Lansley, P R (1998) The winning streak in construction research. In: Hughes, W (ed.) Proceedings of 14th Annual ARCOM Conference, 9-11 September 1998, Reading, UK.
Abstract
The environment of construction management research has changed considerably over the last thirty years. So too has the way in which research is evaluated, especially that undertaken in universities. However, even though the environment has changed many of the issues being addressed are broadly similar to those in the past, but the research has to be executed in a different way. As a result the key factors underlying favourable assessments of research have changed. Consideration of the 1996 Research Assessment Exercise of universities carried out by the UK government suggests that the factors underlying success are those which are largely to be expected and hold no secret threats or insights. Success seems to accompany well- balanced research portfolios of consistently high quality. A major concern, however, is the small number of universities undertaking research predominately at an international and national level of quality.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | evaluation; environment; research; universities |
| Index terms: | exercise, management research |
| Subjects: | health behaviours and lifestyles, research design and methodology |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 CA |
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