Critical success factors for implementing 3D printing technology in construction projects: Academics and construction practitioners' perspectives

Chang, R and Antwi-Afari, M F (2025) Critical success factors for implementing 3D printing technology in construction projects: Academics and construction practitioners' perspectives. Construction Innovation, 25(3), pp. 843-866. ISSN 1471-4175

Abstract

Purpose: The application of three-dimensional (3D) printing technology in construction projects is of increasing interest to researchers and construction practitioners. Although the application of 3D printing technology at various stages of the project lifecycle has been explored, few studies have identified the relative importance of critical success factors (CSFs) for implementing 3D printing technology in construction projects. To address this research gap, this study aims to explore the academics (i.e. researchers) and construction practitioners' perspectives on CSFs for implementing 3D printing technology in construction projects. Design/methodology/approach: To do this, a questionnaire was administered to participants (i.e. academics and construction practitioners) with knowledge and expertise in 3D printing technology in construction projects. The collected data were analysed using mean score ranking, normalization and rank agreement analysis to identify CSFs and determine the consistency of the ranking of CSFs between academics and construction practitioners. In addition, exploratory factor analysis was used to identify the relationships and underlying constructs of the measured CSFs. Findings: Through a rank agreement analysis of the collected data, 11 CSFs for implementing 3D printing technology were retrieved (i.e. 17% agreement), indicating a diverse agreement in the ranking of the CSFs between academics and construction practitioners. In addition, the results show three key components of CSFs including "production demand enabling CSFs", "optimize the construction process enabling CSFs" and "optimized design enabling CSFs". Originality/value: This study highlights the feasibility of implementing the identified CSFs for 3D printing technology in construction projects, which not only serves as a reference for other researchers but also increases construction practitioners' awareness of the practical benefits of implementing 3D printing technology in construction projects. Specifically, it would optimize the construction lifecycle processes, enhance digital transformation and promote sustainable construction projects.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: 3D printing technology; construction projects; critical success factors; factor analysis; questionnaire; rank agreement analysis
Index terms: transformation, sustainable construction project, project lifecycle, lifecycle, factor analysis, construction practitioner, 3D printing, relative importance, exploratory factor analysis, critical success factor, questionnaire, construction project, construction process, methodology
Subjects: production management, sustainable construction, research methods, building construction, manufacturing, project completion, professional development, statistical analysis, control systems, data collection methods, risk assessment, business, project delivery
Topics: Sustainability, Risk Management, Project Management, Information Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Site Management, Digital Applications
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTA

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