In construction, the mirroring of knowledge with tasks increasingly limits firm-level abilities to identify and pursue systemic innovation opportunities. Recent research identifies how integration strategies enable individual projects to break from this trap, but much less is known about potential strategic action of firms to enable systemic innovation. To explore this, a longitudinal comparative case study examines how three entrepreneurial firms – DPR construction, RAD Urban, and Project Frog – in the San Francisco Bay Area describe their own strategic evolution and restructuring of firm boundaries over the past five years to enable greater adoption of digital manufacturing. Each firm has developed a different approach – relational, project-based spinoff; vertical integration; or digital systems integration. Benefits and challenges are identified for each. The approaches are theorized as a form of strategic mirror-breaking intended to redefine the current paradigm of knowledge and task dependencies. They enable the firms to develop products with new system architectures and access more opportunities for innovation in digitally-enabled manufacturing. The paper concludes with discussion of how the identification and characterization of strategies for mirror-breaking enriches understanding of integration for systemic innovation in construction at the firm level. The paper identifies common themes for digitally-enabled manufacturing including the limitations of the current industry structure, the emergence of new hybrid positions, and the opportunity for platforms to provide longitudinal integration.

The construction industry structure resists the adoption of systemic innovations because they cross professional and trade specializations, break industry standards, and redefine how existing modules are produced or fit together. Prior research has identified that vertical and/or horizontal integration in the supply chain makes it far more likely that systemic innovations will be adopted. This paper identifies how nine specific supply chain integration practices (e.g., multiparty contracts, colocated project teams, and digital building information modeling) facilitate mechanisms of supply chain integration and increase the adoption of systemic innovation within the collaborative project delivery of complex projects.

The building sector has a significant potential to reduce the material resource demand needed for construction and therefore, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Digitalization can help to make use of this potential and improve sustainability throughout the entire building’s life cycle. One way to address this potential is through the integration of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) into the building process by employing Building Information Modeling (BIM). BIM can reduce the effort needed to carry out an LCA, and therefore, facilitate the integration into the building process. A review of current industry practice and scientific literature shows that companies are lacking the incentive to apply LCA. If applied, there are two main approaches. Either the LCA is performed in a simplified way at the beginning of the building process using imprecise techniques, or it is done at the very end when all the needed information is available, but it is too late for decision-making. One reason for this is the lack of methods, workflows and tools to implement BIM-LCA integration over the whole building development. Therefore, the main objective of this study is to develop an integrated BIM-LCA method for the entire building process by relating it to an established workflow. To avoid an additional effort for practitioners, an existing structure for cost estimation in the Swiss context is used. The established method is implemented in a tool and used in a case study in Switzerland to test the approach. The results of this study show that LCA can be performed continuously in each building phase over the entire building process using existing Building Information Modeling (BIM) techniques for cost estimation. The main benefit of this approach is that it simplifies the application of LCA in the building process and therefore gives incentives for companies to apply it. Moreover, the re-work caused by the need for re-entering data and the usage of many different software tools that characterize most of the current LCA practices is minimized. Furthermore, decision-making, both at the element and building levels, is supported.