Edum-Fotwe, F T; Kululanga, G K and McCaffer, R (2000) Application of organic learning styles to construction management. Journal of Construction Research, 1(1), pp. 53-58. ISSN 1609-9451
Abstract
The discipline of construction management is currently going through a period of introspective change. One major issue that assumes great significance in this change relates to the way research is undertaken by the discipline, and the basis for augmenting its body of knowledge with new ideas, concepts and developments discovered through research. This has manifested itself in the form of a challenge on its existing culture of research, which is predominated by the scientific approach. As a result, calls have been made to broaden the research perspectives of the discipline, by introducing paradigms from other disciplines to enrich construction management. The main argument that underlies the calls seems to be that "the pendulum must be swung to the other side" in order to bring a balance into construction management research. While this has considerable merit, it seems to overlook the fact that the solution does not simply lie in adopting paradigms. To achieve a more balanced perspective, research has to evolve to make the discipline a dynamic learning system that adapts effectively to its changing environment. This paper examines various styles of how organic systems learn as a means for adapting to the requirements of their internal and external environments, and to achieve greater effectiveness. The principles involved in these models of learning provide useful lessons for taking forward research development in construction management. A framework is developed within which the enrichment and development desired for construction management should take place.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | knowledge; learning style; paradigm; research method |
| Index terms: | effectiveness, body of knowledge, learning style, paradigm, management research |
| Subjects: | learning methods, knowledge management, research design and methodology, performance management, education and knowledge transfer |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Education, Information Management, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 CTA |
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