Identifies strategies for smart technology adoption in urban construction, indicating effective planning under uncertainty.
Smart technology adoption in urban construction is a key driver toward the development of smarter cities. However, the complexities and uncertainties associated with technology acceptance necessitate strategic planning based on structured decision-making frameworks. A hybrid SWOT–MCDM framework was developed under uncertainty for formulating effective strategies for smart technology adoption. In the first phase of the study, a modified six-dimensional SWOT model, including the traditional dimensions (Strengths Opportunitie (SO), Weaknesses Opportunities (WO), Strengths Threats (ST), Weaknesses Threats (WT)) along with two additional dimensions (Weaknesses Strengths (WS), Opportunitie Threats (OT)) was employed to identify and categorize the key factors influencing technology adoption. In the second phase, the Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) approach under Uncertainty was utilized to prioritize the resulting strategic alternatives. The proposed framework was implemented in Qom Municipality - Iran. The findings revealed that among the identified factors, “holding training workshops and seminars” with a weight of 0.1152 was the most influential sub-factor in the strengths category. Furthermore, the evaluation of proposed strategies based on the SWOT framework indicated that the SO strategy (leveraging strengths to exploit opportunities) ranked first with a score of 4.826, followed by the SW (4.660), ST (3.809), WO (3.845), WT (3.338), and OT (3.259) strategies, respectively. This prioritization demonstrates that focusing on maximizing strengths and opportunities can facilitate the successful development and implementation of smart technologies. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness and validity of the prioritization results. Hence, the framework can serve as a tool for policy-makers and urban planners in formulating targeted strategies and making informed investment decisions in innovative construction infrastructures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bakhshipour et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: