Connaughton J, W S (2013) Improving collaboration in construction: An opportunity for action research. In: Smith, S D and Ahiaga-Dagbui, D D (eds.) Proceedings of 29th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2013, Reading, UK.
Abstract
One perceived constraint to more effective collaborative working in UK construction is the current practice whereby individual team members each insure for their respective liabilities. It is argued that this promotes risk avoidance and other non-collaborative behaviour among them. An innovative form of insurance, called Integrated Project Insurance (IPI), promises to help alleviate these constraints by insuring the design and construction team as a whole. An Action Research (AR) project is currently being designed to support the development and implementation of key IPI features on a live construction project from 2013 to 2016, with a focus on improving collaborative working among team members. This paper provides a critical review of AR with a particular focus on its recent application in construction research. It seeks to build on previous studies by introducing the key features of a proposed AR approach in terms of their methodological basis, the roles of participants and the nature of AR 'interventions' occurring over time.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | action research; research method; collaboration; project insurance |
| Index terms: | action research, liability, implementation, design and construction, construction project, collaboration, insurance |
| Subjects: | liability law, management, production management, economic analysis, contractual arrangements, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Procurement, Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Organizational Design, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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