Exploring Developers’ Understanding on Building
Information Modelling (BIM) and Its Impact on
Return on Investment (ROI)
Aryani Ahmad Latiffi
Department of Construction Management
Faculty of Technology Management and Business
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM)
Johor Darul Takzim, Malaysia
aryani@uthm.edu.my
Abstract— Building Information Modelling (BIM) is the
current trend in the construction industry globally, and
Malaysia, is not an exception too. BIM has been in Malaysia
for the past ten (10) years, and in the future, BIM will be an
industry standard, instead of an optional service. Even
though BIM is already in the industry for ten (10) years,
many developers are still reluctant to implement it because
they could not see the benefits of BIM especially in
monetary terms. This paper aims to explore the
understanding developers of BIM and its impact on Return
on Investment (ROI). A literature review is carried out to
review the linkage between BIM and ROI. The study
engages qualitatively with four (4) respondents who held the
title of BIM managers in their respective companies that
have experience in BIM. Data was collected through face-
to-face semi-structured interview sessions and was analysed
using qualitative content analysis techniques. From the
findings, the respondents do understand BIM and that BIM
is not a tool for visualisation only. It is, in fact, able to help
them in project control. The findings show that BIM had
impacted on the ROI of both the project and organisation.
At present, these findings support the argument that BIM
does have an impact on the ROI both positively and
negatively. However, the findings prove that BIM is worthy
of its pricey initial investment. It is, therefore, suggested
that Malaysian developers invest in BIM though the initial
investment may seem pricey.
Keywords— Building Information Modelling (BIM), Return on
Investment (ROI), Construction Industry, Malaysia
I. INTRODUCTION
BIM can be viewed as both a process and technology that
can improve the construction industry. Its implementation is
said to provide benefits to the construction projects and parties
involved [1]. A few of these benefits are summarised for
developers including better project profitability in terms of ROI
[2]. ROI is a term used to evaluate a proposed investment and
is used as a decision-making tool [3].
978-1-5090-6255-3/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE
Ng Hua Tai
Virtual Design and Construction Department
Sunway Construction Sdn. Bhd.
Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
sukinht@gmail.com
Throughout these years, developers are still reluctant to
implement BIM into their projects [4]. The reason being the
cost-savings benefits such as ROI have yet to be proven [5].
The lack of data on ROI of BIM is labelled as one of the top
five (5) factors which impede the implementation of BIM [6]
albeit the rate of BIM adoption has increased to 54% in 2016
as compared to 13% in 2011 [7].
This study aims to identify BIM’s benefits to developers in
terms of ROI. BIM is said to increase the ROI of a project
through some research. However, the reliability of most of the
analysis results for ROI of BIM was doubted [8]. The results
provided are without details regarding the analysis methods that
weaken the reliability on reported of BIM’s ROI, which is why
developers are reluctant to implement BIM.
Furthermore, the benefits of BIM are directly proportional
to the level of experience of developers [4]. New users tend to
gain negative ROI due to lack of knowledge of BIM. However,
BIM could be counter-productive if the level of experience of
users is low [9].
Hence, this study begins to address issues that surround the
impact of BIM towards ROI. More particularly, the study
directly has addressed issues like the disagreement on the
reliability of studies on ROI of BIM from the developer’s
perspective.
A brief overview of BIM in Malaysia and its relation with
ROI will be discussed in the next section. This is then followed
by methods used, results and discussion, and lastly conclusion.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
A. BIM in the Malaysian Construction Industry
In Malaysia’s context, BIM is defined as a modelling
technology and associated set of processes to produce,
communicate, analyse as well as apply the usage of digital
information models throughout a construction project’s life-
cycle [10].
The Director of Public Work Department (PWD)
introduced BIM in Malaysia in the year 2007 [11]. Since then,
many initiatives made by the Malaysia Government to
implement BIM because the Government is very keen in
pushing BIM adoption and making it compulsory for all public
projects [12]. These initiatives are done through the
collaboration of multiple organisations. A BIM committee has
established to identify the suitable platforms for construction
projects [13].
Apart from that, a BIM Unit Project is established by the
Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) to prepare
BIM Standard Manuals and Guidelines [13] and a BIM
Roadmap as a standard guideline to make BIM compulsory in
Malaysia for design-and-build and conventional projects based
on contract values [13].
Furthermore, CIDB also developed a BIM Portal that
contains a good deal of information regarding BIM [10]. On
top of that, CIDB offered training on Revit for those who are
interested or intended to use BIM.
There are many construction projects initiated by the
Government to implement BIM. In fact, there are already a few
projects in Malaysia that had successfully adapted BIM such as
the National Cancer Institute in Putrajaya and the ELITE
Pavillion in Kuala Lumpur [11].
The implementation of BIM in the Malaysian construction
industry is in between BIM level 0 and BIM level 1 [6]. Level
0 and level 1 indicated that the most Malaysian construction
players only know how to manage 2D and 3D formats.
Furthermore, the adoption of BIM in Malaysia is reported to be
running low, approximately 10% [10] due to barriers that
encircle around people’s perceptions [14]. Hence, the usage rate
of BIM in the Malaysian construction industry needs to be
improved.
B. Relation between BIM and ROI
ROI or Return in Investment, is one of the many ways used
to evaluate proposed investments [11]. Those in management
levels use ROI to measure the performance of an investment by
evaluating the capital expenditure proposals [3]. ROI
calculations for BIM investment allows users to reach an
agreement regarding money spent and expected earnings [15].
BIM and ROI are interrelated as the benefits of BIM are
directly proportional to the level of experience of developers
[4]. The potential savings in a BIM project is estimated to range
from 15% to 40% [16]. Another research also had indicated the
average ROI gained from BIM ranges from 634% to 1633%
[17]. These findings had proven that BIM had positive effects
towards the ROI.
However, BIM does not always increase the ROI [5]. A
survey shows that 11.9% of respondents had calculated a
decrease of ROI [5]. This is probably due to the trend that BIM
productivity is likely to decrease in the first few years. Thus, it
impacts negatively on performance, which will produce
negative ROI. Therefore, it can be concluded that BIM does not
necessarily increase ROI.
A survey shows about 69% and 80% of developers in The
United States of America (USA) and The United Kingdom
(UK) respectively who have experienced using BIM had
gained a positive impact in ROI [18]. This shows that different
levels of expertise had different perceived ROI from BIM [11].
Experienced users are said to be most impressed with the
potential reduction in cost and the ROI gained. It can be
concluded that the higher the level of expertise of developers,
the higher the perceived ROI gained [4].
III. METHODOLOGY
A. Methods and Tools
This study uses the qualitative approach that focuses on the
meaning, experiences and understanding [19] as well as
allowing the researcher to interact with individuals or groups
whose experiences are what the researchers want to know [20].
This is because BIM is a comparatively new concept among
developers in Malaysia and that most of those contacted are
assumed to be not obliged to share understandably ‘sensitive’
data, thus, the qualitative approach is chosen.
The method chosen is the qualitative survey, which is
about the exploration of thoughts [21]. It involves open-ended
questions with no direct numerical values. This study is
conducted through an in-depth interview or explorative expert
interview. In-depth interviews allow interviewees to state their
opinions regarding the topic and it enables the interviewer to
understand the interviewees’ view [20]. These respondents
chosen were based on their experiences in BIM and their
expertise. All respondents work as BIM managers in developer
companies that had implemented BIM. This study is based on
preliminary studies on the understanding of developers in BIM
and ROI.
The data collected is analysed using the qualitative content
analysis method. In adopting this method, an initial phase of
analysis was focused on the written interview transcripts and
summarised stories produced from the raw data [21]. Content
analysis involves the transformation of data into text, such as
reducing the data collected into a manageable, informative
database.
B. Respondents
A total of four (4) respondents, who all are BIM Managers,
representing four (4) different organisations had participated in
this study after several selections to achieve the objectives of
this study. Table 1 shows the organisations’ background.
TABLE 1: ORGANISATIONS’ BACKGROUND
Respondent Organisation Years of Experience in BIM
R1 A 1 and 1/2
R2 B 5
R3 C 5
R4 D 3
R1 is working in Organisation A that had implemented
BIM for 1 and ½ years, both R2 and R3 are working in
Organisation B and C that had implemented BIM for 5 years
and R4 is working in Organisation D that had implemented
BIM for 3 years. These organisations can be classified in
accordance with the years of experience in BIM [18]. Table 2
shows the classification of BIM users based on years of
experience of the organisation in BIM.
 TABLE 2: Classification of BIM Users based on Years of Experience
Years of Experiences Classification
1-2 BIM Beginner User
2-5 BIM Moderate User
More than 5 BIM Experienced User
By comparing data in both tables, Organisation A who had
experienced BIM for 1 and ½ years can be classified as a BIM
Beginner User, both Organisation B and C who had
experienced BIM for 5 years can be classified as BIM
Experienced Users and Organisation D who had experienced
BIM for 3 years can be classified as a BIM Moderate User.
Therefore, the respondents and organisations chosen are
suitable for this study based on their position and years of
experience in BIM.
IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
This section discusses the usage of BIM among respondents
and the effect of BIM towards ROI in the organisation that is
implementing BIM. The discussion is organised into four parts;
understanding of BIM, understanding of ROI, the effect of BIM
on the project’s ROI and the effect of BIM on the
organisation’s ROI.
A. What do you understand of BIM?
All respondents have a similar understanding of the BIM, in
which that BIM is not just a 3D model, but with the addition of
information into the model. BIM is also a collaboration between
multiple users, an integration of information and model. BIM
acts as a platform for all construction players to share
information and updates. The statement above is agreed by all
respondents and further elaboration is shown as below.
“BIM is all about the integration between information and the
model built. The power of BIM lies in the information, at any
point of the life cycle of the project.”
(R1)
“BIM enables anyone to update the information anytime and
anywhere. There is a software, where one can take pictures of
the actual progress on the site and upload it. Then, this software
will be able to compare the actual progress and the planned
progress. The report will be generated by itself and informing
the other parties involved.”
(R2)
“With BIM, the 2D drawings, planning and costing are all
integrated together until we are able to simulate the whole
project”
(R3)
“BIM is a collaboration of practices by multidisciplinary.”
(R4)
It can be concluded that the respondents do have the
understanding of BIM. Their understanding of BIM is, in fact
quite high as their definition is in-line with the Malaysia BIM
definition that, BIM is used to communicate and analyse the
information in the models throughout the whole construction
project life-cycle.
B. What do you understand of ROI?
All respondents do have the understanding of ROI. R1
stated that ROI is used to evaluate the efficiencies of an
investment. R3 supported the viewpoint stating that it is used to
predict the future outcome of the investment in terms of money.
R4 further explained that ROI is used to calculate the
investment’s earning by using the formula of cost over profit
which, is similar to the formula suggested by Autodesk in 2007
as below.
Notes: A = Cost of Hardware and Software
B = Monthly Labour Cost
C = Training Time
D = Productivity Lost After Training
E = Productivity Gain after Training
However, R2 had argued that ROI does not only calculate
the profit in terms of money. It also can be used to calculate in
terms of cost, time and quality for the construction industry. R2
further explained that the project is deemed a success if it is
completed within the budgeted cost, scheduled time and quality
parameters requested [22]. R2’s explanation is shown below.
“When calculating the ROI for projects, the elements needed is
different from calculating the ROI of an organisation. For the
calculation of ROI of projects, the whole project’s quality and
time must be included to ensure the accuracy of the calculated
ROI.”
(R2)
Therefore, all respondents have an understanding of what
ROI is, which is profit over cost [23]. However, a new
definition of ROI in the context of the Malaysian construction
industry is developed in this study, which is, ROI does not only
used to calculate future profit in terms of money but also in
terms of cost, time and quality.
C. How does BIM affect the Project Profitability?
All respondents except R1 agreed that the ROI of projects
using BIM is higher than conventional projects. This is because
R1 has yet to calculate the ROI of the project using BIM. R1’s
explanation as below.
“Our BIM project is currently in the designing stage, therefore,
we could not start calculating the ROI.”
(R1)
 However, the percentage of increment of the ROI depends
on how well performed the management team is and the level
of understanding of BIM as explained by R2.
The ROI increases because the cost had been reduced. The
statement is agreed by R2 and R4. R2 revealed that ROI of a
project increases the most in the design and planning stage. The
viewpoint is supported by R4 stating that BIM helps to reduce
the cost and shorten the time during the design stage.
R4 stated that BIM can reduce the cost by reducing the
reworks and clashes during the design stage. This viewpoint is
in line with the statement that costs are saved during the
construction stage [24]. Furthermore, the amount of materials
needed will be lesser, which will reduce the cost as well [25].
The benefit of cost reduction explained by R4 as below.
“Clashes are usually the ones that cause the increasing of the
cost during the construction stage. With BIM, clashes can be
reduced, subsequently, reduces reworks during the
construction stage. All the reduction also means that cost is
maintained. We do not need to fork out extra money just to fix
the clashes.”
(R4)
The findings are in line with the findings of Giel & Issa
(2013) and Barlish & Sullivan (2012) that, ROI for projects
using BIM are higher than conventional projects [26].
D. How does BIM affect the organisation’s ROI?
The ROI of BIM implementation are said to be further
benefited by a higher level of expertise [18] and that the ROI
recorded is directly proportional to the level of expertise of the
BIM user [16]. Thus, the higher the level of expertise of users,
the higher the perceived ROI gained.
Based on the findings, all organisations had recorded a
decrement in ROI during the first year of BIM implementation.
The statement above is agreed by all respondents and further
elaboration is shown as below.
“It usually decreases within the first few years after
implementation because it needs an amount of investment.”
(R1)
“Usually, it will decrease in first to two years due to investment
such as hiring professionals and training.”
(R2)
“During the first few years, we had suffered from
investments.”
(R3)
“We have to take the risk to invest in new technologies.”
(R4)
Table 3 shows the organisations’ ROI in the first year and
current year of BIM implementation.
TABLE 3: VARIATION OF ROI OF ORGANISATIONS
Org Classification 1st Year Years of Current ROI
ROI Implementation
A BIM Beginner ↓ 1 and ½ ↓
B BIM Experienced ↓ 5 ↑
C BIM Experienced ↓ 5 ↑
D BIM Moderate ↓ 3 Break-even
Note: ↓ indicates reduce; ↑ indicates increase
R3 states as shown below that investment is needed to
implement BIM, especially on hardware and software [27].
“To implement BIM, a large sum of investment is needed. All
the hardware upgrades and software need money, even sending
staff for training need money or employing professionals also
need money.”
(R3)
According to Table 3, Organisation A is still recording a
decrement in ROI after 1 and ½ years of implementation.
“We are currently seeing a slight decrease in ROI.”
(R1)
Organisation B and C had seen an increment after 5 years
of implementation. Both R2 and R3 had revealed that their
organisations, had seen an increment of the current ROI
compared to previous years. This is because both companies are
BIM experienced. R2 had revealed that the decrement of the
first year’s ROI is due to the training of employers and hiring
of professionals [28] to guide them while R3 had stated that
their organisation had suffered from some failed projects during
the first year of implementation, which caused them to suffer
from profit loss. Both R2 and R3 statements are shown below.
“Our organisation is currently recording an increment in
ROI.”
(R2)
“We are finally able to see some increment in the ROI.”
(R3)
Organisation D had also recorded a break-even result in its
third year of implementation, which means neither reduction
nor increment. Further explanation is shown below.
“It’s currently breaking an even. Means, we are just recovering
our ROI back to the previous state after implementing BIM.”
(R4)
This finding is in conformity with Jones (2011) that ROI
will continue to increase once the new investment had been
stabilised [29] as shown in Figure 1. All respondents agreed that
it takes about three (3) to five (5) years to see improvement in
the ROI of the organisation.

Fig. 1. ROI vs Years of Implementation
Therefore, the ROI of an organisation will only see an
increment after a range of three (3) to five (5) years. The
findings differ from Becerik-Gerber & Rice (2010) that, it takes
up to six (6) to eight (8) years to see improvements in ROI.
V. CONCLUSION
Developers do have the understanding of BIM and know
about the benefits to be gained through BIM. Still, developers
are reluctant to use BIM. The ROI of BIM projects are proven
to be higher than conventional projects. This is because BIM
saves cost and time as well as aids in improving the quality of
the project. Furthermore, BIM affects the ROI of the
organisation both negatively and positively.
It is undeniable that BIM is able to improve the
construction industry. The uses and benefits of BIM toward
developers are the main factors that developers should
implement BIM. It is important to study the impact of BIM
towards ROI to encourage and increase awareness among
construction players to implement BIM in construction
projects. In the future, it is possible to study the impact of ROI
from other construction players point of view namely
consultant and contractors.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to acknowledge assistance and
encouragement from Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
(UTHM) and Sunway Construction Sdn. Bhd., and special
thanks to all that contributed to the research.
REFERENCES
[1] Azhar S, Khalfan M, and Maqsood T 2012 BIM: Now and Beyond
Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building 12(4)
pp 15-28
[2] Eastman C, Liston K, Sacks R and Teicholz P 2011 BIM Handbook:
A Guide to BIM for Owners, Managers, Designers, Engineers and
Contractors United State of America: Wiley
[3] Phillips J J, and Zúñiga L 2008 Costs and ROI: Evaluating at the
Ultimate Level United State of America: Pfeiffer
[4] McGraw Hill Construction 2009 The Business Value of BIM: Getting
BIM to the Bottom Line New York: McGraw Hill Companies
[5] Becerik-Gerber B, and Rice S 2010 The Perceived Value of BIM in
the United State of America Building Industry Journal of Information
Technology in Construction 15 pp 185–201
[6] Zahrizan Z, Abdul Hamid Z, Marshall-Ponting A, Mohamed Ali N,
and Tarmizi Haron A 2013 Exploring the Barriers and Driving Factors
in Implementing BIM in the Malaysian Construction Industry: A
Preliminary Study IEM Journal 75(1) pp 1–10
[7] NBS 2016 National BIM Report 2016 United Kingdom: RIBA
Enterprises Ltd
[8] Lee G, Park H, and Won J 2012 D3 City project: Economic impact of
BIM-assisted design validation Automation in Construction 22 pp
577-586
[9] Eisenman S and Borinara P BIM’s Impact on Team Performance 45th
ASC International Annual Conference April 1–4 United State of
America 2012
[10] CIDB 2016 Construction Industry Transformation Programme 2016 -
2020 Malaysia: CIDB
[11] Ahmad Latiffi A, Mohd S, Brahim J 2015 Application of Building
Information Modeling (BIM) in the Malaysian Construction Industry:
A Story of the First Government Project. Applied Mechanics and
Material 773 pp 943-948
[12] Rogers, J Chong, H P and Preece C 2015 Adoption of Building
Information Modelling technology (BIM): Perspectives from
Malaysian engineering consulting services firms, Engineering
Construction & Architectural Management Vol. 22(4) pp 424-445
[13] Ahmad Latiffi A, Brahim J, Mohd S, and Fathi M S 2014 The
Malaysian Government’s Initiative in Using BIM in Construction
Projects Sustainable Solutions in Structural Engineering and
Construction pp 767–772
[14] Enegbuma W I, Aliagha G U and Ali K N 2015 Effects of perceptions
on BIM adoption in Malaysian construction industry, Journal of
Technology 77 (15) pp 69-75
[15] Autodesk 2007 BIM’s ROI: Autodesk (Ed.) Revit BIM United
Kingdom: Autodesk
[16] Holness G 2006 BIM ASHRAE Journal 48(8) pp 38-46
[17] Azhar S, Hein M, and Sketo B 2008 BIM: Benefits, Risks and
Challenges Proceedings of the 44th ASC Annual Conference Auburn,
Alabama
[18] McGraw Hill Construction 2014 The Business Value of BIM for
Owners. United Kingdom: McGraw Hill Companies
[19] Ezzy D 2013 Qualitative analysis Routledge
[20] Parkinson G and Drislane R 2011 Qualitative Research Online
dictionary of the Social Sciences.
[21] Smith J A (Ed) 2015 Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to
research methods Sage
[22] Reddy K P 2011 BIM for Building Owners and Developers United
State of America: Wiley
[23] Giel B and Issa R R A 2013 Return on Investment Analysis of Building
Information Modelling in Construction Journal of Computing in Civil
Engineering 27(5) pp 511-521
[24] Barlish K, and Sullivan K 2012 How to Measure Benefits of BIM – A
Case Study Approach Automation in Construction 24 pp 149 – 159
[25] Mitchell D BIM Implementation: A 5D Quantity Surveyor’s Views on
Procurement and Cost Savings RICS COBRA Conference September
10–12, 2013 New Delhi
[26] McGraw Hill Construction 2014 The Business Value of BIM in
Europe: Getting BIM to the Bottom Line in the United Kingdom,
France and Germany Europe: McGraw Hill Companies
[27] Jupp J R BIM Investment: Understanding Value, Return and Models
of Assessment The 38th Australasian Universities of Building
Education Association Conference November 20–23 University of
Auckland, New Zealand 2013
[28] Johansen E and Shahrin F 2013 Challenges in Engaging the Client
during the Capture, Translation, Transformation and Delivery of
Client Requirements within the BIM Environment Proceedings from
7th Nordic Conference on Construction Economics and Organisation
June 12–14 Trondheim. 2013
[29] Jones L R 2011 ROI Analysis: Applying a Private Sector Approach to
Public Sector. Prime Journal of Business Administration &
Management 2(1) pp 426 – 435