Gomez, C P (2002) A study of the situated practice of benchmarking in the UK construction industry. PhD thesis, University of Birmingham, UK.
Abstract
The focus of this thesis is the situated practice of a select number of quality and business improvement practitioners (QMs/BIMs) from the construction industry who were actively involved with academia in collaborative research. The research is described as exploratory to the extent of requiring a revised research instrument that was ‘designed' to meet the concerns of the QMs/BIMs for direct relevance to current work practices. It is in this context that I have undertaken to describe and explore possibilities based on selective experiences based on this research. The approach adopted in undertaking this research is based on the interpretive paradigm, specifically that of reaching understanding based on Habermas' Theory of Communicative Action. The basis for this is in terms of the notion of ‘communal rationality' as proposed by Gergen and Thatchenkery. A key concept in this thesis is that of communities of practice (CoPs) and the notion of legitimate peripheral participation (LPP). These concepts are central to understanding emergent forms of practice amongst these QMs/BIMs. The seemingly chaotic nature of this research and the transient dimension of the research focus is recognised as a feature of the creative tension between academic researchers and practitioners. Within such a complex ‘collaborative' research endeavour, the objective of benchmarking as originally intended is realised, in more practical terms, as the development of a benchmarking methodology.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | benchmarking; participation; communal rationality; communicative action; communities of practice; interpretive paradigm; legitimate peripheral participation |
| Index terms: | academia, legitimate peripheral participation, communicative action, construction industry, business improvement, dimension, communities of practice, communal rationality, interpretive paradigm, practitioner, methodology, work practice, benchmarking |
| Subjects: | sociology, educational institutions, communities and social development, industry analysis, research methods, management, performance measurement, health monitoring assessment and metrics, knowledge management, research design and methodology, learning theory, practitioner |
| Topics: | Information Management, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Organizational Design, Health and Safety, Quality Management, Education |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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