全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用：99美元
投递稿件

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

Understanding the Adoption of Additive Manufacturing in Construction: A Sociological Perspective through a Revised TAM Model

DOI: 10.4236/aasoci.2024.1410035, PP. 517-536

Keywords: Professional Identity, Organizational Change, Resistance to Change, Technology Acceptance, Sociology of Innovation

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

This article examines the adoption of additive manufacturing, or 3D printing, in the construction sector, with a focus on the sociological resistance to this innovation. Despite the clear advantages of this technology, including reduced costs and construction time, its large-scale deployment remains limited, mainly due to reluctance from entrepreneurs. The study adopts a sociological perspective to analyze the relationship between technology and professional identity, drawing on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). This study proposes a revised version of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), which integrates professional identity as a key factor in technology adoption. The model also incorporates additional variables such as contextual organizational factors, organizational support, and professional social networks, to provide a deeper analysis of the barriers to the adoption of 3D printing in this sector.

 References

[1]  Ajzen, I. (1985). From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior. In J. Kuhl, & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action Control: From Cognition to Behavior (pp. 11-39). Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69746-3_2
[2]  Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t
[3]  Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1975). A Bayesian Analysis of Attribution Processes. Psychological Bulletin, 82, 261-277.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076477
[4]  Balogun, V. A., Otanocha, O. B., & Ibhadode, A. O. (2018). The Impact of 3D Printing Technology to the Nigerian Manufacturing GDP. Modern Mechanical Engineering, 8, 140-157.
https://doi.org/10.4236/mme.2018.82010
[5]  Bandura, A. (1985). Model of Causality in Social Learning Theory. In M. J. Mahoney, & A. Freeman (Eds.), Cognition and Psychotherapy (pp. 81-99). Springer US.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-7562-3_3
[6]  Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action (pp. 23-28). Prentice Hall.
[7]  Beck, U. (2001). La politique dans la société du risque. Revue du MAUSS, 17, 376-392.
https://doi.org/10.3917/rdm.017.0376
[8]  Bogue, R. (2013). 3D Printing: The Dawn of a New Era in Manufacturing? Assembly Automation, 33, 307-311.
https://doi.org/10.1108/aa-06-2013-055
[9]  Bourdon, I., & Hollet-Haudebert, S. (2009). Pourquoi contribuer à des bases de connaissances? Une exploration des facteurs explicatifs à la lumière du modèle UTAUT. Systèmes d’information & management, 14, 9-36.
https://doi.org/10.3917/sim.091.0009
[10]  Bourell, D., Kruth, J. P., Leu, M., Levy, G., Rosen, D., Beese, A. M. et al. (2017). Materials for Additive Manufacturing. CIRP Annals, 66, 659-681.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2017.05.009
[11]  Buswell, R. A., Soar, R. C., Gibb, A. G. F., & Thorpe, A. (2007). Freeform Construction: Mega-Scale Rapid Manufacturing for Construction. Automation in Construction, 16, 224-231.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2006.05.002
[12]  Campion, M. A., & Lord, R. G. (1982). A Control Systems Conceptualization of the Goal-Setting and Changing Process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 30, 265-287.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(82)90221-5
[13]  Campion, M. A., Papper, E. M., & Medsker, G. J. (1996). Relations between Work Team Characteristics and Effectiveness: A Replication and Extension. Personnel Psychology, 49, 429-452.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1996.tb01806.x
[14]  Canet, E., & David, A. (2009, May). Stratégie en action et capacités organisationnelles: une comparaison entre le balanced scorecard et la méthode 5 steps. In Colloque Management des capacités organisationnelles, ACFAS 2009 (pp. 95-114).
[15]  Chang, S.-H., Chou, C.-H., & Yang, J.-M. (2010). The Literature Review of Technology Acceptance Model: A Study of the Bibliometric Distributions. In PACIS 2010 Proceedings (p. 158).
http://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2010/158
[16]  Chunhua, S., & Guangqing, S. (2020). Application and Development of 3D Printing in Medical Field. Modern Mechanical Engineering, 10, 25-33.
https://doi.org/10.4236/mme.2020.103003
[17]  Davis, F. D. (1989). Technology Acceptance Model: TAM. In M. N. Al-Suqri, & A. S. Al-Aufi (Eds.), Information Seeking Behavior and Technology Adoption (pp. 205-219). IGI Global.
[18]  Davis, F. D. (1993). User Acceptance of Information Technology: System Characteristics, User Perceptions and Behavioral Impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38, 475-487.
[19]  Davis, F. D., & Granić, A. (2024). The Technology Acceptance Model: 30 Years of TAM. Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45274-2
[20]  Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1111-1132.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x
[21]  de Ryckel, C., & Delvigne, F. (2010). La construction de l’identité par le récit. Psychothérapies, 30, 229-240.
https://doi.org/10.3917/psys.104.0229
[22]  Dubar, C. (2000). La socialisation. Construction des identités individuelles et collectives. Armand Colin.
[23]  Dubar, C. (2001). La construction sociale de l’insertion professionnelle. Éducation et Sociétés, 7, 23-36.
https://doi.org/10.3917/es.007.0023
[24]  Dubar, C. (2007). Les sociologues face au langage et à l’individu. Langage et société, 121, 29-43.
https://doi.org/10.3917/ls.121.0029
[25]  Dubar, C. (2021). Les recherches en sciences sociales et les dispositifs publics en France: Une histoire compliquée.
[26]  Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1976). Misconceptions about the Fishbein Model: Reflections on a Study by Songer-Nocks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 12, 579-584.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(76)90036-6
[27]  Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2011). Predicting and Changing Behavior: The Reasoned Action Approach. Psychology Press.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203838020
[28]  Ford, S., & Despeisse, M. (2016). Additive Manufacturing and Sustainability: An Exploratory Study of the Advantages and Challenges. Journal of Cleaner Production, 137, 1573-1587.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.150
[29]  Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking Qualitative Rigor in Inductive Research: Notes on the Gioia Methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16, 15-31.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112452151
[30]  Handy, C. B. (1994). The Age of Paradox. Harvard Business Press.
https://books.google.com/books?id=v1baPx03VpwC
[31]  Hsiao, C. H., & Yang, C. (2010). Predicting the Travel Intention to Take High Speed Rail among College Students. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 13, 277-287.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2010.04.011
[32]  Jawadi, N. (2014). Facteurs-clés de l’adoption des systèmes d’information dans la grande distribution alimentaire: une approche par l’UTAUT. In 17ème Colloque de l’Association Information et Management (AIM) (pp. 21-22).
[33]  Jonsen, K., & Jehn, K. A. (2009). Using Triangulation to Validate Themes in Qualitative Studies. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 4, 123-150.
https://doi.org/10.1108/17465640910978391
[34]  Koners, U., & Goffin, K. (2007). Learning from Postproject Reviews: A Cross-Case Analysis. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24, 242-258.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2007.00248.x
[35]  Laruellle, F. (1992). Théorie des identités. Presses Universitaires de France.
https://doi.org/10.3917/puf.larue.1992.01
[36]  Leyens, J.-P., & Yzerbyt, V. (1997). Psychologie sociale (Vol. 77). Editions Mardaga.
[37]  Mami, F. (2015). Éco-efficience et analyse des coûts du cycle de vie: Développement d’un outil d’aide à la conception dans l’industrie aéronautique. PhD Thesis, École Polytechnique de Montréal.
https://publications.polymtl.ca/1738/1/2015_FaresMami.pdf
[38]  Perkins, I., & Skitmore, M. (2015). Three-Dimensional Printing in the Construction Industry: A Review. International Journal of Construction Management, 15, 1-9.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2015.1012136
[39]  Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations: Modifications of a Model for Telecommunications. In M.-W. Stoetzer, & A. Mahler (Eds.), Die Diffusion von Innovationen in der Telekommunikation (pp. 25-38). Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-79868-9_2
[40]  Roy, M., Chartier, A., Crête, J., & Poulin, D. (2015). Factors Influencing E-Government Use in Non-Urban Areas. Electronic Commerce Research, 15, 349-363.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-015-9193-4
[41]  Royer, I. (2002). Les procédures décisionnelles et le développement de nouveaux produits. Revue française de gestion, 3-4, 7-25.
[42]  Sainsaulieu, R. (1997). Sociologie de l’entreprise: Organisation, culture et développement. Presses de la Fondation nationale des sciences politiques.
[43]  Senge, P. (1990). La cinquième discipline (trad.). Editions First.
[44]  Standing, G. (2011). Behavioural Conditionality: Why the Nudges Must Be Stopped—An Opinion Piece. Journal of Poverty and Social Justice, 19, 27-38.
https://doi.org/10.1332/175982711x559136
[45]  Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. M. (1997). Grounded Theory in Practice. Sage.
[46]  Susskind, R. (2010). Legal Informatics: A Personal Appraisal of Context and Progress. European Journal of Law and Technology, 1, 88-110.
[47]  Tay, L., Zyphur, M., & Batz, C. L. (2018). Income and Subjective Well-Being: Review, Synthesis, and Future Research. In E. Diener, S. Oishi, & L. Tay (Eds.), Handbook of Well-being. DEF Publishers.
[48]  Topalov, C. (1973). Capital et propriété foncière: Introduction à l’étude des politiques foncières urbaines. Centre de sociologie urbaine Paris.
[49]  Topalov, C. (2017). Les promoteurs immobiliers: Contribution à l’analyse de la production capitaliste du logement en France (Vol. 4). Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.
[50]  Turner, J. C., & Tajfel, H. (1986). The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior. Psychology of Intergroup Relations, 5, 7-24.
[51]  Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions. Decision Sciences, 39, 273-315.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
[52]  Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. Management Science, 46, 186-204.
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
[53]  Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27, 425-478.
https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
[54]  Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology (Vol. 1). Univ. of California Press.
[55]  Whitley Jr., B. E., & Keith-Spiegel, P. (2001). Academic Dishonesty: An Educator’s Guide. Psychology Press.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410604279
[56]  Whyte, D. (2014). Regimes of Permission and State-Corporate Crime. State Crime Journal 3, 237.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133