Ludvig, K and Stenberg, A (2012) The actors and their roles in the meaning making process of an energy target. In: Smith, S D (ed.) Proceedings of 28th Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2012, Edinburgh, UK.
Abstract
How are new long-term energy targets for buildings managed in public construction client organizations? This paper presents an empirical account of the actors, their roles and contributions to the meaning making process regarding an energy target for public buildings and the development of an energy strategy. With this account, we wish to initiate a discussion on what actors and practices that are needed in construction sector when contextualizing and implementing long-term energy targets in practice. The paper is based on a longitudinal study in a public construction client organization in Sweden, where for example in-depth interviews and observations of meetings has been used for data gathering.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | actors; energy target; meaning making process; strategy development process; public construction client |
| Index terms: | public construction, construction sector, public building, interview, meaning, strategy, energy strategy, Sweden, client organization |
| Subjects: | management, Geography, sociology, building construction, industry analysis, construction type, data collection methods, client relations, energy systems |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Sustainability, Construction Technology, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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