Kululanga, G K; Edum-Fotwe, F T; McCaffer, R and Price, A D F (1997) Learning techniques employed by construction contractors' organisations. In: Stephenson, P (ed.) Proceedings of 13th Annual ARCOM Conference, 15-17 September 1997, Cambridge, UK.
Abstract
This paper describes current research within the Department of Civil and Building Engineering at Loughborough University into learning practices within UK Construction Companies. The need to understand how companies learn and accelerate the learning process is greater today than ever before. Companies that stop learning, also stop improving and may run the risk of eventually going out of business. As such, organisations are paying more attention to the concept of corporate learning in order to increase their competitive advantage, and ability to innovate so that they can sustain continuous improvement. The research forms part of a larger theme of improving strategic management practices of construction organisations. By focusing on the organic learning styles and learning mechanisms, the research addresses how construction organisations can employ these options to enhance the strategic process. The paper suggests that continuous improvement in construction companies requires a learning culture.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction companies; learning mechanisms; organic learning styles |
| Index terms: | construction organization, strategic management, building engineering, construction contractor, learning style, construction company, continuous improvement, option, competitive advantage |
| Subjects: | market analysis, decision analysis, practitioner, organization, management, performance measurement, mechanical systems, learning methods |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Education, Quality Management, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here