Laitinen, K; Luhtala, M; Örmä, M and Vaismaa, K (2024) Productivity development enablers in the infrastructure sector: Capability maturity model integration approach. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 14(2), pp. 201-227. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Purpose: Insufficient productivity development in the global and Finnish infrastructure sectors indicates that there are challenges in genuinely achieving the goals of resource efficiency and digitalization. This study adapts the approach of capability maturity model integration (CMMI) for examining the capabilities for productivity development that reveal the enablers of improving productivity in the infrastructure sector. Design/methodology/approach: Civil engineering in Finland was selected as the study area, and a qualitative research approach was adopted. A novel maturity model was constructed deductively through a three-step analytical process. Previous research literature was adapted to form a framework with maturity levels and key process areas (KPAs). KPA attributes and their maturity criteria were formed through a thematic analysis of interview data from 12 semi-structured group interviews. Finally, validation and refinement of the model were performed with an expert panel. Findings: This paper provides a novel maturity model for examining and enhancing the infrastructure sector’s maturity in productivity development. The model brings into discussion the current business logics, relevance of lifecycle-thinking, binding targets and outcomes of limited activities in the surrounding infrastructure system. Originality/value: This paper provides a new approach for pursuing productivity development in the infrastructure sector by constructing a maturity model that adapts the concepts of CMMI and change management. The model and findings benefit all actors in the sector and provide an understanding of the required elements and means to achieve a more sustainable built environment and effective operations.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | capabilities; change management; cmmi; continuous improvement; infrastructure system; lifecycle; maturity; productivity |
| Index terms: | infrastructure sector, capability maturity model, resource efficiency, qualitative research, methodology, integration, validation, lifecycle, built environment, thematic analysis, Finland, productivity, continuous improvement, change management, interview, maturity model, digitalization, maturity level |
| Subjects: | research design and methodology, data collection methods, digital technology, project delivery, research methods, performance measurement, management, evaluation, professional development, Geography, methods and analysis, organizational analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Information Management, Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Urban Studies, 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