Talk:BIM as a project management tool on construction projects

Anna: Very nice topic choice that fits both the requirements for the type of article and the desired structure! Look forward to reading more about this tool.

Reviewer 1: AndreasAndersen

• The first-hand impression of the article is very good and very reader-friendly. The many small headlines makes the article very clear
• The beginning of the article starts first with a description of how the article are structured and afterwards a short introduction to the topic. I would consider to start with the short introduction to the topic because the first thing a viewer are reading in an article should be an appetizer to continue reading
• The figures in the article are understandable and looks nice. But remember to specify the figure names under the figures in the same word. Right now are Figure and Fig used. Try to choose either Figure or Fig. It will not be so confusing and looks better
• Figure 2 is described in the text but the order of the nine points in the text does not match with the order of the nine points on the figure. That can be a bit confusion. For example are the points ”HR” and ”Communication” side by side in the figure but ”HR” is described in the beginning of the section and ”communication” is described in the end of the section. This should be changed so the order of the text and figure fits
• There is a table in the middle of the article. The table should also have a table number and table name in order to refer to the table in article
• Linking your article to other relevant pages in the APPPM Wiki like Gantt Chart and Work Breakdown Structure gives a good understanding of how other methods can be used to the BIM method
• In the discussion section you haven´t been writing anything yet. It would be useful if you could write about how this model could be compared to other models in the same industries. The article has about 2.500 words and therefore their should be enough words to describe this
• It is positive that there are a lot of different references including a reference to the ISO 21500 standard

Answer to reviewer 1: AndreasAndersen

Thanks a lot for the kind feedback! I went through each of the points in order to best address them:

• The beginning of the article starts first with a description of how the article are structured and afterwards a short introduction to the topic. I would consider to start with the short introduction to the topic because the first thing a viewer are reading in an article should be an appetizer to continue reading
  • I've added to the previous "introduction" and began with a short introduction to the topic instead, so the first thing the viewer sees is a more appealing introduction.
• The figures in the article are understandable and looks nice. But remember to specify the figure names under the figures in the same word. Right now are Figure and Fig used. Try to choose either Figure or Fig. It will not be so confusing and looks better.
  • All figures now have the same figure indication instead of "figure/fig".
• Figure 2 is described in the text but the order of the nine points in the text does not match with the order of the nine points on the figure. That can be a bit confusion. For example are the points ”HR” and ”Communication” side by side in the figure but ”HR” is described in the beginning of the section and ”communication” is described in the end of the section. This should be changed so the order of the text and figure fits.
  • The subchapters following Figure 2(now 3) has been altered to fit the allignment of the figure, so that the following chapters follow figure 2 (3) from left to right.
• There is a table in the middle of the article. The table should also have a table number and table name in order to refer to the table in article
  • The table has been properly annotated.

s150799 reviewer nr.2

Overall impression:

• The structure of the article is very good; it is easy and interesting for the reader. It guides the reader well, and I was left with a good understanding of the life cycle of BIM.
• It was smart to narrow the examples to the construction industry.
• The language has good flow and there is nothing to improve in this point.
• There is good discussion of limits and benefits throughout the text.
• Good references to the figures and other Wiki articles.

Improvement areas:

• In the background section it says: “Despite the benefits, the use of BIM as a project management tool is still in the early stages of development, and there are still many challenges and barriers associated with its use.” I felt that this question about barriers and challenges was not answered in the text. But maybe this will come in the limitation section that is missing.
• The pictures are a bit small, so the text is hard to read.

Suggestion of improvement:

• As this is an explanation of a project management tool, I do not think that it is necessary to add a case study. I can see that it is an unwritten point in your content.
• Since you discuss the use and benefits in the section “utilisation of BIM”, and has planned a “limitation” section, I do not see the need of the “discussion and conclusion” section. This could be to just repeat what has already been said.
• Remember the annotated bibliography required.

Answer to reviewer 2: s150799

Thanks for the very useful feedback, i went through all points in order to best address them. The following is how i choose to address the improvement areas:

• In the background section it says: “Despite the benefits, the use of BIM as a project management tool is still in the early stages of development, and there are still many challenges and barriers associated with its use.” I felt that this question about barriers and challenges was not answered in the text. But maybe this will come in the limitation section that is missing.
  • I added the limitations and barriers to the limitations chapter.
• The pictures are a bit small, so the text is hard to read. '
  • I chose to keep the size of the pictures due to alignment issues, but they have all been enhanced with a clickable zoom function.
• As this is an explanation of a project management tool, I do not think that it is necessary to add a case study. I can see that it is an unwritten point in your content.
  • I chose to remove the case study and instead add a chapter regarding industry examples in order to support the article with empirical data.
• Since you discuss the use and benefits in the section “utilisation of BIM”, and has planned a “limitation” section, I do not see the need of the “discussion and conclusion” section. This could be to just repeat what has already been said.
  • I connected the limitations and discussion part, in order to keep the discussion chapter without giving the reader a feeling of reading the same thing twice.
• Remember the annotated bibliography required.
  • The annotated bibliography has been added.

Review 3:

Very good job! It is well written and structured.

• Remember to write the acronym (BIM) first time you write the full name.
• A bit longer abstract wouldn’t hurt explaining pointers from the article.
• The content is good and gives a nice overview but a bit long. Normally you only include two steps. fx. 1 and 1.3 and not 1.2.1
• Good with many of reliable references
• I like your many WIKI references too.
• Nice models, well made in the beginning. Further down the article the figures become a bit too small. I couldn’t read the text on them.
• Remember to make a bibliography it is required.
• Looking forward reading the discussion part. Maybe you could include some of the new software programs that uses BIM or how the "new" BIM is going to be with the numbers ect. (there was a very interesting conference in Odense about it last week, all data should be online by now)

Answer to reviewer 3

Thank you very much for the useful feedback especially the idea to include the new uses of BIM. i went through all points in order to best address them:

• Remember to write the acronym (BIM) first time you write the full name.
  • The first mention of Building information modeling now has the proper acronym (BIM)
• A bit longer abstract wouldn’t hurt explaining pointers from the article.
  • A slightly longer abstract/introduction has been made, giving a more appealing look for the reader
• The content is good and gives a nice overview but a bit long. Normally you only include two steps. fx. 1 and 1.3 and not 1.2.1
  • I chose to keep the content with steps from 1. to 1.2.1, due to difficulties in formatting the different sub-chapters.
• Nice models, well made in the beginning. Further down the article the figures become a bit too small. I couldn’t read the text on them.
  • I've chosen to keep the size of the figures due to alignment issues, but they have all been enchaned with a clickable zoom figure.
• Remember to make a bibliography it is required.
  • The annotated bibliography has been included.
• Looking forward reading the discussion part. Maybe you could include some of the new software programs that uses BIM or how the "new" BIM is going to be with the numbers ect. (there was a very interesting conference in Odense about it last week, all data should be online by now)
  • Due to the complexity of the conference material, i chose instead to include four different cases, with the same publisher, as the mentioned conference in Odense namely "Det digitale Byggeri".