Qu, S (2010) Demolish-IT: the development of a process management tool for the demolition industry. PhD thesis, Loughborough University, UK.
Abstract
Today most demolition projects undertaken are complex and involve many parties who must comply with a myriad of regulations as well as other constraints (e.g. finance). The management of demolition projects requires individual team members to have a wide range of skills and knowledge in addition to practical experience. Demolition processes currently operated are frequently performed in an unstructured, intuitive manner with considerable reliance on experience, skill, knowledge or subjective judgement of the demolition engineer or other individual responsible for a demolition project. Research on demolition ‘process management' is a new area that has rarely been addressed. However, within the building design and construction management sectors, there are a number of intelligent solutions that have been developed to assist in the management of business processes and business process re-engineering. Process management systems and process mapping through the use of Information Communication and Technology (ICT) technology have been applied to help the construction industry significantly improve performance. In an attempt to provide intelligent support to the management of dynamic demolition processes, this research reports upon that was developed using ICT applications a management system prototype entitled “Demolish-IT”. The prototype of Demolish-IT utilises four tiers of information which includes: (1) the standard demolition process map; (2) user-defined demolition process map; (3) demolition task manager; and (4) database of demolition process requirements. The prototype provides on ICT platform that unifies demolition processes and requirements to achieve improved process management. The research involved a combination of face-to-face interviews with demolition experts; real projects document reviews and site observation to produce the generic demolition process map. Other products of the work included: database solutions to store demolition process requirements; and process modelling to manage demolition task compliance flow within relevant industry standards. Evaluation of the research work proved its validity, acceptance and applicability within industry. Future work will aim to transpose the outputs into commercially viable software.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building design; business process re-engineering; commercial; communication; construction management; demolition; evaluation; interview; process modelling; regulation; skills; valuation |
| Index terms: | construction industry, database, validity, engineer, platform, building design, process management, regulation, mapping, prototype, face, process modelling, management system, compliance, manager, business process re-engineering, interview |
| Subjects: | data management, industry analysis, political science, management, spatial and geospatial analysis, health safety and environment, digital design, psychology, design analysis, modelling and simulation, architectural design, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, profession, business, practitioner |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Governance, Design Practice, Digital Applications, Organizational Design |
| 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