La evaluación de los riesgos y las exenciones

This section presents a summary of the next six questions asked as part of the survey. This section of the questionnaire pertained to satisfaction with the quality of

14.9% 39.6% 30.2% 15.3% 20-30 30-40 40-50 50 and above 14.6% _14.0% 49.7% 22.4% High School Diploma Bachelor Post- Graduate

107 information that is handed over to project owners towards the end of the project. Covered topics included challenges in adoption of good data handover practices, drivers for change, clarity of data requirements at handover, and perceptions on role of Building Information Modeling (BIM) in supporting the handover process.

5.3.1 Satisfaction with quality of information handed over to project owners.

Under this theme, the researcher asked the respondents’ opinions concerning their satisfaction with the quality of information that is handed over to project owners towards the end of the project. The finding of this theme reveals that there is a strong distribution of survey respondents close to symmetric distribution, with slightly higher than 83% (Figure 5.3) of the sample population (308) being unsatisfied with the quality of information that is handed over to project owners towards the end of the project. However, 17% of respondents were satisfied with the quality of information that is handed over to project owners towards the end of the project.

Figure 5.3: Distribution of survey respondents’ Satisfaction with quality of information handed over to project owners

5.3.2 Number of years of building handover experiences

The respondents of the survey were asked to describe their experience level in the building handover process in order to establish whether they have the right level of experience to manage the building handover process in their respective organizations. The results are presented graphically in Figure 5.4. It is indicated that the result was more evenly distributed when compared to previous question (Section 5.3.1). More than 100 respondents (slightly less than 34%) had over 20 years of related experience in building handover processes. However, about 21% of the survey respondents had less

83.1% 16.9%

No Satisfied Satisfied

108 than five years of experience at the building handover stage, with 17.2% having 16-20 years, followed by slightly less than 16% with 11-15 years, and 12% with 6-10 years of experience.

Figure 5.4: Respondents years of experience at the building handover stage

5.3.3 Description of the company's principal business activity

The results of the survey indicate that the largest portion (56.8%) of respondents were from public sector client organizations (i.e. government), followed by slightly more than 17% representing facility management firms. This was followed by slightly less than 16% of respondents representing private clients. The smallest portions (5.5% and 3.9%) were contractors and consulted-designers of facility management firms in the KSA public sector construction organisations (Figure 5.5). There was a relatively small difference in the number of respondents representing private client and facility management organisations.

Figure 5.5: Types of Organisations represented by Respondents 21.1% 12.0% 15.9% 17.2% 33.8% 0-5 years 6 to 10 11 to 15 16 to 20 20 to more 56.8% 15.9% 5.5% 3.9% 17.9% Client - Government Client - Privat Contractor Consultant-Designer Facility Management

109

5.3.4 Description of Respondents’ Company

The respondents were asked about how they would best describe their company/organization’s principal business activity. Three given options were: a) contracting company, b) consulting organization, or c) client organization (private or government) company. The detailed results are represented graphically in Figure 5.6. As can be seen, the large proportion (47.7%) of respondents represented the Government Client category, followed by 33.4% of respondents representing private client companies. Contracting organisations represented 11.4% of respondents, whereas the smallest percentage of respondents (7.5%) belonged to consultant companies.

Figure 5.6: Description of the companies

5.3.5 Period of time that organisation has been using BIM

The survey respondents were asked about length of time that their organisations had been using BIM. There were four given options: a) not using BIM at all, b) from 1 to 2 years, c) from 3 to 5 years, and d) for more than 5 years. The results indicated that none of the responding companies had been using BIM for more than 2 years. More than 163 respondents (slightly less than 52.9%) answered that their companies are not using BIM. However, as many as 47.1% of companies indicated that they had used BIM for the past 1-2 years (Figure 5.7). These results indicate that the application of BIM technology in the construction Saudi companies is starting to be explored. Another key factor could possibly be the fact that the survey targeted respondents with more involvement in project handover. In handover phase of the project, usage of BIM within KSA is still in its early stages.

110

Figure 5.7: Distribution of survey respondents’ Period of time that organisation has been using BIM

5.3.6 Classification of the organisation in terms of size

The respondents were asked to classify their organizations in terms of size (based on number of employees). The detailed results are represented graphically by (Figure 5.8). The respondents ranged between medium-to-large organizations. However, most respondents were situated in large organizations, with slightly less than 290 respondents. This equated to 89.0% of the total. The remainder shows that slightly less than 7% of respondents belong to organizations employing a medium number of employees, whereas the smallest percentage (3.9%) of respondents belonged to organizations employing a small number of employees.

Figure 5.8: Size of Respondents’ organisation

52.9% 47.1%

Not using 1-2 years 3-5 years

More than 5 years

3.9% 7.1% 89.0% small size Medium size Large size

111

5.3.7 Recognition of the Importance of the Project Handover Stage

Figure 5.9 illustrates the respondents’ views on importance of the project handover stage to the organisation and client. The response was distributed similarly between very important (45.8%) and important (43.5%). Other options (slightly important, least and others) represented smaller percentages, not exceeding 6.2% (slightly important) and 4.5% (least important) of the total responses. This illustrates that the significance of the handover process is recognized by the respondent group.

Figure 5.9: Importance of the project handover stage to the organisation and clients

5.4 Section 3: Specific and characteristics of Information required for Building