MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035817401 · doi:10.36680/j.itcon.2020.019

Change management practices for adopting new technologies in the design and construction industry

2020· article· en· W3035817401 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Information Technology in Construction · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChange management (ITSM)Context (archaeology)Change orderBusinessOrder (exchange)Critical success factorKnowledge managementBest practiceMarketingOperations managementProcess managementEngineeringComputer scienceProject managementProgram managementManagementOPM3Economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry has often been accused of being slow to adopt change. Yet the breadth of available technology solutions in the modern AEC industry continues to grow. Companies therefore must be adept at organizational change management; otherwise, the full benefits of technology solutions may never be realized when a company fails to achieve successful change adoption. The objective of this study was to identify the relationships between specific change management practices and organizational adoption of new technology solutions. An industry-wide approach was taken, wherein an online survey methodology was used to collect 167 cases of organization-wide change from AEC firms across the United States and Canada. The method of analysis included a correlation analysis between change management practices and change adoption. Reliability testing and principal components analysis were used to extract a single construct measure of change adoption. Rank-based nonparametric testing investigated if there are statistically significant differences between different groups of participants and technologies. Results include a rank-order of specific change management practices most associated with successful technology adoption. Change-agent effectiveness, measured benchmarks, realistic timeframe, and communicated benefits are the four change management practices that had the strongest association strength with successful change adoption. The discussion addresses how these leading change management practices compare with previous literature. Also, it was found that organization type and job position were correlated with the levels of change-adoption success compared to other listed factors. This study contributes an industry-wide view of change management practices within the context of technology-based change adoption and may assist practitioners to better manage technology adoptions in their organizations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it