Table 3. The views of construction... | Emerald Publishing

Table 3.

The views of construction project parties towards MEP prefabrication in Finnish construction projects

Stakeholder	Barriers	Enablers	Value creation opportunities	Value capture opportunities
Client	Social:• Few prefabrication solution providers Technical:•Lack of knowledge about the timing of freezing the design •Lack of PPMOF procurement knowledge Economic:•Price as the main bidding criteria	Political:•The government initiated development programs Technical:•PPMOF procurement expertise Economic:•Relational contracts	•Know-how in facility management •Change agent	•Shortened schedule and reduced cost •Improved quality of the end product •Improved usability and upgradability of facilities
Designers, especially MEP designers	Social:•Used to designing one-of-a-kind products •Industry’s resistance to change Technical:•Lack of capabilities for detailed level design Economic:•Business models, contract boundaries	Social:•Design collaboration with MEP sub-contractor •Changes in sub-contractor responsibilities Political:•Changes in trade union requirements Technical:•Repetition and standardisation in design solutions Economic:•Changes in business models/contract boundaries •Relational contracts	•Installation-level BIM model •Consultant services during design and construction	•More revenue through installation-level design work
MEP trade contractors	Social:•Tight schedule •Risk-averse culture •No shared implementation strategy Political:•Unions’ agreements for prefabrication payments Technical:•Lack of installation-level designs •Lack of repeatability in design Economic:•Business models, contract boundaries	Social:•Agreement on installation-level BIM Technical:•Workshops for prefabrication Technical:•PPMOF procurement expertise •Showcases of good practices for prefabrication Economic:•Relational contracts	•Know-how of installation process	•Project efficiency •Improved worker safety
General contractor	Technical:•Lack of MEP prefabrication procurement knowledge Economic:•Price as the main bidding criteria		•Change agent •The realisation of value from prefabrication	•Reduced throughput time •Site productivity improvement •Fewer logistics
Fabricator	Social:•The market is missing •Detailed MEP design made too late Technical:•Design revisions	Social:•Clients’ or governments’ requirements Technical:•Early design freeze •Better references	•Less material waste •Better quality •Reduced schedule	•Market development •Possibility of investments and international markets

Stakeholder	Barriers	Enablers	Value creation opportunities	Value capture opportunities
Client	Social:• Few prefabrication solution providersTechnical:•Lack of knowledge about the timing of freezing the design•Lack of PPMOF procurement knowledgeEconomic:•Price as the main bidding criteria	Political:•The government initiated development programsTechnical:•PPMOF procurement expertiseEconomic:•Relational contracts	•Know-how in facility management•Change agent	•Shortened schedule and reduced cost•Improved quality of the end product•Improved usability and upgradability of facilities
Designers, especiallyMEP designers	Social:•Used to designing one-of-a-kind products•Industry’s resistance to changeTechnical:•Lack of capabilities for detailed level designEconomic:•Business models, contract boundaries	Social:•Design collaboration with MEP sub-contractor•Changes in sub-contractor responsibilitiesPolitical:•Changes in trade union requirementsTechnical:•Repetition and standardisation in design solutionsEconomic:•Changes in business models/contract boundaries•Relational contracts	•Installation-level BIM model•Consultant services during design and construction	•More revenue through installation-level design work
MEPtrade contractors	Social:•Tight schedule•Risk-averse culture•No shared implementation strategyPolitical:•Unions’ agreements for prefabrication paymentsTechnical:•Lack of installation-level designs•Lack of repeatability in designEconomic:•Business models, contract boundaries	Social:•Agreement on installation-level BIMTechnical:•Workshops for prefabricationTechnical:•PPMOF procurement expertise•Showcases of good practices for prefabricationEconomic:•Relational contracts	•Know-how of installation process	•Project efficiency•Improved worker safety
Generalcontractor	Technical:•Lack of MEP prefabrication procurement knowledgeEconomic:•Price as the main bidding criteria		•Change agent•The realisation of value from prefabrication	•Reduced throughput time•Site productivity improvement•Fewer logistics
Fabricator	Social:•The market is missing•Detailed MEP design made too lateTechnical:•Design revisions	Social:•Clients’ or governments’ requirementsTechnical:•Early design freeze•Better references	•Less material waste•Better quality•Reduced schedule	•Market development•Possibility of investments and international markets