Sustainability and Stakeholder Engagement in Building Information Modelling-Enabled Construction: A Review of Critical Success Factors in Design and Planning Phases

Abstract

This scoping literature review examines critical success factors (CSFs) in the design and planning phases of BIM-enabled construction projects, focusing on integrating sustainability practices across the quadruple bottom line: profit, people, planet, and process. By introducing the novel ‘Process’ pillar, this study aims to bridge critical gaps in sustainability research, emphasising technology-driven practices and mapping 62 CSFs from 31 studies to specific stakeholder roles, and focuses on early project phases in which decisions have the most significant impact on long-term outcomes. The findings highlight how early-phase decisions, guided by the QBL framework, can optimise project outcomes and drive long-term sustainability through effective stakeholder engagement. Despite advancements, the design and planning phases of BIM-enabled construction projects consistently exhibit an underrepresentation of end users and environmental considerations. These omissions highlight inadequacies in stakeholder engagement, which are critical for achieving comprehensive sustainability and aligning project outcomes with user needs and environmental goals. This research maps CSFs to corresponding stakeholders, revealing a complex network with the BIM coordinator/manager playing a pivotal role. This mapping underscores the importance of integrating stakeholder inputs, particularly from end users, early in the project lifecycle to enhance functionality and ensure the long-term viability of construction projects. However, current practices often overlook this, leading to a potential misalignment between project deliverables and user expectations. The construction industry can move towards more sustainable, efficient, and user-focused outcomes by addressing these gaps. This study calls for a paradigm shift in BIM methodologies to adopt a construction environment that is not only efficient but also adaptable to the needs of its users and the environmental imperatives of today’s world.

1. Introduction

Over the last decade, there has been an increased focus on stakeholders in both academic and managerial contexts. A stakeholder is an individual, group, or entity with a stake in a project or who can contribute to or be influenced by the project that a focal organisation undertakes to meet its goals [1,2]. These stakeholders have various interests due to their diverse professions, culture, educational level, gender, and geographical distance from the project. The interests of these parties are essential to guarantee a project’s success. Stakeholder management has proven successful in other sectors, particularly manufacturing, but has had a poor track record when applied to the construction industry [2]. This often leads to randomly chosen stakeholder management approaches in the construction industry, potentially resulting in project failures [3]. Project failure refers to the inability to meet key objectives such as budget, schedule, or stakeholder expectations, often resulting in significant financial losses, reduced stakeholder trust, and long-term reputational damage [4].

The construction industry is experiencing a significant increase in the adoption of building information modelling (BIM). BIM can provide a collaborative environment and add value to project communication, information management, and stakeholder coordination. Despite BIM’s many potential benefits, it carries various risks, including managerial risks [5,6] and legal risks, including ambiguities around data ownership and contractual responsibilities; technical risks stemming from the need for advanced expertise and technology integration; environmental risks related to accurate sustainability assessments; and financial risks, due to the substantial investment required for software, training, and hardware upgrades [5]. To mitigate these risks, key stakeholders, such as the design team, construction team, and the project owner, must work collaboratively in the BIM environment in order for BIM to be effective [7,8]. Another way to mitigate the risks is to have a more in-depth understanding of critical success factors (CSFs) to predict whether the BIM implementation will succeed and avoid failures. According to Rockart [9], CSF can be defined as a specific activity area in which attaining the desired outcomes is essential to the management system’s success. Likewise, Martin [10] adheres to this definition and emphasises the key role that CSFs play in management decision-making. In this regard, the CSF is a useful tool for analysing and categorising strategic goals within management organisations, as well as monitoring the results and activities of these organisations [11].

The need for a holistic view and balancing the three pillars of sustainability, which are social, economic and environmental elements, is emphasised during its implementation process in construction, and by integrating technology into sustainability practices, it can be optimised in any context [12,13]. The triple bottom line (TBL) concept was developed in the context of sustainability to support the delivery of sustainable development. It was initially intended to be used as a framework for accounting that integrated environmental and social factors into conventional financial-centric business performance models [14]. Its purpose was to measure the performance of businesses by taking into account not only their profitability but also how they impact shareholders’ value (stakeholders’ rank and weight according to community priorities), as well as their social, human, and environmental capital [15].

While the TBL literature appears to have garnered a positive reception in various sectors, the situation is quite different from the construction industry’s perspective, which sets it apart from other industries [16] due to its project-based, decentralised structure, the lack of collaboration between project stakeholders, difficulties recruiting skilled workers, and insufficient knowledge transfer between projects [17]. It is also notable that although the literature shows that TBL and sustainable construction have slowly taken hold over the years, they have not been extensively investigated from the perspective of environmental, economic, and social sustainability as a whole. Some previous research has been investigated with a focus on construction materials [18,19,20,21,22], while society or stakeholders have been the focus of other studies [23,24,25], and economic benefits have been investigated [26,27] separately. The TBL framework, while widely recognised for its integration of economic, social, and environmental dimensions, exhibits notable limitations in addressing the technical and operational aspects critical to sustainability in construction. Traditional TBL metrics often fail to capture the role of technological innovations, process optimisation, and quality assurance, which are essential for enhancing construction efficiency and aligning sustainability goals with practical implementation strategies [16]. Furthermore, the absence of technical performance indicators in TBL reporting results in an incomplete sustainability assessment, as operational boundaries and technical efficiencies are overlooked [28]. In industrial contexts, the neglect of these aspects has prompted calls for an expanded framework that incorporates process-oriented and technical factors, ensuring a more holistic evaluation of sustainability performance [29]. This underscores the necessity of integrating a ‘process’ pillar into sustainability frameworks to address these gaps and improve the efficacy of sustainability practices in construction.

The integration of the ‘process’ pillar into the QBL framework significantly enhances sustainability outcomes by addressing the technical and operational dimensions often overlooked in traditional TBL models. For instance, the NASA Office Building at Kennedy Space Centre illustrates how advanced technical processes, such as high-performance building systems, can deliver substantial life cycle cost reductions while achieving environmental benefits, underscoring the critical role of operational efficiency in sustainable construction [30]. Similarly, BIM-enabled methodologies have demonstrated their capacity to optimise resource allocation, improve stakeholder collaboration, and enhance project management, ensuring projects are both economically viable and environmentally responsible [31]. Moreover, the ‘process’ pillar fosters a synergistic interplay among the economic, social, and environmental dimensions. Technological tools like BIM improve cost management and reduce errors (economic), facilitate streamlined workflows for enhanced collaboration (social), and enable eco-friendly material selection and energy-efficient designs (environmental). This integration positions the QBL framework as a more holistic approach, particularly suited for technologically intensive projects, aligning with global sustainability goals while ensuring technical feasibility and operational excellence [31]. By embedding the ‘process’ pillar, the QBL framework not only addresses gaps in traditional sustainability models but also advances construction practices toward more comprehensive and impactful outcomes.

Additionally, the global focus on sustainability, as outlined by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDGs), underscores the need for participatory and inclusive urban planning practices. Specifically, SDG Target 11.3 aims to enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanisation by fostering participatory, integrated, and sustainable human settlement planning and management [32]. This research contributes to achieving this target by addressing gaps in stakeholder engagement during the design and planning phases of BIM-enabled construction projects, which are critical for aligning project outcomes with long-term sustainability goals. By promoting structured stakeholder involvement, this study directly supports the principles of participatory urban planning and sustainable development. This study specifically focuses on the design and planning phases of BIM-enabled construction projects because these phases are pivotal in determining the trajectory of the entire building lifecycle. Research consistently shows that the majority of a building’s environmental, social, and economic impacts are locked in during these early stages, as critical decisions related to design, material selection, stakeholder requirements, and project objectives are made [33]. By addressing the gaps in stakeholder engagement and sustainability considerations at this stage, we aim to ensure that the foundational elements of a project are aligned with long-term goals, including lifecycle efficiency, user satisfaction, and environmental performance. While BIM’s value extends across the entire building lifecycle, the design and planning phases offer the most significant opportunity to influence downstream outcomes, such as construction efficiency, operational sustainability, and end-user satisfaction. This focus allows us to identify CSFs and stakeholder dynamics that directly impact sustainability integration and project success. This expanded framework could further clarify and delineate the technical and social aspects, which have been less precisely defined compared to their environmental and economic counterparts [34].

The present study explores the quadruple bottom line (QBL) approach by integrating technical aspects into the existing triple bottom line approach. In this paper, we will adopt the abbreviation ‘4p’ to represent the four pillars of sustainability. Specifically, the economic dimensions will be referred to as ‘profit’, the environmental dimensions as ‘planet’, the social dimensions as ‘people’, and the technological dimensions as ‘process’. The CSFs are categorised into four elements of sustainability in construction and stakeholder mapping to provide insights into the sustainability and stakeholder dynamics of BIM-enabled construction projects. This paper aims to answer the following questions:

• Are CSFs integral to the design and planning phases of BIM-enabled construction projects? How? What are their primary components?
• In what manner do these CSFs align with the 4P sustainability elements within a BIM context?
• What roles do various stakeholder groups play concerning each CSF, and who stands to benefit the most in BIM-enabled construction projects?

This review makes three key contributions to the understanding of sustainability in BIM-enabled construction projects by addressing critical gaps in existing frameworks and practices. First, it systematically identifies and categorises CSFs within the QBL framework, introducing the novel ‘Process’ pillar. Unlike traditional TBL approaches, which lack a focus on technology, the ‘Process’ pillar integrates technical and operational dimensions, emphasising the pivotal role of tools like BIM in optimising workflows, enhancing decision-making, and achieving sustainability goals. Second, this study bridges the gap in stakeholder engagement research by mapping these CSFs to specific stakeholder groups. This comprehensive mapping highlights the distinct roles of stakeholders in aligning technological innovation with the economic, social, and environmental dimensions of sustainability. Third, the research prioritises the design and planning phases, in which decisions exert the most significant influence on long-term project outcomes. By targeting this early stage, this study addresses the underexplored integration of technology-driven strategies for embedding sustainability into foundational project workflows. Together, these contributions not only enhance theoretical discourse by extending sustainability frameworks but also provide actionable insights for industry practitioners, facilitating improved stakeholder collaboration and the incorporation of technology in advancing sustainability practices.

Table 1. Review of the most relevant studies with a focus on CSFs in construction projects.

Ref.	Focus	CSFs	BIM	Sustainability Frameworks	Sustainability Pillars	Stakeholder Management/Engagement	Stakeholder Mapping
Antwi-Afari et al. 2018 [35]	CSFs for BIM implementation globally	✔	✔	✘	-	✘	✘
Darwish et al. 2020 [36]	CSFs for BIM in construction projects	✔	✔	✘	-	✘	✘
Liu et al. 2022 [37]	BIM adoption during construction phase	✔	✔	✘	-	✔	✘
Evans et al. 2021 [38]	BIM and Lean Construction synergy	✔	✔	✘	-	✔	✘
Yaakob et al. 2016 [39]	CSFs for BIM in Malaysia	✔	✔	✘	-	✘	✘
Sinoh et al. 2020 [40]	CSFs for BIM in Malaysian AEC firms	✔	✔	✘	-	✘	✘
Liao et al. 2017 [41]	Enhancing BIM implementation	✔	✔	✘	-	✘	✘
Tan et al. 2022 [42]	BIM implementation in Turkey	✔	✔	✔	Economic, Technical	✘	✘
AbuMoeilak et al. 2023 [43]	BIM as a sustainable practice	✔	✔	✔	Economic, Environmental, Social	✔	✘
Kiani Mavi et al. 2018 [44]	CSFs for sustainable construction	✔	✔	✔	Economic, Environmental, Social	✔	✘
Banihashemi et al. 2017 [45]	Sustainability in developing countries	✔	✘	✔	Economic, Environmental, Social	✔	✘
Kineber et al. 2021 [46]	Sustainability in residential projects	✔	✘	✔	Economic, Environmental, Social	✔	✘
Gunduz et al. 2020 [47]	Stakeholder-driven sustainability	✔	✔	✔	Economic, Social	✔	✘
Kineber et al. 2024 [48]	Agile management in construction	✔	✘	✔	Economic, Environmental, Social	✔	✘

✔ Means the mentioned study considered this factor. ✘ Means the mentioned study did not consider this factor.

reviews relevant studies on CSFs and BIM-enabled projects, demonstrating the specific contributions of this research paper in sustainability and stakeholder engagement. This paper is organised into three major sections, including the background of stakeholders in construction projects, TBL, and QBL in sustainable construction, followed by a discussion on the research methodology and a discussion of the results. In the last section, we provide a conclusion.

2. Background

2.1. Stakeholders in Construction Projects

Unlike most other industries, the construction industry is project-based [49]. In order to function effectively as a temporary organisation, projects require a particular culture, structure, and team members, as well as a trusting relationship between stakeholders. These depend on complex interpersonal and contractual relationships [50,51]. Considering the intricate, uncertain and dynamic nature of construction projects, systematic methods and appropriate measures must be used to address the interests of all stakeholders in order to ensure the highest possible level of project success [52]. It is becoming increasingly evident that stakeholder satisfaction is an important factor for construction project success [53,54]. According to Li et al. (2013), stakeholder satisfaction can be defined as the degree to which stakeholders’ pre-project expectations have been met in the project’s actual performance over the course of project development [55]. This is significant because most stakeholder groups attempt to influence construction projects in a manner that is in accordance with their expectations [56].

Based on the study by Prebanić et al. 2023, stakeholder satisfaction can be measured using an index system that considers various critical factors influencing satisfaction levels [57]. According to their study, stakeholder satisfaction in construction projects is determined mainly by management mechanisms, including communication, engagement, and commitment, rather than achieving certain goals (such as time, cost, and quality). The performance of stakeholder management can be measured by the level of satisfaction that is generated by the project delivery for the organisation and its stakeholders [58]. Perspectives differ regarding what constitutes a successful construction project. It has been reported that in a substantial number of cases, the end users are so satisfied with the results of the project that the shortcomings of the completion criteria do not pose a problem [59]. It is worth noting that some stakeholders considered the Sydney Opera House and Thames Barrier successful despite their completion dates and budgets exceeding those expected [60]. In contrast, despite the Heathrow Terminal 5 project being completed on time and within budget, some stakeholders were dissatisfied due to operational deficiencies [54,59]. Among many examples, these demonstrate the extent to which stakeholder groups perceive success differently. A construction project’s success has been correlated with the satisfaction of all stakeholders involved in the project [58].

When BIM is used in a project, a team of specialists is assembled and contracted for BIM-related tasks [61]. BIM enables multiple stakeholders to work together to solve problems collaboratively in a virtual environment. According to Mani [62], regular information exchange with the client is key to client and employer satisfaction in a BIM-enabled project. It facilitates collaboration and communication, resulting in a successful end result within the constraints. Additionally, this shared virtual environment provides a means of identifying construction risks and offering better insight to designers and contractors in order to prepare for proactive measures before problems arise [63]. Moreover, BIM contributes to enhancing project management procedures as a whole and stakeholder management specifically.

BIM’s collaborative environment serves as a critical enabler for addressing conflicting stakeholder demands by fostering transparency, enhancing communication, and promoting informed decision-making [7]. Through shared digital models, stakeholders gain real-time access to comprehensive project data, which facilitates the identification and resolution of potential conflicts early in the process [64]. For instance, BIM’s clash detection tools allow design and construction teams to collaboratively resolve spatial conflicts, ensuring that technical feasibility aligns with project objectives [65]. Additionally, BIM supports scenario analysis, enabling stakeholders to evaluate trade-offs and reach consensus on key decisions, such as balancing cost efficiency with sustainability goals [66]. By integrating sustainability metrics, such as energy performance and material impact, BIM ensures that environmental, social, and economic priorities are addressed cohesively [67]. This capability not only reduces the likelihood of misalignment but also enhances the project’s overall sustainability outcomes. For example, in the redevelopment of the King’s Cross Central project in London, BIM played a pivotal role in aligning the diverse priorities of developers, environmental groups, and local authorities [68]. By visualising and analysing alternative designs, stakeholders were able to agree on solutions that met both development and sustainability targets, demonstrating BIM’s effectiveness as a collaborative platform for achieving consensus in complex projects [69].

Owners, project managers, designers, general contractors and subcontractors, suppliers, and BIM coordinators are only a few of the people who are involved in BIM-based projects [70,71]. As a result of these different stakeholder groups, there is a high degree of competition, divergent interests (sometimes conflicting) and a variety of effects on the execution of a project as a whole [72]. The literature on stakeholders in BIM-enabled construction projects identifies the client/owner as the most important stakeholder [12,73,74]. A BIM manager/coordinator is regarded as the second most powerful stakeholder in a BIM project [74]. Since the growing popularity of BIM has resulted in its widespread use, BIM coordinators/managers have become priority partners for owners due to the high demand for their expertise and skill sets in BIM, which are both key elements of adding value to the construction process [75].

The next most important stakeholders in a BIM process are the designer and contractor, who are responsible for developing 3D models and implementing and managing the entire BIM process [12,73,74]. Project success is not only about the project itself (i.e., the project manager and the project team) but also about the end users [76]. When it comes to categorising stakeholders according to their importance, focusing specifically on social sustainability as the criterion for prioritisation notably highlights the importance of end users [77]. Despite having legal or sociological legitimacy, end users have limited influence over major project decisions because of their late involvement [77]. While end users are often engaged later in the construction project lifecycle, their input is crucial for aligning project outcomes with actual needs and long-term user satisfaction. End users offer invaluable insights into functionality, comfort, and usability, which are often overlooked when decisions are made solely by design and construction teams. Their involvement early in the project, especially in BIM-enabled processes, can ensure that sustainability goals, such as energy efficiency, health, and well-being, are met more effectively. Moreover, user-centric designs are shown to increase the overall success of projects by ensuring that the spaces created are adaptable, comfortable, and sustainable. Therefore, positioning end users as critical stakeholders throughout the project lifecycle ensures not only the practical success of the construction but also its alignment with sustainable living practices and long-term environmental goals.

In this study, all stakeholders, including the owner/client, BIM manager/coordinator, design team (architect, civil/structural engineer, electrical and plumbing engineers, quantity surveyors, and safety management officer), general contractor, construction group project manager, and end users are considered to be engaged in the success of the BIM-enabled project. While the focus of this study is on stakeholders directly engaged in BIM processes, it is important to acknowledge the broader context in which these projects operate. Policymakers, for instance, play a significant role at a regulatory level by shaping sustainability practices through legislation, incentives, and standardisation. However, their influence remains indirect and operates outside the immediate dynamics of project-specific design and planning phases [78,79]. By narrowing the scope to stakeholders actively involved in collaborative interactions and decision-making, this review aims to address the critical dynamics that directly impact project outcomes during the early phases of construction. Figure 1 illustrates the hierarchy and roles of stakeholders in BIM-based projects, derived from the literature, highlighting direct engagement, policy makers’ regulatory influence, and end users’ critical role in project performance.

2.2. Triple Bottom Line (TBL) and Quadruple Bottom Line (QBL) in Sustainable Construction

Scholars and practitioners in construction consistently draw attention to the importance of developing sustainable construction environments and methods that serve the needs of people, the planet and profit, referred to as the ‘triple bottom line’ (TBL) [80]. Providing sustainability in construction means ensuring that environmental, social, and economic sustainability is balanced and optimal without allowing any of the pillars to monopolise the others [16]. During the mid-1990s, John Elkington coined the term TBL, which is related to a set of accounting principles that attempted to add environmental and social dimensions to the traditional finance-centric measurement of business performance that had previously prevailed [81]. This framework has also been referred to as the 3Ps: people, planet, and profits, which has resulted in a change in how sustainability performance is measured [15]. However, it is noteworthy that TBL does not possess a standardised reporting method for comprehensively measuring the social, economic, and environmental elements of sustainability [15]. TBL’s approach to the economy considers the economic impacts on various stakeholders, such as employees, government agencies, and the general community at large [82]. It is widely acknowledged that measuring all three dimensions of TBL, particularly those related to the environment and social conditions, is a challenge [83]. The lack of a standard method for assessing performance against the three pillars has led to the emergence of innovative approaches [16].

Achieving environmental sustainability in construction means re-establishing and maintaining a harmonious relationship between the natural and built environments [84]. As a result, it promotes the efficient use of natural resources to reduce adverse impacts on the built environment and improve the quality of the built environment at the same time [85]. Throughout the concept of social sustainability, consideration is given to local development, the involvement of the public, concerns over comfort for the user, health and safety, access to services, equity, and diversity [86]. While emphasising the importance of focusing on people, sustainable construction sometimes ignores social sustainability in its pursuit of people-centred solutions. It is imperative to note that economic sustainability in the construction industry relates to a project’s ability to generate a profit for its stakeholders [26]. The term ‘technical’ refers to elements that contribute to a building’s quality, processes, adherence to legislation and norms, and the use of technology to achieve desired results while addressing gaps in technology-related skills.

The construction industry is transforming through digital technologies and automation, collectively termed Construction 4.0. Rooted in the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR), Construction 4.0 leverages cyber-physical systems (CPS) to enhance design, construction, and operations, addressing inefficiencies and boosting sustainability [87,88]. Digital transformation integrates tools like BIM, artificial intelligence (AI), and big data analytics to optimise workflows and enable data-driven decision-making [88,89]. Unlike simple digitalisation, it reconfigures organisational culture and processes for improved outcomes. Automation, including robotic process automation (RPA), 3D printing, and autonomous vehicles, reduces errors, minimises waste, and enhances precision. These technologies align with sustainability goals by improving resource efficiency and reducing energy use [90,91].

The process pillar of the quadruple bottom line (QBL) framework integrates these advancements to streamline workflows, improve resource use, and enhance project outcomes. This aligns with economic, environmental, and social sustainability while emphasising innovation and continuous improvement. Despite these benefits, barriers such as resistance to change, digital literacy gaps, and high costs hinder adoption. Overcoming these requires collaboration among policymakers, industry, and academia to foster innovation and adaptability [88]. The increasing reliance on digital transformation and automation underscores their critical role in strengthening the technical processes integral to QBL. However, the existing literature on construction projects lacks a comprehensive study focusing on integrating the QBL—profit, people, planet, and process (4P)—within the context of sustainable BIM-enabled projects. While numerous studies address individual aspects of sustainability or the interplay of profit, people, and planet, this paper identifies a focused research gap in understanding how these four dimensions interact specifically within BIM-enabled sustainable construction (Figure 2).

3. Methodology

This study adopted a scoping review approach, recognising its effectiveness in examining the breadth of the literature on specific topics [92]. Scoping reviews are particularly useful for providing an initial exploration of the available evidence and facilitating the identification of areas needing further research [92,93]. Although originally developed within the medical research field, scoping reviews have gained acceptance in construction research due to their systematic nature [94,95]. This paper presents a scoping literature review focused on critical success factors (CSFs) of the design and planning phase of BIM-enabled construction projects, aiming to identify essential factors that can facilitate sustainable project outcomes, consolidate existing knowledge, and provide a foundational framework for future empirical research. The research was structured to first categorise CSFs into four elements of sustainability in construction—profit (economic), people (social), planet (environmental), and process (technical). It then mapped each CSF to the relevant stakeholder group responsible for its implementation, providing insights into sustainability and stakeholder dynamics in BIM-enabled projects.

The first step in this scoping review was to define the aim and scope of the research clearly. This study aimed to explore CSFs in the design and planning phases of BIM-enabled construction projects, examine their categorisation within the four elements of sustainability, and investigate the roles and benefits of different stakeholder groups associated with these CSFs. All identified CSFs are considered with equal weight, ensuring an unbiased and balanced approach to their categorisation across the four pillars of sustainability. The scope of this study was limited to BIM-enabled construction projects, specifically during their design and planning phases. A comprehensive literature search was conducted exclusively using three key academic databases: Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Search terms included combinations of ‘BIM’ OR ‘building information model’, ‘CSF’ OR ‘critical success factor’, ‘design’ OR ‘planning’, ‘sustainability’ OR ‘sustainable’, and ‘stakeholder’ OR ‘project participant’ OR ‘owner’ OR ‘client’ OR ‘contractor’ OR ‘BIM manager’ OR ‘BIM coordinator’ OR ‘designer’ OR ‘end-user’ AND ‘construction’. The search strategy was designed to capture the most relevant and recent articles, focusing only on publications from the last decade to ensure the inclusion of the latest developments in the field.

To ensure broader stakeholder representation, the search strategy was supplemented with terms such as ‘construction’ and ‘end-user’ OR ‘end-user engagement’. This addition captures insights from contractors and end users, who are typically engaged in later phases but whose roles are indirectly influenced by the foundational decisions made during design and planning. This hybrid approach provides a balanced perspective, ensuring the inclusion of all relevant stakeholders without diluting this study’s emphasis on the pivotal early stages of project delivery. This study limits its search to the last decade to capture the most recent advancements and emerging trends in BIM-enabled construction and sustainability. The rapid evolution of digital technologies, particularly in the context of Construction 4.0, has led to significant developments over the past ten years. Limiting the timeframe ensures that the review reflects contemporary practices and aligns with the current state of the field. However, the foundational BIM literature from earlier years, particularly seminal works, has been referenced when relevant to provide context and establish a theoretical basis. To address potential gaps from relying solely on the search string, forward and backward citation analyses were conducted. For backward citation analysis, the reference lists of key studies were reviewed to identify foundational and relevant prior works. For forward citation analysis, citations of seminal works were examined to uncover more recent studies that extend or critique foundational research. This iterative process ensures a comprehensive review by capturing studies that may not have been indexed using the selected search terms.

The data extraction and analysis process involved several steps. Initially, articles were screened based on their titles and abstracts to exclude those not directly related to the review’s primary focus. Irrelevance was defined by the absence of a direct focus on BIM implementation strategies, the lack of discussion on critical success factors, or the article being outside the scope of the construction industry. Duplicate entries retrieved from different databases were carefully removed to avoid redundancy. Following this, the full texts of the selected articles were examined in detail. The identification of the 62 CSFs followed a systematic and iterative process. After the initial literature review, a comprehensive list of CSFs was created by extracting factors mentioned across multiple studies that focused on BIM-enabled construction projects, design phase, sustainability, and stakeholder engagement. To refine this list, each CSF was evaluated based on its relevance to the four pillars of sustainability—profit, people, planet, and process—within the context of the construction design and planning phases. Studies that demonstrated a strong methodological framework and clear evidence supporting the success of particular CSFs were prioritised. Redundancies in CSFs were resolved by combining similar factors while ensuring that distinct elements of sustainability were preserved. This process resulted in a final categorisation of 62 CSFs, mapped to specific stakeholder groups involved in BIM-enabled projects, ensuring the selection was both comprehensive and aligned with this study’s objectives. CSFs were systematically categorised into the four sustainability elements using the QBL approach.

The CSFs were then methodically mapped to their associated stakeholders. This process involved identifying the stakeholders responsible for each CSF and, in some cases, determining which stakeholder groups benefit from them. A total of 62 CSFs, representing sub-attributes of sustainability derived from 31 prior studies, were aligned with various stakeholders through an in-depth analysis. This comprehensive mapping offers valuable insights into the complex dynamics of stakeholder relationships in BIM-enabled construction projects. This study acknowledges the inherent interdependencies and overlaps across sustainability pillars, as many CSFs influence multiple dimensions. However, to maintain analytical focus and ensure clarity, the analysis categorises CSFs under their primary pillar based on their most direct and measurable contribution. While the interrelations between sustainability pillars are significant, a detailed investigation of these interdependencies falls outside the scope of this study. This delineation allows the research to remain concentrated on identifying and categorising the CSFs most relevant to the design and planning phases of BIM-enabled construction projects. Figure 3 illustrates the overall process of this scoping review, demonstrating the systematic approach undertaken in this study.

3.1. Identification, Categorisation, and Stakeholder Mapping of Critical Success Factors in BIM-Enabled Projects

This research has identified 62 critical success factors (CSFs) in BIM-enabled construction projects, categorised under the four pillars of sustainability: profit (economic elements), people (social elements), planet (environmental elements), and process (technical elements). The categorisation of each pillar into main attributes and sub-attributes offers a theoretical framework that deepens the understanding of sustainable practices within BIM-enabled construction projects.

Regarding the first sustainability pillar, economic sustainability in construction projects relies on effective ‘cost’ and ‘time management’. Cost and time management are integral to economic elements in construction projects due to their direct impact on financial performance and efficiency. These attributes ensure projects are completed within budget and on schedule, which are key factors for economic viability and success. By effectively managing costs and timelines, these elements reduce financial risks and optimise resource allocation, making them essential for sustaining the economic health of construction projects. Their fundamental role in economic sustainability is thus crucial, as they help maintain budget integrity and enhance the overall financial management of projects.

The social pillar of sustainability in construction projects addresses key attributes that directly impact human welfare and community engagement, which are essential for the holistic success of projects. Health and safety-related factors are integral because they ensure all workers’ and stakeholders’ safety and physical well-being, mitigating workplace risks and promoting ethical project management. Impact assessment-related factors are included under this pillar due to their role in understanding and managing the social effects of construction activities on local communities, which helps safeguard community interests and promote social responsibility. Design satisfaction and well-being-related factors focus on aligning building designs with user needs, enhancing user satisfaction and usability, hence their categorisation under social sustainability. Stakeholder involvement is crucial for incorporating diverse perspectives into the project planning and execution, enhancing inclusivity and project acceptance. Employment-related factors contribute to social sustainability by fostering economic stability and community development through job creation and fair labour practices. Lastly, education/training-related factors are aligned with this pillar because they enhance workforce skills and support long-term professional development, which are key to sustainable community advancement. Each attribute under the social pillar plays a vital role in enhancing the quality of life and development opportunities for individuals and communities affected by construction projects, thereby supporting the broader goals of sustainable development. Environmental sustainability is central to BIM-enabled construction. BIM’s ability to analyse environmental impacts during the design phase facilitates the selection of eco-friendly materials, energy-efficient systems, and waste reduction strategies. With BIM’s simulation capabilities, greener and more sustainable built environments can be created, contributing to the preservation of our planet.

The technical elements of sustainability are essential for advancing construction methodologies and ensuring high operational standards and efficiency in construction projects. Quality-related factors are aligned with this pillar because they ensure all construction outputs meet required standards, reducing future maintenance needs and enhancing project longevity. Productivity-related factors are categorised here due to their role in optimising resource utilisation and minimising waste, which are crucial for efficient project execution. Competency-related factors are included because developing expertise, particularly in BIM and other technological tools, is vital for maintaining high execution standards and fostering innovation. Legitimacy-related factors are essential for establishing a legal and regulatory-compliant operational framework, which builds trust and ensures reliability in construction outcomes. Technology-related factors are placed under this pillar due to their impact on improving design, construction, and management processes, driving innovation and sustainability in the sector. Lastly, organisational-related factors are categorised here as they support the effective implementation of BIM and sustainable practices, ensuring that management structures adapt to new technologies and continuously improve in response to changing conditions. Each of these attributes directly enhances construction projects’ efficiency, compliance, and innovative capacity, making them critical for the sustainable progression and long-term success of construction endeavours.

In this study, the main stakeholders have been identified from the literature on BIM-enabled construction projects. Each critical success factor (CSF) identified is assigned to its relevant stakeholder, who is responsible for managing and implementing it. This assignment is crucial, as past research has typically investigated CSFs across the entire project and building lifecycle. However, the primary focus of this research is to benchmark and develop a comprehensive framework of CSFs specifically for the planning and design phases of BIM-enabled construction projects. This framework also aims to clearly map these CSFs to their corresponding stakeholders, ensuring that each role’s responsibilities are well-defined and understood.

3.2. Profit (Economic Elements)

The economic elements of sustainability in BIM-enabled construction projects are critical for ensuring financial viability and cost-effectiveness throughout the project lifecycle. While factors such as risk management, supply chain efficiency, and project scheduling are essential for the economic sustainability of construction projects, they are predominantly relevant to the execution and operational phases. This study, however, focuses on the design and planning stages, in which these factors are less directly applicable. These elements involve strategic cost management, effective budgeting, and efficient resource allocation, all facilitated by the advanced capabilities of BIM.

Table 2. Sub-attributes (CSFs) of economic elements of sustainability in BIM-enabled construction projects.

Sustainability Elements	Main Attributes	Critical Success Factors
Profit (Economic elements)	Cost-related factors (C)	C1: Effective cost estimation [96] C2: Reducing construction project cost [42,96,97,98] C3: 5D cost estimation and scheduling (3D + time + cost) [35] C4: Availability of financial resources for BIM software, licences, and its regular upgrades and hardware upgrades [42,99,100,101] C5: Availability of return on investment [42,102]
	Time-related factors (T)	T1: Reducing construction project duration [35,97,98,103] T2: 4D construction scheduling and sequencing (3D + time) [35,104]

provides a detailed breakdown of these economic factors, including cost estimation accuracy and financial management efficiencies. Figure 4 graphically represents the relationship between these economic success factors and their respective stakeholders, highlighting the crucial interdependencies that optimise financial outcomes in construction projects.

3.2.1. Cost-Related Factors

In BIM-enabled construction projects, profit is linked to the effective management of project costs. While profit reflects the financial return, it is directly influenced by how well project costs—such as material, labour, and operational expenses—are controlled. BIM’s 5D capabilities provide a comprehensive framework for managing both costs and schedules, ensuring that accurate cost estimates are integrated throughout the project lifecycle. By forecasting potential cost overruns and identifying cost-saving opportunities early in the design phase, BIM supports decision-making that maximises profit margins. Furthermore, the alignment of project costs with sustainability objectives, such as the use of eco-friendly materials and energy-efficient designs, can further enhance long-term profitability by reducing operational and maintenance costs post-construction. Therefore, cost control through BIM is a key determinant of achieving not only project completion within budget but also maximising the overall financial success of the project.

Regarding the first CSF (C1) in BIM-enabled construction projects, cost estimation is performed by quantity surveyors who are part of the design team. These professionals use the information in the BIM and other relevant project data to develop accurate cost estimates for the project. Using the BIM model, explicit material, labour, and other resource quantities can be generated, allowing costs to be accurately estimated [105]. For C2, which is reducing construction project costs, various stakeholders can contribute to reducing construction costs, including the client/owner, the design team, the contractor, and the BIM coordinator/manager. Each of these stakeholders can take action to identify and address potential cost savings opportunities throughout the project [106]. For example, the client/owner works with the design team to optimise the design, minimise the required materials, or select lower-cost materials without sacrificing quality. The BIM coordinator/manager collaborates with other stakeholders to ensure that the BIM model is kept up-to-date and accurate throughout the project in order to help avoid errors and the need for change orders. For C3, 5D cost estimation is carried out by a team of professionals, including architects, engineers, construction managers, and cost estimators. As a result of the 3D building model and other project data, this team generates a detailed estimate of the project’s costs that are then linked with the project schedule, resulting in an integrated 5D model that assists with budgeting, planning, and managing the project [107]. For C4 and C5, the client/owner is accountable for assuring the availability of financial resources for BIM software, licences, regular upgrades and hardware upgrades, and a positive return on investment (ROI). Despite this, the design and construction teams also play a huge role in a project’s financial success by accurately estimating costs, adhering to budgets, and efficiently executing the construction process, which can contribute to a positive ROI [108,109].

3.2.2. Time-Related Factors

Efficient time management in BIM-enabled projects impacts all four quadruple bottom line (QBL) pillars. From a profit perspective, it optimises cost control, reduces delays, and minimises financial risks, while 4D scheduling helps align time with budget constraints, supporting economic sustainability. In the people pillar, well-planned timelines improve health and safety, reduce worker fatigue, and incorporate end-user feedback, enhancing social sustainability. From a planet perspective, timely scheduling minimises material waste and energy use, ensuring environmental goals are met. In the process pillar, BIM’s real-time scheduling improves technical efficiency, reduces delays, and enhances overall project quality. Thus, time and scheduling are key to balancing financial, social, environmental, and technical sustainability in BIM-enabled projects.

Regarding time-related CSFs, several parties are held accountable for reducing project duration. The client/owner sets aggressive project schedules and timelines to minimise the duration of the construction process [110]. The general contractor coordinates and manages the work of subcontractors and ensures that the project is completed on time. The design team creates detailed designs that are feasible and can be constructed efficiently. The subcontractors and construction team are responsible for completing specific portions of the work on the project. Their performance and efficiency can impact the overall project schedule. The BIM manager coordinates the use of BIM throughout the project and oversees that it is being used effectively to reduce construction duration. Overall, it is a collaborative effort between all these parties to minimise the duration of a construction project in a BIM-based environment. For T2, like 5D construction, the responsibility for 4D construction scheduling (3D + time) falls on the design team and project managers [111].

3.3. People (Social Elements)

The social elements of sustainability in BIM-enabled construction projects are vital for enhancing stakeholder well-being and satisfaction. This includes prioritising worker health and safety, engaging all relevant stakeholders to align the project outcomes with end users’ needs, and using BIM to foster employment and training opportunities, thus promoting social inclusivity and community prosperity.

Table 3. Sub-attributes (CSFs) of social elements of sustainability in BIM-enabled construction projects.

Sustainability Elements	Main Attributes	Critical Success Factors
People (Social elements)	Health and safety-related factors (HS)	HS1: Site layout planning and site safety [96,104]
	Impact assessment-related factors (IA)	IA1: Natural and cultural heritage conservation from project negative impact [112]
	Design satisfaction and well-being-related factors (DP)	DP1: Better design/multi-dimensional design alternatives/applications [35,103] DP2: Improved design flexibility by utilising BIM [42,97,98,101] DP3: Accessibility of family doctor and hospital [112] DP4: Accessibility of shops [112] DP5: Distance from the city centre [112] DP6: Level of compliance with end-user requirements [112] DP7: Traffic index (for city) [112] DP8: Design with accessibility for the disabled (if needed) [112]
	Stakeholder involvement-related factors (SI)	SI1: Trust between various project practitioners [96] SI2: Collaboration in design, construction, and facility management stakeholders [35,42,113] SI3: Design coordination [35,103] SI4: Construction planning and coordination works [35,96,104] SI5: Adaptation of the stakeholders involved in the construction, inspection, and use processes, starting from the design process to the implementation of BIM technology [38,40,42,102,114,115,116]
	Employment-related factors (EM)	EM1: Local employment opportunities [112]
	Education/training-related factors (ET)	ET1: More training programmes for cross-field specialists in BIM [41,42,96,99,100,101,117] ET2: Availability of faculty members who are knowledgeable about BIM technology in universities [40,41,42,118] ET3: Receiving consultancy on BIM technology by universities and specialist companies [42,99,102,117,118,119]

categorises the sub-attributes of these social elements. Figure 5 complements this by visually demonstrating how these elements are interconnected with their respective stakeholders.

3.3.1. Health and Safety-Related Factors

In BIM-based construction projects, site layout planning and safety (HS1) are collaborative efforts involving the design team, contractor, and owner [73]. The design team uses BIM to integrate essential safety features, such as egress routes and accessibility, ensuring designs meet health and safety compliance. The contractor is responsible for faithfully implementing these BIM-enhanced designs on-site, guaranteeing that safety measures like egress paths and accessible facilities are constructed according to plan. The owner sets and monitors compliance with the project’s safety and performance standards. This comprehensive approach ensures that all health and safety aspects are planned and executed, addressing the complexities of compliance in such critical areas [73,111].

3.3.2. Impact Assessment-Related Factors

In BIM-enabled construction projects, the responsibility for assessing the impact on natural and cultural heritage (IA1) primarily rests with the design team and the BIM coordinator or manager. It is incumbent upon these stakeholders to ensure that the project complies with existing legal frameworks and regulations pertaining to the conservation of natural and cultural heritage [120].

3.3.3. Design Satisfaction and Well-Being-Related Factors

Design satisfaction is of the utmost importance since it assists in ensuring that the final product meets the expectations of stakeholders, especially the end users. In BIM-based construction projects, the design team, consisting of architects, engineers, and other design professionals, are responsible for creating and developing design alternatives and applications (DP1) and utilising BIM to improve design flexibility (DP2) [121,122]. This can include developing multi-dimensional designs using BIM software that takes into account various factors such as cost, energy efficiency, and constructability [121]. DP3 to DP7 are designed to enhance end-user satisfaction [123] and are the responsibility of the client/owner and design team. These principles ensure the design process considers end-user well-being by providing convenient access to essential services like shops, hospitals, and city centres [124,125]. Additionally, DP8, which is a joint responsibility of the design team and end users, focuses on integrating feedback to improve accessibility features for disabled users [126]. This ensures that the building design is responsive to the needs of all users, enhancing both functionality and inclusivity.

3.3.4. Stakeholder Involvement-Related Factors

For mapping stakeholder involvement-related factors in BIM-based construction projects, the responsibility for increasing trust among stakeholders (SI1) is shared among the client/owner, BIM coordinator/manager, project manager, contractors, and design team [81]. They employ processes like regular project reviews and audits to foster transparency and accountability. To facilitate collaboration (SI2), the same group sets up regular meetings and communication channels, ensuring all parties access consistent project information and the BIM model [81,127]. Design coordination (SI3) is managed by BIM coordinators/managers and the design team, resolving conflicts efficiently [128,129]. The construction manager and project manager handle construction coordination and planning (SI4), developing schedules and managing the BIM model for tracking progress and resolving issues [130]. Lastly, the adaptation of stakeholder roles in construction, inspection, and use processes (SI5) falls to the BIM coordinators/managers and project managers, who also oversee stakeholder training and equipping [131].

3.3.5. Employment-Related Factors

In providing local employment (EM1), the owner may have the mandate to hire locally or choose to do so as a way to support the local community and economy. Furthermore, the general contractor may decide to hire local workers, either to reduce costs (e.g., by avoiding the need to recruit workers from other areas) or to demonstrate a commitment to the community [132].

3.3.6. Education/Training-Related Factors

In BIM-based construction projects, the BIM manager is responsible for providing training programmes for cross-field specialists in BIM (ET1) [133,134] by hiring trainers to come on-site and provide training, sending employees to BIM training courses or conferences or providing online training resources. For BIM to be used effectively during construction, the BIM manager/coordinator must ensure that all construction team members possess the necessary skills and knowledge. The responsibility for ensuring the availability of faculty members knowledgeable about BIM technology (ET2) falls on the client/owner of the project. They work with the university to identify suitable faculty members with BIM technology expertise and can support and guide project teams [135]. In regard to receiving necessary BIM consultation (ET3), responsibility falls on the BIM coordinator/manager. This ensures that the BIM coordinator/manager is pivotal in providing expertise and guidance throughout the project lifecycle, thereby centralising the consultation process within the specialised roles of the project team [136].

3.4. Planet (Environmental Elements)

The environmental elements of sustainability in BIM-enabled construction projects play a crucial role in reducing ecological impacts and promoting sustainability. This includes using BIM to select eco-friendly materials, optimise energy use, and minimise waste throughout the construction lifecycle. BIM’s advanced simulation capabilities also enable the assessment and mitigation of environmental impacts during the design phase.

Table 4. Sub-attributes (CSFs) of environmental elements of sustainability in BIM-enabled construction projects.

Sustainability Elements	Main Attributes	Critical Success Factors
Planet (Environmental elements)	Environment-related factors (EN)	EN1: Predicting environmental analysis and simulation (airflow, weather) [35,96,103] EN2: Establishment of a model of good practice for BIM and sustainability implementation [96] EN3: Thermal energy analysis and simulation [35,103,137]
		EN4: Provide comprehensive data on circular materials and products for informed decision-making [138]
		EN5: Incorporate design strategies that align with green building certification criteria [138]
		EN6: Utilising materials with high potential for reuse or recycling to maximise lifecycle value [138]
		EN7: Perform lifecycle assessments (LCA) to compare durability and environmental impacts of material options [138]
		EN8: Develop detailed plans for material reuse, including strategies for restoration and deconstruction [138]
		EN9: Ensure compliance with building codes and standards to uphold circular construction practices [138]
		EN10: The design stage should include waste prevention strategies [139]

outlines the sub-attributes of environmental elements. Figure 6 further illustrates the interconnections between these elements and their respective stakeholders, highlighting the collaborative efforts necessary to achieve environmental sustainability goals.

Environment-Related Factors

Predicting environmental analysis and simulation (EN1), such as airflow and carbon dioxide emissions, in the planning phase of BIM-based construction projects is a task that is undertaken by the design team [140,141]. The BIM coordinator is primarily responsible for establishing a model of good practice for BIM and sustainability implementation (EN2) during the design and planning phase. Their role involves developing and managing workflows that integrate BIM tools with sustainability principles, ensuring alignment across all project activities. The designer supports this process by incorporating these practices into the design, ensuring sustainability goals are met through architectural and material decisions [140,142]. The responsibility for thermal energy analysis and simulation (EN3) primarily lies with the BIM coordinator, who utilises BIM tools to conduct energy modelling and thermal performance simulations. These analyses provide critical insights into building energy efficiency, thereby guiding sustainable design decisions. The designer plays a supporting role by incorporating the results of these simulations into architectural and material choices, ensuring the final design aligns with energy efficiency goals [140,143].

EN4 (comprehensive data on circular materials) and EN5 (alignment with green building certification) are jointly the responsibility of the designer and BIM coordinator, where designers integrate material data and certification strategies into the design process, and BIM coordinators manage and structure this data using digital tools [138,144]. EN6 (utilisation of reusable and recyclable materials) involves designers, who select sustainable materials, and owners, who approve these choices based on project goals and lifecycle value [145,146]. EN7 (lifecycle assessments) is a shared responsibility of the BIM coordinator, who conducts the assessments using advanced digital tools, and the designer, who applies the results to inform sustainable design decisions [138,144,145]. EN8 (material reuse plans) is primarily assigned to the designer, who develops initial strategies, and the project manager, who ensures these plans align with project execution requirements [138,145]. EN9 (compliance with building codes for circular practices) involves the designer, who ensures that designs meet regulations; the contractor, who implements these standards during construction; and the project manager, who oversees compliance throughout the project lifecycle [138,147,148]. Finally, EN10 (waste prevention strategies) is managed by both the designer, who incorporates waste minimisation into design strategies, and the BIM coordinator, who models scenarios to optimise material use and prevent waste [139,149,150].

3.5. Process (Technical Elements)

The technical elements of sustainability in BIM-enabled construction projects are integral to achieving high project performance and quality. These elements encompass a range of aspects, from improving construction quality and productivity to developing competencies in BIM technologies, each playing a critical role in enhancing the efficiency and sustainability of construction practices.

Table 5. Sub-attributes (CSFs) of technical elements of sustainability in BIM-enabled construction projects.

Sustainability Elements	Main Attributes	Critical Success Factors
Process (Technical elements)	Quality-related factors (Q)	Q1: Improved construction project performance and quality [35,38,96,118,119,151]
	Productivity-related factors (P)	P1: Improvement in productivity [42,97,98]
	Competency-related factors (CM)	CM1: Technical competence of staff [100,101,113] CM2: Existence of competent design staff with previous experience in BIM implementation [42,99,101,117] CM3: Competent technical support team within the company [99,117] CM4: Effective decision-making [96]
	Legitimacy-related factors (LG)	LG1: Specifying the duties and power of information management [152] LG2: Specifying the roles and responsibilities of each party [152] LG3: Specifying the ownership of the BIM data [152] LG4: Procedures on information sharing and appointment [152] LG5: Terms and conditions of the contract favouring the BIM implementation in the project [42]
	Technology-related factors (TEC)	TEC1: Improve documentation process [96] TEC2: Improvement in exchange of information and lifecycle data management [35,96,97,98,100,151,153] TEC3: MEP analysis and simulation (HVAC) [35,103] TEC4: Structural analysis and design [35,103] TEC5: Acoustical analysis and simulation (sound) [35,103] TEC6: Earlier and accurate 3D visualisation of design [35,96,103] TEC7: Accessibility of design, schedule, and budget data during the design stage with BIM [41,42,101,116] TEC 8: Integrating design validation (clash detection) [35,38,41,42,104,118,151,154,155] TEC 9: Controlling all systems in a 3D model and ensuring that there is instant and automatic intervention [35,38,41,42,114,118,119,151,155] TEC 10: BIM standardises information and supports a variety of file formats [41,42,101,118,151,155] TEC 11: Potential failures, leaks, and evacuation plans can be graphically illustrated and adapted with BIM [38,42,118,151] TEC 12: Specifying the content of the BIM model via common data environment (CDEs) [152]
	Organisational-related factors (ORG)	ORG1: Supporting the use of BIM by top (Client) and middle management [41,42,96,99,101,102,117,118,151,155,156,157] ORG2: The need for significant changes in the organisational structure for integration with BIM technology (size, structure, the culture of the organisation type, etc.) [41,42,99,102,117,119,151,154] ORG3: Formation of a dynamic team, with the new business model causing a change in the decision mechanism and workload distribution [42,102,115,118] ORG4: Inclusion of BIM in the competitive environment of the industry [41,42,151]

categorises these elements, detailing critical success factors such as enhanced construction project performance, productivity improvements, and technical competencies of staff. Figure 7 visually maps these technical success factors to their associated stakeholders, illustrating the extensive collaboration required to leverage technology in driving sustainable construction goals.

3.5.1. Quality-Related Factors

For a BIM-based construction project to be considered high-quality and perform well (Q1), the entire project team, including the owner, design team, contractors, and any other stakeholders concerned with the project, must contribute to the quality [158]. A high-quality construction project with BIM allows all team members to access and collaborate on a shared digital representation of the project so issues can be identified and resolved more efficiently, reduce rework, and improve team coordination. However, it is critical to note that the primary responsibility for enhancing BIM-based construction project performance and quality lies with the project BIM manager/coordinator [159].

3.5.2. Productivity-Related Factors

In productivity improvement (P1), first and foremost, the project owner/client sets clear project goals and objectives, along with any targets for productivity improvements. The design team is essential in improving productivity by using BIM to optimise the project’s design and eliminate potential issues before construction begins [160]. The construction team implements the design and efficiently assembles the project [161]. They can also contribute to productivity improvements by using the BIM model to plan and coordinate their work and by adopting lean construction principles and techniques.

3.5.3. Competency-Related Factors

In order to deliver high-quality designs and BIM models, the design firm must ensure that its employees possess technical competence and experience with BIM implementation (CM1 and CM2) [134,162]. The BIM coordinator/manager is responsible for ensuring that all staff involved in the design possess the necessary technical competencies required to fulfil their roles [134]. It is equally pertinent for all team members to be proficient at using BIM software and processes when conducting a BIM-based construction project, which may necessitate additional training or professional development for some team members [134]. To map the CM3 to its relevant stakeholders, it is up to the BIM manager/coordinator to ensure that a competent technical support team is in place [163]. A team equipped with the necessary skills and knowledge to perform BIM workflows, manage data and information, and provide technical support to project team members is essential for BIM implementation on a project [163]. Effective decision-making (CM4) is a competency-related factor that is associated with the entire project team [164]. Each team member should be aware of how their decisions will affect the project’s overall goals. Therefore, they must establish clear communication channels and make sure that all team members have access to the information they need to come to informed decisions through BIM, allowing for more informed decision-making by providing a centralised digital repository of project data and enabling visualisation and analysis of design options.

3.5.4. Legitimacy-Related Factors

A BIM-enabled construction project can achieve success only if it meets a variety of legitimacy-related requirements [165]. These factors ensure the project is conducted legally, ethically, and socially responsibly. The BIM coordinators/managers are responsible for defining the duties and powers of information management (LG1) [128,166], while both project managers and BIM coordinators/managers share responsibility for defining the roles and responsibilities of each party (LG2) [128,166]. The ownership of BIM data (LG3) is defined collectively by the project managers, BIM coordinators/managers, and the client/owner [128]. The contract terms and conditions related to BIM implementation (LG5) will be negotiated between the client/owner, who is commissioning the project, and the design and construction teams, who will carry out the work [128,167]. The procedure for sharing information and appointments (LG4) is managed by the BIM coordinators/managers and project managers [128,167]. Contract terms and conditions related to BIM implementation (LG5) are negotiated between the client/owner, who commissions the project, and the design and construction teams, who execute the work [128,167]. The contract outlines expectations and requirements for BIM implementation, including specific BIM deliverables, the level of detail and accuracy in the BIM model, and other BIM usage requirements, specifying each party’s roles, responsibilities, quality standards, and necessary approvals or signoffs [167].

3.5.5. Technology-Related Factors

There are more technological factors in BIM-enabled construction projects than in traditional construction projects. Employing BIM technology leads to an improved level of documentation (TEC1), for which the BIM coordinators/managers are responsible, including creating and maintaining the BIM model and documentation of the various systems and components of the building [10]. The exchange of information and lifecycle data management (TEC2) requires participation from both the project managers and BIM coordinators/managers, as all team members should collaborate and share information throughout the project to ensure that the BIM model and associated documentation accurately reflect the current state of the project [168]. Among technical success factors, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) analysis and simulation (TEC3) should be performed by the design team (e.g., architects and engineers) [164,169,170]. During the project’s design phase, MEP engineers design and analyse the systems that provide heating, ventilation, air conditioning, and plumbing for a building using BIM software to create 3D models of the MEP systems and perform simulations to analyse the performance of the systems under different conditions (e.g., different weather patterns and occupancy levels) [170]. These simulations help identify potential issues and inefficiencies in the design and allow the engineer to make adjustments as needed. Similarly, structural analysis and design (TEC4) is the design team’s responsibility (e.g., architects and engineers) [164]. The structural engineer designs the structural elements of a building (e.g., foundation, beams, columns) to ensure their safety, stability, and ability to withstand loads (e.g., gravity, wind, seismic).

Acoustical analysis and simulation (TEC5) is the process of evaluating and predicting the acoustic performance of a building, which includes analysing the transmission of sound between different spaces within the building and the external noise levels experienced by the building. As a rule, the design team is responsible for conducting sound analysis and simulation. During the project’s design phase, acoustic engineers use specialised software and techniques to perform simulations to analyse the acoustic performance of the building under different conditions (e.g., different occupancy levels and noise sources) [171]. In creating and providing 3D visualisations of the design (TEC6), responsibility is shared between the design team and BIM coordinators/managers [172]. For TEC7, the responsibility of maintaining design data falls on BIM coordinators/managers, while the project manager is in charge of maintaining schedule and budget data [173]. Clash detection (TEC8) involves both the design team and BIM coordinators/managers making sure that the design is coordinated and does not contain any clashes, using BIM tools such as clash detection software to identify and resolve any issues early in the design process [174].

To control all systems in a 3D model and ensure that there is instant and automatic intervention (TEC9) as needed, the BIM manager/coordinator is in charge of overseeing the creation, management, and maintenance of the BIM model throughout the design, construction, and operation phases of a project [175]. As part of this process, they work closely with the design team, contractors, and facility managers to guarantee the BIM model reflects the current project status [164]. The BIM manager/coordinator also verifies that information is standardised and different file formats are supported (TEC10) by establishing and enforcing BIM standards and guidelines, including file naming conventions, data standards, and file format support, to ensure that the BIM model is consistent and interoperable [173]. By standardising information and supporting various file formats, the BIM manager/coordinator helps improve collaboration, communication, and coordination among all project stakeholders. TEC11 represents BIM’s graphic illustration and adaptation to control failures, leaks, and evacuation plans. This aspect falls under the safety and security aspect of BIM, so it must be analysed and checked by design team experts [175]. They can use BIM as a tool to simulate evacuation scenarios and identify potential bottlenecks or areas of concern, allowing them to make adjustments to the building design and layout in order to improve safety [176]. In specifying the content of the BIM model via a common data environment (CDE) (TEC12), the design team, BIM coordinators/managers, and project managers are responsible for creating and maintaining the BIM model, defining its content and using a CDE to share and exchange information with other project stakeholders [177].

3.5.6. Organisation-Related Factors

In BIM-enabled construction projects, the successful implementation of BIM technology heavily relies on concerted support from both the client at the top management level and the project manager at the middle management level [163]. These stakeholders share accountability for the project’s outcomes, underpinning the crucial role of coordinated leadership in managing BIM processes [163]. The project manager is chiefly responsible for overseeing the integration of BIM into the project’s overarching plan (ORG2) and schedule and ensuring all stakeholders are aligned with the technological shift [178]. To facilitate this integration, information delivery manuals (IDMs) are employed. IDMs provide a structured approach to managing and disseminating BIM data across project phases, ensuring consistent and efficient information sharing [143]. They guide the creation, utilisation, and management of BIM data, which enhances communication among stakeholders and aligns operations with project goals [143]. The BIM manager, who oversees the project team’s BIM workflows, plays an essential role in this process [134]. They are tasked with identifying the appropriate BIM software and workflows, developing training programmes, and coordinating the necessary resources to implement BIM effectively [134]. IDMs are particularly beneficial in embedding specific performance parameters such as energy efficiency, thus supporting sustainability objectives while improving overall project quality and efficiency [143].

Furthermore, the responsibility for forming a dynamic team equipped to handle BIM-enabled projects (ORG3) typically falls to the owner and the project manager [179]. They must identify essential roles and skills, recruit suitable candidates, and foster an environment conducive to innovative BIM practices. The client or owner also plays a pivotal role in the industry’s competitive landscape (ORG4) by setting strategic goals and providing the necessary funding and decision-making support to foster BIM adoption [180].

In summary, this section highlights a comprehensive mapping of critical success factors in BIM-enabled construction projects, which include cost management, time efficiency, health and safety enhancements, impact assessments, design satisfaction, stakeholder involvement, local employment, education and training, environmental considerations, quality assurance, productivity boosts, competency development, technological integration, and effective organisational structuring. These factors collectively underline that successful BIM implementation necessitates a well-coordinated approach, emphasising the importance of collaboration and accountability among all stakeholders, including the client/owner, design team, contractors, BIM coordinators/managers, and, critically, the end users. Each party’s involvement is vital, not only in meeting immediate project metrics like cost and time but also in achieving broader performance and sustainability goals, thereby ensuring the project’s overall success.

4. Main Findings

Section 4 introduces a novel framework describing the interplay between CSFs and stakeholder roles mapped across the four sustainability pillars. This framework is visually captured in Figure 8, which demonstrates how distinct stakeholder groups significantly contribute to the sustainability pillars, thus highlighting the complex web of interactions essential for successful project execution. The visual representation employs varied line weights to denote the strength of interactions, with thicker lines indicating more substantial influence and engagement between stakeholders and CSFs.

The key findings from this section can be summarised as follows:

• Diverse Stakeholder Engagement and CSF Interaction: Each stakeholder group, from clients/owners to design teams and contractors, engages uniquely with the CSFs, reflecting the multifaceted nature of BIM-enabled construction projects. The pivotal role of the BIM manager/coordinator is particularly emphasised, as illustrated in Figure 8, where their central interaction with almost all CSFs underscores their critical function in weaving BIM seamlessly into the project fabric and aligning sustainability goals with project workflows across the QBL framework. Under the process pillar, they leverage tools such as lifecycle assessments (LCAs), energy modelling, and clash detection to optimise workflows and enhance technical efficiency. This integration directly supports the planet pillar by informing material choices, reducing waste, and minimising environmental impacts. From a profit perspective, BIM coordinators/managers facilitate cost control and resource optimisation through real-time updates to BIM models, reducing financial risks and improving economic outcomes. Their role in enhancing collaboration and data sharing fosters trust and inclusivity among stakeholders, addressing the people pillar and ensuring alignment with social sustainability objectives. This central role demonstrates how BIM coordinators/managers drive comprehensive sustainability by connecting technical processes with stakeholder collaboration and optimising project outcomes across all pillars.
• Influence of CSFs on Project Outcomes: CSFs across the sustainability pillars significantly shape outcomes in BIM-enabled construction projects. Quality, technology, and competency within the process pillar optimise construction methods and project execution standards. Economic factors like cost and time management under the profit pillar are essential for financial viability and timely project completion. In the people pillar, factors such as health and safety, stakeholder involvement, and community impact assessments enhance stakeholder welfare and project ethics. Lastly, environmental CSFs within the planet pillar, such as eco-friendly materials and energy optimisation, ensure projects align with environmental sustainability goals. The integrative visual representations in Figure 8 and Figure 9 highlight the interconnectedness of these CSFs and their stakeholder management, underscoring the necessity of collaborative efforts to achieve comprehensive sustainability objectives in construction projects.
• Quadruple Bottom Line Focus: The research meticulously aligns CSFs within the QBL framework, advocating for a holistic consideration of profit, people, planet, and process. Figure 8 and Figure 9 highlight a pronounced focus on the people and process pillars, suggesting a strategic emphasis on developing human capital and refining process efficiencies within BIM projects. This alignment is critical for fostering an environment where quality and safety are paramount and productivity and competency are enhanced, thereby nurturing the human and procedural foundations of sustainable construction practices.
• End-User Engagement: Despite the comprehensive mapping and integration among stakeholders and CSFs, the diagrams reveal a marked underemphasis on end-user engagement, which is a critical oversight in current practices. This gap, visually represented by thinner and fewer connecting lines to end users in Figure 9, signals a potential misalignment between project deliverables and user expectations, emphasising the necessity for a more inclusive approach in stakeholder engagement strategies.
• Environmental Considerations: The relative underrepresentation of the planet pillar within the stakeholder-CSF mappings calls attention to an imperative area of improvement in the planning and design phase. This oversight highlights the need for a robust enhancement in how environmental impacts are integrated and prioritised among stakeholder considerations. Addressing this gap is essential to elevate the sustainability agenda in construction projects, aligning them more closely with global sustainability mandates.

The findings reveal notable stakeholder underrepresentation and unequal emphasis on CSFs across the sustainability pillars, highlighting critical areas for improvement. Additionally, involving cross-disciplinary teams, including sustainability experts, during project planning can ensure that environmental and social considerations are prioritised alongside economic and technical goals. Stakeholder underrepresentation, particularly for end users and environmental stakeholders, can be attributed to their late engagement in the project lifecycle and the fragmented nature of construction processes. To address this, practical strategies include developing frameworks for early stakeholder inclusion during the design phase. For instance, participatory BIM workshops can enable end users to contribute directly to design decisions, ensuring that project outcomes align more closely with their needs. Additionally, implementing policy mandates requiring early stakeholder involvement can standardise these practices across the industry. Leveraging BIM tools to simulate end-user scenarios and environmental impacts further bridges communication gaps, enhancing stakeholder integration.

Decisions made during the design and planning stages have a profound impact on environmental outcomes, particularly in reducing embodied carbon. Integrating environmental considerations at these early phases is critical for ensuring that sustainability goals are embedded into project workflows and material choices. Practical strategies to enhance environmental performance include expanding the use of BIM tools for energy modelling, life cycle assessment, and resource optimisation, ensuring that environmental impacts are actively addressed during project decision-making. Additionally, adopting circular economy principles, such as material reuse, recycling, and waste reduction, can align construction practices with global sustainability goals.

To operationalise these strategies, standard BIM-based guidelines can be developed to ensure holistic stakeholder engagement and balanced CSF integration during early project stages. Establishing a BIM advisory board to oversee sustainability metrics and stakeholder representation across all pillars can further institutionalise these practices. By addressing these gaps through actionable strategies, this study not only advances the theoretical understanding of sustainability in BIM-enabled construction but also provides practical solutions for industry practitioners, bridging the gap between operational efficiencies and sustainable outcomes. To contextualise the findings and highlight their contributions, this study draws comparisons with existing sustainability frameworks and the prior literature. This study contrasts the QBL framework with existing approaches to sustainability, highlighting how it addresses limitations identified in prior frameworks like the TBL. While TBL emphasises economic, social, and environmental dimensions, it often overlooks the integration of technical factors and stakeholder-specific contributions critical to BIM-enabled projects.

The QBL framework uniquely incorporates the ‘Process’ pillar, capturing technical and operational aspects such as lifecycle assessments (LCAs), energy modelling, and clash detection, which influence both sustainability outcomes and project efficiency. Additionally, the detailed mapping of 62 CSFs to specific stakeholder groups highlights their roles across the QBL pillars, such as BIM coordinators aligning technical processes (process) with material reuse strategies (planet) and cost optimisation (profit).

Furthermore, the QBL framework enhances early-stage stakeholder engagement by incorporating participatory design and leveraging BIM’s collaborative tools, addressing gaps in TBL frameworks in which end-user and environmental considerations are often underrepresented in the planning and design phases. These findings demonstrate how the QBL framework provides a more holistic and actionable approach to sustainability in the initial phases of BIM-enabled construction projects.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, this study has mapped the critical success factors (CSFs) within BIM-enabled construction projects, identifying their essence in the design and planning phases. These critical success factors (CSFs) are interconnected and essential for enhancing project planning, efficiency, safety, viability, and environmental conservation. The investigation has shown that each CSF is not an isolated entity but rather part of an interconnected framework aligned with the four sustainability pillars of profit (economic viability), people (social responsibility), planet (environmental conservation), and process (efficiency and safety), which together construct a comprehensive plan for sustainable construction through BIM.

As we delve into the roles of various stakeholder groups, it becomes evident that their responsibilities are not uniformly distributed. Instead, they form a collaborative network, with the BIM manager/coordinator at its centre, ensuring the smooth integration and implementation of CSFs. The design team, contractors, and project managers, each with their specific commitments, contribute to a dynamic that is responsive to economic demands, mindful of human factors, respectful of environmental constraints, and reliant on technical precision. Moreover, this study underscores the potential benefits for the end user within this network. They stand to gain significantly from each of these success factors through improved usability and satisfaction. However, there is a noticeable lack of involvement during the planning stage. Recognising this as an opportunity, we propose a redefinition of BIM practices. This shift in approach not only aims to engage end users more directly but also to leverage their insights, creating facilities that not only meet but exceed user needs and expectations, fostering a more user-centric approach.

This study contributes to theoretical advancements in multiple domains. First, it extends stakeholder theory by highlighting the dynamic and digitally mediated interactions enabled by BIM. The mapping of CSFs to specific stakeholder roles demonstrates how BIM coordinators facilitate collaboration across diverse groups, including previously underrepresented end users, aligning their inputs with sustainability objectives. This integration suggests a need to evolve stakeholder theory to account for the increasing complexity and interdependence of roles in BIM-enabled projects.

Second, the findings contribute to innovation adoption models by illustrating how the process pillar in the QBL framework fosters the alignment of sustainability goals with digital transformation initiatives. By incorporating advanced digital tools such as lifecycle assessments and energy modelling, this study provides evidence of how BIM adoption not only enhances operational efficiency but also drives broader sustainability transitions, offering a pathway for integrating digital workflows into traditional project management models.

Finally, from a digital transformation perspective, this research underscores the critical role of embedding technical sustainability into design workflows. The introduction of the process pillar bridges gaps in traditional sustainability frameworks by emphasising operational and technological dimensions. This addition aligns with emerging digital transformation frameworks, which advocate for the cohesive integration of technological tools into project planning and execution to achieve sustainable outcomes. These contributions collectively advance the theoretical understanding of how sustainability, stakeholder engagement, and digital innovation intersect in the context of BIM-enabled construction projects.

Moreover, these findings align with global sustainability efforts, particularly the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Target 11.3, which emphasises inclusive and participatory urban planning. By mapping stakeholder roles and emphasising early engagement strategies in BIM-enabled construction, this study supports the creation of sustainable and inclusive urban environments. The actionable strategies proposed for fostering stakeholder collaboration, particularly through participatory planning practices aligned with SDG Target 11.3, represent a pivotal step in evolving BIM-enabled construction. This proactive engagement not only ensures sustainability and efficiency but also enhances user-centric outcomes, highlighting the significance of this approach.

While this study provides a solid foundation for integrating sustainability into BIM-enabled construction projects, some limitations warrant consideration. First, the reliance on a scoping literature review ensures a comprehensive synthesis but may benefit from empirical validation through case studies or surveys to enhance applicability. Second, the focus on design and planning phases captures critical early-stage decisions but does not address factors emerging in later project stages. Expanding the framework to the full lifecycle could provide additional insights. Lastly, the introduction of the quadruple bottom line (QBL) framework advances understanding of technical dimensions, but further research involving real-world applications is recommended to evaluate its practical impacts and broader adoption.

Additionally, while the findings provide actionable insights, they also reveal areas that require further exploration. Future research could focus on developing participatory BIM frameworks to enhance end-user engagement, particularly in the early design phase, in which stakeholder representation is often limited. Additionally, there is a need to investigate advanced methods for considering several CSFs overlap across sustainability pillars in the QBL framework. Finally, exploring the evolving nature of CSFs across project phases and their long-term impact on sustainability outcomes would deepen the field’s understanding of effective stakeholder collaboration and sustainable project delivery.

Therefore, this paper concludes with a resounding call to action for a paradigm shift in BIM methodologies, emphasising inclusivity and the integration of end-user feedback throughout the construction process. This shift could involve the development of standardised BIM frameworks for participatory engagement, enhanced sustainability metrics, and stronger alignment with policy directives to drive meaningful change in construction practices. Moreover, this study identifies an oversight in environmental considerations within stakeholder-CSF mappings. The limited focus on the planet pillar highlights an opportunity to integrate advanced strategies, such as the use of circular economy principles, renewable energy technologies, and enhanced lifecycle assessment tools, to better align construction practices with sustainability goals. It highlights the need to better integrate environmental impacts into stakeholder priorities, aligning construction practices with global sustainability goals. Increasing attention to environmental factors is important for advancing the sustainability agenda in construction projects, ensuring they adhere to ecological and conservation standards.