VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY

The potential weaknesses of the case study research are a problem of accessibility, lack of rigour, sloppiness, biased view, and lack of scientific basis for statistical generalisation. The case study methodology usually faces validity and reliability issues. According to Gibbs (2007), validity in qualitative research refers to the verification process of the findings employed by the researcher. Yin (2009) identified two aspects of validity: internal validity and external validity. The former is concerned with the truthfulness of the case study and interference, and the latter is a question of generalising the findings beyond the immediate case study. On the other hand, reliability according to Gibbs (2007) indicates that the researcher‟s approach is consistent across different cases and projects and concentrates on the errors and bias of the study. To address these issues, the research followed a case study validation strategy, as proposed by Yin (2009) and is depicted in the following Table 3.5:

Table 3.5: Validity and reliability procedures for case study (Yin, 2009, p.41)

TEST Case study tactics Proposed measures

Construct Validity Use multiple source of evidence Establish chain of evidence Have key informants review draft case study report

Triangulation - integrating theories

- multiple sources of evidence (documents review, survey & interview).

- Integrating data analysis methods: content analysis & cognitive mapping.

Reliability Use case study protocol Develop case study database

Documenting procedures and steps used in the case study

Verification of transcripts Consistent interview

In the test of construct validity, the use of multiple sources of evidence can increase the level of validity. In this research, besides having multiple respondents for interview as the primary source of evidence, other sources were also proposed such as documents, reports, etc. However, when the data

78 collection phase was executed, most of the written data was treated as confidential by the respondents. This research therefore could only rely on the use of multiple respondents to satisfy the validity requirement. Also, once the framework had been developed, it was validated by using a focus group workshop in order to confirm the findings of the research by the key informants. For the reliability issue, along the process, the case study protocol was also developed and documented. The case study protocol in a form of interview questions can be further referred to in Appendix 1.0, the interview questions. Besides documenting for the purpose of reliability, outlining the step by step procedure in collecting and analysing data and reporting findings would also serve as guidance for the researcher. Meanwhile, for each individual case that was investigated, reports of finding were prepared and sent back to the organisation involved in the case study to comment. The purpose of this exercise was to address the reliability issue to make sure that what the researcher transcribed and reported was really what the respondents meant.

As discussed, within the validation process, there are two types of validation that are required for this research. The first one is individual case validation, which focuses on validating the individual findings to make sure that what the researcher is reporting reflects the actual company‟s views and practice. The second type of validation is focusing on generalising the conceptual framework that was produced by the research. The latter, after the readiness framework was conceptualised, to validate the framework, a focus group workshop was conducted on 17th November 2011 at Cyberview Resort and Spa, Cyberjaya, Selangor, in collaboration with CREAM. In the collaboration, CREAM agreed to support all expenditure and human resources to enable the focus group workshop to be conducted. In return, the researcher was required to manage a one-day roundtable event, entitled “Industrialised Building System (IBS): Mechanisation through Building Information Modelling (BIM) as can be seen in the following Table 3.6. In addition, the researcher was also required to prepare an industrial report regarding the events, including the workshop validation findings and industrial roundtable discussion findings. Therefore, during the event, the researcher was officially appointed as event coordinator, industrial report editor, and workshop moderator for the researcher‟s slot of workshop validation. The event was attended by 25 participants representing private developers, government agencies, universities, and design consultants. The objectives of the roundtable workshop were:

• To highlight the concept of mechanisation, automation and robotics in construction and its relation with Industrialised Building System (IBS)

• To showcase BIM actual implementation

• To discuss the potential application of BIM towards mechanisation of IBS • To discuss the issues of BIM organisational readiness

79 Table 3.6: Tentative agenda for the roundtable program entitled Industrialised Building System (IBS): Mechanisation through Building Information Modelling (BIM)

TIME ACTIVITY

08.00-09.00 Registration and Breakfast

09.00-10.00

Opening address and Presentation of

Industrialised Building System (IBS) / Building Information Modelling (BIM) Roundtable: Mechanisation of IBS through BIM

Ir. Dr. Zuhairi Abd Hamid, Executive Director of CREAM

10.00-10.45 A Case Study of BIM Implementation in Malaysia

Presented by En. Shaharin Hashim, BIM Manager of IPMS

10.45-11.30

A Case Study of BIM transformation in Oil and Gas Organisation

Presented by Ir Dzulaidin Tasrin, Head of Mechanical and Piping Engineering of Kencana Beswide

11.30-12.00 Coffee Break

12.00-13.00 BIM Industrial Transformation in Australia (Video conference) Presented by Mr Bilal Succar, Director of Change Agents 13.00-14.00 Lunch Break

14.00-16.00

Industry Workshop: BIM Readiness Framework

Moderated by Ahmad Tarmizi Haron, PG University of Salford/Lecturer of University Malaysia Pahang

16.00-17.00 Taskforce Discussion

Moderated by Ir. Dr. Zuhairi Abd Hamid, Executive Director of CREAM

17.00-18.00 Closing and hi-tea

3.6

SUMMARY

In summary, this chapter provides some discussion of case studies in terms of the different types found in the literature. Case studies are considered useful in this research as they enable researchers to examine a rich information data. The case study presents the data of real-life situations and it provides better insights into the detailed behaviours of the subjects of interest. In addition, the exploratory nature of this research to identify the readiness criteria has positioned the case studies as a better option. The use of case study research attempts to explore the current level of BIM implementation and readiness criteria by the organisations involved in the case studies. Meanwhile, a focus group workshop was also held covering the needs and data validation techniques, which was done via questionnaires and a group discussion. The next chapter 4 will discuss the case study findings for each individual case. It describes the current level of BIM implementation of each company and the readiness criteria that was identified in each company. The next chapter will discuss the findings of each individual case. The discussion was made in two parts where the first part discusses the company‟s background and current implementation of BIM. The second part is

80 pertinent as it discusses each readiness criteria that was identified in each case. The readiness criteria would then be used to be cross-analysed and developed further into a case conceptual framework, as can be found in chapter 5.

81

CHAPTER 4: REPORT ON CASE STUDIES

4.1

INTRODUCTION

This chapter discusses the case studies findings for the achievement of the research objectives, to identify the organisational requirement for BIM implementation. To avoid confusion, it is important to mention that the term „readiness criteria‟ used in this research is developed based on the organisational requirement for BIM implementation, and the detailed discussion about the readiness concept can be found in chapter 2, Literature Review. Four companies were involved in the case studies where one BIM consultancy was chosen for piloting the case study, while the remaining three companies, an oil and gas design consultancy, and two A/E/C based integrated consultancies were chosen for the actual case studies. All of the companies are based in Malaysia. The case study findings draw from a number of face to face interviews, observations, and a compilation of physical documentations concerning BIM with key management and technical BIM personnel in the company.

In each of the companies, the first part discusses the background and current level of BIM implementation to understand the context of BIM implementation. The later part focuses on the identification and discussion of the readiness criteria which underpinned the company in implementing BIM. The case studies focus on the main elements of the readiness category which was identified in the literature review as following:

1) PROCESS

a. Process Change Strategy

b. BIM Implementation Management c. Policy 2) MANAGEMENT a. Business Strategy b. Management Competency c. Leadership 3) PEOPLE

a. Roles and Responsibility b. Skills and Attitude c. Training and Education d. Work Environment

4) TECHNOLOGY

a. Hardware

b. Technical Support c. Software

82 The importance of this chapter, with respect to the framework development is it provides the primary data for each individual case. Since the data is qualitative in nature, it provides a better understanding of the justification that was made by the interviewee for each readiness criteria that was identified. This understanding is highly useful to guide the researcher to cross-analyse, discuss and theoretically validate the readiness criteria, as can be found in chapter 5.