Schropfer, T (2004) Relational geographies of building practice: An analytic framework. DDes thesis, Harvard University, USA.
Abstract
The objective of this research is to provide building professionals with a better understanding of the impacts of global projects on local building practices. Today, as increasing spatial reach and density of global interconnectedness weave complex webs and networks of relations between clients, builders, architects, and suppliers, we experience design in an increasingly small world [Rowe, 1996]. With the globalization of economies and markets and the related transfer of professional personnel from one place to another, building practices in one place are not as apart from practices elsewhere as they were before and otherwise disparate elements of professional life have been brought much closer together. Despite the building industry's noted resistance to change, building practices are not isolated from global flows [Castells, 1996]. My research is focused on dynamic and changing practices and I show where impacts occur within the levels of practice, the degree of change, and the resulting consequences for building projects. The impacts of global projects on local building practices are examined both in breadth and depth through qualitative analyses of 46 interviews with professionals of four leading global builders, quantitative analyses of 83 recent global projects, and four in-depth case studies. The findings of the research suggest dynamic and changing global practice environments characterized by global projects with widely varying impacts on local building practices. The research subsequently develops a diversified analytic framework of different global project types with a comprehensive description of the characteristics of each of them. The framework analyzes the principles behind the transformation of building practices. It further demonstrates the correlations between project types and the impacts on local practices. The proposed analytic framework will help building professionals to better understand the nature of globalization in the building industry. It also reveals managerial implications and strategic considerations for global building firms and firms considering going global as well as operational implications including market positioning, project evaluation, contracting, and personnel qualification. Such a framework will enhance building professionals' competence for handling projects successfully in an increasingly globally competitive marketplace.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Huang, J |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | competence; market; personnel; building firms; building industry; globalization; markets; project evaluation; architect; builder; client; professional; supplier; case study; interview |
| Index terms: | transformation, qualification, case study, density, project evaluation, markets, building firm, architect, building industry, building professional, builder, market positioning, interview, personnel, building practice, quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis, globalization, competence |
| Subjects: | value management, practitioner, profession, data collection methods, organization, research design and methodology, business, data analysis and analytics, economic analysis, analytical methods, personnel development, management, educational resources, industry analysis, economic factors, building construction |
| Topics: | Education, Project Management, Urban Studies, Human Resources, International Construction, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology |
| 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