Bhattacharya, S and Momaya, K S (2021) Actionable strategy framework for digital transformation in AECO industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(5), pp. 1397-1422. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: The Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) holds the potential to improve capabilities- and technology-based innovation, which will enable breakout for architectural, engineering, construction and operation and maintenance (AECO) companies, for international competitiveness. Though the top management of such companies is convinced on the utility of the applications, they are unsure on the strategy of implementing the same. The objective of this research is to suggest a strategy framework for digital transformation of the AECO value chain. Design/methodology/approach: The nascent level of research on 4IR in construction necessitated the adoption of the integrative review methodology for the study. Extensive literature review of research on strategy and 4IR has been utilized to establish the validity of the first two pillars, namely “a strategy of simple rules in a complex environment; and deployment of dynamic capabilities.” The validation of a construct for the third pillar of “confluence of change and continuity forces” has been achieved via hypothesis testing of data obtained through a questionnaire survey. Findings: The present study has integrated three diverse ideas of strategy, named as the pillars, to facilitate sustainable digital transformation. Within the third pillar, top three continuity forces which offer resistance to change are organization culture, existing delivery processes and networks, and existing standard operating procedures. On the other hand, the leading drivers of change are needs of competitiveness; global industry trends and the advent of new technologies/innovations. Research limitations/implications: This provides a practical approach to operationalize digital transformation of the AECO at an organization level. The validation relied on opinion and perspectives of a sample frame in the Indian context, which was its limitation. Originality/value: This paper suggests a strategy framework of three pillars to help address specific strategy dilemmas during implementation of digital transformation of particular organizations in AECO. The study contributes to both theory and practice by helping leaders of AECO companies, associations, policymakers and the academia to strategize transformations successfully.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | 4ir; aeco competitiveness; comprehensive/integrating framework; continuity and change; digital transformation strategy; strategy as process and practice |
| Index terms: | validity, transformation, value chain, new technology, implementation, testing, competitiveness, academia, fourth industrial revolution, strategy, literature review, survey, operation and maintenance, standard operating procedure, top management, methodology, dynamic capability, validation, questionnaire |
| Subjects: | professional development, value chain strategy, management, maintenance engineering, research methods, market analysis, educational institutions, process management, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, business, contractual arrangements, data analysis and analytics, innovation and technology management, technology adoption, professional practice |
| Topics: | Supply Chain Management, Quality Management, Digital Applications, Education, Organizational Design, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here