Innovation in offsite construction is moving at a rapid pace, with new materials, automation systems, and software solutions constantly promising to transform factory-built housing. Yet, despite these advancements, many offsite construction managers react with skepticism—sometimes outright resistance—when introduced to fresh ideas, products, or procedures.
.
While it may seem like negativity for negativity’s sake, their reluctance often has a deeper rationale. These managers carry the responsibility of maintaining efficiency, meeting production goals, and keeping costs in check.
Change, even when well-intended, can introduce risks they cannot afford to take lightly.
Risk Aversion: The Fear of Disrupting a Fragile System
Offsite factories rely on finely tuned production processes, where even minor disruptions can lead to major inefficiencies. A new automation tool, an unfamiliar material, or an alternative workflow might appear beneficial in theory, but in practice, it could introduce delays, increase rework, or create unexpected bottlenecks. Many managers have seen well-intentioned changes backfire, whether through software that promised to streamline operations but slowed order processing, or materials that seemed like a cost-saver but resulted in more warranty claims. Their default stance is to protect existing processes, because stability often outweighs the promise of improvement. To gain their trust, any proposed change must come with proof that it will enhance operations without negatively impacting output.
.
Profit Protection: Why Even Good Ideas Can Be a Financial Threat
Every offsite construction factory operates under tight margins, and managers are under pressure to maintain profitability. Introducing a new system, material, or process often requires upfront investment with no immediate guarantee of return. The uncertainty surrounding ROI makes managers hesitant to gamble on innovation, particularly when cost recovery might take years. Many have seen expensive automation systems installed, only for them to sit unused because they didn’t integrate well with existing production lines. It’s not that managers dislike innovation; they simply can’t afford to implement changes without clear financial justification. If an innovation truly delivers cost savings or efficiency gains, it must be backed by concrete data showing exactly how much time and money will be saved per unit produced.
Past Experiences with Failed Innovations: Once Burned, Twice Shy
Managers in offsite construction have been exposed to countless “game-changing” innovations that ultimately failed to deliver. Whether it was software that slowed down workflows, machinery that was too complex for employees to use effectively, or materials that introduced unforeseen quality issues, they have learned to be skeptical. The consequences of a failed innovation are severe. Unlike vendors or salespeople, who can move on to their next product launch, the factory bears the real costs of wasted time, money, and lost productivity. Many managers have learned from experience that most innovations sound great in a sales pitch but don’t hold up in real factory conditions. Because of this, they demand hard evidence before committing to change. Case studies from other factories with similar setups, showing measurable benefits, carry far more weight than theoretical advantages.
Labor Challenges: The Hidden Cost of Retraining Workers
Even if an innovation is truly more efficient, that efficiency is meaningless if factory workers cannot adapt to it quickly. Offsite construction faces high employee turnover, and many workers develop deep expertise in one way of doing things. Introducing new processes means retraining the workforce, which costs time and resources. In some cases, production can slow down for weeks or months before workers become proficient. For managers, this presents a difficult trade-off—risk reduced productivity now in exchange for future efficiency, or continue with the current process that workers already know. Many choose the latter simply because they cannot afford the temporary disruption. The best way to address this concern is to introduce training solutions that minimize downtime and get buy-in from workers before management even considers the change.
Time Constraints: Managers Are Too Busy to Experiment
Factory managers are already stretched thin, juggling production schedules, inventory management, customer expectations, and employee oversight. Their days are filled with solving immediate problems, leaving little time to experiment with new systems or evaluate untested products. Even if an innovation appears beneficial, they often lack the bandwidth to properly assess it. Their primary focus is on meeting daily production goals, and anything that threatens to divert their attention from that mission is usually dismissed. The best way to overcome this resistance is to make it as easy as possible for managers to try a new system. A hands-on demonstration or a low-risk trial period allows them to see potential benefits without the burden of a long evaluation process.
Regulatory and Compliance Concerns: Navigating Red Tape
Offsite construction isn’t just about building efficiently; it’s about building to code. Every material, process, or system must comply with strict building regulations, zoning laws, and safety standards. If a new product doesn’t meet these standards, it can lead to failed inspections, project delays, and potential legal liabilities. Managers know that implementing unapproved materials or processes isn’t just a risk—it could jeopardize an entire project. Many innovations stall at this stage simply because they introduce additional regulatory hurdles that managers do not have time to navigate. The best way to gain their confidence is to ensure all necessary approvals and certifications are already in place before presenting a new product or system.
Mistrust of Sales and Marketing Hype: Industry Fatigue from Overpromises
Offsite construction managers are constantly approached by vendors claiming their product will revolutionize the industry. After hearing countless pitches promising to cut costs by 30%, double efficiency, or eliminate waste, many have grown weary of exaggerated claims. The skepticism isn’t unfounded—many of these solutions fail to deliver on their promises once they’re put into real-world production. Because of this, managers tend to dismiss anything that sounds too good to be true. The key to overcoming this is to provide clear, verifiable data rather than marketing buzzwords. Instead of broad claims about efficiency, an effective pitch should present real-world figures showing exactly how much time and money can be saved.
Fear of Change Backfiring: Who Takes the Blame When It Goes Wrong?
Even when a new system appears to offer advantages, managers know that if it fails, they will be the ones held responsible. If a new process disrupts production, the factory loses money. If it delays deliveries, customers are lost. If it introduces defects, it could lead to costly warranty claims. Unlike vendors who move on after selling a product, factory managers remain accountable for any negative outcomes. Because of this, they are often more concerned with avoiding failure than with chasing potential improvements. To get past this fear, new ideas should be presented as low-risk, with a clear path for testing and evaluation before full implementation. Offering a phased introduction or a small-scale trial helps ease concerns and reduces the perceived risk of failure.
Closing Thoughts
Offsite construction managers are not against innovation; they are against unproven, disruptive changes that put them at risk. Their resistance comes from real-world experience and a responsibility to maintain efficiency, profitability, and compliance. To gain their trust, new ideas must be presented in a way that directly addresses their concerns. Proof of concept, financial justification, minimal disruption, and regulatory compliance are all essential in overcoming skepticism. The key to introducing change in offsite construction isn’t just about having a great idea—it’s about making sure managers see it as a practical, low-risk improvement that benefits both the factory and their own job security.
Gary Fleisher, The Modcoach, writes about the modular and offsite construction industry at Modular Home Source.
.
CLICK HERE to read the latest edition
Contact Gary Fleisher
