Engineering Construction & Architectural Management

Derek S. Thomson; Simon A. Austin; Grant R. Mills; Hannah Devine‐Wright

2013 Engineering Construction & Architectural Management

doi: 10.1108/09699981311323970

Purpose – For over a decade, UK public sector construction policy and industry rhetoric has advanced a value agenda that advocates the development of project‐specific understanding of value. This study aims to examine construction practitioners’ collective cognition of value to determine how their facilitation may bias this intent. A value continuum is contributed. Design/methodology/approach – Critique of the design quality indicator (the primary value agenda instrument) finds that it overemphasises objective value, confirming the need for practitioners to help stakeholders develop broader understanding of value. The freelisting technique of cultural anthropology is adopted to model practitioners’ collective cognition of value and, thus, their bias over this process. The standard freelisting protocol is followed. Findings – Practitioners’ collective understanding is found to comprise related concepts that resolve to a one dimensional “value continuum” with subjective and objective terminals and which fully embodies value agenda intent. In contrast, the concepts articulated by the design quality indicator are biased towards the objective value continuum terminal, confirming the need for practitioners to facilitate stakeholder exploration of the full continuum if the value agenda is to be fully addressed. Research limitations/implications – The value continuum only reflects the views of a small but typical sample of construction practitioners. Further work must characterise model completeness and consistency through the supply chain. Originality/value – This is the first work to derive an empirical model of construction practitioners’ collective understanding of value. It achieves this by the novel linking of a cognitive modelling technique from cultural anthropology with an emic interpretation of the results.

Hervé Leblanc; Craig Thomson; Iain Cameron; Pollaphat Nitithamyong

2013 Engineering Construction & Architectural Management

doi: 10.1108/09699981311323989

Purpose – Improving process management within construction projects has been the source of academic and policy research for decades, and continues to be today. This paper seeks to focuses on the relatively under investigated management of Housing Association (HA) planned works and aims to improve this often ill‐defined process by developing a Planned Work Process Model (PWPM) that aids the definition of the phases and activities. Design/methodology/approach – First step in developing the process model was through semi‐structured interviews with 11 HA practitioners allowing for the identification of 20 planned works activities. Second step considered the responses of 7 HA practitioners to a set of questions about the 20 activities leading to the development of an initial Process Model (PM). Third step contextualises the PM within four case studies with HAs of different sizes from which the PWPM emerged. Finally, the PWPM was validated by a panel of HA practitioners. Findings – The PWPM is a process model specific to the practices of HAs in the UK. It represents the first step for process management improvement for planned works by providing a structure to facilitate project planning and performance monitoring. Research limitations/implications – A panel of HA practitioners recognised the uniqueness and value of the PWPM especially in the context of new staff induction and progress monitoring. Further refinement of the PWPM would be possible through a large survey to help improve its practical applicability and refining the activities description and vocabulary. Originality/value – This research will be of interest to those responsible for planning and delivering HA planned works since it presents a tailored interpretation of the project process that currently does not exist.

Jennifer Barrett; Jack Goulding; Pamela Qualter

2013 Engineering Construction & Architectural Management

doi: 10.1108/09699981311323998

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present the extant literature relating to the social processes of innovation in built environment design teams. The paper connects the relevant and significant work in the field of social psychology and architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) to derive a theoretical framework which can be used to direct further research, towards development of the behavioural facet of design management. Design/methodology/approach – First, the paper establishes which aspects of social processes of innovation are already present within the AEC field and examine concepts/ideas in social psychology that are likely to be important in understanding group processes within AEC, applying three emergent themes of social climate; risk attitudes and motivation and reward. Second, the paper identifies which elements of social psychology may be used to expand, consolidate and develop our understanding and identify gaps in AEC specific knowledge. Findings – The paper suggests that whilst the AEC literature has supplanted some key elements of social psychology, this discipline offers a further and significant theoretical resource. However, whilst some aspects of social climate and motivation/reward are well‐represented in the AEC field, these have not yet been fully explored. Furthermore, how collective attitudes to risk can influence design decision‐making is identified as having a limited presence. Originality/value – This paper is the first to bring together the two disciplines of AEC and social psychology to examine the social aspects of innovative design performance in built environment teams. The paper fulfils an identified need to examine the social processes that influence innovative design performance in construction

Issaka Ndekugri; Hannah Daeche; Diwei Zhou

2013 Engineering Construction & Architectural Management

doi: 10.1108/09699981311324005

Purpose – Project insurance is designed to get over the perceived deficiencies of the conventional insurance practice. It involves the entire project supply chain being insured under a single policy taken out by the project owner. The purpose of this article is to report the outcomes of a study aimed at developing understanding of project insurance practice and how it compares with the conventional system. Design/methodology/approach – The study consisted of a questionnaire survey across four sectors of the construction industry. Findings – Direct experience of project insurance is still very patchy. They also raise doubt whether project insurance offers significant benefits to the supply chain members with direct responsibility for designing or executing projects. The main advantages of project insurance over the traditional fragmented insurance products reported by respondents were: avoidance of litigation to determine which member of the project supply chain should ultimately be liable when loss or damage occurs; the ability to obtain cover for projects too large for the insurance capacity of some members of the supply chain; ability of the project owner to purchase customised cover. Research limitations/implications – The disadvantages were: there is duplication from contractors, sub‐contractor and designers still having to purchase the traditional products for projects on which project insurance is not implemented; the levels of excess in the available project insurance products are too high; there is little reduction in the annual insurance premium bills of contractors, sub‐contractors and designers. Practical implications – Universities and other educational institutions can contribute to developing wider awareness by including project insurance in not only their educational curricula but also their research priorities. The UK Government's decision to implement project insurance on some demonstration projects is a step in the right direction but needs to involve the research community who are better able to distil the experience for dissemination to the wider industry. The insurance industry needs to play a more proactive role by reassessing the levels of excesses in their project insurance policies and collaborating with the research community to develop more detailed knowledge of the technique. Originality/value – This is the only reported empirical study into the use of project insurance in the UK construction industry.

James R. Henderson; Kirti D. Ruikar; Andrew R.J. Dainty

2013 Engineering Construction & Architectural Management

doi: 10.1108/09699981311324014

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to report the empirical findings of a survey aimed to investigate the need to improve cross‐phase learning between design and construction. Through exploring the need to introduce a design‐construction feedback loop, combined with the barriers against its development, an expansion of knowledge surrounding the deficiencies of current practice is provided. Design/methodology/approach – The paper reports the results from an online survey conducted in spring 2011 targeted at experienced personnel in the planning, design, construction and facilities management phases of healthcare infrastructure projects. Findings – The current approach of detecting and correcting errors is significantly hindering the extent to which learning from previous experiences is taking place. It is shown that improved integration between design and construction is required in the form of improved feedback if continuous improvement in the areas of efficiency, quality, value and general learning from previous experiences/projects is to be achieved. Research limitations/implications – The focused population of this study limits the extent to which the findings can be generalised. However, it is viewed that this context is potentially one of the most complex and unique project participant arrangements to overcome. Therefore if the need and ability to share learning outcomes across such a complex arrangement can be achieved, then it may be easier within traditional arrangements. Practical implications – The practical implications of moving away from single‐loop learning towards a double‐loop learning approach are provided. Originality/value – This paper identifies that there is a distinct need for further efforts to be applied in the area of improving feedback between the phases of design and construction.

E.G. Ochieng; A.D.F. Price; X. Ruan; C.O. Egbu; D. Moore

2013 Engineering Construction & Architectural Management

doi: 10.1108/09699981311324023

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine challenges faced by senior construction managers in managing cross‐cultural complexity and uncertainty. The rationale was to identify the key strategies that are considered essential for managing cross‐cultural complexity and uncertainty. Design/methodology/approach – Interviews with 20 senior construction managers, ten in Kenya and ten in the UK, were recorded, transcribed and entered into the qualitative research software NVivo. Validity and reliability were achieved by first assessing the plausibility in terms of already existing knowledge on some of the cultural issues raised by participants. The findings were presented to the participants through workshops and group discussions. Findings – The emerging key issues suggested that project leaders need to learn how to control their own characteristics and to use them selectively. An effective multicultural construction project team should focus on team output and attributes that characterise a multicultural team as a social entity. Practical implications – Findings indicate that the role of construction project managers has significantly changed over the past two decades. In order to deal with cross‐cultural uncertainty, project leaders must have superior multicultural and interpersonal skills when managing global multicultural heavy engineering projects. Originality/value – The research shows that leaders of global construction project teams need a good understanding of their culture, environment and the value of their individual contributions.