Factors Affecting BIM Adoption in the Yemeni Construction Industry: A Structural Equation Modelling Approach

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper is about factors affecting about BIM adoption using a structural equation modelling- an interesting topic. The main problem of the paper is structure, a systematic approach to write the introduction and literature review is lacking, there are lot of irrelevant statements throughout the paper, which causes ambiguity. The language of the paper needs serious revisions, which will make the paper clear.  I have the following further comments:   

 

 

1) There are lot of English grammar mistake throughout the paper.  

 

2) Abstract: Excluding the English grammar mistakes, the abstract is clear in terms of its elements.  

However, the results part in the abstract require further clarity.

It might be better that the authors includes the top five factors affecting BIM adoption.     

 

Introduction:

 

1)  The terms like “Construction nations”, “public and private construction industries”, etc. seems an unusual kind of terminology, thus there are lot of language mistakes. The paper needs major revision in term of proofreading.   

 

2) Many key statements are made without citations, for example “The primary elements influencing BIM adoption in the global construction sector are processes, people, and technology.”

 

3) There is a repetition of statement in the Introduction section 1.

“Although the study's findings or results on BIM adoption have raised or increased the literature on sustainable buildings and have imparted a new attribute to knowledge on construction productivity in Yemen, the study's findings or results on BIM adoption have raised or increased the literature on sustainable buildings and has imparted a new attribute to knowledge on construction productivity in Yemen”

 

Further, the scope of this study is not “sustainable buildings”. Thus, linking its results to body of knowledge on “sustainable buildings” seems wrong.  

 

4) The structure of the “Introduction section” is poor. BIM, BIM adoption, factors affecting BIM adoption, BIM adoption in Yemen Construction industry, etc. are mixed up. The author needs to revise the introduction section and write it in a systematic manner in order to make it clear for readers. There are many irrelevant statements.

 

5) The authors needs to check and confirm the following statement with citation:

 

“Complexity, instability, and time constraints boost building project cooperation”.

 

The structure of the “Problem statement” section is poor, and it should revise. There are many irrelevant statements which causes confusion in understanding the overall scenario.

It might be better to write a clear problem statement in the last paragraph of introduction  

 Literature review

 

1) There are many unclear statements such as:

  “Development of a model using Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) for BIM adoption in construction and assessment of the benefit derived from its adoption.”

2) The Literature review structure is unclear. There are many irrelevant statements. There are many statements without citations.   

3) Literature review is mixed up with authors own statements. For example, “Grey areas such as expertise, collaboration among construction professionals, proof of investment returns, and training should all be improved”.

There are many such kind of statements which confuses between literature review and author own statements. If these are authors own statements, then literature review is not the right section for it.

 

4) The statements which shows the significance of the current study might not appear abruptly in the middle of Literature review section.

 

“This research aimed to gather information on the benefits and limitations of BIM adoption in Yemen. This would surely give the greatest solution for the government and stakeholders to utilize BIM as a modern technique for practical implementation. Thus, this study is a welcome effort in Yemen as it will complement the government's action in the planning and execution of construction projects. “

 

5) In the literature review sections, many studies are mentioned but the focus is mainly on their main aim and methodology but there is little or no information on results of those studies.

6) Some studies which are not related to the subject of this paper are mentioned in the literature review stages. Such as citation number 26.

7) The concluding paragraph (last paragraph) of the literature review section is unclear. The authors are failed to present way forward

 

 

 

Construction industry in Yemen :  

 

1) The information in this section are scattered, there are many studies mentioned in this section; however, the overall section is not connected to the topic of this study. Further, there are some statements which can be part of discussion section.   

 2) There is a problem with the structure (hierarchy wise) of the paper, the authors should describe construction industry in Yemen first then BIM adoption in Yemen and then studies on factors affecting BIM adoption.

 

Research Gap:  

1) There is a repetition between problem statement and research gap section. The research gap needs to be clear.

2) The authors needs to thoroughly check the order of information in the Introduction and Literature review section.

Methodology:  

 The overall structure and sequence of information in the Methodology section needs revision.  

1) Literature search from 2010 to 2020 means that the studies from 2020 onwards are not included in the literature search for initial search for factors affecting BIM adoption. The authors needs to provide justification for not including paper from 2021 onwards.  It is always better to include the latest paper in literature search.   

2) In the initial checking of factors through construction experts, practitioners- who do use are also included. It might be better to include additional information on – what were the reasons for including such experts?  

3) In the methodology section some unclear statements are made, which causes ambiguity, and it is hard to understand the whole section.  such as:

 

“Experts from many engineering disciplines work using a quantitative survey technique in Yemen's construction industry”.

Senior management, the Yemeni Engineering Association (YEA), and the Yemeni Ministry of Public Works and Highways (YMPWH) need BIM for all public construction projects.

 

4) In the section “3.1 Identifying the factors that affect the adoption of BIM” the number of factors is 125 while in the section “3.2 Evaluation of the Factors by Experts” the number of factors is 92. This needs clarity.  

 

Pilot study

1) First sentence in the “Pilot study” section is unclear.  The definition of pilot study can be mentioned with citation.

 

3.4 Questionnaire design

 

1) There is a problem with the order of sections. Generally, the questionnaire design comes before Pilot study.  

2) Additional information on grouping of the factors should be provided.  The authors can explain the logic behind grouping them in 5 groups:  technology, process, policy, people, and the environment. This will strengthen the methodology and results.  

 

Data Collection

1) There is a contradiction between Abstract and data collection sections on sampling techniques. In the Abstract section it is “purposive sampling” while in the data collection it is mentioned that:

“The online questionnaires were open to the entire public”.

 

 

Results

The results are interesting however,

 1) The initial statements in the Results section unclear and few are irrelevant.

2) The section 4 is “Results and discussion”; however, there is no discussion of the results.

 3) The results of the study can be compared with other studies.

 

Conclusion

 

1) In the conclusion section, it mentioned that:

 

“That the most critical factor for BIM adoption in the Yemeni construction sector is policy”.

But according to the earlier information “Policy” is one of the groups, which policy related factors are grouped. But in the Abstract section it is given that “Environment” is the leading factor.

2) Recommendation on future studies can be included in Conclusion section.

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Please check the attached file containing the comments required by you and the answer to each inquiry.

Thank you very much.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Introduction

The introduction section is weak and needs to be rewritten to justify the study and further evidence and references must be provided. Please see following specific comments:

 In justification of the study and in the second paragraph of page two the author mentioned a lot of studies and research; however, just one reference is cited for each of them. 

 Same paragraph authors claim; research has investigated the obstacles to BIM adoption around the world. How are these works not sufficient? Or do authors mean there is limited research in Yemen? Please clearly clarify.

 Same paragraph the authors claim; "Despite several attempts to analyze and model the BIM framework…” No reference is provided!!

 Page 2, third paragraph, the author claim;  “The government of Yemen is making several efforts to promote BIM among local groups. As a result, there is an opportunity to investigate….” What is the source of this information?

 Page 2, third paragraph the authors mention; “It is expected that through this research, the research framework will provide consultants and contractors with a scientific and practical strategy for stimulating collaboration and consultation during the decision-making process for BIM adoption. Although the study's findings or results on BIM adoption have raised or increased the literature on sustainable buildings and have imparted a new attribute to knowledge on construction productivity in Yemen, the study's findings or results on BIM adoption have raised or increased the literature on sustainable buildings and has imparted a new attribute to knowledge on construction productivity in Yemen."

This seems to be a conclusion statement rather than a statement for introduction.

  Problem statement can be merged into the introduction section no need for a sub-section 1.1, because there is no other sub-section.

 Page 2 last paragraph starts with: “Lack of BIM awareness and knowledge [14].” Which is not a clear sentence and needs to be re-written.

 Page 3, first paragraph: “According to an examination of relevant literature, most construction businesses in Yemen still use 2D CAD, not BIM.” Is a repeated statement and has no references either!

 Page 3, second paragraph includes repeated statements, authors should avoid repetition.

  

Literature review

This section lacks consistency and connections. It needs to be logically restructured.

 Page 3, third paragraph; “Development of a model using Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) for BIM adoption in construction and assessment of the benefit derived from its adoption.” The statement is not clear.

 Page 4, paragraph 4 includes the following repeated statements:

“The government is advised to use this study's findings to improve the construction industry's current condition.”

“The Yemeni government is advised to use this study's findings to improve the construction industry's current condition.”

 Research gap also has redundant and repetitive statements.

  

Methodology

This section lacks clarity and needs to be significantly improved.

 Page 5, third paragraph starts with a long and unclear sentence.

 How did the authors reach 248 pertinent articles on BIM adoption?

 Why was the period of 2010 to 2020 chosen? Why not until 2022?

 At the end of section 3.2; “Senior management, the Yemeni Engineering Association (YEA), and the Yemeni Ministry of Public Works and Highways (YMPWH) need BIM for all public construction projects.” This statement has no linkage with this section!

  Pilot study can be merged into questionnaire design.

 Why a survey is used and why a 5-point Likert scale was developed? there needs to be critical discussion to link the methodology with the objectives.

 How are the results from Table 1 used in the discussions?

 Page 7, paragraph 2 the authors mention: “Approximately 49 percent of respondents are likely to respond.” Why the actual response rate not reported why are the authors estimating the likely response rate?

 

Result and discussion

Page 8 last paragraph, authors claim: “According to the study, the use of BIM is constrained in developing nations.” Which study? no reference is provided!

 What are the actual theoretical underpinnings of the listed hypothesis in page 9?

 A sample of questionnaire survey should be included in the appendix and linked to the results section.

  

Conclusions

Practical and academic implications should be added to the conclusion part

 What are the limitations for this study?

Page 18, last paragraph the word “thesis” should change to “study”.

  

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Please check the attached file containing the comments required by you and the answer to each inquiry.

Thank you very much.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

There is a need to add an elaborate discussion of the research findings. This will help increase the legitimacy of the research findings and as well show how it relates to existing research in the domain. This means each of the hypotheses tested needs a detailed discussion. 

Also, the study implications and practical implication unclear. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Please check the attached file containing the comments required by you and the answer to each inquiry.

Thank you very much.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

1. Considering the language of paper, there are lot of inconsistency errors, for example:

 “This study utilises impacting factors from five categories: technology, process, policy, people, and the Environment, to model the strategic implementation strategy for BIM in the Yemeni construction industry.”

If technology, process, policy, and people are written in small letters then environment should also be in small letters. 

“The rate of BIM adoption is increasing in both public and private construction industries in several countries [1], which indicates an increase in BIM adoption and understanding.”

In the above sentence the terms “public and private construction industries” seems incorrect or unusual, the better terms would be “public and private construction sectors”. Further the second part of the sentence is just redundant.  I would advise the authors to thoroughly check the English grammar of the paper. If possible and feasible for authors, may be proofread it through English language expert.     

2. There is a problem with the structure of first paragraph of the introduction section. Introduction section normally describe the topic; however, sentences which shows gap of the study or need of further actions are mostly written in the latter part of the induction section, for example:   

“The significance, drivers, obstacles, and factors for government policies on BIM adoption methods must be determined”

This is just my suggestion, but the authors needs to check the structure of other paragraphs of the paper as well.  English proofread of the paper would also help to solve such issues. 

3) One of the main problems in the paper is the structure of paragraphs, for example the first paragraph of the introduction section carries information on general BIM adoption and factors affecting BIM adoption. While the latter part of the first paragraph describes the Yemeni construction sector in general. However, it is not properly connected.  So, there are information on two topics in the same paragraph and not properly connected.

4) There is a repetition of statement in the introduction section 1.

“Although the study's findings or results on BIM adoption have raised or increased the literature on sustainable buildings and have imparted a new attribute to knowledge on construction productivity in Yemen, the study's findings or results on BIM adoption have raised or increased the literature on sustainable buildings and has imparted a new attribute to knowledge on construction productivity in Yemen.”  (Page 2).

 

5) The author needs to revise the introduction section and write it in a systematic manner in order to make it clear for readers. There are many irrelevant statements.

6). The last paragraph of the paper mentioned about the “gap of the study” or the need of the study and then there is another subheading “Research gap” which carries various general statements on BIM and then the authors mentions:

 

……..“Therefore, Yemeni construction specialists may investigate, inspect, identify, and evaluate the obstacles to BIM implementation in construction projects. This study fills a gap and narrows the scope by focusing on the Yemeni construction industry scenario. A schematic relationship model of effective BIM adoption was also developed in the re-search.”… page 5 in article

So, this gives the impression of repetition with the last paragraph of the introduction section. I personally believe that there is no need of separate of sub section “research gap”. However, the information from research gap can be properly adjusted into the last paragraph of introduction section.  

6)

Literature review is mixed up with authors own statements. For example,

“Grey areas such as expertise, collaboration among construction professionals, proof of investment returns, and training should all be improved”.

“It is advised to employ ongoing BIM-friendly policy formulation.”

There are many such kind of statements which confuses between literature review and author own statements. If these are authors own statements, then literature review is not the right section for it.

The literature review of this paper is not written in standard way of writing literature review part of articles.  The authors should just focus previous literature on “BIM adoption and factors affecting BIM adoption” in the literature review part.

7) The literature review section is seemed to be focused on factors affecting BIM adoption and then there are sudden statements such as:

“Yemen has suffered and continuously experiencing mass structural destruction from a war that has been happening for many years. Many vital structures have been destroyed, and the need for reconstruction is inevitable.”

 While there is another section “construction industry in Yemen”, so if there is already a section on describing Yemen construction then the information on it should be there and not in the General literature review section.

8) section:  2.1 Construction Industry in Yemen

  

In this section the author should give information on Yemen construction industry and then BIM adoption in Yemen. However, the statements such as:

“The government should use this study's results to enhance the construction sector's state. It is necessary to look into previous projects to identify the leading causes of issues and draw lessons for new initiatives.”

Makes it very difficult for readers and confuse it with discussion part of the paper discussing results.

9) Inconsistency in the figure 1:

literature review (small letters)

Questionnaire Development (starts with capital letters)

Pilot study (mix up both)

The authors needs to be consistent

10) The following sentence is ether incorrect or incomplete.  

“The conclusions of a literature review depending on the research methodology.  

There are many such kind (meaning less) of statement throughout the paper, thus the paper needs proofreading.

11)    It would be better to discuss the study results in relation to previous study as well in the discussion section.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear, Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable efforts, attached with this is a file that contains all the comments and the responses to the observation.
Many thanks to all of you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Firstly, I would like to thank the authors for their revision.

The literature review section of the paper can be made more elaborate with more recent literature. Also, the findings from literature should be properly synthesised rather than just explaining the paper methodology.  

However, the discussion of results section needs serious rework. The authors need to make reference to relevant literature while discussing the SEM findings. This categorisation should be divided into the interactions between Technology, Process, Policy, People, Environment and BIM adoption with reference to the research hypotheses. 

Secondly, section 6 should be included as a sub-section of “7. Conclusion”. 

 

Author Response

Dear, Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable efforts, attached with this is a file that contains all the comments and the responses to the observation.

Many thanks to all of you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper's quality has improved significantly. I make no reservations about recommending the paper for publication. All issues raised by the reviewers have been duly addressed. 

Author Response

Response to the Reviewers’ Comments

First of all, we would like to thank the reviewer for his valuable effort.

No issues were raised by the reviewers, just the English language. A minor spell check was required.

There is a general improvement in the English language throughout the article. In several pages, as the tracking indicates.

                                                Thank you so much.