Dowsett, R; Harty, C and Davies, R (2017) Epistemological differences and new technology in construction. In: Chan, P W and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 33rd Annual ARCOM Conference, 4-6 September 2017, Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge, UK.
Abstract
New technology within the construction industry originates from appeals to replicate the efficiencies seen in other sectors such as automation and manufacturing. To fulfil the call for the introduction of new technologies into the industry construction firms are increasingly engaging in collaborative research and development (R&D) projects with sector specialists. These R&D projects intend to create new communities of practice with a shared collection of knowledge, experience, and problem-solving approaches that represent the disparate expertise of each member to contribute to the development of new and innovative technological solutions.However, there can be fundamental epistemological differences between collaborating firms from different sectors that can hinder this process. Shared knowledge and experience to develop ideas is not easily communicated across a project team within which each member possesses a differing approach to understanding the common problem.This paper presents early research engagement in an R&D project investigating the potential of utilising Flexible Robotic Assembly Modules in the Built Environment (FRAMBE). FRAMBE is a scalable, automated and modularised Flying Factory solution that will utilise advanced robotics to manufacture a wide range of building components appropriate to a specific project near to or onsite, capitalising on both off-site and automated construction processes. The project, led by Skanska UK, is in collaboration with a large UK robotics company, a 3D CAD software development company, and a lean consultancy firm. The challenges observed with the process of inter-firm collaboration to develop FRAMBE as a technological solution to date are described.The aim of this paper is exemplify the inherent communication issues within cross-sector R&D projects and to argue for more careful consideration of the epistemological differences within communities of practice in order to establish a common understanding of the problem and therefore ways in which to resolve issues surrounding technology development.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | robotics; technology development; epistemological differences |
| Index terms: | built environment, module, robotics, research and development, collaboration, automated construction process, building component, consultancy, project team, construction industry, technology development, automation, software development, new technology, communities of practice, onsite, efficiency, construction firm, inter-firm collaboration |
| Subjects: | innovation and technology management, knowledge management, project delivery, business, organization, industry analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, building construction, research management, automation and robotics, management, architectural elements, software systems, performance management |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Construction Technology, Design Practice, Urban Studies, Digital Applications, Quality Management, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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