Collaboration in BIM-based construction networks: a bibliometric-qualitative literature review

Mehran Oraee, M. Reza Hosseini, Eleni Papadonikolaki, Roshani Palliyaguru, Mehrdad Arashpour

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

99 Citations (Scopus)


BIM-based Construction Networks (BbCNs) are teams comprising members from several specialist organisations to undertake BIM-related tasks on BIM-enabled projects. Fostering collaboration within BbCNs is a top priority for construction project managers, yet no explicit body of knowledge has focused on investigating the relevant research gaps in knowledge. The present study intends to address this gap by plotting the storyline of relevant research studies in the last 10 years (2006–2016). A “Collaboration Pentagon” consisted of context, process, task, team and actor as the theoretical lens is created through integration of relevant frameworks. The study draws upon a bibliometric analysis of 1031 studies on BIM alongside the outcome of a qualitative evaluation of a total of 62 carefully selected papers on collaboration in BbCNs. The findings reveal that the scholarship on collaboration on BIM-enabled projects has predominately focused on technology as one antecedent of collaboration while project-related and managerial antecedents have remained under-researched. Moreover, though enhancing collaboration necessitates inclusion of all influential antecedents, studies with such an all-inclusive perspective are rare. The study contributes to the field through this inclusive Collaboration Pentagon and by providing a systematic and objective evaluation of available literature on collaboration in BbCNs and uncovering respective gaps.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1288-1301
Number of pages14
JournalInternational Journal of Project Management
Issue number7
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2017
Externally publishedYes


  • Bibliometric analysis
  • Building information modelling (BIM)
  • Collaboration
  • Construction project management
  • Mixed methods systematic review

Cite this