Towards a decision support for modular integrated construction: an integrative review of the primary decision-making actors

Abstract

Where circumstances merit and favourable conditions prevail, modular integrated construction (MiC) becomes a superior choice of construction method over the traditional approach. For many types of buildings, MiC is becoming a preferred alternative to traditional construction. However, the decision to use MiC must be made after critical analysis because several key factors and conditions need to converge to make MiC economical and feasible. As a result, this research conducted a systematic review of the determinant factors in deciding to use MiC in a project. The literature analysis identified 51 decision-making factors (DMFs) for implementing MiC. Of these, the top 5 most cited DMFs include availability of skilled and experienced factory labour force; availability of skilled management and supervising team; demanding and tight project schedule; transport infrastructure, size restrictions, and equipment availability; and need for improved construction safety. The study proposed a conceptual framework for the identified DMFs consisting of labour considerations; project characteristics; location and site attributes; and organizational factors. A stage-gate model is proposed to demonstrate the MiC implementation decision-making process. Thus, the paper contributes to a better theoretical and practical understanding of the primary DMFs for implementing MiC and will help to maximize benefits and minimize risk.

Keywords:

• Decision support system
• determinant factors
• decision-making factors
• modular integrated construction
• review

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

The work described in this paper is fully funded by the Department of Building and Real Estate of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University under the auspices of the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (PF17-00649). However, the views expressed herein are solely those of the authors and not the funding body.