Bruce, R D; Gebken, R J and Strong, S D (2010) Evaluating self-perceived benefits of credentials in the building design and construction community: Cpc, LEED-ap, and dbia. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 6(3), pp. 165-178. ISSN 1557-8771
Abstract
Previous research in the building design and construction community has examined the benefits of gaining individual certifications but no research has been found that evaluates multiple certifications in the same industry. The purpose of this research was to determine if statistically significant differences existed between the selfperceived value of the Certified Professional Constructor (CPC) certification, the Leadership in Energy and Efficient Design Accredited Professional (LEED-AP) accreditation, and the Design Build Institute of America's Design-Builder designation (DBIA). Researchers evaluated the results of three previously completed surveys. The researchers were able to analyze 203 out of 527 (39%) responses from CPCs, 9,060 out of 46,332 (22%) responses from LEED-APs, and 155 of 631 (24.5%) responses from DBIAs. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was utilized to determine whether statistically significant differences existed between the three groups mean scores on eight impact questions. Results indicated statistically signifigant (0.05 alpha) difference between the groups on seven questions. On five of these seven questions, the mean scores for CPCs were significantly lower than LEED-Aps and DBIAs. These results may be used by the credentialing organizations to measure their competitiveness and by those seeking certification to identify the potential benefits of certification.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accreditation; certification; construction education; credential |
| Index terms: | design-builder, construction community, competitiveness, building design, variance, construction education, design build, survey, certification |
| Subjects: | architectural design, contractual arrangements, practitioner, professional education, market analysis, data collection methods, administrative processes, measurement and scaling, professional development |
| Topics: | Procurement, Education, Information Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Design Practice, Contract Administration |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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