Construction management research: A blend of rationalist and interpretative paradigms

Holt, G D and Faniran, O (2000) Construction management research: A blend of rationalist and interpretative paradigms. Journal of Construction Research, 1(2), pp. 177-182. ISSN 1609-9451

Abstract

There are those who question the robustness, validity and usefulness of construction management research (CMR). In the main, this is a result of the ontological viewpoint whereas in reality CMR is as much concerned with both ontological and epistemological research paradigms. The role of CMR is reviewed and the authors suggest that is not always taken as seriously as it might be, particularly by those outside of the discipline. The role of CMR and the significance of its contribution to construction practice and the wider research community is discussed. It is concluded that CMR cannot be packaged under existing 'standard' (typically engineering biased) research domains and therefore needs to be: more clearly delineated; more seriously recognized as a research discipline per-se; and consequently afforded more distinct recognition.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: construction management research; research paradigms
Index terms: validity, paradigm, management research
Subjects: evaluation and assessment methods, research design and methodology, education and knowledge transfer
Topics: Research Practice
Descriptive scope: 2 TA

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