Detecting defects in the UK new-build housing sector: A learning perspective

Hopkin, T; Lu, S L; Rogers, P and Sexton, M (2015) Detecting defects in the UK new-build housing sector: A learning perspective. In: Raiden, A and Aboagye-Nimo, E (eds.) Proceedings of 31st Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-9 September 2015, Lincoln, UK.

Abstract

House builders play a key role in controlling the quality of new homes in the UK. The UK house building sector is, however, currently facing pressures to expand supply as well as conform to tougher low carbon planning and Building Regulation requirements; primarily in the areas of sustainability. There is growing evidence that the pressure the UK house building industry is currently under may be eroding build quality and causing an increase in defects. It is found that the prevailing defect literature is limited to the causes, pathology and statistical analysis of defects (and failures). The literature does not extend to examine how house builders individually and collectively, in practice, collect and learn from defects experience in order to reduce the prevalence of defects in future homes. The theoretical lens for the research is organisational learning. This paper contributes to our understanding of organisational learning in construction through a synthesis of current literature. Further, a suitable organisational learning model is adopted. The paper concludes by reporting the research design of an ongoing collaborative action research project with the National House Building Council (NHBC), focused on developing a better understanding of house builders' localised defects analysis procedures and learning processes.

Item Type: Conference Paper (Paper)
Uncontrolled Keywords: action research; defects; house builders; new homes; organisational learning
Index terms: research design, new-build housing, builder, low carbon, statistical analysis, organizational learning, building regulation, action research, pathology, building industry, evidence
Subjects: sustainability assessment, economic development, medical science and clinical practice, professional development, regulatory law, industry analysis, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, research design and methodology, practitioner, data science
Topics: Legal Issues, Urban Studies, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Information Management
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