Ter Huurne, R; Scholtenhuis, L O and Dorée, A (2022) Change triggers in early innovation stages: How technology pilots enable routine reflection. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 148(9): 05022005, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Many scholars have denounced innovation in construction as problematic. Existing work processes and routines may resist or even block the adoption of new technologies. Unravelling how new technology interferes with organizational processes could facilitate a more mindful innovation process. This study, therefore, conceptualizes how technology pilots influence early change of existing practices. Five utility localization projects were studied, in which ground-penetrating radar (GPR) technology was introduced. The researchers observed existing practices onsite, demonstrated and moderated the use of GPR, and conducted semistructured reflective interviews. Based on the concept of routine dynamics, selective and axial coding resulted in the identification of two types of mechanisms: (1) change triggers occurred when routines fell short and practitioners started favoring the GPR, and (2) stabilization occurred when routines proceeded as expected and shielded GPR from being considered. Objecting linear innovation adoption, the findings contribute an empirical conceptual model of early-stage innovation adoption dynamics. This model aids decision makers in timely identifying (1) whether routines are receptive to the uptake of new technologies, and (2) how new technologies may advance these routines. Additionally, this study demonstrates the merit of using practice-based studies to conceptualize in rich detail how innovation processes are shaped in situated construction contexts.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | disruption; pilots; practice theory; routine dynamics; technology adoption |
| Index terms: | reflection, innovation adoption, dynamics, routine, practitioner, technology adoption, onsite, interview, localization, new technology, practice theory, stabilization |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, building construction, economic analysis, professional development, innovation and technology management, urban planning, systems engineering, theoretical framing, innovation studies, practitioner, sociology |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Governance, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Organizational Design, Construction Technology |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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