Benefits and Limitations of Using Low-Code Development To Support

Automation in Construction 152 (2023) 104909
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Automation in Construction
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/autcon
Benefits and limitations of using low-code development to support

digitalization in the construction industry
Eder Martinez a, *, Louis Pfister b
a
School of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geomatics, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland (FHNW), Hofackerstrasse 30, Muttenz
4132, Switzerland
b
Head of Lean Construction Division Civil Engineering, Implenia AG, Thurgauerstrasse 101A, Glattpark (Opfikon) 8152, Switzerland
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Low-code development is a technology enabling people with no advanced computing or coding skills to develop
Low-code custom-made applications and digital solutions to address specific operational needs. Low-code has gained
Citizen developer significant momentum in the last years and some studies have already reported the use of this technology to
Construction industry
digitalize workflows and processes in a variety of business scenarios. Nevertheless, to-date there is no research
Digitalization
Industry 4.0
evaluating the implications of this technology to support digitalization in construction industry. Based on a
Lean construction hybrid research approach combining literature review, case study, and surveys, this paper addresses this gap by
Building information modelling evaluating the benefits and limitations of using low-code in the construction industry context. The study reveals
that low-code productive application development practices have the potential to enable different degrees of
digitalization and innovation in specific construction processes. The study also recognizes the relevance of
adopting a strategic approach to fully leverage low-code at an organizational construction firm level and iden
tifies several areas for further research. This includes leveraging synergies with industry-relevant subjects such as
lean construction, Building Information Modelling, the Internet of Things, and Industry 4.0, among others.
1. Introduction modeler with an intuitive graphical interface offering different pre

defined components assisting in the application development process.
The use of cutting-edge technologies offers the construction industry Users drag and drop different pre-defined constructs in the graphical
a great opportunity to optimize processes and increase productivity. A interface which automatically generate the code in the background. In
new technology paradigm offering opportunities in this area is low-code this way, a user with no advanced coding skills can design and deliver
development. Although there is no clear definition of low-code in fully functional applications or digital solutions without necessarily
neither academia nor the industry [1,2], low-code can be described as being supported by software developers [10].
technology “supporting rapid development of customer-facing applica Some authors argue that more than a disrupting technology, low-
tions, requiring minimal hand-coding and enabling productive new code should be considered as the evolution of Computer-Aided Soft
development practices” [3]. Richardson et al. [3] coined the term low- ware Engineering (CASE) concepts [1]. Bucaioni et al. [11], for instance,
code pointing out that it emerged as a response to rapid changing position low-code as a set of tools and methods in the context of a
business environments and the need for faster and cheaper software broader Model-Driven Engineering (MDE) methodology. Some authors
development [4,5]. argue that there is no fundamental technical contribution in the low-
Low-code development allows individuals with limited coding skills code trend and its rise in popularity could be attributable to the
to develop and implement digital solutions targeted to specific business rebranding of parent MDE/CASE concepts [12].
needs. Low-code lowers the technical barriers of coding allowing people Despite the debate about its roots, low-code is gaining significant
closer to operations (practitioners or even end-users) to realize digital momentum. Some market reports are very adventurous forecasting that
solutions to their business challenges. Some authors refer to these in by 2025, nearly 70% of all business applications will be developed using
dividuals as “Citizen Developers” [6–9]. In practice, the user interacting some sort of low-code [13] and that over 90% of organizations will be
with the low-code platform (Citizen Developer) uses an application either using or considering using low-code application platforms [14]. If
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: eder.martinez@fhnw.ch (E. Martinez).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2023.104909
Received 18 October 2022; Received in revised form 23 April 2023; Accepted 24 April 2023
Available online 11 May 2023
0926-5805/© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
E. Martinez and L. Pfister Automation in Construction 152 (2023) 104909
predictions are true, low-code will strongly influence digitalization in 2.1. Literature review
several industries shaping how operations and projects are managed. It
is estimated that by 2023, the number of Citizen Developers will be four The literature review pursued 2 objectives. First, derive an overview
times that of professional developers [15]. In fact, the Project Manage of main low-code research themes, focusing on practical applications of
ment Institute (PMI) launched an educational program aiming to equip low-code in businesses/operations scenarios. Second, consolidate re
Citizen Developers with the required skills and capabilities to enable ported benefits and limitations of using low-code to derive a “benefits
digitalization through low-code [8]. Research projects have also and limitations framework” (B&L framework).
emerged focusing on preparing engineers to work with low-code plat Fig. 2 depicts the protocol followed for the literature review. The
forms [16]. authors searched in the Web of Science and Science Direct databases the
Low-code has already been explored in the automation of processes terms “low-code” and “citizen developer” in publication titles, abstracts,
and workflows in different business scenarios (e.g., [2,5,17,18]). How or author keywords. The results were filtered to a temporal range be
ever, to the best of the authors' knowledge, there is no research ana tween 2015 and 2022 under the rationale that the term low-code was
lysing its implications for the construction industry. The authors aim to introduced in late 2014, thus previous research may contain the terms
fill this gap by exploring the benefits and limitations of this technology but used in other research fields. The initial search resulted in 208
to support construction industry digitalization. This research contributes articles.
to knowledge in the following areas. It 1) introduces the use of low-code The authors screened the articles analysing the titles and abstracts
to the construction industry, 2) synthesizes low-code literature, aiming to place literature in the context of interest. 124 articles were
including practical applications, 3) contextualizes the benefits and excluded because they dealt with low-code but in other fields. For
limitations of using low-code in the construction industry, and 4) en instance, RNA code in biomedicine, video coding, and seismic design
lightens opportunities for future research in this relatively new research code, among others. In other cases, the term low-code was effectively
area. used in computing or engineering but referring to traditional coding. For
instance, we found articles dealing with “low code” quality, density,
2. Research design maintainability, and readability, just to mention a few.
The authors clustered the selected 84 articles into research themes
The authors investigate two main research questions: RQ1) What are using thematic analysis. Thematic analysis is a qualitative research
the benefits and limitations of using low-code development in the process used encode qualitative information. Thematic analysis is often
context of construction business and operations? and RQ2) How could used in early phases of an enquiry to identify themes, gaps, and define
low-code contribute to the digitalization of the construction industry? future research agenda [19]. A theme corresponds to a common pattern
RQ1 focuses on operational aspects of using low-code, while RQ2 aims found in a group of articles which is used define the clusters. Since
to analyse low-code implementation from a wider organizational and identifying practical uses of low-code was an objective of the review, the
industry perspective. To address these questions, the authors combine authors deliberatively defined the theme “business applications” at the
the outcomes from 3 research streams (Fig. 1). beginning of the process. The authors defined the other themes deduc
tively by analysing articles content in a first review pass. In a second
round, the authors adjusted the themes and ensured that articles were
logically allocated into their corresponding theme. The authors describe
Fig. 1. Research design.
2
Fig. 2. Literature review protocol.
the research themes and provide a summary of the literature in section 4. publications found in grey literature [3,20,21] enlightened by Bucaioni
Since there is no previous research analysing low-code use in the et al. [11]. In this process, articles citing previous research were
context of the construction industry, the authors abstracted benefits and excluded. For example, [18] who provides a list of benefits and limita
limitations identified in previous works, regardless of the industry or tions based on previous works (e.g., [3,16]). Several articles focus on
business context where they were recognized. The rationale is to derive describing the technical aspects of a specific low-code platform, rather
a B&L framework built upon previous knowledge, which can be vali than considering broader implications and potential drawbacks (e.g.,
dated considering insights derived from case studies and the perspec [22,23]). These type or articles we not included in the framework. It is
tives of practitioners captured through a survey. For this purpose, the also important to point out that literature does not always refer to
authors analysed the articles chronologically and abstracted benefits benefits and limitations using a consistent terminology. For instance, in
and limitations in a matrix (Table 1). This included 3 additional relevant terms of benefits, some authors refer to “complexity reduction” as
Table 1
Low-code use benefits and limitations matrix.
Benefits (B) and limitations (L) Source
[3] [21] [20] [5] [41] [16] [9] [65] [64] [1] [2] [35] [74] [72] [75] [73]
B1 - More speed/Agility ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
B2 - Cost savings ● ● ● ●
B3 - Complexity reduction ● ● ● ● ●
B4 - Easier maintenance ● ● ● ●
B5 - Business profiles involvement ● ● ● ● ●
B6 - Instable/inconsistent requirements ● ●
B7 - increased privacy ●
L1 - Lack of customization ● ● ● ● ●
L2 - Scalability ● ● ●
L3 - Fragmentation ● ● ●
L4 - Vendor lock-in ● ● ● ● ● ●
L5 - High licensing cost ● ●
L6 - Security ● ●
3
“simplicity.” In terms of limitations, some authors refer to “fragmenta 2.3. Survey

tion” as “limited integration” or to “vendor lock-in” as “third-party de
pendency.” The authors rationally considered these factors and The group of practitioners surveyed included 6 project/site man
variations in terminology to provide a comprehensive overview of the agers, 2 Building Information Modelling (BIM) specialists, and 3 Infor
benefits and limitations emphasized in previous works. mation Technology (IT) experts. Within the operational context,
project/site managers were responsible for steering the projects onsite,
2.2. Case studies thus they were key end-users providing critical feedback during devel
opment. BIM specialists supported locally the projects to handle BIM
This research includes 3 case studies where low-code was used to models and manage data onsite. IT experts supported the organization
develop applications supporting the digitalization of processes in con with the rollout of different systems, including the low-code platform
struction operations. Using multiple case studies supports placing the used in the case studies. From their roles, they all contributed to the low-
subject of study in real life context and allows access to different sources code development process (e.g., eliciting requirements, testing pro
of evidence to validate findings [24]. The authors contributed to the case totypes, supporting with the use of the low-code platform, and/or using
studies by developing the applications based on specific project re the application). Having different profiles in the survey helped to cap
quirements (acting as Citizen Developers). Being part of the project ture insights not only at the project but also at an organizational level
allowed the authors to experience and observe directly the low-code which enriches the outcomes.
application development process, including group and organizational The survey was based on the B&L framework (example in Fig. 3,
interactions. Observational methods offers many opportunities in the performed electronically). Practitioners were asked to provide inputs
context of construction management [25] allowing the researcher to about how benefits and limitations resonate to them considering lean
gather insights which may not be accessible using other means of data ings in the case studies. This was done based on an agree, neutral, and
collection [24]. disagree rating. Furthermore, per each benefit and limitation, practi
The authors also analysed different sources of primary data and tioners were asked to provide additional comments (not mandatory)
documents produced by the group members. This includes project supporting their position. Hereby, the authors pursued two objectives.
meeting protocols, data modelling diagrams, requirements management First, analyse to what extent benefits and limitations experienced in
records, and early application mock-ups. The authors combine obser other business scenarios apply to the construction industry. Second,
vations and the analysis of primary data sources to summarize the capture practitioners' experience to support the interpretation of results
description of the case study in section 5. The authors report case study and bring their insights into the study.
context, operational challenges, and analysed the development process The outcomes from the different research streams are consolidated
from the elicitation of requirements until the applications' operational and analysed to derive the findings of the study. The subsequent sections
use. The authors also consolidated the learnings from the case studies of this paper are arranged according to this research design.
considering the B&L framework derived from the literature review.
Along with contextualizing low-code development within the con 3. Overview of research themes
struction industry, the case studies allowed a group of 11 industry
practitioners (excluding authors) to experience the use of low-code. Although the term low-code was coined in 2014, the first work on
Their experiences and insights were subsequently captured through a this topic dates back to 2016 [7]. From there, the number of publications
survey. has significantly increased over time providing evidence of the growing
interest in the subject (Fig. 4 left). The authors were able to organize the
articles into 5 research themes: technical, interfaces with contemporary
Fig. 3. Survey screen caption.
4
Fig. 4. Number of articles over time (left) and main low-code research themes (right).
topics, implications to software development, literature reviews, and have received little attention. Likewise, the required level of expertise,
business applications (Fig. 4 right). skills, and values of the people involved, namely Citizen Developers, as a
Technical: From different perspectives, most of the literature deals key role in the system is also unresearched. Bucaioni et al. [11] perform
with technical aspects of low-code platforms. Research in this cluster a multi-vocal systematic review including grey literature. Grey literature
focuses on describing the characteristics and/or use of existing low-code is relevant in the context of low-code considering that the term origi
platforms [22,23,26–36]. For instance, Marek et al. [22] and Roszczyk nated in the industry, and a significant portion of work has been pub
et al. [23] describe BalticLSC, a software development environment lished outside traditional academic channels. Bucaioni et al. [11]
allowing users to quickly develop applications using predefined com emphasize that most of the low-code literature has been published at
ponents. Some studies in this category also compare different technical workshops, highlighting that research on the topic is in a maturation
and usability aspects of low-code platforms [10,37,38] or propose phase. The authors also reveal several relationships between low-code
frameworks/models to assess the impact of their implementation and MDE eventually defining low-code as a “set of tools and methods
[39,40]. Sahay et al. [10], for example, use a conceptual comparative in the context of a broader methodology, often being identified as
framework and surveys to contrast the features and functionalities model-driven engineering.”
offered by different low-code platforms. Other studies concentrate on Business applications: some studies report practical uses of low-code
challenges associated with low-code such as security [41,42], potential to address operational challenges. In the context of education, Saay and
fragmentation of the overall application landscape [43], and strategical Margaria [67] use eXtreme Model-Driven Development (XMDD) and
perspectives to leverage the use of low-code into existing larger systems low-code to facilitate users' data integration among different e-learning
[44]. platforms in an educational network. The authors report the use of DIME
Interfaces with contemporary topics: Another important group of [68], a low-code development environment for XMDD, supporting agile
articles focuses on exploring interfaces of low-code with contemporary communication of requirements between IT professionals and non-
topics related to information management. For instance, some articles technical stakeholders. In the same field, Rajaram et al. [69] report
delve into the potential of low-code to support processes and interfaces using low-code to develop a virtual educational platform to consolidate
of Digital Twins [45–47]. Other authors analyse the use of low-code to and make available different educational resources during the pandemic
facilitate the integration of Internet of Things (IoT) devices with IoT times.
platforms [48,49]. Another group of articles explores the use of low- In the area of sports performance management, Oliveira et al. [70]
code in the context of Industry 4.0 [50,51], Artificial Intelligence (AI) document the development of an application to control and analyse
[52,53] and Big Data [54]. Focusing on the software/application sport progress records. The authors use OutSystems' low-code develop
development process, some authors analyse the implications of low-code ment platform to develop a solution to register daily workouts and
to agile/scrum methodologies [55–57]. leverage the use of artificial intelligence to capture and process the data.
Implications to software development: Some articles in this category In agriculture, Neto et al. [71] report the use of an algorithm in a mobile
analyse the implications of low-code to the software development pro application to predict diseases in beef stock production. The author also
cess and the role of the information technology (IT) profession consid use the OutSystems platform and leverage using data mining and AI.
ering this new technology paradigm [58,59]. Studies in this cluster Varajao [72] describes the use of low-code to develop an information
discuss the effects of shifting the centre of software/app development system supporting the monitoring and control of a virus epidemic. The
from professional developers to business experts (e.g., Citizen De author emphasizes that the use of low-code was key to enabling a fast
velopers) and the new resulting structures of IT delivery and digitali development process for a digital solution which was urgently needed to
zation [1,7,9,60]. Other articles in this cluster explore the use of low- control the spread of Covid.
code in educational programs to support the development of digital Some articles report using low-code in the context of manufacturing
skills aiming to address the shortage of IT professionals [61–63]. Other and supply chain management. Waszkowski [5] describes the use of a
studies focus on assessing the factors influencing the use of low-code low-code platform for automating business processes. The author
from the perspective of IT professionals [64] analysing the most trend highlights that one of the main benefits of low-code is the reduction of
ing discussions in popular developers' forums [65]. time in the transfer of requirements from the end user to the IT de
Literature reviews: We found 2 studies analysing literature. Prinz velopers. The author attributes this to the fact that the Citizen Developer
et al. [66] use a socio-technical systems framework to analyse 32 pub can play the dual role as end-user and developer. In the same area, Wolff
lications. Coincidently with the results of our literature review, Prinz [17] describes several examples of low-code use to digitalize workflows
et al. [66] conclude that most of the research focuses on the technical in repair services and inventory management. The author argues that
aspects of low-code platforms. The authors point out that social aspects manufacturing is particularly suited for low-code because most of the
related to roles and responsibilities, alignment processes, and commu engineers running business processes are familiar with a programming
nication related to the deployment of low-code in business environments language, thus the low-code environment is not fully foreign to them.
5
From a broader perspective, Sanchis et al. [18] analyse low-code suit One of the main limitations of low-code platforms relates to
ability to support digitalization in manufacturing. The authors examine restricted customization options [2,65]. The lack of customization de
the status of research and benchmark different low-code platforms rives from the fact that low-code development is naturally less powerful
identifying challenges and opportunities. The authors place low-code in than traditional programming, and users are limited to the options
the context of a virtual factory open operating system (vf-OS) and offered in the low-code platform. In more complex scenarios, a Citizen
highlight interfaces to IoT and Industry 4.0 to facilitate the information Developer may be unable to meet demanding requirements, eventually
transfer and optimization of equipment and products along the entire requiring support from professional developers [20]. Tisi et al. [16] also
value chain. Wang et al. [73] document the use of low-code to build a identify scalability and fragmentation as low-code shortcomings. Scal
small-scale Enterprise Resource (ERP) system to support operations in ability refers to the ability to expand the use of a given application to
the context of the hydrogen equipment manufacturing industry. The larger systems, projects, or organizations. Fragmentation relates to
authors report the benefits of the low-code-based ERP system over the limited interoperability among low-code platforms and supporting da
previous semi-manual Microsoft Excel approach highlighting the po tabases. Some organizations hesitate to fully embark on low-code
tential of low-code to foster innovation and business agility within an because of the high cost per user [2], and concerns about potential
organization. vendor lock-in [20]. In terms of limitations, the author identified the
During the literature review, the authors did not find case studies of following:
low-code use in the context of the Architecture, Engineering, and Con
struction industry. This is highlighted as one of the contributions of this ▪ L1 - Lack of customization: Low-code is less powerful than
study. traditional programming. Users are limited to options offered in
the low-code platform.
▪ L2 - Limitations in terms of scalability: Low-code involves
3.1. Benefits and limitations framework building small applications but solutions at an enterprise level
are not yet possible, or hard to materialize.
Literature highlights faster development, ease of use, and cost sav ▪ L3 - Fragmentation: Low-code systems/paradigms are
ings as the main benefits of low-code [2,64]. On top of reducing hand- different from vendor to vendor. This prevents data integration
coding, the assisted low-code process facilitates data integration, pro when using different low-code platforms.
vides space for testing and experimenting with new ideas, as well as ▪ L4 - Vendor lock-in: Companies start using and developing
becomes a single control point for configuration and application main apps and then they get locked into a particular vendors' envi
tenance [3]. Based on an industry survey, Richardson and Rymer [21] ronment. A company may be indirectly forced to keep using a
report that the low-code development process can be 5 to 10 times faster particular vendor once apps have been released.
than traditional approaches. In a similar direction, other industry sur ▪ L5 - High licensing cost: The initial cost for app development
veys report that software developers are embracing low-code to accel is not very high. However, the cost increases when rolling out
erate digital transformation, increase response to changing business the app to a larger number of users.
requirements, and reduce reliance on hard-to-hire IT developers [20]. ▪ L6 – Security: People in the organization could start devel
Overall, the authors abstracted the following benefits: oping and releasing apps having no consideration for security.
This may threaten overall organizational IT security.
▪ B1 - More speed or agility in app development: Low-code
applications require less hand coding, thus less time to 4. Case studies
develop. The development process is then faster enabling
earlier availability of functional applications. Table 2 provides an overview of the 3 case studies. They were con
▪ B2 - Cost savings: Low-code applications require fewer re ducted within the same organization which is a multinational con
sources to be developed (e.g., fewer working hours are required struction and real estate organization based in central Europe. Each case
for development) and there is no need of hiring professional study was developed in a different project, country, and involving
developers. different type of construction processes and operational teams. The va
▪ B3 - Complexity reduction: Applications are not built from riety of scenarios enriches the sample providing a good baseline to
scratch. In most cases, there are pre-defined components and
templates to develop an app. For this reason, application
Table 2
development is simplified and focus is given to meeting user
Case studies overview.
requirements.
▪ B4 - Easier maintenance: Low-code applications are supposed Type of project and Country Context and Low-code
processes challenges platform
to be lighter in code when compared to traditional coding. For applications
this reason, the outcome results in fewer lines of code and effort used
to maintain.
Case study 1: Switzerland Digitalization of the Microsoft Lists,
▪ B5 - Higher involvement of business profiles: Low-code Tunnelling project, data collection process PowerApps, and
enables the involvement of people closer to operations in the drill and blast to report activities in Power BI
development process. This facilitates translating requirements operations different project shifts
into features of the application because people close to the Case study 2: Germany Digitalization of on- Microsoft Lists,
Complex site inventory PowerApps.
process have a better understanding of business needs. infrastructure management for
▪ B6 - Minimisation of unstable or inconsistent re project, inventory critical items
quirements: Low-code facilitates building early prototypes to management
validate requirements. This prevents wasting resources on un Case study 3: France Digitalization of the Microsoft
Tunnelling project, data collection process Dataverse,
necessary features/functionalities and to avoid unnecessary
excavation, to report activities in PowerApps, and
development loops. umbrella pipes, and different project shifts Power BI
▪ B7 - Increased privacy: Low-code applications are developed drill and blast – including different
by internal staff/people (e.g., no need for external IT consul type of processes (e.g.,
tants). As a result, the data remains internally in the organi excavation, drill and
blast)
zation, increasing privacy.
6
address the research questions. Single case study allows analysing the work full-time on development but engaged in a series of iterative loops
outcomes of low-code implementation at a project / operational level, which allowed testing and refining the concept to meet the re
which is aligned with RQ1. Analysing the outcomes across the 3 quirements. This process lasted 3 months. The team included the project
different case studies enables adopting a wider organizational / industry manager, site manager, foremen, key crew members, and two central
perspective, which supports addressing RQ2. office operations experts (acting as the Citizen Developers) to support in
The architecture of the systems was built on the Microsoft Power the elicitation of requirements to develop the mobile application.
Platform. Microsoft Power Platform is a set of cloud applications sup System architecture and outcomes: The architecture of the system
porting the automation of business processes and the creation of appli is depicted in Fig. 6. Primary users provide inputs about the drill and
cations using low-code [76]. Within this platform, the applications were blast processes through a graphical user interface (GUI) built in Pow
developed using PowerApps and Power BI. PowerApps is a suite of app erApps. From the mobile application, data inputs are stored in a data
components, services, connectors, and data platforms offering a devel base hosted on Microsoft Lists. Microsoft Lists allow structuring data in a
opment environment to realize applications tailored to specific business set of cloud-based tables, including relationships through unique IDs for
needs [77]. PowerApps allows connecting data stored in data platforms the different entries. The GUI is connected to the Microsoft Lists via
such as Microsoft List, Dataverse, or SQL Server. Power BI was used to integrated data connectors predefined in the Microsoft Power Platform.
model and visualize data coming from different sources facilitating the These data connectors allow the data model to be retrieved, displayed,
creation of customized reports and dashboards to enable business and edited through the mobile application.
intelligence. The generation of reports, data analysis, and overall business intel
ligence is done using Power BI. Using a series of interconnected queries
4.1. Case study 1: tunnelling - drill and blast operations and data table relationships, Power BI retrieves and combines data from
Microsoft Lists to generate visual insights. This allows the team access to
Context and main challenges: the case study involves a project real-time information about project performance which facilitates the
using drill and blast method for the construction of a 300 m tunnel in identification of improvement opportunities to increase productivity.
Switzerland. Drill and blast is a tunnelling excavation method charac Fig. 7 depicts the mobile application GUI and the dashboard.
terized by a series of repetitive steps depicted in Fig. 5: 1) drilling-blast
holes in the front of the tunnel face, 2) loading the holes with explosives, 4.2. Case study 2: complex infrastructure project - onsite inventory
3) clearing the area for safety and detonating the blast, 4) ventilation of management
the area to remove blast fumes and any hazardous elements on the air, 5)
evacuation of the blasted rock from the tunnel by using different loading Context and main challenges: this case study involves the prepa
and transporting machinery (mucking), 6) profiling the walls to remove ration phase of a complex infrastructure project, including the con
loosened pieces of rock and to ensure designed tunnel geometry, 7) struction of two vertical shafts and 6.8 km of the tunnel using hydro-
installation of ground support, bolts, or grouting to ensure stability, 8) shield tunnelling technique in one of the largest cities in Germany. On
advancing rail, ventilation, and utilities, 9) surveying and repeating the top of the technical challenges derived from the tunnelling technique,
process. the project team faced significant supply chain difficulties since the
Traditionally, to track the progress and performance of this process, project is located in the city center resulting in limited space for site
construction crews fill in different paper forms with information about logistics. Initially, onsite inventory management was done manually by
the duration of activities and resources used in each cycle. This infor performing periodic counts to assess stock levels for different materials
mation is processed and analysed using spreadsheets. This manual and assets. This manual process was cumbersome and prone to mis
process to capture and process data is time-consuming and prone to calculations considering that materials were continuously (in some cases
errors. Furthermore, in many cases, the data is not promptly processed, simultaneously) replenished and withdrawn from different storage lo
which prevents managers and production crews to have real-time cations distributed onsite. Under this scenario, it was challenging for the
feedback about project performance. In this project, three working team to centralize the information to have a real-time overview of the
shifts handled six different paper forms containing inputs such as ac availability of materials necessary to keep the flow of production.
tivity durations, and resource use (e.g., machine, personnel hours, Aiming to cope with this uncertainty, the team allocated quantity
subcontractors, etc). buffers for critical materials to absorb fluctuations and avoid any critical
Low-code development process: the project team aimed to tackle disruption in construction works. This workaround exacerbated onsite
these shortcomings by digitalizing and automating the process of data space constraints since these safety buffers demanded additional storage
capturing and processing. Searching in the market for a simple out-of- areas and extra logistics. The project team needed to find a more effi
the-box solution did not derive positive results, thus the team evalu cient solution to manage the inventory of critical materials onsite.
ated developing a customized mobile application. For this purpose, the Low-code development process: the project team investigated
project team conducted a series of workshops to map the value stream of different asset management systems available in the market. The re
the drill and blast process seeking to identify all relevant data inputs. quirements of the system considered a relatively simple assets/materials
The team also used six different paper forms used in other projects as a counting system, including the use of mobile devices to support
baseline to design the data model. From the workshops, the team was capturing data from different storage areas distributed on-site. Since no
able to consolidate requirements to replace the paper forms used in the suitable system could be found at a reasonable price, and considering
project and to derive all relevant data relationships. The team did not case study 1 experience, the project sought to work on developing a
Fig. 5. Drill and blast cycle.
7
Fig. 6. Case study 1 system architecture.
Fig. 7. Case study 1 application GUI (left) and dashboard (right).
digital system based on specific project requirements. The requirements storage locations can then be assigned to the same item using a third list
of the system were elicited in close cooperation with the project team. stock acting as a placeholder which users can edit in the app GUI with a
After the initial requirements were captured, the team conducted book in/out transaction (+/− ). When this is done, a new list entry is
additional working sessions to refine different iterations of the appli created in the background in the transactions list which records the type
cation aiming to ensure meeting all the requirements. The project team of transaction (book in, book out, move). To create the relationship
uploaded to the system relevant information about materials to be between the lists, the IDs of the items and the storage locations are taken
tracked, including minimum stock levels and a representative picture. over into the list elements of the stock and transactions. This creates 1: n
The team also created and assigned bar codes to the different materials relationships from the stock/item master lists to the stock/transaction
and storage areas which can be scanned using the mobile app. The team lists.
delivered a functional application after a month of work. The users can handle the data in two different ways: 1) to record
System architecture and outcomes: the architecture of the system master data containing information of materials and storage locations,
is depicted in Fig. 8. The information processed in the app is stored in and 2) directly tracking inventory levels by booking in-and-out mate
Microsoft Lists. Material items in the master data are stored with an rials. Fig. 9 depicts the app GUI to track materials. This is done by
identity number and other item-specific data such as barcode, minimum identifying the material with corresponding book in/out or move items
storage quantity, item image, etc. The master data also contains all among locations (in German, Einbuchen +/ Ausbuchen - / Veschschie
storage locations on the construction site with their corresponding ben). Alternatively, there is an option to add QR codes and use a scan
identification number and barcode linked to the item. One or more ning feature on a mobile device. Based on these inputs, the app
8
Fig. 8. Case study 2 system architecture.
Fig. 9. Case study 2 application GUI.
calculates in real time the number of items still available onsite. To umbrella pipes technique. The final phase involves 3.5 km of tunnel
support the timely ordering of materials, a color-coding convention was construction using drill and blast technique. The operational challenges
implemented to warn users when predefined minimum stock levels of an of this case study are similar to the ones described in case study 1. That
item have been reached. is, the project team seeks to replace manual data capturing with a digital
solution enabling more efficient data processing. Nevertheless, in this
4.3. Case study 3: earthmoving and tunnelling operations case, the variety of construction operations involved (earthmoving, drill
and blast, umbrella pipes) required adapting the data model and GUI to
Description and challenges: this case study involves the con accommodate the singularities of the different processes in one digital
struction of a section of a large bi-country tunnel project in France. The solution.
project considers different types of operations and tunnelling tech Low-code development process: the development process started
niques. The initial construction phase includes earthmoving operations with a requirements workshop including key project participants. The
to remove soft soil in front of the planned tunnel section opening. The project team provided different spreadsheet templates that they were
second phase considers 500 mts of tunnelling construction using the planning to use to capture the data. These files served as a baseline to
9
design the data model and the workflow implemented to capture data viable products (MVPs) in a relatively short timeframe. Similarly, the
with the mobile application. The project team also provided spreadsheet involvement of people closer to operations providing requirements and
mockups depicting how they would like to visualize the data in a real- validating them through MVPs enabled a more productive development
time dashboard. The requirements captured in the first workshop process. The authors (acting as Citizen Developers) had direct access to
allowed the development of the prototype. The development process the projects and operations, facilitating communication with the key
was facilitated considering that several of the components developed in users and speeding up validation loops. Most practitioners also
case study 1 were reused and adapted for this application. The prototype perceived these benefits and valued being highly involved in the
was handed over to the project team for feedback which was used to development process.
release a second version of the application. The project team included 1 Benefits related to B2 - Cost savings and B4 - Easier maintenance
project manager, 2 site managers, 1 local IT systems support, and 1 seem not so evident. In these dimensions, the evolution of the applica
quality manager. At the moment of writing this research, the team was tion along its lifecycle and the perspective adopted to evaluate the case
working on the feedback to release the final version of the app. Up to this studies (individually or as a group) plays a fundamental role. The evo
point, the team worked sporadically for 2 months. lution of an application may result in complex improvement re
Overall system architecture and outcomes: The system architec quirements which may not be accomplishable with out-of-the-box low-
ture is similar to case study 1 (Fig. 6), except for the database envi code components. This scenario requires the involvement of professional
ronment. Based on the experience gained in previous cases and developers, changing the programming language, or technology stack,
considering the forecasted amount of data to be handled in this project, which eventually impacts the total development cost. For example, in
the team decided to use Microsoft Dataverse instead of Microsoft Lists. case study 3 we had to migrate the database to another environment to
Microsoft Dataverse allows the definition of relational connections cope with higher data model complexity and to accommodate external
among tables and offers a superior capacity to accommodate more project joint venture users. This required upgrading app users to a more
complex data requirements [78]. In the system, the users capture expensive licensing scheme which was not initially considered. Main
process-related data through a mobile application built on Microsoft tenance benefits also depend on the perspective. Single app maintenance
PowerApps. First, the users start creating a shift recording basic infor could be considered easy since this could be done by the Citizen De
mation (e.g., date, time, project manager, location, etc.) along with an velopers (as done in the case studies). Nevertheless, maintaining a larger
automated unique ID for each entry. Once the shift is created, the user portfolio of low-code apps could become cumbersome if the develop
can access to the record and add (or attach) information about the ment process has not been properly documented. Reliable app devel
different activities (e.g., type of activity, time, units of production, etc.). opment documentation is key to facilitating knowledge transfer,
This is maintained based on a 1: n data relationship considering that maintenance, and troubleshooting. The development of low-code apps
each shift can have several activities. The team plans to process the data without proper governability could become counterproductive to the
using Power BI to create a real-time dashboard. At the moment of overall digitalization effort. This was something pointed out by some of
writing this paper, the dashboard was not yet developed. The applica the IT experts in the survey.
tion prototype GUI is depicted in Fig. 10. The results are also not explicit with regards to B6 - Instable/
inconsistent requirements. We provide evidence of productive devel
5. Survey opment practices using low-code. However, the development process
involves a holistic process (e.g., requirements management, analysis,
5.1. Findings prioritizing, documentation, etc.) which goes beyond the use of a
particular development platform. In all case studies, the authors expe
Table 3 consolidates the findings of the study considering the ben rienced that low-code helped to capture and validate requirements
efits and limitations identified in literature. The left column summarizes through quick iterations, but they also encountered unproductive loops
the analysis and most relevant observations derived from the case related to issues in the development process itself. For instance, in one
studies, while the right column incorporates the outcomes of the survey, case study changes in requirements came up because two key stake
including a synthesis of the rationale supporting practitioners agree/ holders were not involved in the initial workshop. The dispersion of
neutral/disagree judgment. Hereby the authors aim to contrast the survey results seems to reflect these types of experiences. Eventually,
learnings from the case studies with the practitioners' perspective. low-code development has the ability to facilitate digitalization, but
Our findings confirm low-code benefits related to B1 - more speed/ implementation success relies on people and the process they used to
agility, B3 -complexity reduction, and B5 - business profiles involve work with it.
ment. From the low-code development perspective, these benefits are Benefits related to B7 - Increased privacy were also not very
perceived at the beginning of the process since the availability of pre noticeable. Privacy was not a topic of concern considering that the low-
defined components in the platform enables the release of minimum code platform used was already integrated into the organizational IT
Fig. 10. Case study 3 application GUI (some fields in French)
10
Table 3
Summary of case studies and survey findings.
Case studies Survey (percentage and number of
responses)
Agree Neutral Disagree
B1 - More speed/Agility 81.8% (9) 9.1% (1) 9.1% (1)

The development process benefited from using predefined elements offered in the low-code platform. Predefined data connectors and flows Most practitioners agree that the
in the low-code platform significantly contributed to speeding up the development process. development process is faster and
more agile. Some attribute this to the
fact that low-code allows fast
development of a minimum viable
product, thus prototypes are available
earlier supporting feedback and
validation loops. Neutral/disagree
inputs comes from practitioners with
some knowledge about coding
arguing that “…similar apps can be
done as fast with traditional
coding…”
B2 - Cost savings 63.6% (7) 9.1% (1) 27.3% (3)
Low-code platform fees and development costs (Citizen Developers hours) were carried by the global organization. The only investment at From a project and short-term
the project level was the time of people to work on providing requirements and feedback to the prototypes. Although the total cost of perspective, cost savings seem
development was not explicitly tracked, the authors assume that indirect cost benefits can be derived from shorter development time and apparent. However, some
autonomy (no need for professional developers). practitioners point out that depending
on the complexity of requirements
professional developers may be
needed, impacting initial cost savings.
Complex requirements may also
demand intense workarounds inside
the low-code platform. as pointed out
by one practitioner “…low-code
development is not that flexible, so in
some cases cost and time intensive
workarounds must be
implemented…”
B3 - Complexity reduction 91.9% 9.1% (1) 0%
(10)
The development process did not start from scratch and there was no need for additional code or external IT experts to support in meeting Practitioners highlight the “easy to
end-user requirements. There was no need to install any additional software to transfer the app to users. use interface” and availability of
predefined components within the
platform as the most relevant
advantages of using low-code. As
pointed out by one of the
practitioners: “…complexity
reduction is one main points that
makes it possible for non-IT people to
build low-code apps…”
B4 - Easier maintenance 54.5% (6) 45.5% 0%
(5)
Maintaining, troubleshooting, and taking care of potential improvements are done by Citizen Developers. From this perspective, maintenance In the short term and for a single app,
is easier. Nevertheless, the complexity and workload of this task grows as made apps were launched for the different case studies. maintenance could be considered
easier. Nevertheless, this depends on
the perspective. Digitalization efforts
may be compromised if the delivery of
low-code apps lacks governability and
the development process is not
properly documented. One
practitioner indicates this is true if “…
components are well documented and
designed for easy maintenance over a
long lifecycle…”
B5 - Business profiles involvement 81.8% (9) 18.2% 0%
(2)
The Citizen Developers and project teams contributing with requirements are experts in the business processes and operations. This This is also seen as one of the biggest
significantly facilitates translating requirements into features of the application. advantages from practitioners'
perspectives. One of the practitioners
stated: by using low-code “…concept
work and translation (of
requirements) between IT and
business can be reduced.”
B6 - Instable/inconsistent requirements 63.6% (7) 36.4% 0%
(4)
Low-code approach enabled fast feedback loops to validate and refine requirements. However, we experienced that consistency and stability Quick transition to app testing and
of requirements depend on the process going beyond the low-code platform. We also went through requirement changes and unproductive validation are pointed out as
loops which cannot be attributable to the low-code platform but to the development process. important advantages of low-code.
Nevertheless, some practitioners
pointed out that expertise in
(continued on next page)
11
Table 3 (continued )
responses)
requirements management and their

mapping to app features is also
critical to reduce inconsistent
requirements. One practitioner poses
the open question: “…are we
prepared to deliver requirements in a
managed way?”
B7 - Increased privacy 54.5% (6)
18.2% (2) 27.3% (3)
There were no concerns related to privacy. The applications were developed by internal staff and in an environment already embedded in the Responses here vary depending on
organizational IT landscape. Users having access to the data can export and misuse the information but those are issues applicable to any practitioner perspectives. Some
kind of IT system. We assumed that privacy topics were already managed by the global IT organization. assume that this is already covered in
the low-code platform privacy
assessment done by global IT.
Practitioners with more knowledge
about IT systems express concerns
about this matter: “…unfortunately
privacy and security are often topics
which are not sufficiently considered,
especially in low-code development.”
L1 - Lack of customization 72.7% (8) 27.3% 0%
(3)
Aware of potential limitations in this area, the development process considered balancing end-user requirements with the capabilities of the Most practitioners recognize that low-
low-code platform, as well as the expertise of the Citizen Developers. There was no out-of-the-box customization necessary to meet the code may not be able to cope with
requirements. complex requirements. They also
recognize that for the scope of the
projects in the case studies, no
additional capabilities were required.
A practitioner pointed out “…I agree,
but for our projects, it is enough.”
Other practitioner highlights the
quick release of new features in low-
code platforms to expand capabilities.
L2 - Scalability 27.3% (3) 36.4% 36.4% (4)
(4)
The authors experienced scalability by improving the app from case study 1 into 3. The data model and several components were re-used. Responses are dispersed because of
Nevertheless, we experienced challenges with database capabilities. The database upgrade required in case study 3 involved rebuilding the different perspectives adopted by
tables and relationships. From a broader perspective, the learnings of the case study enlighten that a strategic approach is required to make practitioners. For some, this is not a
app development among projects efficient and sustainable. relevant topic because apps can be
“copied” from one project to another.
Others see low-code as only useful for
“simple functions” and they should
not be used at a global level. Some
practitioners state that applications
could be scaled up at a corporate
level, but it requires more effort. In
general, people at the project level do
not see challenges in scalability. This
is not the same opinion of
practitioners taking a broader global
perspective
L3 - Fragmentation 18.2% (2) 63.6% 18.2% (2)
(7)
The applications developed in the case studies are not intended to connect to other systems or platforms. The built-in Application Integrating information from the low-
Programming Interfaces (APIs) supported seamless data transfer among different applications in the low-code platform. We realized use code to other platforms requires
cases to connect our low-code databases to BIM models and ERP systems. necessary APIs and most probably
support from a professional
developer. Nevertheless, some
practitioners also highlight there are
more and more APIs available. Some
practitioners disagree arguing that
other low-code platforms may offer
enhanced interoperability.
L4 - Vendor lock-in 72.7% (8) 18.2% 9.1% (1)
(2)
Applications in the case studies were developed using the same platform. As per scope, there was no need to change vendor or integrate with The different components of the apps
another. Nevertheless, the team was aware that it was restricted to working within the environment and solutions included in the low-code are hosted in the vendors' cloud
platform. environment. Moving away from this
will require migrating data, app logic,
and GUI to a new one, increasing
switching costs. Some practitioners
state these risks are mitigated by
making strategic and long-term
(continued on next page)
12
Table 3 (continued )
responses)
decisions at an enterprise architecture

level.
L5 - High licensing cost 36.4% (4)
27.3% (3) 36.4% (4)
The authors used the basic licensing scheme provided by the organization for the low-code platform. This means that users and projects using The varied responses here are
the application did not carry an extra cost. Nevertheless, moving to a more advanced database (case study 3) required paying extra attributed to the different
licensing fees on top of the basic ones. perspectives of the practitioners.
Projects and practitioners in case
study 1 and 2 did not experience extra
costs. However, for case study 3, the
project team had to carry additional
costs to host the app database in
Dataverse. According to one
practitioner “…licensing costs are
difficult to estimate at the beginning
of some projects, especially when the
user group has not yet been
established or is continuously
growing.”
L6 - Security 45.5% (5) 18.2% 36.4% (4)
(2)
No significant security constraints were experienced in the case studies. Security of the application and the data were assumed to be Some practitioners disagree with
considered as part of the global organizational IT strategy. The only challenge related to security relates to the fact that in case study 1 and security constraints because they
3, the apps were used in joint ventures. This required providing access to our environment to colleagues from partner companies (external assumed that the security of the
users). application inherited the measures
taken by global IT. Despite this, some
practitioners still acknowledge that
security is always a concern because
the apps are not developed by
professional developers and thus,
Citizen Developers may overlook
some of the basic measures needed in
this regard.
landscape and hence it was assumed that privacy topics were addressed of results in these dimensions derives from the different profiles of
by the global IT organization. The dispersion of results in the survey practitioners in the survey and the perspective they adopt for the anal
derives from the fact that practitioners assess the topic from the ysis. At the single case study (project) level, practitioners privilege the
perspective of their respective roles. For example, privacy is a critical delivery of a digital solution for their project, thus scaling it up to an
topic for an IT specialist taking a more organizational perspective. For organizational level is not a priority. In contrast, scalability and
others working closer to project operations, this seems not so relevant. licensing costs become important for IT experts or central functions
Our findings also confirm L1 - Lack of customization and L4 - Vendor seeking to leverage the use of an application across different projects.
lock-in as the major limitations of using low-code. In terms of custom These varied perspectives, project versus organizational, are recurrent in
ization, Citizen Developers in the case studies were conscious that the the survey. For instance, an IT expert agrees with the scalability limi
materialization of complex requirements may not be possible using out- tation stating that “…It takes some effort to raise a low-code app to an
of-the-box features in the low-code platform. For this reason, the project enterprise level,” while another practitioner at the project level dis
teams adopted two mitigation actions to prevent failure in application agrees indicating that we can easily share solutions from project to
delivery. First, the team pre-assessed the feasibility to materialize core project. In terms of licensing cost, dissimilar inputs may derive from the
requirements using low-code predefined components. Second, the team fact that in case studies 1 and 2, the project team did not pay any
continuously contrasted more demanding requirements against the licensing fees to materialize the app. In contrast, the project in case
platform capabilities, as well as the “low-code” knowledge of the Citizen study 3 had to carry an extra licensing cost to upgrade the database.
Developers. This approach proved to be successful for the type of pro Results are also not consistent in terms of L6 – Security. In all case
cesses described in the case studies, preventing customization con studies we assumed that security measures were already considered by
straints becoming a barrier to delivering a functional app. Some global IT (like B7). The only security concern was related to potential
surveyed practitioners argue that this limitation helps to focus on simple access to confidential information by external joint venture partners.
and efficient solutions which are enough for the context of construction Large projects are normally executed through joint ventures and em
projects. Others highlight that customization limits should be constantly ployees of these external organization needed to have access to a low-
assessed considering that low-code platforms are continuously incor code app environment and database to use the application. This chal
porating additional features and capabilities in every new release. In lenge was handled by creating specific external-user accounts with
terms of vendor lock-in, the platform used offered all the elements to essential restrictions to ensure the protection of corporate confidential
materialize requirements in the same cloud environment, which facili information.
tates development but raised concerns about the flexibility to change
vendor. Although not used in the case studies, there are options to use 6. Discussion
premium connectors to exchange data with other cloud services, which
could mitigate this situation but increases the cost of the development. The authors analyse the findings of this study to discuss the impli
The results are not consistent in terms of the limitations L2 – Scal cations of low-code from a broader industry perspective, focusing on the
ability, L3 – Fragmentation, and L5 - High licensing cost. The dispersion value it brings to support construction industry digitalization.
13
Low-code and construction industry innovation: low-code offers confirm some benefits and limitations of using low-code (B1, B3, L1, L4)
opportunities to facilitate the digitalization of construction industry but the results are not conclusive for the others. When triangulating
processes since it has the potential to cope with the so-called one-of-a- data, we identify that scattered results could be rooted in strategic
kind nature of the construction business. The lack of standardization in concerns about low-code implementation, and not necessarily in us
construction processes is usually linked to the varied characteristics of ability or capabilities of the low-code technology. Scalability limitations
site conditions, as well as the transient nature of projects and organi (or leveraging the efficient use of an application in different projects)
zations defined to build them [79,80]. As a result, out-of-the-box in could be tackled by defining an organizational approach to develop
formation technology tools struggle to cope with a variety of project-based apps which can be scaled up to a global level. For instance,
requirements to match every business case, limiting their usability on- by implementing a repository of reusable components or apps to be
site, and broader roll-out in other projects. This can explain the large directly downloaded and adapted to new projects. This could appear
and fragmented landscape of information technology tools available in straightforward. However, is very likely that an organization starting
the market [81]. Low-code benefits related to complexity reduction and using a low-code platform does not consider this broader perspective.
agility in the development process empower project teams to develop Likewise, concerns about maintenance and lack of project documenta
their own approaches to digitalization. This bottom-up low-code tion in app development could be tackled via a standard organizational
approach to address operational challenges could derive in different approach to low-code app development. Defining a strategic approach to
types of innovations that can incrementally be scaled up at an organi low-code can enable the organization to benefit from this technology not
zational or industry level. only at the project but also at an organizational level. At a project level,
Leveraging the use of data: the construction industry is data teams can have real-time access to project performance metrics, identify
intensive but most of it is not fully used [82]. Several companies still use bottlenecks, and define actions to improve key processes productivity.
discrete and non-real-time systems to process data, and many rely on At an enterprise level, construction firms could consolidate data
spreadsheets to monitor project operations [83,84]. Data needs to be generated from different projects and leverage the use of this informa
properly processed to derive insights and valuable information. This tion to improve performance in other phases of the project life cycle. In
process, when done by discrete and manual means, is time-consuming this regard, our experience enlightens that organizations should
and prone to errors. From the case studies, we learned that the exces consider the opportunity strategically and first assess how low-code
sive effort required to capture and process data from discrete sources platforms fit into their broader information technology landscape and
prevents project teams to adopt a fact-based project management business structure. We consider that the strategic analysis of re
approach. In this aspect, low-code facilitates the transition from data to quirements to fully leverage the use of low-code in the construction
information, allowing teams to promptly access to relevant facts to steer industry is a critical topic for future research.
the projects.
Low-code and computing literacy: although low-code platforms 7. Study limitations
are intended to be intuitive, the Citizen Developer still requires knowl
edge about data modelling and requirements management to deliver an The findings of this study should be analysed considering that the
application. This seems to be contradictory with low-code marketing digital solutions were developed using one of the many low-code plat
statements implying that anyone can build applications without any forms available in the market [13]. This platform was already incor
software expertise. In fact, the term “low-code” and “no code” are used porated in internal organization IT systems which facilitated the
interchangeably [59,85]. As per our experience, along with under implementation process. Low-code development platforms offer similar
standing how to use the low-code platform, the materialization of the features (e.g., [10]). Nevertheless, the authors acknowledge that using a
case studies demanded knowledge about data modelling (tables and particular platform could have an impact on the benefits and limitations
data relationships) and requirements engineering. Without these, the assessed in the study. This study limitation translates into an opportu
delivery of a functional application able to capture and process the data nity for future research by comparing different platforms and their
required by project teams would have been extremely difficult. Some suitability to the construction industry.
research is ongoing in industrial engineering and project management
education aiming to define the skills and knowledge required by Citizen 8. Conclusions
Developers to leverage the use of low-code [8,86]. Exploring what are
the necessary competencies of a Citizen Developer in the context of the The paper introduces the paradigm of low-code development in the
construction industry offers an interesting area for further research. construction industry. The authors combined the outcomes of the liter
Links to other contemporary construction industry topics: ature review, case studies, and surveys, aiming to answer 2 research
working on the case studies, the authors realized low-code overlaps with questions: RQ1) What are the benefits and limitations of using low-code
contemporary industry topics. Some of them are highlighted in the development in the context of construction business and operations?
literature review section. For example, we identify several synergies and RQ2) How could low-code contribute to the digitalization of the
between the implementation of low-code and lean construction princi construction industry?
ples. By using the apps, the teams removed waste from processes (e.g., With regards to RQ1, the findings confirm that productive practices
time to process data) and the processed data provides transparency and the involvement of business profiles in the development process of
about key performance indicators which could be used to drive digital solutions are the major benefits of low-code. This facilitated the
continuous improvement (e.g., [87]). Similarly, since contemporary elicitation of requirements and their translation into features of the
project delivery methods such as Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and digital solutions, ensuring the delivery of applications meeting project
Virtual Design and Construction would be hard to realize without proper and end-user requirements. In terms of limitations, the lack of custom
information technology [88], it would be interesting to explore how ization and potential vendor lock-in are confirmed as the major con
low-code could contribute to facilitate their implementation. Further cerns. The results are not conclusive for several other benefits and
more, the digitalization of data enabled by low-code opens opportunities limitations analysed in this study. The triangulation of results calls for
to find synergies with industry data-driven topics such as BIM, Digital attention to the general organizational and strategical aspects when
Twin, the Internet of Things, Industry 4.0, and AI. For instance, research implementing low-code, suggesting that some of the limitations could be
could be done to define how the data captured through low-code apps eased (and benefits further exploited) when considering the strategical
can be efficiently linked to Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) to enrich fit of low-code into organizational IT landscape and operational
the data available in BIM models. structure.
Strategical approach to low-code: the findings of this study In terms of RQ2, our findings suggest that by lowering the technical
14
barriers to software/app development, low-code empowers people ps://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/5022324/low-code-development-plat

form-market-by-component, 2020.
closer to operations to develop their own digital approaches to address
[15] J. Wong, M. Driver, S. Ray, The future of apps must include citizen development,
operational challenges. This has the potential to enable digitalization Gartner (2019). Accessed: Aug. 11, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.gart
and innovation at different levels of the construction industry. The ner.com/en/documents/3970067. Accessed: Aug. 11, 2022. [Online]. Available:.
ability of low-code to support the digitalization and integration of data [16] M. Tisi, J.M. Mottu, D. Kolovos, J.D. Lara, E. Guerra, D.D. Ruscio, A. Pierantonio,
M. Wimmer, Lowcomote: training the next generation of experts in scalable low-
also opens opportunities for synergies with several contemporary code engineering platforms, STAF Co-Located Events Joint Proceed. (2019),
managerial and information technology topics such as Lean Construc https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4314656.
tion, IPD, BIM, the Internet of Things, and AI. [17] I. Wolff, Making in-house apps with ash low-code, no-code platforms, Manuf. Eng.
(2019). https://www.sme.org/technologies/articles/2019/october/software-maki
Low-code is gaining momentum and scientific interest in the topic is ng-in-house-apps-with-low-code-no-code-platforms/ (accessed Aug. 15, 2022).
rising. Existing literature focuses on the technical aspects of low-code [18] R. Sanchis, O. Garcia-Perales, F. Fraile, R. Poler, Low-code as enabler of digital
platforms but neglects organizational and social aspects linked to transformation in manufacturing industry, Appl. Sci. 10 (1) (Jan. 2020), https://
doi.org/10.3390/app10010012.
development practices required for its implementation. The skills, ca [19] R.E. Boyatzis, Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code
pabilities, roles, and responsibilities of Citizen Developers in the con Development, Sage Publications, 1998. ISBN: 0–7619–0961-3.
struction industry organizational structure are also highlighted as a [20] Outsystems, The State of Application Development Is IT Ready for Disruption?,
Accessed: Aug. 15, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.outsystems.com/-/me
topic for future research. dia/E0A6E7121AAD4A4C975828265B3639ED.ashx?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiT1Rsb
U56azNNakJsWVRaaiIsInQiOiIyNlBCdGlrRnVHclVEY2c3TWtSSEUwNWtTU3FB
VVE0M2gwK0xoSW0xaktSZ3dWS2t6amQxOFU2WlFCRllwR256aUh
Declaration of Competing Interest
MTHVWa0ROSnZrU2tRUlZ4cTV5RFJXb2o5Wlphc21jaFR4bXY4ZmU3U3B
rTkFNMm1BZm9MWkNsRHg0YjlzayJ9, 2019.
The authors declare the following financial interests/personal re [21] C. Richardson, J.R. Rymer, Vendor landscape: the fractured, fertile terrain of low-
lationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: code application platforms, Forrester (2016). Accessed: Aug. 11, 2022. [Online].
Available: https://www.forrester.com/report/Vendor-Landscape-The-Fractured-Fe
At the time of conducting this research, both authors worked for rtile-Terrain-Of-LowCode-Application-Platforms/RES122549. Accessed: Aug. 11,
Implenia, the company where the case studies and survey were 2022. [Online]. Available:.
conducted. [22] K. Marek, M. Smialek, K. Rybinski, R. Roszczyk, M. Wdowiak, Balticlsc: low-code
software development platform for large scale computations, Comput. Inform. 40
(22) (2021) 734–753, https://doi.org/10.31577/cai_2021_4_734, 4.
Data availability [23] R. Roszczyk, M. Wdowiak, M. Smialek, K. Rybinski, K. Marek, BalticLSC: a low-
code HPC platform for small and medium research teams, in: 2021 IEEE
Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC), 2021,
Data will be made available on request. pp. 1–4, https://doi.org/10.1109/VL/HCC51201.2021.9576305.
[24] R.K. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5th edition, SAGE
References Publications, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2014. ISBN: 978–1–4522-4256-9.
[25] R.M. Leicht, S.T. Hunter, C. Saluja, J.I. Messner, Implementing observational
research methods to study team performance in construction management,
[1] A.C. Bock, U. Frank, Low-code platform, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 63 (6) (2021) 733–740,
J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 136 (1) (2010) 76–86, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-021-00726-8.
CO.1943-7862.0000080.
[2] Y. Luo, P. Liang, C. Wang, M. Shahin, J. Zhan, Characteristics and challenges of
[26] M. da Cruz, H. de Paula, B.P.G. Caputo, S.B. Mafra, P. Lorenz, J. Rodrigues, OLP-A
low-code development: the practitioners’ perspective’, in: Proceedings of the 15th
RESTful open low-code platform, Future Internet 13 (10) (2021), https://doi.org/
ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and
10.3390/fi13100249.
Measurement (ESEM), 2021, pp. 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1145/
[27] D. Falcioni, R. Woitsch, OLIVE, a model-aware microservice framework, in:
3475716.3475782.
E. Serral, J. Stirna, J. Ralyté, J. Grabis (Eds.), The Practice of Enterprise Modeling
[3] C. Richardson, J.R. Rymer, C. Mines, A. Cullen, D. Whittaker, New development
(PoEM), 2021, pp. 90–99, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91279-6_7.
platforms emerge for customer-facing applications, Forrester (2014). Accessed:
[28] H. Henriques, H. Lourenco, V. Amaral, M. Goulao, Improving the developer
Aug. 11, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.forrester.com/report/New-Deve
experience with a low-code process modelling language, in: 21st ACM/IEEE
lopment-Platforms-Emerge-For-CustomerFacing-Applications/RES113411.
International Conference On Model Driven Engineering Languages And Systems
Accessed: Aug. 11, 2022. [Online]. Available:.
(MODELS), 2018, pp. 200–210, https://doi.org/10.1145/3239372.3239387.
[4] M. Fryling, Low code app development, J. Comput. Sci. Colleges 34 (6) (2019) 119.
[29] A. Indamutsa, D.D. Ruscio, A. Pierantonio, A low-code development environment
https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.5555/3344051.3344061.
to orchestrate model management services, in: A. Dolgui, A. Bernard, D. Lemoine,
[5] R. Waszkowski, Low-code platform for automating business processes in
G. VonCieminski, D. Romero (Eds.), Advances in Production Management Systems.
manufacturing, IFAC-PapersOnLine 52 (10) (2019) 376–381, https://doi.org/
Artificial Intelligence for Sustainable and Resilient Production Systems APMS,
10.1016/j.ifacol.2019.10.060.
2021, pp. 342–350, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85874-2_36.
[6] J. Everhard, The Pros and Cons of Citizen Development. https://www.forbes.co
[30] B. Lopes, S. Amorim, C. Ferreira, Solution discovery over feature toggling with
m/sites/johneverhard/2019/01/22/the-pros-and-cons-of-citizen-development/?sh
built-in abstraction in outsystems, in: ACM/IEEE International Conference on
=4d04dfae84fd, 2019 accessed Aug. 03, 2021.
Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems Companion (MODELS-C), 2021,
[7] C. Olariu, M. Gogan, F. Rennung, Switching the center of software development
pp. 49–58, https://doi.org/10.1109/MODELS-C53483.2021.00015.
from it to business experts using intelligent business process management suites, in:
[31] H. Lourenco, C. Ferreira, J.C. Seco, OSTRICH - a type-safe template language for
V.E. Balas, L.C. Jain, B. Kovačević (Eds.), Soft Computing Applications, 2016,
low-code development, in: ACM/IEEE 24th International Conference on Model
pp. 993–1001, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18416-6_79.
Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MODELS), 2021, pp. 216–226,
[8] Project Management Institute, Introducing PMI Citizen Developer. https://www.
https://doi.org/10.1109/MODELS50736.2021.00030.
pmi.org/citizen-developer, 2021 accessed Aug. 03, 2021.
[32] J. Pacheco, S. Garbatov, M. Goulao, Improving collaboration efficiency between
[9] M. Woo, The rise of no/low code software development—no experience needed?
UX/UI designers and developers in a low-code platform, in: 24th ACM/IEEE
Engineering 6 (9) (2020) 960–961, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2020.07.007.
International Conference On Model-Driven Engineering Languages And Systems
[10] A. Sahay, A. Indamutsa, D.D. Ruscio, A. Pierantonio, Supporting the understanding
Companion (MODELS-C), 2021, pp. 140–149, https://doi.org/10.1109/MODELS-
and comparison of low-code development platforms, in: 46th Euromicro
C53483.2021.00025.
Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), 2020,
[33] R. Rasiman, F. Dalpiaz, S. Espana, How effective is automated trace link recovery
pp. 171–178, https://doi.org/10.1109/SEAA51224.2020.00036.
in model-driven development? in: V. Gervasi, A. Vogelsang (Eds.), Requirements
[11] A. Bucaioni, A. Cicchetti, F. Ciccozzi, Modelling in low-code development: a multi-
Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality (REFSQ), 2022, pp. 35–51, https://
vocal systematic review, Softw. Syst. Model. 21 (2022) 1959–1981, https://doi.
doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98464-9_4.
org/10.1007/s10270-021-00964-0.
[34] J. Ramalho, H. Lourenco, J.C. Seco, From Builders to editors: bidirectional
[12] J. Cabot, Positioning of the low-code movement within the field of model-driven
transformations of Low-code Models, in: 24th ACM/IEEE International Conference
engineering, in: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on
On Model-Driven Engineering Languages And Systems Companion (MODELS-C),
Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems: Companion Proceedings, 2020,
2021, pp. 108–117, https://doi.org/10.1109/MODELS-C53483.2021.00022.
pp. 1–3, https://doi.org/10.1145/3417990.3420210.
[35] E. Sahinaslan, O. Sahinaslan, M. Sabancioglu, Low-code application platform in
[13] J. Wong, K. Iijima, A. Leow, A. Jain, P. Vincent, Magic quadrant for enterprise low-
meeting increasing software demands quickly: SetXRM, in: Fourth International
code application platforms, Gartner (2021). Accessed: April. 10, 2023. [Online].
Conference Of Mathematical Sciences (ICMS), 2021, https://doi.org/10.1063/
Available: https://www.gartner.com/en/documents/4005939. Accessed: April.
5.0042213 (070007) 1–4.
10, 2023. [Online]. Available:.
[36] C.D. Sipio, J.D. Rocco, D.D. Ruscio, P.T. Nguyen, A low-code tool supporting the
[14] Research and Markets, Low-Code Development Platform Market by Component
development of recommender systems, in: 15th ACM Conference On Recommender
(Platform and Services), Application Type, Deployment Type (Cloud and On-
Systems (RECSYS), 2021, pp. 741–744, https://doi.org/10.1145/
Premises), Organization Size (SMEs and Large Enterprises), Industry, and Region -
3460231.3478885.
Global Forecast to 2025, Accessed: Aug. 11, 2022. [Online]. Available: htt
15
[37] A.C. Bock, U. Frank, In search of the essence of low-code: an exploratory study of (ISSREW), 2021, pp. 415–420, https://doi.org/10.1109/
seven development platforms, in: 24th ACM/IEEE International Conference On ISSREW53611.2021.00112.
Model-Driven Engineering Languages And Systems Companion (MODELS-C), [61] R. Pecinovsky, J. Pavlickova, Modifications of development environment for use in
2021, pp. 59–68, https://doi.org/10.1109/MODELS-C53483.2021.00016. the architecture first methodology, in: 9th International Conference On Education
[38] F. Gurcan, G. Taentzer, Using microsoft powerapps, mendix and outsystems in two And New Learning Technologies (EDULEARN17), 2017, pp. 648–653, https://doi.
development scenarios: An experience report, in: 24th ACM/IEEE International org/10.21125/edulearn.2017.1136.
Conference On Model-Driven Engineering Languages And Systems Companion [62] J. Metrolho, R. Araujo, F. Ribeiro, N. Castela, An approach using a low-code
(MODELS-C), 2021, pp. 69–74, https://doi.org/10.1109/MODELS- platform for retraining professionals to ICT, in: 11th International Conference On
C53483.2021.00017. Education And New Learning Technologies (EDULEARN19), 2019, pp. 7200–7207,
[39] M. Overeem, S. Jansen, Proposing a framework for impact analysis for low-code https://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2019.1719.
development platforms, in: 24th ACM/IEEE International Conference On Model- [63] J.C. Metrolho, F. Ribeiro, R. Araujo, A strategy for facing new employability trends
Driven Engineering Languages And Systems Companion (MODELS-C), 2021, using a low-code development platform, in: 14th International Technology,
pp. 90–99, https://doi.org/10.1109/MODELS-C53483.2021.00020. Education And Development Conference (INTED2020), 2020, pp. 8601–8606,
[40] C. Silva, J. Vieira, J.C. Campos, R. Couto, A.N. Ribeiro, Development and https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2020.2341.
validation of a descriptive cognitive model for predicting usability issues in a low- [64] H.A. Alsaadi, D.T. Radain, M.M. Alzahrani, W.F. Alshammari, D. Alahmadi,
code development platform, Hum. Factors 63 (6) (2021) 1012–1032, https://doi. B. Fakieh, Factors that affect the utilization of low-code development platforms:
org/10.1177/0018720820920429. survey study, Romanian J. Inform. Technol. Automatic Control-Revista Romana
[41] M. Oltrogge, E. Derr, C. Stranksy, Y. Acar, S. Fahl, C. Rossow, G. Pellegrino, Inform. Automat. 31 (3) (2021) 123–140, https://doi.org/10.33436/
S. Bugiel, M. Backes, The rise of the citizen developer: assessing the security impact v31i3y202110.
of online app generators, in: IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), 2018, [65] M.A.A. Alamin, S. Malakar, G. Uddin, S. Afroz, T.B. Haider, A. Iqbal, An empirical
pp. 634–647, https://doi.org/10.1109/SP.2018.00005. study of developer discussions on low-code software development challenges, in:
[42] C. Zolotas, K.C. Chatzidimitriou, A.L. Symeonidis, RESTsec: a low-code platform IEEE/ACM 18th International Conference On Mining Software Repositories (MSR),
for generating secure by design enterprise services, Enterp. Inform. Syst. 12 (8–9) 2021, pp. 46–57, https://doi.org/10.1109/MSR52588.2021.00018.
(2018) 1007–1033, https://doi.org/10.1080/17517575.2018.1462403. [66] N. Prinz, C. Rentrop, M. Huber, Low-code development platforms - a literature
[43] M. Setala, P. Abrahamsson, T. Mikkonen, Elements of sustainability for public review completed research, in: Proceedings of the 27th annual Americas
sector software - mosaic enterprise architecture, macroservices, and low-code, in: Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), 2021 [Online]. Available: https
Software Business (International Conference on Software Business), 2021, pp. 3–9, ://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2021/adv_info_systems_general_track/adv_info_systems_
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91983-2_1. general_track/2/.
[44] R. Noel, J.I. Panach, O. Pastor, Challenges for model-driven development of [67] S. Saay, T. Margaria, Model-Driven-Design of NREn Bridging Application: Case
strategically aligned information systems, IEEE Access 10 (2022) 38237–38253, Study AfgREN, in: IEEE 44th Annual Computers, Software, and Applications
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3162225. Conference (COMPSAC), 2020, pp. 1522–1527, https://doi.org/10.1109/
[45] D. Bano, J. Michael, B. Rumpe, S. Varga, M. Weske, Process-aware digital twin COMPSAC48688.2020.00-39.
cockpit synthesis from event logs, J. Comput. Languages 70 (2022), 101121, [68] S. Boßelmann, M. Frohme, D. Kopetzki, M. Lybecait, S. Naujokat, J. Neubauer,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cola.2022.101121. D. Wirkner, P. Zweihoff, B. Steffen, DIME: a programming-less modeling
[46] M. Dalibor, M. Heithoff, J. Michael, L. Netz, J. Pfeiffer, B. Rumpe, S. Varga, environment for web applications, in: T. Margaria, B. Steffen (Eds.), Leveraging
A. Wortmann, Generating customized low-code development platforms for digital Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation: Discussion,
twins, J. Comput. Languages 70 (2022), 101117, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Dissemination, Applications, 2016, pp. 809–832, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
cola.2022.101117. 319-47169-3_60.
[47] J. Michael, A. Wortmann, Towards development platforms for digital twins: a [69] A. Rajaram, C. Olory, V. Leduc, G. Evaristo, K. Coté, J. Isenberg, J.S. Isenberg, D.
model-driven low-code approach, in: A. Dolgui, A. Bernard, D. Lemoine, L. Dai, J. Karamchandani, M.F. Chen, C. Maedler-Kron, P.O. Fiset, An integrated
G. VonCieminski, D. Romero (Eds.), Advances in Production Management Systems. virtual pathology education platform developed using Microsoft power apps and
Artificial Intelligence for Sustainable and Resilient Production Systems (APMS), Microsoft teams, J. Pathol. Inform. 13 (2022), 100117, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
2021, pp. 333–341, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85874-2_35. jpi.2022.100117.
[48] R.A. Deshmukh, D. Jayakody, A. Schneider, V. Damjanovic-Behrendt, Data spine: a [70] J. Oliveira, S. Nicola, P. Graca, S. Martins, T. Gafeira, Application for the
federated interoperability enabler for heterogeneous IoT platform ecosystems, management of sports performance in crossfit supported by an artificial
Sensors 21 (12) (2021), https://doi.org/10.3390/s21124010. intelligence cognitive service, in: Innovations in Bio-Inspired Computing and
[49] S.G. Pantelimon, T. Rogojanu, A. Braileanu, V.D. Stanciu, C. Dobre, Towards a Applications (IBICA), 2022, pp. 590–598, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-
seamless integration of iot devices with iot platforms using a low-code approach, 96299-9_56.
in: IEEE 5th World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), 2019, pp. 566–571, [71] A. Neto, S. Nicola, J. Moreira, B. Fonte, Livestock Application: Naive Bayes for
https://doi.org/10.1109/WF-IoT.2019.8767313. Diseases Forecast in a Bovine Production Application Use of Low Code, in:
[50] X.P.I. Palomes, P. Tuset-Peiro, P.F.I. Casas, Combining low-code programming and Innovations in Bio-Inspired Computing and Applications (IBICA), 2022,
SDL-based modeling with snap! in the industry 4.0 Context, in: 24th ACM/IEEE pp. 183–192, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-96299-9_18.
International Conference On Model-Driven Engineering Languages And Systems [72] J. Varajao, Software development in disruptive times, Commun. ACM 64 (10)
Companion (MODELS-C), 2021, pp. 742–751, https://doi.org/10.1109/MODELS- (2021) 32–35, https://doi.org/10.1145/3453932.
C53483.2021.00120. [73] L. Wang, S.P. Guan, W. Deng, P. Lu, ERP system Design for Hydrogen Equipment
[51] R. Waszkowski, G. Bocewicz, Visibility matrix: efficient user Interface modelling Manufacturing Industry Based on low code technology, Mob. Inf. Syst. 2022
for low-code development platforms, Sustainability 14 (13) (2022), https://doi. (2022), https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5371471.
org/10.3390/su14138103. [74] K. Talesra, N. G. S, Low-code platform for application development, Int. J. Appl.
[52] A. Redchuk, F.W. Mateo, ‘New business models on artificial intelligence-the case of Eng. Res. 16 (5) (2021) 346–351, https://doi.org/10.37622/ijaer/16.5.2021.346-
the optimization of a blast furnace in the steel industry by a machine learning 351.
solution’, applied system, Innovation 5 (1) (2022), https://doi.org/10.3390/ [75] D.D. Ruscio, D. Kolovos, J. de Lara, A. Pierantonio, M. Tisi, M. Wimmer, Low-code
asi5010006. development and model-driven engineering: two sides of the same coin? Softw.
[53] W. Villegas-Ch, J. Garcia-Ortiz, S. Sanchez-Viteri, Identification of the factors that Syst. Model. 21 (2) (2022) 437–446, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-021-00970-
influence university learning with low-code/no-code artificial intelligence 2.
techniques, Electronics 10 (10) (2021), https://doi.org/10.3390/ [76] Microsoft, Microsoft Power Platform. https://powerplatform.microsoft.com
electronics10101192. /en-us/, 2022 accessed Aug. 15, 2022.
[54] P. Bocciarelli, A. D’Ambrogio, T. Panetti, A. Giglio, E-MDAV: a framework for [77] Microsoft, What is Power Apps. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/powerapps
developing data-intensive web applications, Informatics 9 (1) (2022), https://doi. /powerapps-overview, 2022 accessed Aug. 11, 2022.
org/10.3390/informatics9010012. [78] Microsoft, Comparing Microsoft Lists, Dataverse for Teams, and Dataverse - Power
[55] N. Jesse, Agility eats legacy - the long good-bye, IFAC-PapersOnLine 52 (25) Apps. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/power-apps/teams/compare-data-sourc
(2019) 154–158, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2019.12.464. es, 2022 accessed Sep. 20, 2022.
[56] M. Lebens, R. Finnegan, Using a low code development environment to teach the [79] G. Ballard, G. Howell, What kind of production is construction, in: Proceedings of
agile methodology, in: P. Gregory, C. Lassenius, X. Wang, P. Kruchten (Eds.), Agile the 6th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction
Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming, 2021, pp. 191–199, (IGLC), IGLC, Guarujá, Brazil, 1998, pp. 13–15. Accessed: Dec. 12, 2022. [Online].
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78098-2_12. Available: https://iglc.net/Papers/Details/37.
[57] L. Poe, L. Mew, The effects of using the agile methodology as an instructional [80] R. Vrijhoef, L. Koskela, Revisiting the three peculiarities of production in
format for software development courses, Ind. High. Educ. 36 (5) (2021) 638–646, construction, in: Proceedings of the 13th Annual Conference of the International
https://doi.org/10.1177/09504222211058658. Group for Lean Construction (IGLC), IGLC, Sydney, Australia, 2005, pp. 19–27.
[58] S.J. Andriole, Editorial: where did IT go? Int. J. Technol. Manag. 89 (1–2) (2022) Accessed: Dec. 12, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://iglc.net/Papers/Details/345.
1–8, https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2022.123011. [81] J.L. Blanco, A. Mullin, K. Pandya, M. Parsons, M. Ribeirinho, Seizing Opportunity
[59] G. Hurlburt, Low-code, no-code, What’s under the Hood? IT Profess. 23 (6) (2021) in Today’s Construction Technology Ecosystem, McKinsey & Company, 2018.
4–6, https://doi.org/10.1109/MITP.2021.3123415. Accessed: Dec. 12, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.mckinsey.com/capabi
[60] Y. Wang, Y. Feng, M. Zhang, P. Sun, The necessity of low-code engineering for lities/operations/our-insights/seizing-opportunity-in-todays-construction-technolo
industrial software development: a case study and reflections, in: IEEE gy-ecosystem. Accessed: Dec. 12, 2022. [Online]. Available:.
International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering Workshops [82] M. Bilal, L.O. Oyedele, J. Qadir, K. Munir, S.O. Ajayi, O.O. Akinade, H.A. Owolabi,
H.A. Alaka, M. Pasha, Big data in the construction industry: a review of present
16
status, opportunities, and future trends, Adv. Eng. Inform. 30 (3) (2016) 500–521, [86] B. Adrian, S. Hinrichsen, A. Nikolenko, App development via low-code
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2016.07.001. programming as part of modern industrial engineering education, in: I.L. Nunes
[83] G. Armstrong, C. Gilge, Global Construction Survey: Make it, or Break (Ed.), Advances in Human Factors and Systems Interaction, 2020, pp. 45–51,
it–Reimagining Governance, People and Technology in the Construction Industry, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51369-6_7.
KPMG, 2017. Accessed: Dec. 13, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://kpmg.com/t [87] E. Martinez, I.D. Tommelein, A. Alvear, Integration of lean and information
w/en/home/insights/2017/10/global-construction-survey-make-it-or-break-it.ht technology to enable a customization strategy in affordable housing, in:
ml. Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean
[84] C. Dosad, W. Squires, The Value of Information Management in the Construction Construction (IGLC), IGLC, Heraklion, Greece, 2017, pp. 95–102, https://doi.org/
and Infrastructure Sector, Accessed: Sep. 19, 2022. [Online]. Available: htt 10.24928/2017/0136.
ps://home.kpmg/uk/en/home/insights/2021/06/the-value-of-information-manag [88] E. Martinez, A. Ezzeddine, B. García de Soto, Integrating project delivery and
ement-in-the-construction-and-infr.html, 2021. information technology: Challenges and opportunities, in: V. González, F. Hamzeh,
[85] S.S. Bhattacharyya, S. Kumar, Study of deployment of “low code no code” L.F. Alarcón (Eds.), Lean Construction 4.0: Driving a Digital Revolution of
applications toward improving digitization of supply chain management, J. Sci. Production Management in the AEC Industry, 1st ed., Routledge, 2022,
Technol. Policy Manag. 14 (2) (2021) 271–287, https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM- pp. 275–287, https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003150930-22 (ISBN:
06-2021-0084. 9780367714208).
17

Benefits and Limitations of Using Low-Code Development To Support

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Benefits and Limitations of Using Low-Code Development To Support

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Benefits and Limitations of Using Low-Code Development To Support

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Automation in Construction 152 (2023) 104909

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Benefits and limitations of using low-code development to support

1. Introduction modeler with an intuitive graphical interface offering different pre­

Fig. 1. Research design.

Fig. 2. Literature review protocol.

“simplicity.” In terms of limitations, some authors refer to “fragmenta­ 2.3. Survey

Fig. 3. Survey screen caption.

Fig. 5. Drill and blast cycle.

Fig. 6. Case study 1 system architecture.

Fig. 7. Case study 1 application GUI (left) and dashboard (right).

Fig. 8. Case study 2 system architecture.

Fig. 9. Case study 2 application GUI.

Fig. 10. Case study 3 application GUI (some fields in French)

Agree Neutral Disagree

B1 - More speed/Agility 81.8% (9) 9.1% (1) 9.1% (1)

Agree Neutral Disagree

requirements management and their

Agree Neutral Disagree

decisions at an enterprise architecture

barriers to software/app development, low-code empowers people ps://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/5022324/low-code-development-plat

You might also like

1. Introduction modeler with an intuitive graphical interface offering different pre

“simplicity.” In terms of limitations, some authors refer to “fragmenta 2.3. Survey