Technology adoption: breaking down barriers using a virtual reality design support tool for hybrid concrete

The use of hybrid concrete technologies as a viable solution to traditional frame design has been inhibited by a general lack of information. The uptake of this technology has therefore been slow and parochial, as designers have tended to stay loyal to ‘traditional’, tried and tested technologies—their ‘comfort zone’. This research identifies the barriers associated with technology adoption at industry, organization and individual levels; and uses hybrid concrete as the core context for discussion. The role of an enabling design support tool (HyCon) is presented, which can allow designers to overcome these inhibitors by providing an immersive, interactive and information‐rich environment through which design solutions can be explored. This collaborative research project describes a ‘proof of concept’ design support tool to promote the use of hybrid concrete in structural frames. It encompasses knowledge creation, application and sharing functionality, to envision support and use of this new technology—thereby promoting organizational learning. Research findings note that, while design tools have a valuable role to play, it is also important to appreciate that the uptake of any new technology is a social phenomenon, and that subsequent adoption/uptake requires careful embedding and augmentation into company organizational systems in order to leverage advantage.

[1]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning , 2007 .

[2]  J. Ruiz Moreno.  [Organizational learning]. , 2001, Revista de enfermeria.

[3]  Chris Sauer,et al.  Reengineering the Supply Chain Using Collaborative Technology: Opportunities and Barriers to Change in the Building and Construction Industry , 1999, New Information Technologies in Organizational Processes.

[4]  S. Winter,et al.  In search of useful theory of innovation , 1993 .

[5]  Jon-Chao Hong,et al.  Knowledge management in the learning organization , 1999 .

[6]  Martin Sexton,et al.  Innovation in small construction knowledge‐intensive professional service firms: a case study of an architectural practice , 2006 .

[7]  Peter E.D. Love,et al.  Re‐thinking TQM: toward a framework for facilitating learning and change in construction organizations , 2000 .

[8]  Andrew R.J. Dainty,et al.  Structural frame selection processes: case studies of hybrid concrete construction projects , 2004 .

[9]  W. Orlikowski.  Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations , 2000 .

[10]  Roberto Pietroforte,et al.  Communication and governance in the building process , 1997 .

[11]  Anumba Chimay.  INDUSTRY UPTAKE OF CONSTRUCTION IT INNOVATIONS - KEY ELEMENTS OF A PROACTIVE STRATEGY , 1998 .

[12]  James H. Garrett,et al.  A framework for representing design intent , 1994 .

[13]  Alice Lam.  Tacit Knowledge, Organizational Learning and Societal Institutions: An Integrated Framework , 2000 .

[14]  Alistair G.F. Gibb,et al.  Re-engineering through pre-assembly: client expectations and drivers , 2003 .

[15]  Francis E. Griggs.  To Be or Not To Be—Ethical That Is! , 1997 .

[16]  Bing Yu,et al.  Software tools supporting business process analysis and modelling , 1997, Bus. Process. Manag. J..

[17]  D. Hambrick,et al.  Upper Echelons: The Organization as a Reflection of Its Top Managers , 1984 .

[18]  Mary Tripsas.  UNRAVELING THE PROCESS OF CREATIVE DESTRUCTION: COMPLEMENTARY ASSETS AND INCUMBENT SURVIVAL IN THE TYPESETTER INDUSTRY: UNRAVELING THE PROCESS OF CREATIVE DESTRUCTION , 1997 .

[19]  Keith D. Hampson.  Construction innovation and research , 1998 .

[20]  T. C. Powell,et al.  Information technology as competitive advantage: the role of human , 1997 .

[21]  Jane M. Howell,et al.  Champions of Technological Innovation. , 1990 .

[22]  Michael J. Mawdesley,et al.  A knowledge based system for linking information to support decision making in construction , 2002, J. Inf. Technol. Constr..

[23]  Martin Sexton,et al.  The role of technology transfer in innovation within small construction firms , 2004 .

[24]  Marvin V. Zelkowitz,et al.  Experimental Models for Validating Technology , 1998, Computer.

[25]  Andrew D.F. Price,et al.  Dynamics of learning for advancing improvement in organisations within the construction industry , 1999 .

[26]  Estelle Brodman,et al.  Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technological Information Within the R&D Organization (Book Review) , 1978 .

[27]  Andrea Taylor-Cummings,et al.  Bridging the user-IS gap: a study of major information systems projects , 1998, J. Inf. Technol..

[28]  James M. Utterback,et al.  Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation , 1996 .

[29]  Karen E. Watkins,et al.  Towards a Theory of Informal and Incidental Learning in Organizations. , 1992 .

[30]  Reza Beheshti,et al.  Design decisions and uncertainty , 1993 .

[31]  K. James,et al.  Back to the workplace How organisations can improve their support for management learning and development , 2005 .

[32]  Thomas H. Davenport,et al.  Book review:Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Thomas H. Davenport and Laurence Prusak. Harvard Business School Press, 1998. $29.95US. ISBN 0‐87584‐655‐6 , 1998 .

[33]  M. Fleischer,et al.  processes of technological innovation , 1990 .

[34]  Ruediger Klimecki,et al.  Modes of Organizational Learning , 1998 .

[35]  M. Tushman,et al.  Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments , 1986 .

[36]  Anna Grimán,et al.  Selecting Tools for Software Quality Management , 2002 .

[37]  Lorne Olfman,et al.  Organizational Memory , 1998, Proceedings of the Thirty-First Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[38]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Technological frames: making sense of information technology in organizations , 1994, TOIS.

[39]  Rodney McAdam,et al.  The links between organisational learning and total quality: a critical review , 1998 .

[40]  David. Proverbs,et al.  Demonstrating hybrid concrete construction performance through virtual simulation - A case study approach , 2004 .

[41]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Looking Forward and Looking Backward: Cognitive and Experiential Search , 2000 .

[42]  Donald A. Schön,et al.  Organizational Learning: A Theory Of Action Perspective , 1978 .

[43]  Ghassan Aouad,et al.  A Generic Guide to the Design and Construction: Process Protocol , 1998 .

[44]  Marvin V. Zelkowitz,et al.  EXPERIMENTAL MODELS FOR VALIDATING COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY , 2001 .

[45]  Raja R. A. Issa,et al.  Virtual Reality: A Solution to Seamless Technology Integration in the AEC Industry , 2000 .

[46]  Mike Kagioglou,et al.  The role of the HyCon design‐support tool in elevating hybrid concrete as a design option for structural frames , 2005 .

[47]  G. Gary Wang,et al.  Definition and Review of Virtual Prototyping , 2002, J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng..

[48]  Watts S. Humphrey,et al.  Managing Technical People: Innovation, Teamwork, and the Software Process , 1996 .

[49]  Fernando Olivera,et al.  Memory Systems In Organizations: An Empirical Investigation Of Mechanisms For Knowledge Collection, Storage And Access , 2000 .

[50]  Rod Coombs,et al.  `Knowledge management practices' and path-dependency in innovation , 1998 .

[51]  Ashok Jashapara,et al.  Organisational learning and inter-firm 'partnering' in the UK construction industry. , 1998 .

[52]  James Backhouse,et al.  Risks in the use of information technology within organizations , 1996 .

[53]  J. N. J. A. Vambersky.  Hybrid structures in challenging architecture , 2002 .

[54]  Ardeshir Mahdavi.  A comprehensive computational environment for performance based reasoning in building design and evaluation , 1999 .

[55]  Gustavo Stubrich.  The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization , 1993 .

[56]  Tom Heath,et al.  Method in architecture , 1984 .

[57]  Donna Ladkin,et al.  Back to the workplace , 2004 .

[58]  J. Dutton,et al.  The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis , 1986 .

[59]  Konstantinos Papamichael.  Application of information technologies in building design decisions , 1999 .

[60]  G. Huber.  Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures , 1991 .

[61]  Bryan Lawson,et al.  How Designers Think , 1980 .

[62]  Kit Grindley,et al.  Information systems issues facing senior executives: the culture gap , 1992, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[63]  Toby E. Stuart,et al.  Local search and the evolution of technological capabilities , 2007 .

[64]  T. Allen.  Managing the flow of technology , 1977 .

[65]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits , 1999 .

[66]  Martin Fischer,et al.  Requirements and Benefits of Interactive Information Workspaces in Construction , 2000 .

[67]  Agnes Werner,et al.  An attributional explanation of individual resistance to the introduction of information technologies in the workplace , 1996, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[68]  Dennis A. Gioia,et al.  Scripts in Organizational Behavior , 1984 .

[69]  J. Metcalfe,et al.  Innovation, Capabilities and Knowledge: The Epistemic Connection , 1996 .

[70]  Luca Caneparo,et al.  Shared virtual reality for design and management: the Porta Susa project 1 The article is based on t , 2001 .

[71]  Martin Fischer,et al.  The product model and Fourth Dimension project , 2003, J. Inf. Technol. Constr..

[72]  Jonathan Evans,et al.  Problem-solving Strategies and Expertise in Engineering Design. , 1997 .

[73]  Andrew R.J. Dainty,et al.  Towards a decision-support tool for selecting an appropriate structural frame , 2004 .

[74]  Giuseppe Conti,et al.  Virtual Reality in the Service of User Participation , 2002 .

[75]  J. Fairclough,et al.  RETHINKING CONSTRUCTION INNOVATION AND RESEARCH - A REVIEW OF THE GOVERNMENT'S R&D POLICIES AND PRACTICES , 2002 .

[76]  Jacqueline Glass,et al.  Perceptions of hybrid concrete construction in the UK construction industry , 2001 .

[77]  Alison Alker,et al.  Managing learning: what do we learn from a learning organisation? , 1998 .

[78]  K. Clarke.  Pathways to technology strategy: Technological configurations, stability and change , 1992 .

[79]  Andrew R.J. Dainty,et al.  Criteria for assessing the potential performance of hybrid concrete structural frames , 2004 .

[80]  Curba Morris Lampert,et al.  Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: a longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions , 2001 .

[81]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  The Interaction of Design Hierarchies and market Concepts in Technological Evolution : Research Policy , 1985 .

[82]  Peter Barrett,et al.  Hybrid concrete: improved processes and performance , 2003 .

[83]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[84]  Stephen L. Parente,et al.  Barriers to Technology Adoption and Development , 1994, Journal of Political Economy.

[85]  Michael H. Zack,et al.  Managing Codified Knowledge , 1999 .

[86]  S. Wheelwright,et al.  The interaction of design hierarchies and market concepts in technological evolution * , 2003 .

[87]  R. M. Bokeno,et al.  Introduction: appraisals of organizational learning as emancipatory change , 2003 .

[88]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  The myopia of learning , 1993 .

[89]  P. Jackson,et al.  E‐business and organisational change: Reconciling traditional values with business transformation , 2003 .

[90]  Fred D. Davis.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: System Characteristics, User Perceptions and Behavioral Impacts , 1993, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..