Extended Technology-Acceptance Model to Make Smart Construction Systems Successful
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 144, Issue 6
Abstract
Research and development (R&D) of smart construction systems has been constrained by the contentious relationship between system developers and potential industry users. System developers are critical of practitioners’ reluctance to embrace new technologies, while practitioners tend to view developers’ systems as disruptive. In explaining acceptance or non-acceptance of smart construction systems, the well-established technology-acceptance model (TAM) is a powerful instrument. However, the model fails to capture changes in user acceptance over time. In this study, an extended TAM that can reflect the changes in attitude is modeled from and substantiated by a two-year longitudinal action research study conducted in parallel with the codevelopment of a smart system for prefabrication housing construction. It is discovered that users’ attitudes toward a smart construction system are not invariable, nor toward the “perceived usefulness” and “perceived ease of use.” Developers should continuously enhance usefulness and user-friendliness of a system to facilitate its adoption. A particularly noteworthy finding is that external isomorphic pressures, including normative, coercive, mimetic, or a combination thereof, can affect users’ attitudes toward a smart construction system, and, in turn, influence the uptake of the system. Managers tactically can create such pressures to enhance technology acceptance within their organizations. These findings, in combination with the extended TAM, offer the foundations for development of a general theory on technology infusion in the construction industry.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data generated or analyzed during the study are available from the corresponding author by request. Information about the Journal’s data-sharing policy can be found here: http://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001263.
Acknowledgments
This study is jointly supported by the General Research Fund (Project No. 17205614) of the Hong Kong Research Grant Council (RGC) and the Innovation and Technology Fund (Project No. ITP/ 045/13LP) of the Hong Kong Innovation and Technology Commission (ITC).
References
Agarwal, R., and Karahanna, E. (2000). “Time flies when you’re having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage.” MIS Q., 24(4), 665–694.
Akhras, G. (1999). “Advanced composites for smart structures.” Proc., 12th Int. Conf. on Composite Materials, DGA, Paris.
Akhras, G. (2000). “Smart materials and smart systems for the future.” Can. Military J., 1(3), 25–31.
Akinci, B., Boukamp, F., Gordon, C., Huber, D., Lyons, C., and Park, K. (2006). “A formalism for utilisation of sensor systems and integrated project models for active construction quality control.” Autom. Constr., 15(2), 124–138.
Bagozzi, R. P. (2007). “The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift.” J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 8(4), 3.
Bajaj, A., and Nidumolu, S. R. (1998). “A feedback model to understand information system usage.” Inf. Manage., 33(4), 213–224.
Bem, D. J. (1967). “Self-perception: An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena.” Psychol. Rev., 74(3), 183–200.
Benbasat, I., and Barki, H. (2007). “Quo vadis TAM?” J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 8(4), 7.
Berger, P. L., and Luckmann, T. (1991). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge (No. 10), Penguin, London.
Bergvall-Kareborn, B., and Stahlbrost, A. (2009). “Living lab: An open and citizen-centric approach for innovation.” Int. J. Innovation Reg. Dev., 1(4), 356–370.
Birkinshaw, J. (2001). “Strategies for managing internal competition.” California Manage. Rev., 44(1), 21–38.
Brydon-Miller, M., Greenwood, D., and Maguire, P. (2003). “Why action research?” Action Res., 1(1) 9–28.
Cao, D., Li, H., and Wang, G. (2014). “Impacts of isomorphic pressures on BIM adoption in construction projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., .
Chan, A. P., Fan, L. C., and Yu, A. T. (1999). “Construction process reengineering: A case study.” Logist. Inform. Manage., 12(6), 467–476.
Chen, K., Lu, W., Peng, Y., Rowlinson, S., and Huang, G. Q. (2015). “Bridging BIM and building: From a literature review to an integrated conceptual framework.” Int. J. Project Manage., 33(6), 1405–1416.
Chen, Y. H., and Barnes, S. (2007). “Initial trust and online buyer behaviour.” Ind. Manage. Data Syst., 107(1), 21–36.
Davies, R., and Harty, C. (2013). “Measurement and exploration of individual beliefs about the consequences of building information modelling use.” Constr. Manage. Econ., 31(11), 1110–1127.
Davis, F. D. (1985). “A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results.” Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Davis, F. D. (1989). “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology.” MIS Q., 13(3), 319–340.
Davis, F. D. (1993). “User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioural impacts.” Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud., 38(3), 475–487.
Dawood, N., Miller, G., Patacas, J., and Kassem, M. (2014). “Combining serious games and 4D modelling for construction health and safety training.” Proc., 2014 Int. Conf. on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering, International Society for Computing in Civil and Building Engineering, Orlando, FL, 2087–2094.
DiMaggio, P., and Powell, W. W. (1983). “The iron cage revisited: Collective rationality and institutional isomorphism in organisational fields.” Am. Sociological Rev., 48(2), 147–160.
Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., and Liston, K. (2011). BIM handbook: A guide to building information modeling for owners, managers, designers, engineers and contractors, Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken, NJ.
Egan, J. (1998). “The Egan report-rethinking construction.” Report of the construction industry task force to the deputy prime minister, Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken, NJ.
Fishbein, M., and Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Fishbein, M. E. (1967). Readings in attitude theory and measurement, Wiley, New York.
Fricke, W., and Totterdill, P., eds. (2004). Action research in workplace innovation and regional development, Vol. 15, John Benjamins Publishing, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Froehlich, M. A., and Azhar, S. (2016). “Investigating virtual reality headset applications in construction.” Proc., 52nd ASC Annual Int. Conf., Clyde Companies, UT.
Gann, D. M., and Salter, A. J. (2000). “Innovation in project-based, service-enhanced firms: The construction of complex products and systems.” Res. Policy, 29(7), 955–972.
Ha, S., and Stoel, L. (2009). “Consumer e-shopping acceptance: Antecedents in a technology acceptance model.” J. Bus. Res., 62(5), 565–571.
Hartmann, T., Fischer, M., and Haymaker, J. (2009). “Implementing information systems with project teams using ethnographic-action research.” Adv. Eng. Inf., 23(1), 57–67.
Heintze, J., Teerhuis, P. C., and Weiden, A. (1996). “Controlled hydraulics for a direct drive brick laying robot.” Autom. Constr., 5(1), 23–29.
Holnicki-Szulc, J., Motylewski, J., and Kolakoswski, P. (2008). Introduction to smart technologies. Smart technologies for safety engineering, Wiley, Chichester, U.K., 1–10.
Hsu, J. Y., and Hasmath, R. (2014). “The local corporatist state and NGO relations in China.” J. Contemp. China, 23(87), 516–534.
Huang, J. H., Lin, Y. R., and Chuang, S. T. (2007). “Elucidating user behaviour of mobile learning: A perspective of the extended technology acceptance model.” Electronic Lib., 25(5), 585–598.
Karahanna, E., Straub, D. W., and Chervany, N. L. (1999). “Information technology adoption across time: A cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs.” MIS Q., 23(2), 183–213.
Kostova, T., and Roth, K. (2002). “Adoption of an organizational practice by subsidiaries of multinational corporations: Institutional and relational effects.” Acad. Manage. J., 45(1), 215–233.
Lee, S., Yu, J., and Jeong, D. (2013). “BIM acceptance model in construction organizations.” J. Manage. Eng., .
Lee, Y., Kozar, K. A., and Larsen, K. R. (2003). “The technology acceptance model: Past, present, and future.” Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 12(1), 50.
Legris, P., Ingham, J., and Collerette, P. (2003). “Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model.” Inf. Manage., 40(3), 191–204.
Lewin, K. (1946). “Action research and minority problems.” J. Soc. Issues, 2(4), 34–46.
Lu, W., Huang, G. Q., and Li, H. (2011). “Scenarios for applying RFID technology in construction project management.” Autom. Constr., 20(2), 101–106.
Lu, W., Liu, A. M. M., Wang, H. D., and Wu, Z. B. (2013). “Procurement innovation for public construction projects: A study of agent-construction system and public-private partnership in China.” Eng. Constr. Archit. Manage., 20(6), 543–562.
Martin, R. C. (2003). Agile software development: Principles, patterns, and practices, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Melas, C. D., Zampetakis, L. A., Dimopoulou, A., and Moustakis, V. (2011). “Modeling the acceptance of clinical information systems among hospital medical staff: An extended TAM model.” J. Biomed. Inf., 44(4), 553–564.
Morris, P. W., and Geraldi, J. (2011). “Managing the institutional context for projects.” Project Manage. J., 42(6), 20–32.
Murray, E., et al. (2011). “Why is it difficult to implement e-health initiatives? A qualitative study.” Implementation Sci., 6(1), 1.
Niu, Y., Lu, W., Chen, K., Huang, G. G., and Anumba, C. (2015). “Smart construction objects.” J. Comput. Civ. Eng., .
Niu, Y., Lu, W., Liu, D., Chen, K., Anumba, C., and Huang, G. G. (2016). “An SCO-enabled logistics and supply chain-management system in construction.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., .
Park, Y., Son, H., and Kim, C. (2012). “Investigating the determinants of construction professionals’ acceptance of web-based training: An extension of the technology acceptance model.” Autom. Constr., 22, 377–386.
Pitt, J. C. (2000). Thinking about technology, Seven Bridges Press, New York.
Reason, P., and Bradbury, H., eds. (2001). Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Scholz, C. (1990). “The symbolic value of computerised information systems.” Symbols and artifacts: Views of the corporate landscape, P. Gagliardi, ed., Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 233–254.
Simon, H. A. (1976). Administrative behaviour, 3rd Ed., Free Press, New York.
Son, H., Park, Y., Kim, C., and Chou, J. S. (2012). “Toward an understanding of construction professionals’ acceptance of mobile computing devices in South Korea: An extension of the technology acceptance model.” Autom. Constr., 28, 82–90.
Takim, R., Harris, M., and Nawawi, A. H. (2013). “Building Information Modeling (BIM): A new paradigm for quality of life within Architectural, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry.” Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci., 101, 23–32.
Venkatesh, V., and Davis, F. D. (2000). “A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies.” Manage. Sci., 46(2), 186–204.
Wang, F. Y. (2010). “The emergence of intelligent enterprises: From CPS to CPSS.” IEEE Intell. Syst., 25(4), 85–88.
Worden, K., and Staszewski, W. (2003). “Data fusion—The role of signal processing for smart structures and systems.” Smart technologies, World Scientific Publishing, Singapore, 71–107.
Woudhuysen, J., and Abley, I. (2004). Why is construction so backward?, Wiley Academy, London.
Xu, H., Feng, J., and Li, S. (2014). “Users-orientated evaluation of building information model in the Chinese construction industry.” Autom. Constr., 39, 32–46.
Zollmann, S., Hoppe, C., Kluckner, S., Poglitsch, C., Bischof, H., and Reitmayr, G. (2014). “Augmented reality for construction site monitoring and documentation.” Proc. IEEE, 102(2), 137–154.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 144 • Issue 6 • June 2018
Copyright
©2018 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jul 30, 2017
Accepted: Nov 27, 2017
Published online: Mar 28, 2018
Published in print: Jun 1, 2018
Discussion open until: Aug 28, 2018
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.