Elvin, G A (1998) A process model for integrated design and construction. PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley, USA.
Abstract
Throughout history, buildings have been made by people who saw the transformation from architectural idea into architectural object as a single, continuous flow—a unity of design and construction. Against this backdrop of architectural practice as a continuous flow we have built a paradigm characterized by the organizational separation of disciplines and the sequential separation of design and construction activities. The paradigm of separation, however, is proving to be incompatible with the principles and procedures of new processes that suggest a rejuvenation of unified architectural practice. The new surge in concurrent, collaborative methods in architecture like design-build and fast-track production demands new models and methods for the integration of design and construction. Design-build, in which a contractually unified Warn provides both design and construction services, has grown to nearly forty percent of new construction. In fast-track production, construction begins well before design is complete, and design and construction activities proceed concurrently throughout the life of the project. An integrated approach to architecture brings together architects, engineers, contractors and owners dedicated to continuous design improvement during design and construction. This dissertation presents a process model describing fundamental processes of observation, comparison, exploration, decision, instruction and transformation in design and construction. It describes coordination processes and procedures of team building, project planning, communication, risk management and decision making. These coordination processes are presented as hypotheses forming a normative model of integrated design and construction. Hypothesis testing is grounded in case studies of recent architectural projects. Theory-testing data collection was carried out in the form of structured interviews and on-site observation with participants from three case study projects. This study contributes a model of design and construction as a whole system, bridging the gap between design-only and construction-only models to explore critical interprocess relationships. It has defined concepts and tested procedures which can be used to improve design-construction integration. It has identified crucial leverage points in architectural process, leverage points lying in-between the traditional divisions of design and construction, which can become focal points of organizational energy in a method of continuous design improvement within the collaborative, concurrent project environment taking shape today.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Martin, W M |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction activities; coordination; communication; decision making; integration; project planning; risk management; architects; owner; case studies; case study; interview |
| Index terms: | risk management, architect, design and construction, architectural practice, paradigm, coordination, dissertation, testing, case study, team building, transformation, owner, engineer, construction activity, integration, decision-making, exploration, project planning, history, integrated approach, integrated design and construction, interview |
| Subjects: | construction operations, contractual arrangements, professional practice, architectural and construction history, environmental resource management, control systems, risk assessment, profession, data collection methods, research dissemination and communication, business, organizational analysis, decision analysis, sociology, management, education and knowledge transfer, construction integration |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Sustainability, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Site Management, Organizational Design |
| 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