Building Information Modelling (BIM) is believed to enable significant efficiency improvements in interdisciplinary design in construction. This is mainly based on the rhetoric of BIM dominated by promoting its capabilities for data transactions. However, literature shows that there are problems in applying BIM technologies in practice, because their use causes unanticipated shifts in the focus and organisation of design projects. Furthermore, changes wrought by applied BIM technologies transcend the boundaries of the organisation of individual projects, and displace the previous ethos of ‘professionalism’ in design in construction. Consequently, there is unresolved confusion and evaluation about BIM technologies in terms of the nature and extent of the change they create. The present research aims to develop a better-informed understanding of BIM-driven change in design in construction through an empirical study of ‘organising’ and ‘order’ in BIM-enabled interdisciplinary design projects. Using a practice-based methodology, this research focused on the interdisciplinary interactions during three projects. A practice-based methodology sees ‘organising ‘and ‘order ‘as continuously accomplished through the ongoing activities that are performed in practices. Therefore, the research scrutinised the interdisciplinary activities and processes which look mundane but enable ‘organising’, and ‘order ‘in the studied projects. Three explanatory organisational concepts are developed through the analyses of the empirical data: ‘organisational premises’, ‘purposeful artefact’, and ‘technological premises’. These concepts provide three different explanations about how ‘organising ‘interdisciplinary design in BIM-enabled projects is accomplished through the ongoing interdisciplinary activities performed in practices. Thus, they produce rich understanding of the complex organisational phenomena. Interdisciplinary design development is then seen as a ‘continuous process of (re-)establishing a shared sense of purposefulness ‘among the members of a design team, which largely depends on previous shared experiences. This continuous requirement for mutual dependency does not align well with the operational characteristics of BIM technologies, which are fundamentally planned and rigid. Therefore, practitioners experience divergent views of ‘organising’ (i.e. and ‘work’) in BIM-enabled projects. The ‘ordering ‘induced by BIM technologies appears in the interface of these different views of ‘organising’(and ‘work'), as it is here that practices unfold, and become directed towards one or other view. In such cases, the extent to which information modelling and design development can be prioritised is determined by the level of reliance on technology, and the level of authority of those individuals who are in control of the BIM technologies. The practice-based understandings of ‘organising ‘and ‘order ‘that emerge from the analyses are used herein to refine the notions of ‘design’, ‘design collaboration’, ‘use of information and communication technologies (ICT) in construction design’, and ‘CT-driven change in construction design’. Thus, the practice-based methodology reveals that some of the main arguments upon which the promotional rhetoric of BIM is founded are incomplete or flawed. Through its methodological and theoretical contributions, the present research evaluated BIM-driven change in design in construction, and created an agenda for further critical and practically-relevant studies into interdisciplinary design in construction. This shows the need for further research which should re-establish the use and development of BIM by aligning it with the realities of actual practice
