Comparison of BIM Adoption Models between Public and Private Sectors through Empirical Investigation

Table 1

Detail summary of shortlisted papers through a systematic literature review.

No.	Author	Method	Drivers/factors	Country
1	Babatunde et al. [20]	Descriptive statistics	Cost and Time Saving, Improved Communication, BIM Awareness, and Government Support	Nigeria
2	Ahmed and Suliman [21]	SEM	Competitive Strategies, Market Demand, Market Flexibility, Competitive Advantages, Best Practices, BIM Benefits, and Team Expectations	Bahrain
3	Mosse et al. [25]	Descriptive statistics	Legal Issues, Knowledge and Awareness, Efficiency, Versatility, Leadership, and Competitiveness	Kenya
4	Chen et al. [2]	PLS-SEM	Relative Advantage, Top Management Support, and Organizational Readiness	China
5	Ahuja et al. [22]	SEM	Consistency, Availability of BIM Software, Favorable Attitude towards BIM, Compatibility, Top Management Support, BIM Readiness, and Existing Green Rating System Supporting BIM Adoption	India
6	Kwofie et al. [26]	Descriptive statistics	Accuracy of BIM-Adopted Communication, Timeliness in BIM Communication, Overcoming Barriers, and Avoiding Distortions	South Africa
7	Almuntaser et al. [27]	Descriptive statistics	Faster Design Processes, Effective Reuse of Information, and Overall Client Satisfaction	Saudi Arabia
8	Ngowtanasawan [1]	SEM	Quality, Relative Advantage, Trialability, Ease of Use, and Compatibility	Thailand
9	Ozorhon and Karahan [12]	ANOVA	Availability of Qualified Staff, Effective Leadership, Availability of Technology, Coordination among Parties, and Training of Employees	Turkey
10	Enegbuma et al. [28]	SEM	Business Process, Construction Business Reengineering, and Computer-Integrated Construction	Malaysia
11	Rogers et al. [29]	Descriptive statistics	Construction firms were prepared to adopt BIM where market demands and competitive advantage	Malaysia
12	Masood et al. [30]	Descriptive statistics	Effective Design Management, Quality of Construction, and Rework Management	Pakistan