journal article
Download Only Collection
Home
Hallowell, Matthew R.; Bhandari, Siddharth; Alruqi, Wael
doi: 10.1080/01446193.2019.1598566pmid: N/A
AbstractConstruction safety prediction is an emerging field where various forms of information and analytical techniques are used to predict the likelihood or severity of a future injury. A review of this literature reveals that even though the approaches are used for the same goal of predicting future safety outcomes, they are modeled independently and exclusively from one another. To organize thinking in safety prediction, the literature is organized into four operationally-defined predictive families: (1) safety risk assessment, which considers the characteristics and dangers of the work; (2) precursor analysis, which considers the conditions of the workers; (3) leading indicators, which consider the quantity of safety management activities; and (4) safety climate assessments, which considers worker perceptions of safety. Additionally, a unified model is proposed where the four families are considered together and opportunities for synergy and cross-validation are exploited. Researchers may benefit from this model as they create points of departure, propose and test novel approaches, and attempt to contextualize their findings within the existing body of literature. Furthermore, practitioners may use the model to make more accurate and robust safety predictions that account for the interconnectedness of the work attributes, human resources, and management strategies that affect safety.
Hall, Daniel M.; Whyte, Jennifer K.; Lessing, Jerker
doi: 10.1080/01446193.2019.1656814pmid: N/A
AbstractIn construction, the mirroring of knowledge with tasks increasingly limits firm-level abilities to identify and pursue systemic innovation opportunities. Recent research identifies how integration strategies enable individual projects to break from this trap, but much less is known about potential strategic action of firms to enable systemic innovation. To explore this, a longitudinal comparative case study examines how three entrepreneurial firms – DPR construction, RAD Urban, and Project Frog – in the San Francisco Bay Area describe their own strategic evolution and restructuring of firm boundaries over the past five years to enable greater adoption of digital manufacturing. Each firm has developed a different approach – relational, project-based spinoff; vertical integration; or digital systems integration. Benefits and challenges are identified for each. The approaches are theorized as a form of strategic mirror-breaking intended to redefine the current paradigm of knowledge and task dependencies. They enable the firms to develop products with new system architectures and access more opportunities for innovation in digitally-enabled manufacturing. The paper concludes with discussion of how the identification and characterization of strategies for mirror-breaking enriches understanding of integration for systemic innovation in construction at the firm level. The paper identifies common themes for digitally-enabled manufacturing including the limitations of the current industry structure, the emergence of new hybrid positions, and the opportunity for platforms to provide longitudinal integration.
doi: 10.1080/01446193.2020.1718723pmid: N/A
AbstractAs a tribute to Ray Levitt’s early computer science contributions, this paper presents the research methodology he and I in close collaboration with Barbara Hayes-Roth followed to develop the SightPlan system. This research methodology falls under the umbrella of what is known as “design science.” Design science concerns itself with designing and making artefacts to fulfil a purpose, and then testing and validating that they indeed are fit-for-purpose. Design science does not belong in the category of physical science or of fundamental science; instead, it falls in the category of the sciences of the artificial. This paper describes the methodological steps pursued in design science and in parallel illustrates how these steps were instantiated and what artefacts were produced in the course of developing the SightPlan system, a blackboard expert system that lays out temporary facilities on construction sites. The aims of this paper are to recognise Ray’s work as an advisor and researcher, reflect on and promote the use of design science in construction management and economics and thereby participate in the ongoing discussion on research methods in this journal, and illustrate to scholars in this field that research is an opportunistic endeavour.
doi: 10.1080/01446193.2020.1714068pmid: N/A
AbstractVirtual Design and Construction (VDC) is the use of integrated multi-disciplinary performance models of design-construction projects to support explicit and public business objectives. Professor Levitt’s Virtual Design Team (VDT) project provided a fundamental point of departure of this work: the organisation model provides a central theoretical and practical element in the VDC framework. VDC models are virtual because they are computer-based descriptions of the project. This paper summarises the VDC framework that integrates an organisation perspective with perspectives that are implicit in VDT, including 3D Building Information Model (BIM) product models of a product to be designed, built and operated – typically a physical facility – management by objectives, Lean production management and the social method of Integrated Concurrent Engineering (ICE). Thus, VDC project models emphasise those aspects of the project that can be designed and managed, i.e., the product (typically a building or plant facility), the organisation that will define, design, construct and operate it, and the process that the organisation teams will follow. Many companies and hundreds of professionals now use VDC methods, and they consistently find that they improve project and business performance.
Balasubramani, Mahesh; Mahalingam, Ashwin; Scott, W. Richard
doi: 10.1080/01446193.2019.1619932pmid: N/A
AbstractOversight arrangements which articulate technical, contractual and organizational decisions in a project domain constitute project governance. In the light of rapid globalization and an increasing number of complex, pluralistic and heterogeneous projects, the need for contingent project governance arrangements which bridge both stability and temporality of project decisions is emphasized in the literature. Nevertheless, inadequate attention has been paid to study how these governance arrangements are actually set up on contemporary projects. We use a combination of institutions-based and practice-based lenses to develop arguments on how governance arrangements are initially selected and replicated or revised, thereby leading to the emergence of order in project governance structures. We gather empirical evidence by qualitatively studying the shaping of project governance structures in a metro rail project in India. Our data show how the project promoters drew from the Delhi Metro’s governance structures to make technical, contractual and organizational decisions in the Chennai Metro, and then contested or stabilized these structures within the project field through situated interactions. Consequently, we identify 11 underlying mechanisms of sustenance and change of governance arrangements and project norms. By bridging both generic and contextual governance perspectives, the study underlines the role of situated “governing” in (re)creating governance structures.
Dewulf, Geert; Garvin, Michael J.
doi: 10.1080/01446193.2019.1618478pmid: N/A
AbstractDespite the awareness that uncertainty impacts projects with long time horizons, public-private partnership (PPP) research has not extensively examined the operations phase of such projects where interactions between public and private counterparties will be frequent and long-term while subject to a changing environment. Accordingly, two distinct but related investigations examining how governance strategies can address uncertainty in PPP projects are presented. The first identified contractual mechanisms for risk sharing formed during the shaping phase of a broad set of PPP projects; a majority of these mechanisms were strategically designed to address risks as they unfold so counterparty project managers can rely on current information and circumstances during risk resolution. The second explored the emergence of relational mechanisms over time, which revealed that project managers had to consistently adjust established relational approaches to respond to unforeseen events in PPPs. The findings of both studies illustrate the necessity for responsiveness and complementarity of contractual and relational mechanisms in PPPs. Further, the mechanisms uncovered demand project management agility and flexibility as well as improved relational strategies, which is aligned with the emphasis on learning and adaptation in the broader, contemporary project management literature. Consequently, principles from project management 2.0 such as empowering competent project managers and shared global awareness are likely to enhance responsive PPP governance and warrant further exploration.
Chinowsky, Paul S.; Javernick-Will, Amy
doi: 10.1080/01446193.2019.1607513pmid: N/A
AbstractNetworks that generate collaboration and innovative ideas on a regular basis are characterized in this paper as high-value, collaborative networks. The initiation and development of these networks outside of the confines of a formal organization is analyzed in the context of the Engineering Project Organization Society (EPOS). The society, initiated by Professor Raymond Levitt, has existed for 15 years and continues to grow while retaining a core group of founding members. We conducted and analyzed interviews with society members to develop a framework that describes how individuals can form a core with sufficient pull to enable a network to form, stabilize and grow. The framework provides a perspective on how networks sustain through its individual members, the environment in which the network exists, and the rewards individuals obtain from being part of the network. Each of these elements by itself is insufficient to develop network stability; rather, it is the combination of a stable network core and continuous reinforcement of value from the network that serves to preserve and expand network membership. The development of the framework will benefit both academic and professional contexts by highlighting the key elements required to introduce and sustain a dynamic knowledge network.
Showing 1 to 9 of 9 Articles