Research Dissertation: Barriers of Modular Construction in Australia

This research dissertation investigates the barriers to the adoption of modular construction in Australia. The study begins with an overview of the construction industry in Australia and the potential of modular construction as an innovative solution to industry challenges. The research employs a mixed-methods approach, including a literature review to identify theoretical barriers and a survey strategy to validate these barriers within the context of the Australian construction industry. The survey involved key decision-makers from various engineering, architectural, and manufacturing companies, exploring their perspectives on the challenges associated with modular construction. The research identifies and analyzes factors such as cost, skills and experience, and industry familiarity as significant barriers. The findings are interpreted within a framework of innovation diffusion, providing valuable insights into the obstacles that hinder the widespread adoption of modular construction in Australia, and the potential for overcoming these challenges.

RESEARCH DISSERTATION ( BARRIERS OF MODULAR
CONSTRUCTION IN AUSTRALIA”)
By Name
Course
Instructor
Institution
Location
Date

Research Questions
 To identify the main characteristics of the Australian industry of the construction.
 To identify modular construction potential as a practice of innovation in the construction
industry of Australia.
 To properly synthesize the related literature to the diffusion of innovation in the context
of organizations within Australia utilizing modular construction.
Research Methodology
Research Design
In Australia, as a percentage of overall market place of the construction, permanent modular
construction has basically lagged the rest parts of this universe (Sutrisna et al 2019). This is
despite the fact it has been identified as promising innovation in constructions that has the
potential to effectively solve some o the significant challenges facing the industry of construction
in Australia. Majority of the studies which are related to modular construction have been
technical in nature besides focusing on the issues of the engineering and design (Lacey et al
2018). The research work on this particular study considers factors beyond limitation on the
same. In this particular chapter, there is provision of the design of the research as well as
methodology. The selection of the participants of the survey, the approach of the study, the
development of the questions of the survey and finally the used methods in the analysis of data
from survey has been detailed as shown (Smith and Rice 2017).
Research Design General Approach
Qualitative method

First, there was literature review which was carried out and analysis of the secondary data done.
This involved identification seven theoretical barriers which were non-technical in their nature to
the adoption of modular construction in broader perspective (Hammad and Akbarnezhad 2017).
Quantitative methods
Secondly there was use of survey strategy to assist in the collection of the primary data which
were later used in the validation of the theoretical proposition that the identified seven potential
issues were actually barriers and the validity of the factors tested in the context of Australian
engineering, architectural and construction industry (Navaratnam et al 2019). There has been
recognition for a long time that every scientific inquiry method has had limitations. This is the
reason why choosing of the methods for doing such studies involves tradeoffs. A research
strategy for survey was chosen for this particular study while considering the following reasons:
 Surveys are generally known to be cost effective as far as collection of the information is
concerned.
 Surveys are dependable
 They are flexible
 Also they are extensive (Salama, Salah, and Moselhi 2017)
The cost –effectiveness as well s flexibility of the survey allowed the interviews for this
particular paper to carried out either by phone or in person with several respondents across the
entire geographical area at relatively cheaper cost. Through the processes of the survey, detailed
as well as extensive answers were sought from the specialized (Woo 2017). Also the questions
which have been perceived to be relatively complexes were explored. In addition, it allowed for
the conclusions to be drawn from more accurate samples collected from the region. Finally the

dependability on the results from the surveys which have been graded with high degree have
been known to originate from unambiguous and candid answers which were received from the
respondents who had been assured that their responses would be treated with as high
confidentiality as possible (Sutrisna, Lofthouse and Goulding 2017). This was due to the fact
that some of the participants in the survey included competitors. The choosing of the key
decision makers was based on their ability to have glued commitments to their respective
companies as far as the adoption of the construction innovation called modular building is
concerned.
Respondents of the survey
One of the key decision makers in relation to the unit analysis of engineering, architectural and
manufacturing contracting company was based on either familiarity with or involvement in the
modular construction. There was random choosing of corporation which was made up of two
engineering firms, two architectural companies, three general contractors and finally three
modular manufacturers whose details were enrolled for the exercise of the survey. In this
particular exercise, there was no requirement for the companies to have adopted innovations in
the modular construction at every level (Banihashemi, Tabadkani and Hosseini 2017).
This implies that some of the companies were having more experience with innovation of the
modular construction than others. It considered the aspects such as engineering and modular
design. Each of the corporation was represented in the study by one key decision maker. Each
decision maker was therefore expected to speak on behalf of the company (Qiu et al 2018). They
included mechanical engineer at one of the recognized company, principal architect from a
company of architecture, electrical engineer at two levels of operations one being chief executive

and the other being executive officer at the modular manufacturers associates. Also in the mix
were the senior managers of the project r from the general contracting firms.
Format of the Survey
General information and data were collected were collected from every respondent of the survey
about their professional and organizational views on the issues which faces the industry of the
modular construction. All key decision makers, respondents in various organizations were
requested as to contribute as representatives of the respective companies. In general, the survey
was made up of 22 questions of multi-part interviews. Also included were both no and yes
questions besides long-answer questions. The interviews were conducted both in person and over
the phone. The answers were manually recorded and digitally transcribed at later date
(MEGAPROJECTS 2019).
Data Analysis
There was undertaking of the qualitative analysis on the received responses to the dichotomous
questions of the survey. This extended to the analysis of the content of the answers of the
respondents. This was necessary in opening up the open-ended questions of the survey which
were used in the determination of the trends (Pan, Yang and Yang 2018).
This was followed by the calculations of the statics while using the respondent’s survey results
as well as questions. The ratios of the respondent’s survey which felt specific challenge was
found to be a barrier to the adoption of modular as per the calculations. Besides identification of
no or yes of every challenge as the critical barrier, there was classification low, moderate or high.
The perceived seriousness of every challenge was calculation through assignment of dummy

variable. Such kind of the perception was calculated by the use of only same answers that had
potentially identified the challenge to be a barrier (Salama, Moselhi and Al-Hussein 2018).
Interpretations of the survey
The survey results were interpreted both within the seven potential barriers framework while
making reference to the adoption of the modular to the industry of the construction and through
the lens of the model of the five factors for the innovation’s diffusions in the same field of the
construction in Australia. The advantage of this kind of the approach was that it allowed for the
examination of the potential seven barriers while considering them under the broader scope of
the model of the five factors.
Significance of the study
The modular construction together with the associated fabrication processes and techniques in
the off-site has been identified as one of the innovations with the five greatest and potentially
effective as afar as productivity and efficiency is concerned. In all the cases of the latent
potential in modular construction ,greater part of the investigations which are identified with
particular development have been specialized in nature other than concentrating on the issues of
the building and structure. The exploration deals with this specific examination while focusing
on the variables past constraint on the equivalent concept (Weerasinghe et al 2017).
In this specific section, there is arrangement of the plan of the examination just as approach. The
determination of the members of the study, the methodology of the examination, the
advancement of the inquiries of the review lastly the utilized strategies in the investigation of
information from overview has been explained properly in the research work. In all the cases of

critical modular construction, there is usually a characteristic resistance to the adoption of the
innovation of modular concept by the industries of the construction in broader perspective.
There is a general promise which is held the modular building which can assist in overcoming
the challenges which apparently affects the construction industry in Australia. This particular
study was found to be very necessary to assist in the identification of the potential barriers to the
application of this new innovation called modular construction concept. Through this particular
innovation, the perceived challenges such as general quality, insufficient mechanization in the
process of the production, architects unfamiliar with the work of the design, contractors
unfamiliar with the products which are modular in nature, engineers who are unfamiliar with the
requirements of the modular design among others are effectively sorted out. In summary, the
study was projected to increase the vibrancy in the industry of the construction through
implementation of the modular construction as a new concept or innovation.

REFERENCES
Banihashemi, S., Tabadkani, A. and Hosseini, M.R., 2017. Modular coordination-based
generative algorithm to optimize construction waste. Procedia engineering, 180, pp.631-639.
Hammad, A.W.A. and Akbarnezhad, A., 2017. Modular vs conventional construction: a multi-
criteria framework approach. In ISARC. Proceedings of the International Symposium on
Automation and Robotics in Construction (Vol. 34). Vilnius Gediminas Technical University,
Department of Construction Economics & Property.
Lacey, A.W., Chen, W., Hao, H. and Bi, K., 2018. Structural response of modular buildings–an
overview. Journal of Building Engineering, 16, pp.45-56.
Lacey, A.W., Chen, W., Hao, H. and Bi, K., 2018. Structural Response of Modular Building
Subjected to Earthquake Loading. In 13th International Conference on Steel, Space and
Composite Structures (Vol. 31).
MEGAPROJECTS, O., 2019. CHAPTER FIFTEEN THE IMPACT OF MODULAR
CONSTRUCTION ON LNG MEGAPROJECTS MARTIN RICHARDSON, DEAN BORG,
ANTHONY WOOD. Perspectives in Project Management: A Selection of Masters Degree
Research Projects, p.285.
Navaratnam, S., Ngo, T., Gunawardena, T. and Henderson, D., 2019. Performance review of
prefabricated building systems and future research in Australia. Buildings, 9(2), p.38.
Pan, W., Yang, Y. and Yang, L., 2018. High-rise modular building: ten-year journey and future
development. In Construction Research Congress 2018 (pp. 523-532).

Qiu, X.T., Yao, R., Zhou, W.F., Liu, M.D., Liu, Q., Song, Y.L., Young, D.J., Zhang, W.H. and
Lang, J.P., 2018. Rectangle and [2] catenane from cluster modular construction. Chemical
communications, 54(33), pp.4168-4171.
Salama, T., Moselhi, O. and Al-Hussein, M., 2018. Modular Industry Characteristics and
Barriers to its Increased Market Share. Modular and Offsite Construction (MOC) Summit
Proceedings, 1(1).
Salama, T., Salah, A. and Moselhi, O., 2017. Configuration of hybrid modular construction for
residential buildings. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 8(2),
p.106.
Smith, R.E. and Rice, T., 2017. Permanent modular construction: construction performance.
In Offsite Architecture (pp. 135-153). Routledge.
Sutrisna, M., Cooper-Cooke, B., Goulding, J. and Ezcan, V., 2019. Investigating the cost of
offsite construction housing in Western Australia. International Journal of Housing Markets and
Analysis, 12(1), pp.5-24.
Sutrisna, M., Lofthouse, B. and Goulding, J., 2017. Exploring the potential of offsite
construction to alleviate constraints to house building in Western Australia. WELCOME TO
DELEGATES IRC 2017, p.896.
Weerasinghe, P., Samarasinghe, T., Gunawardena, T., Nguyen, K., Mendis, P., Ngo, T. and Aye,
L., AN OPTIMUM CONSTRUCTION STRATEGY FOR MULTI-STORY RESIDENTIAL
PREFABRICATED MODULAR BUILDINGS. 2017, p.896.

Woo, J., 2017. A post-occupancy evaluation of a modular multi-residential development in
Melbourne, Australia. Procedia Engineering, 180, pp.365-372.