Mulhorn, W L (1987) Sources of conflict as perceived by architects and New Jersey public school officials when involved in a building project. EdD thesis, Temple University, USA.
Abstract
Introduction. The purpose of the study was to determine if previously defined areas of perceived conflict continue to exist between school architects and public school officials in the State of New Jersey when both parties are involved in building projects in excess of $1 million dollars. Procedure. Two major and six subsidiary research questions served as a basis for formulating a two part questionnaire/survey. This instrument was initially mailed to 530 New Jersey public school districts. Ultimately, forty public school officials and the architects associated with twenty of the forty building projects responded with information and perceptions pertinent to the study. Findings. The data collected served as the basis for the statistical analysis designed to address the purpose of the study. The analysis resulted in the following findings: (1) None of the forty projects was conflict free. (2) The public school officials indicated that the aspect of the relationship between the school official and the architect that caused the most concern was the architect's supervision of the construction phase of the project. (3) The architects indicated that the aspect of the relationship between the school official and the architect that caused the most concern was the architect's position regarding dispute resolution. (4) No significant differences were found between the public school officials' and the architects' perception of the extent of the conflict and the relationship of that conflict to the complexity of the project, to the employment of a clerk of the works, or to the time of hire of the architect. Conclusions. (1) Although conflict is likely to occur it is not likely to be extensive. (2) Both public school officials and architects agree that more conflict is experienced during the actual construction phase of the project than at any other phase. (3) The conflict expressed by both groups support the conclusion that they continue to have differences in role expectations for each other. (4) Adherence to guidelines which include strict procedures for selecting an architect, clear expectations for the roles of the architect and the public school official, definition of contract language, and the relagation of the architect's fee to the proper perspective, may aid in the establishment of positive work relationships between public school officials and architects.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Walters, D |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | complexity; construction phase; dispute resolution; employment; supervision; architects; Jersey; statistical analysis |
| Index terms: | Jersey, complexity, questionnaire, survey, New Jersey, construction phase, resolution, supervision, public school, architect, dispute, employment, statistical analysis |
| Subjects: | data science, project delivery, dispute resolution, control systems, data collection methods, profession, systems engineering, conflict resolution, educational institutions, Geography, management |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Legal Issues, Human Resources, Education |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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