Harris, R B (1992) A challenge for research. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 118(3), pp. 422-434. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Over the years, contractors have looked to educational institutions to provide a cadre of skilled construction employees, and to gain access to new construction technologies. Early contractor proponents of construction education considered research to be a necessary educational component of benefit to the contracting community. It now appears that this research objective has been overlooked and that communication has been lost between contractors and the researchers. The present work attempts to show that the research community, needs the construction industry if construction programs are to survive in the major universities, and that nonengineering construction education programs also need research to provide the teaching personnel and the subject matter for educating students. The construction industry needs research to develop the advanced construction methods and management skills needed to meet competition and increase profits. The research community is asked to expend greater efforts in developing mutual relationships with contractors and technology oriented educational programs. The Construction Research Council (CRC) is proposed as a possible leader in these efforts.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | construction education, construction employee, competition, construction technology, construction industry, personnel, construction method, program, profit |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, building construction, practitioner, economic analysis, digital engineering, market analysis, professional education, software systems, management |
| Topics: | Site Management, Research Practice, Digital Applications, Human Resources, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Education |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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