• Ahmad Taufik Nursal School of Quantitative Science, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Kedah, Malaysia.
  • Mohd Faizal Omar School of Quantitative Science, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Kedah, Malaysia.
  • Mohd Nasrun Mohd Nawi School of Technology Management & Logistics, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Kedah, Malaysia.



Decision support system (DSS), Web 2.0, building information modeling (BIM), multi criteria decision making (MCDM), software selection.


The emerging of new Information Communication Technology (ICT) technology namely Building Information Modeling been proven benefits toward construction industry. As a result, the list of BIM software available in the market is keep increasing in recent years. This has led to the selection problem among construction companies. Moreover, the selection BIM software also required high investment in term of software, hard ware and training expenses. These aforementioned issues have increased the complexities of decision process and the need of decision aid in BIM software selection. Thus, this paper has introduced a new approach in MCDMDSS web development by utilization of Web 2.0 application. The rapid development of Information technology has highly benefit to the development of web based DSS. The design and validation architecture of a web base DSS called topsis4BIM for Building Information Modeling (BIM) is presented. 


M. F. Hergunsel, 2011. Benefit Of Building Information Modeling For Construction Manager And BIM Base Scheduling. Worchester Polytechnic Institute.

K. Wong and Q. Fan, 2013. Building Information Modelling (BIM) For Sustainable Building Design. Facilities. 31(3): 138–157.

Y. Jung and M. Joo, 2011. Building Information Modelling (BIM) Framework For Practical Implementation. Autom. Constr. 20(2): 126–133.

S. Azhar, 2008. Building Information Modeling ( BIM ): A New Paradigm for Visual Interactive Modeling and Simulation for Construction Projects. in First International Conference on Construction in Developing Countries. 1: 435–446.

A. T. Nursal, M. F. Omar, and M. N. M. Nawi, 2014. Case Study Methodology of DSS Development for BIM Software Selection in Construction Industry. Am. J. Sustain. Agric. 8(3): 81–85.

R. a. Ribeiro, A. M. Moreira, P. van den Broek, and A. Pimentel, 2011. Hybrid Assessment Method For Software Engineering Decisions. Decis. Support Syst. 51(1): 208–219.

J. Otamendi, J. M. Pastor, and A. Garcı´a, 2008. Selection Of The Simulation Software For The Management Of The Operations At An International Airport. Simul. Model. Pract. Theory. 16(8): 1103–1112.

Z. Ayağ and R. G. Özdemİr, 2009. An Intelligent Approach To ERP Software Selection Through Fuzzy ANP. Int. J. Prod. Res. 45(10): 2169–2194.

C. Eastman, P. Teicholz, R. Sacks, and K. Liston, 2011. BIM Handbook: A Guide To Building Information Modeling For Owners, Managers,Designers, Enggineers And Contractors. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

J. V. Kumar and M. Mukherjee, 2009. Scope of Building Information Modeling ( BIM ) in India. J. Eng. Sci. Technol. Rev. 2(1): 165–169.

J. M. Ruiz, 2009. BIM Software Evaluation Model For General Contractors. University of Florida.

B. Y. Chung, M. J. Skibniewski, H. C. L. Jr, and Y. H. Kwak, 2008. Analyzing Enterprise Resource Planning System Implementation Success Factors in the Engineering– Construction Industry. 373–382.

A. S. Jadhav and R. M. Sonar, 2009. Evaluating And Selecting Software Packages : A review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 51(3): 555–563.

M. F. Omar, A. T. Nursal, M. N. M. Nawi, A. T. Haron, and K. C. Goh,2014. A Preliminary Requirement of Decision Support System for Building Information Modelling Software Selection. Malaysia Constr. Res. J. 15(2): 11–28.

R. Sprague and E. Carlson, 1982. Buidling Effective Decision Support System. New Jersey: Practice-Hall.

H. Features, 1999. Multicriteria Dss With H Istorical D Atabase A Ttenuator S Election. July: 187–197.

G. Kou, Y. Shi, and S. Wang, 2011. Multiple Criteria Decision Making And Decision Support Systems - Guest Editor’s Introduction. Decis. Support Syst. 51(2): 247–249.

V. UrbanaviÄiene, A. Kaklauskas, E. K. Zavadskas, and M. Seniut, 2009. The Web–Based Real Estate Multiple Criteria Negotiation Decision Support System: A New Generation Of Decision Support Systems. Int. J. Strateg. Prop. Manag. 13(3): 267–286.

E. W. L. Cheng and H. Li, 2004. Contractor Selection Using The Analytic Network Process. Constr. Manag. Econ. 22(10): 1021–1032.

C. Kahraman, U. Cebeci, and Z. Ulukan, 2003. Multi-Criteria Supplier Selection Using Fuzzy AHP. Logist. Inf. Manag.16(6): 382–394.

M. F. Omar, 2012. The Structured and Practical Approach in Development of Decision Support System for Consultan Selection in Public Sector Infrastructre Project. Queensland University of Technology.

Y. Q. Chen, J. Y. Liu, B. Li, and B. Lin, 2011. Project Delivery System Selection Of Construction Projects In China. Expert Syst. Appl. 38(5): 5456–5462.

D. J. Power and R. Sharda, 2007. Model-Driven Decision Support Systems: Concepts And Research Directions. Decis. Support Syst. 43(3): 1044–1061.

D. Delen, R. Sharda, and P. Kumar, 2007. Movie forecast Guru: A Web-based DSS for Hollywood managers. Decis. Support Syst. 43(4): 1151–1170.

M. Rao, G. Fan, J. Thomas, G. Cherian, V. Chudiwale, and M. Awawdeh, 2007. A Web-Based GIS Decision Support System For Managing And Planning USDA’s Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). Environ. Model. Softw. 22(9): 1270–1280.

Q. Sheng, Z. Lei-shan, and Y. Yi-xiang, 2010. A Web-based Distributed Group Decision Support System for Railway Construction Organization.

G. Banias, C. Achillas, C. Vlachokostas, N. Moussiopoulos, and I. Papaioannou, 2011. A Web-Based Decision Support System For The Optimal Management Of Construction And Demolition Waste. Waste Manag. 31(12): 2497–502.

I. Bessedik, N. Taghezout, and A. Saidi, 2012. Web 2.0 integration in a Web-Based Decision Support System: Effect Study Of Social Networking On Decision-Making. Second Int. Conf. Innov. Comput. Technol. (INTECH 2012). 365–370.

S. Aghaei, M. A. Nematbakhsh, and H. K. Farsani, 2012. “Evolution of the World Wide Web : From Web 1.0 to Web 4.0,†Int. J. Web Semant. Technol. 3(1): 1–10.

A. T. Nursal, M. F. Omar, and M. N. M. Nawi, 2014. An Overview Of Emerging Technologies In Contemporary Decision Support System Development. in AIP Proceedings. 634: 634–638.

M. Saremi, S. F. Mousavi, and A. Sanayei, 2009. TQM Consultant Selection In Smes With TOPSIS Under Fuzzy Environment. Expert Syst. Appl. 36(2): 2742–2749.

J.-W. Wang, C.-H. Cheng, and K.-C. Huang, 2009. Fuzzy Hierarchical TOPSIS For Supplier Selection. Appl. Soft Comput. 9(1): 377–386.

İ. Ertu and N. Karaka, 2008. Comparison Of Fuzzy AHP And Fuzzy TOPSIS Methods For Facility Location Selection. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 39: 783–795.

T.-C. Chu and Y.-C. Lin, 2009. An Interval Arithmetic Based Fuzzy TOPSIS Model. Expert Syst. Appl. 36(8): 10870–10876.

C. T. Chen, 2000. Extensions Of The TOPSIS For Group Decision-Making Under Fuzzy Environment. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 114(1): 1–9.

H.-S. Shih, H.-J. Shyur, and E. S. Lee, 2007. An Extension Of TOPSIS For Group Decision Making. Math. Comput. Model. 45(7–8): 801–813.

E. Ataei and A. Branch, 2013. Application of TOPSIS and Fuzzy TOPSIS Methods for Plant Layout Design. 24(7): 908–913.

M. B. Ayhan, 2013. Fuzzy Topsis Application For Supplier Selection. Int. J. Information, Bus. Manag. 5(2): 159–174.

L. A. Zadeh, 1965. Fuzzy Sets * -, Inf. Control. 353: 338–353.

D. J. Power and N. Iowa, 2000. Web-Based and Model-Driven Decision Support Systems : Concepts and Issues. in American Conference on Information System.

C. -l. Hsu, 2010. Sociology of Hyperlink Networks of Web 1.0, Web 2.0, and Twitter: A Case Study of South Korea. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev.,29(3): 354–368,.

A. Isfandyari-Moghaddam and M. Hosseini-Shoar, 2014. Factors Affecting Web 2.0 Adoption: A Case Study. Progr. Electron. Libr. Inf. Syst. 48(1): 2–15.

S. Murugesan, 2007. Second Generation Web Technology, IEEE Computer Society. August: 34–41.

T. O. Reilly and O. R. Media, 2007. What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software. Comun. Strateg. 65: 17–37.




How to Cite