Walker, A; Greenwood, D and Johansen, E (2010) User engagement and quality in the design of UK schools. In: Egbu, C (ed.) Proceedings of 26th Annual ARCOM Conference, 6-8 September 2010, Leeds, UK.
Abstract
For over fifty years, dating back to the Simon report (1944), commentators on the UK construction industry have been lamenting the design-construct divorce and advocating earlier contractor involvement to produce, inter alia, better quality buildings. Since 2003 a substantial part of the addition to the value of UK new building stock has been in the form of schools. Most have been delivered through the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme and the majority of projects within BSF have been procured under a modified PFI (PPP) system. This of course means that early contractor involvement is a 'given'. Despite this, in 2006 a CABE report on new schools was still critical of their quality. The paper explores whether other factors – in particular the degree and timing of user-engagement – have had an influence on the quality of the end product, and presents a method for testing this.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building schools for the future; design process; design quality indicator; user engagement |
| Index terms: | testing, construction industry, user engagement, design process, early contractor involvement, building stock, programme, design quality indicator |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, project controls, asset management, design methods, professional practice, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Procurement, Design Practice, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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