Kwok, T W and Chang, S (2025) Comprehensive evaluation of digital technology's effects on the supply chain of prefabricated construction. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 32(8), pp. 5350-5370. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose – Digital technology, which is regarded as a prominent and transformational force in modern society, encompasses a wide variety of technology that utilize digital data to process, store and transfer various types of information. Digital technologies have continually been introduced as cutting-edge information tools in order to achieve effective management of vast information that arises from the prefabrication supply chain. However, without a sufficient performance evaluation, drawbacks of technology investment, such as financial losses and ineffective resource allocation, keep occurring, which hinders the widespread implementation of digital technologies. This study demonstrates a comprehensive evaluation of digital technologies' effects on the prefabrication supply chain based on multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) theory. Design/methodology/approach – Specifically, the targeted digital technologies and project constraints were first identified through a systematic literature review. The effects of the digital technologies were then scored using a questionnaire survey. The TOPSIS model was established to quantitatively rank the effectiveness of selected digital technologies. Findings – Overall, BIM technology shone out in the rankings and is regarded as the most beneficial digital solution by multi-stakeholders to the existing constraints, such as working efficiency. Collaboration patterns between different stakeholders and technology integration trend were also indicated. Originality/value – Compared with existing outcomes, this study specifically focused on examining the effects of digital technologies on the prefabrication supply chain, the most significant link in the process for prefabricated structures. New findings indicate the overall performance that considered both multi-stakeholders' preferences and project constraints. The quantitative evaluation presents a comprehensive understanding of digital technologies' effects, enabling industrial participants to reach well-informed, strategic and profitable investment decisions.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | digital technology; industry 4.0; modular integrated construction; prefabrication; supply chain |
| Index terms: | performance evaluation, society, project constraint, systematic literature review, prefabrication, resource allocation, topsis, questionnaire, preference, effectiveness, implementation, industry 4.0, digital technology, efficiency, survey, collaboration, multi-criteria decision analysis, investment decision, integration, methodology |
| Subjects: | control systems, building construction, research methods, performance measurement, contractual arrangements, decision analysis, decision-making and reasoning, decision-making and optimization, management, data collection methods, computing systems, technology adoption, communities and social development, resource management, performance management, research evaluation and metrics, economic analysis, organizational analysis |
| Topics: | Procurement, Business Strategy, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Organizational Design, Risk Management, Site Management, Construction Technology, Digital Applications, Quality Management |
| 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