Construction Economics and Building Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017 © 2017 by the author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License (https:// creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/), allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license. Citation: Oraee, M., Hosseini, M.R., Namini, S.B.& Merschbrock, C. I. 2017. Where the Gaps Lie: Ten Years of Research into Collaboration on BIM-Enabled Construction Projects., Construction Economics and Building, 17:1, 121-139. http://dx.doi. org/10.5130/AJCEB.v17i1.5270 ISSN 2204-9029 | Published by UTS ePRESS | ajceb.epress. lib.uts.edu.au Abstract A BIM-enabled Construction Project (BIMCP) refers to a project involving relevant BIM tools to generate, exchange and manage project data between project participants. Success in delivering BIMCPs largely relies on how effective project members collaborate. As a result, collaboration on BIMCP has become a growing field of research while a review of studies on collaboration on BIMCPs is still missing. To address this gap, this paper presents the findings of a systematic review on studies devoted to collaboration on BIMCPs over the past 10 years (2006-2016). To this end, 208 studies published in 12 ICT-oriented journals in the construction context are thoroughly reviewed. The findings bring to light that studies on collaboration on BIMCPs are sporadic, isolated and focus on narrowed, limited and disjointed areas associated with collaboration. The study contributes to the field through highlighting the gaps of the existing literature on the topic. This provides a stepping stone to direct future inquiries that target collaboration on BIMCPs. Keywords Building information modelling, collaboration, construction projects, systematic review VIEWPOINT Where the Gaps Lie: Ten Years of Research into Collaboration on BIM-Enabled Construction Projects Mehran Oraee1, M. Reza Hosseini1, Saeed Banihashemi Namini2, Christoph Merschbrock3 1 Deakin University, Australia 2 University of Canberra, Australia 3 Oslo and Akershus University College, Norway Corresponding author: M. Reza Hosseini, Deakin University, Australia. Locked Bag 20001, Geelong VIC 3220, Australia. Reza.Hosseini@deakin.edu.au DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v17i1.5270 Article History: Received 22/11/2016; Revised 04/02/2017; Accepted 18/02/2017; Published 31/03/2017 DECLARATION OF CONFLICTING INTEREST The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. FUNDING The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. 121 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://dx.doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v17i1.5270 http://dx.doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v17i1.5270 ajceb.epress.lib.uts.edu.au ajceb.epress.lib.uts.edu.au mailto:Reza.Hosseini@deakin.edu.au http://dx.doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v17i1.5270 Introduction The advent of Building Information Modelling (BIM) has led to significant changes in the way construction projects are delivered in terms of the style of information sharing among the parties involved (Liu, van Nederveen and Hertogh, 2016). BIM-enabled Construction Projects (BIMCPs) are delivered by a network comprising members from specialist organisations that are contracted to perform BIM-related works (Grilo et al., 2013). These members are expected to work together collaboratively where the challenges of managing multiple disciplines and organisations involved in BIMCPs have proven problematic (Alreshidi, Mourshed and Rezgui, 2016; Liu, van Nederveen and Hertogh, 2016). Lack of collaboration among members of BIMCPs is still one of the major impediments to successful delivery of BIM-enabled projects (Hosseini et al., 2016; Volk, Stengel and Schultmann, 2014). As a result, the report by McGraw-Hill (2012, p.7) recommended focusing on fostering collaboration on BIMCP as “the most important area of BIM investment”. This has resulted in an upsurge in the number of studies on this area (Mignone et al., 2016). Having a large body of literature on a topic necessitates conducting regular critical review studies to uncover certain research requirements, which have not been adequately met in the current research trend (Lu et al., 2015). This study intends to address this need through mapping the status quo of the body of literature allocated to collaboration on BIMCPs. To this end, the study aims at presenting a picture of the findings of available studies devoted to collaboration on BIMCPs to unearth the gaps and trends. Collaboration on BIM-enabled Construction Projects Hughes, Williams and Ren (2012) state that collaboration in construction studies is usually seen as an umbrella term that refers to partnering, alliancing, networking and joint ventures, thus perceived in different ways by different stakeholders of projects. As put by Van Gassel, Láscaris-Comneno and Maas (2014, p.85) and Azhar, Khalfan and Maqsood (2012), collaboration is “a creative process undertaken by two or more interested individuals, sharing their collective skills and knowledge in an atmosphere of openness, honesty, trust, and mutual respect, to jointly deliver the best solution that meets their common goal”. The technical capabilities of BIM in facilitating a collaborative environment has been promoted as a selling point for BIM methodology (Alreshidi, Mourshed and Rezgui, 2016; Liu, van Nederveen and Hertogh, 2016). Gaining the full benefits offered by BIM methodology is contingent upon effective collaboration and coordination of activities in BIMCPs (Alreshidi, Mourshed and Rezgui, 2016; Bassanino, Fernando and Wu, 2014; Volk, Stengel and Schultmann, 2014). In essence, implementing BIM in an environment where effective collaboration is absent is “scratching the surface” (Mignone et al., 2016). To address this, investigators have identified a wide range of problems that hinder establishing a collaborative environment in BIMCPs (Bassanino, Fernando and Wu, 2014; Mignone et al., 2016). Of these, Olatunji (2011b) contended that the conventional legal structure on construction projects is a barrier to collaborative attempts in BIMCPs. From another vantage point, Merschbrock (2012) attempted to foster collaboration using enhanced collaboration technologies. Sackey, Tuuli and Dainty (2015) asserted that members of BIMCPs are to become constant learners in order to foster collaboration. MacDonald and Mills (2013) proposed an integrated approach for teaching BIM subjects at universities to address the lack of collaboration in BIMCPs through training potential graduates that come to the construction industry. As another suggestion, Merschbrock and Munkvold (2014) maintained that enhancing collaboration in BIMCPs Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017122 may not occur in the absence of instructive protocols, manuals and guidelines. From a broader viewpoint, Liu, van Nederveen and Hertogh (2016), Homayouni, Neff and Dossick (2010) and Shelbourn et al. (2007) emphasised the crucial impacts of three dimensions of technology, people and process on collaborative nature of BIMCPs. Despite the individual contributions of these studies on the topic, the adequacy and comprehensiveness of such attempts are to be assessed against an established theory or framework as described below. Collaborative Working Model (CWM) Patel, Pettitt and Wilson (2012) developed a Collaborative Working Model (CWM) to distinguish the main factors that act as the antecedents of collaboration. The proposed CWM identified 6 primary factors to be central to establishing a collaborative environment in any team. These were termed as “context”, “support”, “tasks”, “interaction processes”, “teams” and “individuals”. “Context” defines the types of individuals and teams involved. As for “support”, the difference between a successful collaboration effort and an unsuccessful one is directly affected by the level of management support in terms of providing resources and tools. “Tasks” represent the characteristics of the responsibilities and activities to be completed by the team at hand. “Interaction processes” encapsulate the behaviours that follow each other in a collaborative effort to convert resources into a product or service. “Teams” as another antecedent of collaboration represents all the elements relevant to the structure of teams being co-located, virtual and the configuration of members in terms of the distance and time. The factor labelled as “individual” refers to the performance of team members in terms of social and interaction activities. CWM is particularly applicable to virtual construction/ engineering teams as asserted by Patel, Pettitt and Wilson (2012). Thereby, CWM was selected as the yardstick to evaluate the adequacy of scholarship on collaboration on BIMCPs in the present study. Research method The primary method deployed in this study entailed a systematic review of literature on collaboration in BIMCPs. Systematic reviews are invaluable scientific activities through which a large amount of information produced by scholarship are reduced to “palatable pieces of information for digestion” (Mulrow, 1994, p.597). Systematic reviews are needed in any field of study. That is, systematic reviews enable researchers to assess the consistency and adequacy of scientific attempts and uncover the gaps within the existing literature on a topic (Mulrow, 1994). The procedure for conducting the systematic review in the present study was informed by the procedure proposed by Lu et al. (2015) for conducting systematic reviews within the construction context according to a two-staged procedure as illustrated in Figure 1. To balance the quality of the review vis-à-vis the number of literature relevant to collaboration on BIMCPs, the ICT-oriented journals in the construction context were considered. That was because, BIM and collaboration on BIMCPs are subsets of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) as asserted by Hosseini et al. (2015). As such, outlets devoted to ICT in the construction context were deemed the most suitable sources to provide a comprehensive coverage of studies conducted on collaboration on BIMCPs. Such journals were identified through using the list of ICT-oriented journals in construction research as suggested by Lu et al. (2015). This list comprised a total of 12 journals as illustrated in Table 1, which Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017123 provided the sources for spotting publications. As such, this review targeted journal articles published in the last 10 years (from 2006 to 2016). The list of journals covered first-tier outlets for scholarly publications in the construction field alongside several journals specifically devoted to the ICT domain. This was justified as, suggested by Okoli and Schabram (2010), investigators are expected to find and exhaust all available sources when conducting systematic reviews on ICT-related topics. Table 1 ICT- oriented journals in the construction context (input from Lu et al. (2015)) Journal Abbreviation 1 Automation in Construction AUTCON 2 Journal of Information Technology in Construction ITCON 3 Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering JCCE 4 Construction Innovation: Information, Process, Management CI 5 Architectural Engineering and Design Management AEDM 6 Advanced Engineering Informatics AEI 7 Journal of Construction Engineering and Management JCEM 8 Journal of Management in Engineering JME 9 Construction Management and Economics CME 10 International Journal of Project Management IJPM 11 Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering CACIE 12 Project Management Journal PMJ Figure 1 Procedure of systematic review Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017124 The Keywords of BIM (Building Information Modelling), collaboration, integration and IPD (integrated project delivery) were set to be screened primarily while “collaborative” and “integrated” terms were also considered for identifying relevant published studies. The reason for inclusion of these keywords was based on the common trend towards widespread use of BIM as the principal means to deliver projects in IPD mode and direct associations of these concepts with collaboration as argued by Ma and Ma (2017). Findings of the study The keywords as discussed were utilised successively. That is, initially the keyword BIM was utilised to search publications within the journals as illustrated in Table 1, thus a total of 1034 BIM-related papers were found. To narrow down the search, the keywords ‘collaboration’ or ‘integration’ or ‘IPD’ or ‘collaborative’ or ‘integrated’ were utilised to identify applicable studies to the topic among the 1034 publications. Titles, abstracts and keyword sections of these 1034 articles were screened. Thus, a list of 208 papers relevant to BIM and devoted to the concept of collaboration was detected. As the final stage of selecting articles, and to specify the most relevant papers, at least two members of the research team examined all 208 articles to identify the papers with a focus on collaboration in BIMCPs. Finally, 62 papers (see Table 2) were identified as directly relevant studies to be thoroughly analysed as discussed below. PRIMARY OUTLETS As illustrated in Table 2, among the ICT-oriented journals in the construction industry, AUTCON and ITCON have been the most popular outlets for publishing studies on collaboration on BIMCPs. AUTCON and ITCON (see Table 2) have published the largest number of studies on the topic with 19 articles (31%) and 14 articles (23%), respectively. On the other hand, project management related journals have the smallest share. This reveals a common trend dominant within the current literature. That is, technology-oriented journals are the desired destination for studies on collaboration on BIMCPs while the outlets focused on construction, project and management aspects have been overlooked. This could be translated to the corresponding aims and objectives of the published studies on these journals. In a wider context, it can be stated that team working, construction context and the project nature of collaboration on BIMCPs are being overshadowed by technology within the published studies. TREND OVERVIEW The number of articles published on collaboration on BIMCPs is illustrated in Figure 2. As BIM is a new methodology to the construction industry, the number of publications before 2007 was significantly low (see Figure 2). Nevertheless, from 2007 onwards the rate has enjoyed an overall continuous growth. The trend line as illustrated in Figure 2 attests to an increasingly noticeable attention to the concept of collaboration on BIMCPs among the scholarship investigating BIM. Judging from the shape of the trend line, the number of publications is expected to increase steadily in the upcoming years. COUNTRY/REGION As for the country and region contribution, Figure 3 illustrates the total of 62 publications based on their region and country of origin. The context of the study referring to the country Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017125 Ta bl e 2 O ut co m es o f t he r el ev an t p ub lis he d ar ti cl es in IC T- or ie nt ed jo ur na ls in th e A EC in du st ry Jo ur na l Se ar ch o ut co m es th ro ug h ke yw or ds A ss oc ia te to B IM & C ol la bo ra tio n Ex am in at io n O ut co m es B IM ar tic le s B IM & C ol la bo ra tio n B IM & C ol la bo ra tiv e B IM & In te gr at io n B IM & In te gr at ed B IM & IP D C ol la bo ra tio n in B IM P er ce nt ag e A U TC O N 37 2 17 8 28 65 1 69 19 31 % IT C O N 73 16 15 12 15 1 30 14 23 % A ED M 42 12 15 20 20 2 21 9 15 % JC EM 11 6 7 0 14 14 1 14 5 8% C I 52 9 2 9 10 1 17 4 6% C M E 81 18 11 19 13 2 18 4 6% IJ P M 19 1 1 1 1 0 3 2 3% JC C E 11 7 3 1 12 12 0 19 2 3% A EI 10 1 1 2 6 10 0 10 2 3% JM E 41 1 1 4 4 0 6 1 2% C AC IE 14 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0% P M J 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% To ta l 10 38 20 8 62 10 0% Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017126 or region where data were collected or location of the studied case were considered to specify the country or region associated with a study. As indicated in Figure 3, the UK, followed by the North America, have been the sources of the largest number of studies with 35% and 21% respectively, of the total world publications allocated to collaboration on BIMCP. This shows the concentration of research on the topic (above 56%) within these two regions whereas the rest of the world are noticeably behind. Benchmarking against the Collaborative Working Model (CWM) Each identified paper was critically reviewed and the contents were analysed in terms of associating the collaboration factors targeted in each paper with the antecedents of collaboration as outlined by CWM as discussed. To this end, the contents of identified studies were assigned to the factors as described by CWM. This was through an in-depth analysis of the content by at least two members of the research team, which resulted in defining the main factors covered by each of these 62 studies as illustrated in Table 3. Figure 2 Trend overview of the publications on collaboration on BIMCPs 1 0 1 3 7 6 4 11 9 4 16 0 5 10 15 20 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Figure 3 Worldwide distribution map of the 62 reviewed articles Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017127 # St ud y C ol la bo ra tio n fa ct or s (C W M ) C on te xt Te ch no lo gy Ta sk s In te ra ct io n pr oc es se s Te am s In di vi du al 1 (A br is ha m i e t a l., 2 01 4) • • 2 (A bu el m aa tt i a nd A hm ed , 2 01 4) • • • 3 (A da m u, E m m itt a nd S oe ta nt o, 2 01 5) • • • • 4 (A hu ja e t a l., 2 01 6) • • • 5 (A ja m , A ls ha w i a nd M ez he r, 2 01 0) • • • 6 (A l M ou sl i a nd E l- Sa ye gh , 2 01 6) • • • 7 (A m an n an d B or rm an n, 2 01 6) • 8 (B ab ič , P od br ez ni k an d R eb ol j, 20 10 ) • 9 (B as sa ni no , F er na nd o an d W u, 2 01 4) • • • • 10 (B ec er ik -G er be r, G er be r an d K u, 2 01 1) • • 11 (B ot on , K ub ic ki a nd H al in , 2 01 3) • • 12 (C he n an d H ou , 2 01 4) • • • 13 (C he n et a l., 2 01 3) • 14 (C ir ib in i, M as tr ol em bo V en tu ra a nd P an er on i, 20 16 ) • • Ta bl e 3 Fa ct or s co ve re d by s tu di es o n co ll ab or at io n on B IM C P s us in g th e C W M Ta bl e 3 co nt in ue d on th e ne xt p ag e Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017128 # St ud y C ol la bo ra tio n fa ct or s (C W M ) C on te xt Te ch no lo gy Ta sk s In te ra ct io n pr oc es se s Te am s In di vi du al 15 (D os si ck a nd N ef f, 20 09 ) • • • • 16 (F er na nd o, W u an d B as sa ni no , 2 01 3) • • • 17 (F ra nz e t a l., 2 01 7) • • • 18 (F u et a l., 2 00 6) • 19 (G ou ld in g, P ou r R ah im ia n Le ila ba di a nd W an g, 20 14 ) • • 20 (G ri lo a nd J ar di m -G on ca lv es , 2 01 3) • • 21 (G u an d Lo nd on , 2 01 0) • • • 22 (H am m ad e t a l., 2 01 6) • • 23 (H as sa n Ib ra hi m , 2 01 3) • • 24 (H u an d Zh an g, 2 01 1) • • 25 (H u et a l., 2 01 6) • • 27 (Is ik da g, 2 01 2) • • • • 26 (Is ik da g an d U nd er w oo d, 2 01 0) • • 28 (J as on a nd U m it, 2 01 1) • Ta bl e 3 co nt in ue d on th e ne xt p ag e Ta bl e 3 (C on tin ue d) Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017129 # St ud y C ol la bo ra tio n fa ct or s (C W M ) C on te xt Te ch no lo gy Ta sk s In te ra ct io n pr oc es se s Te am s In di vi du al 29 (J ia o et a l., 2 01 3) • • • 30 (K en t a nd B ec er ik -G er be r, 2 01 0) • • • • 31 (K ih on g K u an d M ah ab al es hw ar ka r, 2 01 1) • • • • 32 (K ok ko ne n an d A lin , 2 01 6) • • 33 (K u an d P ol la lis , 2 00 9) • • • • 34 (K u K e t a l., 2 00 8) • • • 35 (L ee , E as tm an a nd L ee , 2 01 5) • • • • 36 (L iu , A l- H us se in a nd L u, 2 01 5) • • 37 (L iu , v an N ed er ve en a nd H er to gh , 2 01 6) • • • 38 (L on do n an d Si ng h, 2 01 2) • • • 39 (M er sc hb ro ck , 2 01 2) • • • 40 (M ig no ne e t a l., 2 01 6) • • • 41 (N ik na m a nd K ar sh en as , 2 01 5) • • 42 (O ch ie ng a nd P ri ce , 2 01 0) • • • 43 (O la tu nj i, 20 11 a) • • • • Ta bl e 3 (C on tin ue d) Ta bl e 3 co nt in ue d on th e ne xt p ag e Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017130 # St ud y C ol la bo ra tio n fa ct or s (C W M ) C on te xt Te ch no lo gy Ta sk s In te ra ct io n pr oc es se s Te am s In di vi du al 44 (O w en e t a l., 2 01 0) • • • • 45 (P al a et a l., 2 01 6) • • 46 (P ap ad on ik ol ak i, Vr ijh oe f a nd W am el in k, 2 01 6) • • • 47 (P ar k an d K im , 2 01 3) • • 48 (P ik as , S ac ks a nd H az za n, 2 01 3) • • • 49 (P oi ri er , F or gu es a nd S ta ub -F re nc h, 2 01 6) • 50 (R afi q an d R us te ll, 2 01 3) • • 51 (R ob so n, B oy d an d Th ur ai ra ja h, 2 01 6) • • • 52 (S ac ke y, T uu li an d D ai nt y, 2 01 5) • • • 53 (S ha fiq , M at th ew s an d Lo ck le y, 2 01 3) • • • 54 (S id aw i a nd H am za , 2 01 2) • • • 55 (S in gh , G u an d W an g, 2 01 1) • • • 56 (S ol no sk y, P ar fit t a nd H ol la nd , 2 01 4) • • • 57 (S uc ca r, 2 00 9) • • • • 58 (V an G as se l, Lá sc ar is -C om ne no a nd M aa s, 2 01 4) • • • • Ta bl e 3 (C on tin ue d) Ta bl e 3 co nt in ue d on th e ne xt p ag e Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017131 # St ud y C ol la bo ra tio n fa ct or s (C W M ) C on te xt Te ch no lo gy Ta sk s In te ra ct io n pr oc es se s Te am s In di vi du al 59 (W al ke r, 2 01 6) • • 60 (W al la ce Im ou du , U ch e G od w in a nd K he ru n N ita , 20 14 ) • • 61 (W ei e t a l., 2 01 4) • • • • 62 (Z an ni , S oe ta nt o an d R ui ka r, 2 01 6) • • • Sh ar e of e ac h fa ct or 48 % 92 % 18 % 63 % 29 % 21 % Ta bl e 3 (C on tin ue d) Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017132 As illustrated in Table 3, studies on collaboration on BIMCPs for the most part (92% of studies) have targeted the technology factor. Likewise, studies have had a bias towards interaction processes (63%) and context (48%). The findings show that collaboration factors such as individuals, tasks, and teams (see the definitions by CWM) have been often overlooked with only a handful of available studies referring to them in investigating collaboration on BIMCPs. This points to a concentration of the current body of literature on certain factors of the CWM framework while several factors are being overlooked as discussed next. Discussion of the findings The status of publications and the comparison of the objectives of available studies both attest to the concentration on “technology” as one antecedent of collaboration outlined by CWM and dominance of technology-oriented studies within the area of collaboration on BIMCP. This resonates with anecdotal statements by Homayouni, Neff and Dossick (2010); Mignone et al. (2016); Shelbourn et al. (2007) who referred to such a gap in the body of knowledge on collaboration on BIMCP. This could be inferred that the present study provides evidence to corroborate the intuitive awareness of such a gap as pointed out in previous studies. Furthermore, the study reveals the disjointed and fragmented nature of scholarship on the topic. Such one-sided approach to collaboration on BIMCPs, according to the findings of the study, is visualised in Figure 4. As illustrated in Figure 4, almost all factors described by the CWM (Patel, Pettitt and Wilson, 2012) are in need of further inquiries as fertile grounds for future research on collaboration on BIMCPs. Of particular interest are areas associated with “individuals”, “tasks” and “teams” for which the number of studies has been hitherto very limited. This points to a necessary shift in defining the objectives of future studies on collaboration on BIMCPs by diversifying the defined objectives and switching the primary goals from “technology” towards other factors outlined by CWM. The framework deployed here namely CWM and the visualisation of the gap (see Figure 4) could be treated as benchmarks for directing future studies towards the key areas in need of special attention. Figure 4 Gap visualization of the body of the knowledge on collaboration on BIMCPs according to CWM 48% 92% 18% 63% 29% 21% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Context Technology Tasks Interac�on Process Teams Individuals Eff ec�ve Collabora�on on BIM CP Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017133 Conclusion This study contributes to the body of the knowledge on BIM and in particular, collaboration on BIMCPs in several ways. First, the study identifies and provides a shortcut to the existing literature targeting collaboration on BIMCPs for investigators interested on this topic. Second, the study draws a picture of the current state of research on collaboration on BIMCPs. This includes identification of predominant research trends, preferences, and potential concentration areas as well as neglected and overlooked areas when it comes to the factors affecting collaboration on BIMCPs. Furthermore, the study provides evidence for anecdotal statements in previous studies regarding the gaps within the body of the knowledge on the topic. On top of that, an established benchmarking tool as CWM that was utilised on this study and the visualisation of gaps provides a sound basis for future investigators in identifying and spotting areas that need further research. The clear message is that the time has come for investigators to move beyond the technology- oriented debate in collaboration on BIMCPs and paying undivided attention to all the factors outlined through the CWM. It is now incumbent upon the researchers to move the prevalence of their research studies from technology to cover all the factors outlined by CWM. Focusing on theories outlining the interactions among human beings in technology-oriented networks would provide a solid basis for future inquiries on the topic. Such attempts need established theories to be imported to the construction context through following a multidisciplinary approach. References Abrishami, S., Goulding, J.S., Pour-Rahimian, F. & Ganah, A. 2014, ‘Integration of BIM and Generative Design to Exploit AEC Conceptual Design Innovation’, Journal of Information Technology in Construction, vol. 19, pp. 350-359 Abuelmaatti, A. & Ahmed, V. 2014, ‘Collaborative Technologies for Small and Medium-Sized Architecture, Engineering and Construction Enterprises: Implementation Survey’, Journal of Information Technology in Construction, vol. 19, pp. 210-224 Adamu, Z.A., Emmitt, S. & Soetanto, R. 2015, ‘Social BIM: Co-Creation with Shared Situational Awareness’, Journal of Information Technology in Construction, vol. 20, pp. 230-252. Ahuja, R., Jain, M., Sawhney, A. & Arif, M. 2016, ‘Adoption of BIM By Architectural Firms in India: Technology–Organization–Environment Perspective’, Architectural Engineering and Design Management, vol. 12 no. 4, pp. 311-330, https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2016.1186589 Ajam, M., Alshawi, M. & Mezher, T. 2010, ‘Augmented Process Model for E-Tendering: Towards Integrating Object Models with Document Management Systems’, Automation in Construction, vol. 19 no. 6, pp. 762-778, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.04.001 Al Mousli, M.H. & El-Sayegh, S.M. 2016, ‘Assessment of The Design–Construction Interface Problems in The UAE’, Architectural Engineering and Design Management, vol. 12 no. 5, pp. 353-366, https://doi.org /10.1080/17452007.2016.1187111 Alreshidi, E., Mourshed, M. & Rezgui, Y. 2016, ‘Requirements for Cloud-Based BIM Governance Solutions to Facilitate Team Collaboration in Construction Projects’, Requirements Engineering, pp. 1-31, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-016-0254-6 Amann, J. & Borrmann, A. 2016, ‘Embedding Procedural Knowledge Into Building Information Models: The IFC Procedural Language and Its Application for Flexible Transition Curve Representation’, Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, vol. 30 no. 5, p. C4016006, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943- 5487.0000592 Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017134 https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2016.1186589 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.04.001 https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2016.1187111 https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2016.1187111 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-016-0254-6 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000592 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000592 Azhar, S., Khalfan, M. & Maqsood, T. 2012, ‘Building Information Modeling (BIM): Now and Beyond’, Construction Economics and Building, vol. 12 no. 4, pp. 15-28, https://doi.org/10.5130/ajceb.v12i4.3032 Babič, N.Č., Podbreznik, P. & Rebolj, D. 2010, ‘Integrating Resource Production and Construction Using BIM’, Automation in Construction, vol. 19 no. 5, pp. 539-543, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. autcon.2009.11.005 Bassanino, M., Fernando, T. & Wu, K.-C. 2014, ‘Can Virtual Workspaces Enhance Team Communication and Collaboration in Design Review Meetings?’, Architectural Engineering and Design Management, vol. 10 no. 3-4, pp. 200-217, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2009.11.005 Becerik-Gerber, B., Gerber, D.J. & Ku, K. 2011, ‘The Pace of Technological Innovation in Architecture, Engineering, and Construction Education: Integrating Recent Trends Into The Curricula’, Journal of Information Technology in Construction, vol. 16, pp. 411-432 Boton, C., Kubicki, S. & Halin, G. 2013, ‘Designing Adapted Visualization for Collaborative 4D Applications’, Automation in Construction, vol. 36, pp. 152-167, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.09.003 Chen, H.-M. & Hou, C.-C. 2014, ‘Asynchronous Online Collaboration in BIM Generation Using Hybrid Client-Server and P2P Network’, Automation in Construction, vol. 45, pp. 72-85, https://doi. org/10.1016/j.autcon.2014.05.007 Chen, S.-M., Griffis, F.H., Chen, P.-H. & Chang, L.-M. 2013, ‘A Framework for An Automated and Integrated Project Scheduling and Management System’, Automation in Construction, vol. 35, pp. 89-110, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.04.002 Ciribini, A.L.C., Mastrolembo Ventura, S. & Paneroni, M. 2016, ‘Implementation of an Interoperable Process to Optimise Design and Construction Phases of A Residential Building: A BIM Pilot Project’, Automation in Construction, vol. 71 (part 1), pp. 62-73, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.03.005 Dossick, C. & Neff, G. 2009, ‘Organizational Divisions in BIM-Enabled Commercial Construction’, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 136 no. 4, pp. 459-467, https://doi.org/10.1061/ (ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000109 Fernando, T., Wu, K.-C. & Bassanino, M. 2013, ‘Designing A Novel Virtual Collaborative Environment to Support Collaboration in Design Review Meetings’, Journal of Information Technology in Construction, vol. 18, pp. 372-396 Franz, B., Leicht, R., Molenaar, K. & Messner, J. 2017, ‘Impact of Team Integration and Group Cohesion on Project Delivery Performance’, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 143 no. 1, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001219 Fu, C., Aouad, G., Lee, A., Mashall-Ponting, A. & Wu, S. 2006, ‘IFC Model Viewer to Support nD Model Application’, Automation in Construction, vol. 15 no. 2, pp. 178-185, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. autcon.2005.04.002 Goulding, J.S., Pour-Rahimian, F. & Wang, X. 2014, ‘Virtual Reality-Based Cloud BIM Platform for Integrated AEC Projects’, Journal of Information Technology in Construction, vol. 19, pp. 308-325 Grilo, A. & Jardim-Goncalves, R. 2013, ‘Cloud-Marketplaces: Distributed e-Procurement for the AEC sector’, Advanced Engineering Informatics, vol. 27 no. 2, pp. 160-72, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2012.10.004 Grilo, A., Zutshi, A., Jardim-Goncalves, R. & Steiger-Garcao, A. 2013, ‘Construction Collaborative Networks: The Case Study of A Building Information Modelling-Based Office Building Project’, International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, vol. 26 no. 1-2, pp. 152-165, https://doi. org/10.1080/0951192X.2012.681918 Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017135 https://doi.org/10.5130/ajceb.v12i4.3032 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2009.11.005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2009.11.005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2009.11.005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.09.003 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2014.05.007 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2014.05.007 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.04.002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.03.005 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000109 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000109 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001219 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2005.04.002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2005.04.002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2012.10.004 https://doi.org/10.1080/0951192X.2012.681918 https://doi.org/10.1080/0951192X.2012.681918 Gu, N. & London, K. 2010, ‘Understanding and Facilitating BIM Adoption in the AEC Industry’, Automation in Construction, vol. 19 no. 8, pp. 988-999, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.002 Hammad, A.W.A., Akbarnezhad, A., Rey, D. & Waller, S.T. 2016, ‘A Computational Method for Estimating Travel Frequencies in Site Layout Planning’, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 142 no. 5, p. 04015102, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001086 Hassan Ibrahim, N. 2013, ‘Reviewing the Evidence: use of Digital Collaboration Technologies in Major Building and Infrastructure Projects’, Journal of Information Technology in Construction, vol. 18, pp. 40-63 Homayouni, H., Neff, G. & Dossick, C.S. 2010, ‘Theoretical Categories of Successful Collaboration and BIM Implementation within the AEC Industry’, In: J. Ruwanpura, Y. Mohamed and S. Lee (eds), Construction Research Congress Banff, Alberta, Canada, May 8-10, https://doi. org/10.1061/41109(373)78 Hosseini, M.R., Banihashemi, S., Chileshe, N., Namzadi, M.O., Udaeja, C., Rameezdeen, R. & McCuen, T. 2016, ‘BIM Adoption within Australian Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs): an innovation Diffusion Model’, Construction Economics and Building, vol. 16 no. 3, pp. 71-86, https://doi.org/10.5130/ AJCEB.v16i3.5159 Hosseini, M.R., Chileshe, N., Zuo, J. & Baroudi, B. 2015, ‘Adopting Global Virtual Engineering Teams in AEC Projects: A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Innovation Diffusion Studies’, Construction Innovation, vol. 15 no. 2, pp. 151-179, https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-12-2013-0058 Hu, Z.-Z., Zhang, X.-Y., Wang, H.-W. & Kassem, M. 2016, ‘Improving Interoperability between Architectural and Structural Design Models: An Industry Foundation Classes-Based Approach with Web- Based Tools’, Automation in Construction, vol. 66, pp. 29-42, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.02.001 Hu, Z. & Zhang, J. 2011, ‘BIM- and 4D-Based Integrated Solution of Analysis and Management for Conflicts and Structural Safety Problems During Construction: 2. Development and Site Trials’, Automation in Construction, vol. 20 no. 2, pp. 167-180, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.014 Hughes, D., Williams, T. & Ren, Z. 2012, ‘Differing Perspectives on Collaboration in Construction’, Construction Innovation, vol. 12 no. 3, pp. 355-368, https://doi.org/10.1108/14714171211244613 Isikdag, U. 2012, ‘Design Patterns for BIM-Based Service-Oriented Architectures’, Automation in Construction, vol. 25, pp. 59-71, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.04.013 Isikdag, U. & Underwood, J. 2010, ‘Two Design Patterns for Facilitating Building Information Model- based Synchronous Collaboration’, Automation in Construction, vol. 19 no. 5, pp. 544-553, https://doi. org/10.1016/j.autcon.2009.11.006 Jason, U. & Umit, I. 2011, ‘Emerging Technologies for BIM 2.0’, Construction Innovation, vol. 11 no. 3, pp. 252-258, https://doi.org/10.1108/14714171111148990 Jiao, Y., Wang, Y., Zhang, S., Li, Y., Yang, B. & Yuan, L. 2013, ‘A Cloud Approach to Unified Lifecycle Data Management In Architecture, Engineering, Construction and Facilities Management: Integrating BIMs and SNS’, Advanced Engineering Informatics, vol. 27 no. 2, pp. 173-188, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2012.11.006 Kent, D.C. & Becerik-Gerber, B. 2010, ‘Understanding Construction Industry Experience and Attitudes toward Integrated Project Delivery’, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 136 no. 8, pp. 815-825, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000188 Kihong Ku. & Mahabaleshwarkar, P.S. 2011, ‘Building Interactive Modeling for Construction Education in Virtual Worlds’, Journal of Information Technology in Construction, vol. 16, pp. 189-208 Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017136 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.002 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001086 https://doi.org/10.1061/41109(373)78 https://doi.org/10.1061/41109(373)78 https://doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v16i3.5159 https://doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v16i3.5159 https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-12-2013-0058 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.02.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.014 https://doi.org/10.1108/14714171211244613 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.04.013 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2009.11.006 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2009.11.006 https://doi.org/10.1108/14714171111148990 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2012.11.006 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000188 Kokkonen, A. & Alin, P. 2016, ‘Practitioners Deconstructing and Reconstructing Practices when Responding to the Implementation of BIM’, Construction Management and Economics, vol. 34 no. 7-8, pp. 578-591, https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2016.1164327 Ku K, Pollalis S, Fischer, M. & D, S. 2008, ‘3D Model-Based Collaboration in Design Development and Construction of Complex Shaped Buildings’, Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 13(Special Issue Case studies of BIM use), pp. 258-285 Ku, K. & Pollalis, S. 2009, ‘Contractual Standards for Enhanced Geometry Control in Model-Based Collaboration’, Journal of Information Technology in Construction, vol. 14, pp. 366-384 Lee, Y.-C., Eastman, C.M. & Lee, J.-K. 2015, ‘Validations for Ensuring the Interoperability of Data Exchange of a Building Information Model’, Automation in Construction, vol. 58, pp. 176-195, https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2015.07.010 Liu, H., Al-Hussein, M. & Lu, M. 2015, ‘BIM-Based Integrated Approach for Detailed Construction Scheduling under Resource Constraints’, Automation in Construction, vol. 53, pp. 29-43, https://doi. org/10.1016/j.autcon.2015.03.008 Liu, Y., van Nederveen, S. & Hertogh, M. 2016, ‘Understanding Effects of BIM on Collaborative Design and Construction: An Empirical Study in China’, International Journal of Project Management, http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.06.007 London, K. & Singh, V. 2012, ‘Integrated Construction Supply Chain Design and Delivery Solutions’, Architectural Engineering and Design Management, vol.9 no. 3, pp. 135-157, https://doi.org/10.1080/1745 2007.2012.684451 Lu, Y., Li, Y., Skibniewski, M., Wu, Z., Wang, R. & Le, Y. 2015, ‘Information and Communication Technology Applications in Architecture, Engineering, and Construction Organizations: A 15-Year Review’, Journal of Management in Engineering, vol. 31 no. 1, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000319 Ma, Z. & Ma, J. 2017, ‘Formulating the Application Functional Requirements of a BIM-based Collaboration Platform to Support IPD Projects’, KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, pp. 1-16, https:// doi.org/10.1007/s12205-017-0875-4 MacDonald, J. & Mills, J. 2013, ‘An IPD Approach to Construction Education’, Construction Economics and Building, vol. 13 no. 2, pp. 93-103, https://doi.org/10.5130/ajceb.v13i2.3324 McGraw-Hill. 2012, The Business Value of BIM in North America: Multi-Year Trend Analysis and User Ratings (2007-2012). Bedford, MA: McGraw-Hill Construction Merschbrock, C. 2012, ‘Unorchestrated Symphony: The Case of Inter–Organizational Collaboration in Digital Construction Design’, Journal of Information Technology in Construction, vol. 17, pp. 333-350 Merschbrock, C. & Munkvold, B.E. 2014, ‘How is Building Information Modeling Influenced by Project Complexity?: A Cross-Case Analysis of e-Collaboration Performance in Building Construction’, International Journal of e-Collaboration (IJeC), vol. 10 no. 2, pp. 20-39 Mignone, G., Hosseini, M.R., Chileshe, N. & Arashpour, M. 2016, ‘Enhancing Collaboration in BIM- based Construction Networks through Organisational Discontinuity Theory: A Case Study of the New Royal Adelaide Hospital’, Architectural Engineering and Design Management, vol. 12 no. 5, pp. 333-352, https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2016.1169987 Mulrow, C.D. 1994, ‘Rationale for Systematic Reviews’, BMJ: British Medical Journal, vol. 309 no. 6954, p. 597, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.309.6954.597 Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017137 https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2016.1164327 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2015.07.010 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2015.07.010 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2015.03.008 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2015.03.008 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.06.007 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.06.007 https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2012.684451 https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2012.684451 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000319 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-017-0875-4 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-017-0875-4 https://doi.org/10.5130/ajceb.v13i2.3324 https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2016.1169987 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.309.6954.597 Niknam, M. & Karshenas, S. 2015, ‘Integrating Distributed Sources of Information for Construction Cost Estimating Using Semantic Web and Semantic Web Service technologies’, Automation in Construction, vol. 57, pp. 222-238, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2015.04.003 Ochieng, E.G. & Price, A.D.F. 2010, ‘Managing Cross-Cultural Communication in Multicultural Construction Project Teams: The case of Kenya and UK’, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 28 no. 5, pp. 449-460, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.08.001 Okoli, C. & Schabram, K. 2010, ‘A Guide to Conducting a Systematic Literature Review of Information Systems Research’, Sprouts Work. Pap. Inf. Syst, vol. 10 no. 26, pp. 1-49 Olatunji, O.A. 2011a, ‘Modelling Organizations’ Structural Adjustment to BIM Adoption: a Pilot Study on Estimating Organizations’, Journal of Information Technology in Construction, vol. 16, pp. 653-668 Olatunji, O.A. 2011b, ‘A Preliminary Review on the Legal Implications of BIM and Model Ownership’, Journal of Information Technology in Construction, vol. 16, pp. 687-696 Owen, R., Amor, R., Palmer, M., Dickinson, J., Tatum, C.B., Kazi, A.S., Prins, M., Kiviniemi, A. & East, B. 2010, ‘Challenges for Integrated Design and Delivery Solutions’, Architectural Engineering and Design Management, vol. 6 no. 4, pp. 232-240, https://doi.org/10.3763/aedm.2010.IDDS1 Pala, M., Edum-Fotwe, F., Ruikar, K., Peters, C. & Doughty, N. 2016, ‘Implementing Commercial Information Exchange: a Construction Supply Chain Case Study’, Construction Management and Economics, pp. 1-21, https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2016.1211718 Papadonikolaki, E., Vrijhoef, R. & Wamelink, H. 2016, ‘The Interdependences of BIM and Supply Chain Partnering: Empirical Explorations’, Architectural Engineering and Design Management, vol. 12 no. 6, pp. 476-494, https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2016.1212693 Park, C.-S. & Kim, H.-J. 2013, ‘A Framework for Construction Safety Management and Visualization System’, Automation in Construction, vol. 33, pp. 95-103, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.09.012 Patel, H., Pettitt, M. & Wilson, J.R. 2012, ‘Factors of Collaborative Working: A Framework for a Collaboration Model’, Applied Ergonomics, vol. 43 no. 1, pp. 1-26, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2011.04.009 Pikas, E., Sacks, R. & Hazzan, O. 2013, ‘Building Information Modeling Education for Construction Engineering and Management. II: Procedures and Implementation Case Study’, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 139 no. 11, p. 05013002, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943- 7862.0000765 Poirier, E., Forgues, D. & Staub-French, S. 2016, ‘Collaboration Through Innovation: Implications for Expertise in the AEC Sector’, Construction Management and Economics, pp. 1-21, https://doi.org/10.1080 /01446193.2016.1206660 Rafiq, M. & Rustell, M. 2013, ‘Building Information Modeling Steered by Evolutionary Computing’, Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, vol. 28 no. 4, p. 05014003, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE) CP.1943-5487.0000295 Robson, A., Boyd, D. & Thurairajah, N. 2016, ‘Studying ‘Cost as Information’ to Account for Construction Improvements’, Construction Management and Economics, vol. 34 no. 6, pp. 418-431, https:// doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2016.1200734 Sackey, E., Tuuli, M. & Dainty, A. 2015, ‘Sociotechnical Systems Approach to BIM Implementation in a Multidisciplinary Construction Context’, Journal of Management in Engineering, in Press, vol. 31 no. 1, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000303 Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017138 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2015.04.003 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.08.001 https://doi.org/10.3763/aedm.2010.IDDS1 https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2016.1211718 https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2016.1212693 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.09.012 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2011.04.009 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000765 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000765 https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2016.1206660 https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2016.1206660 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000295 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000295 https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2016.1200734 https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2016.1200734 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000303 Shafiq, M.T., Matthews, J. & Lockley, S. 2013, ‘A study of BIM Collaboration Requirements and Available Features in Existing Model Collaboration Systems’, Journal of Information Technology in Construction, vol. 18, pp. 148-161 Shelbourn, M., Bouchlaghem, N., Anumba, C. & Carrillo, P. 2007, ‘Planning and Implementation of Effective Collaboration in Construction Projects’, Construction Innovation, vol. 7 no. 4, pp. 357-377, https://doi.org/10.1108/14714170710780101 Sidawi, B. & Hamza, N. 2012, ‘Intelligent Knowledge-Based Repository to Support Informed Design Decision Making’, ITCON Special Issue: CAAD and Innovation. pg, pp. 308-318 Singh, V., Gu, N. & Wang, X. 2011, ‘A Theoretical Framework of a BIM-Based Multi-Disciplinary Collaboration Platform’, Automation in Construction, vol. 20 no. 2, pp. 134-144, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. autcon.2010.09.011 Solnosky, R., Parfitt, M.K. & Holland, R. 2014, ‘Delivery Methods for a Multi-Disciplinary Architectural Engineering Capstone Design Course’, Architectural Engineering and Design Management, vol. 11 no. 4, pp. 305-324, https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2014.925418 Succar, B. 2009, ‘Building Information Modelling Framework: A Research and Delivery Foundation for Industry Stakeholders’, Automation in Construction, vol. 18 no. 3, pp. 357-375, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. autcon.2008.10.003 Van Gassel, F., Láscaris-Comneno, T. & Maas, G. 2014, ‘The Conditions for Successful Automated Collaboration in Construction’, Automation in Construction, vol. 39, pp. 85-92, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. autcon.2013.12.001 Volk, R., Stengel, J. & Schultmann, F. 2014, ‘Building Information Modeling (BIM) for Existing Buildings — Literature Review and Future Needs’, Automation in Construction, vol. 38, pp. 109-127, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.10.023 Walker, D.H.T. 2016, ‘Reflecting on 10 years of Focus on Innovation, Organisational Learning and Knowledge Management Literature in a Construction Project Management Context’, Construction Innovation, vol. 16 no. 2, pp. 114-126, https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-12-2015-0066 Wallace Imoudu, E., Uche Godwin, A. & Kherun Nita, A. 2014, ‘Preliminary Building Information Modelling Adoption Model in Malaysia’, Construction Innovation, vol. 14 no. 4, pp. 408-432, https://doi. org/10.1108/CI-01-2014-0012 Wei, Z., David, H., Panagiotis, G. & Joseph, H.M.T. 2014, ‘User-Centred Design for Collaborative 4D Modelling’, Construction Innovation, vol. 14 no. 4, pp. 493-517, https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-01- 2014-0008 Zanni, M.A., Soetanto, R. & Ruikar, K. 2016, ‘Towards a BIM-Enabled Sustainable Building Design Process: Roles, Responsibilities, and Requirements’, Architectural Engineering and Design Management, pp. 1-29 Oraee, Hosseini, Namini & Merschbrock Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 17, No. 1 March 2017139 https://doi.org/10.1108/14714170710780101 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.011 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.011 https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2014.925418 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2008.10.003 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2008.10.003 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.12.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.12.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.10.023 https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-12-2015-0066 https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-01-2014-0012 https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-01-2014-0012 https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-01-2014-0008 https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-01-2014-0008