Development of BIM Performance Measurement System for Architectural Design Firms

  • Jihye Shin
  • Jungsik ChoiEmail author
  • Inhan Kim
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 527)


Despite the effort of Korean government to vitalize BIM adoption in AEC industry, the domestic adoption of BIM is still in its initial step. Particular in design field where medium and small firms being the majority, shows lower level of BIM adoption. The primary reason for this can be considered as lacking of necessities caused by uncertain benefits of BIM. Therefore, it is time to develop the objectives, quantifiable and qualitative measurement system of BIM performances. The purpose of this study is to suggest the BIM Performance Measurement System for architectural design firms. In achieving this, the authors have developed Balanced Scorecard (BSC) and validated its appropriateness by questionnaire survey with experts and performing statistical analysis. This development can be contributed to the voluntary BIM adoption by visualizing the detailed benefit of BIM and to the improvement of enterprise competitiveness by facilitating management of design process and estimating future outcome.


Building information modeling (BIM) BIM adoption BIM benefit Performance measurement system (PMS) Balanced scorecard (BSC) Critical success factors (CSF) Key performance indicators (KPI) 



This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MEST) (No. 2010-0029196). This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (No. 2013R1A1A2065654).


  1. 1.
    Kim, W., et al.: Survey and Implications of Utilizing BIM in Construction Company. Construction & Economy Research Institute of Korea, Korea (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Becerik-Gerber, B., Rice, S.: The percieved value of building information modeling in the U.S. building industry. ITcon 25, 185–201 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Radhkrishnan, A., et al.: A process-oriented perspective on differential business value creation by information technology: a empirical investment. Omega 36, 1105–1125 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Song, M., et al.: BSC based measurement of satisfaction degree for based BIM construction project. Korean J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 12, 117–129 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lee, J., Lee, J.: A study on BIM capability evaluation for design organizations. J. Archit. Inst. Korea Planning Design 27(6), 257–266 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Seo, J., Choo, S.: A study on cost-benefit analysis of BIM-based integrated design process in Korean architectural offices. Int. J. CAD/CAM 15, 261–270 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Barlish, K., Sullivan, K.: How to measure the benefits of BIM – a case study approach. Autom. Constr. 24, 149–159 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kang, T., et al.: A Study on the Development Direction of a BIM Performance Assessment Tool. Korean J. Space Inf. 21, 53–62 (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Im, J.: Study on using BSC framework to develop CSF & KPI for IT performance measure on IT organization and examining the relation of cause and effect in indicators, Master dissertation, Yonsei University (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grembergen, W.: Information Technology Governance Through the Balanced Scorecard, pp. 199–211. IDEA Group Publishing, Hershey (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lee, Y.: IT performance of small and medium firms : a comparison between manufacturers and non-manufacturers, Master dissertation, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Olve, N., et al.: Performance Drivers : A Practical Guide to Using the Balanced Scorecard. Haneon Books, Seoul (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Choi, D.: (Easy to Know) BSC. KOMIT Publishing, Seoul (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Min, J.: Performance evaluation of knowledge workers in knowledge-based organization. Korean J. Manag. Sci. 25, 137–154 (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim, H.: A case study on the establishing public IT organization’s performance measurement model through the IT BSC, Master dissertation, Soongsil University (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kaplan, S. and Noton, P.: Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management System, Harvard Business Review, January-February, 75–85 (1996)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Seo, J., et al.: The development of an evaluation model for the work environment of the BIM-based architectural design firms. J. Archit. Inst. Korea Planning Design 28(5), 95–105 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cha, S., Kim, T.: Developing measurement system for key performance indicators on building construction projects. Korean J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 9, 120–130 (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kim, E., et al.: A Study on Building the Work Environment to Utilize BIM for Domestic Architectural Firms. J. Archit. Inst. Korea Planning Design 30(3), 121–128 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kim, J., Lee, Y., Kim, S.: Perceived IT performance and contextual factor of small firms in Korea: an explorative study. J. Inf. Prof., pp. 23–41 (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Caleb&Company: Performance drivers, pp. 36–129. Hanun, Seoul (2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Won, T., Jung, S.: Statistical Research SPSS PASW STATISTICS 18.0, pp. 343–357. Hanara Academi, Seoul (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kyung Hee UniversitySeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations