Barriers to adoption of RPAs on construction projects: a task–technology fit perspective

Golizadeh, H; Hosseini, M R; Edwards, D J; Abrishami, S; Taghavi, N and Banihashemi, S (2019) Barriers to adoption of RPAs on construction projects: a task–technology fit perspective. Construction Innovation, 19(2), pp. 149-169. ISSN 1471-4175

Abstract

Purpose: Extant literature extensively articulates the advantages of using remotely piloted aircrafts (RPAs) in a myriad of construction activities. Yet, the barriers that hinder their wider adoption on construction projects have received scant academic attention. This study aims at addressing this gap in the literature. Design/methodology/approach: This study reviews 59 papers published on the use of RPAs for construction activities and offers an evaluation of barriers to widespread adoption throughout the sector. Findings: Barriers are identified, collated and categorized into five thematic groups, namely, technical difficulties, restrictive regulatory environment, site-related problems, weather and organizational barriers. Practical implications: The paper contributes to knowledge by: signposting a need for reordering priorities when defining future research on RPAs, suggesting measures to address the barriers identified and providing pragmatic guidance for construction companies intending to use RPAs on their projects. Originality/value: Using the task–technology fit theory, the study uncovers that current RPA technology is an under-fit match for construction activities and represents a prominent barrier to adoption. This is a dissenting finding, given that past studies on RPAs have primarily focused upon addressing public acceptance, concerns and societal consequences. Enablers of the identified barriers are also collated from extant literature and contemporary practice and encapsulated in a conceptual model.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: adoption; barrier; civil engineering; construction industry; drone; uav
Index terms: drone, construction company, methodology, construction project, weather, construction activity, construction industry
Subjects: research methods, automation and robotics, production management, industry analysis, organization, air quality, construction operations
Topics: Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Sustainability, Digital Applications, Site Management
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