Construction Technology

Dive Brief:

• Researchers with the University of Nevada in Reno are experimenting with a process to help the U.S. Army 3D print structures, including bridges and buildings, in active combat zones, according to a Dec. 3 news release from the university.
• The team’s program, which began in early 2024, involves testing bridging infrastructure assembled with printed 3-foot-long, Lego-like concrete modules, per the release.
• Most experiments with 3D-printed materials are conducted by trial and error, according to the school. In contrast, the research team numerically simulated the bridge — a computational technique to analyze real-world systems through mathematical models, or calculations that run on a computer — in addition to physically testing the structure.

Dive Insight:

The project’s ultimate objective is to provide the Army with a solid technical basis on how to print and assemble structures in the field, including in combat zones where other resources might not be readily available, according to Assistant Professor Floriana Petrone, who is leading the study. 

Modular bridges have long been a viable solution for quick fixes in the wake of natural disasters, such as hurricanes. But those components usually need to be shipped to a location. The advantage of the university’s approach is that it would allow teams to print sections quickly onsite. 

The university’s approach uses printed components in the shape of Ls and Ts that connect to each other with cables and don’t need specialized equipment, according to the release. The segments could theoretically be disassembled into their component parts when they no longer are needed. Once that happens, the bricks can be reassembled into new configurations. 

“Everything could be assembled manually on site,” Petrone said in the release.

The team trialed seven concrete segments held together with post-tensioned cable running through the center of the components, which held an increasing amount of load. The narrow section of bridge supported up to 7,000 pounds, according to the release.

The project is unique due to its combination of 3D-printing, segmental construction and advanced numerical simulation, according to the university. Together, those aspects provide a basis for building what it calls reliably sound, scalable structures.

“The integration of numerical modeling with 3D printing and segmental construction provides a powerful tool for predicting structural performance before construction even begins,” said Sherif Elfass, an associate research professor and team member, in the release. “This allows engineers to optimize the placement of segments and the design of printed components, ensuring that printed structures meet the necessary strength and durability requirements in a variety of conditions.”

The researchers collaborated with the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center Construction Engineering Research Laboratory, and were supported by the U.S. Department of Defense, per the article. The project is funded through June 2025.

Dive Brief:

• The cyber threat contractors face shows no signs of waning as 481 construction organizations were listed on data-leaking websites used by ransomware attackers in 2024, a 41% increase year over year, according to a report from Tampa, Florida-based cybersecurity technology company ReliaQuest.
• The report noted that phishing continues to be a thorny problem for builders as well. Spearphishing, or a phishing attempt personalized to a victim, was the most prominent vector of attack and accounted for nearly one in five incidents, ReliaQuest said. Internal spearphishing was second, where a compromised account within the organization attacks other users in the enterprise.
• Credential exposure is also a primary threat for builders. According to data fromReliaQuest’s cybersecurity protection product, GreyMatter, credential exposure incidents now account for 75% of all construction alerts, per the report. The number is an 83% increase from the previous year.

Dive Insight:

In light of the research, ReliaQuest predicted that phishing attacks, cloud exploitation and attacks via infostealers — a type of malware designed to compromise user credentials — will rise in 2025. Once credentials are published and sold, threat actors can gain access to sensitive data or deploy additional malware.

“The construction sector’s susceptibility to cyber threats and its critical need to maintain operational continuity makes it a prime target for malicious actors,” John Dilgen, cyber threat intelligence analyst for ReliaQuest and the report’s author, wrote. “The diverse range of attacks targeting the sector underscores the urgent necessity for organizations to implement strict security measures and digital risk protection (DRP) strategies.”

To protect themselves, contractors need to be on alert. One of the metrics ReliaQuest used to measure performance is known as “mean time to contain a threat” or MTTC. On average, companies in the construction industry contain a threat within about five hours. However, companies that used automation and artificial intelligence had times closer to five minutes.

According to the report, builders should also:

• Audit cloud accounts and resources rigorously.
• Pay close attention to cloud permission levels that could grant extensive access.
• Enforce the principle of least privilege for all third parties and contractors.
• Enable multifactor authentication for accounts.
• Implement a digital risk protection strategy to continuously monitor for exposed credentials.

Dive Brief:

• The Federal Highway Administration has disbursed a wave of grants worth $16.6 million to eight states under the Advanced Digital Construction Management Systems program, the agency announced in a Nov. 1 news release.
• The funding apparatus comes from 2021’s $1.2 trillion bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and is one aspect of FHWA’s Technology and Innovation Deployment Program. Once awarded, the grants will go to private contractors through these government projects.
• Most of the projects revolve around the use of building information modeling technology, data and document tracking via software and digital delivery practices for projects, according to the FHWA. The project is oversubscribed by 80%, according to Kristin White, acting federal highway administrator.

Dive Insight:

The TIDP, which has existed since 2013, receives $550 million over five years, which comes out to $110 million annually, and funds various transportation and highway research endeavors. It was continued in 2016 and 2021 by the FAST Act and the IIJA respectively.

ADCMS, one offshoot, provides $85 million from FY 2022-2026. In 2022 and 2023, the program was able to allocate $34 million, but this year is the start of the smaller disbursement, which is capped at $17 million until the end of the funding lifecycle.

This is the second wave of grants to roll out since the program’s inception. Last year, the government disbursed a combined $34 million to 10 states.

“These projects — which range from technologies to support the workforce, improve bid accuracy, and improve the way we communicate with the public — are leading the way to modernizing transportation,” White said in the release.

The goals of the funding include an accelerated adoption of advanced digital construction management systems throughout the project lifecycle to boost productivity, the development and deployment of best practices on construction sites and increased technology adoption and deployment by states and local governments, according to the news release.

Awards include:

• New York State DOT will receive $3.4 million for its Advancing Lifecycle Management of Subsurface Roadway Asset Information project that will use building information modeling to integrate data related to the subsurface of the roadway. This will save time on design and construction timelines reducing the number of subsurface explorations.
• Ohio DOT will receive $3.29 million for its Workflows Optimization for Real-time Knowledge Sharing project that uses building information modeling in all stages of project development to create significant time savings through information-sharing.
• New Hampshire DOT will receive $3.2 million for its Using Digital Project Delivery as a Catalyst for Recruitment and Retention at NHDOT to establish digital workflows and data standards for better information management.
• New Mexico DOT will receive $1.86 million for its Advanced Digital Construction Management Systems Implementation Plan project to develop workflow and standards to enable seamless and interoperable use of data across the survey, design, construction, planning and management phases of a project.
• Maine DOT will receive $1.52 million for its Digital Results and Innovation are a GO for 2030 project to pilot the electronic delivery of projects, improve data collection and eliminate the need for paper documentation.
• Arizona DOT will receive $1.36 million for its Igniting Arizona's Digital Delivery Revolution project to develop and pilot modern digital delivery practices on Arizona transportation projects.
• Oregon DOT will receive $1.02 million for its Item Type Library for standardized information on transportation items and features, such as guardrails, traffic barriers, signage, lighting and numerous other transportation assets to manage these throughout their lifecycle.
• Maryland State Highway Administration and Montgomery County DOT will receive $1 million for the Precise 3D Survey and Engineering of Transportation Infrastructure pilot project that will use cloud-based software to expedite project development and reduce the need for paper files.

Construction has a reputation of being a Luddite industry. Extra costs and an aversion to risk-taking can make builders hesitant to try new technology.

But tales of success can be found, if one knows where to look.

Take, for example, Providence, Rhode Island-based Gilbane Building Co., which used New York City-based Trunk Tools to track 21,000 documents on a large stadium project in Wisconsin. The software saved Gilbane’s project team 20 to 40 minutes in travel and in searching for answers to each question, and more than $100,000 in avoided rework.

The firm thought the results were so successful, it went on to sign an enterprise agreement with Trunk Tools to roll out the tech nationally. 

Meanwhile, Edmonton, Alberta-based PCL, whose U.S. headquarters are in Denver, trialed Broomfield, Colorado-based Vita Industrial’s Load Navigator, which helped the builder work through high-wind days while hauling giant pieces of form work through the air. The team saw a 30% increase in efficiency, and one project manager said it could potentially save anywhere from thousands to tens of thousands of dollars. 

And LeChase Construction Services, headquartered in Rochester, New York, adopted Oakland, California-based Join’s preconstruction tech planning tools to help streamline its work and meet a key funding deadline on a $13.5 million school expansion in New York. The outcome? The team maintained constant forward momentum during the preconstruction process, and the school is slated for completion in spring 2025. 

Key to all three of these success stories is the deliberate measures that these contractors took to test these technologies before committing wholesale. It’s not simple — trialing new technologies and services on a job or a jobsite can be a stressful and complicated task. On top of the pressure to make the investment work, there may be a compounding drive to make a profit or see immediate results.

Below, construction technology experts provide their list of “do’s” and “don’ts” to help builders make sense of how best to pilot their next technology.

DO: Pilot for the right reasons

When piloting a new piece of technology, make sure you're doing it for the right reasons. A strong correlation between what the business needs and the goals of the pilot committee are important, said Alex Belkofer, senior director of VDC for St. Louis-based McCarthy Building Cos.

“I've seen a lot of folks go down the route of doing a pilot with a small group of people, and they come out with an end result, but if it doesn't meet the needs of the business, sometimes those pilots dissipate,” Belkofer said.

McCarthy has stakeholders that come together to make these pilots happen — its innovation team, emerging technology team and VDC team, Belkofer said. That group, which he calls a community of practice, loops in the teams on the jobsite, such as field operations and preconstruction, who implement the pilot.

DON’T: Skimp on investment

Companies that talk the talk, but don’t walk the walk, on innovation can potentially set their teams up for failure. It’s up to builders to make sure the teams in charge of innovation can get what they need to make their pilots work, said Tim Gaylord, corporate director of innovation for Redwood City, California-based DPR Construction.

While Gaylord acknowledged that margins in construction are thin, he noted how vital it is that innovation teams be able to work on these types of technology.

“If you don't have dedicated budgets that can help people try new things, and folks to help document and set these up, it's really hard to innovate when you're on a project,” Gaylord said.

DO: Know exactly what your tech does

Builders need to know what, exactly, they’re hoping to get out of it, said Jit Kee Chin, chief technology officer for Boston-based Suffolk Construction.

Chin used the example of Microsoft’s Copilot technology, the tech giant’s AI assistant that integrates with Microsoft 365. She said it operates best when given a specific set of parameters in the questions users ask. If someone types out a random question and receives a hit-or-miss answer, Chin says, then that user isn’t using the technology to its full potential.

“Understanding that and then having a way to know what it takes to be successful, to use and then actually get through that adoption barrier is super important,” Chin said.

DON’T: Fear failure.

Experiments are experiments. Don’t be afraid to fail fast, Gaylord said.

“I think there's a lot that can be learned from a tool that doesn't work out, but you have to have a structured way of capturing that and sharing that, which is tough. Let your people try new things,” Gaylord said.

Chin noted that construction is a high-hazard industry. But that can’t stop innovators.

“Take a risk. The industry needs to change,” Chin said.

DO: Learn from your peers

The world of construction is big — connecting with technologically advanced peers is a great way to understand these processes better.

Belkofer recommended going to conferences, speaking with stakeholders and user groups and sharing notes with other innovators to get a finger on the pulse of the industry and what it's doing with technology.

“Reach out. There's a network of folks out there that are probably doing and chasing a lot of the same things that you are,” Belkofer said.

Learning from peers doesn’t necessarily mean other companies, however — it could even be in-house.

And again, don’t look at failures as, well, failures. There’s a lot a builder can glean from a tech that doesn’t pan out the way it’s expected to, Gaylord said. For example, learning why it failed allows an innovation team to pass the lessons on, so the next person doesn’t make those mistakes.

“It’s kind of like investing in the stock market, right? They’re not all going to be winners, but if you can learn from them and share those lessons learned so folks aren't duplicating those efforts and wasting time, that's huge,” Gaylord said.

Dive Brief:

• A newly released report highlights the impact that the growing field of artificial intelligence has on the architecture, engineering and construction industries.
• The survey, which was taken in July and based on 400 technology decision-makers at AEC firms in the U.S., U.K., Canada, France, Spain, Germany, Australia and New Zealand, found that almost three quarters — 74% — of AEC companies globally are using AI in one or more phases of their building projects.
• Implementation is particularly prevalent in the design and planning phases of construction, with almost half of AEC firms surveyed using AI for design (48%) and planning (42%) specifically, according to the report from Pasadena, California-based AEC software developer Bluebeam. 

Dive Insight:

The survey also found that companies are willing to invest in the technology. Within the companies that are using AI, 55% agree that it has become highly important, with over 70% now allocating up to 25% of their tech budget to the technology. This is set to rise, as 84% of respondents said they plan to increase their investment in AI over the next five years.  

However, over half (54%) of those using AI are concerned about AI regulation and of those, 44% say these concerns are having an impact on AI implementation within their companies. 

It also found that AEC firms face significant roadblocks in driving greater technology adoption and digitization. A third reported a lack of training and skills development within their employees as a key challenge to increased digitization. Other barriers include integration (27%) and technical (26%) issues. 

These challenges continue to hold AEC firms back from eliminating paper-based physical documents from the construction process, with 72% still using paper during one or more phases of the building lifecycle. Of those firms who continue to rely on paper, the need for physical signatures or approvals was cited by 46% as the top reason behind continuing to use outdated paper-based processes. 

While the potential of AI in construction is significant, several roadblocks hinder its full adoption, according to Angus Frost, a senior IT consultant at Chicago-based Burger Consulting Group. These include the high cost, the need for skilled personnel, data privacy concerns and resistance to change within the industry. 

Many U.S. contractors are using AI-based tools to help streamline work in a variety of ways, including to track specifications, contracts and other documents, for project management and to provide safety monitoring and analytics.

Scott Franchini is a partner at Phoenix-based RedHammer, an outsourced accounting and consulting firm specializing in the construction industry, who has held leadership roles at Deloitte & Touche, Deloitte Consulting and Microsoft. Opinions are the author’s own.

I’ve been implementing accounting software since the late ‘90s, and despite all the technological advances, the fundamentals of a successful implementation haven’t changed. 

Through the years, I’ve seen countless projects in various industries, including construction, go off track — not because the software was flawed, but because companies made avoidable mistakes during the process.

Implementing new software is a major challenge for any organization, especially in the construction industry, where job costing, subcontractor management and compliance tracking add layers of complexity. Below are 10 of the biggest mistakes I’ve seen companies make over the years when implementing new software systems and ways to avoid them:

1. Underestimating complexity

One of the most significant pitfalls in any software implementation is underestimating the complexity involved. The system you're implementing may be more intricate than anticipated, or you may oversimplify the process, overlooking critical details. Misjudging complexity often leads to rushed implementations, putting the entire project at risk.

To avoid this pitfall: Thoroughly evaluate the software's capabilities and your business processes before starting the implementation. Break down the project into manageable phases, allowing for detailed planning and adjustments as needed and engage subject matter experts to assess and understand the full scope of the project.

2. Insufficient planning

Inadequate project planning is another common pitfall that can severely impact the success of a software implementation. Without a well-defined plan that outlines project goals, timelines and resource allocation, the implementation process can quickly become chaotic.

To avoid this pitfall: Develop a comprehensive project plan that addresses all aspects of the implementation, including initial setup, testing and post-go-live support. Assign clear roles and responsibilities to ensure accountability and communication throughout the project. Regularly review and adjust the plan to stay aligned with project goals and timelines.

3. Failing to reset

Overlooking the chance to reset key elements, such as your chart of accounts and cost codes, is a missed opportunity to enhance your financial and operational reporting. Implementing new software is the perfect time to clean up and reorganize these components to better reflect your current business needs.

To avoid this pitfall: Take the time to evaluate your existing financial structures and identify areas for improvement before migrating to the new system. Consult with financial experts to design a chart of accounts and cost codes that align with your current and future business goals. 

4. Not identifying reporting requirements early

Failing to identify reporting requirements at the beginning of the project is a major pitfall. Without a clear understanding of the necessary reports, the system configuration may not support your business’s needs, leading to costly adjustments later.

To avoid this pitfall: Conduct a thorough needs assessment to identify all reporting requirements before configuring the system. Collaborate with end users to ensure the system will deliver the insights they need. In addition, incorporate flexibility in the reporting structure to accommodate future business changes. 

5.  Relying on vendors

Relying solely on the software vendor to set up and test the system can be risky. While vendors know their products, they may not fully understand your business processes or unique operational requirements. 

Vendors often focus on delivering a generalized solution that works for a broad range of clients but may not align with your specific needs. This misalignment can result in a system that doesn’t fully support your processes, leading to the need for costly post-implementation customizations.

To avoid this pitfall: Take an active role in the setup and testing phases to ensure the system is tailored to your specific needs. Establish a cross-functional team within your organization to oversee the implementation and testing. 

6.  Not understanding your contracts

Not thoroughly reading and understanding your contract with your vendor is a common pitfall. Software vendors and service integrators typically include baseline services in their contracts, with any additional work often handled through change orders, which can increase costs.

To avoid this pitfall: Carefully review the contract, paying close attention to the scope of work and any additional fees. Consult with legal and professional experts who not only understand the legality but also have experience with software implementations to ensure that the contract terms align with the complexities of the project.

7.  Insufficient training

Insufficient training can result in underutilization of the software’s capabilities and may lead users to revert to old processes, which can limit the effectiveness of the new system.

To avoid this pitfall: Develop a detailed training plan that covers all user roles and system functionalities. Provide continuous training opportunities, including refresher courses and advanced training sessions and encourage a culture of learning, where users feel supported in mastering the new system.

8.  Not prioritizing data migration

Data migration is a critical step that, if not done properly, can cripple a new system. Poorly managed data migration can result in inaccurate or incomplete data, leading to significant problems in daily operations and decision-making.

To avoid this pitfall: Prioritize data migration early in the project, allocating sufficient time and resources for this task. Use data validation tools to ensure accuracy and completeness before going live. In addition, you should convert master data early and do a test run of critical transactions to ensure the system behaves as expected.

9.  Overlooking post go-live support

Failing to plan or budget for post-go-live support can significantly undermine your software’s long-term success. Even the most robust systems require regular maintenance, updates and troubleshooting.

To avoid this pitfall: Include post-go-live support in your initial project plan and budget. Establish a support team or contract with external providers to handle ongoing maintenance and updates. Plan for regular system audits to identify and address any issues early on.

10.  Poor change management

Poor change management can derail a software implementation. People often resist change, especially when it disrupts established workflows. Without a structured approach to managing change, adoption of the new system may suffer, resulting in underutilization or reversion to old processes.

To avoid this pitfall: Communicate the reasons for the change clearly and consistently to all stakeholders. Involve key stakeholders in the decision-making process to build buy-in and reduce resistance and provide ongoing support and resources to help users adjust to the new system.

The journey of software implementation is rarely smooth, but with the right planning and foresight, it doesn’t have to be a source of frustration or financial strain. 

Whether you’re a small construction company or an industry giant, the key takeaway is this: software itself is rarely the problem — how you implement it is what makes all the difference.