Azhar, S; Ahmad, I and Sein, M K (2010) Action research as a proactive research method for construction engineering and management. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(1), pp. 87-98. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Academic research in applied disciplines such as construction engineering and management (CEM) has the dual mission of simultaneously contributing to the solution of practical problems and creating theoretical and conceptual knowledge. To do so, appropriate research approaches are needed. However, extant literature in the field has paid little attention to this issue and research methods used have been almost entirely either quantitative surveys or case studies. In this paper, action research (AR) is proposed as an answer to this knowledge gap. AR aims at building and testing theory within the context of solving an immediate practical problem in a real setting. The paper describes the underlying philosophy and application procedure of AR and highlights its strengths and weaknesses. Then, the applicability of the method to CEM is illustrated through a case study of improving access to information to support planning and decision making in a construction owner organization through designing and implementing a data warehouse. The findings indicate that AR is a reliable, structured, and rigorous research approach that is very useful for conducting applied research in construction and enabling academia to influence and improve construction industry practices. It can also effectively help to improve collaboration between academic researchers and industry practitioners in research and development projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | classification description; databases; decision support systems; information management; information technologies; organizational issues; organizations |
| Index terms: | access to information, organizational issue, testing, academia, construction engineering, database, owner, case study, information technology, construction industry practice, practitioner, decision-making, collaboration, research and development, philosophy, survey, decision support, action research |
| Subjects: | computing systems, practitioner, data collection methods, business, professional practice, social equity, management, engineering methods, philosophical studies, data management, educational institutions, research management, decision analysis, sociology |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Ethics, Digital Applications, Organizational Design, Education |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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