Low, S P; Gao, S and Ng, E W L (2021) Future-ready project and facility management graduates in Singapore for industry 4.0: Transforming mindsets and competencies. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(1), pp. 270-290. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: The disparity between employers' expectations and the ability of graduates to meet them is an issue for employment. Industry 4.0, represented by technologies like big data and automation, permeate the construction industry, exacerbating the rift of changing expectations that future graduates must bridge. As sophisticated forms of technology emerge, the ways individuals work are also expected to change. Soft skills are needed to support, materialise, and enhance the workforce’s existing technical skills. The purpose of this paper is to explore the effect of Industry 4.0 on employability in the local construction industry from the viewpoint of employers and future graduates. Design/methodology/approach: This study adopts mixed-methods sequential explanatory design, quantitative followed by qualitative. The questionnaire survey crosschecked the needs and expectations of employers in the local construction industry, regarding these nine soft skills and the extent to which students currently possess them, to determine whether students from the construction industry are Industry 4.0-ready. Qualitative interviews were also conducted with employers in the construction industry and PFM students to further understand the disparity between the survey results of the two parties. Findings: Gap analyses and t-test results found six significant divides in nine soft skills – resilience, curiosity, adaptability, entrepreneurial thinking, pursuing convictions and vision – showing a significant difference between the mean expectations of employers and the soft skills capabilities of graduate students. Future graduate students thus lack the soft skills needed by Industry 4.0. The reasons for this significant difference and the barriers to improving soft skills are explored through interviews with employers and future graduates. Three parties – government, educational institutions and industry – were identified as crucial partners in change. Originality/value: Little has been researched about the future strategies and mindsets required by the workforce to prepare for the changes brought by Industry 4.0. Likewise, the government’s and companies' one-sided focus on promoting skill-upgrading leaves many to wonder about the soft skills needed to stay competitive. Hence, it is timely to examine the readiness of Singapore’s future graduates in the construction industry in adapting to Industry 4.0’s requirements in terms of soft skills.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction industry; employability; industry 4.0; servqual model; soft skills; usem model of employability key |
| Index terms: | automation, employment, big data, construction industry, mindset, survey, disparity, interview, methodology, adaptability, Singapore, questionnaire, industry 4.0, graduate student, technical skill, strategy, upgrading, employability, gap analysis |
| Subjects: | professional development, data collection methods, user focus, health behaviours and lifestyles, information systems, automation and robotics, management, social justice, technology adoption, performance measurement, curriculum design, industry analysis, human resources and leadership, research methods, Geography, strategic management |
| Topics: | Education, Information Management, Geographical Context, Digital Applications, Human Resources, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Design Practice, Ethics |
| 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