Aouad, G F; Hinks, J; Cooper, R; Sheath, D M; Kagioglou, M and Sexton, M (1998) An information technology (IT) map for a generic design and construction process protocol. Journal of Construction Procurement, 4(2), pp. 132-151. ISSN 1358-9180
Abstract
It is widely acknowledged that work undertaken later in any product development process costs relatively more than that conducted early in the process (Gause and Weinbery, 1989). Research currently underway at the University of Salford in the development of a generic design and construction process protocol has highlighted the need for greater "front-end" activity in the process. Many of the potential benefits associated with an improved process can be realised with significant Information Technology (IT) support. Indeed, the IT will only achieve profound change if its introduction and use is linked to changes in the overall conduct of the design and construction process. This paper presents an IT map that supports an improved design and construction process. This IT map should be looked at as an enabler and not as a driver of the process.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | design, information technology, process re-engineering |
| Index terms: | product development process, information technology, design and construction |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, innovation studies, computing systems |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Digital Applications, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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