Craft workforce is the main productive factor in traditional construction. Construction 4.0 visions are based on automation and digitalisation, meaning that human site activities will require/stipulate changes. The extent to which manual tasks done by humans in construction will be replaced is uncertain. This might vary considering the context or type of work. Construction 4.0 includes craft workforce activities, as these can benefit from technology, fostering digital transformation in the short/medium term. The research scope is workforce-innovation-management using data from job sites. A framework is developed based on data future use involving electronic performance monitoring, building information modelling, smart contracts and artificial intelligence. A systematic scoping review is developed to identify legal/ethical issues in connection to technological aspects. The discussion and findings focus on General Data Protection Regulation compliance to apply the proposed framework. Optimised human-machine-controlled environments must be ethically managed by pre-established collective agreements and must rely on each worker's awareness and consent. The findings suggest that the human aspects if improperly addressed could result in a bottleneck of digital transformation advances. Along with the framework, the paper provides a step-by-step, streamlined review of the regulations and requirements that need to be considered when implementing electronic monitoring of workers.
The insufficient understanding and literature on people collaborating in the Architectural-Engineering-Construction (AEC) industry has prompted researchers to investigate this by conducting project-to-project comparisons. A mixed method-based comparison of two construction projects’ design teams was made in order to present factors to be considered in fostering a positive collaborative culture. Client knowledge and involvement, existing relationships between teams, stronger informal collaboration, a decentralised leadership style and the adequate monetary motivation to a firm were found to be most critical. The study also assessed whether the use of holistic analysis methods can quantitatively show the differences between the projects; in particular, which project had a more positive collaborative culture. The perception based method used correlated the variance of perception of the teamwork environment and systemic risk to the projects with a more positive collaborative culture; 80% of constructs (some postulated attribute of people assumed, to reflect in test performance) supported the qualitative data. Additionally, assessments of the personalities of respondents from the project with a more collaborative culture also showed higher collective agreeableness. Findings suggest that projects with more changes, more assumptions made and uncertainty in requirements affect the collaborative culture negatively.
Understanding of the constitution of client involved decisions is important for future improvements of the processes. Significant decisions in construction projects are reliant on heuristic processes where assumptions are developed from past experience. The paper presents a methodology to collect empirical data in an unstructured manner utilizing participant intuition and experience regarding project level collaboration, a term easily understood by practitioners. Empirical data collected from 6 focus group discussions in Norway and 18 individual interviews in Finland is associated with biases in decision making aimed at bridging the gap of understanding and literature's insufficient coverage. An analytic framework was developed to suit the diverse emergence of concepts to allow application of psychological principles in a structured manner to empirical data. The paper contributes by identifying types of cognitive and motivational biases in client involved decisions. The biases are found to be alleviated by one another depending on the particular application of the decision. Findings suggest that normative beliefs exist developed from past experience and habitual thinking. A number of emerged biases in this domain are alleviated from normative beliefs which are discussed in this paper.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.