Cai, J; Li, Z; Dou, Y; Li, T and Yuan, M (2023) Understanding adoption of high off-site construction level technologies in construction based on the TAM and ttf. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 30(10), pp. 4978-5006. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: Off-site construction (OSC) has been regarded as a clean and efficient production approach to help the construction industry towards sustainability. Different levels of OSC technologies vary greatly in their implementations and adoptions. Compared to low OSC level technologies have been applied widely, the adoption of high OSC level technologies (HOSCLTs) in practice remains limited. The adoption mechanism for HOSCLTs by firms has not been clear, hindering their promotion. This study aims to explore the mechanism combining subjective and objective adoption for HOSCLTs. Design/methodology/approach: This study developed an integrated model illustrating mechanism for HOSCLTs adoption based on the technology acceptance model (TAM), which has strong capacity to explain potential adopters' subjective intentions to adoption, and the task-technology fit (TTF) theory, which well describes the linkages between the task, technology and performance in technology adoption. The proposed model was then empirically evaluated through a survey of 232 practitioners in the Chinese OSC industry using partial least squares structural equation modeling. Findings: The results indicate that both task characteristics (TAC) and technology characteristics (TEC) positively affect TTF of HOSCLTs. TAC, TTF, firm conditions and stakeholder influence have significant positive effects on perceived usefulness (PU), which further positively influence attitude towards adoption. TEC and firm conditions are significantly related to perceived ease of use (PEU). TTF, PEU and attitude towards adoption are good predictors of behavior intention to HOSCLTs adoption. PEU only significantly influences adoption intention and is not observed to influence attitudes and PU, unlike prior research on common OSC adoption. Originality/value: This study contributes to the body of knowledge by exploring HOSCLTs adoption in the industry based on distinguishing the levels of OSC technologies and supplementing an integrated model for explaining the mechanism with the combination of subjective and objective adoption. The study also provides useful insights into understanding and promoting HOSCLTs adoption for policy makers and stakeholders actively involved in the OSC field.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction technology adoption; high off-site construction level technologies; subjective and objective combination; task-technology fit theory; technology acceptance model |
| Index terms: | linkage, integrated model, promotion, off-site construction, implementation, construction industry, technology acceptance model, technology adoption, construction technology, structural equation modelling, perceived usefulness, survey, body of knowledge, partial least square, methodology, practitioner, perceived ease of use |
| Subjects: | acoustic properties, research methods, management, behavioral psychology, statistical analysis, industry analysis, building construction, practitioner, digital engineering, business, data collection methods, analytical methods, innovation and technology management, contractual arrangements, knowledge management |
| Topics: | Construction Technology, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Human Resources, Digital Applications |
| 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