Jarrah, R T (2007) Planning for, facilitating, and evaluating design effectiveness. PhD thesis, University of Texas at Austin, USA.
Abstract
Design Effectiveness is the degree to which the design effort helps in achieving project value objectives. Because Design Effectiveness largely exists within the context of the design phase, considerations on other project phases, such as front-end development or construction management, have been excluded from this study. Practices that promote Design Effectiveness are called Design Effectiveness Practices (DEPs), and the primary aim of this research was to develop a method for identifying suitable DEPs on a given project. The research consisted of three segments. The first segment of the research consisted of an ANOVA analysis of the CII benchmarking database to analyze the effect of Design on project performance metrics. The second (and main) segment of the research was the development and validation of a Design Effectiveness Practices Selection Tool. The MS Excel® based tool determines the priority of application of 30 different DEPs on a project given the project's desired benefits (from 11 Project Value Objectives), design phase, and unique characteristics. All the 30 DEPs were correlated with the three input parameters using Score Matrices with the aid of expert opinion. The Score Matrices produced a score for each of the input parameters, and the three scores were combined to form a Composite Index Score for each DEP. The Selection tool was also validated in a two-step process, and met the validation thresholds set out for it. The third segment of this research involved the development of a Design Effectiveness Evaluation Tool, also based on MS Excel®. This dissertation contributes to a growing area of research by providing comprehensive, structured compilation of DEPs and also by developing a selection method to effectively recommend the most suitable DEPs. From the perspective of the industry, the results of this research (and most notably the Selection Tool), facilitate the implementation of the DEPs and should help in maximizing the potential benefits to a particular project.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | O'Connor, J T |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | benchmarking; project performance; validation |
| Index terms: | project performance, design phase, effectiveness, evaluation tool, dissertation, implementation, composite, database, validation, benchmarking, selection method |
| Subjects: | data management, professional development, project management theory and practice, performance measurement, performance management, tendering, professional practice, contractual arrangements, materials science, research dissemination and communication, evaluation and assessment methods |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Procurement, Project Management, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Construction Materials, Information Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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