggested that the
BIM acceptance model revealed that the organizational and individual acceptability of
BIM use need to be taken into account in order for BIM to be fully adopted. As a tool for
decision-makers for the application of BIM, Juan et al. [33] created a prediction model to
evaluate Taiwanese architects’ preparedness and acceptability.
Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 6 of 17

Organizational Usage Acceptance: It is expected that views among BIM users will
change with time. Construction organizations should become more aware of the benefits
and significance of BIM as use cases and markets grow. Therefore, it is anticipated that
construction companies will adopt BIM frequently, and Lee et al. [34] expect that as a
technology’s adoption grows inside an organization, so will people’s opinions about it and
the connections between the variables affecting these opinions. Developing a support plan
for successful and efficient BIM acceptance requires a deep comprehension of the essential
components related to the acceptance stage.

3. Research Methodology
3.1. Research Instruments
This study investigated the factors affecting BIM adoption in Qatar’s construction
sector, advocating for the TAM and ISSM frameworks to enhance BIM utilization. Empirical
analysis was conducted via an online survey, providing data to validate the proposed model.
The survey gathered real-world insights from construction professionals, shedding light on
their perspectives regarding BIM adoption. By integrating theoretical frameworks with
empirical evidence, the study aimed to offer practical recommendations for promoting BIM
adoption and improving construction practices in Qatar. The information was gathered
using a methodical questionnaire. A total of 300 construction professionals working in
Qatar were given the questionnaire, designed in accordance with the relevant literature,
and 284 responded, leading to a 94.66% response rate.
The survey was structured using three sections: an overview of the research question,
the goals of the study, and the researchers. The survey’s second section asked questions
about the participants’ gender, age group, education level, job position or role, total number
of years spent in construction, and company size. A series of questions assessing the vari-
ables incorporated into the research model comprised the third section of the questionnaire.
The following constructs were measured by 47 items in the instrument: Total Quality
(TQ-5 items), Operational Efficiency (OE-5 items), Innovativeness (IN-5), Organizational
Efficiency (OF-5), Financial Aspects (FA-5), Perceived Usefulness (PU-7), Perceived Ease of
Use (PE-6), Individual Usage Acceptance (UA-7), and Organizational Usage Acceptance
(OA-7). English-language statements were used for each independent or dependent vari-
able in the study to measure each construct. The items in the instrument were selected
based on previous research [24–37] in order to improve its overall validity and reliability.
Survey questions were scored on a Likert scale of 1 to 5, with 5 denoting Strongly Agree
and 1 denoting Strongly Disagree.
Ten participants completed the entire questionnaire as part of a pilot test before data
collection. The pilot study’s main goals were to evaluate the statements’ clarity and confirm
their content, and the second objective of the pilot research was to assess and improve
the questionnaire’s content. The pilot test encompassed 50 respondents to check the
questionnaire understanding, contextualization, and recommendations. The initial overall
Cronbach alpha output was obtained to be 0.857, which was higher than the recommended
threshold of 0.70 [38]. Only minor grammatical errors and context specifications were
suggested as changes to be made. At any point during the procedure, study participants
had the choice to accept or decline the invitation to participate and to revoke their consent
at any moment. All participants in these cases were kept completely anonymous, and data
confidentiality was upheld.

3.2. Sample and Sampling Process

All construction professionals working in the State of Qatar were the study’s target
population. Sending an online link via social media platforms and email was the sampling
process, using convenience sampling as a method of distribution. The link led respondents
to a Google Forms-based online platform for data collecting. In total, 284 relevant people
were targeted in the online community. The period of data collection was from June to
September 2023. Only 284 of the 300 respondents who took part in the survey (94.66%
Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 7 of 17

response rate) provided legitimate responses; the other surveys were invalid due to missing
information and no response.
In Table 2, the sample’s demographic details are displayed. The sample has a majority
of men (69.37%), followed by women (30.63%) in terms of gender. The age groups of
18 to 24 (4.58%), 25 to 34 (35.21%), 45 to 54 (15.49%), and 55 years and above (2.46%)
provided the lowest percentages of responses. The highest rate of assessment response
was 42.25% from the 35 to 44 years of experience group. The bulk of participants (79.93%)
held Bachelor’s Degrees, with the second group having Master’s Degrees with 13.73%,
followed by a Diploma Course with 5.28% and a Doctoral Degree (1.06%). The greatest
response rate (24.65%) came from architects, with respondents generally being evenly split
by role in their organization. The majority of responders (43.31%) had 6–10 years of work
experience in the construction industry, with a lower response rate (1.76%) for less than
1 year. The survey participants belonged to the following sectors: enterprise (20.42%) and
large (20.07%), medium (42.61%), and small (16.90%) businesses.

Table 2. Sample demographics.

Characteristics Category N %
Male 197 69.366%
Gender
Female 87 30.634%
18–24 13 4.577%
25–34 100 35.211%
Age 35–44 120 42.254%
45–54 44 15.493%
55 and above 7 2.465%
Diploma Course 15 5.282%
Bachelor’s Degree 227 79.930%
Educational Background
Master’s Degree 39 13.732%
Doctoral Degree 3 1.056%
Project Manager 28 9.859%
Architect 70 24.648%
Engineer 64 22.535%
Job Position/Role
Contractor 38 13.380%
BIM Specialist 51 17.958%
Vendor/Supplier 33 11.620%
Less than 1 year 5 1.761%
1–5 years 18 6.338%
Experience on Construction Industry 6–10 years 123 43.310%
11–15 years 82 28.873%
More than 15 years 56 19.718%
Small (1–50 employees) 48 16.901%
Medium (51–250 employees) 121 42.606%
Company/Organizational Size
Large (251–1000 employees) 57 20.070%
Enterprise (1000+ employees) 58 20.423%

3.3. Data Analysis Techniques

In structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis, a structural model that employs
mathematical equations to highlight all connections between constituent components is
combined with a measurement model known as confirmatory factor analysis. The measure-
ment approach must be confirmed, since SEM reveals relationships between latent variables
and their causal relationships. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, which assesses the internal
consistency and has a minimum acceptable value of 0.70, is used to determine the reliability
of scales [38]. The SEM methodology was taken into account, because it provides a useful
way to assess different study hypotheses [38–45]. SEM is an effective statistical technique
that is utilized in studies to examine and comprehend intricate relationships between latent
 combined with a measurement model known as confirmatory factor analysis. The meas-
urement approach must be confirmed, since SEM reveals relationships between latent var-
iables and their causal relationships. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, which assesses the
internal consistency and has a minimum acceptable value of 0.70, is used to determine the
Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 reliability of scales [38]. The SEM methodology was taken into account, because it8 of pro-
17
vides a useful way to assess different study hypotheses [38–45]. SEM is an effective statis-
tical technique that is utilized in studies to examine and comprehend intricate relation-
ships between factors
(unobservable) latent (unobservable) factors and
and apparent variables apparent
[38]. variables
To this end, [38]. To
this study this end, the
considered this
study considered the common method of
common method of bias-SEM using IBM AMOS v23. bias-SEM using IBM AMOS v23.

4.4.Results
Results
The
Theresults
resultsof
ofthe
thepreliminary
preliminarySEM SEManalysis
analysisare
areshown
shownin inFigure
Figure2,2,along
alongwith
withfactor
factor
loadings that show the connections between the item indicators and
loadings that show the connections between the item indicators and the corresponding the corresponding
latent
latentvariables
variables and coefficients,
coefficients,indicating
indicatingthe theadoption
adoptionand and acceptance
acceptance of of
BIM BIM in the
in the Qa-
Qatari construction
tari construction sector.
sector. According
According to Hair
to Hair et al.’s
et al.’s [46][46] recommendation,
recommendation, to qualify
to qualify as
as sig-
significant, a measurement
nificant, a measurement needs
needs to have
to have a beta
a beta coefficient
coefficient withwith a p-value
a p-value ofthan
of less less or
than or
equal
equal to 0.05 and a minimum of 0.50 for the measured items. According
to 0.05 and a minimum of 0.50 for the measured items. According to the result of this to the result of this
study’s
study’sinitial
initialSEM,
SEM,there
thereare
areno nosignificant
significantrelationships
relationshipsbetween
betweenOE OEon onPUPUandandPEPEandand
IN PU—shown as broken lines, since the p-value
IN on PU—shown as broken lines, since the p-value was greater than 0.05, while thefactor
on was greater than 0.05, while the factor
loadings
loadingswerewereless
lessthan
than0.50.
0.50.ItItwas
wasnecessary
necessaryto toadjust
adjustthethemodel’s
model’sfitfitwith
withindices
indicesininorder
order
to
toobtain
obtainaameasurement
measurementthat thatwaswasadequate.
adequate.

Figure2.2.The
Figure Theinitial
initial assessment
assessment forfor assessing
assessing thethe variables
variables andand indicators
indicators related
related to thetoadoption
the adoption
and
and acceptance
acceptance of BIM. of BIM.

Theabsolute
The absolutecorrelation
correlationbetween
betweenthe
theconstruct
constructand
andits
itsmeasuring
measuringitemsitemswas
wasgreater
greater
thanthe
than theminimal
minimalthreshold
threshold requirement,
requirement, according
according to findings
to findings regarding
regarding the construct’s
the construct’s va-
lidity and reliability. Table 3 displays the descriptive statistics, as well as the initial and end
factor loadings for each item measured. Every loading was regarded as significant [42,44].
Hair suggested analyzing the Composite Reliability, Cronbach’s alpha, and Average Vari-
ance Extracted (AVE) to further assess the validity and reliability of the constructs. The
study met the criteria, which were higher than the corresponding values of 0.50 and 0.70.
In addition, no values exceeded ±1.96 using the Shapiro–Wilks test, which indicates that
the data are normally distributed.
Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 9 of 17

Table 3. Reliability and validity.

Factor Loading
Latent Mean STD CR AVE CA
Initial Final
TQ1 3.982 0.464 0.638 0.649 0.837 0.508 0.803
TQ2 4.173 0.608 0.736 0.736
TQ3 4.159 0.806 0.745 0.733
TQ4 4.042 0.765 0.714 0.718
TQ5 4.109 0.717 0.726 0.723
IN1 4.060 0.612 0.672 0.681 0.846 0.525 0.812
IN2 4.092 0.692 0.772 0.769
IN3 4.130 0.743 0.659 0.676
IN4 4.011 0.691 0.695 0.691
IN5 3.930 0.758 0.790 0.797
OF1 4.049 0.562 0.697 0.707 0.840 0.513 0.758
OF2 4.074 0.616 0.686 0.714
OF3 4.028 0.936 0.797 0.802
OF4 4.081 0.665 0.652 0.648
OF5 4.067 0.687 0.705 0.700
FA1 3.933 0.645 0.748 0.752 0.834 0.502 0.832
FA2 4.106 0.700 0.682 0.688
FA3 4.028 0.765 0.699 0.690
FA4 3.997 0.711 0.712 0.717
FA5 4.039 0.705 0.696 0.694
PU1 4.049 0.633 0.704 0.669 0.878 0.507 0.867
PU2 4.053 0.673 0.742 0.707
PU3 4.078 0.714 0.734 0.706
PU4 4.113 0.694 0.723 0.701
PU5 3.951 0.707 0.786 0.758
PU6 4.014 0.672 0.739 0.719
PU7 4.060 0.703 0.744 0.719
PE1 3.975 0.626 0.747 0.763 0.857 0.550 0.845
PE2 4.102 0.733 0.458 -
PE3 3.986 0.761 0.519 0.542
PE4 4.063 0.670 0.614 0.713
PE5 4.032 0.648 0.889 0.838
PE6 3.979 0.733 0.819 0.816
UA1 3.989 0.609 0.847 0.808 0.837 0.510 0.866
UA2 4.130 0.683 0.455 -
UA3 4.049 0.697 0.786 0.752
UA4 4.099 0.644 0.446 -
UA5 4.042 0.732 0.717 0.718
UA6 4.014 0.688 0.787 0.724
UA7 4.074 0.676 0.548 0.541
OA1 3.993 0.606 0.848 0.873 0.885 0.610 0.870
OA2 4.106 0.664 0.579 0.579
OA3 4.063 0.763 0.752 0.761
OA4 4.144 0.665 0.877 0.872
OA5 4.099 0.701 0.789 0.782
OA6 4.078 0.694 0.566 -
OA7 4.120 0.672 0.454 -
OE1 4.035 0.581 0.744 -
OE2 4.085 0.651 0.695 -
OE3 4.123 0.790 0.657 -
OE4 3.989 0.685 0.667 -
OE5 4.028 0.737 0.774 -
(AVE) Average Variance Extracted, (CA) Cronbach’s Alpha, (CR) Composite Reliability.
 OE1 4.035 0.581 0.744 -
OE2 4.085 0.651 0.695 -
OE3 4.123 0.790 0.657 -
OE4 3.989 0.685 0.667 -
Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 10 of 17
OE5 4.028 0.737 0.774 -
(AVE) Average Variance Extracted, (CA) Cronbach’s Alpha, (CR) Composite Reliability.

Figure
Figure33displays
displaysthethe
final SEM
final SEMafter the the
after modification indices
modification analysis.
indices All the
analysis. elements
All the ele-
were deemed significant, with p-values below the significance level (<0.05).
ments were deemed significant, with p-values below the significance level (<0.05). Fur- Furthermore,
Table 4 shows
thermore, that
Table each component’s
4 shows model fit model
that each component’s was definitely within the
fit was definitely threshold.
within All
the thresh-
the SEM parameters were within the minimal permitted range as per the literature
old. All the SEM parameters were within the minimal permitted range as per the literature [47,48].
This implies
[47,48]. Thisthat the final
implies SEM
that the employed
final in this investigation
SEM employed was appropriate.
in this investigation was appropriate.

Figure 3.
Figure 3. The
The final
final analysis
analysis for
forthe
theevaluation
evaluationofofindicators
indicatorsand
andvariables forfor
variables thethe
adoption andand
adoption ac-
ceptance of BIM.
acceptance of BIM.

Table 4. Goodness of fit of final SEM.

Table 4. Goodness of fit of final SEM.
Goodness of Fit Measures Parameter Estimates Minimum Cut-Off Suggested by
Goodness
Incremental of Fit (IFI)
Fit Index Measures Parameter Estimates 0.831Minimum Cut-Off >0.80 Suggested[47]
by
Incremental Fit Index
Tucker–Lewis Index (IFI)
(TLI) 0.831 0.886 >0.80 >0.80 [47] [47]
Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI) 0.886 >0.80 [47]
Comparative Fit Index (CFI) 0.826 >0.80 [47]
Comparative Fit Index (CFI) 0.826 >0.80 [47]
Goodness of Fit Index
Goodness of Fit Index (GFI)(GFI) 0.839 0.839 >0.80 >0.80 [47] [47]
Adjusted Goodnessofof
Adjusted Goodness FitFit Index
Index (AGFI)
(AGFI) 0.808 0.808 >0.80 >0.80 [47] [47]
Root Mean
Root Mean Square
SquareErrorErrorof of Approximation (RMSEA) 0.066 <0.07
0.066 <0.07 [48] [48]
Approximation (RMSEA)

Lastly, Table 5 concludes by presenting this study’s causal link. According to the direct
impacts, PEOU and FA had the biggest effects on behavioral domains, followed by OF, TQ,
PU, and IN. OE on PU and PE and IN on PU, however, were not significant.

Table 5. Direct, indirect, and total effects.

No. Variable Direct Effect p-Value Indirect Effect p-Value Total Effect p-Value
1 FA → PEOU 0.757 0.019 - - 0.757 0.019
2 FA → PU 0.740 0.015 - - 0.740 0.015
3 OF → PEOU 0.573 0.008 - - 0.573 0.008
4 OF → PU 0.661 0.005 - - 0.661 0.005
5 IN → PEOU 0.188 0.040 - - 0.188 0.040
Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 11 of 17

Table 5. Cont.

No. Variable Direct Effect p-Value Indirect Effect p-Value Total Effect p-Value
6 TQ → PEOU 0.288 0.008 - - 0.288 0.008
7 TQ → PU 0.540 0.004 - - 0.540 0.004
8 PEOU → OA 0.930 0.002 - - 0.930 0.002
9 PEOU → UA 0.822 0.007 - - 0.822 0.007
10 PU → OA 0.166 0.026 - - 0.166 0.026
11 PU → UA 0.222 0.034 - - 0.222 0.034
12 FA → OA - - 0.827 0.010 0.827 0.010
13 FA → UA - - 0.786 0.012 0.786 0.012
14 OF → OA - - 0.642 0.006 0.642 0.006
15 OF → UA - - 0.617 0.010 0.617 0.010
16 IN → OA - - 0.175 0.039 0.175 0.039
17 IN → UA - - 0.155 0.043 0.155 0.043
18 TQ → OA - - 0.357 0.010 0.357 0.010
19 TQ → UA - - 0.356 0.012 0.356 0.012

5. Discussion
Using TAM and ISSM, a comprehensive evaluation of the adoption and acceptance
of BIM in the Qatari construction industry were carried out by the study’s respondents,
who were professionals in the field of construction in Qatar. Table 6 presents the findings
from the hypotheses that were examined in this research. Eleven of the fourteen theories
received acceptance, and the explanations for these are provided in the section that follows.

Table 6. Summarized results for hypotheses.

Hypotheses No. Relationship Decision

1 TQ → PU Accepted
2 TQ → PEOU Accepted
3 OE → PU Not supported
4 OE → PEOU Not supported
5 IN → PU Not supported
6 IN → PEOU Accepted
7 OF → PU Accepted
8 OF → PEOU Accepted
9 FA → PU Accepted
10 FA → PEOU Accepted
11 PU → UA Accepted
12 PU → OA Accepted
13 PEOU → UA Accepted
14 PEOU → OA Accepted

This demonstrates that perceptions of the ease of use have the most effects on Individ-
ual and Organizational Usage Acceptance of BIM. The results indicated that PEOU, through
OA (β = 0.930 and ϱ = 0.002) and UA (β = 0.822 and ϱ = 0.007), implied that people within
construction firms are more likely to accept and integrate BIM into their regular work
processes when they believe it to be simple to use and understand. This is consistent with
the TAM’s well-established concepts and earlier research [29,49,50], which emphasized the
significance of perceived usability in influencing individual technology adoption choices
within the construction sector. Although PEOU directly affects OA through UA, it should
be noted that this may not be the only factor. The level of organizational acceptability as a
whole may also be significantly influenced by other contextual factors, including company
culture, leadership support, and resource allocation [3,51].
Additionally, this study discovered a favorable correlation between financial factors,
including cost savings, project efficacy, and profitability and perceived BIM usefulness. If
they see BIM as a valuable resource, construction professionals are more likely to use it
Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 12 of 17

to its fullest extent and provide better project results [52]. This supports the significant
result of FA on PU (β = 0.740 and ϱ = 0.015). Furthermore, the association between PEOU
and financial benefits (β = 0.757 and ϱ = 0.019) is consistent with the founding concepts
of the ISSM and TAM. These theories contend that technology that is simple to use and
understand will be quickly adopted and beneficial to society. Better construction decision-
making, reduced errors, increased project efficiency, and cost savings are the outcomes, all
of which contribute to better financial outcomes [53]. Other research observed that, when
considering the financial elements of technology adoption in the construction industry,
there was no statistically significant association between PEOU and PU [36]. Although
this outcome may have been surprising, it did not lessen the significance of PEOU and PU
in the adoption of technology within the construction sector. They rather draw attention
to the necessity for a more in-depth understanding of how user perceptions interact with
other organizational and contextual factors to influence financial results.
The authors looked at the critical relationships between PEOU and PU and their effect
on OF on the industry’s usage of technology in the construction industry. The findings
demonstrated a strong and statistically significant relationship between PEOU, PU, and
Organizational Efficiency, which offered crucial insights into the dynamics of technology
adoption and its consequences for organizational effectiveness in construction projects.
Organizational Efficiency has a positive influence on PU (β = 0.661 and ϱ = 0.005) and
PEOU (β = 0.573 and ϱ = 0.008). The findings in the studies by Venkatesh et al. [54]
and Al-Yami and Sanni-Anibire [55] showed that construction enterprises often display
higher levels of project execution efficiency when technology is perceived as significant
and user-friendly. It should be noted first that the construction business is notorious for
its complexity, with numerous factors other than technology adoption influencing project
performance. Numerous elements, such as organizational culture, leadership philosophies,
project management techniques, external market conditions, and resource allocation, can
significantly affect the performance of an organization. The direct effects of PEOU and PU
on organizational effectiveness may be mitigated or covered up due to the complexity of
the environment [56].
Within the context of technology adoption in the construction industry, this study
demonstrated a high and positive relationship between IN and PEOU (β = 0.188 and
ϱ = 0.040). This result demonstrates how employees in the construction business are more
inclined to adopt innovation when they think that a technology is easy to use. This supports
the notion that user-friendly interfaces and procedures can encourage and facilitate the
adoption of innovation [57,58]. Consequently, the construction sector is widely recognized
for its well-established protocols, and the adoption of new technologies could be influenced
by a complex network of factors that are not covered by PEOU. Organizational culture,
leadership support, resource accessibility, and project-specific requirements are additional
factors that may significantly influence whether innovation is promoted or hampered [59].
Using SEM analysis, it was discovered that a significant and positive relationship
existed between PU and both individual UA (β = 0.222 and ϱ = 0.034) and OA (β = 0.166
and ϱ = 0.026). This implies that a technology’s perception among construction industry
professionals has a significant influence on both their personal adoption of the technology
and its industry-wide acceptability. The importance of PU in promoting the adoption and
acceptance of new technologies in the construction sector is illustrated by these data. The
implications for practice include the need to highlight how technology can be applied
during implementation efforts in order to create a positive response at the individual and
organizational levels, which will increase the rate of technology adoption and integration
in construction projects [60,61].

5.1. Theoretical Contributions

Our understanding of the use of BIM in Qatar’s building industry has improved
because of this work’s significant theoretical contribution, which other construction sectors
may find useful. Applying SEM to assess and improve the TAM and ISSM, two well-
Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 13 of 17

known theoretical models, provides a holistic assessment. By proving this, it strengthens

the theoretical foundation of these models by illustrating how they may be used in the
particular setting of Qatar’s construction industry. By identifying and quantifying critical
elements influencing BIM adoption targets, this study goes above and beyond simple
validation. Researchers will also be able to track changes over time and better understand
how BIM usage is changing thanks to this study’s ability to conduct a longitudinal analysis.
This longitudinal view is essential, because it reflects the dynamic character of technology
adoption in the construction industry, which is important for academics and business
professionals who wish to stay up-to-date with technological breakthroughs and their
ramifications. This perspective strengthens the theory behind this BIM adoption research.
The work advances our theoretical knowledge of BIM adoption in Qatar and contributes to
the broader discussion on technology acceptance models in construction settings.

5.2. Practical Implications

This study has significant practical implications, as it provides useful information to a
number of stakeholders in Qatar’s construction sector. First and foremost, the findings give
regulatory authorities and policymakers a solid foundation for making informed decisions
regarding promoting and regulating BIM. Policies and incentives may be created within
the organization to promote the widespread use of BIM by implementing mandatory BIM
training, introducing performance bonuses for project teams that successfully employ BIM
to meet or exceed project timelines and budget constraints, and establishing a BIM leader-
ship program that recognizes and promotes employees who show exceptional proficiency
in BIM. Those who excel can be fast-tracked for promotions or receive salary increases
to meet the objectives and goals of the sector. The data from this study can be instantly
used to the advantage of Qatari construction companies by adjusting their BIM adoption
strategy. By focusing on solving the specific aspects listed in the research, such as boosting
the quality (system, information, and service), the businesses may enhance the entire BIM
user experience. Because of this, BIM may be more successfully incorporated into their
projects and receive higher acceptability, improving project efficiency and outcomes.
The research underlines the need for targeted initiatives that address how usable and
convenient BIM technologies are seen to be for training and educational institutions. The
information and abilities needed to use and navigate BIM efficiently can be acquired by
construction professionals through these courses. Additionally, the study offers practical
implications for companies seeking to obtain a competitive edge in the Qatari building mar-
ket. Other businesses could adopt BIM early and successfully and be led by an awareness
of the factors influencing adoption to be strategically positioned to outperform competitors
in terms of project efficiency, cost management, and client satisfaction.
Additionally, the study stresses the value of cooperation and integration among
diverse construction industry stakeholders, including architects, engineers, contractors,
and owners. With more people accepting BIM, project workflows may move more quickly,
and project delivery could be improved. Enhancing teamwork and communication is
also made possible. Because of this, the study’s applications have an impact on a wide
range of building industry stakeholders and provide useful guidance for maximizing BIM
technology’s potential in Qatar’s construction industry.

5.3. Limitations and Future Works

This study has various limitations that might be considered for future research. First,
the results could not be generalized to other nations due to the contextual nature of BIM
adoption and the cultural variances that are present in the workplace. Future studies should
extend their scope to include more domains and industry sectors in order to have a more
thorough knowledge of the impact of contextual variables. Second, because it relies on
cross-sectional data, the study cannot show how BIM utilization has changed dynamically
over time. Making use of longitudinal data could make it possible to understand attitudes
and behaviors more thoroughly. Additionally, while the quantitative focus of this study
Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 14 of 17

is useful for identifying relationships between components, it might overlook qualitative

nuance, which future works may consider.
In order to fully explore the complex relationships between PU (β = 0.540 and ϱ = 0.004)
and PEOU (β = 0.288 and ϱ = 0.008) and their combined impact on the overall quality in the
construction sector, the study utilized an SEM technique. The findings provided intriguing
information on the complex relationships between user perceptions and how they affect
the general standard of projects in the construction industry, in addition to confirming the
significance of these relationships [26]. Despite the use of SEM, we were unable to identify
any relationships between PU, PEOU, and TQ. Given the intricate interplay of numerous
factors in this context, a fuller understanding of how technology adoption affects overall
quality needs to be explored [36,62].
To better understand the nuances of BIM adoption, future studies might incorporate
qualitative techniques like case studies or interviews. Future research in this field may
combine quantitative and qualitative research methods to gain a holistic view, employ
longitudinal studies to track trends in BIM adoption, and compare BIM adoption across
different locales to find contextual effects. Future studies should focus on the adoption of
BIM following deployment, its interactions with Industry 4.0 technologies, and its effects
on sustainable practices in the building sector. All of these are interesting directions for
further study. It might be possible to gain a deeper understanding of cross-cultural patterns
of technology acceptance by looking at the cultural aspects of technology adoption in the
Middle East, especially in Qatar. By addressing these obstacles and considering these
potential opportunities in the future, it will be possible to gain a better understanding of
BIM adoption and its effects on the building sector.
Lastly, future researchers may look at other generalizations in the context of demo-
graphic characteristics. The current study took into account only those who were willing
to respond and had used the technology with permission from the respective industries.
Therefore, the generalizability of the findings may be limited to males of the age between
25 and 44 years old. The younger generation may provide other insights, as they are
more inclined to use technology, being tech-savvy generations. In accordance with this,
older generations may take into account several nuances and possible difficulties in us-
ing the technology. Experience was also mostly between 6 and 10 years, which indicates
that respondents were mostly immersed in using the technology. Therefore, future re-
searchers may evaluate less experienced individuals to obtain other findings. Moreover,
applications in industries of different sizes, and even implementation and utility, may also
be considered.

6. Conclusions
The current research found several important connections in the Qatari building
industry. Notably, we found a strong correlation between PU and PEOU, reiterating the
value of user-centered design and training initiatives in fostering BIM acceptability. The
strong impact of PEOU and PU on elements like Organizational Efficiency, individual user
acceptance, and Organizational Usage Acceptance further emphasizes the broad effects of
user perceptions in determining the successful integration of BIM technology. Our study
also emphasized how innovation plays a key role in determining BIM acceptability. In
order to encourage the adoption of cutting-edge technology like BIM, it is essential to
cultivate a creative culture inside Qatar’s construction firms.
However, certain sections of our research also revealed non-significant associations,
like the connection between Operational Efficiency through PU and PEOU and Innova-
tiveness via Perceived Usefulness. It is important to consider many organizational and
contextual elements that may impact the acceptance of BIM, as these contradictory results
demonstrate the intricate nature of technology adoption in the Qatari construction industry.
It could be deduced that the current study adds to the body of knowledge on BIM
implementation and acceptance in the construction sector, especially in the context of
Qatar. These results provide a direction for policymakers and stakeholders in the building
Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 15 of 17

industry who want to improve BIM deployment tactics. It was also emphasized that there
is a necessity for future studies delving deeper into the complexities of technology adoption
within certain regional and industry settings, ensuring that customized techniques are
devised to optimize the advantages of cutting-edge technologies like BIM. Finally, this study
contributes to our understanding of the technology acceptance process in the construction
industry and establishes a foundation for future research and development of BIM adoption
in Qatar’s construction industry.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, L.S.V., A.K.S.O. and J.D.G.; methodology, L.S.V., A.K.S.O.
and J.D.G.; software, L.S.V., A.K.S.O. and J.D.G.; validation, L.S.V., A.K.S.O. and J.D.G.; formal
analysis, L.S.V., A.K.S.O. and J.D.G.; investigation, L.S.V., A.K.S.O. and J.D.G.; resources, L.S.V.,
A.K.S.O. and J.D.G.; data curation, L.S.V.; writing—original draft preparation, L.S.V. and A.K.S.O.;
writing—review and editing, L.S.V., A.K.S.O. and J.D.G.; visualization, L.S.V., A.K.S.O. and J.D.G.;
supervision, A.K.S.O.; project administration, A.K.S.O. and J.D.G.; funding acquisition, A.K.S.O. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by Mapua University Directed Research for Innovation and
Value Enhancement (DRIVE).
Institutional Review Board Statement: This study was approved by Mapua University Research
Ethics Committees (FM-RC-23-01-43) approved in 24 October 2023.
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in this
study (FM-RC-23-02-43).
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the
corresponding author.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank all the respondents who answered our online
questionnaire. We would also like to thank our friends for their contributions to the distribution of
the questionnaire.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Eastman, C.M.; Teicholz, P.M.; Sacks, R.; Lee, G. BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building Information Modeling for Owners, Managers,
Designers, Engineers and Contractors; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2011.
2. Succar, B. Building Information Modelling Framework: A research and Delivery Foundation for industry stakeholders. Autom.
Constr. 2009, 18, 357–375. [CrossRef]
3. Zahrizan, Z. Exploring the adoption of building information modelling (BIM) in the Malaysian construction industry: A
qualitative approach. Int. J. Res. Eng. Technol. 2013, 2, 384–395.
4. Farooqui, R. BIM-Based Sustainability Analysis: An Evaluation of Building Performance Analysis Software. Proceedings of the
45th ASC. 2009. Available online: https://www.academia.edu/14724531/BIM_based_Sustainability_Analysis_An_Evaluation_
of_Building_Performance_Analysis_Software (accessed on 12 May 2024).
5. Barlish, K.; Sullivan, K. How to measure the benefits of BIM—A case study approach. Autom. Constr. 2012, 24, 149–159. [CrossRef]
6. Eager, D. Investigation of Potential Benefits of BIM to Provide Efficiencies in the AEC Industry. Available online: https:
//sear.unisq.edu.au/51810/3/EAGER%20Drew%20dissertation_redacted.pdf (accessed on 9 September 2023).
7. Abotaleb, M.M.; Saab, E.; AbdelZaher, M. Integrating Building Information Management (BIM) in Civil nfrastructure Coordina-
tion: Application at Lusail Plaza. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Civil Infrastructure and Construction (CIC
2020), Doha, Qatar, 2–5 February 2020. [CrossRef]
8. Olofsson Hallén, K.; Forsman, M.; Eriksson, A. Interactions between human, technology and organization in building information
modelling (BIM)—A scoping review of critical factors for the individual user. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2023, 97, 103480. [CrossRef]
9. ISO 19650-1:2018; Organization and Digitization of Information about Buildings and Civil Engineering Works, including Building
Information Modelling (BIM)—Information Management Using Building Information Modelling Part 1: Concepts and Principles.
ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/68078.html (accessed on 12 May 2024).
10. Mohammed, A.; Hasnain, S.A.; Quadir, A. Implementation of Building Information Modelling (BIM) Practices and Challenges in
Construction Industry in Qatar. J. Eng. Res. Rep. 2019, 9, 1–9. [CrossRef]
11. Dowsett, R.M.; Harty, C.F. Assessing the implementation of BIM—An information systems approach. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2019,
37, 551–566. [CrossRef]
12. Takim, R.; Harris, M.; Nawawi, A.H. Building Information Modeling (BIM): A new paradigm for quality of life within architectural,
engineering and Construction (AEC) industry. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2013, 101, 23–32. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 16 of 17

13. Rokooei, S. Building Information Modeling in Project Management: Necessities, challenges and outcomes. Procedia-Soc. Behav.
Sci. 2015, 210, 87–95. [CrossRef]
14. Sun, C.; Xu, H.; Wan, D.; Li, Y. Building Information Modeling Application Maturity Model (BIM-AMM) from the viewpoint of
construction project. Adv. Civ. Eng. 2021, 2021, 6684031. [CrossRef]
15. Liu, S.; Xie, B.; Tivendal, L.; Liu, C. Critical barriers to BIM implementation in the AEC Industry. Int. J. Mark. Stud. 2015, 7, 162.
[CrossRef]
16. Wong, J.K.W.; Zhou, J.X.; Chan, A.P. Exploring the linkages between the adoption of BIM and design error reduction. Int. J.
Sustain. Dev. Plan. 2018, 13, 108–120. [CrossRef]
17. Cheng, J.; Huang, L.; Jiang, L.; Chen, J.; Chen, W.; He, Y. Fostering knowledge collaboration in construction projects: The role of
bim application. Buildings 2023, 13, 812. [CrossRef]
18. Senouci, A.; Al-Abbadi, I.; Eldin, N. Safety improvement on building construction sites in Qatar. Procedia Eng. 2015, 123, 504–509.
[CrossRef]
19. Shareef, M.A.; Kumar, V.; Kumar, U.; Dwivedi, Y.K. E-government adoption model (GAM): Differing service maturity levels. Gov.
Inf. Q. 2011, 28, 17–35. [CrossRef]
20. Davis, F.D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Q. 1989, 13, 319.
[CrossRef]
21. DeLone, W.H.; McLean, E.R. Information Systems Success: The quest for the dependent variable. Inf. Syst. Res. 1992, 3, 60–95.
[CrossRef]
22. DeLone, W.H. The Delone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A ten-year update. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2003, 19,
9–30.
23. Chen, L.; Luo, H. A BIM-based construction quality management model and its applications. Autom. Constr. 2014, 46, 64–73.
[CrossRef]
24. Xing, D.; Tao, J. Design and application of green building based on bim. In Geo-Informatics in Resource Management and Sus-
tainable Ecosystem, Proceedings of the Third International Conference, GRMSE 2015, Wuhan, China, 16–18 October 2015; Springer:
Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 901–907.
25. Alothman, A.; Ashour, S.; Krishnaraj, L. Energy Performance Analysis of building for sustainable design using BIM: A case study
on institute building. Int. J. Renew. Energy Res. 2021, 11, 556–565.
26. Lee, S.; Yu, J.; Jeong, D. BIM acceptance model in construction organizations. J. Manag. Eng. 2015, 31, 04014048. [CrossRef]
27. Lee, S.K.; Yu, J.-H. Effects of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation factors on BIM acceptance. J. Korea Inst. Build. Constr. 2013, 13,
242–252. [CrossRef]
28. Ghaffarianhoseini, A.; Tookey, J.; Ghaffarianhoseini, A.; Naismith, N.; Azhar, S.; Efimova, O.; Raahemifar, K. Building Information
Modelling (BIM) uptake: Clear benefits, understanding its implementation, risks and challenges. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
2017, 75, 1046–1053. [CrossRef]
29. Acquah, R.; Eyiah, A.K.; Oteng, D. Acceptance of Building Information Modelling: A survey of professionals in the construction
industry in Ghana. J. Inf. Technol. Constr. 2018, 23, 75–91.
30. Batarseh, S.; Kamardeen, I. The impact of individual beliefs and expectations on BIM adoption in the AEC Industry. In Proceedings
of the AUBEA 2017: Australasian Universities Building Education Association Conference, Melbourne, Australia, 3–5 July 2017.
EPiC Series in Education Science.
31. Hochscheid, E.; Halin, G. A framework for studying the factors that influence the BIM adoption process. In Proceedings of the
Information Technology for Construction, Newcastle, UK, 18–20 September 2019.
32. Liu, R. Factors Influencing the Adoption of Building Information Modeling in the AEC Industry. Available online: https://
www.academia.edu/7032507/Factors_Influencing_the_Adoption_of_Building_Information_Modeling_in_the_AEC_Industry (ac-
cessed on 19 November 2023).
33. Juan, Y.-K.; Lai, W.-Y.; Shih, S.-G. Building Information Modeling Acceptance and Readiness Assessment in Taiwanese architectural
firms. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 2016, 23, 356–367. [CrossRef]
34. Lee, S.; Yu, J. Longitudinal Study on construction organization’s BIM acceptance. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5358. [CrossRef]
35. Azhar, S.; Nadeem, A.; Mok, J.Y.N.; Leung, B.H.Y. Building Information Modeling (BIM): A New Paradigm for Visual Interactive
Modeling and Simulation for Construction Projects. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Construction in
Developing Countries, Karachi, Pakistan, 4–5 August 2008.
36. Becerik-Gerber, B.; Rice, S. The perceived value of Building Information Modeling on the U.S. Building Industry. J. Inf. Technol.
Constr. 2010, 15, 185–201.
37. Wong, K.; Fan, Q. Building Information Modelling (BIM) for Sustainable Building Design. Facilities 2013, 31, 138–157. [CrossRef]
38. Hair, J.F.; Ringle, C.M.; Gudergan, S.P.; Fischer, A.; Nitzl, C.; Menictas, C. Partial least squares structural equation modeling-based
discrete choice modeling: An illustration in modeling retailer choice. Bus. Res. 2019, 12, 115–142. [CrossRef]
39. Adeyemi, I.O.; Issa, A.O. Integrating Information System Success Model (ISSM) and Technology Acceptance Model (TAM):
Proposing students’ satisfaction with university web portal model. Rec. Libr. J. 2020, 6, 69. [CrossRef]
40. Prihatono, F.A.; Adi, T.J. Building Information Modeling (BIM) technology acceptance analysis using technology acceptance
model (TAM). IPTEK J. Proc. Ser. 2021, 1, 81. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2024, 14, 1433 17 of 17

41. Al-sarafi, A.H.; Alias, A.H.; Shafri, H.Z.; Jakarni, F.M. Factors affecting BIM adoption in the Yemeni construction industry: A
structural equation modelling approach. Buildings 2022, 12, 2066. [CrossRef]
42. Prasetyo, Y.T.; Ong, A.K.; Concepcion, G.K.; Navata, F.M.; Robles, R.A.; Tomagos, I.J.; Young, M.N.; Diaz, J.F.; Nadlifatin, R.; Redi,
A.A. Determining factors affecting acceptance of e-learning platforms during the COVID-19 pandemic: Integrating Extended
Technology Acceptance Model and Delone & McLean is success model. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8365. [CrossRef]
43. Tan, S.; Gumusburun Ayalp, G.; Tel, M.Z.; Serter, M.; Metinal, Y.B. Modeling the critical success factors for BIM implementation
in developing countries: Sampling the Turkish AEC Industry. Sustainability 2022, 14, 9537. [CrossRef]
44. Weston, R.; Gore, P.A. A brief guide to structural equation modeling. Couns. Psychol. 2006, 34, 719–751. [CrossRef]
45. Waqar, A.; Othman, I.; Radu, D.; Ali, Z.; Almujibah, H.; Hadzima-Nyarko, M.; Khan, M.B. Modeling the relation between building
information modeling and the success of construction projects: A structural-equation-modeling approach. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13,
9018. [CrossRef]
46. Hair, J.; Black, W.; Babin, B.; Anderson, R.; Tatham, R. Multivariate Data Analysis; Pearson Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ,
USA, 2010.
47. Gefen, D.; Straub, D.; Boudreau, M.-C. Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for Research Practice. Commun.
Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2000, 4, 7. [CrossRef]
48. Steiger, J.H. Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modeling. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2007,
42, 893–898. [CrossRef]
49. Abubakar, M.; Ibrahim, Y.M.; Kado, D.; Bala, K. Contractors’ perception of the factors affecting building information modelling
(BIM) adoption in the Nigerian Construction Industry. In Computing in Civil and Building Engineering; ASCE: Reston, VA, USA,
2014.
50. Xu, H.; Feng, J.; Li, S. Users-orientated evaluation of building information model in the Chinese Construction Industry. Autom.
Constr. 2014, 39, 32–46. [CrossRef]
51. Won, J.; Lee, G.; Dossick, C.; Messner, J. Where to focus for successful adoption of building information modeling within
organization. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2013, 139, 04013014. [CrossRef]
52. Wang, G.; Song, J. The relation of perceived benefits and organizational supports to user satisfaction with building information
model (BIM). Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 68, 493–500. [CrossRef]
53. Sacks, R.; Koskela, L.; Dave, B.A.; Owen, R. Interaction of Lean and building information modeling in construction. J. Constr. Eng.
Manag. 2010, 136, 968–980. [CrossRef]
54. Venkatesh, V.; Davis, F.D. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Manag. Sci.
2000, 46, 186–204. [CrossRef]
55. Al-Yami, A.; Sanni-Anibire, M.O. Bim in the Saudi Arabian construction industry: State of the art, benefit and barriers. Int. J.
Build. Pathol. Adapt. 2019, 39, 33–47. [CrossRef]
56. Bhattacherjee, A. Understanding Information Systems Continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Q. 2001, 25, 351.
[CrossRef]
57. Teo, T.; Noyes, J. An assessment of the influence of perceived enjoyment and attitude on the intention to use technology among
pre-service teachers: A structural equation modeling approach. Comput. Educ. 2011, 57, 1645–1653. [CrossRef]
58. Ling, F.Y.; Hartmann, A.; Kumaraswamy, M.; Dulaimi, M. Influences on innovation benefits during implementation: Client’s
perspective. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2007, 133, 306–315. [CrossRef]
59. Rogers, E.M. Diffusion of Innovations, 4th ed.; Simon and Schuster: New York, NY, USA, 2010.
60. Hong, Y.; Hammad, A.W.A.; Sepasgozar, S.; Akbarnezhad, A. Bim adoption model for small and medium construction organisa-
tions in Australia. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2018, 26, 154–183. [CrossRef]
61. Jin, R.; Hancock, C.; Tang, L.; Chen, C.; Wanatowski, D.; Yang, L. Empirical study of BIM implementation–based perceptions
among Chinese practitioners. J. Manag. Eng. 2017, 33, 04017025. [CrossRef]
62. Cao, D.; Wang, G.; Li, H.; Skitmore, M.; Huang, T.; Zhang, W. Practices and effectiveness of building information modelling in
construction projects in China. Autom. Constr. 2015, 49, 113–122. [CrossRef]

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.