越览（174）——精读硕士论文 BIM 软件供应商选择评价指标的初选

摘要：This issue of tweets will introduce 3.1 Preliminary selection of evaluation criteria for BIM software suppliers for construction c

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（174）——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3.1建筑施工企业 BIM 软件供应商选择评价指标的初选

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

3.1 Preliminary selection of

evaluation criteria for BIM software suppliers

for construction companies

of "Yuelan (174)——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3.1建筑施工企业 BIM 软件供应商选择评价指标的初选。

This issue of tweets will introduce 3.1 Preliminary selection of evaluation criteria for BIM software suppliers for construction companies of the doctoral 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）相关文献分析（Related literature analysis）

文献研究方法旨在通过收集、甄别和分析相关文献，全面了解研究问题的历史和现状，从而为研究提供理论支持。本研究的核心任务是初步获取“建筑施工企业BIM软件供应商选择评价指标”，并以此为基础进行文献检索和分析。在检索过程中，首先设置关键词“建筑企业（或施工企业）”“BIM（或BIM软件）”“供应商（或服务商）”“评价指标（或选择指标，或影响因素）”，通过CNKI数据库进行搜索，初步结果仅获取到少量直接相关文献。为弥补不足，研究扩大检索范围，将软件供应商选择评价相关文献纳入分析，并采用中文与英文关键词进行检索，共获得26篇具有参考价值的文献。

The literature research method aims to provide theoretical support by collecting, identifying, and analyzing relevant literature to gain a comprehensive understanding of the history and current status of the research question. The core task of this study was to initially identify "evaluation indicators for BIM software vendor selection by construction companies" and use this as a basis for literature search and analysis. The search process began with the keywords "construction companies (or construction companies)," "BIM (or BIM software)," "suppliers (or service providers)," and "evaluation indicators (or selection indicators, or influencing factors)." Initial results revealed only a small number of directly relevant documents. To address this, the search scope was expanded to include literature on software vendor selection and evaluation. The search was conducted using both Chinese and English keywords, resulting in a total of 26 reference-worthy documents.

在整理分析阶段，对检索到的文献进行阅读、分类，并提取其中涉及的评价指标，形成初步指标汇总。分析结果显示，直接针对建筑施工企业BIM软件供应商选择评价指标的研究较少，但软件供应商选择评价的相关研究对本研究具有借鉴意义，尤其是建筑房地产企业ERP软件供应商选择的研究。大多数文献从软件价格、供应商特征、软件功能特征和用户服务四个方面构建评价指标体系，部分研究则加入技术难度、兼容性、模型表现力等维度。该现状表明本研究不仅具有探索价值，也能够填补一定的研究空白。

During the collation and analysis phase, the retrieved literature was reviewed and categorized, and the evaluation indicators involved were extracted to form a preliminary index summary. The results of this analysis revealed that while there is limited research directly addressing evaluation indicators for BIM software vendor selection in construction companies, related studies, particularly those on ERP software vendor selection for construction and real estate companies, offer valuable insights for this study. Most literature constructs evaluation index systems based on four key dimensions: software price, vendor characteristics, software functional features, and user service. Some studies also incorporate dimensions such as technical difficulty, compatibility, and model expressiveness. This suggests that this study not only has exploratory value but also fills a significant research gap.

（二）问卷调查方案（Questionnaire survey plan）

本研究在文献研究的基础上，为弥补行业差异带来的不足，设计并实施问卷调查，以全面获取建筑施工企业选择BIM软件供应商的评价指标。

Based on the literature research, this study designed and implemented a questionnaire survey to make up for the shortcomings caused by industry differences, so as to comprehensively obtain the evaluation indicators of construction companies in selecting BIM software suppliers.

问卷内容分为三部分：第一部分为样本基本信息（学历、工作年限、单位类别等）；第二部分调查单位BIM软件使用情况，了解采购关注点；第三部分针对企业选择BIM供应商时考虑的评价因素（软件费用、供应商实力、软件功能特征和用户服务）。

The questionnaire is divided into three parts: the first part is the basic information of the sample (education level, years of work experience, unit type, etc.); the second part investigates the use of BIM software in the unit to understand procurement concerns; the third part focuses on the evaluation factors considered by enterprises when selecting BIM suppliers (software costs, supplier strength, software functional characteristics and user services).

在正式调查前，先进行抽样预调查，共发放12份问卷，回收10份有效问卷。反馈建议主要包括：增加受访者对调查熟悉程度的问题，以及在第三部分补充指标描述与示例，以便理解。问卷根据意见进行了完善。

Before the formal survey, a preliminary sampling survey was conducted, distributing 12 questionnaires and collecting 10 valid responses. Feedback suggestions primarily included adding questions to familiarize respondents with the survey and supplementing the indicator descriptions and examples in Section 3 to facilitate understanding. The questionnaire was refined based on these feedback.

调查采用非概率抽样，在置信度0.95、样本量计算为97的条件下，共收集有效问卷119份。问卷发放通过电子邮件及问卷星平台进行，涉及建筑施工企业、BIM供应商、高校科研机构和行政单位，且同一单位问卷不超过2人。

The survey used non-probability sampling, with a confidence level of 0.95 and a sample size of 97. A total of 119 valid questionnaires were collected. Questionnaires were distributed via email and the WJX platform, targeting construction companies, BIM suppliers, universities, research institutes, and administrative units. No more than two people from the same unit were required to complete the questionnaire.

本次问卷共回收119份有效问卷，其中建筑施工企业占比70.6%，BIM供应商占比16.8%，样本结构较为均衡，能够满足抽样要求。信度分析结果显示，问卷的Cronbach’s α系数为0.624，表明调查结果的可信度可以接受。效度分析方面，问卷设计基于文献研究并经专家意见完善，内容效度和表面效度均符合要求，构建效度通过KMO和Bartlett检验，KMO值为0.617，满足统计学标准。

A total of 119 valid questionnaires were collected, of which 70.6% were from construction companies and 16.8% from BIM suppliers. This balanced sample structure met sampling requirements. Reliability analysis revealed a Cronbach's α coefficient of 0.624, indicating acceptable credibility. Regarding validity, the questionnaire design was based on literature research and refined with expert input. Both content and face validity met requirements. Construct validity was tested through KMO and Bartlett tests, with a KMO value of 0.617, meeting statistical standards.

统计结果显示，76.82%的受访者对BIM技术比较熟悉或非常熟悉，确保了问卷填写的理解度和可靠性。调查还表明，72.27%的单位已在实际工程中应用BIM软件，20.35%的单位虽然购买但尚未应用，反映出BIM应用需求强烈。未能应用的主要原因包括缺乏培训和人员（53.61%）、软件功能不完善（17.82%）、企业无相关规划等（28.57%）。在购买原因方面，82.14%的受访者认为购置BIM软件是基于企业发展需求及经济效益，而非宣传或关系因素。对于未购买BIM软件的企业，主要原因是软件价格高及担心无法推行，两者合计占86.26%。

Statistics show that 76.82% of respondents are relatively or very familiar with BIM technology, ensuring the comprehension and reliability of the questionnaire responses. The survey also revealed that 72.27% of companies have already implemented BIM software in actual projects, while 20.35% have purchased but not yet implemented it, reflecting strong demand for BIM applications. The main reasons for this lack of adoption include lack of training and personnel (53.61%), incomplete software functionality (17.82%), and lack of relevant company plans (28.57%). Regarding the reasons for purchasing BIM software, 82.14% of respondents believe that the purchase of BIM software is driven by business development needs and economic benefits, rather than promotional or personal connections. For companies that have not purchased BIM software, the main reasons are high software prices and concerns about implementation, which together account for 86.26%.

关于选择BIM软件供应商的评价指标，大多数受访者认同问卷中提出的四个维度：软件费用、供应商实力、软件功能特征和用户服务，同时部分受访者提出补充指标，如性价比、数据安全、二次开发能力、技术适用性以及产品性能与使用体验。这些结果不仅验证了现有指标体系的合理性，也为进一步完善指标提供了参考依据。

Regarding the evaluation criteria for selecting BIM software vendors, the majority of respondents agreed with the four dimensions proposed in the questionnaire: software cost, vendor strength, software features, and user service. Some also proposed additional criteria, such as cost-effectiveness, data security, secondary development capabilities, technical applicability, and product performance and user experience. These results not only validate the existing indicator system but also provide a basis for further refinement.

（三）评价指标的初选（Preliminary selection of evaluation indicators）

通过文献研究和问卷调查，论文整理并归纳了建筑施工企业BIM软件供应商选择的初步评价指标。针对不同来源描述存在差异的指标进行了合并和简化，确保指标具有代表性、系统性和综合性，最终形成初选指标体系。

Through literature research and questionnaire surveys, this paper compiled and summarized preliminary evaluation indicators for selecting BIM software vendors for construction companies. Indicators with different descriptions from different sources were merged and simplified to ensure that the indicators were representative, systematic, and comprehensive, ultimately forming a preliminary selection indicator system.

四、知识补充（Knowledge supplement）

为了构建科学合理的评价指标体系，本文结合文献研究、问卷调查及信度效度分析方法，以实现理论与实践的有机融合。

In order to construct a scientific and reasonable evaluation index system, this paper combines literature research, questionnaire survey and reliability and validity analysis methods to achieve an organic integration of theory and practice.

（一）文献研究法（Literature research method）

文献研究是构建评价指标体系的基础。通过系统收集国内外关于软件供应商选择、BIM技术应用及相关评价体系的研究成果，可以提炼出具有普遍性的核心维度，如软件价格、功能特征、供应商实力、用户服务等。这一方法的优势在于，能够借鉴前人的成熟经验和理论框架，避免从零开始构建指标体系，节省研究成本。然而，文献研究的局限性在于，不同软件类型和行业背景可能导致指标差异，现有研究往往缺乏针对建筑施工企业和BIM软件的专门研究。因此，需要在文献基础上结合行业特性进行适度调整。

Literature research is the foundation for constructing an evaluation index system. By systematically collecting research findings from both domestic and international research on software vendor selection, BIM technology applications, and related evaluation systems, we can identify universal core dimensions, such as software price, functional features, vendor capabilities, and user service. This approach has the advantage of drawing on the proven experience and theoretical frameworks of previous researchers, avoiding the need to construct an index system from scratch and reducing research costs. However, a limitation of literature research is that indicators may vary depending on software type and industry background, and existing research often lacks specific research on construction companies and BIM software. Therefore, appropriate adjustments based on the literature and industry characteristics are necessary.

（二）问卷调查法（Questionnaire survey method）

问卷调查是对文献研究的有效补充，能够从实践层面收集一手数据，反映企业在实际供应商选择中的关注点。问卷设计时，结合文献中已有指标，并加入企业可能提出的个性化因素，如数据安全、二次开发能力、技术适用性和用户体验等。通过大样本数据，可以验证文献指标的适用性，并发现新的指标补充。同时，问卷调查的结果还可用于后续的统计分析、信度与效度检验，确保指标体系的科学性和可靠性。

Questionnaire surveys are an effective supplement to literature research, collecting firsthand data from a practical perspective and reflecting the concerns of companies in their actual supplier selection process. When designing the questionnaire, we combined existing indicators from the literature with personalized factors that companies might raise, such as data security, secondary development capabilities, technical applicability, and user experience. Using large sample data, we can validate the applicability of indicators from the literature and identify new supplementary indicators. Furthermore, the results of the questionnaire survey can be used for subsequent statistical analysis, reliability, and validity testing to ensure the scientific nature and reliability of the indicator system.

（三）信度与效度分析（Reliability and validity analysis）

为了确保问卷调查数据的质量，需要进行信度和效度分析。信度分析采用Cronbach’s α系数，检验问卷题项的内部一致性，确保各评价指标在测量同一构念时的一致程度。当系数≥0.7时可信度高，0.35-0.7可接受，低于0.35则不适用。效度分析包括内容效度、表面效度和构建效度。内容效度通过专家咨询和文献对比保证问卷内容合理，表面效度通过预调查和修订提高可理解性，构建效度通过KMO和Bartlett球形检验验证指标体系的结构合理性。

To ensure the quality of the questionnaire data, reliability and validity analyses are required. Reliability analysis uses Cronbach's α coefficient to test the internal consistency of questionnaire items and ensure the consistency of each evaluation indicator when measuring the same construct. When the coefficient is ≥0.7, the reliability is high, 0.35-0.7 is acceptable, and less than 0.35 is not applicable. Validity analysis includes content validity, face validity, and construct validity. Content validity ensures the rationality of the questionnaire content through expert consultation and literature comparison. Face validity improves comprehensibility through pre-survey and revision. Construct validity verifies the structural rationality of the indicator system through KMO and Bartlett's sphericity test.

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