An In-Depth Analysis
In the offsite construction industry, innovation is considered essential to long-term success. From modular housing to pre-fabrication and 3D printing, technological advancements have the potential to reshape how homes and buildings are designed, manufactured, and delivered. Yet, despite the rapid pace of innovation, many well-established offsite construction factories are slow to adopt new processes, technologies, or management systems. This hesitation is not born out of ignorance or laziness but stems from a series of legitimate concerns that warrant consideration.
For decision-makers within these established factories, the old adage “if it isn’t broken, don’t fix it” often governs the approach to change. Profits are being made, production targets are being met, and customers are satisfied, so why risk everything by trying something new?
I decided to dive deep into the reasoning behind this reluctance, from the fear of jeopardizing current profitability to the concerns around the adoption of new technology. I examined the cost implications that make innovation in established factories a complex decision.
Profitability vs. Innovation: Why Fix What’s Working?
The central reason for hesitation is simple: many established factories are already profitable. Decision-makers are faced with the question, Why risk a new idea if the old system is generating profit? The mindset here is largely driven by the fact that implementing a new system—whether it’s a software update, production line automation, or a managerial change—can create disruptions. A profitable business, especially one that has seen consistent growth and success, may view these disruptions as unnecessary risks. The fear is that any change, no matter how well-planned, could temporarily stall production or lead to unforeseen issues, potentially eroding the margins they’ve worked so hard to build.
Additionally, profits are often tied to a factory’s operational consistency. Even minor interruptions to production schedules, supply chain logistics, or delivery times could disrupt long-standing client relationships, leading to dissatisfaction and lost business. Established factories are more inclined to focus on what they know works rather than risk venturing into untested waters. These businesses frequently opt for incremental improvements rather than sweeping changes, ensuring that any innovation introduced can be managed without threatening the profitability of the business.
.
The Software Conundrum: Is New Always Better?
Technological upgrades, particularly software, represent another area where factories are slow to adopt changes. Factory management may ask, How long will it take to install new software, and is it really any better than the system we have now? This is a critical concern because the introduction of new software systems, especially those involved in manufacturing processes, inventory management, or project planning, can take months to install, test, and roll out.
During this time, production can slow down as workers adjust to the new systems, which might not be as intuitive or user-friendly as the older models. Additionally, the performance of the new software isn’t guaranteed, meaning that the promise of improved efficiency might not materialize as quickly as expected. In many cases, the existing system, while not perfect, has been optimized over time to fit the specific needs of the factory. For this reason, a factory may be hesitant to implement a system that may require substantial adjustments to be as effective as the one already in place.
Furthermore, there’s the issue of software compatibility with existing hardware and systems. Even when a factory decides to upgrade its software, the new system might require upgrades in other areas, adding to both time and costs. These unknowns lead many factories to take a “wait-and-see” approach, preferring to let others adopt the technology first and observe its performance before taking the plunge themselves.
The Cost and Timeline of Automation: A Decade of Payback?
One of the most promising innovations in offsite construction is the introduction of robotics and automation in the production line. However, The initial cost of acquiring a new production line process, such as robotics or automation, can take a decade to pay for itself. This is a major factor in decision-making for established factories.
Robotics and automated processes have the potential to revolutionize production efficiency, reduce labor costs, and improve product consistency. However, these systems come with a high upfront cost. The financial burden is significant, with many factories calculating that it could take a decade or longer to see a return on investment. Even then, the lifespan of the technology itself becomes a concern. After a decade, will the system still be relevant, or will it have become outdated, requiring further upgrades or replacement?
Moreover, automation often demands retraining or replacing parts of the workforce. Factories are forced to consider the social impact, including the potential for job losses and employee pushback. There are also operational adjustments that must be made. Automated systems may not integrate seamlessly with existing workflows, and the downtime required to implement these changes could have serious financial implications. In an industry where margins are tight, the idea of investing in a system that won’t produce results for years can be a hard sell.
Training and Maintenance Costs: The Hidden Expense of New Processes
Beyond the upfront costs of new technology, many factories are reluctant to embrace change because new processes and procedures have large initial training and maintenance costs that could be avoided if they didn’t bring them on board. Training the existing workforce to adopt new procedures, whether it involves learning new software, adjusting to automated processes, or integrating a new production line, can be expensive and time-consuming.
The cost of training extends beyond financial expenses; it also impacts productivity. While employees learn the ropes of new systems, production often slows down, leading to temporary inefficiencies. Furthermore, there’s no guarantee that all employees will adjust smoothly to the new changes, and this could result in a higher turnover rate or dissatisfaction among the workforce.
Maintenance is another concern. New technology or processes often require more sophisticated maintenance procedures, either due to the complexity of the systems involved or because the factory does not yet have the expertise to maintain them in-house. This often means contracting with outside specialists, adding another ongoing expense that established factories may prefer to avoid.
Familiarity with Suppliers and Partners: Breaking Long-Term Relationships
Many established factories have spent years building relationships with suppliers, logistics providers, and clients, all of whom have become part of their regular, reliable business ecosystem. Introducing a new system or process often means altering these relationships, which could introduce risk. For example, if a factory changes its production methods, it might need to find new suppliers who can provide materials compatible with the new processes.
Such changes require significant effort, time, and research to find new partners who can meet the factory’s high standards. There’s also the risk that new suppliers might not be as reliable or cost-effective as the long-established ones. Similarly, clients might have certain expectations based on the factory’s current output and timelines. A shift in production could impact the delivery of products, leading to dissatisfaction or a breakdown in relationships.
Regulatory Compliance and Risk of Errors
Finally, compliance with building codes, safety regulations, and industry standards can be a reason for hesitation in established factories. New technologies often require re-certification or compliance with updated regulations. The risk of errors during the implementation of these new systems—either in production quality or compliance—can lead to costly reworks, legal challenges, and damaged reputations. Factories are keen to avoid these issues by sticking with tried-and-tested systems that they know meet all current regulatory requirements.
Modcoach Note
For well-established offsite construction factories, the decision to embrace innovation is fraught with complexity. While there are clear benefits to adopting new technologies and processes, such as increased efficiency, lower long-term costs, and enhanced product quality, these benefits must be weighed against the risks. Concerns over jeopardizing current profits, the steep learning curve of new software, long payback periods for automation, and the social and financial costs of training all contribute to a culture of caution.
Understanding these reasons for hesitation is essential for innovators and technology providers aiming to penetrate the offsite construction industry. By addressing these concerns and offering clear pathways to minimizing risks, these innovators may be able to help factories overcome their reluctance and step confidently into the future.
.
CLICK HERE to read the latest edition
Contact Gary Fleisher
