Civil Engineering and Architecture 10(4): 1538-1546, 2022 http://www.hrpub.org DOI: 10.13189/cea.2022.100423 Building Information Modelling (BIM) Performance Metrics Using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Rolyselra Orbintang Robin 1 , Mohd Yamani Yahya 1,* , Azlina Md Yassin 2 , Haidaliza Masram 2 1 Department of Construction Technology Management, Faculty of Technology Management and Business, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM), Johor, Malaysia 2 Department of Real Estate Management, Faculty of Technology Management and Business, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM), Johor Malaysia Received October 19, 2021; Revised January 1, 2022; Accepted January 25, 2022 Cite This Paper in the following Citation Styles (a): [1] Rolyselra Orbintang Robin, Mohd Yamani Yahya, Azlina Md Yassin, Haidaliza Masram , "Building Information Modelling (BIM) Performance Metrics Using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)," Civil Engineering and Architecture, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 1538-1546, 2022. DOI: 10.13189/cea.2022.100423. (b): Rolyselra Orbintang Robin, Mohd Yamani Yahya, Azlina Md Yassin, Haidaliza Masram (2022). Building Information Modelling (BIM) Performance Metrics Using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Civil Engineering and Architecture, 10(4), 1538-1546. DOI: 10.13189/cea.2022.100423. Copyright©2022 by authors, all rights reserved. Authors agree that this article remains permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License Abstract An organization must evaluate its internal ability to optimize the benefits of BIM. Hence, it is important to provide a set of numerical weights for each performance metric before starting the evaluation. Hence, this study applies the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique to assign weights for the organizational BIM performance evaluation. The AHP survey was collected using self-completion method and received feedback from twenty (20) respondents. Findings from AHP Survey were analyzed using AHP Excel Template. This analysis has set a weighting value for each metric. As a result of using the AHP technique, the consistency value (CR) of all metrics determined was less than 0.1, which indicates that the experts' decisions were consistent. In addition, the value of consensus also exceeds 50 %, which confirms that the agreement on the value of metric weights among the experts is acceptable. Subsequently, the AHP had successfully assigned the weightage to all BIM performance metrics, with five (5) Main Metrics as the most critical metrics; Policy (37%), Process (17%), Technology (16%), People (15%), and Organization (15%). Keywords Building Information Modelling (BIM) Performance, Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) 1. Introduction The failure to understand the BIM performance evaluation areas causes the organization to maximize the benefits of BIM. The evaluation areas are the basis for the organization to improve its BIM processes and deliverables. Apart from that, the lack of a way to systematically scale evaluation to assess the BIM application in an organization will make tracking their weakness and possible risks challenging. They will fail to identify gaps in the BIM application, including the organization's resources and how these gaps can be addressed. If these matters happen, the organization is unable to improve and miss growth opportunities. Consequently, it is necessary to develop consistent BIM performance evaluation to guide the organization to understand the performance and level of performance that suits their organizational needs; therefore enabling to utilize and build BIM capabilities. Various BIM performance models are being developed to assist businesses in achieving various BIM evaluation goals in the construction sector. They differ in terms of applicability and evaluation intent (Wu et al., 2017). Some demand a third-party assessor (with fee), some lack guidelines on using them, while others need a couple of hours to complete. Therefore, an expanded BIM performance model for the evaluation is preferred.