Chen, Z; Chen, K and Cheng, J C P (2023) ISM-based analysis of VR-AEC adoption barriers and their inner mechanisms. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 30(9), pp. 4271-4293. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: As an emerging visualization technology, virtual reality (VR) falls into the dilemma of having great potential but a low adoption degree in the architectural, engineering and construction (AEC) industry. However, few studies paid attention to studying barriers affecting VR’s adoption and their inner mechanisms. This makes AEC users hard to catch the key points for VR’s implementations. This study aims to get a clear structure of these barriers and provide insights for the improvement. Design/methodology/approach: First, 12 major VR-AEC adoption barriers were identified by a systematic literature review and expert interviews (EI). Second, EI and similarity aggregation method were conducted to achieve reliable barrier relationships. Third, interpretive structural modeling was used to establish a multi-level model for barriers. Finally, ten crucial barriers were targeted with a comprehensive strategy framework. Findings: The findings help AEC stakeholders get a thorough understanding of the VR-AEC adoption barriers. Besides, the inner mechanism among barriers is revealed and analyzed, followed by a systematic strategy framework. It is anticipated that users could conduct more effective VR-AEC promotions in the future. Originality/value: This paper is the first to propose a comprehensive literature review on the VR-AEC adoption barriers. In addition, this paper is novel in building a hierarchy model that explores barriers' inner mechanism, where structural strategies are proposed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | adoption barriers; engineering and construction; inner mechanism architectural; interpretive structural model; virtual reality |
| Index terms: | virtual reality, systematic literature review, interpretive structural modelling, falls, interview, visualization, strategy, literature review, implementation, promotion, methodology |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, data analysis and analytics, research methods, health risk and incident analysis, management, research evaluation and metrics, contractual arrangements, virtual reality, design practice |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Business Strategy, Procurement, Human Resources, Digital Applications, Research Practice, Health and Safety |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 CTEA |
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