On-site inspections: the shift from forms to digital capture

According to several studies, most building defects originate during production or construction (Josephson and Hammarlund 1999). Much time and effort is spent on inspecting and documenting construction defects in buildings (Nguyen et al. 2015). Furthermore, they are costly – rectifying is assumed to account for up to 15% of the total construction costs (Yue et al. 2019). Inspections may be carried out during construction and during use, as well as during takeover (Nguyen et al. 2015). While prevention would be preferable, it is not always possible or even the most cost-effective (Vaxevanidis and Petropoulos 2008), so there will always be a need for appraisal and correction of defects.

Digitization, headed by building information modeling (BIM), has taken over as the preferred method for everything from design collaboration to scheduling, cost planning, and facility management, improving efficiency and quality along the whole chain (Miettinen and Paavola 2014). Digital tools are not reserved for designers and consultants at their desks, as on-site workers are also embracing the technology with access to the three-dimensional (3D) model on mobile devices. Along with this development, numerous associated mobile apps are made available for the construction phase, offering tools for anything from model viewing and safety monitoring (Azhar et al. 2015) to note taking, invoicing, and form filling – the latter going under the label of workflow apps.

Mobile apps specifically designed for construction defect management, commonly called snagging apps, are meant to simplify surveys, inspections, reporting, communication, and more, and thus improve the handover process. Instead of filling out and updating detailed paper forms describing the nature, location, responsible person, and status of each issue and taking steps to communicate this information to the right persons, snapshots are taken, the position is indicated (with the use of GPS) on a floor plan, and instructions are sent directly to the responsible people. The information is readily understood, and when action has been taken, feedback is immediately given and the issue is closed. All can be handled on smartphones or tablets (Bowden et al. 2006).

This represents a significant change in work procedures. As with all institutional change, it might happen that the transition is resisted (Oliver 1991). This might be because the new technology is perceived not to be useful or found to be difficult to use (Davis 1985). It is important for change to happen that the users experience relative advantage of new solutions over the familiar processes that they replace (Rogers 2010).

Wishing to answer the question “Will digital defect management systems be accepted by the parties involved on construction sites?”, we conducted a case study and interviews with project managers and on-site workers on various building projects in Norway, where the “* Capture” snagging app (RIB 2019) was deployed. The interview questions were guided by the technology acceptance model (TAM) (Davis 1985), our chosen theoretical approach. Thus, we hope to disclose any barriers to the employment of a relatively new technology that might improve the quality of buildings under construction.

An early version of this study has been presented at the Creative Construction Conference 2019, and the conference paper was published in the proceedings (Rolfsen et al. 2019). This is an extended version of that paper. Some of the text has been modified, and citations have been added. Furthermore, the respondents have been approached with follow-up questions regarding actual continued use of the technology.

This article starts with an introduction to the theoretical lens; next, the software and our research method are described. Findings are presented and analyzed according to the theoretical construct, and finally the discussion and conclusion answer the research questions.

Several theoretical models explaining adoption and acceptance of new technology exist (e.g. TAM, unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, actor network theory, and diffusion of innovations) (Merschbrock 2012). The TAM has informed research on the user acceptance of building management systems and research on individual beliefs about the outcomes of BIM use (Davies and Harty 2013; Lowry 2002). TAM can be viewed as an adaptation of the theory of reasoned action to the field of information systems (Venkatesh et al. 2003). The model depicted in Figure 1 builds on the original TAM model introduced by Davis (1989) and the theoretical extensions (e.g., TAM2) suggested by Venkatesh and Davis (2000). Diverging from the original TAM and TAM2 models, the construct names “intention to use” and “usage behavior” have been replaced with “behavioral intention to use” and “actual system use”, respectively. This has been done in accordance with what has been proposed by Venkatesh et al. (2003). TAM suggests that perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use will determine an individual’s intention to use and sees “behavioral intention to use” as a mediator of actual system use. A strong emphasis is placed on the user’s subjective opinion.

Fig. 1

The main TAM constructs are (1) perceived usefulness – “the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would enhance his or her job performance” (Davis et al. 1989), (2) perceived ease of use – “the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would be free of effort” (Davis et al. 1989), (3) behavioral intention to use – users’ intention of use of the system in the future (Venkatesh et al. 2003), and (4) actual system use – users’ continued use of the system for performing work tasks (Venkatesh et al. 2003). TAM has proven its value for explaining how users come to accept and use new technology, making it a good fit for our study (Rolfsen and Merschbrock 2016).

There have been many attempts to extend the model by introducing new factors or disclosing moderators for perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use (Wixom and Todd 2005). In later developments of the theory, Venkatesh et al. introduced moderators such as gender, age, and experience (Venkatesh et al. 2003), some of which we also look at in this paper. A possible criticism of TAM might be that behavioral features play in, so that if someone has an intrinsic motivation to act (e.g., enjoyment) (Davis et al. 2006), he or she will be free to do so. This, however, would not be the case in practical settings where, for instance, organizational rules or resources prevent people from acting freely (Merschbrock and Rolfsen 2016).

A case study was considered appropriate since it allows for exploring “sticky practice based problems where the experience of the actors are important and the context of the action is critical” (Benbasat et al. 1987). The main case study was conducted by three students from Oslo Metropolitan University at an apartment building construction project in Oslo, Norway. The main contractor, Contractor 1, were using a combination of paper and a digital workflow management software for organizing their documents and forms. The workflow management software (called “the traditional method” in the following) had no link to BIM and no “snagging” function. The defect management application “* Capture” was presented to the team of Contractor 1. Next, two separate inspections were carried out with the app on the case site, with a project engineer and a site manager attending. Various functions of the app were explored: registering the project, 2D drawings and involved parties, registering nonconformities, snapping photos and marking their locations in the plans, and linking each issue to the appropriate subcontractor. The students participated in the inspections to get an impression of the users’ benefits from using the program and of their practical understanding of the application itself. Interviews were conducted a couple of weeks after the demonstrations, when the users, including subcontractors, had had a chance to gain some experience with using the system. The data were collected through semi-structured interviews (face to face, Skype, and e-mail) with nine construction professionals working on various sites, as a way to access the interpretations of informants in the field. The interviews were conducted in October 2016, at a point in time when the design and construction had not been finalized. To supplement the research, professionals with three other contractors not involved in the case project were interviewed. Table 1 provides an overview of the interviews conducted. Interview guides were designed based on the TAM.

The follow-up questions regarding actual system use were presented to the managers in November 2019, by e-mail. Two of the project/site managers who had been involved were no longer employed at their firms, but new contacts were made and answers to our questions were obtained. Table 2 shows the overview of follow-up interviews.

The analysis follows the structure suggested by the TAM presented in Section 2. First, the contractors’ perceived usefulness of * Capture for carrying out their work is recounted. Second, the perceived ease of use of the application in the context of on-site construction work is recounted. Third, the behavioral intention to continue using * Capture for construction works as an indicator for actual system use in other projects is presented. Finally, we disclose the firms’ actual continued use of construction defect management systems.

The TAM served well as an analytical tool for explaining user choice of technology in the context of construction projects. Table 3 shows a brief summary of the main findings. The findings indicate that the defect management app tested was viewed as advantageous for various aspects of the building process.

The case study and the results of the interviews show that using IT systems leads to great benefits and significant time savings when dealing with faults and defects during preinspections and handover on construction sites. The interviewees’ views on using various software depend on whether the users see the usefulness and ease of digital tools. In the study, it was found that the users were willing to change their work methods, although they were skeptical at first.

In the group interview with the foremen of the carpenters and the plumbers in the case project, the interviewees explained that when they used the traditional method, they had to print out the forms for registration. Here, the way the registration was structured meant that the registrations collided between the different disciplines’ activities, which made it difficult for the skilled workers to get a clear overview of their own activities. The defect management app solved this problem, since registrations were sent directly to the appropriate recipient. When using the app to register faults and defects on the part of a subcontractor, this subcontractor received a simple message by email stating that a case has been opened. This was one of the positive aspects of the program that made the skilled workers prefer a defect management app over the traditional method. Good collaboration between all the parties involved is a prerequisite for using the technology. This also means having a good flow of communication so that certain problems can be prevented before growing more serious.

Several players in the construction industry are loyal to traditional methods. This is often because site managers and skilled workers prefer to do the job they are used to doing, and because they have a conservative way of thinking that can cause frustration in relation to new work methods. For the case project, gender did not appear to affect the users’ perceptions of usefulness and ease of use, but age and experience with information technologies (ITs) did. This was, however, only a minor problem, mainly because most of the employees were aged between 30 and 50 years and comfortable with using digital systems. The software does not require high IT competence and is easy to use for everyone in the industry. The people responsible for registering faults and defects felt that this was more systematic in the program, and the access to information meant that the parties could easily learn the system. The skilled workers gained interest in using the technology.

The fact that none of the contractors new to * Capture opted for the specific product may seem in contradiction to the theory. However, it is important to note that they all continued to use a mobile app for construction defect management, with the functionalities of snapping photos, registering position on plans (or in a 3D model), writing notes, sending directly to involved parties, filling forms, following up on completion, and filing. While there may be some variance in the sophistication of the software (active link to the BIM model, compatibility with other construction management systems), the interactive, mobile way of working is the same. The decision on which specific product to adopt was to a large degree taken by management and influenced by other factors such as cost, compatibility, and organizational policies. Being interactive systems, it is of great importance that all involved parties in a project use compatible software.

This paper has presented a case study of a construction project where a construction defect management app was used. By basing the study on core concepts of the TAM, it became possible to answer the research question: Will digital defect management systems be accepted by the parties involved on a construction site? Our findings illustrate that the application was perceived as a useful tool to efficiently improve and minimize faults and defects in the completion phase of a building project. It was found that all involved parties saw the app as user-friendly, since it was easy to use and quick to master. The perceptions of managers and skilled workers alike led to a willingness to take the technology into use. In the study, it was furthermore found that such a tool is likely to be adopted for continued use and thereby has a great potential for improving the end quality of construction projects.

Our study is limited in that it only involved one technology application and a handful of respondents. Nevertheless, the findings were mutually consistent and in accordance with the TAM. Further research might uncover which features are most useful and which might be made even more accessible, also for users with limited IT competencies.