Regrettably, the analysis is totally based on theexpert opinion of a single BIM consultant who takesthe interview; and, consequently, the validation isdifficult. Moreover, the analysis is not quantifiable,which means that an objective overall comparison orbenchmarking between different organizationscannot be made. Since the depth of the analysis isalso very limited, this tool is only suitable to raise theBIM awareness of an organization, which hopefullyleads to a follow-up discussion on the necessaryimprovements.Another attempt to develop a BIM assessmenttool has been made by Gobar with the ‘BIMSuccesvoorspellers’ (Bergs, 2009). Similar to the BIMSuccespredictor by DeBIMspecialist, this tool aimsto comprehensively assess both the hard aspects(e.g. technologies and protocols) and soft aspects(e.g. organizational culture and motivation) of BIM.BIM Succesvoorspeller presents a clear overview offive main aspects of BIM and their inter-relationships. This can be considered as animprovement over other tools, which show a list ofmany various aspects that are seeminglyunconnected. The tool puts ‘human’ as the centralaspect that connects the other four aspects, namelystrategy, business process, information andtechnology. It then links key performanceindicators (KPIs) to the five main aspects.Although the tool is still in the development stage, amajor scientific weakness has already beendiscovered in the analytical method, which is solelybased on the qualitative judgement of the BIMconsultant.Based on the literature survey, the followingconclusions can be drawn. A number of tools havebeen developed and used recently to measure thecapacity and maturity of BIM. Unfortunately, theexisting tools still have significant weaknesses. Nocurrent tool can measure the BIM maturity of boththe model and the organization. NBIMS CMMfocuses only on the model and the other tools focusonly on the organization. BIM areas of interestaddressed by different tools vary greatly. Differenttools cannot be applied complementarily, since theircriteria and weighing factors are not compatible. Alltools aim at becoming an objective measureinstrument, but the achievement of this aim ishampered by the lack of scientific underpinning forperforming the analysis and validating the results.Furthermore, no tool has been commonlyacknowledged and used in the construction industry.In the USA, a broader acceptance may be expectedfor the CMM since the tool is endorsed by NBIMS.In the Netherlands, independent BIM consultantsthat have developed the existing tools are smallenterprises with limited market shares. Hence, noexisting tool is able to serve as a national or aninternational standard benchmarking instrument.DEVELOPMENT OF TNO BIM QUICK SCANTOOLThe development of a BIM benchmarking tool aimsto resolve the shortcomings of the existingassessment tools by introducing a new tool that canserve as a standard BIM benchmarking instrument inthe Netherlands. Three main steps during thedevelopment of the tool can be distinguished, namelystep 1 – exploratory field and desk research; step 2 –developing analytical method and setting-upassessment criteria; step 3 – development, practicalverification and validation of the prototype tool.The first step included exploratory field research,through interviews among construction clients andtheir consultants, to determine the most importantaspects to be objectively assessed at tender andduring selection of designers, engineers andcontractors for a BIM-based building project.Additionally, exploratory field research throughinterviews was carried out among designers,engineers and contractors to gain an insight into theexisting ways used by these actors to present theirBIM competencies to the client. Simultaneously,desk research was performed on the existing BIMguidelines, handbooks, measurement criteria andassessment tools. The critical review, as presentedin the previous section, also resulted in lessonslearned from the development and use of theexisting assessment tools.
The second step comprised deciding on theunderpinning method used for the new assessmenttool to meet the needs of the clients and tool usersas well as to create the highest practical impact. Thenew assessment tool is called the ‘BIM Quick Scan’.Although the scan should be performed quickly, thatis, in a limited time of maximum one day, theassessment is quite comprehensive. The analyticalmethod (i.e. formulas for weighted calculation andcross-check analysis) was established accordingly.Next, a list with all relevant aspects for assessmentwas set up. These aspects were then categorizedinto ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ aspects for quantitative andqualitative evaluations. Much time and effort wasspent on restructuring, detailing and refining theaspects and KPIs. This process was executed in fiverounds by three experts from an independentresearch institute. The tentative results of eachround were reviewed with a peer group consisting ofBIM consultants, clients, designers, engineers andcontractors who had participated in the exploratoryfield research.In the third step, the prototype tool was developedafter the final KPIs and assessment aspects wereintegrated with the analytical method. Practicalverification and validation of the prototype tool werethen carried out. This process is described moreextensively in the next section of this article. In orderto measure the performance, certain key KPIs wereused. These KPIs allow the BIM Quick Scan tool toreport past outcomes, both good and bad; todetermine the quality and robustness of BIMservices and products; to identify whereimprovements should be made and to allow BIMexperts to independently judge an organization’sperformance. While it is important to developmetrics and benchmarks for BIM performanceassessment, it is equally important for those metricsto be consistently accurate and adaptable todifferent industry sectors and organization sizes. Thetool and its KPIs are, therefore, designed to conformto a set of guiding principles purposely developed tomeasure the specifics of BIM performance asfollows (Succar, 2010):l Accurate: clear, non-falsifiable and allow accurate,repeatable assessment.l Applicable: can be utilized by all stakeholdersacross project life-cycle phases.l Attainable: benchmarks can be achieved throughprogressive accumulation of defined actions.l Consistent: when conducted by differentassessors, measurements yield the same results.l Cumulative: benchmarks are set as logicalprogressions; deliverables from one benchmarkact as pre-requisites for another.l Flexible: assessments can be performed acrossmarkets, organization scales and theirsubpisions.l Informative: measurements provide ‘feedback forimprovement’ and ‘guidance for next steps’.l Neutral: measurements do not prejudiceproprietary, non-proprietary, closed, open, free orcommercial solutions or schemata.l Specific: metrics are well defined and serveindustry-specific assessment purposes.l Usable: metrics are intuitive and can be easilyemployed to assess BIM performance.The new BIM Quick Scan tool is intended to be usedto scan an organization over four main chapters(Figure 1) that represent both ‘hard’ and ‘soft’aspects of BIM, namely:l chapter 1: organization and management;l chapter 2: mentality and culture;l chapter 3: information structure and informationflow; andl chapter 4: tools and applications.Each chapter contains a number of KPIs in the form ofa multiple-choice questionnaire. The total number ofcriteria is limited to 50 in order to keep an in-depthscan that can be performed with reasonable speed.  Within the first chapter (corporate management),the following KPIs are addressed: vision andstrategy, distribution of roles and tasks, organizationstructure, quality assurance, financial resources andpartnership on corporate and project level. Thesecond chapter (organizational culture) focuses onBIM acceptance among the staff and workers, groupand inpidual motivation, presence and influence ofthe BIM coordinator, knowledge and skills,knowledge management and training. The followingKPIs are composed in the third chapter (datastructure and information flow): use of modelling,open ICT standards, object libraries, internal andexternal information flow, type of data exchange andtype of data in each project phase. The hardware-and software-related KPIs are pulled together in thelast chapter (technology platforms and tools): use ofmodel server, type and capacity of model server,type of software package, advanced BIM tools,model view definitions and supporting rules.The analytical method is a unique combinationbetween quantitative measure and expert opinion.The quantitative measure works as follows. Witheach KPI, there are a number of possible answers.For each answer, a score is assigned. Each KPI alsocarries a certain weighting factor. BIM性能基准测试工具英文文献和中文翻译(3):http://www.youerw.com/fanyi/lunwen_51796.html