Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract: Computer aided design 共CAD兲 technology is one of the most influential information technology 共IT兲 innovations of the last
four decades. This paper studies the factors that influence the spread of this important IT innovation in the context of the Turkish
architectural design practice. It builds on the innovation diffusion theory which proposes that internal 共i.e., copying behaviors of others兲
and external influence 共i.e., complying with clients’ requirements, changes in government regulations, demand conditions, and consulting
firms’ suggestions兲 factors drive diffusion of an innovation. The paper empirically tests the propositions of innovation diffusion theory by
using three mathematical models: The internal influence model, the external influence model, and the mixed influence model. Research
findings point out that the mixed influence model has the highest exploratory power. They show that the diffusion of CAD technology in
architectural design practice is primarily driven by internal rather than external influence factors. This study is of importance to research-
ers because this is the first application of the influence models to the study of the diffusion of CAD technology in architectural design
practice. It is also of relevance to design practitioners since the findings should provide a useful guide in their decision to adopt or not to
adopt CAD technology.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲0733-9364共2005兲131:10共1135兲
CE Database subject headings: Innovation; Computer aided design; Architecture; Information technology 共IT兲.
冤 冥
1 − exp共− 共b + a兲t兲 it enabled designers to produce three-dimensional visualizations
N共t兲 = m 共6兲 of buildings. The third generation of CAD technology was intro-
a
1 + exp共− 共b + a兲t兲 duced in the late 1980s. The primary purpose of the third genera-
b
tion of CAD technology was to integrate geometric information
Plotting the cumulative distribution of adopters in this influence with nongeometric data and establish associative and parametric
model gives rise to a generalized logistic curve. The shape of this relationships between geometric and nongeometric data. Geomet-
curve is jointly determined by a and b. ric data include the definition of objects in terms of three-
The internal, external, and mixed influence models have been dimensional solids and surfaces expressed by either user defined
commonly used in the marketing domain for explaining the fac- or database-defined parametric information. Nongeometric infor-
tors that underlie the diffusion process and the market potential of mation includes object characteristics such as weights, materials,
durable consumer goods, such as refrigerators, color televisions, strength, etc. The first and second generations of CAD technology
and washers 共Mahajan et al. 1990兲. These models have also been have been widely adopted by architectural design firms. The third
used for exploring the diffusion of administrative 共Teece 1980兲 generation of CAD technology is not as widely adopted yet, as
and technological 共Shao 1999; Teng et al. 2002兲 innovations were previous generations of CAD technology.
among organizations. These research studies reveal that the mixed These three different generations of CAD technology present a
influence model is a powerful model for explaining the diffusion number of opportunities to architectural design firms, including
processes of organizational innovations. The relative influence of better communication with clients, contractors, subcontractors
the internal 共a兲 and external 共b兲 influence components varies and regulatory bodies, better document management, simplified
across administrative and technological innovations. production of working drawings, better drafting quality, higher
efficiency in the production of drawings, shorter production time
of construction and working drawings, simplified process for ac-
Computer Aided Design Technology commodating design changes, shorter time for implementing de-
and Architectural Design Practice sign changes, better control of information, higher consistency in
drawings, powerful visualizations and presentations, and more
The architectural design process involves a number of different convenient archiving of design data for future use 共Pendergast
activities: Analysis, synthesis, representation of design, archiving 1991; Lawson 1998兲.
design and design data, and communication with other parties. The use of CAD technology in architectural design has gener-
The unprecedented advancements in IT have revolutionized the ated considerable debate concerning the impact of CAD technol-
architectural design process. CAD technology constitutes the cor- ogy on the creative processes in the practice of architectural de-
nerstone of these advancements and is considered to be the most sign. Some architects argue that CAD technology reduces the
important IT innovation of the last four decades. Early research potential for creativity and depersonalizes drawing production.
on CAD technology started in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Some others advocate that CAD technology, in particular second
Sutherland’s 共1963兲 Sketchpad system was a milestone in the de- and third generations, enhances creativity and facilitates the
velopment of CAD technology. The Sketchpad system integrated evaluation of design alternatives. Research indicates that the ben-
The mixed influence model provides the best fit as suggested ernment regulations, demand conditions, and consulting firms’
by the coefficient of determination 共R2 = 0.92 and F value suggestions兲 influence factors. These research findings suggest
= 125.46兲, which indicates that, in global terms, an acceptable that increases in the number of architectural design firms that
level of precision has been reached with regard to the data. It adopt CAD technology influenced the number of remaining archi-
shows that the predicted number of potential adopters 共m = 193兲 tectural design firms that have subsequently adopted CAD tech-
is exactly equal to the total number of firms that adopted CAD nology. These findings are consistent with Teng et al.’s 共2002兲
technology 共193兲 during the study period 1990–2003. The coeffi- findings that external influence factors constitute an inadequate
cients of internal influence 共a兲 and external influence 共b兲 are explanation for the spread of CAD technology among North
0.6232 and 0.0142, respectively. These coefficients suggest that American firms and that the primary reason that causes North
the internal influence factor 共a兲 plays a more important role American firms to adopt CAD technology is imitative behavior.
than the external influence factor 共b兲 in the diffusion of CAD The imitative behavior observed in Turkish architectural de-
technology. sign firms can be explained by the rational efficiency hypothesis.
These research findings jointly point out that the diffusion of Studies conducted by Manley and McFallen 共2003兲 and Toole
CAD technology among Turkish architectural design firms is pri- 共1998兲 point out that information on the costs and benefits of
marily driven by internal 共i.e., imitative behavior兲 rather than ex- adopting an innovation in the construction industry is obtained by
ternal 共i.e., complying with client requirements, changes in gov- means of various communication channels. For example, in-
creased adoption of CAD technology by architectural design
firms is likely to capture the attention of professional journals and
Table 2. Diffusion of Computer Aided Design Technology in trade magazines, and may be debated at architectural design ex-
Architectural Design Practice
hibitions and competitions, trade shows, and similar gatherings.
Diffusion model Architectural design firms might become aware of the existence
Internal External Mixed of CAD technology through these information channels, or by
Description influence influence influence communicating with previous adopters, and by observing the out-
comes of CAD technology adoption 共e.g., profits, market share,
Parameter estimation
etc.兲 by other firms.
a 共coefficient of 0.0051 — 0.6232 The imitative behavior observed in Turkish architectural de-
internal influence兲 共0.0003兲 共0.05694兲
sign firms can also be explained by the bandwagon hypothesis.
b 共coefficient of — 0.0329 0.0142
The sheer number of firms adopting CAD technology can cause
external influence兲 共0.0542兲 共0.2764兲
competitive and institutional bandwagon pressures, promoting
m 共potential number 166.2918 525.5961 193.2319
other firms to adopt CAD technology. A firm that has not adopted
of adopters兲 共11.4382兲 共706.1096兲 共12.0385兲
CAD technology may appear not be totally legitimate to clients,
Model fit i.e., it may give the impression that the firm is not qualified even
Mean-square error 1,992.2752 1,367.1555 1,371.5801 though it has provided excellent service over the years. Architec-
F value 95.46 10.93 125.46 tural design firms want to avoid the negative inferences that could
R2 0.84a 0.05a 0.92a come from being disqualified by potential clients for not using the
Note: Standard errors in parenthesis. latest CAD technology. It follows that architectural design firms
a
All models are significant at p 艋 0.01. are sometimes forced to adopt CAD technology due to the fear of