| description abstract | Substantial research has been performed on data standards and exchanges in the AEC/FM (Architecture, Engineering, Construction and Facilities Management) industry over the past several years. The growing popularity of Building Information Modeling (BIM) technology is based heavily on the perception that it can facilitate the sharing and reuse of information during a project’s lifecycle. Although many researchers and practitioners are in agreement about the potential applicability and benefit of BIM in construction, it is still unclear why BIM is adopted, and what factors enhance the implementation of BIM. Thus, BIM acceptance and use remains a central concern of BIM research and practice. BIM was accepted in the United States earlier than in Korea, and BIM users are expected to have a higher maturity and positive perception about utilizing BIM depending on a lengthier utilization period. This means that the mechanism for achieving acceptance of BIM in Korea differs from the mechanism in the United States. Therefore, Korea’s BIM acceptance model was compared to that in the United States using structural equation modeling. The key components, including the BIM acceptance model, were identified through a literature review of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and related theories and was consolidated by interviews and pilot studies with professionals in the construction industry. Based on these components, a questionnaire was designed and sent out to workers in construction organizations (such as contractors, architects, construction managers, engineers, and facility managers) in Korea and the United States. A total 164 completed questionnaires were retrieved. Structural equation modeling for hypothesis testing was conducted using commercially-available software. The results from this study can serve as a foundation for research looking into the organizational context to further BIM acceptance in the construction industry. The comparison of the mechanism and subsequent results will serve as a guideline for developing an acceptance strategy that is suitable for Korea. | |
