Implementing Digital Visual Management: Case Studies on Barriers and Enablers.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	Implementing Digital Visual Management: Case Studies on Barriers and Enablers.
Authors:	Reinbold, Ana¹ ana.reinbold@aalto.fi, Lappalainen, Eelon² eelon.lappalainen@aalto.fi, Uusitalo, Petri² petri.uusitalo@aalto.fi, Seppänen, Olli³ olli.seppanen@aalto.fi, Peltokorpi, Antti³ antti.peltokorpi@aalto.fi
Source:	Lean Construction Journal. 2025, p45-71. 27p.
Subjects:	Situational awareness, Project management, Continuous improvement process, Architectural engineering, Adoption of ideas, Theory of constraints, Facilitators (Persons), Data visualization
Abstract:	Question: The architecture, engineering and construction industry (AEC) has an increasing interest in achieving better situational awareness (SA) in complex projects. The implementation of digital visual management (DVM) tools as a means of communication to increase SA in AEC projects has the potential to simplify information dissemination. What are the barriers faced during the implementation of DVM? Is it possible to identify factors that can facilitate implementation? Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to identify the barriers encountered during the implementation of DVM and to identify possible countermeasures to overcome such barriers. Research Method: 21 interviews were conducted with project management professionals who implemented DVM in four projects in Finland. Findings: Barriers include technological limitations on data collection and sharing of information, cultural mistrust among project participants, and increased work for data collection. On the other hand, the findings show that lean principles, such as the openness of the environment to share information, the standardization of work, and continuous improvement, have the potential to facilitate DVM implementation. Limitations: Interviews as a research method are limited due to their subjective nature. In addition, the interviews were limited to Finnish projects and complex infrastructure project management professionals. Thus, the results and explanations do not necessarily generalize to other construction industries or project types. Implications: Project teams that desire to implement DVM or that are implementing DVM can now identify expected barriers and plan possible ways of overcoming them during implementation in advance. The identified enablers contribute to knowledge about DVM and can offer practical guidance during the implementation of these strategies. Value for authors: This paper identifies barriers and enablers to the adoption and implementation of DVM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of Lean Construction Journal is the property of Lean Construction Institute and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Engineering Source

Description
Abstract:	Question: The architecture, engineering and construction industry (AEC) has an increasing interest in achieving better situational awareness (SA) in complex projects. The implementation of digital visual management (DVM) tools as a means of communication to increase SA in AEC projects has the potential to simplify information dissemination. What are the barriers faced during the implementation of DVM? Is it possible to identify factors that can facilitate implementation? Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to identify the barriers encountered during the implementation of DVM and to identify possible countermeasures to overcome such barriers. Research Method: 21 interviews were conducted with project management professionals who implemented DVM in four projects in Finland. Findings: Barriers include technological limitations on data collection and sharing of information, cultural mistrust among project participants, and increased work for data collection. On the other hand, the findings show that lean principles, such as the openness of the environment to share information, the standardization of work, and continuous improvement, have the potential to facilitate DVM implementation. Limitations: Interviews as a research method are limited due to their subjective nature. In addition, the interviews were limited to Finnish projects and complex infrastructure project management professionals. Thus, the results and explanations do not necessarily generalize to other construction industries or project types. Implications: Project teams that desire to implement DVM or that are implementing DVM can now identify expected barriers and plan possible ways of overcoming them during implementation in advance. The identified enablers contribute to knowledge about DVM and can offer practical guidance during the implementation of these strategies. Value for authors: This paper identifies barriers and enablers to the adoption and implementation of DVM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	15551369
DOI:	10.60164/3ebgqeshn