3,336
Views
11
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Unpacking construction site digitalization: the role of incongruence and inconsistency in technological frames

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 987-1002 | Received 30 Aug 2020, Accepted 12 Sep 2021, Published online: 03 Oct 2021

References

  • Arvidsson, V., et al., 2014. Information systems use as strategy practice: a multi-dimensional view of strategic information system implementation and use. The journal of strategic information systems, 23 (1), 45–61.
  • Barrett, M., 1999. Challenges of EDI adoption for electronic trading in the London Insurance Market. European journal of information systems, 8 (1), 1–15.
  • Baskerville, R.L., et al., 2020. Digital first: the ontological reversal and new challenges for information systems research. Management information systems. MIS quarterly, 44 (2), 509–523.
  • Boland, R.J., et al., 2007. Wakes of innovation in project networks: the case of digital 3-D representations in architecture, engineering, and construction. Organization science, 18 (4), 631–647.
  • Braun, V., and Clarke, V., 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3 (2), 77–101.
  • Braun, A., and Borrmann, A., 2019. Combining inverse photogrammetry and BIM for automated labeling of construction site images for machine learning. Automation in construction, 106, 102879.
  • Brynjolfsson, E., and McAfee, A., 2014. The second machine age: work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
  • Bråthen, K., and Moum, A., 2016. Bridging the gap: bringing BIM to construction workers. Engineering, construction and architectural management, 20 (6), 751–764.
  • Bygballe, L.E., and Ingemansson, M., 2014. The logic of innovation in construction. Industrial marketing management, 43 (3), 512–524.
  • Bygballe, L.E., and Swärd, A., 2019. Collaborative project delivery models and the role of routines in institutionalizing partnering. Project management journal, 50 (2), 161–176.
  • Chau, K.W., et al., 2004. Four-dimensional visualization of construction scheduling and site utilization. Journal of construction engineering and management, 130 (4), 598–606.
  • Davidson, E., 2006. A technological frames perspective on information technology and organizational change. The journal of applied behavioral science, 42 (1), 23–39.
  • Davidson, E.J., 2002. Technology frames and framing: a socio-cognitive investigation of requirements determination. MIS quarterly, 26 (4), 329–358.
  • Davidson, E., Pai, D., et al., 2004. Making sense of technological frames: promise, progress, and potential. In: Bonnie Kaplan, eds. Information systems research. IFIP International Federation for Information Processing. Boston, MA: Springer, 473–491.
  • Dubois, A., and Gadde, L.-E., 2002a. Systematic combining: an abductive approach to case research. Journal of business research, 55 (7), 553–560.
  • Dubois, A., and Gadde, L.-E., 2002b. The construction industry as a loosely coupled system: implications for productivity and innovation. Construction management and economics, 20 (7), 621–631.
  • Dwivedi, Y.K., et al., 2015. Research on information systems failures and successes: status update and future directions. Information systems frontiers, 17 (1), 143–157.
  • Giddens, A., 1984. The Constitution of Society. Berkeley, Calif: California Press.
  • Gioia, D. A., 1986. Symbols, scipts, and sensemaking: creating meaning in the organizational experience. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Grill, M., et al., 2019. The leadership practices of construction site managers and their influence on occupational safety: an observational study of transformational and passive/avoidant leadership. Construction management and economics, 37 (5), 278–293.
  • Hall, D.M., et al., 2020. Mirror-breaking strategies to enable digital manufacturing in Silicon Valley construction firms: a comparative case study. Construction management and economics, 38 (4), 322–339.
  • Havenvid, M.I., et al., 2016. Renewal in construction projects: tracing effects of client requirements. Construction management and economics, 34 (11), 790–807.
  • Henfridsson, O., et al., 2018. Recombination in the open-ended value landscape of digital innovation. Information and organization, 28 (2), 89–100.
  • Jacobsson, M., et al., 2017. The role of industry: an analytical framework to understand ICT transformation within the AEC industry. Construction management and economics, 35 (10), 611–626.
  • Jacobsson, M., and Linderoth, H.C.J., 2010. The influence of contextual elements, actors’ frames of reference, and technology on the adoption and use of ICT in construction projects: a Swedish case study. Construction management and economics, 28 (1), 13–23.
  • Kim, C., et al., 2013. On-site construction management using mobile computing technology. Automation in construction, 35, 415–423.
  • Lam, K., et al., 2007. The application of the ant colony optimization algorithm to the construction site layout planning problem. Construction management and economics, 25 (4), 359–374.
  • Lavikka, R., et al., 2018. Digital disruption of the AEC industry: technology-oriented scenarios for possible future development paths. Construction management and economics, 36 (11), 635–650.
  • Lee, A.S., and Baskerville, R.L., 2003. Generalizing Generalizability in Information Systems Research. Information systems research, 14 (3), 221–243.
  • Linderoth, H.C.J., 2017. From visions to practice – the role of sensemaking, institutional logic and pragmatic practice. Construction management and economics, 35 (6), 324–337.
  • Lundberg, O. et al., 2020. Cycles of innovation and alignment in digital transformation: investigating the dynamics of resource recombination in a construction firm. In: Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, 4346–4355.
  • Morgan, B., 2019. Organizing for digitalization through mutual constitution: the case of a design firm. Construction management and economics, 37 (7), 400–417.
  • Nambisan, S., et al., 2017. Digital innovation management: reinventing innovation management research in a digital world. MIS quarterly, 41 (1), 223–238.
  • Nylén, D., and Holmström, J., 2015. Digital innovation strategy: a framework for diagnosing and improving digital product and service innovation. Business horizons, 58 (1), 57–67.
  • Olesen, K., 2014. Implications of dominant technological frames over a longitudinal period. Information systems journal, 24 (3), 207–228.
  • Orlikowski, W.J., 2000. Using technology and constituting structures: a practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization science, 11 (4), 404–428.
  • Orlikowski, W.J., and Gash, D.C., 1994. Technological frames: making sense of information technology in organizations. ACM transactions on information systems, 12 (2), 174–207.
  • Papadonikolaki, E., and Wamelink, H., 2017. Inter- and intra-organizational conditions for supply chain integration with BIM. Building research & information, 45 (6), 649–664.
  • Sandberg, J., et al., 2020. Digitization and phase transitions in platform organizing logics: evidence from the process automation industry. MIS quarterly, 44 (1), 129–153.
  • Sayer, K., 1998. Denying the technology: middle management resistance in business process re-engineering. Journal of information technology, 13, 247–257.
  • Schein, E. H., 1992. Organizational culture and leadership. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Sherratt, F., et al., 2013. UK construction site safety: discourses of enforcement and engagement. Construction management and economics, 31 (6), 623–635.
  • Shibeika, A., and Harty, C., 2015. Diffusion of digital innovation in construction: a case study of a UK engineering firm. Construction management and economics, 33 (5–6), 453–466.
  • Slaughter, E.S., 2000. Implementation of construction innovations. Building research & information, 28 (1), 2–17.
  • Steinhardt, D., et al., 2020. The structure of emergent prefabricated housing industries: a comparative case study of Australia and Sweden. Construction management and economics, 38 (6), 483–501.
  • Tilson, D., et al., 2010. Research commentary—digital infrastructures: the missing IS research agenda. Information systems research, 21 (4), 748–759.
  • Van Berlo, L.A., and Natrop, M., 2015. BIM on the construction site: providing hidden information on task specific drawings. Journal of information technology in construction (ITcon), 20 (7), 97–106.
  • Walsham, G., 1995. Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method. European journal of information systems, 4 (2), 74–81.
  • Weick, K. E., 1995. Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  • Whyte, J., 2019. How digital information transforms project delivery models. Project management journal, 50 (2), 177–194.
  • Wimelius, H., et al., 2021. A paradoxical perspective on technology renewal in digital transformation. Information systems journal, 31 (1), 198–225.
  • Yin, R. K., 2009. Case study research: design and methods. 4th ed. Los Angeles, Calif: SAGE.
  • Yoo, Y., et al., 2010. The new organizing logic of digital innovation: an agenda for information systems research. Information systems research, 21 (4), 724–735.
  • Young, B., et al., 2016. Inconsistent and incongruent frames during IT-enabled change: an action research study into sales process innovation. Journal of the association for information systems, 17 (7), 495–520.