DEGREE PROJECT
IN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGEMENT
REAL ESTATE AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT MASTER OF SCIENCE, 30 CREDITS, SECOND LEVEL STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN2020
Exploring Use and Perception of Augmented- and Virtual Reality in the
Swedish AEC Industry
Bahar Dashti and Roberto Viljevac-Vasquez
TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE AND CONSTRACTION MANAGEMENT ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
Master of Science thesis
Title Exploring Use and Perception of Augmented-
and Virtual Reality in the Swedish AEC Industry
Author(s) Bahar Dashti and Roberto Viljevac-Vasquez
Department
Master Thesis number
Real Estate and Construction Management
Supervisor Tina Karrbom Gustavsson
Keywords Digitalization, Augmented Reality, Virtual
Reality, Building Information Modeling, Construction, Management
Abstract
Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality is on a trend of development. These technologies could have an impact on the way construction is carried out in the future. Right now these technologies are not widely used in the construction industry. What this report aims to understand is how the Swedish construction industry adheres to the current trend of digitalization, with an emphasis on Augmented- and Virtual Reality.
By interviewing 13 managers within 8 different AEC organizations, in the form of semi-structured interviews, it was found that these technologies are indeed viewed as something that could change the way these organizations work. The current
literature provides examples of how Augmented- and Virtual Reality can be used.
However, these technologies are not mature enough to make an impact right now, as most managers see the technology as too expensive and they also had little to no knowledge of its contributions. The case was also the same with BIM, where a lack of knowledge seems to be the norm for all sorts of positions within the construction industry, from worker to manager. This is in accordance with previous studies and the interview findings. A lack of demand from clients and outdated work routines also affect adoption of BIM, Augmented- and Virtual Reality.
TRITA-ABE-MBT-20536
Acknowledgement
This Master-thesis has been written by Roberto Viljevac and Bahar Dashti in the Degree Program in Civil Engineering and Urban Management, within Construction Management. We would like to thank everyone who has supported us to fulfil the work. We specially would like to thank our supervisor at Royal Institute of
Technology for supporting and guiding us. We would also thank all interview respondents, from various organisations in the construction industry, that have taken their time in order to answer our questions.
Stockholm
Roberto Viljevac & Bahar Dashti
Examensarbete
Titel Utforskande av användning och uppfattning
av Augmented- och Virtual Reality i den svenska AEC-branschen
Författare Bahar Dashti och Roberto Viljevac-Vasquez
Institution
Examensarbete Master nivå
Fastigheter och byggande
Handledare Tina Karrbom Gustavsson
Nyckelord Digitalization, Augmented Reality, Virtual Reality, Building Information Modeling, Construction, Management
Sammanfattning
Augmented Reality och Virtual Reality befinner sig just nu vid ett utvecklingsstadie.
Denna teknik kan påverka hur konstruktion genomförs i framtiden. Just nu används dessa tekniker inte i någon stor utsträckning inom byggindustrin. Syftet med denna uppsats är att förstå hur den svenska byggbranschen förhåller sig till den nuvarande trenden av digitalisering, med fokus på Augmented- och Virtual Reality. Genom att intervjua 13 chefer och projektledare inom 8 olika AEC-organisationer, i form av semistrukturerade intervjuer, konstaterades det att dessa teknologier ses som någonting som kan förändra hur dessa organisationer arbetar. Den nuvarande litteraturen ger exempel på hur Augmented- och Virtual Reality kan användas. Dock har det visat sig att dessa teknologier inte är tillräckligt mogna för att ha en påverkan just nu eftersom de flesta chefer och projektledare såg tekniken som för kostsam, de hade också liten eller ingen kunskap om dess potentiella bidrag. Detsamma gällde BIM, där en brist på kunskap fortfarande verkar vara normen för alla typer av tjänster inom byggbranschen, från arbetare till chef. Detta stämmer överens med tidigare studier och intervjuresultaten. Brist på efterfrågan från kunder samt gamla rutiner påverkar också adoptionen av BIM, Augmented- och Virtual Reality.
TRITA-ABE-MBT-20536
Förord
Denna masteruppsats har skrivits av Roberto Viljevac and Bahar Dashti för
civilingenjörsprogrammet Samhällsbyggnad, inom byggprojektledning. Vi vill tacka alla som har stöttat oss i att färdigställa arbetet. Vi vill speciellt tacka vår handledare på Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan för vägledning och support. Vi vill också tacka alla de som blev intervjuade av oss, från olika organisationer i byggindustrin, för att ha tagit sig tiden att svara på våra frågor under en intervju.
Stockholm
Roberto Viljevac & Bahar Dashti
Table of contents
1. Introduction 1
2. Literature review 3
2.1 Augmented Reality & Virtual Reality 3
2.1.1 Augmented Reality (AR) 3
2.1.2 Virtual Reality (VR) 4
2.1.3 Benefits of AR/VR 4
2.1.4 Challenges with AR/VR 6
2.2 Building Information Modeling 7
2.2.1 Benefits of BIM 7
2.2.2 Challenges with BIM 8
2.3 Integration of BIM and AR/VR 8
3. Theory 9
3.1 Technology, Organization, and Environment framework 9 3.2 Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 10
4. Method 12
4.1 Research approach and strategy 12
4.2 Case selection for interviews 12
4.3 Collection of data 13
4.3.1 Literature study 13
4.3.2 Empirical data collected by interviews 13
4.4 Analysis methodology 15
5. Findings 17
5.1 Interview findings 17
5.1.1 The perception and value of digitalization 17
5.1.2 The extent of usage of AR/VR and BIM 22
6. Discussion 25
6.1 UTAUT 25
6.2 Technology 25
6.3 Organization 26
6.4 Environment 26
6.5 Limitations and future research 27
7. Conclusion 28
8. References 29
Appendix 35
Appendix 1- interview guides 35
Initial interview 35
Interview 2.0 36
Interview 3.0 37
Appendix 2- Quotes 38
Definition of Terms
AEC- Architecture, Engineering and Construction BIM- Building Information Modeling
AR- Augmented Reality VR- Virtual Reality
IVE- Immersive Virtual Reality
TOE- Technology, Organization, and Environment framework UTAUT- Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology
1
1. Introduction
The AEC industry is the largest industrial sector in the world (Lavikka et al., 2018).
As the AEC industry is project based, challenges with project delivery include meeting the three criteria for project success; staying within budget, staying within the specified timeframe, and ensuring the quality of the project (Pollack et al., 2018).
Though the AEC industry has not been innovative enough as can be seen by its flat productivity curve, digitalization is starting to make an impact (Lavikka et al., 2018).
One of the newer technologies for the industry is Augmented Reality (AR), which is on a trend of development. The range of applications of which, in the construction industry, cover among other things: safety, cost, and control of production. Along with Virtual reality (VR), AR is also useful in the design, management and
organization of the buildings themselves (Kaplinski, 2018). As the requirements on hardware are reduced, and other devices can be used such as mobile phones or tablets, as well as headset that free the hands, AR becomes more user friendly (Jetter et al., 2018). AR has potential in the AEC industry and can provide much more information to users than traditional presentations (Adăscăliţei & Bălţoi, 2018), such as drawings and PDF-files. Jutraž & Moine (2016) found in their studies about public participation in urban design that immersive environments such as but not limited to VR, when used, offer better satisfaction for users, saves time and saves money. Mixed reality, along the spectrum of VR-AR-Reality, makes it possible to compare options and if rightly implemented offer users the ability to give feedback and share ideas at any time of the day (Elshimy et al., 2015).
However right now, one of the most prominent digital changes in construction is that of BIM, or Building information Modeling. But as the industry is slow to change, the BIM adoption rate has been slow (Charef et al., 2019). Challenges in the
implementation of BIM include: different levels of skill in BIM, attitudes and beliefs, and a lack of client demand, among others (Vass & Karrbom Gustavsson, 2017). But in Sweden and other countries, BIM standardization efforts have been made.
OpenBIM, later rebranded as BIM Alliance Sweden, is an industry wide effort to help standardize BIM in Sweden (Hooper, 2015).
As Aibinu et al. (2014) state, due to lack of team integration, managing information is considered as one of the difficulties of a construction project. This is because the information needs to be recreated during the whole life cycle by involved actors.
Thereby, waste of time, less productivity and waste of resources are presented as some consequences of the lack of team integration (Aibinu et al., 2014). According to Bryde et al. (2013) another difficulty in larger projects is the complexity throughout the whole project life cycle. Communication between actors is considered as one of the complexities due to difficulties to control and manage activities (Bryde et al., 2013). Li et al. (2018) also explain another type of issues in the AEC industry
regarding safety and training of workers. According to the authors, previous studies
2 show that there is a lack of action regarding training and education of workers when it comes to identification and control of risks.
As has been said before, the AEC industry is slow to change (Charef et al., 2019).
Howard et al. (2017) in their work on individual perceptions in the UK found that working with BIM was seen as more of a hurdle than something which improves their work. A major constraint in the use of BIM in the Swedish AEC industry is the lack of demand from clients (Bosch-Sijtsema et al., 2017). Another hindrance that was discovered in Finland is that businesses are more inclined to use their business models that have been proven to work (Lavikka et al., 2018).
What does this say for the case of AR/VR? Could AR/VR be in the same seat as BIM?
That many don’t see the use of AR/VR because it just feels like a hindrance to
everyday work rather than something useful as stated by Howard et al. (2017). There seems to be a lack of research in previous studies when it comes to usefulness and perception of technologies such as Augmented-and Virtual Reality in the AEC industry, as the authors of this report had trouble finding relevant research.
What this paper aims to understand is how the Swedish construction industry adheres to the current trend of digitalization. The authors will put an emphasis on new technology for the construction industry such as AR and VR and its uses throughout the AEC industry. The authors will also take BIM into consideration when doing the research, to make a small comparison between it and AR/VR. Thus, the research questions proposed by the authors are:
RQ1: To what extent and in which ways are AR,VR and BIM already in use by Swedish AEC organizations?
RQ2: How do managers in AEC organizations view digitalization? How are AR, VR and BIM perceived as tools?
3
2. Literature review
The aim of this chapter is to introduce the results of the previous research in the field in order to partly answer the presented research questions.
2.1 Augmented Reality & Virtual Reality
2.1.1 Augmented Reality (AR)
A well used definition of Augmented Reality is that of Azuma (1997). It is described as a technology that allows the user to see virtual objects superimposed onto the real world. Thereby supplementing the real world, rather than replacing it (as with VR).
It is also characterized by two more properties: the ability to interact with in real- time and the positioning of objects in 3D. As Milgram & Kishino (1994) present in figure 1, augmented reality is a part of the general concept of Mixed Reality that has an extent between the real environment to the virtual environment.
Figure 1, Extent of Mixed Reality including AR, based on illustration of Milgram & Kishino (1994).
One of the reasons AR has garnered interest worldwide, particularly in games, was the launch of Pokémon Go in 2016 (Rauschnabel et al., 2017). Masood & Egger (2019) calls AR key for enabling industry 4.0 concepts and explains that the range of applications for AR is wide. It can be used for design, manufacturing operations, maintenance, quality assurance and more. The view of AR as an enabler for industry 4.0 is also shared by Gallala et al. (2019), Pierdicca et al. (2017) and Fraga-Lamas et al. (2018) among others. It has been shown to reduce the time of assembly tasks compared to using a paper manual (Pierdicca, 2017). Industry 4.0, or the 4th industrial revolution, is the transition towards smarter production by using the Internet of Things (IoT), Artificial Intelligence (AI), big data and other new developments. This revolution also affects construction by ways of: visualization, simulation, 3D modeling and digitalization (Maskuriy et al., 2019). The Case Western Reserve University in the US has tested AR in the education of anatomy, and is even building a curriculum with the technology in mind (The Daily, 2016). The use of AR can also help with the human-machine interaction. As industrial robots are becoming more collaborative, safer, and versatile; they have been used more in the last decades (Gallala et al., 2019).
4 2.1.2 Virtual Reality (VR)
VR technology is used to produce a 3D model which makes users able to see the final product. It means that the technology may provide the opportunity for the users to experience the virtual world through different sensations such as seeing, hearing and smelling (Qin, 2013). Li et al. (2018) explain, by usage of VR, users are able to
experience specific knowledge about how the real world works. In another study by Sacks et al. (2013), immersive VR, even called IVE, has been presented. IVE
contributes with some possibilities such as; surrounding users and letting them experience a virtual environment and creating a scene that updates in accordance with the user's movements. Furthermore, according to Qin (2013) the technology has obtained a new way for users to work with complex data to be able to create an
environment by computer and with help of different devices make sure the set goals will be achieved. One of the benefits of using VR in the construction process is efficiency improvement in projects. This means that the technology would improve different aspects in a project for instance ensuring progress, minimizing the cost, increasing work safety and decreasing risks.
2.1.3 Benefits of AR/VR
A literature study conducted by Calderon-Hernandez et al. (2018) found that the research on AR in conjunction with BIM was limited. It was studied in the design phase and the construction phase. Alone, AR is being studied in several stages of the construction process. The uses for AR in construction are various. It has been tested for: use in the early stages of construction projects to enhance public participation (Sanchez-Sepulveda et al. 2019), for architectural visualization (Wang et al., 2014a), and for conveying information in cross-disciplinary areas (Lin et al., 2015). AR also contributes in other areas of construction projects such as project scheduling Meža et al. (2015) and progress monitoring (Zaher et al., 2018), employee training and safety management (Albert et al., 2014), defect and quality management (Kwon et al., 2014) and reduction of costs (Adăscăliţei & Bălţoi, 2018) .
Regarding contribution of AR within scheduling, Meža et al. (2015) in their research have studied potential uses of AR. In order to do this study, a prototype was created that could show the 3D model and also verify if the construction is following the schedule. It was then tested and evaluated by architects and engineers who on a survey revealed that AR was considered better than 3D models on a pc or 2D plans.
This was true for both progress monitoring and preliminary design visualisation.
Zaher et al. (2018) in their research about mobile AR applications present a new approach for progress monitoring through an Android application named BIM-U and a mobile AR channel called BIM-phase. The conjecture in the beginning was if combination of mobile phones with other techniques such as AR and BIM could be a new and modern approach when coming to progress monitoring. It was made by using AR in order to visualize the construction progress on-site. The result of the study shows that combination of those technologies would provide potential
5 solutions regarding issues as well as cost, time and quality. Park et al. (2013) state also that AR would make it possible to ensure that, for instance, demanded materials would exist on the site through material tracking. Furthermore according to
Adăscăliţei & Bălţoi (2018), the use of AR in order to take advantage of virtual elements, would lead to reduction of cost of manufacturing real world prototypes. It would be possible due to the ability of the technology to create a real scale of items and minimizing error when measuring space.
In a literature study written by Wang (2009), the author states that there is a huge generation of information between various actors in different places in the
architecture and construction industry. This is presented as a complication and therefore there is a need to improve new technologies such as AR to overcome this issue. Usage of augmented workplace in the design and construction process enhances the whole process by making it easier to access the huge amount of architecture-, engineering- and construction information. Furthermore, Wang &
Dunston (2006) have presented AR technology as a useful tool when it comes to improving quality of the work. It means that AR could be used as a guide for the workers through the process and it will lead to reduction of loss of resources and misunderstanding of information.
Regarding defect and quality management, according to Kwon et al. (2014), an integration of BIM models and AR provides the opportunity to improve existing inspections models. It means that different information such as drawings, schedule and materials from a BIM model would be converted to a marker which results in addition of information as real components on site. Park et al. (2013) explain the process of AR implementation in 3 stages that are; identification of objects and estimation of information, prediction of virtual objects locations through estimated information and lastly the real world will be combined with the virtual elements. In figure 2, illustrated by Kwon et al. (2014), the process of AR technology for defects and quality management is shown. This process is developed in terms of identifying and correcting possible defects.
6 Figure 2, Defect management process by AR based on illustration of Kwon et al. (2014).
When it comes to training and safety management, Albert et al. (2014) states that an individuals’ ability to identify and estimate hazards in complicated situations is very limited. It is shown that workers with less experience of working in construction sites, have not been able to identify 57% of dangers. Therefore, there is a potential of enhancing skills in terms of safety improvement. Sacks et al. (2013) claim that VR is an appropriate technology to present the risks to the workers without putting them directly into risky situations. Another benefit by usage of VR compared with
classroom training is that participants have better attention for learning.
Furthermore, the authors present that training through experiencing dangerous situations on the site as too risky. One solution to overcome this issue is use of VR and IVE. By using these tools, the user can experience the dangerous situation without being exposed to danger. In this way, the workers would be able to identify and estimate a situation and find out appropriate actions. Chi et al. (2013) explain training of workers as an important action for every project. As an example, AR techniques could be used for training when it comes to learning how to use heavy equipment such as construction cranes. Wang & Dunston (2006) also state that AR provides better opportunities when it comes to working in an environment with dangerous circumstances where it is not possible for humans to get access to. AR could also make it possible for the workers, during renovation of a building, to discover hidden objects. This function will help workers to avoid harms, saving time and improving efficiency.
2.1.4 Challenges with AR/VR
However there are also some challenges when it comes to usage of AR/VR in the AEC industry. Wang (2009) has presented some challenges regarding the architecture and design process when using AR. The first challenge is related to how the information is stored in databases. A great amount of information is stored as 2D models instead of 3D models. Due to the lack of existence of 3D models, the usage of AR systems for the purpose of supporting information would be limited. According to Wang & Dunston (2006), who have tested prototypes, using AR would also be
7 considered as complex when it comes to interpreting and understanding the
information by users. It means that users should receive and combine the
information from different entities. This heavy workload could therefore lead to a risk for users being subjected to mental strain. Wang (2009) presents the second challenge related to the reality model and its preparation. These models could be considered as complex when it comes to 3D models of larger projects, method and rendering issues. The third challenge presented in this research is issues related to the technology and its limitations. This is considered as the major challenge when it comes to usage of AR systems. There is a need for sensors that enable the system to identify the location of all objects in the environment that are a part of the model.
As Sacks et al. (2013) mention in their study, some other challenges are related to the cost of the materials that are needed for the training programmes. Moreover, the usage of immersive virtual reality is limited due to lack of knowledge and
understanding of its application. According to Li et al. (2018) the high cost of
training still remains as a challenge when it comes to training of workers in high risk environments.
2.2 Building Information Modeling
2.2.1 Benefits of BIM
Building Information Modeling, or BIM, has entered the construction industry as one of the most promising developments (Charef et al., 2019). The confidence in which as a means to increase efficiency has in certain countries in the north of Europe, among others, caused public clients to require BIM as a part of the project (Bosch-Sijtsema et al., 2017). According to Kalinichuk (2015), BIM is a useful tool to manage activities such as simulations and documentations in different parts of a project. BIM can be divided mainly into process, policy and technology fields. The process field includes the involved actors that have responsibility for design, use and manage the BIM model. The technology field includes architecture and engineers and also actors that develop the software and hardware. Regarding the BIM policy field, a successful collaboration requires sharing of information between the team.
Aranda-Mena et al. (2009), state that it is important to satisfy the clients
requirements and therefore BIM has been presented as an opportunity to simplify the collaboration between internal- and external actors. In another article regarding effectiveness of construction projects, the author presents BIM as a tool providing effective information sharing, decreasing documentation errors, time and cost reduction during different phases (Gao, 2016).
8 2.2.2 Challenges with BIM
According to Vass & Karrbom Gustavsson (2017) the lack of client demand regarding implementation of BIM has been presented as a challenge and obstacle when it comes to use of BIM. Bosch-Sijtsema et al. (2017) based on their findings in their research highlights the influence of client’s demand for use of BIM. The authors explain lack of knowledge and understanding on what value BIM provides for the project as reasons for this lack of demand from clients. Organizations would wait for clients to demand BIM use to start using it themselves. Bryde et al. (2013) have also presented some issues related to software and hardware in the case of BIM. Another challenge according to Chong et al. (2017) is the lack of usefulness of BIM in the whole life cycle of a project and that is why some new BIM tools should be developed in terms of supporting the sustainability aspect. The application of BIM is considered as limited just into the planning, design and production phases and not in demolition and renovation parts.
2.3 Integration of BIM and AR/VR
Even though BIM is one of the most popular information handling technologies, the technology’s value in field work is limited due to the scope of interaction between virtual and real world. Integrating AR into BIM allows for this interaction to occur (Chai et al., 2019). BIM may also lead to an information overload making work difficult for the worker. By using AR the information extracting process could be improved (Chu et al., 2018). Traditional approaches to visualize architectural designs are subject to problems like expensive design evolution and a lack of stakeholder communication. Integrating BIM and AR offers a more immersive and intuitive environment (Wang et al., 2014a).
There have been a number of studies testing the usage of BIM and AR/VR. Bae et al.
(2013) tested a mobile AR system where the user takes photos of the site and from pre-collected site photographs, the system evaluates the user’s position relative to the site and correctly gives cyber-information based on the user’s position. Zaher et al.
(2018) created two mobile applications that complemented each other, that together would help project managers in their decision-making by being able to monitor the construction process. The applications show a model that can be viewed in different phases, and users are able to update the progress from different areas using a mobile device. Williams et al. (2015) developed a low cost system called BIM2MAR that transports data and geometries from BIM to MAR (Mobile Augmented Reality), that is, on a hand held device. The integration between the two technologies has also been used when scanning a historical building, for the purpose of providing an extended reality experience with improved levels of information (Banfi et al., 2019). There was also a study made by Wang et al (2014b), where they investigated the use of AR and BIM for a large Liquefied Natural Gas project. The aim was to facilitate control and monitoring and the systems showed that AR together with BIM can be used together to effectively gather information from the models.
9
3. Theory
This section describes the theoretical frameworks that have been used in order to fulfill the purpose of the paper.
3.1 Technology, Organization, and Environment framework
In their work, Bosch-Sijtsema et al. (2017) based their questionnaire on the
Technology, Organization, and Environment framework, TOE. Their work has been very guiding in the structure of our work and therefore the TOE framework seems fitting to use. A literature review by Oliveira & Martins (2011) discussed the TOE model as well as the DOI model, Diffusion Of Innovation. They found the TOE framework to be more complete as it includes the environment aspect, which DOI does not do. The TOE framework has been used to look into different industries and it is very versatile. Though Oliveira & Martins (2011) found it to be best used when used in conjunction with another framework or theory. The framework was used by Wang et al. (2016) to gauge why hotels adopt a mobile reservation system. Some of the reasons concluded by them to why hotels adopt mobile reservation systems are:
Compatibility, technological competence and critical mass.Jia et al. (2017) used the TOE framework to expand upon the Information System continuance model (the IS continuance model). More specifically they used constructs related to the
organizational and environmental aspects of the TOE framework.
The TOE framework was developed in 1990 by Tornatzky and Fleischer. The framework is actually a part of the process of innovation, and considers how the context of the firm influences the adoption of innovations and also the
implementation of said innovations. There are three different elements that explain a firm’s decisions on the organizational level when it comes to context influence
adoption. The three elements are described as the Technological context, the organizational context, and the environmental context. (Baker, 2011).
Baker (2011) also provides a description of the three elements:
Technological aspect
The technological aspect considers all the relevant technologies that are available.
These are technologies already used by the organisation as well as those that are available on the market but not presently used. The technologies already used by a firm sets a wide limit on the rate of technological change a firm can undertake. The existing technologies not used by the firm shows what's possible and what technology allows them to adapt and evolve.
There is also the consideration of how much the technology will change the firm. The incremental, synthetic or discontinuous changes are all different levels of change.
10 Incremental changes are virtually upgrades, that is, from a CRT monitor to an LCD monitor. Synthetic changes are more about combining already existing technologies in new ways. Last is discontinuous change, which alters the playing field much more.
In some cases rendering some competences obsolete.
Organizational aspect
The organizational aspects include different features such as, among others, the amount of available resources in an organisation, communication and links within the organisation and the size of the organisation.
Generally, there have been studies regarding the relationship between the organisational aspects with the adoption of innovation in an organisation. Some organisational structures such as “organic and decentralized”, are presented as structures that would be useful when it comes to adoption of innovation. Regarding the implementation of the innovation process, structures that identify the roles and the formal relationships in an organisation would be most suitable structures.
Moreover, the communication process ,that is identified as an organizational aspect, may also support the innovation process by creating a context which supports change and innovation.
Environmental aspect
The environmental aspects refer to the “structure of the industry”, access to
“technology service providers” and “regulatory environment”. The structure of the industry has been studied in different ways and it has been shown that competition would lead to stimulation of adoption of innovation. Furthermore, the organisations in growing industries are more willing to innovate. It is also possible that an
industry’s decline may be used by some other organisations to innovate by, for instance, creating new lines of business or coming up with new ideas to expand the business.
3.2 Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology
The authors will also somewhat make use of the UTAUT model (Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology). Lai (2017) made a literature review that studied different models concerning adoption of technology. The models studied include TAM (Technology Acceptance Model), TPB (Theory of Planned Behaviour), UTAUT and others. The review was comprehensive and served greatly in the choosing of another model to supplement the TOE framework.
The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology was created by Venkatesh et al. (2003) to explain how users adopt new technology. It is a theory that has drawn from previous technology acceptance models in an attempt to create a model that integrates elements from the eight models reviewed by them. The model, and
11 those it draws elements from, is a model that explains the acceptance of new
technology by users. This will complement the focus of the firm-level of the TOE- framework. The four key constructs of the UTAUT are: Performance expectancy, Effort expectancy, Social influence, and Facilitating conditions.
Performance expectancy is the perception the user has of the system in question in the sense of how well it will aid the user. Effort expectancy is defined as how the users view how easy or hard the system is to work with. Social influence is the perception an individual has of the important others believe they should use the system. Lastly, Facilitating conditions is the view the individual has of the
organizational and technical support infrastructure within the organization. These are very similar to the constructs of the TAM, but the TAM does not make use of the other constructs proposed in the UTAUT, which are: gender, age, experience and voluntariness of use.
This model has been used to: predict tablet adoption among generations
(Magsamen-Conrad et al., 2015), explain mobile banking user adoption (Zhou et al., 2010), among other things. A study, made by Dwivedi et al. (2019), comprehensively examined the UTAUT model and also looked over other technology
acceptance/adoption models such as, but not limited to,: TAM , DIT (Diffusion of Innovation Theory) and TPB . The study proposed an alternative theoretical model based on UTAUT and found that Attitude is central in IS/IT acceptance.
According to Howard et al. (2017), the model has some limitations and it is not adaptable in every system. They mean that the model is created for environments where the use of technology is optional instead of being mandatory. When it comes to decision making about use of BIM in an organisation, such decisions are made in a project level which means that the use is mandatory.
12
4. Method
The purpose of this section is to explain the underlying methodology and strategies that have been used in order to achieve desired results.
4.1 Research approach and strategy
The used research approach and strategy in this work has been abductive in nature.
As Saunders et al. (2016) mention, this approach is a combination of induction and deduction. In some qualitative research, the inductive approach is used for the purpose of developing an already existing theory or to create a new one, otherwise, the deductive approach is used to test a theory. The abductive approach is often used in qualitative research for developing a theory with the help of developing inductive conclusions and testing the deductive ones. As already mentioned before, the used theoretical frameworks in this report have been TOE and UTAUT, however, what must be said is that the authors of this report will mostly focus on the TOE
framework and use UTAUT to complement by understanding the view on how individuals perceive the adoption of the studied technologies. The authors deemed the TOE to be most in line with the research questions.
4.2 Case selection for interviews
The selection of interviewees was made by selecting organizations that are part of different stages of the construction process. The requirements for the interviewees was that they should have insight into digitalization, and tools such as BIM and/or AR/VR, for their respective organizations. The subject did not have to be an expert in the field and what would be most interesting was their experience and perceptions.
The first few selections were made by talking to representatives at the job fair at KTH. There the initial prospects would be organizations that would be on different ends of a construction project i.e. contractors, clients and specialists. The initial meetings were discussed and set. The snowball effect was also used by asking the interviewees if they knew someone the authors could or should contact for the
author’s thesis. In table 1, the types of organizations that the interviewees worked for are presented. The 13 interviewees worked for 8 different organizations.
13 Table 1, Presentation of organizations
Type of project actor Description
Client / Property owner Large organisation, high level of investment in digital tools and facilities Consultant BIM software developer and specializing, high level of experience with BIM
and develop AR/VR solutions
Client / Property Owner Large organisation, exploring usage of BIM and AR/VR Design & Build
Contractor Property developer organisation, experience of BIM and some experience of VR, exploring AR
Property owner and
developer Large property owner organisation with experience of BIM, testing and exploring use of AR/VR
Client / Build Contractor Facility developer organisation, high experience with BIM, exploring and evaluating usage of AR/VR
Consultant Installation consultant, experience with BIM
Consultant Software developer and technique consultant, high level of experience of BIM and ready to use AR/VR
4.3 Collection of data
4.3.1 Literature study
A literature study was conducted to gather a greater understanding of the subject topics of this thesis. Peer-reviewed articles were found by sifting through relevant titles and keywords, which were then skimmed through to review the relevancy of the content. If found relevant, i.e. containing information about applications of AR/VR in the AEC industry, the articles where then read more in depth. The references in the articles were also examined to further find more relevant articles. Initially relevant titles contained words associated with digitalization in the construction industry, BIM, and AR/VR in construction. Later some articles on the technologies of BIM and AR/VR were studied to describe these technologies. Keywords included:
Digitalization in construction, Building Information Modeling, BIM, AR and VR in construction, Augmented Reality in construction, benefits of AR/VR in construction, challenges of AR/VR and variations thereof. The primary sources of peer-reviewed articles were the KTH search engine PRIMO, and Google Scholar.
4.3.2 Empirical data collected by interviews
The interviews were recorded initially by laptop and later, when video calls were used, the program Zoom was used to both host and record the interviews. Because of the corona virus that was prevalent during the time of the writing and data collection, video calls were one of the only options for data collection. The interviews were conducted as a semi-structured interview as they are flexible and allow the researcher to ask for clarification (Doody & Noonan, 2013). The respondent had ample time to answer the questions and the interviewers subsequently asked follow-
14 up questions. The questions themselves were open ended and open to some
interpretation, as the perception of the respondents was what was looked for. Also, the authors followed a set of questions (see appendix 1) that was modified after the initial two interviews (see appendix 1) as reflexive interviews are part of an iterative cycle (Arsel, 2017). The interview guide was revised two times, as the first two
interviews were more like tests (the second of the first two interview recordings were lost, as a result only notes from that interview remain), though the data they
generated is still relevant data, they served as a benchmark and the interview was changed to accommodate answers more in line with what the authors wanted to examine. The third and final version (see appendix 1) included more questions for subjects that had less or no experience with AR/VR in the organizations they worked for. A total of 13 interviews were conducted, with people from 8 different companies.
In table 2, an overview of interviews has been shown.
15 Table 2, Overview of interviews
Respondent Position Type of project actor Contact Date
R1 Digital property developer Client / Property owner Meeting 2020-03-06
R2 BIM process manager Consultant Meeting 2020-03-09
R3 Project Manager Client / Property Owner Video call 2020-03-25
R4 IT-Manager Client / Property Owner Video call 2020-03-25
R5 Project Manager Client / Property Owner Video call 2020-03-25 R6 Business Developer Design & Build
Contractor Video call 2020-03-26
R7 Technical Manager Client / Build Contractor Video call 2020-03-31
R8 Project supporter Property owner and
developer Video call 2020-04-01
R9 Head of the Company Consultant Video call 2020-04-03
R10 Project Planner Consultant Video call 2020-04-03
R11 Project Manager Client / Build Contractor Video call 2020-04-07
R12 Business developer Consultant Video call 2020-04-09
R13 Project Manager/ research and development of software
Consultant Video call 2020-04-24
4.4 Analysis methodology
The chosen data analysis methodology in this research is a thematic analysis.
According to Saunders el al. (2016), this is a flexible systematic approach to analyze the qualitative data which contributes to comprehensive explanations. By using a thematic analysis, it would be possible to understand large amounts of qualitative data, combine data from various transcripts, collocate themes from collected data and describe them. Braun & Clarke (2006) describe a guideline for identification of themes in thematic analysis consisting of different phases that are;
1. Becoming familiar with data 2. Creating initial codes
3. Identifying themes 4. Reviewing themes 5. Naming themes
6. Generating the final analysis
16 The first phase is about becoming familiar with the collected data. It would be
possible by reading the data and writing down ideas. In the second phase, relevant data are collected and every set of data would be named as a code. The third phase is about creating themes with the help of the collected codes. Then in the fourth phase, the relevance of themes in relation to the codes and the whole data need to be
reviewed. In the fifth phase of the process, the relevant themes that have been identified in the previous phase, would be named. Finally, it is time to generate the final report by making the final analysis related to the presented research questions and literature (Braun & Clarke, 2006).
In this thesis, the above mentioned phases have been performed through making transcripts of the recorded interviews in order to be more familiar with the data.
Later on, to get a better understanding of what the respondents have said, the transcripts were read several times. While reading data, initial codes were identified by finding similarities and contradictions. The codes were given names based on the content of the phrases that stood out. Furthermore, the codes were sorted by
connections and then themes were created based on the relevancy for the research questions. The data analysis was conducted by the authors separately reviewing the findings and taking notes, to then compare and discuss what could be concluded from the findings.
17
5. Findings
5.1 Interview findings
5.1.1 The perception and value of digitalization Resource Efficiency
A general opinion revealed by the interviews was that the tools, i.e. AR, VR and BIM, were too expensive to adopt. One respondent said that the cost was just not
justifiable at this moment. Another interviewee noted that AR/VR hardware as well as software was particularly expensive, upwards of 30.000 SEK. The organizations that these people work for don’t see the investment as justifiable at this moment, and therefore they don’t allocate resources to the development, research or adoption of these technologies. Those that do conduct research have no dedicated employees conducting it, it is instead other employees with other main responsibilities that are perhaps enthusiastic in new technology. The sentiment of wasting resources does not only concern AR and VR, BIM is also considered by some as a waste of resources that could be put to better use. On the topic of resources not being put to use efficiently, the head of an organization said that they do not put people on training for future solutions if they can’t relate to it today.
”... if you do a training that you won’t use within a year… there is no reason to do it.”(R9)
This view is not shared by all organizations, as the organizations whose business model is tied to technology do spend money on the research and adoption. For these organizations, digitalization is their business model and researching and testing new technology is something that is done all the time.
Focus on modernization
A majority of the interviewees said that the guidelines the organizations they worked for had involved some concept of digitalization. The organizations do not want to lag behind and staying modern ensures that they can keep competing in the market. A head of IT that was interviewed had this to say:
“We are to do as much as we can to be efficient and relevant on the digital market”(R4)
Staying modern is considered more important than being leading in the technology race. The risk of investing in something new is not something smaller organizations can take lightly:
“There are many thing to prioritize, we are a small firm and are trying to weigh what we think is important”(R7)
Innovation was also mentioned by the majority of the interviewees. One of the
organizations is continually evaluating suggestions from coworkers that if considered promising would lead to a full scale test. Innovation is not as important to these organizations as modernization. Wasting resources on potentially fruitless
18 technology is not within the business model. This is also touched upon in Resource efficiency.
Cooperation
Working together has been pointed out by some respondents, during the interviews, as an important approach when it comes to development as a whole. The ‘business developer’ of a technique consultant company explained that in the construction industry, there are companies that were working with the same approaches and it was an opportunity to work together in terms of achieving higher level of efficiency:
“ In order to make it work, we must do it together” (R12)
This has been supported by several respondents. An ‘IT- manager’ highlighted the importance of taking advantage of what others were doing and it would be possible by working together. The ‘project manager’ in one of the property owner companies stated that it is quite common that different organizations develop products and working methods together:
“ It’s not so much pressure from other companies, but we could maybe learn and see what they do” (R3)
In that part of the industry with less competitors, some respondents thought that being able to collaborate with other companies was of importance in terms of streamlining the results, which inherently would lead to satisfaction of the client’s requirements on the final product:
“We don't think we have so many competitors, we are colleagues in the industry…” (R9)
Disruption of work procedures
Some of the respondents agreed that the development av digitalization was quite slow in the construction industry. This was dependent on various factors, such as old routines and habits. One of the respondents who worked as a business developer stated that the contract forms are not adapted and modern:
“What is in the bottom of these projects are these contracts(AB, ABT etc.), they are not adopted for anything modern at all” (R12)
Another reason why digitalization has not developed as it should, according to one of the respondents, was the organization's view. There are organizations that see it as an obstacle rather than an opportunity:
“ for most of the companies that have a lot of people and incorporated processes and then new opportunities arise and it can be distraction to test them all the time” (R12)
This is also confirmed by one of the project managers who defined digitalisation initially as a difficulty but still something necessary. This point of view depended on difficulties to change of the old routines that have been used for a long time and challenges to start working in new ways:
“More a necessary evil perhaps, at the same time much has worked in all these years and it becomes difficult to let go, then you do not want to be first out with things” (R11)
19 According to some respondents, working with old routines needed to be updated.
Based on the opinion of the ‘IT-manager’ this would be possible by changing the business models which was identified as a difficult process but still worthy. Another respondent highlighted this by explaining digitalization from a different perspective and seeing it as an opportunity to create changes:
“ We probably have to do something because we cannot sit and do as we always have done, because in the end we will be overtaken … digitalization creates the opportunity to break into those structures, you don’t have to have an actor who is expert in every part and there are other ways to learn and collect the data ” (R6)
Respondent R8 also mentioned that older generations of workers may have
difficulties with new technology, as a 60-year old technician would have problems working in new ways and with new technologies.
Future value
Something that contrasts the notion of digitalization being too costly or time consuming is that many of the respondents (about half), said that digital technologies would become more valuable in the future. As either the cost and usability would improve or that the business landscape would make it a requirement to use new digital technologies as it would become:
“Eventually inevitable” (R6)
As (R6) said on the topic of digitalization. For AR/VR/BIM the interviewees claimed that these technologies would improve time optimization and reduce errors in the design of constructions. They would also make information more accessible as 3D models are better at conveying information. A common theme of the responses was that most of them could see potential value in these technologies. A majority also hopes that the technology becomes cheaper and more user-friendly, as they believe that it is indeed the future of construction to use these technologies.
“But after a while when you’ve built in the technology and contractors have gotten further in their development then I believe that it is absolutely, like, the future” (R8)
More Effort
When it comes to digitalization of the workflow, almost a third of the respondents noted that the companies they worked for, could devote more resources to digitize the workflow. Respondent 4, who work as an ‘IT manager’, stated that there was always something that could be improved, however there has to be a balance when considering digitalization:
“I can say that much more could be done and we can spend more resources.
From the company's perspective, we need to have a balance between how much money we invest on new development versus how much money we deliver as profit” (R4)
Another respondent, who worked as a ‘project manager’ for a longer time, told us that the organization had sufficient resources, but the development of digitalization
20 in the organization did not go so fast and it could depend on the lack of
understandings of needs and requirements:
“ It maybe does not go so fast but we have the resources”(R5)
That some organizations have resources but still do not use them to digitalize the workflow could be a matter of resource efficiency that earlier has been presented.
One of the respondents explained this to depend on priorities and what was declared to be the highest and least priority within the organization's framework.
“There are many thing to prioritize, we are a small firm and are trying to weigh what we think is important” (R7)
However, according to another of the respondents who worked as ‘business
developer’, the matter that some organizations do not devote sufficient resources to digitalize the workflow was quite ok, although it seems important to do more:
“You could always do more but I have no frustration that more resources are not devoted”(R6)
Necessity
Being able to identify needs and requirements of clients and employees, were identified as important factors by many respondents. It is also important to take consideration to which demands are set by the organization and the management.
Regarding the necessity of tools such as BIM, one of the respondents who worked within installation mentioned that tools such as BIM have existed for many years.
Although there are many advantages to using BIM, it has been found that the the tool has not been required by clients:
“My experience shows that, when it comes to clients, it is not [BIM]
something that is demanded” (R9)
The fact that there is no demand may lead to less resources and investment in both software and education purchases:
“If it is required to use a certain digital tool then vi buy it in educations and softwares” (R9)
Furthermore, another respondent who worked with software development also highlighted the importance of taking into account client’s needs and requirements.
This means that the focus should be on who the user is and what types of
requirements exist. In general, digitalization should facilitate the work and it should not be perceived as something difficult:
“We can not just focus on technology but we should also think about who the user is” (R13)
The amount of resources an organization devotes on digitalization of the workflow depends also on the type of clients and their set requirements, another respondent noted:
“ It depends on what type of clients and project you work with and what is demanded”(R10)
One of the respondents, regarding the use of BIM, stated that the management has not demanded to use BIM and that was the reason the tool was not used as it should:
21
“It is the management that should be interested and they have not demanded it yet” (R5)
However, there were other companies that had demanded the use of BIM in all phases, according to one of the respondents who worked as a ‘digital property developer’:
“The requirement is that BIM should be used in all new productions and also for major renovations and additions” (R1)
This respondent explained earlier in the interview that the CEO of the organization was willing to invest in digitalization and this was considered a priority.
When it comes to use of AR/VR, there have been some companies that did not really see a need to use this technology in their project. One of the ‘project managers’
explained the reason why they did not use AR/VR was due to no requirements from the organization that consultants should use them and due to high cost of those tools:
“We have estimated that it costs a lot” (R5)
Furthermore, another respondent explained that it was about the perceptions of clients about those tools and that would affect their requirements:
“If the client requires, then we use it” (R13)
Information accessibility
The contributive properties of AR/VR is known to many of the respondents. Here it is important to differentiate individuals from the organization. This part pertains to the individuals views, as many of the respondents had a position that concerned IT in some way. Visualization of various things in different phases was presented by
almost all respondents. Being able to draw information from models and visualizing how the finished product was supposed to become were common answers.
“You can get a clearer picture of quarters and how roads and such could look like when it’s completed, maybe compare different options easier than you can today” (R5)
Many also believe that through AR one would find errors much earlier in the process, and the models could easier be revised. As information communication is a constant issue within many industries, being able to easily convey the finished product for potential buyers or municipalities is considered as something very valuable, or even just for the builders so all are on the same page on what is supposed to be built.
“... then this scanning would I like to implement more...to get a better
description of what things are and how they are to be maintenanced, as it is regular people that sit on the board and it is good to use these tools for them to have a better understanding. The more complicated things that are put there the more we have to explain these things in a smooth way . “(R11) Depending on the interface of the software and hardware, AR could also make information more readily available to newer individuals in a project. Making the information flow smoother and more effective. However, management must make sure that only relevant information is imported to the BIM model, this is for any possible case concerning BIM with or without AR integration. As a BIM model grows
