By DOUG VINCENT

We’re dead last. Finite project timelines that make it tough to invest in long-term digital solutions. Formula for success below.

Back in 2015, a McKinsey report placed the construction industry near the bottom of the digitization ladder.

Construction is second from the bottom.

Fast forward a decade. While construction has made notable progress, it’s fair to ask: Is the industry still playing catch-up? Yes, we still suck, but maybe not for lack of want.

Agriculture Outperforming Construction

Since 2015, both the agriculture and construction sectors have experienced notable advancements in digitization, and yet agriculture has made more progress in adopting digital technologies than has the

Agriculture has embraced a variety of innovative tools and technologies aimed at improving efficiency, sustainability and overall productivity such as precision farming, digital platforms and automation and IoT. We’ve all see the videos of the crazy tractors and automated farming equipment.

Digital Tools in Construction

While construction has also made some cool new digital tech, its adoption of digital technologies has been slower and more fragmented compared to agriculture. Here are a few things we’ve seen:

• Building Information Modeling: The adoption of BIM has improved collaboration and project visualization, allowing for better planning and execution. Mostly, though, it’s good for clash detection and it hasn’t been realized fully.
• Drones and Robotics: Construction sites have begun utilizing drones for surveying and robots for repetitive tasks, increasing safety and efficiency.
• Project Management Software: Digital tools for project management have streamlined scheduling, resource allocation and communication among stakeholders – mostly as people have become fed up with spreadsheets.

Regarding the above, it’s no driverless tractor, but these tools are definitely no longer just nice-to-haves. They’re driving real results for firms willing to invest. However, the productivity gains from these tools often don’t fully offset inefficiencies elsewhere in the construction process.

For that reason, productivity has remained stagnant. Gains have been counterbalanced by increased requirements in areas such as safety, compliance and other operational encumbrances.

What’s the Difference? Construction vs Agriculture

The paradox of technological adoption not directly translating into higher efficiency in construction warrants deeper exploration. While both agriculture and construction have embraced digitization, agriculture has achieved a faster and more widespread integration of digital technologies over the past decade.

Why is this the case? In my view, construction projects – and the industry at large – operate within finite time horizons. A construction project has a defined end date and is inherently cyclical, making it impractical to invest in a two-year digitization process for a project that itself lasts only two years.

In contrast, Agriculture other sectors that are business or service based can afford to invest in such long-term digital initiatives, as the resulting systems or processes are likely to remain in place indefinitely, providing ongoing value.

This time limitation (call it a constraint) reduces the feasibility and attractiveness of costly or time-intensive digital initiatives in construction. As a result, stakeholders often default to traditional methods instead of adopting new technologies.

For digital solutions to succeed in construction, they must fit within the time and cost constraints of individual projects – providing clear, immediate value without exceeding those thresholds.

How this manifests in behaviors is:

• Sticker Shock: The cost of implementing new digital tools can scare off buyers, especially where projects are even shorter timeframes.

• Cultural Pushback: Some stakeholders resist change, sticking to tried-and-true methods. There’s no point investing time into a digital initiative if the ROI produced by the initiative is short-lived within a project lifecycle.
• Integration Headaches: New tech doesn’t always play nicely with existing project systems.

The fragmentation of the construction process – with multiple stakeholders, complex workflows and bespoke projects – compounds inefficiencies.

How to Invest in Digitization

For a two-year project with a $10 million budget, investing in digital technology should be strategic and proportionate. In my view:

• One percent to five percent of the total budget – roughly $100,000 to $500,000 – is a reasonable range for digital tools that focus on tools that address critical challenges like safety, compliance or efficiency.
• Implementation should be swift, ideally not exceeding 10 percent to 15 percent of the project timeline (two to three months), to avoid delays.
• Priority should be given to technologies that deliver measurable benefits within the project’s duration, are simple to integrate and scalable for future use. Key considerations include:

Definitely prequalify and select technologies that seamlessly integrate with existing systems to minimize disruptions. Also, opt for solutions that can be reused or scaled for future projects, maximizing long-term value.

Conclusion – Climbing the Digitization Ladder

Despite progress, construction still lags behind sectors like agriculture in digital adoption due to inherent constraints around short project lifecycles – and costs reducing ROI, and therefore investment.

For true transformation, digital solutions must offer immediate, tangible value and integrate seamlessly into existing processes with benefit beyond the life of the project.

Doug Vincent is the co-founder at Mastt.com.