Construction projects are organized in loosely coupled systems, where fragmentation and weak cross-project continuity hinder learning and innovation. Standardization has been promoted as a remedy to these systemic disconnects, yet it embodies a fundamental duality: it can act both as a driver and a barrier to innovation. This study examines how standardization can function as a cross-project connector in construction through the combined lenses of loose coupling and connectivity. Drawing on a two-year participatory case study of Building Services Engineering (BSE) in a large Swedish construction contractor, we identify how organizational and contextual conditions shape three interrelated dimensions of connectivity: contested, fragile, and unpredictable. The findings demonstrate that standardization operates as a negotiated connector rather than a fixed coordination mechanism. It simultaneously enables repeatability and adaptation, while also constraining systemic learning. The inherent tension between stability and flexibility reveals how standardization’s dual role both enables and limits innovation across projects. We argue that realizing its potential for connectivity and innovation requires continuous maintenance of linkages over time, positioning standardization not as a static technical instrument, but as an evolving organizational practice embedded in the dynamics of connectivity.

This study explores how the logic of product modularity could be useful for the design of complete residential building areas. Previous research has noted that product modularity is usually only applicable if a ‘full modularization’ approach is pursued (i.e., an approach with completely defined modules). This is challenging in Engineer To Order production strategies. Therefore, an approach towards partial product modularity is sought instead. In this approach, the modules are lesser defined to allow flexibility following, e.g., architectural design freedom, as well as per project-specific requirements posed in house-building projects. This study identifies nine (9) ‘modules’ which are denominated as functional spaces. By explaining how unique project requirements affect functional spaces, some integral elements of house-building are detailed. By evaluating the functional spaces in regards to the level of predefinition, as well as the level of relationship, their level of modularity is explored. The usefulness of partial modularity for house-building is suggested to be for coordination of design work and support tools that aides design work. This study suggests that partial modularity can be a feasible approach towards modularity without the need for countermeasures in terms of increasing product predefinition.

Managing digital information in construction is commonly described through Building Information Modelling (BIM), which advocates seamless chains of information, increased coordination between different actors and a life-cycle perspective on information management. However, low adoption outside the design phase entails that handling information in production is in many cases manual and paper-based, which increases vulnerability for upstream errors materialising downstream in production. Furthermore, issues with interoperability surround many areas when managing digital information. For industrialised house-builders, the transmitter and receiver of information are in many cases integrated within the same company or based on long-term collaboration. This affects their ability to manage information and utilise design information, which implies that their strategy for digital information management (DIM) might benefit from being addressed differently compared to more traditional BIM-based approaches. In this paper, we describe and discuss an implemented DIM-solution at an industrialised house-builder in order to address the benefits and challenges with DIM when managing information from design to production. The results imply that in order for several different functions within the company to reap benefits, a customised DIM-solution adapted after the company's specific needs is a well-suited approach forward to avoid sacrificing functionality when utilising design information.

Product platforms have proven to be an effective means for many industries, seeking to achieve front end variety based on back end commonality. Modular design with standardised interfaces, enabling reuse of components in derivative products over time, has been a success factor for i.e. automotive industry and other types of industries operating in a modify-to-order or configure-to-order supply chain. For construction companies who operate in an engineer-to-order, or even design-to-order supply chain, extensive and changing customer requirements must be managed and full product standardisation could, therefore, affect a company’s market offer adversely depending on its market segmentation. In previous research, one key finding is that construction companies tending to a wider market segment could focus on standardising processes rather than products. Furthermore, previous research highlight the notion of process platforms as a subset within product family design, albeit, little research focus has been given to process platforms for construction companies. In this study, two construction companies are studied with the aim to describe their means for enabling a flexible product offer whilst maintaining a platform strategy. Findings shows that both companies have process platforms with explicit and implicit relations to product realisation and that standardised processes are a vital part in offering end product flexibility whilst maintaining a platform strategy. This study identifies the need for additional research to elaborate and generalise the relation between process platforms and product flexibility, and implies that theory linked to product platforms need to be developed in order to incorporate construction companies where full product standardisation is in conflict with their production strategy.