2571-1075ISSN (Online)
Volume 12 , Issue 1 , PP: 21-37, 2026 | Cite this article as | XML | Html | PDF | Full Length Article
Ashraf Elhendawi 1 * , Muhaideb AlMuhaideb 2 , Abdul Salam Darwish 3
Doi: https://doi.org/10.54216/IJBES.120102
Purpose – The current global transformation in the construction industry, through the use of Building Information Modeling (BIM) and ISO 19650 information management, is hindered by a missing financial Return on Investment (ROI) on the ISO 19650 information management. This is a hindrance for investment and decision-making. The research seeks to solve the problem through the establishment of a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) for the realization of the “ISO 19650 Dividend.” Design/methodology/approach – A sequential explanatory mixed-methods approach was adopted, integrating a systematic literature review, the analysis of existing data (n = 104), a cross-sectional study involving a primary survey of a targeted cohort in the UK and Saudi Arabia (n = 187), and in-depth expert interviews (n = 15). Quantitative data were analysed using weighted mean, gap, and path analyses, while qualitative data were examined through thematic analysis. Findings – The paper pinpoints the attainment of operational efficiency and cost competitiveness as the key priority level for the value drivers, while pointing out the substantial gap in measuring the intangible value, such as organization capital and sustainability. Commitment to the organization by the leaders stands as the key critical success factor. The key outcome of this paper includes the development of the four-leveled KPI Framework and the conceptual model focusing on the adoption and successful measurement, resulting in the ROIa. Practical implications – The framework offers a structured roadmap or a step-by-step process change that enables organizations to move from basic process compliance measurement metrics to financial metrics measurement in their digital projects. This framework provides professionals in this domain a way in which benefits realized from collaboration are converted into a proxy measures. Originality/value – Instead, this research breaks the mold of general sets of BIM benefits in offering the first-ever integrated measurement framework that specifically sets out to quantify the ROI of implementing ISO 19650, by synthesizing performance metrics with qualitative knowledge of leadership and change management in a holistic approach for the realization of digital promise and profit.
Building Information Modeling (BIM) , ISO 19650 , Return on Investment (ROI) , Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) , Digital Transformation , Construction Industry
[1] L. Gharaibeh, K. Eriksson, and B. Lantz, “Quantifying BIM investment value: A systematic review,” J. Eng. Des. Technol., vol. 23, no. 3, 2024.
[2] Elhendawi, Leadership and Change Management in Adopting ISO 19650 Standards as a Catalyst for Digital Transformation in Construction Organisations, M.B.A. thesis, Horizons Univ., Paris, France, 2025.
[3] T. Vu and S. Hsieh, “Influence of project managers’ inspirational motivation leadership style on coordination and performance of BIM construction projects,” J. Manage. Eng., vol. 42, no. 1, 2025.
[4] R. Abougamil, D. Thorpe, and A. Heravi, “Investigating the source of claims with the importance of BIM application on reducing construction disputable claims in KSA,” Buildings, vol. 13, no. 9, p. 2219, 2023.
[5] K. Barlish and K. Sullivan, “How to measure the benefits of BIM—A case study approach,” Autom. Constr., vol. 24, pp. 149–159, 2012.
[6] McGraw-Hill Construction, The Business Value of BIM in North America: Multi-Year Trend Analysis and User Ratings (2007–2012). Bedford, MA, USA: McGraw-Hill Construction, 2012.
[7] National Building Information Modeling Committee, National BIM Standard. Washington, DC, USA: National Institute of Building Sciences, 2015.
[8] B. Munshi, Data-Driven Decisions for Project Success: Digitalization, Analytics, KPIs, Dashboards, BIM/ISO 19650, Risk (ISO 31000), Earned Value, Digital Twins, Forecasting, Governance, and Evidence-Based Delivery, Preprint, 2025.
[9] J. Ma, S. Mao, W. Lin, and X. Zhu, “Predicting behavioral resistance to BIM implementation among design engineers in construction projects: An SQB-based empirical study from China,” Buildings, vol. 15, no. 22, p. 4190, 2025.
[10] S. Mirhosseini, R. Mavi, N. Mavi, B. Abbasnejad, and F. Rayani, “Interrelations among leadership competencies of BIM leaders: A fuzzy DEMATEL–ANP approach,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 18, p. 7830, 2020.
[11] V. T. D. and S. H. H., “Impact of project managers’ contingent reward leadership style on performance of BIM construction projects,” J. Manage. Eng., vol. 41, no. 3, p. 224, 2025.
[12] J. A. Smith, L. R. Johnson, and M. K. Lee, “Integrating smart technologies in urban development: A sustainable approach,” Sustain. Cities Soc., vol. 68, pp. 102–115, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2022.102115.
[13] R. T. Brown and P. H. Green, “Building information modeling and sustainability: A framework for enhancing urban resilience,” J. Urban Technol., vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 45–62, 2024, doi: 10.1080/10630732.2023.2134567.
[14] C. Zhang, W. Dong, W. Shen, and Y. Du, “Influencing factors of BIM application benefits in construction projects based on SEM,” Buildings, vol. 15, no. 11, p. 1875, 2025.
