Senescu, R R (2011) Design process communication methodology. PhD thesis, Stanford University, USA.
Abstract
Building project design teams struggle to (1) collaborate around processes within projects, (2) share processes between projects, and (3) understand opportunities for investment in improving processes across projects. Overcoming each challenge requires effective and efficient communication of design processes. Yet, methods for communicating design processes from the design process communication research field are too cumbersome to be useful during design, and methods from the project information management research field focus only on information exchange and not process communication. To address these limitations, I aggregate findings from organizational science, human computer interaction, and process modeling fields to develop the characteristics of the Design Process Communication Methodology (DPCM). DPCM is Computable, Embedded, Modular, Personalized, Scalable, Shared, Social, and Transparent. Enabling these characteristics, DPCM consists of elements which represent and contextualize processes and methods that enable designers to capture and retrieve processes. To test DPCM, I map the elements and method s to the Process Integration Platform (PIP). PIP is a web tool that enables project teams to organize and share files as nodes in an information dependency map that emerges as the team works. Results from the use of PIP in student design charrettes and class projects provide evidence for the power of DPCM to effectively and efficiently communicate building design processes within project teams, between project teams, and across project teams. I claim DPCM as a contribution to the fields of design process management and project information management. DPCM lays the foundation for commercial software that shifts focus away from incremental and fragmented process improvement toward a platform that nurtures emergence of (1) improved multi-disciplinary collaboration, (2) process knowledge sharing, and (3) innovation-enabling understanding of existing processes.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Fischer, M; Haymaker, J and Winograd, T |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | emergence; multi-disciplinary; project team; building design; collaboration; communication; information management; innovation; integration; investment; designer |
| Index terms: | science, human-computer interaction, knowledge sharing, information exchange, process improvement, process modelling, management research, design process, emergence, collaboration, methodology, integration, evidence, charrette, aggregate, designer, building design, platform, project design, project team |
| Subjects: | project delivery, data science, research design and methodology, profession, design methods, organizational analysis, systems engineering, management, design analysis, architectural design, contractual arrangements, knowledge management, evaluation and assessment methods, specialized education, materials science, human-computer interaction, research methods, design process, digital design |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Information Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Education |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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