Grabham, S and Manu, E (2022) Diffusion of platform thinking as an innovation in the construction supply chain. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 175(3), pp. 119-130. ISSN 17514304
Abstract
The construction industry has received long-standing criticism over its fragmented approach to supply chain management, adversarial relationships and ongoing defects. Platform thinking has been observed in other industries as a phenomenon that offers reinvention from the traditional perspectives on the supply chain. In this study, a literature review of platform thinking is presented. A database search of 656 papers across 15 journals, along with 3 sources from a Google search and 12 sources from a manual review of the reference lists were reviewed in relation to platform thinking in construction. While many variants of platforms exist, the literature review demonstrates a focus on product platforms that has historical precedents. This paper highlights the benefits of platform thinking while linking to the lessons of the past. This also provides a valuable insight for future implications of platform thinking and contributes to the limited literature on platform thinking in the construction industry by linking historical examples with present and potential future investigation.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | business; economics & finance; procurement |
| Index terms: | construction industry, investigation, construction supply chain, database, platform, product platform, journal, literature review |
| Subjects: | innovation and technology management, research dissemination and communication, digital design, data analysis and analytics, construction logistics, data collection methods, industry analysis, data management |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Digital Applications, Engineering Principles, Supply Chain Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 CTA |
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