Gil, N; Beckman, S and Tommelein, I (2008) Problem-solving base building under uncertainty and ambiguity: Multiple-case study on an airport expansion program. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(12), pp. 991-1001. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This multiple-case study induces alternative strategies to coordinate the overlap of tasks to detail and physically execute base building with tasks to conceptualize the business-critical fit out. Base-building subsystems provide service space for occupancy, whereas fit-out subsystems make the space functional. Our empirical findings on problem-solving base-building design under uncertainty and ambiguity stem from a number of projects in an airport expansion program. They suggest that base-building subsystems show low sensitivity to incremental changes in fit out as their definitions are seldom optimized to eliminate slack. Yet, base-building subsystems show high sensitivity to radical changes in fit out when the architectures of the two subsystems are integral to one another. Three strategies for problem-solving base building stand out: (1) iterate design when preliminary information about fit out is ambiguous, or precise but unstable; (2) physically decouple the architectures of base building and fit out; and (3) design buffers in base building when preliminary information about fit out lacks precision but it is not ambiguous. These buffers can be designed out if uncertainties in fit out resolve favorably before starting the physical execution for base building.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | airports and airfields; fast-track construction; flexibility; infrastructure; uncertainty principles |
| Index terms: | buffer, building design, strategy, case study, slack, program |
| Subjects: | operations research, management, financial risk, software systems, architectural design, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Research Practice, Digital Applications, Business Strategy, Time Control, Cost Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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