Fig. 1.
Mean score of strategies to enhance BIM adoption in flood mitigation (own research)
| Strategies to enhance BIM adoption in flood mitigation | Mean score | Mean score interpretation | Standard deviation | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Promoting strong senior management support for BIM adoption in flood mitigation | 4.33 | high | 0.816 | 1 |
| Introducing the National BIM eSubmission (NBeS) system to facilitate building plan submissions and approvals, reducing turnaround time for flood mitigation projects | 4.00 | high | 1.195 | 2 |
| Providing comprehensive and affordable BIM training through the myBIM Centre for flood mitigation | 3.93 | high | 0.961 | 3 |
| Providing financial incentives for companies investing in BIM software, technology, and training for flood mitigation projects | 3.93 | high | 1.223 | 4 |
| Mandating the adoption of BIM for flood mitigation projects valued at RM10 million and above | 3.87 | high | 0.915 | 5 |
| Standardising workflows in flood mitigation projects by adopting ISO 19650, and using Common Data Environments for seamless collaboration | 3.87 | high | 0.915 | 5 |
Frequency analysis of current levels of BIM adoption in flood mitigation (n = 15) (own research)
| Category | Frequency | Percentage [%] | Cumulative percentage [%] | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frequency of BIM implementation in flood mitigation | Never | 3 | 20.0 | 20.0 |
| Rarely | 0 | 0.0 | 20.0 | |
| Sometimes | 2 | 13.3 | 33.3 | |
| Often | 3 | 20.0 | 53.3 | |
| Always | 7 | 46.7 | 100.0 | |
| Level of BIM maturity in flood mitigation projects | Level 3: Integrated BIM | 9 | 60.0 | 60.0 |
| Level 0: No BIM Use | 3 | 20.0 | 80.0 | |
| Level 1: Low Collaboration | 2 | 13.3 | 93.3 | |
| Level 2: Collaborative BIM | 1 | 6.7 | 100.0 |
Mean score of barriers to BIM implementation in flood mitigation (own research)
| Barriers to BIM implementation in flood mitigation | Mean score | Mean score interpretation | Standard deviation | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| High initial investment costs for BIM implementation in flood mitigation | 3.87 | high | 1.060 | 1 |
| Limited access to accurate flood and terrain data for BIM modelling in flood mitigation | 3.73 | high | 0.961 | 2 |
| Lack of expertise in both BIM technology and flood management | 3.73 | high | 1.223 | 3 |
| Resistance from individuals and organisations to adopt new BIM technologies in flood mitigation | 3.27 | moderate | 1.280 | 4 |
| Lack of standardisation in data exchange between different BIM software platforms in flood mitigation | 3.00 | moderate | 0.926 | 5 |
Cronbach’s alpha value of strategies to enhance BIM adoption in flood mitigation (own research)
| Cronbach’s alpha value | Internal consistency |
|---|---|
| α = 0.863 | good |
Interpretation of mean score analysis (Hamid et al_, 2022; Ahmad, 2002)
| Mean score | Mean score interpretation |
|---|---|
| 1.00–2.33 | low |
| 2.34–3.67 | moderate |
| 3.68–5.00 | high |
Demographic profile of respondents (n = 15) (own research)
| Demographic information | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Respondent | Category | Frequency | Percentage [%] |
| Gender | Male | 13 | 86.7 |
| Female | 2 | 13.3 | |
| Age group | 26–35 years old | 5 | 33.3 |
| 36–45 years old | 4 | 26.7 | |
| Under 25 years old | 3 | 20.0 | |
| Above 45 years old | 3 | 20.0 | |
| Highest level of education | Bachelor’s Degree | 11 | 73.3 |
| Diploma | 2 | 13.3 | |
| Master’s Degree | 1 | 6.7 | |
| PhD / Doctorate | 1 | 6.7 | |
| Professional role | Civil Engineer | 5 | 33.3 |
| Construction Manager | 4 | 26.7 | |
| Architect | 3 | 20.0 | |
| Project Engineer | 2 | 13.3 | |
| Project Manager | 1 | 6.7 | |
| Years of professional experience | Less than 2 years | 4 | 26.7 |
| More than 15 years | 4 | 26.7 | |
| 2–5 years | 3 | 20.0 | |
| 11–15 years | 3 | 20.0 | |
| 6–10 years | 1 | 6.7 | |
Interpretation of Cronbach’s alpha value (Cronbach, 1951)
| Internal consistency | Cronbach’s alpha range |
|---|---|
| Excellent | α ≥ 0.9 |
| Good | 0.8 ≤ α < 0.9 |
| Acceptable | 0.7 ≤ α < 0.8 |
| Questionable | 0.6 ≤ α < 0.7 |
| Poor | 0.5 ≤ α < 0.6 |
| Unacceptable | α < 0.5 |
Cronbach’s alpha value of barriers to BIM implementation in flood mitigation (own research)
| Cronbach’s alpha value | Internal consistency |
|---|---|
| α = 0.833 | good |