越览（184）——精读硕士论文的4.3 BIM 软件供应商的综合评价

摘要：This issue of tweets will introduce 4.3 Comprehensive evaluation of BIM software suppliers for construction enterprises of the mas

分享兴趣，传播快乐，

增长见闻，留下美好。

亲爱的您，这里是LearningYard学苑！

今天小编为大家带来

“越览（184）——精读博士论文

《建筑施工企业BIM软件供应商的选择与评价研究》

的4.3建筑施工企业 BIM 软件供应商的综合评价

选择评价指标体系的构建欢迎您的访问！

Share interests, spread happiness,

increase knowledge, and leave beautiful memories.

Dear you, this is LearningYard Academy!

Today, the editor brings you

4.3 Comprehensive evaluation of

BIM software suppliers for construction enterprises

of "Yuelan (184)——Intensive reading of

the master’s thesis

‘Research on the selection and evaluation of BIM

software suppliers for

construction enterprises’".

Welcome to visit!

一、内容摘要（Summary of content）

本期推文将从思维导图、精读内容、知识补充三个方面介绍硕士论文《建筑施工企业BIM软件供应商的选择与评价研究》的4.3建筑施工企业 BIM 软件供应商的综合评价。

This issue of tweets will introduce 4.3 Comprehensive evaluation of BIM software suppliers for construction enterprises of the master's thesis "Research on Industrial Chain Resilience from the Perspective of Supply Chain Network Structure" from three aspects: mind mapping, intensive reading content, and knowledge supplement.

二、思维导图（Mind mapping）

三、精读内容（Intensive reading content）

（一）评价指标的量化处理（Quantitative processing of evaluation indicators）

1. 定性指标的量化必要性（The necessity of quantifying qualitative indicators）

论文研究对象为建筑施工企业在多个BIM软件供应商投标方案中的选择与排序。由于评价体系中所设定的大部分指标属于定性指标，这类指标无法直接用于数值化比较。如果不进行科学合理的量化处理，就难以实现对各方案的综合评价与排序。因此，对定性指标进行量化是整个评价过程中的关键步骤，其目的在于将模糊的定性信息转化为可操作的数值信息，为后续决策提供客观依据。

This paper examines the selection and ranking of proposals from multiple BIM software vendors by construction companies. Since most of the indicators in the evaluation system are qualitative, they cannot be directly used for numerical comparison. Without scientific and rational quantification, comprehensive evaluation and ranking of proposals would be difficult. Therefore, quantifying qualitative indicators is a key step in the entire evaluation process, aiming to transform ambiguous qualitative information into actionable numerical data, providing an objective basis for subsequent decision-making.

2. 定性指标量化的常用方法分类（Classification of common methods for quantifying qualitative indicators）

梳理相关文献发现，定性指标的量化方法可以大致分为直接打分法和间接打分法两类。直接打分法要求评价人员依据既定准则对指标给出分值，包括加分制与扣分制等具体形式。这种方法具有简便直观的优点，但容易受到评价人员主观偏差和准则设定不当的影响，导致误差累积，从而影响整体评价结果的真实性。相较之下，间接打分法并不直接给出具体数值，而是通过等级评定、层次分析等方式保持指标评价结果的优劣顺序，更强调方案间的“保序性”。

A review of relevant literature reveals that quantification methods for qualitative indicators can be broadly categorized into direct and indirect scoring methods. Direct scoring requires evaluators to assign scores to indicators based on established criteria, including specific methods such as bonus and deduction systems. This method offers the advantages of simplicity and intuitiveness, but is susceptible to subjective biases by evaluators and improperly defined criteria, leading to cumulative errors and thus affecting the authenticity of the overall evaluation results. In contrast, indirect scoring does not directly assign specific numerical values. Instead, it maintains the order of merit of indicator evaluation results through methods such as grading and hierarchical analysis, placing greater emphasis on "order preservation" between options.

3. 论文的选择与理由（Choice of paper and reasons）

论文的研究任务是针对多个BIM软件供应商投标方案进行优劣排序，重点在于确保不同方案之间的比较结果能够准确反映其相对水平。相比之下，直接打分法虽然操作简单，但主观性强且存在累积误差，不适用于本研究。间接打分法能够避免直接赋值所带来的局限，更符合论文对“保序性”的核心需求，因此成为更合理的选择。

The research task of this paper is to rank the bids from multiple BIM software vendors, with the key focus on ensuring that the comparison results accurately reflect their relative performance. While direct scoring is simple to use, it is highly subjective and subject to cumulative errors, making it unsuitable for this study. Indirect scoring avoids the limitations of direct assignment and better meets the paper's core requirement of "preserving rank," making it a more reasonable choice.

4. 具体采用的方法（Specific methods used）

在具体方法的选取上，等级评定法虽然属于间接打分方式，但容易出现多个方案处于相同等级的情况，从而影响排序的精确性。为克服这一不足，论文最终采用基于层次分析法改进的方案比较法。该方法通过对同一指标下的不同投标方案进行两两比较，并结合权重进行判断，可以有效保证评价过程的精细性和结果的区分度，从而实现对BIM软件供应商的科学量化评价与排序。

Regarding the specific method used, while the grading method is an indirect scoring method, it can easily result in multiple proposals being ranked at the same level, thus affecting the accuracy of the ranking. To overcome this shortcoming, the paper ultimately adopted a scheme comparison method based on an improved analytic hierarchy process. This method compares different bidding proposals under the same metric pairwise and makes judgments based on weights. This method effectively ensures the precision of the evaluation process and the discriminability of the results, thereby achieving a scientific and quantitative evaluation and ranking of BIM software vendors.

（二）综合评价计算（Comprehensive evaluation calculation）

通过将各个评价指标的打分值与对应的指标权重进行加权计算，得到各方案的综合评价结果。

By weighting the score of each evaluation indicator with the corresponding indicator weight, the comprehensive evaluation results of each plan are obtained.

最后，根据各方案的综合评价结果，将其由大到小进行排序，进而依次确定中标人顺序。

Finally, based on the comprehensive evaluation results of each plan, they will be ranked from large to small, and the order of successful bidders will be determined in turn.

四、知识补充（Knowledge supplement）

在多指标决策分析中，加权求和法是最常见且应用广泛的一种综合评价方法。其基本思想是将各个评价指标的打分值与指标权重相乘，然后对所有指标结果进行累加，从而得到每个方案的综合得分。

In multi-criteria decision-making analysis, the weighted summation method is the most common and widely used comprehensive evaluation method. Its basic idea is to multiply the score of each evaluation indicator by the indicator weight, and then accumulate all the indicator results to obtain the comprehensive score of each option.

该方法的理论基础在于效用加和假设，即认为决策者对不同指标的偏好可以通过线性加权的方式进行整合。具体来说，指标权重反映了指标在整体评价中的重要性，而打分值经过标准化处理后能够消除量纲差异，使得不同性质的指标能够在同一评价框架下进行比较。通过计算出的综合得分，能够较为直观地反映出各个方案在综合绩效上的优劣。

The theoretical basis of this method lies in the utility summation hypothesis, which holds that decision makers' preferences for different indicators can be integrated through linear weighting. Specifically, indicator weights reflect their importance in the overall evaluation, while standardized scores eliminate dimensional differences, allowing indicators of different nature to be compared within the same evaluation framework. The resulting composite score provides a more intuitive reflection of the overall performance of each option.

在实践中，加权求和法具有直观性强、计算简便、易于操作等优点，因而被广泛用于工程管理、供应商选择和项目投标等领域。但其潜在缺陷在于结果较为依赖于权重的确定方式，若权重分配不合理，可能会影响最终的排序结果。因此，在实际应用时，权重的确定需要借助科学方法（如层次分析法、熵值法等），以保证评价结果的客观性与可信度。

In practice, the weighted summation method has advantages such as intuitiveness, simple calculations, and ease of operation, making it widely used in engineering management, supplier selection, and project bidding. However, a potential drawback is that the results are highly dependent on the weighting method. If the weights are not properly assigned, the final ranking results may be affected. Therefore, in practical applications, the determination of weights requires the use of scientific methods (such as the Analytic Hierarchy Process and the Entropy Method) to ensure the objectivity and credibility of the evaluation results.

今天的分享就到这里了。

如果您对文章有独特的想法，

欢迎给我们留言，让我们相约明天。

祝您今天过得开心快乐！

That's all for today's sharing.

If you have a unique idea about the article,

please leave us a message,

and let us meet tomorrow.

I wish you a nice day!

文案|yyz

排版|yyz

审核|hzy