Chiponde, D B; Gledson, B and Greenwood, D (2024) Challenges and opportunities of learning from failure: Looking backwards to move forward using vignettes. In: Thomson, C (ed.) Proceedings of 40th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2024, London South Bank University, UK.
Abstract
Data collection on topics such as failure may be challenging due to their sensitive nature. Hence, as a way of 'looking backwards in order to move forward', this study adopted self-administered vignettes to review the topic of learning from failures by construction professionals. Findings reveal that efforts to learn from failures across the sector are hampered by the fragmented nature of the industry and divergent perception and values held by projects parties. To enhance learning from failure, the sector is encouraged to ensure that project parties have a common goal and are supported by openness and transparency. In addition, technological tools are to be considered for both capturing and sharing lessons from failure realising the complex and sensitive nature of failure. Implication for the academia and industry are that to understand failure, non-obtrusive research approaches are encouraged such as vignettes.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | learning from failure; challenges; vignettes; failure |
| Index terms: | project party, vignette, transparency, construction professional, academia |
| Subjects: | educational institutions, sociology, professional development, research dissemination and communication |
| Topics: | Education, Information Management, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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