Liu, K; Hwang, B G; Jia, J; Man, Q and Zhang, S (2025) Shaping online and offline informal learning networks in off-site construction projects: A proximity perspective. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 32(2), pp. 939-966. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: Informal learning networks are critical to response to calls for practitioners to reskill and upskill in off-site construction projects. With the transition to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, social media-enabled online knowledge communities play an increasingly important role in acquiring and disseminating off-site construction knowledge. Proximity has been identified as a key factor in facilitating interactive learning, yet which type of proximity is effective in promoting online and offline knowledge exchange remains unclear. This study takes a relational view to explore the proximity-related antecedents of online and offline learning networks in off-site construction projects, while also examining the subtle differences in the networks' structural patterns. Design/methodology/approach: Five types of proximity (physical, organizational, social, cognitive and personal) between projects members are conceptualized in the theoretical model. Drawing on social foci theory and homophily theory, the research hypotheses are proposed. To test these hypotheses, empirical case studies were conducted on two off-site construction projects during the COVID-19 pandemic. Valid relational data provided by 99 and 145 project members were collected using semi-structured interviews and sociometric questionnaires. Subsequently, multivariate exponential random graph models were developed. Findings: The results show a discrepancy arise in the structural patterns between online and offline learning networks. Offline learning is found to be more strongly influenced by proximity factors than online learning. Specifically, physical, organizational and social proximity are found to be significant predictors of offline knowledge exchange. Cognitive proximity has a negative relationship with offline knowledge exchange but is positively related to online knowledge exchange. Regarding personal proximity, the study found that the homophily effect of hierarchical status merely emerges in offline learning networks. Online knowledge communities amplify the receiver effect of tenure. Furthermore, there appears to be a complementary relationship between online and offline learning networks. Originality/value: Proximity offers a novel relational perspective for understanding the formation of knowledge exchange connections. This study enriches the literature on informal learning within project teams by revealing how different types of proximity shape learning networks across different channels in off-site construction projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | multivariate exponential random graph model; off-site construction projects; online and offline informal learning networks; proximity |
| Index terms: | project team, coronavirus, tenure, off-site construction, social media, knowledge exchange, graph model, case study, pandemic, informal learning, questionnaire, practitioner, methodology, drawing, interview, COVID-19 |
| Subjects: | health risk and incident analysis, health conditions and diseases, learning methods, data collection methods, mathematical modelling, technology adoption, project delivery, technical documentation, real estate economics, research methods, building construction, practitioner, knowledge management |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Information Management, Research Practice, Construction Technology, Roles and Professions, Education, Project Management, Health and Safety |
| 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