Wood H L, P P F E R P (2013) Understanding complexity in the AEC industry. In: Smith, S D and Ahiaga-Dagbui, D D (eds.) Proceedings of 29th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2013, Reading, UK.
Abstract
Complexity is not new to the AEC industry. It dates back well beyond the invention of construction management as an independent field within the building disciplines. Yet the introduction of construction management added a new magnitude to the understanding about, and handling of complexity. This however started with a positivistic reductionist approach which was understood as a scientific method and only defendable academic approach to portray complexity. A simple classification of complexity based on the project size or simply dividing it into 'organisational' and 'technological' may have been deemed sufficient as of in 1980s or 1990s. On the other hand introduction of new construction technologies, new building materials, new structural optimisation tools and techniques have introduced new factors into the building process throughout its lifecycle. All those added by more demanding clients' briefs, more complicated and ambitious design intents, ever-tightening legislations and building regulations, and growing awareness about how the buildings behave beyond their physical boundaries and outside their traditionally understood lifespan have introduced new layers to complexity in the AEC industry. Although still valid in some respects and to some extents, our traditional view of construction complexity is not considered 'inclusive' anymore; nor is it ample enough to address the ever-growing 'complexity of complexity'. This paper takes a cross-sectional approach to present a qualitative comparative analysis. It maps out complexity, its definitions and implications and the impact it has upon the construction process. The aim of this review paper is to provide a ground upon which more in-depth systematic research into understanding, management and handling of complexity can be based, thereby suggesting a 're-reading of the concept of complexity' to be able to more informingly feed it back into construction process in the AEC industry.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | complexity; design complexity; organisational complexity; project complexity |
| Index terms: | construction technology, boundaries, project complexity, complexity, building process, lifecycle, building material, construction process, qualitative comparative analysis, maps, lifespan, legislation, building regulation |
| Subjects: | spatial and geospatial analysis, research methods, organizational theory, building construction, regulatory law, systems engineering, digital engineering, building materials, property law, legal systems, material degradation and durability, project delivery |
| Topics: | Construction Materials, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Research Practice, Digital Applications, Legal Issues, Design Practice, Site Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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