Fox, S (2003) A matrix to indicate the utility of technologies. Construction Management and Economics, 21(2), pp. 187-196. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The development and performance of buildings and building components can be improved through better use of technology. However, identifying appropriate technologies can become more difficult as more options become available. Detailed descriptions of alternative technologies can be difficult to compare with each other. Yet, more superficial descriptions can be misleading and result in unnecessarily limited adoption of technologies. In other industries, simple diagrammatic tools such as matrices have proven to be an effective method of indicating the utility of technologies. These show the relevance of specific technologies to different types of products and product components. This paper proposes a matrix to indicate the relevance of technologies to different types of buildings and building components. First, the purpose of the technology matrix (TM) is defined. Then, the conceptual framework of the TM is explained. Next, factors to be considered when assessing the utility of technologies are described. Having introduced the TM, some illustrative examples are provided. These show that there are few technologies that can improve the development and performance of all buildings and building components. In many cases, there are barriers to feasibility, viability and/or practicability that need to be represented. In conclusion, guidelines for successful introduction of the TM are discussed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | feasibility; matrix; practicability; technology; viability |
| Index terms: | option, building component, appropriate technology, alternative technology, conceptual framework |
| Subjects: | technological development, architectural elements, theoretical framing, decision analysis, factor and component analysis |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Research Practice, Design Practice, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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