Kavuri, A S; Soetanto, R; Goodier, C; Murguia, D and Szczygiel, M (2020) Scenarios for the digitalisation of the construction industry. In: Scott, L and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 36th Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-8 September 2020, Online Event, UK.
Abstract
Digital technology is frequently put forward as being able to address the major challenges of low productivity and poor quality in the construction industry. For this potential to be realised however, a detailed examination of the fundamental issues connecting digital technology adoption and business/ delivery models that bring the most benefit to construction stakeholders is required. To understand this complex inter-relationship within structural and cultural context explicitly, there is a need to develop implementation strategies which are sensitive to plausible future scenarios on industry development pathways. As part of Transforming Construction Initiative, the research presented here outlines four plausible future scenarios for a transformed construction sector enabled by digital technologies. The underpinning empirical work involved a review of academic literature in the areas of economics, architecture, engineering, construction, technology change and various consulting materials, 22 semi-structured interviews and 4 focus groups to identify and explore uncertainties (e.g. Brexit), trends (e.g. environmental concerns) and barriers to digital technology adoption (e.g. lack of understanding, low capital) and business model change. The analysis also involved 3 scenario development workshops. The next step was to represent the data on two intersecting axes. Our investigation found that uncertainties, trends and barriers all impact research, development and innovation (RDI). Furthermore, our analysis determines that business models can be changed due to the extent of collaboration/ integration. For instance, the amount of collaboration/ partnership between high-tech firms and construction sector firms. Consequently, the extent of RDI and collaboration/ integration provide the underpinning key dimensions for the scenarios (the x-axis and y-axis respectively). The final stage also developed policy recommendations. For instance, to increase the adoption of digital technology, policymakers should design regulation that promotes accountability and transparency.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | digitalisation, scenarios, research development and innovation, collaboration, business model |
| Index terms: | collaboration, industry development, integration, investigation, regulation, business model, construction sector, dimension, digital technology, construction industry, implementation, transparency, interview, digitalization, workshop, focus group, partnership, environmental concern, strategy, productivity, accountability |
| Subjects: | liability law, political science, industry analysis, partnership management, organizational analysis, professional development, management, health monitoring assessment and metrics, contractual arrangements, digital technology, computing systems, environmental issues, business, organization, data collection methods, construction type |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Construction Technology, Procurement, Sustainability, Governance, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Information Management, Organizational Design, Legal Issues, Digital Applications |
| 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