Baker, H; Velikova, M; Smith, S D; Masterton, G and Hewlett, B (2024) Understanding and learning from failure. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 177(1), pp. 3-14. ISSN 17514304
Abstract
Failure is an intrinsic part of systems, including construction. While there is a less than consistent understanding of what failure is, it is an aspect of human nature that people wish to learn from mistakes. To gain insights into how failure is understood and what failure means in construction and as a precursor to developing learning materials for higher-education students, the outcomes of 19 semi-structured interviews with construction personnel in the UK are presented. The interviews explore processes employed by the construction industry to capture, understand and extract learning from these events, including an exploration of any perceived attitudes towards failure and whether such attitudes are barriers or aids to effective learning in practice. The findings revealed different types of failure within the construction industry, manifested as separate and individually developed learning cycles, while attitudes towards failure impact the learning process. Two pairs of attitude stimuli were revealed: ownership and blame and acceptance and leadership. These findings are then used to provide learning tools for undergraduate students in built environment degree programmes. A taxonomy of failure was developed, incorporating three levels of causes, symptoms and consequences. A face validity exercise with industry experts provides the confidence to adopt this taxonomic approach.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | education & training/failure/interview/taxonomy/UN SDG 9; industry, innovation and infrastructure |
| Index terms: | validity, exercise, construction industry, taxonomy, undergraduate, ownership, built environment, construction personnel, face, programme, interview, exploration |
| Subjects: | health behaviours and lifestyles, evaluation and assessment methods, curriculum development, psychology, environmental resource management, economics, industry analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, project controls, data collection methods, workforce, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Time Control, Organizational Design, Urban Studies, Human Resources, Research Practice, Education, Sustainability, Health and Safety |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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