O'Keeffe, D J; Thomson, D S and Dainty, A R J (2014) An illustration of the development of a strategy for evaluating the design of hospitals within a practice order network. In: Raiden, A and Aboagye-Nimo, E (eds.) Proceedings of 30th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2014, Portsmouth, UK.
Abstract
This paper is part of on-going research that is investigating the potential of a practice theory perspective to understanding stakeholder evaluation of hospital design. Practice theory offers numerous affordances, especially to researchers and practitioners who seek alternatives to the problematic assumed universality of other 'traditional' theoretical perspectives. However there are several disagreements left unresolved in the literature about practice theory methodology that risk compromising its full potential. Drawing on Schatzki's notion of site ontology and illustrated by an on-going ethnographic study of the practice of evaluating the design of a major UK National Health Service (NHS) hospital, this paper seeks to contribute to resolving such disagreements by developing a strategy that generates a methodology for use with practice theory. The strategy is based on the premise of ontological salience and phenomenological congruence. Arguments for the mobilisation of a pluralistic portfolio of methodologies, methods and the synthesis of a pair of analytical devices ('design evaluation as practice' and 'design evaluation in practice') that emerged from the application of the strategy are explored. Dialogical reflexivity is foregrounded as a further and essential part of the strategy. The paper elucidates and enhances both the praxis and practices stimulated by current approaches to design evaluation. It raises important implications for the future development of UK Government policy to substantively improve the design quality of NHS healthcare building sand, in turn, improve patient healthcare outcomes.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | methodology; practice theory; design evaluation; pluralism; dialogical reflexivity |
| Index terms: | reflexivity, health service, design quality, ontology, practice theory, strategy, drawing, practitioner, government policy, methodology, design evaluation, sand, affordance, praxis |
| Subjects: | building materials, public policy, technical documentation, professional practice, design assessment, practitioner, behavioral psychology, research paradigm research concept, education and knowledge transfer, theoretical framing, management, public and environmental health, research methods, reflexivity |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Governance, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Health and Safety |
| 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