Gana, V F G (2018) Soft Landings based Design Management as a tool to enhance Sustainability: a case study of non-residential buildings in the UK. PhD thesis, University of Kent, UK.
Abstract
This thesis charts the rise of sustainable buildings and traces the evolution of design management from a process used in design to its current position in the construction industry in the UK. The established fact that design plays a vital role in achieving sustainability in building presents itself from different perspectives. For projects to achieve their sustainability targets, the industry must understand the issues surrounding sustainability. The industry can look to Soft Landings to be the next step in the evolution of design management. With the industry having to deal with ever stringent targets from policymakers, and the uncertainty surrounding the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the European Union, how can Soft Landings be positioned to be effective in closing the performance gap in non-residential buildings? 'Intellectual inquisitiveness' should lead us to ask how we can get the best out of the current processes. The thesis looks at the working processes of Soft Landings projects at the design stage to discover how the interactions between the design team and other team members can foster collaborative working. It also aims to develop a framework for quality communication and information flow. Using case studies and interviews with the professionals involved in the projects, the research uncovers important elements for achieving sustainability. The research discovered that although the projects adopted Soft Landings, there was still an atmosphere of holding back information that may be important to the project because of future competition. There was also a lag in the flow of information during the distinct stages of the project which had a negative effect on some of the projects. The research concludes that although the framework for Soft Landings is comprehensive and can enhance energy efficiency in buildings, it does not adequately address communication between teams, especially during the design process. The implications of this research for design teams is the use of communication and information flow frameworks specific to Soft Landings to assist them in communication with other teams. The contribution of this research is adding to the body of work for academic research into Soft Landings. It has shed light on the practical adoption and the challenges of the process.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Renganathan, G; Watkins, R and Mills, G |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | communication; competition; design management; design process; efficiency; interview; policy; professional; sustainable building; uncertainty; United Kingdom |
| Index terms: | design process, interview, information flow, design team, United Kingdom, design stage, competition, design management, sustainable building, evolution, performance gap, non-residential building, case study, energy efficiency, efficiency, European Union, interaction, soft landing, construction industry |
| Subjects: | professional practice, environmental science, construction type, market analysis, behavioral psychology, physical geography and landforms, sustainable construction, design process, Geography, sustainability and energy, data collection methods, design methods, information systems, industry analysis, performance management, design practice |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Sustainability, Quality Management, Research Practice, Construction Technology, Design Practice, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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