Pendlebury, M C (2000) Techniques and strategies to improve conceptual and schematic design. PhD thesis, Loughborough University, UK.
Abstract
This research has investigated the management of the concept and schematic design stages with particular reference to brief development, the exchange of design and cost information between the client and designers, and the impact of early design decisions on construction. A critical review of current practice by both literature review and case study revealed that early stage design often failed to meet the expectation of clients leading to frequent redesign and inaccurate cost advice. Poor communication of information between all parties was primarily to blame. This led to the research combining the three elements, design, cost, and risk and developing a Scheme Design Process Model (SDPM) based on ADePT principles to provide designers for the first time the opportunity to: Accurately and systematically, plan ahead for the work required during the scheme design stage; identify conflicts that lead to iterative problems; mitigate iterative problems by identifying and recording the design risk source; qualify the accuracy of the cost advice based on the progress of the design; ensure closer cross-disciplinary cooperation; reduce overall project timescale. The research identified that a generic programme of work can now be produced that includes all major elements for the multi-disciplinary design team. The research provides a contribution to the design-modelling database by introducing and demonstrating flexibility between design stages. In addition to the SDPM the research has also addressed accountability within the decision making process by demonstrating QFD techniques that can be applied at various stages of early design.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accountability; case study; concept design; prototype development; schematic design |
| Index terms: | cost information, case study, concept design, decision-making process, designer, database, modelling, redesign, design process, literature review, strategy, design team, prototype, accountability, programme, accuracy, design risk, design stage, cooperation, design decision |
| Subjects: | financial risk, design process, professional development, accounting and finance, management, design practice, liability law, decision analysis, data management, project controls, design methods, profession, data collection methods, analytical methods, data analysis and analytics, professional practice, modelling and simulation, psychology |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Digital Applications, Organizational Design, Time Control, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Research Practice, Information Management, Roles and Professions, Legal Issues, Engineering Principles, Risk Management |
| 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