Johansen, E and Carson, J (2003) Improving the effectiveness of the building design management process in the UK. In: Greenwood, D J (ed.) Proceedings of 19th Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2003, Brighton, UK.
Abstract
Managing the design process has become an issue of prominence in the UK Construction industry in recent years. Experience of practitioners as well as research and industry analysis have suggested that the process is not under control and there is a lack of understanding of how it works in practice. In order to consider how to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the process an investigation was carried out by obtaining data from senior practitioners in the local Architecture Engineering and Construction professions in the North East of England. The analysis suggests that, in order to improve, the most significant concepts which need attention are; the Design time available, the quality of briefing, the involvement of a team approach, that a clearly identified competent manager controls the process and that the process and particularly task dependencies are understood.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | design control; design management; design process constraints |
| Index terms: | construction industry, briefing, design management, profession, effectiveness, practitioner, investigation, building design management, industry analysis, efficiency, manager, England, design process |
| Subjects: | design process, Geography, performance management, industry analysis, scope management, design methods, institututions, practitioner, strategic management, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions, Quality Management, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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