File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Bug or feature? Institutional misalignments between construction technology and venture capital

TitleBug or feature? Institutional misalignments between construction technology and venture capital
Authors
KeywordsAEC
construction robotics
entrepreneurship
Institutional logic
new practice
Issue Date18-Sep-2024
PublisherTaylor and Francis Group
Citation
Construction Management and Economics, 2024, v. 43, n. 2, p. 130-152 How to Cite?
AbstractDespite substantial investments into new technologies, the adoption of systemic innovations such as construction robotics remains limited. Therefore, this study investigates the discrepancy between the assumed advantages of construction technologies and their actual performance during practical implementation, using construction robotics as the empirical case. Through an abductive thematic analysis of 127 interviews across Europe and North America, we identify six enablers of institutional misalignment: cognitive frame differences, divergent time horizons, conflicting market strategies, product versus revenue focus, varying risk tolerances, and information asymmetry. These misalignments between startup founders’ technological logic and investors’ economic logic constrain adoption, emphasizing the influence of institutional dynamics over technological feasibility. Our findings suggest these challenges are not unique to construction robotics but may extend to other emerging construction technologies. This highlights the critical need for aligning institutional logics to fully harness the potential of innovation in construction.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/362559
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 3.0
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.874

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWalzer, Alexander N.-
dc.contributor.authorTan, Tan-
dc.contributor.authorGraser, Konrad-
dc.contributor.authorHall, Daniel M.-
dc.date.accessioned2025-09-26T00:36:08Z-
dc.date.available2025-09-26T00:36:08Z-
dc.date.issued2024-09-18-
dc.identifier.citationConstruction Management and Economics, 2024, v. 43, n. 2, p. 130-152-
dc.identifier.issn0144-6193-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/362559-
dc.description.abstractDespite substantial investments into new technologies, the adoption of systemic innovations such as construction robotics remains limited. Therefore, this study investigates the discrepancy between the assumed advantages of construction technologies and their actual performance during practical implementation, using construction robotics as the empirical case. Through an abductive thematic analysis of 127 interviews across Europe and North America, we identify six enablers of institutional misalignment: cognitive frame differences, divergent time horizons, conflicting market strategies, product versus revenue focus, varying risk tolerances, and information asymmetry. These misalignments between startup founders’ technological logic and investors’ economic logic constrain adoption, emphasizing the influence of institutional dynamics over technological feasibility. Our findings suggest these challenges are not unique to construction robotics but may extend to other emerging construction technologies. This highlights the critical need for aligning institutional logics to fully harness the potential of innovation in construction.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherTaylor and Francis Group-
dc.relation.ispartofConstruction Management and Economics-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectAEC-
dc.subjectconstruction robotics-
dc.subjectentrepreneurship-
dc.subjectInstitutional logic-
dc.subjectnew practice-
dc.titleBug or feature? Institutional misalignments between construction technology and venture capital-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/01446193.2024.2401818-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85204245648-
dc.identifier.volume43-
dc.identifier.issue2-
dc.identifier.spage130-
dc.identifier.epage152-
dc.identifier.eissn1466-433X-
dc.identifier.issnl0144-6193-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats