Atkinson, Adrian R (1999) The management of error in construction projects. PhD thesis, University College London, UK.
Abstract
The 'defects problem' has demanded considerable attention in recent years, with much emphasis given to the technical causes of failure. This research project examines the problem from a different point of view - that of human error. Taking as a starting point, technical publications in the construction industry, the research reviews human error literature from a variety of industries and perspectives and synthesises a model of error causation covering organisations in a construction project context. This model is then progressively tested in four studies, a general preliminary survey and three more detailed studies of house-building. Conclusions support the view that errors leading to failure in complex socio-technical systems often exhibit systems characteristics and involve the whole managerial structure. An improved model is proposed, which emphasises the importance of both project and general management errors.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | defects; failures; human error; project management; socio-technical systems |
| Index terms: | project management, construction industry, survey, publication, socio-technical system, construction project |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, production management, project management theory and practice, theoretical framing, data collection methods, research dissemination and communication |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Information Management |
| 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