A Decision Theoretic Framework for Information System Planning in the Construction Industry

Abstract

Automation and Information Systems (IS) implementation in the construction industry have evolved in scope and scale of effects over the years. With their growing importance, there is a need for a more practical IS planning approach. Along with the alignment of Information Technology Strategy with the overall corporate strategy of the firm, the Critical Success Factor method, the Value Chain method and other Opportunity frameworks emphasize the prioritization of the key processes for Information Systems planning. The effects of information technology on organizational hierarchy, internal power structures and control flows have been well documented. In the specifics pertaining to the construction industry, this involves a considerably risky transition from a multilevel hierarchy organizational structure to a relatively decentralized, flat organization. This paper presents a decision theoretic framework for Information Systems planning in the construction industry. The objective is to provide a comprehensive and unified approach for analysis and evaluation of the roles, scale and scope of Information Technology in the construction firm. This presupposes elicitation of requirements from a diverse set of stakeholdersmanagers, workers, suppliers and so on. One common problem is the difficulty in maintaining a sufficient degree of formalization and uniformity of structure to ensure effective communication across distributed design teams, while also ensuring adaptability and flexibility in the approach to accurately capture requirements elicitations of different users. The Cognitive Dimensions framework is an approach to analyzing the usability of information artifacts: Here, we apply it to the requirements elicitation process for IS planning in the Construction Industry.

Automation in architecture, engineering and construction: a scientometric analysis and implications for management

“…The gap between their perceptions could create barriers to the effectiveness of production control. In addition, during the implementation period, communications across distributed teams might be ineffective owing to the lack of formal structures (Ingawale, 2007). To address these barriers, managers at different levels (i.e.…”