Udomdech, P; Papadonikolaki, E and Davies, A (2018) An alternative project-based learning model for building information modelling using teams. In: Gorse, C and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 34th Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2018, Queen’s University, Belfast, UK.
Abstract
The construction innovation of Building Information Modelling is widely utilised by organisations to manage work complications and increase their competitive advantage. BIM is an advanced digital construction process and technology that provides individuals with capabilities to integrate, assess, visualise, and evaluate building information on a shared platform. Knowledge of its effective appropriation is deficient. Project knowledge transfer is an approach recognised by scholars and practitioners as a practical antidote to challenges found in BIM adoption. However, there is limited research that describes and illustrates how knowledge transfer occurs in projects. The paper aims to formulate a conceptual model of how knowledge is captured, transferred, and absorbed among individuals across projects. Project-based knowledge transfer has been highlighted as a relevant practice to construction innovation adoption by scholars due to its direct connection to the temporal nature of construction. The study is theoretical and reviews literature on innovation adoption, construction innovation adoption, project knowledge management, and project knowledge transfer, aiming to synthesise them into a conceptual model. It qualitatively utilises findings, frameworks, and models from the literature. Specifically, using BIM as a research setting, it analyses the process of knowledge transfer among individuals across projects, the transmission channels exercised, the social context that project situated in, and the influencing factors. This conceptual model will consolidate the state of academic research on project knowledge transfer, and strengthen ties between theories of construction innovation adoption and practices of how individuals learn innovation in projects. From a practical perspective, it will build a theoretical foundation for scholars and practitioners to generate better understanding against challenges of BIM utilisation. It will also benefit other project-based organisations in innovation implementation, using BIM to contextualise the research setting. Lastly, it will expand literature of innovation adoption, construction innovation adoption, project knowledge management, and project-based learning.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building information modelling; competitive advantage; innovation; knowledge management; learning; project-based learning |
| Index terms: | project-based organization, innovation adoption, digital construction, platform, influencing factor, competitive advantage, building information modelling, construction innovation, knowledge management, implementation, knowledge transfer, practitioner, project-based learning, project knowledge |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, knowledge management, organization, risk assessment, research dissemination and communication, learning methods, practitioner, innovation studies, building construction, market analysis, information systems, digital design, professional development |
| Topics: | Procurement, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Business Strategy, Education, Organizational Design, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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