Construction 4.0 Organisational Level Challenges and Solutions
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Background
2.1. Industry 4.0 (I4) Principles
2.2. The Concept of C4
- 1.
- C4 as the application of I4 in the CI;
- 2.
- Application of industrial processes and new methods;
- 3.
- Construction-specific innovative tools: devices, information technology, materials;
- 4.
- Industry-wide collaboration between construction professionals, start-ups and digital firms.
2.3. Organisational Level Challenges behind C4
2.4. Organisational Level Solutions behind C4
3. Research Methods
4. Results
4.1. Challenges and Solutions of C4
4.1.1. Human Resource and Society
“The construction industry is seen as an industry that doesn’t really have career paths. That’s partly because there aren’t always many kinds of joins to upskill people more, enable people to move within the industry to different disciplines.”(Interviewee 15)
“Several Member States there are the facing a lacking workforce or in if they have an ageing workforce and we see that the constructions it is not attractive for younger generations.”(Interviewee 8)
“One interesting point is, especially in Africa, that is lack of trained excellence, to use some of those technologies.”(Interviewee 14)
“Also, for the consultants, things have become more complicated, and they’ve got a problem with the skill set. That thing risk now in producing these construction details, they end up getting things wrong, and people see them, but at the same time there’s lots of good money in that.”(Interviewee 22)
“90% of construction businesses at least are already paying for Word, Excel, and PowerPoint, and then you just teach them how to work on the same document at the same time, which is BIM.”(Interviewee 26)
“Construction, as an industry, is still learning that the industry needs to become more social. Construction has growing up to do in terms of the way that they treat their people, and I think that we’re going to see a shortage of tech strong workforce because they’re being pulled out by the technology companies.”(Interviewee 20)
“Not just in the younger people are more attracted by anything that is digital electronics, and if the sector is completely lacking in that field is not just there, not sexy for them so that they go to other sectors.”(Interviewee 8)
4.1.2. Organisational Factors
“You know your competitive advantage should not be the data about the buildings you’re constructing.”(Interviewee 9)
“I think the implementation is the main issue. The process is not easy as well, but implementation is the toughest thing.”(Interviewee 5)
4.1.3. Management Reality and Expectations
“I think the pressure on the management, especially on the top management of large construction companies, will certainly increase over time.”(Interviewee 4)
“They cannot say because they do not understand what is possible, so it is hard for them to see the big picture.”(Interviewee 11)
“I think that then they will invest in some of their work for security or have to be trained to do this. I think this is very important. If they do not, if they are not convinced that they will have a benefit from new technology, they will just continue business as usual.”(Interviewee 8)
“So we are moving from this idea of isolated or standalone products. We are moving towards products and services.”(Interviewee 7)
4.1.4. Market Conditions and Competitions
“The traditional measuring methods are slowly, slowly becoming obsolete because there’s simply a technology becoming cheaper and cheaper.”(Interviewee 28)
4.1.5. Financial Resource and Profitability
“Subscription, and it’s ridiculously expensive and less prohibitive.”(Interviewee 10)
“Labour rates will rise because we have to pay people more in order to get them interested. So then construction costs of construction will go up because there’s a direct relationship with the labour cost.”(Interviewee 20)
“Without any technology, just by organising the work smartly, you can save 50% of all the time and using technology will boost it even further.”(Interviewee 16)
“Handover is really important. So it’s the most in terms of monetary value. It’s one of the most important to get right because 78% of your OpEx costs around.”(Interviewee 23)
“Why not be part of the ongoing money? Because if you look at the pie of the life cycle of a building design and construction is under 10% of its overall cost. The real cost is in operations. That means 90% of the value of that property.”(Interviewee 3)
4.1.6. Customer Satisfaction
“Once you’re able to separate them and holistically, look at the building and then you’re able to optimize it and change things and understand exactly the implications. So it’s it’s about looking at the product and building a better product.”(Interviewee 18)
“The group of people that will profit most from all those developments are the owners. Once the governments realise that all those things would benefit them the most, they will start to increase, fostering and demanding building information modelling and other technologies and practices.”(Interviewee 4)
5. Discussion and Future Research Directions
6. Conclusions and Future Research Directions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
ID | Dominant Industry | Stakeholder in Construction | Country | Organisation Type | Position | Business exp. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Construction | Consulting/Technology investor/Association | United Kingdom | MNE/SME/NGO | Manager/CEO/Founder | 5+ |
2 | Construction | Technology provider | USA | DLC | Director | 10+ |
3 | Real estate | Consulting/Technology investor/Investor | USA | DLC | CEO | 25+ |
4 | Construction | Technology investor and provider | Germany | DLC | CEO | 15+ |
5 | Construction | Technology investor | Israel | DLC | CEO | 25+ |
6 | Construction | Research and development | Portugal | EDU | Employee | 5+ |
7 | Real estate | Research and development | Finland and India | EDU | Associate Professor | 15+ |
8 | Government | Authority | Poland | GOV | Employee | 5+ |
9 | Government | Authority | Estonia | GOV | Director | 5+ |
10 | Electronic automotive | Investor | United Kingdom | MNE | Manager | 15+ |
11 | Construction | Designer | Finland | MNE | Director | 15+ |
12 | Construction | Consulting | United Kingdom | MNE | Employee | 5+ |
13 | IT | Investor/Technology provider | USA | MNE | Director | 15+ |
14 | Construction | Consulting | Nigeria | NGO | Employee | 5+ |
15 | Construction | Research and development | United Kingdom | NGO | Manager | 5+ |
16 | Construction | Consulting | Finland | SME | CEO | 35+ |
17 | Construction | Consulting | United Kingdom | SME | CEO | 10+ |
18 | Construction | Technology provider | USA | SME | Manager | 5+ |
19 | Construction | Technology provider | USA | SME | Manager | 5+ |
20 | Construction | Consulting | USA | SME | CEO | 20+ |
21 | Construction | Consulting | USA | SME | CEO | 25+ |
22 | Construction | Consulting | United Kingdom | SME | Manager | 20+ |
23 | Manufacturing | Technology provider | United Kingdom | SME | Manager | 5+ |
24 | Construction | Consulting | Netherland | SME | CEO | 15+ |
25 | Construction | Consulting | United Kingdom | SME | CEO | 20+ |
26 | Construction | Consulting | United Kingdom | SME | Director | 15+ |
27 | Construction | General contractor and education | India | SME/EDU | Manager/lecturer | 5+ |
28 | Construction | Consulting | Latvia | SME/EDU | CEO | 10+ |
29 | Construction | Consulting | Hungary | SME/EDU | CEO/researcher | 5+ |
References
- Maskuriy, R.; Selamat, A.; Maresova, P.; Krejcar, O.; David, O.O. Industry 4.0 for the Construction Industry: Review of Management Perspective. Economies 2019, 7, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Aghimien, D.; Aigbavboa, C.; Oke, A.; Thwala, W.; Moripe, P. Digitalization of Construction Organisations–A Case for Digital Partnering. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2020, 1–10, ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bosch-Sijtsema, P.; Claeson-Jonsson, C.; Johansson, M.; Roupe, M. The Hype Factor of Digital Technologies in AEC. Constr. Innov. 2021, 21, 99–916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klinc, R.; Turk, Ž. Construction 4.0-Digital Transformation of One of the Oldest Industries. Econ. Bus. Rev. 2019, 21, 393–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dallasega, P.; Rauch, E.; Linder, C. Industry 4.0 as an Enabler of Proximity for Construction Supply Chains: A Systematic Literature Review. Comput. Ind. 2018, 99, 205–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Centre for Digital Built Britain Year One Report towards a Digital Built Britain; Centre for Digital Built Britain: West Cambridge, UK, 2018.
- Rivera, F.M.-L.; Mora-Serrano, J.; Valero, I.; Oñate, E. Methodological-Technological Framework for Construction 4.0. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2021, 28, 689–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boton, C.; Rivest, L.; Ghnaya, O.; Chouchen, M. What Is at the Root of Construction 4.0: A Systematic Review of the Recent Research Effort. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2020, 28, 2331–2350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Du, J.; Zhao, D.; Zhang, O. Impacts of Human Communication Network Topology on Group Optimism Bias in Capital Project Planning: A Human-Subject Experiment. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2019, 37, 44–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lavikka, R.; Kallio, J.; Casey, T.; Airaksinen, M. Digital Disruption of the AEC Industry: Technology-Oriented Scenarios for Possible Future Development Paths. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2018, 36, 635–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- De Soto, B.G.; Agustí-Juan, I.; Joss, S.; Hunhevicz, J. Implications of Construction 4.0 to the Workforce and Organizational Structures. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2019, 1–13, ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Osunsanmi, T.O.; Aigbavboa, C.O.; Emmanuel Oke, A.; Liphadzi, M. Appraisal of Stakeholders’ Willingness to Adopt Construction 4.0 Technologies for Construction Projects. Built Environ. Proj. Asset Manag. 2020, 10, 547–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lekan, A.; Clinton, A.; Fayomi, O.S.I.; James, O. Lean Thinking and Industrial 4.0 Approach to Achieving Construction 4.0 for Industrialization and Technological Development. Buildings 2020, 10, 221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zabidin, N.S.; Belayutham, S.; Ibrahim, C.K.I.C. A Bibliometric and Scientometric Mapping of Industry 4.0 in Construction. J. Inf. Technol. Constr. 2020, 25, 287–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Forcael, E.; Ferrari, I.; Opazo-Vega, A.; Pulido-Arcas, J.A. Construction 4.0: A Literature Review. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sacks, R.; Brilakis, I.; Pikas, E.; Xie, H.S.; Girolami, M. Construction with Digital Twin Information Systems. Data-Centric Eng. 2020, 1, e14-1-26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zezulka, F.; Marcon, P.; Vesely, I.; Sajdl, O. Industry 4.0—An Introduction in the Phenomenon. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2016, 49, 8–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Begic, H.; Galic, M.A. A Systematic Review of 4.0 in the Context of the BIM Premise. Buildings 2021, 11, 337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pamidimukkala, A.; Kermanshachi, S. Impact of Covid-19 on Field and Office Workforce in Construction Industry. Proj. Leadersh. Soc. 2021, 2, 100018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogunnusi, M.; Omotayo, T.; Hamma-Adama, M.; Awuzie, B.O.; Egbelakin, T. Lessons Learned from the Impact of COVID-19 on the Global Construction Industry. J. Eng. Des. Technol. 2021. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buhr, D. Social Innovation Policy for Industry 4.0; Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung: Bonn, Germany, 2015; pp. 1–24. [Google Scholar]
- Schuh, G.; Potente, T.; Wesch-Potente, C.; Weber, A.R.; Prote, J.P. Collaboration Mechanisms to Increase Productivity in the Context of Industrie 4.0. Procedia CIRP 2014, 19, 51–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Roblek, V.; Meško, M.; Krapež, A. A Complex View of Industry 4.0. SAGE Open 2016, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schönbeck, P.; Löfsjögård, M.; Ansell, A. Quantitative Review of Construction 4.0 Technology Presence in Construction Project Research. Buildings 2020, 10, 173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liao, Y.; Deschamps, F.; de Loures, E.F.R.; Ramos, L.F.P. Past, Present and Future of Industry 4.0—A Systematic Literature Review and Research Agenda Proposal. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2017, 55, 3609–3629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bleicher, J.; Stanley, H. Digitization as a Catalyst for Business Model Innovation a Three-Step Approach to Facilitating Economic Success. J. Bus. Manag. 2016, 4, 62–71. [Google Scholar]
- Kozlovska, M.; Klosova, D.; Strukova, Z. Impact of Industry 4.0 Platform on the Formation of Construction 4.0 Concept: A Literature Review. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szabó, Z.R.; Hortoványi, L. Digitális Transzformáció És Ipar 4.0: Magyar, Szerb, Szlovák És Román Tapasztalatok. Külgazdaság 2021, 65, 56–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szabo, R.Z.; Herceg, I.V.; Hanák, R.; Hortovanyi, L.; Romanová, A.; Mocan, M.; Djuričin, D. Industry 4.0 Implementation in B2b Companies: Cross-Country Empirical Evidence on Digital Transformation in the Cee Region. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Horváth, D.; Szabó, R.Z. Driving Forces and Barriers of Industry 4.0: Do Multinational and Small and Medium-Sized Companies Have Equal Opportunities? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2019, 146, 119–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gerbert, P.; Castagnino, S.; Rothballer, R.; Renz, A.; Filitz, R. Digital in Engineering and Construct. 2016. Available online: http://futureofconstruction.org/content/uploads/2016/09/BCG-Digital-in-Engineering-and-Construction-Mar-2016.pdf (accessed on 8 August 2018).
- Craveiro, F.; Duarte, J.P.; Bartolo, H.; Bartolo, P.J. Additive Manufacturing as an Enabling Technology for Digital Construction: A Perspective on Construction 4.0. Sustain. Dev. 2019, 4, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aripin, I.D.M.; Zawawi, E.M.A.; Ismail, Z. Factors Influencing the Implementation of Technologies Behind Industry 4.0 in the Malaysian Construction Industry. In Proceedings of the MATEC Web of Conferences, EDP Sciences, Sibiu, Romania, 5–7 June 2019; 266, p. 01006. [Google Scholar]
- Manzanares, F.V.; Gonçalves, M. Construction 4.0: Towards Sustainability in the Construction Industry. In Proceedings of the 24th International Congress on Project Management and Engineering, Valencia, Spain, 7–10 July 2020; pp. 424–437. [Google Scholar]
- Alaloul, W.S.; Liew, M.S.; Zawawi, N.A.W.A.; Kennedy, I.B. Industrial Revolution 4.0 in the Construction Industry: Challenges and Opportunities for Stakeholders. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2020, 11, 225–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Danel, T.; Lafhaj, Z.; Puppala, A.; Lienard, S.; Richard, P. Proposal for Tower Crane Productivity Indicators Based on Data Analysis in the Era of Construction 4.0. Buildings 2021, 11, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szabó, Z.R.; Horváth, D.; Hortoványi, L. Hálózati Tanulás Az Ipar 4.0 Korában. Közgazdasági Szemle 2019, 66, 72–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cimini, C.; Pirola, F.; Pinto, R.; Cavalieri, S. A Human-in-the-Loop Manufacturing Control Architecture for the next Generation of Production Systems. J. Manuf. Syst. 2020, 54, 258–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hortovanyi, L. The Dynamic Nature of Competitive Advantage of the Firm. Adv. Econ. Bus. 2016, 4, 634–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hortoványi, L.; Balaton, K. A Versenyképesség És Az Innováció Vállalati Szintű Vizsgálata. Budapest Management Review 2016, 47, 38–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Csedő, Z.; Zavarkó, M.; Sára, Z. Innováció-e a Digitalizáció? A Digitális Transzformáció És Az Innovációmenedzsment Tanulságai Egy Pénzügyi Szolgáltatónál. Budapest Management Review 2019, 50, 88–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cimini, C.; Boffelli, A.; Lagorio, A.; Kalchschmidt, M.; Pinto, R. How Do Industry 4.0 Technologies Influence Organisational Change? An Empirical Analysis of Italian SMEs. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2020, 32, 695–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Veile, J.W.; Kiel, D.; Müller, J.M.; Voigt, K.I. Lessons Learned from Industry 4.0 Implementation in the German Manufacturing Industry. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2019, 31, 977–997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Müller, J.M.; Kiel, D.; Voigt, K.I. What Drives the Implementation of Industry 4.0? The Role of Opportunities and Challenges in the Context of Sustainability. Sustainability 2018, 10, 247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Adepoju, O.O.; Clinton, O.A. Assessing Knowledge and Skills Gap for Construction 4.0 in a Developing Economy. J. Public Aff. 2021, 21, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lingard, H.; Peihua Zhang, R.; Räisänen, C.; Miang Goh, Y.; Bowen, P.; Bhandari, S. Special Issue: What Have We Learnt from the COVID-19 Global Pandemic: Improving the Construction Industry’s Abilities to Foresee, Respond to and Recover from Future Endemic Catastrophes. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2021, 39, 192–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Saeed, Y.; Edwards, D.J.; Scaysbrook, S. Automating Construction Manufacturing Procedures Using BIM Digital Objects (BDOs): Case Study of Knowledge Transfer Partnership Project in UK. Constr. Innov. 2020, 20, 345–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Kassem, M.; Ciribini, A.L.C.; Bolpagni, M. A Proposed Approach Integrating DLT, BIM, IOT and Smart Contracts: Demonstration Using a Simulated Installation Task. International Conference on Smart Infrastructure and Construction 2019, ICSIC 2019: Driving Data-Informed Decision-Making, Cambridge, UK, 8–10 July 2019; ICE Publishing: London, UK, 2019; pp. 275–282. [Google Scholar]
- Delgado, J.M.D.; Oyedele, L.; Ajayi, A.; Akanbi, L.; Akinade, O.; Bilal, M.; Owolabi, H. Robotics and Automated Systems in Construction: Understanding Industry-Specific Challenges for Adoption. J. Build. Eng. 2019, 26, 100868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Newman, C.; Edwards, D.; Martek, I.; Lai, J.; Thwala, W.D.; Rillie, I. Industry 4.0 Deployment in the Construction Industry: A Bibliometric Literature Review and UK-Based Case Study. Smart Sustain. Built Environ. 2020. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bonanomi, M.M.; Hall, D.M.; Staub-French, S.; Tucker, A.; Talamo, C.M.L. The Impact of Digital Transformation on Formal and Informal Organizational Structures of Large Architecture and Engineering Firms. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2019, 27, 872–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, Y.W.; Kim, S.C. Cost Analysis of Information Technology-Assisted Quality Inspection Using Activity-Based Costing. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2011, 29, 163–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rane, S.B.; Potdar, P.R.; Rane, S. Development of Project Risk Management Framework Based on Industry 4.0 Technology. Benchmarking 2021, 28, 1451–1481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frederick, D.E. Libraries, Data and the Fourth Industrial Revolution (Data Deluge Column). Libr. Hi Tech. News 2016, 33, 9–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hortoványi, L.; Szabó, Z.R.; Nagy, S.G.; Stukovszky, T. A Digitális Transzformáció Munkahelyekre Gyakorolt Hatásai:Felkészültek-e a Hazai Vállalatok a Benne Rejlő Nagy Lehetőségre (Vagy a Veszélyekre)? Külgazdaság 2020, 64, 73–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Erol, S.; Schumacher, A.; Sihn, W. Strategic Guidance towards Industry 4.0-a Three-Stage Process Model. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Competitive Manufacturing 2016, Stellenbosch, South Africa, 27–29 January 2016; pp. 495–501. [Google Scholar]
- Barata, J.; da Cunha, P.R. The Viable Smart Product Model: Designing Products That Undergo Disruptive Transformations. Cybern. Syst. 2019, 50, 629–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Henderson, R.; Gulati, R.; Tushman, M. Leading Sustainable Change: An. Organizational Perspective, 1st ed.; Henderson, R., Gulati, R., Tushman, M., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2015; ISBN 978-0-19-870407-2. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, Y.; Zheng, J.; Darko, A. How Does Transformational Leadership Promote Innovation in Construction? The Mediating Role of Innovation Climate and the Multilevel Moderation Role of Project Requirements. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Glaser, G.B.; Strauss, L.A. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 1967; ISBN 0-202-30260-1. [Google Scholar]
- Bryant, A. Grounded Theory and Grounded Theorizing: Pragmatism in Research; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2017; ISBN 978-0199922604. [Google Scholar]
- Biernacki, P.; Waldorf, D. Snowball Sampling Problems and Techniques of Chain Referral Sampling. Sociol. Methods Res. 1981, 10, 141–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kvale, S. InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing, 1st ed.; Sage Publications, Inc: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1996; ISBN 978-0803958203. [Google Scholar]
- Boncz, B.; Szabó, Z.R. Etikus És Biztonságos Mesterséges Intelligencia. Magyar Tudomány 2021, 182, 1203–1209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Challenge | Sources |
---|---|
New skills for human labour | [1,7,10,47,48] |
Organisational and workflow changes | [1,7,50] |
Management knowledge in technologies | [12] |
The high initial cost of new technologies | [1,49,53] |
Solution | Sources |
---|---|
Make CI more attractive | [1,11,35] |
New roles and skills | [10,11] |
Social network analysis | [51] |
Digital partnering and group construction | [2,10] |
Involve research and development and innovation | [7,14,15] |
Situational leadership | [59] |
Early technology involvement | [11,33] |
Sustainable solutions | [10,35] |
Increase competitiveness | [2,52]. |
Challenge | Category | Solution | |
---|---|---|---|
Attractive industry Education Skill and labour shortage Human feeling Generational issues Robot and human collaboration | Human resource and society | Situational awareness Young generation Reform the industry brand Low skilled labour Knowledge transfer More social industry | |
Information and data Innovative mindset Historical assumptions Procurement and bidding Collaboration Technology and process | Organisational factors | Faster adaption of SMEs Data handling in the contract Data collection Data sharing R&D investment | |
Technology pressure To see the transformative industry Organisational politics Understanding the value of innovation Believing technology without process Mindset change Lack of training | Management reality | Management expectation | Think collaboration as a profit Change decision-making process Strategic thinking New business model |
Technology competition Cheaper technologies Governmental level competition Single digital market SMEs market position | Market conditions and competition | ||
Low margin Lack of process innovation leads to waste of money Cost of labour Cost of robots Cost of subscription | Financial resource and profitability | Start-up solutions Balancing the budget with technology New business model The monetary value of handover Using available technology Cost of connectivity Material saving | |
Time pressure Improving customer satisfaction Demand for quality Lack of customer demand Changing the bidding process | Customer satisfaction | Building as a product Building as a service Space as a service Sustainable solutions Collaboration platform |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Nagy, O.; Papp, I.; Szabó, R.Z. Construction 4.0 Organisational Level Challenges and Solutions. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12321. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132112321
Nagy O, Papp I, Szabó RZ. Construction 4.0 Organisational Level Challenges and Solutions. Sustainability. 2021; 13(21):12321. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132112321
Chicago/Turabian StyleNagy, Orsolya, Ilona Papp, and Roland Zsolt Szabó. 2021. "Construction 4.0 Organisational Level Challenges and Solutions" Sustainability 13, no. 21: 12321. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132112321
APA StyleNagy, O., Papp, I., & Szabó, R. Z. (2021). Construction 4.0 Organisational Level Challenges and Solutions. Sustainability, 13(21), 12321. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132112321