Automation in Construction 103 (2019) 67–79

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Automation in Construction
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/autcon

Analysis of negative impacts of BIM-enabled information transparency on T

contractors' interests
Hongling Guoa, , Run Yua, Yihai Fangb
⁎

a
Department of Construction Management, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Clayton, Australia

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Building Information Modeling (BIM) generates accurate information in an explicit way and allows project
BIM stakeholders to easily access information of various types, greatly promoting information transparency during
Information transparency the lifecycle of a facility. Information transparency brings a number of benefits but potentially influences con-
contractors' interests tractors' interests by weakening their core competencies or preventing some unethical but lucrative practices
Unethical practices
from occurring. This may impede the extensive application of BIM. However, it still lacks a comprehensive
research on this. This research aims to develop a comprehensive understanding of the negative impact of BIM-
enabled information transparency on contractors' interests and further on BIM adoption by conducting an
anonymous questionnaire survey. The results show that 1) the transparency of construction techniques and
methods can impair contractors' interests in the long run, but relevant information is almost not disclosed by BIM
so far; 2) the transparency of construction resource, cost and time has an instant and direct impact on con-
tractors' interests, but only resource-and-cost-related unethical practices are influenced by BIM; and 3) the
transparency of construction quality and safety has little impact on contractors' interests and relevant unethical
practices are almost not influenced by BIM. Besides, contractors are reluctant to share information or use BIM
with owners, thus further impeding BIM adoption. Based on these results, this research also presents some
implications for the improvement of current working processes among stakeholders in the BIM context to protect
contractors' core competencies and prevent unethical practices. These findings are expected to promote the
extensive use of BIM in the construction industry.

1. Introduction isolated. When a stakeholder makes changes in a document, other re-

Building Information Modeling (BIM), defined as a business process
for generating and leveraging building data to design, construct and operate
the building during its lifecycle [1], is being vigorously discussed and has
been exploited at various levels in the construction industry. A BIM
model digitally displays the physical and functional characteristics of a
facility and serves as a shared database enabling the collaboration of
different project stakeholders (e.g., owners, designers, and contractors)
[1]. These characteristics facilitate information transparency and
sharing to a large extent.
Transparency has three implications: disclosure, clarity, and accu-
racy [2]. Information transparency refers to the disclosure of accurate
information in a clear and easy-to-understand way. Traditionally,
paper-based documents make it inconvenient for project stakeholders
to obtain and compare information, making it possible to falsify some
data or information. Moreover, various kinds of information are
levant documents are not updated automatically, leading to incon-
sistence among different documents. With these concerns in mind, BIM
is designed and expected to promote information transparency by
providing an accurate model that integrates and visualizes various
types of information of a facility. These functionalities enable project
stakeholders to obtain and share information through a centralized and
federated model. As information can be updated simultaneously among
stakeholders when changes take place, BIM streamlines the problem-
solving process and enhances work efficiency. Structured and measur-
able data (e.g., geometry, resource, and cost) are more transparent in
the BIM context since they can be easily derived from BIM models and
calculated and updated by computers. Moreover, information trans-
parency is expected to contribute to the reduction of corruption (e.g.,
fraud and deception, dishonesty, and bribery) [3–6] by preventing
certain unethical practices (e.g., overstating time and resource re-
quirement for variation, cutting corners, submitting false documents)

⁎
Corresponding author at: Room 3-406E, West Main Building, Tsinghua University, Haidian District, Beijing, China.
E-mail addresses: hlguo@tsinghua.edu.cn (H. Guo), yihai.fang@monash.edu (Y. Fang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2019.03.007
Received 29 July 2018; Received in revised form 5 March 2019; Accepted 6 March 2019
0926-5805/ © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
H. Guo, et al.
from occurring [3,6,7].
However, information transparency may raise some stakeholders'
concerns about the disclosure of sensitive or critical information (e.g.,
the ownership of BIM model and associated data) [8,9], as well as the
prevention of certain practices which may impair their interests. Ac-
cording to the authors' survey, contractors show more concerns on in-
formation transparency than owners and designers, worrying about the
weakening of their core competencies (i.e., human resources, equip-
ment, financial capacities, technical capacities, organizational capa-
cities, past experience and specific knowledge that they can leverage to
compete with others) [10–13] due to the disclosure of certain in-
formation (e.g., construction methods and techniques), and the pre-
vention of some lucrative but unethical practices usually taken to make
profits.
Various reasons induce contractors to take these unethical practices.
Competitive bidding with the lowest bidder winning or low bid, a
commonly-used procurement approach in construction projects [14],
often results in low profit for contractors. In such an approach, some
contractors have to make up for their losses or push for more profits by
taking some unethical practices (related to change orders and claims),
which likely lead to quality problems and safety risks [15,16]. As
mentioned above, BIM-enabled information transparency can prevent
such kind of unethical practices. As a result of this “adverse” effect,
contractors may be reluctant to use BIM with owners, thus hampering
BIM adoption in the industry. In order to extend the application of BIM
in the construction industry, it is necessary to comprehensively un-
derstand how BIM-enabled information transparency impacts con-
tractors' interests, and as a consequence the long-term BIM adoption.
However, the literature currently lacks a comprehensive analysis to fill
this knowledge gap.
In this study, an anonymous questionnaire survey is conducted to
analyze the negative impact of BIM-enabled information transparency
on contractors' interests and BIM adoption. First, unethical practices by
contractors, BIM functions, and various types of construction informa-
tion being transparent in the BIM context are identified through a lit-
erature review. Then a questionnaire is designed and distributed to
industry practitioners to seek their opinions on various interrelated
topics including the unethical practices, BIM functions, various types of
construction information being transparent in the BIM context, as well
as contractors' opinions on information sharing in the BIM context and
their attitudes towards BIM adoption. Based on the survey results, a
discussion is further presented on how BIM-enabled information
transparency impacts contractors' interests in terms of weakening of
contractors' core competencies or prevention of the unethical practices,
as well as how their counteraction to BIM impedes its extensive appli-
cation. Furthermore, this research explores the implications for the
improvement of working processes among project stakeholders in the
BIM context so as to promote the extensive use of BIM in the con-
struction industry. Finally, a conclusion is drawn with some limitations
and future work articulated.
2. Literature review
2.1. Corruption and unethical practices in the construction industry
According to Merriam-Webster's Dictionary, Cambridge Dictionary
and Collins Dictionary, corruption refers to illegal, bad, or dishonest be-
haviors, especially by people in positions of authority or power.
Corruption displays in various forms and there are a wide range of
practices for each form, among which some are illegal around the world
while others may be legal in some countries [17]. In the construction
industry, corruption takes place at every phase of a project, involving
different project stakeholders including government officials, owners,
investors, engineers, constructors, suppliers and so forth [4]. Many
studies have identified common forms of corruption and provided
specific examples, which are springing up in the construction industry.
68
Automation in Construction 103 (2019) 67–79
Zou [18] classified corruption into contractor-related corruption
and professional-consultant-or-government-officer-related corruption
and provided examples for each category. Bowen et al. [19] refined
corruption into two categories: tender irregularities, as well as contract
administration and closeout irregularities. Specifically, Vee and Skit-
more [6] and Bowen et al. [3] sought for the opinions of Australian and
South African construction professionals respectively. They found out
various forms of corruption including collusive tendering, bribery,
professional negligence, fraud, dishonesty and unfairness and providing
specific examples for each form. Sohail and Cavill [20] defined specific
forms of corruption including bribery, embezzlement, kickbacks and
fraud, and provided examples for each form. de Jong et al. [4] identi-
fied main forms of corruption in the construction industry as kickbacks
and bribery, front companies, bid rigging and collusion, fraud, and
conflicts of interest by giving detailed explanation of each form with
specific examples. Hartley [21] listed bad and anti-competitive prac-
tices in the Australian construction industry including collusive ten-
dering, lack of honesty and fairness in business relationships, bad in-
dustrial and workplace practices as well as poor or nonexistent
occupational health and safety practices. Le et al. [5] summarized
twelve forms of corruption in the construction industry through a lit-
erature review: bribery, fraud, collusion, bid rigging, embezzlement,
kickback, conflict of interest, dishonesty and unfair conduct, extortion,
negligence, front companies, and nepotism. The Global Infrastructure
Anti-Corruption Centre (GIACC) [22] defined corruption in a wider
sense, including bribery, extortion, fraud, cartels, abuse of power, em-
bezzlement, and money laundering. Alutu and Udhawuve [23] assessed
the respondents' perception of 35 unethical practices in the Nigerian
construction industry and explored the factors leading to these un-
ethical practices. GIACC [7] provided 47 examples of unethical prac-
tices in the construction industry in relation to bribery, deception and
fraud at the phase of pre-qualification and tender, project execution and
dispute resolution.
Based on the literature review above, unethical practices by con-
tractors are refined with the focus on the phase of project execution and
dispute Resolution (see Table 1).
2.2. BIM-enabled information transparency
2.2.1. BIM functions
The BIM Project Execution Planning Guide (Version 2) (2010) pre-
sents 21 BIM functions in the lifecycle of a facility, of which the most
common ones are listed as follows: 1) 3D modeling, known as design
authoring, is to translate a 2D drawing into a 3D BIM model, making it
possible to link the model to a huge database of physical properties,
work quantities, construction methods and techniques, time, resources,
costs, quality, safety and so forth, and enabling project stakeholders to
review the design and collaborate with each other. 2) Engineering
analysis (e.g., structural, lighting, energy, mechanical) is to figure out
the most effective engineering method in compliance with design spe-
cifications using analysis tools and performance simulation tools, en-
hancing future energy consumption of the facility. 3) 3D coordination is
to integrate different building systems in a model for comparison. 4)
Clash detection is to use relevant software to detect conflicts among the
systems prior to construction, aiming to reduce construction cost and
save time. 5) Cost estimation is to create accurate work quantities, re-
source consumption estimate, cost estimate and following additions and
modifications, saving time and curbing budgets. 6) Site utilization
planning is to digitally generate and display site usage layout for per-
manent or temporary facilities, labor resources, materials and equip-
ment with work schedule, facilitating the review of construction
methods and the recognition of conflicts. 7) 4D modeling (phase
planning) is to showcase the durations, space requirements of certain
work tasks and the construction sequences, and to better schedule and
cost estimate the project by incorporating resources planning into the
3D model, greatly visualizing the critical path of a project and
H. Guo, et al. Automation in Construction 103 (2019) 67–79

Table 1
Forms of corruption and unethical practices by contractors.
Forms of corruption Contractor-related unethical practices at the construction phase References

Fraud and deception Inflated variation claim for time and resources Inflated variation claim for time and resources [7,22]
Fraudulent variation claim Claim for work not actually done [3]
False variation claim by bribing the architects who issue the variations [7]
Claim for fictitious extras [3]
Submission of incorrect contract claims [7]
Spurious time extension application False extension of time application where the stated cause of delay is not the actual [7]
cause of delay
Spurious request for time extension [3]
Purposely using inferior materials or Purposely using cheaper or inferior materials instead of specified ones [3]
inadequate materials Cutting corners [20]
Submission of fabricated or falsified Making invoices and payment for equipment, materials or services which were not [3,20,5]
supporting documents supplied
Altering original invoices when submitting claims [6,18]
Altering of construction documents [6]
Fabricating or falsifying evidence to support claims [22]
Submission of fabricated or falsified supporting documents [7,18]
Dishonesty and unfairness Concealing defects caused by poor Intentionally covering up poor workmanship and material quality during inspections [6,22]
workmanship and material quality Concealing defects [20,7]
Concealment of documents Concealment of documents [7,3]
Unfairness with subcontractors Not paying and deducting subcontractors' fees without proper justification [6,3]
False statements to sub-contractors that he received a smaller amount from the project [7]
owner under the settlement agreement than he actually received
Negligence Poor documentation Poor documentation [6,3]
Poor construction resources Poor workmanship [6,3]
Low-quality materials [6,3,23]
Misuse of vehicles and funds [20]
Inadequate construction techniques Inadequate construction techniques [6]
Inadequate quality and safety standards, Inadequate quality specifications [6]
control and management Inadequate safety standards on site [6,3]
Poor quality control, supervision on site, management skills [3]
Bribery Bribing the relevant official Bribing the relevant official to certify that the work was done in accordance with [20]
specification
Bribing the project owner's representative Bribing the project owner's representative to have defective or non-existent work [22]
approved
Bribing the architects False variation claims by bribing the architects who issue the variations [7]

promoting the understanding of construction plans.
Besides, BIM has other functions such as construction control and
management, including time management, cost management, quality
and safety management and so forth [24]. Specifically, in the BIM
context, the actual progress of different tasks can be added into the 4D
model and compared with the schedule; the actual resource consump-
tion can be compared with the planned one; accurate work quantities
provided by the BIM model can be used for material planning; cost
estimation and then for cost analysis and control in comparison with
the actual cost [25]. BIM can aid in quality and safety management
based on integrated and visualized information [26,27]. Specifically,
the integration of BIM model and positioning techniques such as RFID
(Radio Frequency Identification) can help to identify whether workers
are in danger [28,29].
2.2.2. Information integrated in the BIM model
A BIM model accurately generates and clearly represents various
types of information, enabling project stakeholders to collaborate with
each other by sharing the consistent and non-redundant information in
a coordinated way [9]. Wu and Xu [30] divided the types of informa-
tion in a BIM model into three categories: geometric information (e.g.,
size, area, volume, space), physical information (e.g., quantity, mate-
rial, performance) and process information (e.g., cost, quality, time).
According to the definition in IFC standards, Man and Sun [31] cate-
gorized the construction information model into a process model (e.g.,
work task, work plan, work schedule element, work schedule, process
and sequence), a resource model (e.g., subcontractors, equipment re-
sources, material resources, crew resources, labor resources and pro-
duct resources), and a cost model (e.g., cost element, cost schedule).
Zhang and Hu [32] set up a 4D (four-dimensional) structural in-
formation model for construction which was made up of three types of
information: basic information (e.g., geometric information), 4D in-
formation (e.g., site layout, construction activities, resources, sche-
dules, processes) and structural information. Zhang et al. [25] estab-
lished a 4D construction resource information model and developed a
system for dynamic resource management and real-time cost mon-
itoring. The 4D construction resource information model consists of
basic information (e.g., size, layout, basic project information such as
project name and owner), 4D information (e.g., schedule, human re-
sources, raw materials, construction machines, and process) and cost
information (e.g., bill of work quantities and engineering quota). Ni
et al. [24] proposed a BIM-based project management system, involving
time (e.g., schedule, the actual progress), cost (e.g., the bill of work
quantities, engineering quota), quality, safety, etc. Quality and safety
information refers to technical schemes to ensure the quality of a fa-
cility or construction safety, the records of quality and safety inspec-
tions，the problems detected and tracked (i.e., poor design, inferior or
inadequate materials, poor workmanship, workers' unsafe behaviors,
unsafe construction environment, and unsafe conditions of objectives),
as well as solutions or measures to the quality and safety problems.
Other information includes contract information, work surface in-
formation, and drawings.
2.2.3. Construction-related information being transparent in the BIM
context
Based on the references above, Table 2 refines construction-related
information being transparent in the BIM context.
2.3. Summary
Through the literature review above, seven unethical practices by
contractors (P1-inflated variation claim for time and resources, P2-

69
H. Guo, et al. Automation in Construction 103 (2019) 67–79

Table 2 of the degree of vulnerability to information transparency, top 3 types

Construction-related information being transparent in the BIM context. of construction-related information selected from T1–T7 and their
Type of information Contents References rankings in terms of level of negative impacts of their transparency on
contractors' interests, and contractors' opinions on information sharing
Construction methods and Construction methods and [33] and attitudes towards BIM adoption, see Tables 4–7). Note that this
techniques techniques
research focuses on all 7 unethical practices, all 8 BIM functions and all
Time Construction sequence [31,33]
Schedule [32,31,24,33]
7 types of construction-related information rather than some of them.
The actual progress [32,31,25,24] Obviously, it should be better to ask respondents to rank all of the
Resource Human resources [31,25,33] options. According to previous responses to the pilot survey, it was
Materials [31,25,33] difficult for the respondents to rank all of the options as there are so
Equipment [31,25,33]
many options. Thus, in order to improve the effectiveness of the survey,
Cost Bill of work quantities [25,24]
Engineering quota [25,24] the questionnaire in the formal survey was adjusted to ask respondents
Resource consumption [33] to select and rank the top 3 options based on their own knowledge and
estimate experience. Even so, considering that different respondents may make
Cost estimate [33]
different selections, their collective selections may still cover all of the
Cost with the schedule [31]
Cost additions and [33]
options.
modifications Specifically, four variables are used to describe each unethical
Quality Quality inspections and quality [24] practice: occurrence rate (A1), the level of potential profits for a con-
problems tractor (A2), the level of negative impacts on a project (A3), as well as
Technical schemes and [24]
the degree of vulnerability to information transparency or the degree to
solutions
Safety Safety inspections and safety [24] which a practice is prevented by information transparency (A4). For
problems each BIM function, there are three variables: usage rate (B1), benefit
Technical schemes and safety [24] level (B2), and transparency degree (B3). B2 refers to the level at which
measures a BIM function brings benefits to the user, while B3 refers to the degree
Others Contract, work surface, and [24]
drawings.
to which a BIM function promotes information transparency. It is noted
that although this questionnaire is contractor-oriented, most of the
Noted: CICRPPSU [33] refers to BIM Project Execution Planning Guide Version questions were designed available and open to other stakeholders in
2 (2010). order to collect comprehensive and unbiased data.

fraudulent variation claim, P3-spurious time application, P4-purposely

using inferior materials or inadequate materials, P5-concealing defects
caused by poor workmanship and material quality, P6-concealment of
supporting documents, P7-submission of fabricated or falsified sup-
porting documents), eight BIM functions (F1-3D modeling, F2-en-
gineering analysis, F3-3D coordination, F4-clash detection, F5-cost es-
timation, F6-site utilization planning, F7-4D modeling, F8-construction
control and management), and seven types of construction-related in-
formation being transparent in the BIM context (T1-construction
methods and techniques, T2-resource, T3-time, T4-cost, T5-quality, T6-
safety, T7-others) are adopted as the basis for the questionnaire and the
whole research.
3. Research methodology
This research aims to investigate how BIM-enabled information
transparency impairs contractors' interests in terms of weakening their
core competencies or preventing some unethical but lucrative practices
from occurring. It will also explore how BIM-enabled information
transparency further impedes BIM adoption as a result of the hinder-
ance of contractors' interests (see Fig. 1).
3.1. Questionnaire design
The questionnaire consists of four sections: 1) the basic information
of the respondents (e.g., job, position, age, experience in the con-
struction industry, BIM knowledge and experience, see Table 3); 2) the
current situation of the construction industry (e.g., top 3 unethical
behaviors selected from P1 to P7 and their rankings in terms of oc-
currence rate, level of their potential profits for a contractor, as well as
the level of their negative impacts on a project respectively, see
Table 4); 3) the current situation of BIM application (e.g.,top 3 BIM
functions selected from F1 to F8 and their rankings in terms of usage
rate and benefit level respectively, see Table 5), and 4) issues on BIM-
enabled information transparency (e.g., top 3 BIM functions selected
from F1 to F8 and their rankings in terms of transparency degree, top 3
unethical behaviors selected from P1 to P7 and their rankings in terms
3.2. Data collection
Considering that the topic of this research is quite sensitive and
related to the respondents' personal and institutional interests, in order
to achieve reliable results, an anonymous questionnaire survey was
conducted through online platforms between February and April 2017.
The respondents included both practitioners and academics in BIM or
construction engineering and management. At the end of survey period,
129 questionnaires were returned, among which 8 ones were removed
due to the respondents' lack of BIM knowledge, and a valid response
rate of 93.8% was achieved. It can be seen from Table 3 that the re-
spondents come from various institutions in the construction industry,
including owners 12.4%, contractors 24.8%, designers 19.0%, con-
sultants 6.6%, scholars and researchers 31.4% and others 5.8%. They
are involved in a wide range of positions, including general managers
3.3%, deputy general managers 5.8%, department managers 11.6%,
project managers 3.3%, designers 8.3%, general engineers 3.3%, en-
gineers 20.7%, BIM engineers 4.9%, cost engineers 3.3%, researchers
30.6% and others 4.9%. 13.2% of the respondents have over 20 years'
experience in the construction industry, 26.4% with 11 to 20 years'
experience, 14.1% with 6 to 10 years' experience, and the rest 46.3%
with 1 to 5 years' experience. Besides, 11.6% of them have experience
in 7 BIM projects and more, 14.8% in 3–6 BIM projects, 40.5% in 1–2
BIM projects, and 33.1% without the experience of BIM projects.
3.3. Data processing
For certain questions in the questionnaire (e.g., the occurrence rate
of unethical practices, the usage rate of BIM functions, and the level of
negative impact of transparency of each type of construction-related
information on contractors' interests, see Tables 4–7), the respondents
were required to select top 3 options from all options and rank them. In
these cases, a weight was given to each of the three options before
calculating their scores. Specifically, the weight of 3 was given to the
option ranking No. 1, 2 to No. 2, and 1 to No. 3. The score of an option
ranking after the third place was 0 [34].

70
H. Guo, et al. Automation in Construction 103 (2019) 67–79

Fig. 1. Research focus.

Table 3 in the second place; 7 respondents ranked it in the third place; and the
Profile of the respondents. rest 22 respondents ranked it after the third place. Hence, the final
Personal attributes Categories Number of Percentage (%) score of P1 = (82 ∗ 3 + 10 ∗ 2 + 7 ∗ 1) / 121 = 2.256.
respondents In order to visualize and evaluate the results at three different levels
(i.e., low, middle and high), the above score of each factor was nor-
Job Owner 15 12.4%
malized as follows. For the option (e.g. P1) with the highest score of a
Contractor 30 24.8%
Designer 23 19.0%
certain question, its score was adjusted to 3, based on which the scores
Consultant 8 6.6% of the other options were adjusted as well via Eq. (2):
Scholar and 38 31.4%
The adjusted score of each option = its final score 3/the highest score
researcher
Others 7 5.8% (2)
Position General manager 4 3.3%
Deputy general 7 5.8%
The adjusted score determines the level: < 1, between 1 and 2,
manager and > 2, corresponding to low, moderate and high level respectively.
Department 14 11.6% The adjusted score and corresponding level can be used to evaluate
manager each option by combining its ranking. Then the adjusted scores were
Project manager 4 3.3%
used to make scatterplots for better visualization, which were further
Designer 10 8.3%
General engineer 4 3.3% divided into nine cells (high-high, high-moderate, high-low, moderate-
Engineer 25 20.7% high, moderate-moderate, moderate-low, low-high, low-moderate, and
BIM engineer 6 4.9% low-low) according to the combination of the adjusted scores. The
Cost engineer 4 3.3%
scatterplots of a different couple of variables were combined into a
Researcher 37 30.6%
Others 6 4.9%
simplified and unstandardized scatterplot matrix for multidimensional
Experience (Years) 1–5 56 46.3% visualization [35,36] to provide a systematic understanding of each
6–10 17 14.1% option.
11–20 32 26.4%
> 20 16 13.2%
4. Results
Experience (No. of 1–4 58 47.9%
Projects) 5–8 21 17.4%
9–12 7 5.8% This section presents the opinions of different stakeholders on the
≥13 35 28.9% unethical practices, BIM functions, and various types of construction-
BIM knowledge Much 16 13.2%
related information, as well as contractors' opinions on information
Comparative 53 43.8%
much
sharing in the BIM context and their attitudes towards BIM adoption.
Some 52 43.0%
BIM experience (No. of None 40 33.1% 4.1. Unethical practices
Projects) 1–2 49 40.5%
3–4 16 13.2%
Table 4 shows the scores, adjusted scores and rankings of each
5–6 2 1.6%
≥7 14 11.6% unethical practice in terms of occurrence rate (A1), the level of po-
tential profits for a contractor (A2), the level of negative impacts on a
project (A3), and the degree of vulnerability to information transpar-
The final score of each option = (N1 3 + N2 2 + N3 1)/N (1) ency (A4) respectively. It can be seen from Table 4 and Fig. 2 that
inflated variation claim for time and resources (P1) and spurious time
where, N for the total number of respondents who answered this extension application (P3) with high or moderate level of potential
question; and N1/N2/N3 for the number of respondents who selected profits for a contractor (ranking No. 1 and No. 3 respectively) and
this option as the first/second/third priority respectively. moderate negative impacts on a project occur most frequently. How-
For example, 121 respondents selected the top 3 unethical practices ever, the two unethical practices are highly or moderately vulnerable to
in terms of the occurrence rate and ranked them. For unethical practice information transparency (ranking No. 1 and No. 3 respectively), in
P1, 82 respondents ranked it in the first place; 10 respondents ranked it other words, contractors may run the high or moderate risk of being

71
H. Guo, et al. Automation in Construction 103 (2019) 67–79

Scores of each unethical practice in terms of occurrence rate (A1), the level of potential profits for a contractor (A2), the level of negative impacts on a project (A3), and the degree of vulnerability to information
punished in a transparent environment if they conduct P1 and P3.

Ranking
Fraudulent variation claim (P2) and purposely using inferior ma-

1
2
3
6
7
4
5
terials or inadequate materials (P4) are at a moderate level of potential
Adjusted score profits for a contractor, but the two practices ranked No. 2 and No. 1
respectively in terms of negative impacts on a project, which reduces
their occurrence rate (ranking No. 6 and No. 5 respectively) by a large
Vulnerability (A4)

margin. Particularly, information transparency has a significant influ-

3.000
1.931
1.430
0.903
0.778
1.097
0.945
ence on P2, which may further reduce its occurrence rate in the future.
Concealing defects caused by poor workmanship and material
1.785
1.149
0.851
0.537
0.463
0.653
0.562
Score

quality (P5), with No. 3 negative impacts and No. 5 potential profits,
has No. 3 occurrence rate. A possible reason for the results is that both
high level of negative impacts of P2 and P4 (ranking No. 2 and No. 1)
Ranking

on a project and low level of potential profits of P6 and P7 (ranking No.

4
2
5
1
3
6
7

6 and No. 7) for a contractor may reduce their occurrence rate more
greatly than P5. It is also noted that P5, along with P4, both closely
Adjusted score

related to quality information of a project, which is unstructured in

Negative impacts (A3)

most cases and difficult to measure, shows lowest degrees of vulner-

ability to information transparency.
1.829
2.617
1.428
3.000
2.287
1.171
0.952

Concealment of supporting documents (P6) and submission of fab-

ricated or falsified supporting documents (P7), which mainly occur at
0.826
1.182
0.645
1.355
1.033
0.529
0.430
Score

the dispute resolution stage, share the least potential benefits for a
contractor and negative impacts on a project at the same time.
On the other hand, Fig. 3 displays different opinions on the un-
Ranking

ethical practices from owners, contractors and designers. Apparently,

1
4
3
2
5
6
7

contractors vote fraudulent variation claim (P2) as more frequently-

conducted, lucrative and harmful than other stakeholders, especially in
Adjusted score

sharp contrast with designers. As for spurious time extension applica-

tion (P3), contractors think that it has less occurrence and harm to
projects, totally different from owners and designers. Besides, con-
Profit level (A2)

3.000
1.354
1.407
1.487
0.915
0.822
0.650

tractors think quality-related unethical practices, purposely using in-

ferior materials or inadequate materials (P4) and concealing defects
1.868
0.843
0.876
0.926
0.570
0.512
0.405
Score

caused by poor workmanship and material quality (P5), have the lowest
profit level for them, showing a significant difference from the opinions
of owners and designers. Contractors give higher scores to the sub-
Ranking

mission of fabricated or falsified supporting documents (P7) in terms of

1
6
2
5
3
4
7

all the four indicators as well.

Adjusted score

4.2. BIM functions

Occurrence rate (A1)

Table 5 shows the scores, adjusted scores and rankings of each BIM
3.000
0.593
1.593
0.681
0.846
0.791
0.472

functions in terms of usage rate (B1), benefit level (B2), and transpar-
ency degree (B3) respectively.
2.256
0.446
1.198
0.512
0.636
0.595
0.355
Score

From Table 5 and Fig. 4, it can be seen that clash detection (F4) and
3D coordination (F3) are the most beneficial functions with high usage
rate and moderate transparency degree according to the respondents.
Concealing defects caused by poor workmanship and material quality

As mentioned above, F3 and F4 are used to figure out the conflicts

between building systems prior to construction, avoiding rework and
saving time and cost.
Submission of fabricated or falsified supporting documents
Purposely using inferior materials or inadequate materials

3D modeling (F1), cost estimation (F5), and construction control

and management (F8) at moderate benefit level with different trans-
parency degrees are most frequently adopted apart from F4 and F3.
Inflated variation claim for time and resources

Particularly, F1 is the most frequently adopted function among all of

the functions because it is the most basic function to create transpar-
ency and then serves other functions.
Concealment of supporting documents
Spurious time extension application

For the rest functions (F2, F6, and F7), they are ranked in the last
Noted: number of respondents = 121.

places whether in terms of B1, B2 or B3. Among them, F2 is mainly

adopted by designers, which may reduce its usage rate. However, as
Fraudulent variation claim

mentioned above, both F6 and F7 contain various information with a

high transparency degree once adopted, this is in sharp contrast with
the findings. Particularly F7, which has been being promoted in the
industry for many years, remains a low usage rate. Some contractors
transparency (A4).
Unethical practice

use F7 just for displaying the project to the owners, failing to fully
exploit its benefits and values.
On the other hand, Fig. 5 displays the opinions of different stake-
Table 4

holders on the BIM functions. Contractors, compared to designers and

P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
P6
P7

owners, tend to think clash detection (F4) is more frequently-adopted

72
H. Guo, et al. Automation in Construction 103 (2019) 67–79

Table 5
Scores of each BIM function in terms of usage rate (B1), benefit level (B2), and transparency degree (B3).
BIM functions Usage rate (B1) Benefit level (B2) Transparency degree (B3)

Score Adjusted score Ranking Score Adjusted score Ranking Score Adjusted score Ranking

F1 3D modeling 1.860 3.000 1 0.769 1.375 4 1.413 3.000 1

F2 Engineering analysis 0.215 0.347 6 0.364 0.651 6 0.438 0.930 6
F3 3D coordination 1.322 2.132 3 1.248 2.231 2 0.860 1.826 3
F4 Clash detection 1.421 2.292 2 1.678 3.000 1 0.752 1.597 5
F5 Cost estimation 0.620 1.000 4 0.851 1.521 3 1.116 2.369 2
F6 Site utilization planning 0.124 0.200 8 0.248 0.443 7 0.190 0.403 8
F7 4D modeling 0.207 0.334 7 0.132 0.236 8 0.438 0.930 6
F8 Construction control and management 0.231 0.373 5 0.711 1.271 5 0.793 1.684 4

Noted: number of respondents = 121.

Table 6 your interests? It can be seen that the transparency of resource and cost
Impact of construction-related information transparency on contractors' inter- has the most negative impacts on contractors' interests, followed by
ests. construction methods and techniques as well as time. The rest types of
Information type Score Ranking information show a significant difference from those mentioned above,
for example, the score of quality is only one-fourth of that of resource or
T1 Construction methods and techniques 1.267 3 cost.
T2 Resource 1.467 1
T3 Time 1.100 4
T4 Cost 1.467 1 4.4. Contractors' opinions on information sharing and attitudes towards
T5 Quality 0.367 5 BIM adoption
T6 Safety 0.233 6
T7 Others 0.100 7
Table 7 shows the opinions of contractors on information sharing in
Noted: Number of respondents = 30 (only contractors). the BIM context. 37.29% of them are unwilling or will refuse to share
the information related to their core competencies, 30.51% are un-
and beneficial, as it helps contractors figure out possible conflicts prior willing or will refuse to share the information related to their direct
to construction, avoiding rework and saving both time and cost. Be- economic interests (e.g., change orders and claims), 15.25% are likely
sides, contractors give higher scores to cost estimation (F5) and con- to share incomplete or inaccurate information, and only 16.95% are
struction control and management (F8) (including cost control and willing to share all the information.
management) in terms of benefit level and transparency degree, as both Table 7 also shows how information transparency influences con-
of the two functions are directly related to economic interest. Although tractors' attitudes towards BIM adoption. 36.67% of them think in-
site utilization planning (F6) is least-frequently adopted according to formation transparency influences their attitudes towards BIM adoption
contractors, they think it's beneficial and transparent as it can display to a high degree and they tend to either use BIM less or only use the BIM
and optimize site layout and also save cost. In sharp contrast to owners, functions unrelated to information transparency. 26.67% think the in-
contractors think 4D modeling (F7) is less beneficial, indicating that fluence is at a middle degree and they will use the BIM functions in little
they may use F7 more for visual presentation rather than in-depth relation with information transparency. 23.33% think the influence is
analysis, thus failing to fully use its potential in practice. In contractors' at a low degree and they will continue to use BIM except for the BIM
opinions, F1 and F3 are less beneficial and transparent, possible reasons functions impacting their core interests. The rest two cases respectively
for this may be that the two functions are more frequently and mainly account for 6.67%, representing very-high-degree influence with ‘I will
adopted by designers. not use BIM any more’ and no influence with ‘I will continue to use
BIM’.
4.3. Construction-related information being transparent in the BIM context
5. Discussion
Table 6 reveals contractors' responses to the question - the trans-
parency of which type of information will have the most negative impact on Based on the above results, this section aims to discuss how BIM-

Table 7
Contractors' opinions on information sharing and attitudes towards BIM adoption.
Question Option Percent Ranking

What're your opinions on information sharing in the BIM I am willing to share all the information. 16.95% 3
context? I am unwilling or I will refuse to share the information related to our core competencies. 37.29% 1
I am unwilling or I will refuse to share the information related to our direct economic 30.51% 2
interests (e.g., change orders and claims).
I will share incomplete or inaccurate information. 15.25% 4
How information transparency influences your attitudes towards Very high degree-I will not use BIM any more. 6.67% 4
BIM adoption? High degree-I will use BIM less or I will only use the BIM functions unrelated to 36.67% 1
information transparency.
Middle degree-I will use the BIM functions in little relation with information 26.67% 2
transparency.
Low degree-I will continue to use BIM except for the BIM functions impacting our core 23.33% 3
interests.
No influence- I will continue to use BIM. 6.67% 4

Noted: Number of respondents = 30 (only contractors).

73
H. Guo, et al. Automation in Construction 103 (2019) 67–79

Fig. 2. Scatterplot matrix for unethical practices.

enabled information transparency impacts contractors' interests in
terms of weakening contractors' core competencies or preventing the
unethical but lucrative practices, as well as how their counteraction to
BIM impedes its extensive application. Note that “transparency” is re-
quired by owners.
5.1. Negative impacts of BIM-enabled information transparency on
contractors' interests
As mentioned in the literature review, various types of information
become transparent with the adoption of different BIM functions. Their
transparency may prevent a host of unethical but lucrative practices

Occurrence rate (A1) Profit level (A2)

2.5 2.5
2.0 2.0
1.5 1.5
1.0 1.0
0.5 0.5
0.0 0.0
P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7
Owner Contractor Designer All Owner Contractor Designer All

Negative impacts (A3) Vulnerability to transparency (A4)

2.5 2.5
2.0 2.0
1.5 1.5
1.0 1.0
0.5 0.5
0.0 0.0
P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7

Owner Contractor Designer All Owner Contractor Designer All

Fig. 3. Opinions from different stakeholders on the unethical practices.

74
H. Guo, et al. Automation in Construction 103 (2019) 67–79

Fig. 4. Scatterplot matrix for BIM functions.

from occurring or weaken contractors' core competencies. This research
focuses on the prevention of unethical practices. Specifically, two in-
dicators are introduced to discuss this topic: 1) the possibility of
transparency of BIM functions, and 2) the level of potential economic
losses in the transparent environment of unethical practices. Based on
this, the possibility of transparency of specific types of information and
their negative impacts on contractors' interests are discussed by
matching a specific type of information with relevant BIM functions and
unethical practices.
For BIM functions, those adopted frequently with a high transpar-
ency degree is expected to create a higher possibility of transparency, as
information is more easily revealed and frequently shared among pro-
ject stakeholders with the adoption of these functions. For each BIM
function, the possibility of transparency can be calculated using Eq. (3)
and displayed in Fig. 6a.
Possibility of transparency (PT)
= usage rate (B1) transparency degree (B3) (3)
For unethical practices, those are more vulnerable to information
transparency with large potential profits are likely to cause more eco-
nomic losses for contractors, because contractors run more risks to
conduct them and sometimes they have to abandon them at the cost of
high potential profits. For each unethical practice, the level of potential
economic losses in a transparent environment can be calculated using
Eq. (4) and displayed in Fig. 6b.
Level of potential economic losses in a transparent environment (LPEL)
= degree of vulnerability to information transparency (A4)
level of potential profits (A2) (4)
For a specific type of information, relevant BIM functions and un-
ethical practices are figured out based on literature review (see
Table 8). The possibility of its transparency and its negative impacts are
discussed with the two indicators above. Note that the transparency of
construction techniques and methods is discussed separately in terms of
core competencies, while the rest in terms of unethical practices.
Considering that the scores of quality and safety information show a

Usage rate (B1) Benefit level (B2)

2.500 2.500
2.000 2.000
1.500 1.500
1.000 1.000
0.500 0.500
0.000 0.000
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8
Owner Contractor Designer All Owner Contractor Designer All

Transparency degree (B3)

2.500
2.000
1.500
1.000
0.500
0.000
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8

Owner Contractor Designer All

Fig. 5. Opinions from different stakeholders on the BIM functions.

75
H. Guo, et al.
2.5 Bubble Size=the score of PT
2.0
1.5 F1
B3
F5
1.0
F8 F3
F4
0.5 F2 F7
F6
0.0
0.0 1.0 2.0
B1
a) Possibility of transparency for BIM
functions
Fig. 6. Possibility of transparency for BIM functions and level of potential economic losses for unethical practices.
significant difference from those of resource, time, and cost information
(see Table 6), these types of information are divided into two groups for
discussion.
5.1.1. Transparency of construction methods and techniques
Construction methods and techniques, with No. 3 highest score (see
Table 6), are mainly revealed by F7 and F6 (see Table 8). For many
contractors, construction methods and techniques are one of their core
competencies. The disclosure of the key innovations is likely to seat
contractors in a disadvantaged position when bidding for new projects
with its competitors, gradually impairing their interests in the long run.
However, due to the low usage rate and transparency degree of F7 and
F6, this type of information has a low possibility of transparency caused
by BIM functions. This may be due to that the two functions, particu-
larly F7, are mainly used for presentation rather than in-depth analysis,
thus failing to show their value compared to the cost of them.
5.1.2. Transparency of construction resource, cost and time
Construction resource and cost obtain the top two highest scores in
terms of the negative impacts of their transparency on contractors' in-
terests while time ranks No. 4 (see Table 6). As shown in Table 8, both
resource and cost are mainly revealed by F1, F5, F7 and F8, the former
also revealed by F6. F1 has the highest possibility of transparency and
F5 ranks No. 4 while the rest two have a comparatively low possibility
of transparency. In terms of unethical practices, resource is mainly re-
lated to P1, P2, P4, P6 and P7, while cost is mainly related to P2, P6 and
Automation in Construction 103 (2019) 67–79
2.5 Bubble Size=the score of LPEL
2.0
P1
A4 1.5
P2
1.0 P3
0.5 P7P6 P4
P5
0.0
3.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
A1
b) Level of potential economic losses in a
transparent environment for unethical practices
P7. P1 and P2, ranking in the top two places in terms of the level of
potential economic losses in a transparent environment, can be influ-
enced by BIM functions (particularly F1 and F5) to a large extent. The
variations of resource and cost can be quantified and visualized by F1
and F5, thus providing a benchmark for resource and cost control. By
doing so, owners can easily track and check the variation in claims and
relevant documents submitted by contractors by searching relevant
figures (e.g., physical quantities, resource consumption and unit price),
thus preventing P1 and P2 from occurring. This indicates big potential
economic losses for contractors.
As for time information, it is mainly revealed by F6, F7 and F8,
related to P1, P2, P3, P6 and P7. F6, F7 and F8 rank in the last fourth
places in terms of the possibility of transparency, indicating that time
information doesn't have the high possibility of transparency either.
Possible reasons are already mentioned in Section 4.2. For example, F7
has merely been used for presentation in most cases to date. On the
other hand, although P1, P2 and P3 rank top three in terms of the level
of potential economic losses in the transparent environment, time in-
formation, unlike resource and cost information, is not directly con-
nected to money, thus having a less negative impact on contractors'
interests.
5.1.3. Transparency of construction quality and safety
It is shown from Table 6 that the transparency of quality and safety
information exerts a limited impact on contractors' interest. As shown
in Table 8, quality information is mainly revealed by F1, F3, F4, F7 and
76
H. Guo, et al. Automation in Construction 103 (2019) 67–79

Table 8
BIM functions and unethical practices related to a certain type of information.
Information types Related BIM functions Related unethical practices

T1-Construction methods and Site utilization planning (F6)

techniques 4D modeling (F7)

T2- Resource 3D modeling (F1) Inflated variation claim for time and
Cost estimation (F5) resources (P1)
Site utilization planning (F6) Fraudulent variation claim (P2)
4D modeling (F7) Purposely using inferior materials or
Construction control and inadequate materials (P4)
management (F8) Concealment of supporting documents (P6)
Submission of fabricated or falsified
supporting documents (P7)

T4-Cost 3D modeling (F1) Fraudulent variation claim (P2)

Cost estimation (F5) Concealment of supporting documents (P6)
4D modeling (F7) Submission of fabricated or falsified
Construction control and supporting documents (P7)
management (F8)

T3-Time Site utilization planning (F6) Inflated variation claim for time and
4D modeling (F7) resources (P1)
Construction control and Fraudulent variation claim (P2)
management (F8) Spurious time extension application (P3)
Concealment of supporting documents (P6)
Submission of fabricated or falsified
supporting documents (P7)

T5-Quality 3D visualization (F1) Purposely using inferior materials or

3D coordination (F3)
Clash detection (F4)
4D modeling (F7)
Construction control and
management (F8)
inadequate materials (P4)
Concealing defects caused by poor
workmanship and material quality (P5)
Concealment of supporting documents (P6)
Submission of fabricated or falsified
supporting documents (P7)

T6-Safety 3D visualization (F1) Concealing defects caused by poor

Construction control and workmanship and material quality (P5)
management (F8) Concealment of supporting documents (P6)
Submission of fabricated or falsified
supporting documents (P7)

F8, and related to P4, P5, P6 and P7, while safety information is mainly
revealed by F1 and F8, and related to P5, P6 and P7. Although F1, F4
and F3 are the top three BIM functions in terms of the possibility of
transparency (see Fig. 6a), quality and safety information does not seem
to have a high possibility of transparency. This is because they are
usually descriptive and difficult to be quantified, thus not being in-
tegrated well with BIM so far. On the other hand, P4, P6, P5 and P7
rank in the last fourth places in terms of potential economic losses in
the transparent environment (see Fig. 6b). Specifically, only P6 is at a
moderate degree of vulnerability to information transparency with a
low level of potential profits for contractors, while P4, P5 and P7 are at
a low degree of vulnerability to information transparency. In other
words, even if quality and safety information are highly transparent,
their transparency is not likely to have a great impact on the prevention
of related unethical practices. Thus it is less possible for the transpar-
ency of quality and safety information to cause contractors' economic
losses.
Moreover, it is also found that F2 with a low usage rate as well as a
low transparency degree is not related to any kind of the above con-
struction-related information, this is because it is mainly used at the
design stage to improve the design and energy efficiency. Besides, P6
and P7 seem to have a connection with the transparency of all types of
information, which is possibly due to the reason that all kinds of in-
formation are recorded inside the documents.
5.2. Impacts of BIM-enabled information transparency on BIM adoption
Collaboration among different stakeholders is the original target of

77
H. Guo, et al.
BIM [37]. Thus the unwillingness to information sharing caused by
BIM-enabled information transparency (see Table 7) will definitely
impede the collaboration and impair BIM's value. Furthermore, un-
willing or refusal to share information may cause pending in the deci-
sion-making process and increase project duration, while sharing in-
complete or inaccurate information may lead to a wrong decision or
suboptimal alternatives, thus reducing project quality and even gen-
erating extra costs. Poor project performance with BIM and associated
profits further discourage project stakeholders to use BIM in other
projects, thus stagnating or slowing down the development of BIM. In
addition, less use of BIM or not will directly impede the extensive
adoption of BIM.
5.3. Implications for the improvement of BIM work process
The above results and discussion indicate some implications on the
improvement of working processes among stakeholders in the BIM
context. On one hand, this research has revealed that some contractors
are reluctant to employ BIM because it usually discloses their core
competencies such as construction methods and techniques. This in-
dicates that current work processes can be improved by taking some
measures to avoid this kind of disclosure. For example, information
generated and shared in the BIM context can be summarized as a list
and then evaluated whether it is related to a certain stakeholder's core
competencies. If yes, this kind of information in BIM is configured to be
only visible to the stakeholder so as to protect their interests.
On the other hand, this research has found that the disclosure of the
information directly related to contractors' economic interests (e.g.,
resource consumption, cost), which has the most negative impact on
contractors. This indicates that owners or supervisors could pay more
attention to these kinds of information in case of modification or fal-
sification in a traditional mode. Alternatively, they can improve the
information exchange process among stakeholders if BIM is adopted
only for visualization. For contractors, an incentive and punishment
system can be established in the BIM context. For example, they can be
rewarded if they achieve a positive project performance with the
adoption of BIM and don't have any unethical practices, and vice versa.
6. Conclusions
This research has investigated the influence of BIM-enabled in-
formation transparency on contractors' interests (in terms of the dis-
closure of core competencies and the prevention of unethical but lu-
crative practices) as well as BIM adoption in the construction industry
through an anonymous questionnaire survey. It's found that 1) the
transparency of construction techniques and methods may impair
contractors' interests in the long run, but at present it is seldom influ-
enced by BIM; 2) the transparency of construction resource, cost and
time, which are closely related to change orders and claims and can be
quantified and easily compared, has instant and direct impacts on
contractors' interests, but only some of the resource and cost-related
unethical practices (e.g., P1 and P2) are affected by BIM while time-
related unethical practices are almost not affected; and 3) the trans-
parency of construction quality and safety，which are descriptive and
difficult to be quantified, has limited impacts on contractors' interests
and relevant unethical practices are almost not influenced by BIM as
well. The main reasons for this are identified as follows: 1) construc-
tion-resource-and-cost-related BIM functions are widely adopted in
construction; 2) construction-method-and-time-related BIM functions
not fully used or only adopted by contractors themselves (not involving
owners); and 3) construction quality and safety information are not
integrated well with BIM or relevant BIM functions are not fully
adopted by contractors. This research also finds that contractors are
reluctant to share information, especially that related to their interests,
or only share incomplete or even incorrect information. This will pre-
vent the extensive adoption of BIM and impede collaboration among
78
Automation in Construction 103 (2019) 67–79
different stakeholders.
The results of this research unveil some critical issues during the
execution of BIM. Based on this, further research should be conducted
to develop available solutions in the future. On one hand, an effective
information sharing mechanism in BIM execution should be established
to clarify the right of each party in obtaining information from BIM
models. This not only facilitates information sharing but also protects
the core competencies of some parties. On the other hand, an appro-
priate benefit distribution mechanism in conducting BIM should be in
place to clarify the interest from the use of BIM for each party. It means
all participants would share the benefit from BIM. This also enables
information sharing and reduces the unethical practices. To do these,
apart from contractors' interests, which this research mainly focuses on,
other stakeholders' interests should also be investigated in the future.
Conflict of interests
There is no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgment
We would like to thank the National Natural Science Foundation of
China (Grant No. 51578318, 51208282) as well as Tsinghua University-
Glodon Joint Research Centre for Building Information Model (RCBIM)
for supporting this research. The support from the industry practi-
tioners and academics to the survey are also appreciated.
References
[1] NIBS, National BIM Standard - United States (Version 3), https://www.
nationalbimstandard.org/, (2015) , Accessed date: July 2018.
[2] A.K. Schnackenberg, E.C. Tomlinson, Organizational transparency: a new perspec-
tive on managing trust in organization-stakeholder relationships, J. Manag. 42 (7)
(2016) 1784–1810, https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314525202.
[3] P. Bowen, A. Akintoye, R. Pearl, P.J. Edwards, Ethical behaviour in the south
African construction industry, Constr. Manag. Econ. 25 (6) (2007) 631–648,
https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190701225707.
[4] M. de Jong, W.P. Henry, N. Stansbury, Eliminating corruption in our engineering/
construction industry, Leadersh. Manag. Eng. 9 (3) (2009) 105–111, https://doi.
org/10.1061/(ASCE)1532-6748(2009)9:3(105).
[5] Y. Le, M. Shan, A.P. Chan, Y. Hu, Overview of corruption research in construction,
J. Manag. Eng. 30 (4) (2014) 02514001, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-
5479.0000300.
[6] C. Vee, C. Skitmore, Professional ethics in the construction industry, Eng. Constr.
Archit. Manag. 10 (2) (2003) 117–127, https://doi.org/10.1108/
09699980310466596.
[7] Global Infrastructure Anti-Corruption Centre (GIACC), Examples of corruption in
infrastructure, http://www.giaccentre.org/documents/GIACC.
CORRUPTIONEXAMPLES.pdf, (2008) , Accessed date: June 2018.
[8] S. Azhar, M. Khalfan, T. Maqsood, Building information modelling (BIM): now and
beyond, Construction Economics and Building 12 (4) (2015) 15–28, https://doi.
org/10.5130/AJCEB.v12i4.3032.
[9] C. Eastman, P. Teicholz, R. Sacks, K. Liston, BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building
Information Modeling for Owners, Managers, Designers, Engineers and Contractors,
John Wiley & Sons, 9780470541371, 2011.
[10] L.F. Alarcón, C. Mourgues, Performance modeling for contractor selection, J.
Manag. Eng. 18 (2) (2002) 52–60, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X
(2002)18:2(52).
[11] D.C. Galunic, S. Rodan, Resource recombinations in the firm: knowledge structures
and the potential for Schumpeterian innovation, Strateg. Manag. J. 19 (12) (1998)
1193–1201, https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(1998120)
19:12<1193::AID-SMJ5>3.0.CO;2-F.
[12] E. Palaneeswaran, M. Kumaraswamy, Recent advances and proposed improvements
in contractor prequalification methodologies, Build. Environ. 36 (1) (2001) 73–87,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1323(99)00069-4.
[13] C.K. Prahalad, G. Hamel, The core competence of the corporation, in: D. Hahn,
B. Taylor (Eds.), Strategische Unternehmungsplanung - Strategische
Unternehmungsführung, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2006, pp. 275–292, https://
doi.org/10.1007/3-540-30763-X_14.
[14] G. Alexandersson, S. Hultén, Predatory bidding in competitive tenders: a Swedish
case study, Eur. J. Law Econ. 22 (1) (2006) 73–94, https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10657-006-8981-7.
[15] L.G. Crowley, D.E. Hancher, Risk assessment of competitive procurement, J. Constr.
Eng. Manag. 121 (2) (1995) 230–237, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-
9364(1995)121:2(230).
[16] W.G. Wang, D.H. Liu, The incomplete information game-theoretical analysis of
winning the bid with low-priced in engineering project, Chinese Journal of
H. Guo, et al.
Management Science 16 (S1) (2008) 444–449 https://doi.org/10.16381/j.cnki.
issn1003-207x.2008.s1.020.
[17] D. Kaufmann, P.C. Vicente, Legal corruption, Econ. Polit. 23 (2) (2011) 195–219,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0343.2010.00377.x.
[18] P.X. Zou, Strategies for minimizing corruption in the construction industry in China,
Journal of Construction in Developing Countries 11 (2) (2006) 15–29 http://web.
usm.my/jcdc/vol11_2_2006/2_Patrick%20Zou%20(p.15-29).pdf.
[19] P.A. Bowen, P.J. Edwards, K. Cattell, Corruption in the South African construction
industry: a thematic analysis of verbatim comments from survey participants,
Constr. Manag. Econ. 30 (10) (2012) 885–901, https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.
2012.711909.
[20] M. Sohail, S. Cavill, Corruption in construction projects, in: A. Serpell (Ed.),
Proceedings of the CIB W107 Construction in Developing Countries Symposium,
January 18–20, Santiago, Chile, Santiago, CIB, 2006, https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/
2134/3966.
[21] R. Hartley, Fighting corruption in the Australian construction industry: the national
code of practice, Leadersh. Manag. Eng. 9 (3) (2009) 131–135, https://doi.org/10.
1061/(ASCE)1532-6748(2009)9:3(131).
[22] Global Infrastructure Anti-Corruption Centre (GIACC), What is corruption, http://
www.giaccentre.org/what_is_corruption.php, (2014) , Accessed date: June 2018.
[23] O.E. Alutu, M.L. Udhawuve, Unethical practices in Nigerian engineering industries:
complications for project management, J. Manag. Eng. 25 (1) (2009) 40–43,
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2009)25:1(40).
[24] H.B. Ni, Y. Wang, et al., Report on Development of Informatization in Chinese
Construction Industry (2015): Application and Development of BIM, China City
Press, Beijing, 9787507430196, 2015.
[25] J.P. Zhang, Z. Fan, Y.L. Wang, Z.G. Huang, Resource dynamic management and cost
real-time monitoring in building construction based on 4D-BIM, Construction
Technology 4 (40) (2011) 37–40 http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-
SGJS201104014.htm.
[26] L.J. Chen, H.B. Luo, A BIM-based construction quality management model and its
applications, Autom. Constr. 46 (2014) 64–73, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.
2014.05.009.
[27] H.L. Guo, H. Li, V. Li, VP-based safety management in large-scale construction
projects: a conceptual framework, Autom. Constr. 34 (2013) 16–24, https://doi.
79
Automation in Construction 103 (2019) 67–79
org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.10.013.
[28] Y. Fang, Y.K. Cho, S. Zhang, E. Perez, Case study of BIM and cloud–enabled real-
time RFID indoor localization for construction management applications, J. Constr.
Eng. Manag. 142 (7) (2016) 05016003, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-
7862.0001125.
[29] H.L. Guo, W.P. Liu, W.S. Zhang, M. Skitmore, A BIM-RFID Unsafe On-site Behavior
Warning System, ICCREM 2014: Smart Construction and Management in the
Context of New Technology, (2014), pp. 330–339, https://doi.org/10.1061/
9780784413777.040.
[30] Y.J. Wu, N. Xu, BIM information collaborative framework based on supply chain
management, ICCREM 2014: Smart Construction and Management in the Context of
New Technology, 2014, pp. 199–207, https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784413777.
024.
[31] Q.P. Man, C.S. Sun, Construction information model based on IFC, Chin. Civil Eng.
J. 44 (S1) (2011) 239–243, https://doi.org/10.15951/j.tmgcxb.2011.s1.002.
[32] J.P. Zhang, Z.Z. Hu, BIM-and 4D-based integrated solution of analysis and man-
agement for conflicts and structural safety problems during construction: 1.
Principles and methodologies, Autom. Constr. 20 (2) (2011) 155–166, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.013.
[33] The Computer Integrated Construction Research Program at the Pennsylvania State
University, BIM project execution planning guide (Version 2.0), https://www.bim.
psu.edu/, (2010) , Accessed date: June 2018.
[34] L. Zhao, Discussion on statistical processing method of multiple arrangement
questions in social statistics, Statistics and Decision 21 (2014) 71–73 https://doi.
org/10.13546/j.cnki.tjyjc.2014.21.020.
[35] D.B. Carr, R.J. Littlefield, W.L. Nicholson, J.S. Littlefield, Scatterplot matrix tech-
niques for large N, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 82 (398) (1987) 424–436, https://doi.org/10.
1080/01621459.1987.10478445.
[36] N. Elmqvist, P. Dragicevic, J.D. Fekete, Rolling the dice: multidimensional visual
exploration using scatterplot matrix navigation, IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 14
(6) (2008) 1539-1148, https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2008.153.
[37] NIBS, United States National Building Information Modeling Standard (Version 1),
National Institute of Building Sciences, Washington DC, US, 2007http://citeseerx.
ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.194.2132&rep=rep1&type=pdf ,
Accessed date: July 2018.