Le Masurier, J W (2001) Developing the observational method as a systematic approach to uncertainty management. PhD thesis, University of Bristol, UK.
Abstract
The Observational Method is applied in geotechnical engineering to manage the uncertainties associated with the complex behaviour of the ground and its interactions with structures. Here it is demonstrated that the Observational Method is a special case of a generic approach to uncertainty management, employing the principles of systems thinking. Observational engineering is proposed as a unifying uncertainty management methodology, based on a combination of the principles of Observational Method with a systems approach. The methodology subsumes partnering, value management and benchmarking and uses process modelling to manage both technical and human uncertainties at various levels in a project, leading to continuous improvement. The process models help to identify all processes within a construction project and establish explicit criteria for their success. To be most effective the process models must be produced by concurrence of a team rather than imposed from above. This serves to generate and confirm common objectives and agreement over responsibilities and to establish a co-operative culture. The models so produced become integral to the processes and serve to mediate and facilitate process enactment. The process models encapsulate key performance indicators (KPIs) for each process. In a traditional geotechnical application of the Observational Method these KPIs might be readily measured quantities such as prop loads or foundation settlements. Such KPIs can be included together with more business oriented KPIs and grouped under the headings of time, cost, functionality and people. It is the people factors that make this modelling particularly novel since these are often not considered or are left to chance, yet it is precisely these factors that are crucial for success of a project. Developed through detailed case studies and trials within industry, observational engineering is a robust tool to support those concerned with performance improvement and managing project uncertainties. Being firmly grounded in industry practice it has benefits over imported alternative management techniques.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | continuous improvement; uncertainty; systems thinking; construction project; benchmarking; geotechnical engineering; key performance indicators; partnering; performance improvement; value management; process modelling; case study; observational method |
| Index terms: | partnering, case study, key performance indicator, continuous improvement, performance improvement, uncertainty management, value management, modelling, interaction, operative, observation, systems thinking, process modelling, project uncertainty, functionality, construction project, methodology, foundation settlement, benchmarking |
| Subjects: | project management theory and practice, production management, research methods, management, structural engineering, performance measurement, behavioral psychology, partnership management, practitioner, data collection methods, risk assessment, project delivery, analytical methods, design analysis, design features |
| Topics: | Value Management, Quality Management, Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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