Adoption of smart contracts in the construction industry: an institutional analysis of drivers and barriers

Abstract

Purpose

The construction industry has arrived at a crossroads of rapid technological progress. While it is foreseen that the advent of new construction technologies will disrupt the construction industry’s future, such disruptions often create the ideal environment for innovation. As poor payment practices continue to plague the construction industry, the advent of smart contracts has created an opportunity to rectify the inherent flaws in the mitigation of payment problems in traditional construction contracts. Given the intrinsic resistance of construction firms to such revolutionary changes, this study aims to understand the various factors influencing the adoption of smart contracts in the Singapore construction industry.

Design/methodology/approach

A mixed method was adopted involving quantifying respondents’ perceptions of the factors influencing smart contract adoption, and validation from a group of interviewees on the matter. Out of 461 registered quantity surveyor members contacted via the Singapore institute of surveyors and valuers website, 55 respondents took part in the survey. This is followed by semi-structured interviews to validate the survey results.

Findings

The findings indicate that construction firms have neither a significant knowledge of nor willingness to adopt smart contracts. A total of 29 institutional factors were also identified that significantly influence the adoption of smart contracts. The quantitative findings were further reinforced by qualitative interviews with five industry experts.

Originality/value

With recognition of and the successful formulation of the significant institutional drivers and barriers, the key findings of this study will be integral in driving the commercial adoption of smart contracts within the construction industry.

Citation

Shang, G., Pheng, L.S. and Zhong Xia, R.L. (2024), "Adoption of smart contracts in the construction industry: an institutional analysis of drivers and barriers", Construction Innovation, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 1401-1421. https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-03-2022-0066