Offsite manufacturing research: A systematic review of methodologies used

Ehwi, R J; Oti-Sarpong, K; Shojaei, R and Burgess, G (2022) Offsite manufacturing research: A systematic review of methodologies used. Construction Management and Economics, 40(1), pp. 1-24. ISSN 01446193

Abstract

Debates regarding research methodologies in construction, engineering and management (CEM) literature are long-standing. However, in the growing literature on offsite manufacturing (OSM), such debates are lacking and some studies conflate different components of research methodologies such as research design, methods, data sources, data types, and analytical techniques. This study examines the components of research methodologies reported in the OSM literature and how they compare with the established relationships between the key components of research methodologies. We analyse 74 articles on OSM sampled from 26 journals and find that quantitative methods, case studies, primary data, bibliometric database and modelling are the most preferred methodological approaches. The methodological components reported also cohere with established relationships between components of research methodology, other than the relationship between research methods and data sources. The findings reveal a growing hybridisation of research designs, data sources and analytical techniques, which suggests that methodological plurality is emerging in the OSM literature. This re-echoes concerns regarding the dominance of quantitative methods and the limited use of theory in CEM research, and consequently highlights the need for diversity in methodologies to expand knowledge boundaries.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: methodological consistency; offsite manufacturing; research methodology; systematic review
Index terms: quantitative method, case study, research design, methodology, modelling, database, research methodology, systematic literature review, journal, boundaries
Subjects: research methods, property law, data collection methods, research design and methodology, data analysis and analytics, analytical methods, data management, research evaluation and metrics, research dissemination and communication
Topics: Research Practice, Digital Applications, Legal Issues, Engineering Principles
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTE

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