THE

QUANTITY
SURVEYOR
JOURNAL OF THE NIGERIAN INSTITUTE OF QUANTITY SURVEYORS

Volume 66 | No. 1 | 2020 | ISSN: 116 - 915X

Volume 65 | No. 1 & 2 Cost management
|2019|ISSN:116 -915X | Procurement Management | Project Management
AIMS AND SCOPE

The Quantity Surveyor is published bi-annually (twice per year) including special issue(s) where
necessary, through the Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors.

The Quantity Surveyor publishes high quality - minimum of double - blind peer-reviewed
research papers in the areas of Cost management; Cost information management; Construction
economics; Construction project management; Design and construction management processes;
Housing and infrastructure development; Stakeholders management; Project planning and
project impact assessments; Procurement management; Management of construction companies;
Industry development; Knowledge management in construction; Innovation in construction;
Sustainable construction; Project financing; Current and emerging infrastructure issues in
developing countries etc. as well as other relevant issues.

The goal of the journal is to broaden the knowledge of construction professionals and
academicians by promoting access to quality information and providing valuable insight to
construction-related information, research and ideas.

The Quantity Surveyor welcomes research or technical articles, which are published after proper
peer-review process, and provided the author(s) adhere strictly to the guideline for publication.
Copyright: © 2020, The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors

All rights Reserved. In accessing this journal, you agree that you will access the contents for your
own personal use but not for any commercial use. Any use and or copies of this Journal in whole
or in part must include the customary bibliographic citation, including author attribution, date and
article title.

Disclaimer of Warranties
In no event shall the management of The Quantity Surveyor be liable for any special, incidental,
indirect, or consequential damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use of the
articles or other material derived from The Quantity Surveyor, whether or not advised of the
possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability.

This publication is provided “as is” without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied,
including, but not limited to, the implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular
purpose, or non-infringement.

Descriptions of, or references to, products or publications does not imply endorsement of that
product or publication.

While every effort is made by management of The Quantity Surveyor to see that no inaccurate or
misleading data, opinion or statements appear in this publication, they wish to make it clear that
the data and opinions appearing in the articles and advertisements herein are the responsibility of
the contributor or advertiser concerned. Management of The Quantity Surveyor makes no
warranty of any kind, either express or implied, regarding the quality, accuracy, availability, or
validity of the data or information in this publication or of any other publication to which it may be
linked.
The Quantity Surveyor
Chief Editor
Prof. Deji R. Ogunsemi
Department of Quantity Surveying,
Federal University of Technology Akure, Nigeria
Email: drogunsemi@futa.edu.ng

Editor
Dr. Ayodeji E. Oke
Department of Quantity Surveying,
Federal University of Technology Akure, Nigeria
Email: emayok@gmail.com, aeoke@futa.edu.ng

Other Editorial Board Members

Prof. Henry A. Odeyinka
Prof. Ahmed D. Ibrahim
Prof. Yakubu Ibrahim
Prof. Samuel I. J. Onwusonye
Prof. Uchenna O. Ajator
Dr. Richard Kolawole
Dr. Simon Eigbe
Prof. Olukayode S. Oyediran
Prof. Olubola Babalola
Prof King N.O. Nyenke
Prof. Yahaya M. Ibrahim
Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, Bauchi, Nigeria
Imo State University, Owerri, Nigeria
Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria
Federal Polytechnic, Bauchi, Nigeria
Auchi Polytechnic, Auchi, Nigeria
University of Lagos, Akoka, Nigeria
Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
Rivers State University, Port-Harcourt, Nigeria
Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria

Editorial Advisory Board

Prof. Abdul Rashidi Universiti Sains Malaysia
Prof. Charles Egbu University of East London, UK
Prof. George Ofori London South Bank University, UK
Prof. Godwin Jagboro Obafemi Awolowo University Ile-Ife, Nigeria
Prof. Hamman Tukur Sa'ad Ahmadu Bello University Zaria, Nigeria
Prof. Joseph Afolayan Anchor University Lagos, Nigeria
Prof. Kabir Bala Ahmadu Bello University Zaria, Nigeria
Prof. Martin Skitmore Queensland University of Technology Sydney, Australia
Prof. Paul Olomolaiye University of the West of England Bristol, UK
Prof. T. C. Mogbo Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu, Nigeria
Prof. Theo Haupt Mangosuthu University of Technology Durban, South Africa
Prof. Julius Fasakin Federal University of Technology Akure, Nigeria
Prof. Stephen Ogunlana Heriot-Watt University Edinburgh, UK

Support Staff
Ms. Lauretta Gerard
Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors
House No 84, 4th Avenue, Gwarinpa,
Abuja, Nigeria

The Quantity Surveyor

ISSN: 116-915X © 2020 The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors
http://journal.niqs.org.ng
The Quantity Surveyor

VOLUME 66 NUMBER 1 MARCH 2020 ISSN 116-915X

CONTENTS

4 EDITORIAL

PAPERS
6-22 Jonathan Zishim Danjuma, Ahmed Doko Ibrahim, and Peter Gangas
Chindo
A comparative analysis of factors affecting contractors' mark-up
decision based on selected project and organisational characteristics

23-30 Olubunmi Comfort Ade-Ojo and Joseph Aderemi Akinola

Problems associated with plant and equipment hiring in Ondo State
Nigeria

31-42 Muhammad Abdullahi, Tsaku Joseph Ombugadu, Ahmed Doko

Ibrahim, Yahaya Makarfi Ibrahim and Peter Gangas Chindo
IFCs' Capabilities for supporting quantity take-off of building works
using BESMM 4

43-59 Chukwuemeka Patrick Ogbu and Vera Braiye Ebiminor

Relationship between bill of quantities errors and construction
disputes: A multivariate analysis

60-67 Usman Sulaiman Jibril, Baba Adama Kolo, and Peter Gangas Chindo
Assessment of project manager's roles in management of construction
projects in Nigeria

68-81 Chukwuemeka Patrick Ogbu and Monday Omogiate Imafidon

Criteria for selection of consultants for tertiary institution
construction projects in Nigeria

82-96 Solomon Olusola Babatunde, Tolulope Esther Adeleye and Adedayo

Opeyemi Adekunle
Assessment of barriers and measures to improve BIM based detailed
cost estimating in quantity surveying practices

97-103 Olufisayo Adewumi Adedokun, Fidelis Ojuoluwa Rufus and Isaac

Olaniyi Aje
Indications of stress among the quantity surveyors

The Quantity Surveyor

ISSN: 116-915X © 2020 The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors
http://journal.niqs.org.ng
The Quantity Surveyor (March, 2020) 66, 4

Editorial
The Nigerian construction industry like most developing countries, is governed by a competitive business environment
driven by the lowest cost mentality. Therefore, any contractor who must remain in business within the industry must be
determined and use optimal bid mark-ups low enough to win the job, at the same time high enough to provide the minimum
expected profit. To help contractors decide on the optimum mark-up to insert in their bids in Nigeria, Danjuma, Ibrahim and
Chindo examined and uncovered the factors affecting contractors' mark-up decisions in Nigeria through a comparative
analysis of factors affecting contractors' mark-up decision based on selected project and organisational characteristics. Their
study is relevant to construction industry players as it provides knowledge on how project and organisational characteristics
affect factors affecting contractors' mark-up decision, therefore creating a better ground for improvements in tendering
practices. This improvement in tendering practice in Nigeria has the potential to enhance the construction industry's
performance.
Ade-Ojo and Akinola assessed the problems associated with plant and equipment's hiring in Ondo State, Nigeria. They
indicated the major problems associated with plant and equipment hiring for construction works, and concluded that
inability of hiring firms to keep and maintain plant and equipment in a working condition contributed to the problem of
project delivery in Nigeria. They recommended proper project planning and good assessment of plant and equipment to be
hired by contracting organization in order to prevent time overrun.
In Nigeria, the Building and Engineering Standard Method of Measurement (BESMM 4) is currently the standard for
measurement of construction works but, till date an assessment of how well IFCs data schema supports the measurement of
construction works using the BESMM 4 provisions is not known. Therefore, the capabilities of IFC for supporting quantity
take-off of Building works using BESMM 4 was investigated by Abdullahi, Ombugadu, Ibrahim, Ibrahim, and Chindo.
They concluded that software and BIM platform based on the current IFC4 Add 1 data schema are not adequate for quantity
take-off of building works using BESMM 4 standard. The output of their study will avail schema developers and software
vendors with the information requirement for schema extensions that capture the local requirement for cost estimating in the
Nigerian construction industry.
Bills of quantities (BoQs) doubtlessly remain the most preferred cost management instrument in construction
procurements globally. However, BoQ errors has the potential to cause construction disputes. Ogbu and Ebiminor exposed
the sources of BoQ errors and the relationship between BoQ errors and construction disputes. Based on their findings, they
made recommendations on how best to address professional incompetence and mistakes in the preparation of BoQs. This
paper offers insights into the relationship between errors in BoQs and construction disputes.
Jibril, Kolo and Chindo acknowledged that lack of understanding of roles and responsibilities of construction
practitioners (CPs) as one of the factors leading to ineffectiveness in teamwork within the construction industry. They
appraised the roles of a project manager (PM) in the management of construction project and established that on a project
where a PM is appointed, none among the roles and responsibilities of PM identified is fully undertaken by the PM. They
concluded that there is a conflict amongst construction practitioners on the role of a PM. They suggested that CPs should
improve their knowledge on the specific role of PM in construction projects and the attendant responsibilities that comes
with such role.
Almost all tertiary institutions' new construction projects in Nigeria have consultants. In spite of this, majority of these
projects in the institutions underperform due to poor management as a result of flaws in the selection of consultants. The
order of priority of the criteria for the selection of consultants for public tertiary institution construction projects in Edo and
Delta States was ascertained by Ogbu and Imafidon. The output of their study will assist tertiary institutions on what to
prioritise in the criteria used in selecting construction consultant for their projects. It will also expose consultants to the key
qualifying criteria for successful bidding in the institutions. They recommended that the use of ICT and location of
firm/proximity to the site should be among the criteria for the selection of construction consultants for tertiary institution
projects.
Babatunde, Adeleye and Adekunle examined the barriers to the implementation of building information modelling (BIM)
based detailed cost estimating in quantity surveying practice; and evaluated the measures to improve its adoption within
Nigerian quantity surveying firms. They presented the relative importance of the identified barriers and measures to improve
BIM adoption. Their findings will help to ameliorate the barriers hindering the adoption of BIM based detailed cost
estimating among quantity surveyors; thereby improving the reliability of the detailed cost estimating. Furthermore, their
findings will positively inform the decisions of construction stakeholders, particularly quantity surveyors to formulate
strategies to adopt the full implementation of BIM in their practices.
Today's workforce is experiencing stress in epidemic proportions as illness and absenteeism cannot be overemphasized at
all levels. Therefore, Adedokun, Rufus and Aje appraised the indications of stress among Quantity Surveyors with a view to
enhance productivity while also improving stress management. They uncovered the most evident indications of stress and
the major sub factors of these indications of stress. They further reported the significant sub factors of the indications of
stress and made recommendations on how to curb factors that could trigger stress among employees.

The Quantity Surveyor

ISSN: 116-915X © 2020 The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors
http://journal.niqs.org.ng
The Quantity Surveyor (March, 2020) 66, 82-96

Assessment of barriers and measures to improve BIM based detailed cost

estimating in quantity surveying practices
1* 2 3
Solomon Olusola Babatunde , Tolulope Esther Adeleye and Adedayo Opeyemi Adekunle
1,2 & 3
Department of Quantity Surveying, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
* - E-mail address of Corresponding Author: sobatunde80@gmail.com

Abstract

Globally studies on BIM abound. However, studies on the implementation of Building Information Modeling
(BIM) for cost estimating are few. The purpose of this study is to identify and examine the barriers to
implementation of BIM based detailed cost estimating in quantity surveying practice; and assess the measures to
improve its adoption within the Nigerian quantity surveying firms. This study adopted literature review, pilot
study, and questionnaire survey. The primary data were collected through questionnaire administered to both the
BIM adopters and non-BIM adopters' quantity surveying firms in Lagos state, Nigeria. The data collected were
analyzed using mean score, standard deviation, Mann-Whitney test, and factor analysis. The study identified 18
barriers to BIM based detailed cost estimating and identified 8 measures to improve its adoption. The relative
importance of both the identified barriers and measures to improve its adoption were assessed. The Mann
Whitney results showed that none (out of 18) identified barriers and one (out of 8) identified measures to promote
BIM; there is no significant difference in the perception of the respondents. The factor analysis result grouped the
18 identified barriers into six major factors to include: standardization issues and resistance to change; technical
change and insufficient remuneration issues; high cost of setting-up and training; weak awareness and lack of
demand from key players; lack of management support and legal issues; and interoperability issues. These study
findings will help to ameliorate the barriers hindering the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating among
quantity surveyors; thereby improving the reliability of the detailed cost estimating. Moreover, these study
findings will positively inform the decisions of construction stakeholders, particularly quantity surveyors to
formulate strategies to adopt the full implementation of BIM in their practices.

Keywords: BIM, barriers, measures, detailed cost estimating, quantity surveyors

Introduction

In last decade, BIM technology is one of the major innovations that have been trending in the construction
industry. BIM has shown numerous benefits by augmenting the activities of construction professionals. Parmak
and Malek (2017) described BIM as a digitalized symbolism of the physical and functional behavior and features
of a construction project, which serves as a source of reliable information about a facility and as a result aids
decision making throughout the life of the project. This innovation also aids the extraction, exchanging and
networking of data files within the simulated environment for a particular project. BIM surfaced majorly to
automate designs by creating a model that depicts the actual elements and components of a construction project
(Yan and Damian, 2008). A survey carried out in the UK construction industry identified some solutions BIM has
provided as reducing errors, reworks, and waste; improved sustainable designs and risk management; and
improved change response (Khosrowshashi and Arayici, 2012). Valende, Nicolle and Cruz (2008) described
BIM as the process of producing, storing, managing, exchanging and sharing of building information in an
interoperable and re-usable way. BIM primarily emerged to satisfy the design automation needs by building a
model that represents the actual elements and components of a building (Yan and Damian, 2008). This
automation explored by the use of BIM has helped increase efficiency in cost estimating, scheduling and
tracking, safety plans, facility management, sustainability rating system compliance amongst many others
(Alufohai, 2012).
Detailed cost estimating is the most valuable duty of a quantity surveyor which involves the determination of
project costs (Ismail, 2018). The end point is achieving a project estimate which stands on a number of variables
such as materials, labour, plant, profit and overhead. This process becomes cumbersome as projects become
enormous and complex in nature. Detailed cost estimating process requires an absolute understanding of the
interdependency among building system (Shen and Issa, 2010). Shen and Issa (2010) further emphasized that
generating a detailed cost estimate is critical and time consuming as it requires a large amount of time to be spent

The Quantity Surveyor

ISSN: 116-915X © 2020 The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors
http://journal.niqs.org.ng
83 Babatunde et al

on visualization, interpretation among others. It can be deduced that the reliability of detailed cost estimate
depends on the ability and the amount of details provided to the quantity surveyors on the specific construction
projects. According to Shen and Issa (2010), only the visualization attribute that BIM offers is sufficient to hike
the effectiveness of estimating process in relation to accuracy and speed. Aside the visualization attribute, BIM
concept has a unique capability of synchronizing all information required for estimating process in order to
enhance productivity.
Quantity take-off automation is one of the capabilities of BIM which reduces time and cost required to
estimate (Sattineni and Harrison, 2011) and this automation of information provided by BIM helps improving the
quality of data (Nagalingam, Jayasena, and Ranadewa, 2013). Compared to the traditional method, BIM based
detailed cost estimating poses a greater advantage. For instance, Attar et al. (2012) investigated the impact of
conventional building methods with implementation of BIM and found out the benefits BIM offers include
improved productivity, better coordination and reduced error. They also found out that by adopting BIM, 80%
reduction in time to prepare estimates and 10% savings on construction cost through clash detection. Eastman,
Teicholz, Sacks and Liston (2011) concluded that in a one-fold view, BIM data allows the preparation of accurate
and reliable estimate. Azhar (2011) alluded to the advantage of BIM that it produces estimates 3% more accurate
compared to the conventional methods of estimation. In spite of these benefits that BIM has shown to the detailed
cost estimating, quantity surveyors are reluctant to the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating. For
instance, Ho (2012) asserted that quantity surveyors are lagging behind in the adoption of BIM compared to
Architects and Engineers. Olatunji and Sher (2014) stated that quantity surveyors are generally slow in the
adoption of new innovations or technology compared to the other professionals in the construction industry.
Also, a survey carried out in the Australian construction sector found out that only 20% of the quantity surveyors
adopted BIM for detailed cost estimating (Aibinu and Venkatesh, 2013).
In Nigeria, Alufohai (2012) asserted that there is low knowledge of BIM as it is mostly used by Architects to
present their designs. This is affirmed by Olugboyega and Aina (2016) that quantity surveyors and facility
managers were the least in the usage of BIM. Other relevant studies in Nigeria include Fadason et al. (2018) that
carried out a study on the challenges of BIM implementation in Nigeria, the study found out that lack of BIM
education is a significant challenge of BIM in Nigeria. Abubakar, Ibrahim, Kado and Bala (2014) studied the
perception of contractors in relation to the factors influencing BIM adoption among others. Despite these
previous studies, there is dearth of studies on BIM based detailed cost estimating in Nigeria. Also, the complete
adoptions of BIM based detailed cost estimating cannot be explored until the factors influencing the adoption are
fully investigated, most especially in developing countries. Therefore, this study becomes necessary to
identifying and examining the barriers to BIM based detailed cost estimating in quantity surveying practice; and
assessing the measures to improve the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating.

Literature review

BIM evolution

The concept of BIM started in the 1990's, and has presented so many opportunities to the construction industry.
BIM has evolved from being just a software to an integrating system, BIM does not present itself as software,
instead it is an IT solution for integrating software application, which is not dependent on the software used
(Jayasena and Weddikkara, 2012). The evolution of BIM has caused drastic change in the way operations are
being carried out in the industry. The basic concept of BIM is hinged on the need to provide a platform that
provides solution to the lapses of the 2D CAD technologies by ensuring a cooperative platform that brings
together all building information in a single file which can be exchanged and used by all the parties to a project
(Ibrahim and Abdulahi, 2016). There has been no definite definition ascribed to BIM as revealed by several
researchers. RICS (2012) reported that the theory of BIM has no established meaning as a result of its improving
scope and attributes which is endless and being continually explored.
Kamadeen (2010) described the collaboration of all the features of BIM as a problem solving evolution. The
prominent IT based information system, promotes and integrates the designs, assembles all operations of the
building. The emergence of BIM is a turning point for the built environment, overcoming the barriers faced by all
professionals. BIM evolutions are usually described in terms of dimensions, since it is an advancement of 2D
CAD technologies; its evolution emerged from the 3D technology for visualization, 4D for scheduling, 5D for
cost estimating at various phases, 6D for facility management, 7D for sustainability, and 8D for safety planning
(Smith, 2014). The various dimensional ability of BIM can be described as an “nD” model as it has the ability to
extend to an infinite number of dimensions (Eastman et al., 2011). Therefore, the adoption of BIM is vital to the
efficacy and competitiveness of the construction industry (Newton and Chileshe, 2012).
Assessment of barriers and measures to improve BIM based detailed cost estimating 84

Concept of BIM based detailed cost estimating

The concept of BIM is hinged on the integration of data rather than referring to a set of software. BIM-enabled
estimating involves sequential series of operations which are programmed, customized, extracted and transferred
and associated with their unit cost to arrive at an estimate. This approach is different from the conventional
estimating method (Ashworth, 2010). The integration of activities by BIM-enabled estimating (5D) helps in
narrowing the operations of detailed estimating, thereby reducing the laborious operations carried out in the
manual method. Therefore, Table 1 shows the BIM software for detailed cost estimating.
85 Babatunde et al

As shown in Table 2, BIM based detailed estimating automates the quantification process thereby overruling the
enormous process in traditional estimating approach leaving ample time for the estimator to review and use his
experience on the estimates generated. These quantities are exported to estimating software and data from cost
databases are set against the quantities to generate the required estimates or exported to external spreadsheet or
plug in to 3D software.

Barriers to the adoption of BIM among quantity surveyors

Sattineni and Harrison (2013) stated that the most challenging aspect of BIM implementation is cultural
switching within the organization and the level of confidence of the estimator with automated quantities. Liu,
Issa and Olbina (2010) stated that the impediments to the adoption of BIM among quantity surveyors are lack of
governmental guidelines and policies and lack of push on the part of the client. Further, they stated that clients not
demanding the use of BIM poses a great barrier on its adoption resulting into a low external force for adoption,
organization becomes complacent in adoption considering that BIM adoption is unimportant. Zahrizan,
Mohamed-Ali, Haron, Marshall-Ponting and Abd-Hamid (2013) stated that lack of government policies, and
lack of training is also a threat undermine the adoption of BIM among quantity surveyors. Smith (2014) identified
lack of push through mandates from the government as an impediment to the adoption of BIM for detailed cost
estimating among quantity surveyors. Yahaya and Muhammed (2016) stated some of the challenges of BIM as
encountered by quantity surveyors as substandard BIM models, inadequate information, interoperability
challenge, legal and liability issue and manual review of extracted quantities. American Institute of Architects
(2012) reported that an incomplete model is synonymous to an incomplete drawing and cannot be the sole source
of information to rely on. Zahrizan et al. (2014) identified lack of data return on investment of BIM tends to make
the practitioners fall back to the conventional method. Moses and Hampton (2017) identified the barriers of
adoption of 5D among quantity surveyors as cultural switching or reluctance to evolutions, initial investment in
purchasing software, and training of staff. Also, automated quantities require close scrutiny engineering and
managed in order to achieve the potentials BIM presents (Olatunji, Sher and Gu, 2010).

Barriers to the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating in quantity surveying practice

Ismail (2017) stated that the countless BIM benefits emphasized do not imply that BIM does not have its own
challenges. For instance, as simple as automation sounds they come with their own deficiencies, but these
deficiencies do not overrule the benefits they present. According to RICS (2011) the most prevailing barrier for
quantity surveyor in adopting BIM for detailed cost estimating is lack of clients' demand, high cost of training
workers, point of interconnection between applications and software. Smith (2014) asserted that the impediment
to the adoption of BIM is the huge capital expended in setting up the model and most times the consultancy fees
are not substantial enough to build the models to the required level. The author also stated that the understanding
of the quantity surveyors with automated quantities is also an impediment to the adoption of BIM based detailed
estimating, which apparently requires a level of professionalism and experience to figure out any indicated
problem with the automated quantities. The perceived barriers of implementing 5D BIM amongst quantity
surveyors are incompatibility of software, prohibitive cost of building the model, lack of e- standard for coding
building BIM software and lack of protocols for coding objects within the model (Wu et al., 2014). Nagalingam
et al. (2013) asserted that new innovations always come in hand with huge expenses in adoption and insufficient
knowledge and skill related to the innovation becomes an impediment to its adoption.
Olatunji and Sher (2010) claimed that new techniques will be needed by the team working on a project in order
to produce a substantial outcome from its use and fees scales need to be reviewed in order to commensurate with
their professional duties. Stanley and Thurnell (2014) identified the barriers to BIM adoption in detailed cost
Assessment of barriers and measures to improve BIM based detailed cost estimating 86

estimating among quantity surveyors in Auckland as lack of software compatibility, huge set up cost among
others. Also, lack of knowledge and precise understanding and experience contributes to the impediment of the
adoption of BIM based detailed estimating (Jayasena and Weddikkara, 2012). Kekana et al. (2014) found that the
barriers to the adoption of BIM based detailed estimating in South Africa to include absence of BIM specialist in
the country and resistance of practitioners in moving away from the traditional method. Smith (2014) identified
lack of push through mandates from the government as an impediment to the adoption of BIM for detailed cost
estimating among quantity surveyors. Boon (2009) identified that interoperability among software of different
developers as a factor that undermines the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating. For instance, the
author stated that if the descriptions in 3D modeler do not correlate with the descriptions used in the estimating
software, then the two cannot be used together. It is evident that several studies on barriers to BIM incorporation
in quantity surveying practice are available, but none of these studies on BIM based detailed cost estimating have
been conducted, particularly through an empirical approach in Nigeria.

Measures to promote the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating in quantity surveying practice

Ismail (2017) stated that encounters usually come up with the data quality of the BIM model, incompatibility
between BIM modeling process and the QS cost estimating rules, and some data exchange issues. The adoption of
BIM for detailed estimating has attained a level of maturity most especially in developed countries like US and
UK. It has received several recommendations on its improvement among Qs practitioners which its adherence
has been put to place in these countries. Smith (2014) recommended that government mandates to the use of BIM
on public projects as instilled in United States would most likely enhance the BIM adoption by all professionals in
the industry. This is most likely because government are the major clients with high capital projects in any
country which makes them a major push for organizations to adopt the use of BIM if mandated. Ismail et al.
(2018) stated that in promoting effective use of BIM among quantity surveyor practitioners, the users must be
competent in the use of these softwares, understand the models created and the quantity surveyor must possess
adequate knowledge and skills in operating this software.
Olatunji and Sher (2014) stated that communicating the benefits of BIM enables cost estimating to client so
they can be fully aware of the professional services provided to them. Rajith (2016) the study recommended that
seminars should be conducted, workshops, brief duration courses should be organized in order to improve the
adoption of BIM among quantity surveyor professionals in Sri Lanka. They also concluded that BIM should be
included on educational curriculum and the benefits and its importance should also be made known to the
quantity surveyors and finally stated that the government of a country are the largest client so should help in
promoting BIM adoption by enforcing on its projects and a regulatory body for BIM should be created (Al-Sadon,
2012; Abeywardhana, 2016). Moreover, Mom et al. (2011) stated that government enforcement of BIM, client's
demand, organizing training programs for staff, knowledge management practices and provision of standardized
system of work and awareness of benefits BIM would bring to their projects would help improve its adoption
among professionals.
Akerele, Adebimpe and Moses (2016) identified that increase in the awareness of its use, involvement of
government, training and re training of company's staff and involvement of the various professional bodies in the
construction sector would improve BIM adoption among various professionals. Zahrizan, Ali, Baron, Amanda
and Zuhain (2013) stated that training is important to increasing BIM adoption and without training users
efficiently there will be no substantial improvement in its adoption. Liu et al. (2010) opined that the input
government and a laid down policy would increase the adoption of BIM. In addition, the intervention of
government and professional bodies to develop guidelines and strategies for BIM implementation would
enhance its adoption (Wong, Salleh and Ibrahim, 2014).
The adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating has attained a level of maturity most especially in
developed countries like the US and UK. It has received several measures to its improvement among quantity
surveyor practitioners, which its adherence has been put to place in several developed countries. Therefore, it
becomes imperative to empirically assess the measures to improve the adoption of BIM based detailed cost
estimating in developing countries. It is against this backdrop that necessitated this present study within the
Nigerian quantity surveying firms.

Research methodology

The target population for this study comprised both the professional quantity surveyors that are BIM adopters and
non-BIM adopters for detailed cost estimating in Lagos state, Nigeria. This study area was chosen because a large
percentage of quantity surveying firms are located in this area. This is corroborated by Babatunde (2015) that the
reasons for chosen Lagos as a study area are as follows: availability of substantive respondents in construction
87 Babatunde et al

management and other related studies; and ease access to conduct a survey to obtain appropriate data. An
extensive literature review was undertaken to identify the various barriers to BIM based detailed cost estimating;
and identify the measures to improve its adoption.. Similarly, the measures to improve the adoption of BIM based
detailed cost estimating were as well identified from important literature The pilot study was conducted to
identify the BIM adopters among the quantity surveying firms in the study area. The outcome of pilot study
indicated that 13 quantity surveying firms are already adopting BIM (i.e. BIM adopters) in the study area.
Moreover, the total list of quantity surveying firms in the study area was obtained from the NIQS Lagos
Chapter Newsletter 2016. The non-probability sampling technique employed was purposive sampling
technique, which was used to select BIM adopters among the quantity surveying firms. Also, for the non-BIM
adopters, probability sampling technique precisely systematic random sampling was employed based on every
5th firm on the list of registered firms after the exclusion of the BIM adopters for detailed cost estimating.
Therefore, 13 BIM adopters and 24 non-BIM adopters' quantity surveying firms were selected. This is resulting
into 37 quantity surveying firms. Owing to the number of firms under consideration, three questionnaires were
distributed to each quantity surveying firm. This approach is supported by earlier studies in construction
economics research (see Badu et al., 2012; Babatunde and Perera, 2017) among others. In total, 111 (i.e. 37 x 3)
questionnaires which comprised section A: background information of the respondents and Section B:
respondents perception on 18 BIM barriers and 8 measures to improve its adoption were self-administered to the
BIM adopters and non-BIM adopters quantity surveying firms in the study area.
A total of 73 questionnaires comprised 31 BIM adopters and 42 non-BIM adopters were fully completed and
used for the analysis. The data obtained were analysed using mean score, standard deviation, Mann-Whitney test,
and factor analysis. Mann Whitney test is a non-parametric test used when to test the null hypothesis when two
samples originates from the same population. Thus, the Mann-Whitney test was conducted to determine whether
there is a statistical significant difference in the ranking of both 18 identified barriers to BIM based detailed cost
estimating and 8 identified measures to improve the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating between the
two groups comprised BIM adopters and non- BIM adopters' quantity surveying firms. In addition, the factor
analysis was conducted to identify a small number of factor categorizations that could be used to show
relationships among a set of numerous inter-related variables (Pallant, 2010; Hair et al., 2010). In this study, the
factor analysis was carried out on the 18 identified barriers to BIM based detailed cost estimating with a view to
determining the underpinning interactions or grouping that might exist between the identified barriers. It is
worthy to mention that factor analysis was not conducted on the measures to improve the adoption of BIM based
detailed cost estimating because there are fewer identified variables, precisely 8 variables.

Results and discussion

Background information of respondents

Figure 1 shows the background information of the respondents, which comprise of years of work experience,
designation of the respondent in the firm, highest academic qualifications and professional qualification of the
respondents. As indicated in Figure 1, 31 of the respondents have 1 to 5 years experience, 27 respondents have 6
to 10 years, and 15 respondents have 10 to 20 years of work experience. Regarding the designation of the
respondents, it can be seen that majority of the respondents are between assistant quantity surveyors and
registered quantity surveyor. Also, large percentage of the respondents have BSc. (Bachelor Degree), followed
by MSc (Masters Degree). In addition, majority of the respondents are registered members of the Nigerian
Institute of Quantity Surveyors (NIQS). Based on this background information, it can be deduced that there is a
appropriate distribution of the characteristics of the respondents. Thus, the information supplied by these
respondents is adjudged reliable and accurate for analysis.
Assessment of barriers and measures to improve BIM based detailed cost estimating 88

Figure 1: Background information of the respondents

Ranking of barriers to the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating

Table 3 displays the ranking of the 18 identified barriers from the two groups comprised BIM adopters and non-
BIM adopters' quantity surveying firms. It shows the ranking of the 18 identified barriers to the adoption of BIM
based detailed cost estimating. The mean score values obtained from the BIM adopters ranging from 3.47 to 4.46.
While for non-BIM adopters, the mean score values range from 3.69 to 4.63. As shown in Table 3, the results
produced from the mean ranking can be deduced that both the BIM adopters and non-BIM adopters agreed that
the 18 identified barriers confronting the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating.. Furthermore,
attributes with the same mean value are allotted ranks based on their standard deviation. In other words, the
variable with the lowest standard deviation are given a higher rank (Field, 2005).

As indicated in Table 3, the detail results of the ranking are presented as follows:

BIM adopters: The top six ranked barriers to the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating from BIM
adopters' quantity surveying firms are: lack of experience, training, understanding and confidence of the
estimator with automated quantities; huge initial cost of investment; high cost of training of existing
workers/staff; lack of governmental support or policies; insufficient consultancy fess; and cultural
switching/resistance to change with their respective mean values of 4.46, 4.45, 4.39, 4.32, 4.27, and 4.26
respectively.

Non-BIM adopters: The top six ranked barriers from non-BIM adopters' quantity surveying firms include: high
cost of training of existing workers/staff; huge initial cost of investment; cultural switching/resistance to change,
lack of experience, training, understanding and confidence of the estimator with automated quantities;
insufficient consultancy fees; and poor information sharing or collaboration issues with their mean values of
4.63, 4.43, 4.38, 4.26, 4.21, and 4.13 respectively.

Furthermore, the ranking of total mean values for the top six ranked barriers to the adoption of BIM based
detailed cost estimating as displayed in Table III includes: high cost of training of existing workers/staff; huge
initial cost of investment; lack of experience, training, understanding and confidence of the estimator with
automated quantities; cultural switching/resistance to change; insufficient consultancy fees; and lack of
governmental support or policies with their total mean values of 4.51, 4.44, 4.36, 4.32, 4.24, and 4.16
respectively. These findings confirm the existing literature. For instance, Smith (2014) found out that the barriers
to the adoption of BIM is the huge capital cost of investment, and most times the consultancy fees are always not
sufficient to remunerate. Moses and Hampton (2017) identified the barriers to adoption of 5D among quantity
surveyors as cultural switching or reluctance to evolutions. They also mentioned the conventional payment
method; cost of coding would need a replacement to cater for the effect of change in their services. These
previous findings are related to the findings of this study. However, the little difference of findings could be as a
result of geographical locations of the respondents which will have an overall effect on the perception of the
respondents.
89 Babatunde et al
Assessment of barriers and measures to improve BIM based detailed cost estimating 90

In other to verify further if an observation in one group tends to be larger in the other group, Mann Whitney test
was carried out to check if there is a significant difference between the mean rankings of the two groups. As
shown in Table 3, the P- value generated for all the 18 identified barriers from the two groups (i.e. BIM adopters
and Non-BIM adopters) all exceeds 0.05, which implies that there is no significant difference between the
responses of the two groups. In other words, there is a very high level of consensus between the two groups
pertaining to barriers to the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating. It shows that they have a common
perception towards the barriers to the adoption of BIM for detailed cost estimating.

Factor analysis of the barriers to the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating

Prior to carrying out of factor analysis, Kaiser-Mayer- Olkin (KMO) and Barlett's test of sphericity were
conducted to confirm the data obtained are adjudged suitable for factor analysis. The result of KMO value is
0.769; this KMO value exceeded the 0.6 value that Kaiser (1974) suggests as satisfactory for accurate completion
of factor analysis, indicating that the data obtained is appropriate for factor analysis. Also, Bartlett's test of
sphericity is 0.000 signifying a strong correlation. This is supported by earlier studies that sphericity test should
be less than 0.05 (Field, 2005; Pallant, 2007). It is evident that the data obtained is satisfactory for factor analysis
given that the results of the KMO and sphericity are appropriate. Therefore, factor analysis was carried out to
identify the major relationship among the 18 identified barriers to the adoption of BIM based detailed cost
estimating.
In achieving a more lucid result and determine the underpinning interactions or grouping that might exist
between the identified barriers as shown in Table 4, the principal factor extraction was used with varimax rotation
in 9 iterations. Upon this process the result of the principal factor rotation grouped the 18 identified barriers into 6
principal factors ranging from 0.415 to 0.853 this implies that there is no need to eliminate any variable from the
analysis (Table 4 for details). This was supported by earlier researchers. For instance, Kline (2002) stated that
variables with a factor loading of 0.30 or higher can be considered significant. This is corroborated by Leech et al
(2005) that factor loadings of less than 0.3 are considered low. The percentage of total variance explained of the
factors ranges from 7.483 to 15.648 while the cumulative percentage of the total variance explained of the six
factors is 72.330%.

As indicated in Table 4, the six principal factors are named as follows:

Factor 1: Standardization issues and resistance to change
Factor 2: Technical change issues and insufficient remuneration
Factor 3: High cost of setting- up and training
Factor 4: Weak awareness and lack of demand from key players
Factor 5: Lack of management support and legal issues
Factor 6: Interoperability issues

Table 4: Principal factor extraction, varimax rotation and total variance explained on 18 identified
barriers to the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating

Factor 1: Standardization issues and resistance

to change

Factor 2: Technical change issues and insufficient

remuneration
91 Babatunde et al

Table 4: Principal factor extraction, varimax rotation and total variance explained on 18 identified
barriers to the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating cont'd

Factor 3: High cost of setting-up and training

Factor 4: Weak awareness and lack of demand

from key players

Factor 5: Lack of management support and legal

issues

Factor 6: Factor 6: Interoperability issues

Factor 1: Standardization issues and resistance to change

This factor has 15.648% of the total variance of the barriers to the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating
(see Table 4). This factor contains five components to include: incomplete model/low quality of BIM data; lack
of data return on BIM; lack of protocols for coding objects within the model; incompatibility between BIM data
and standard practices; and cultural switching/resistance to change respectively. The components have factor
loadings of 0.853, 0.825, 0.781, 0.537, and 0.415, respectively. These study findings confirmed the earlier
studies. For instance, Zahrizan et al. (2014) identified lack of data return on investment of BIM tends to make the
quantity surveyors practitioners fall back to the conventional method. Moses and Hampton (2017) identified the
barriers of adoption of 5D among quantity surveyors as cultural switching or reluctance to evolutions. Sattineni
and Harrison (2013) found out that the most challenging aspect of BIM implementation is cultural switching
within the organization.

Factor 2: Technical change issues and insufficient remuneration

This factor amounts to 14.931% of the total variance (see Table 4). The major components of the factor are: poor
information sharing or collaboration issues; absence of BIM specialist; lack of check mechanism for designs;
and insufficient consultancy fees respectively. These factors have factor loadings of 0.820, 0.766, 0.759, and
0.543, respectively (see Table 4). This finding is affirmed the assertion of Olatunji and Sher (2010) that new
techniques will be needed by the team working on a project in order to produce a substantial outcome from using
BIM and fees scales need to be reviewed in order to commensurate with their professional duties. Also, Kekana et
al. (2014) found that absence of BIM specialist as a barrier to BIM in the South Africa.

Factor 3: High cost of setting-up and training

This factor represents 11.972% of the total variance (see Table 4). The major components of the factor are huge
initial cost of investment, and high cost of training workers. These two components have factor loadings: 0.710;
and 0.672 respectively. These findings confirmed the assertion of Smith (2014) that the impediment to the
adoption of BIM is the huge capital expended in setting up the model and most times the consultancy fees are not
substantial enough to build the models to the required level. Also, Nagalingam et al. (2013) asserted that new
innovations always come in hand with huge expenses in adoption and insufficient knowledge and skill related to
Assessment of barriers and measures to improve BIM based detailed cost estimating 92

the innovation becomes an impediment to BIM adoption in quantity surveying practice.

Factor 4: Weak awareness and lack of demand from key players

This factor constitutes 11.940% of the total variance (see Table 4). This factor has three main components to
include: lack of awareness of BIM based detailed cost estimating and its potentials; lack of client's demand; and
lack of experience, training, understanding and confidence of the estimator with automated quantities. The factor
loadings for these components are: 0.805, 0.736 and 0.593 respectively. This finding confirmed the earlier
studies. For instance, Akerele and Etiene (2016) found out that the most challenge to BIM usage is the lack of
awareness of its use and lack of government support for its adoption, particularly in developing countries. In
addition, lack of push through mandates from the government and clients not demanding the use of BIM poses a
great barrier to the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating among the professional quantity surveyors.

Factor 5: Lack of management support and legal issues

This factor amounts to10.355% of the total variance (see Table 4) with major components as lack of senior
management support and legal uncertainties. These two components have factor loadings of 0.807 and 0.794
respectively. This finding affirmed the assertion of Sunil et al. (2015) that identified lack of leadership, and
organizational structure as barriers for adopting BIM based software among quantity surveyors. For example,
the top managers of most of the quantity surveying firms assume that their current practices are sufficient and
individuals already have their own system that is working them. Also, Zulkipli and Lim (2015) identified legal
issue of who owns the BIM and intellectual property rights as a barrier to BIM adoption.

Factor 6: Interoperability issues

This factor amounts to 7.483% of the total variance of the barriers to the adoption of BIM based detailed cost
estimating. This factor has only one component, which is an interoperability issue with a high factor loading of
0.841(see Table 4). This finding confirmed the previous studies. For instance, Boon (2009) identified that
interoperability among software of different developers as a factor that undermines the adoption of BIM based
detailed cost estimating among the professional quantity surveyors. For example, if the description of the object
used by the 3D modeler does not correlate with the description used in the estimating software, this implies that
the two cannot be used together. In addition, Zulkipli and Lim (2015) identified lack of standards relating to
interoperability between software due to a large data exchange as a barrier encountered by professional quantity
surveyors.

Ranking of measures to promote the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating

Table 5 displays the mean values and standard deviations for each of the 8 identified measures to promote the
adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating in quantity surveying practice. The mean ranking from the BIM
adopters indicates that all the 8 identified measures have mean values between 4.49 and 4.93; which signifies that
the BIM adopters agreed to a large extent that the identified measures are critical towards promoting the adoption
of BIM based detailed cost estimating. It further implies from Table 5 that all the identified measures should be
taken into consideration by quantity surveyors practitioners. From the perspective of the non BIM adopters, all
the 8 identified measures have mean values ranging from 4.56 to 4.89, which indicates that the entire identified
measures are very important in promoting the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating. In addition, the
overall ranking of the two groups (i.e. BIM adopters and non- BIM adopters) revealed the top five ranked
measures to promote the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating. These include: organizing short
courses, seminars, workshops by professional bodies; training and retraining of existing staffs; development of
BIM guidelines and strategies by government and professional bodies; increase awareness of the benefits and
potentials of BIM based detailed cost estimating; and involvement of professional bodies with mean values of
4.89, 4.81, 4.79, 4.76 and 4.73, respectively. These findings affirmed earlier studies. For example, Zahrizan et al.
(2015) stated that training is important to increasing BIM adoption and without training the users efficiently there
will be no substantial improvement in its adoption.
In addition, Rajith (2016) affirmed that seminars, workshops, and brief duration courses should be organized
in order to improve the adoption of BIM among quantity surveyors professionals. Wong et al. (2014) found that
the intervention of both government and respective professional bodies to develop guidelines for BIM
implementation would enhance its adoption. A further test was carried out to test if there is a significant
difference between the mean rankings of BIM adopters and non-BIM adopters' quantity surveying firms. In order
93 Babatunde et al
Assessment of barriers and measures to improve BIM based detailed cost estimating 94

to achieve this, the Mann Whitney test was carried out for this purpose which is shown in Table 5. The results of
the P- value indicated that there is no significant difference between the mean rankings of the two groups except
for training and retraining of staff which has a significance value of 0.034. This is not surprising because it could
be attributed to the fear of abandonment by the staff after much BIM training have been acquired.

Conclusions

In the quest to enhance the adoption of BIM based detailed cost estimating among quantity surveyors'
practitioners as a step to the full integration of BIM. This study identified and examined the barriers to BIM based
detailed cost estimating in quantity surveying practice; and assessed the measures to improve its adoption within
the Nigerian quantity surveying firms. The study identified 18 barriers to BIM based detailed cost estimating and
identified 8 measures to improve its adoption. The relative importance of both the identified barriers and
measures to improve its adoption were appraised from both the BIM adopters and non- BIM adopters' quantity
surveying firms. The study revealed the overall top six ranked barriers to the adoption of BIM based detailed cost
estimating to include high cost of training of existing workers/staff, huge initial cost of investment, lack of
experience, training, understanding and confidence of the estimator with automated quantities, cultural
switching/resistance to change, insufficient consultancy fees and lack of governmental support or policies
respectively.
The study further identified 8 measures to promote BIM based detailed cost estimating. The mean ranking
from both the BIM adopters and non-BIM adopters indicated that all the 8 identified measures have a very high
mean values. This implied that the entire identified measures are critical towards promoting the adoption of BIM
based detailed cost estimating among quantity surveyors' practitioners. Therefore, all the identified measures
should be taken into consideration by quantity surveyors practitioners and their professional bodies such as
RICS, NIQS etc. In addition, the overall top five ranked measures to promote the adoption of BIM based detailed
cost estimating are: organizing short courses, seminars, workshops by professional bodies; training and
retraining of existing staffs; development of BIM guidelines and strategies by government and professional
bodies; increase awareness of the benefits and potentials of BIM based detailed cost estimating; and involvement
of professional bodies.
The Mann Whitney results showed that none (out of 18) identified barriers and one (out of 8) identified
measures to promote BIM; there is no significant difference in the perception of the respondents. The factor
analysis result grouped the 18 identified barriers into six major factors to include: standardization issues and
resistance to change; technical change and insufficient remuneration issues; high cost of setting-up and training;
weak awareness and lack of demand from key players; lack of management support and legal issues; and
interoperability issues. These study findings will help to ameliorate the BIM barriers among quantity surveyors;
thereby improving the reliability of the detailed cost estimating. Moreover, these study findings will positively
inform the decisions of construction stakeholders, particularly quantity surveyors to formulate strategies to adopt
the full implementation of BIM in their practices. The little difference in the findings of this study compared to
existing literature could be as a result of geographical locations of the respondents which will have an overall
effect on the perception of the respondents.

Based on these study findings, the study recommends as follows:

Ÿ Professional bodies, particularly NIQS should organise short courses, seminars, and workshops that would
promote BIM based detailed cost estimating among quantity surveyors in Nigeria.
Ÿ Cost of BIM software and training of staff should be subsidize by the government and other approved
authorities;
Ÿ Appropriate government policies and guidelines that support BIM implementation should be in place in
developing countries as whole; and
Ÿ BIM based detailed cost estimating should be incorporated as a module in quantity surveying education.
References

Abubakar, M., Ibrahim, Y. M., Kado, D. and Bala, K. (2014). Contractors' perception of the factors affecting
building information modeling adoption in the Nigerian construction industry. Computing in Civil and
Building Engineering, 167-178.
Aibinu, A. and Venkatesh, S. (2013). Status of BIM adoption and the BIM experience of cost consultants in
Australia. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education & Practice.
95 Babatunde et al

Akerele, A. O. and Etiene, M. (2016). Assessment of the level of awareness and limitations on the use of building
information modelling in Lagos State. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications,
6(2), 229–234.
Alufohai, A. (2012). Adoption of building information modeling and Nigeria's quest for project
cost management. Nigerian institute of quantity surveyors, 1(1), 6-10.
American Institute of Architects, (2007). Integrated project delivery: a practical guide. Available at:
http://www.aia.org/documents/pdf/aiab083423.pdf (accessed 18 December 2018).
Ashworth, A. (2010). Cost Studies of Building, 5th/Ed. Pearson Prentice Hall, Harlow, UK.
Azhar, S. (2011). Building information modeling (BIM): trends, benefits, risks, and challenges for the AEC
industry. Leadership and Management in Engineering, 11(3), 241-252.
Azhar, S., Khalfan, M., and Maqsood, T. (2012) “Building Information Modeling: Now and Beyond,”
Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, 12, 15-28.
Babatunde, S.O. (2015). Developing public private partnership strategy for infrastructure delivery in Nigeria.
Doctoral thesis, Northumbria University, UK.
Babatunde,S.O. and Srinath Perera,S. (2017). Barriers to bond financing for public-private partnership
infrastructure projects in emerging markets: a case of Nigeria. Journal of Financial Management of
Property and Construction, 22(1), 2-19.
Badu, E., Edwards, D.J., Owusu-Manu, D. and Brown, D.M. (2012). Barriers to the implementation of
innovative financing (IF) of infrastructure. Journal of Financial Management of Property and
Construction, 17(3), 253-273.
Boon, J. (2009). Preparing for the BIM revolution. In 13th Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors Congress
(PAQS), 33–40.
Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R. and Liston, K. (2011). BIM handbook: a guide to building information
modeling for owners, managers, designers, engineers, and contractors, Wiley, New Jersey.
Fadason, R., Chitumu, D., and Kaduma, L. (2018). Challenges of building information modelling
implementation in Africa: A case of Nigerian construction industry.
Field, A. (2005), Discovering Statistics using SPSS, Sage, London.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective,
Pearson, Upper Saddle River, NJ, London.
Ho, T. (2012). Divisional news and activities, quantity surveying division: chairman's message. Available at:
http://www.hkis.org.hk/en/st/ ST2012/201203/2012st03_5f_qsd.pdf. (Accessed 16 December 2018)
Ismail, A.A. (2017) Construction cost estimating incorporating BIM in the Malaysian construction industry,
Doctor of Philosophy thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Australia.
Ismail, A.A., Idris, H.N., Ramli, H., Sahamir, S.R.and Rooshdi, M.R. (2018). Sustainable BIM-based cost
estimating for quantity surveyors. The Italian Association of Chemical Engineering, 235-236.
Jayasena, H. S. and Weddikkara, C. (2012). Building information modeling for Sri Lankan construction industry,
Paper presented at the World Construction Conference, Global Challenges in Construction Industry,
Colombo.
Kaiser, H. (1974), “An index of factorial simplicity”, Psychometrika, 39 (1), 31-36
Kekana T.G., Aigbavboa C.O., and Thwala W.D. (2014). Building Information Modelling (BIM): Barriers in
Adoption and Implementation Strategies in the South Africa Construction Industry. International
Conference on Emerging Trends in Computer and Image Processing (ICETCIP'2014) Dec. 15-16, 2014
Pattaya (Thailand).
Khosrowshahi, F. and Arayici, Y. (2012). Roadmap for implementation of BIM in the UK construction industry.
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 19(6), 610-635
Kline, P. (2002), An Easy Guide to Factor Analysis, Routledge, London.
Leech, N.L., Barrett, K.C., and Morgan, G.A (2005). SPSS for Intermediate Statistics, Use and Interpretation,
2nd Ed., New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Liu, R., Issa, R. and Olbina. S. (2010). Factors influencing the adoption of building information modeling in the
A E C I n d u s t r y. Av a i l a b l e a t : h t t p : / / w w w. e n g i n e e r i n g . n o t t i n g h a m . a c . u k / i c c c b e /
proceedings/pdf/pf70.pdf (Accessed 16 December 2018).
Merschbrock, C., Munkvold, B. E. (2012) "A Research Review on Building Information Modeling in
Construction―An Area Ripe for IS Research," Communications of the Association for Information
Systems: 31(10).
Moses, T. and Hampton, G. (2017), Cost certainty: a lead driver for 5D building information modeling
implementation, in 21st Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors Congress (PAQS 2017), 24th-
25thJuly, 2017, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 30-53
Nagalingam, G., Jayasena, H. S. and Ranadewa, K. A. (2013). Building information modeling and future quantity
Assessment of barriers and measures to improve BIM based detailed cost estimating 96

surveyor's practice in Sri Lankan construction industry. The Second World Construction Symposium,
Socio-Economic Sustainability in Construction, Colombo, Sri Lanka, 81-92.
Newton, K. and Chileshe, N. (2012). Awareness, usage and benefits of building information modeling (BIM)
adoption-the case of the South Australian construction organisations In: Smith, S.D (Ed) Procs 28th
Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5th September, 2012, Edinburgh, UK, Association of Researchers in
Construction Management, 3-12.
Olatunji, O.A., Sher, W. and Gu, N. (2010). Building information modeling and quantity surveying practice.
Emirates Journal for Engineering Research, 15(1), 67-70.
Olatunji, O.A and Sher, W. (2014). Perspectives on estimating practices Modeling. Australia's Journal of
Construction Economic Building, 14 (4), 32–53.
Olugboyega, O. and Aina, O. (2016). Analysis of building information modeling usage indices and facilitators in
the Nigerian construction industry. Journal of Logistics, Information and Service Sciences.3(2),1-36.
Pallant, J. (2007) SPSS Survival Manual: A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis using SPSS for Windows, Open
University Press, Berkshire.
Rajith, D.B.A. (2016) Quantity surveying practice with the adoption of BIM application in Sri Lanka. BSc.
dissertation, Sheffield University, UK.
Park, K.S. and Kim, K.P (2014). Essential BIM input data study for housing refurbishment: homeowners'
preferences in the UK. Buildings 4 (3), 467-487.
Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (2012). Building information modeling survey report, Available at:
http://www.scan2bim.info/ files/rics_2011_BIM_Survey_Report.pdf (Accessed 16 December 2018).
Sattineni, A., Harrison R. B. (2011). Estimating with BIM: A survey of UK construction company. Proceedings
of the 28th ISARC, Seoul, Korea. 564-569.
Shen, Z. and Issa, R. R. A. (2010). Quantitative evaluation of the BIM-assisted construction detailed cost
estimates, Journal of Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), 15, 234–257.
Smith, P. (2014). Project cost management with 5D BIM. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 226,
193–200.
Stanley, R. and Thurnell, D (2014). The benefits of, and barriers to, implementation of 5D BIM for quantity
surveying in New Zealand. Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, 14(1), 105-
117.
Sunil, K., Pathirage, C. and Underwood, J. (2015). The importance of integrating cost management with building
information modeling. Paper presented at the 12th International Post-Graduate Research Conference,
Salford, UK.
Vanlande, R., Nicolle, C., Cruz, C (2008). IFC and building lifecycle management. Automation in construction,
18 (1), 70-78.
Wong, P. F., Salleh, H. & Rahim, F. A. (2014). The relationship of Building Information Modelling (BIM)
capability in quantity surveying practice and project performance. International Journal of Civil,
Structural,Construction and Architectural Engineering, 8(10). 1039-1044.
Wu, S., Wood, G., Ginige, K. and Jong, S.W. (2014), “A technical review of BIM based cost estimating in UK
quantity surveying practice, standards and tools”, Journal of Information Technology in Construction
(ITcon), Vol 19, pp. 534-563
Yahaya, M.I., and Muhammad, A. (2016). Introduction to Building Information Modeling. A 3 – Day
Workshop/Annual General Meeting Of The Nigerian Institute Of Quantity Surveyors, Port- Harcourt.
Yan, H. and Damian, P. (2008) Benefits and barriers of building information modeling. Paper presented at the
12th International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering, Beijing, China.
Zahrizan, Z., Mohamed Ali, N., Haron, A. T., Marshall-Ponting, A., and Abd Hamid, Z. (2014). Exploring the
barriers and driving factors in implementing building information modeling in the Malaysian
construction industry: a preliminary study. Journal of The Institution of Engineers, Malaysia, 75, 1-10.