Courtney, R and Winch, G M (2003) Re-engineering construction: The role of research and implementation. Building Research & Information, 31(2), pp. 172-178. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
This note reports the background research sponsored by the International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction (CEB) for the development of a strategy for re-engineering construction. Three different data collection methods were used: a survey of CDB coordinators, a web-survey and three regional workshops. The principal conclusion is that the concept of Re-engineering Construction restrictive, and the concept of re-valuing construction was posed as a broader alternative that better captures the challenges facing the international construction industry. Other important findings are the widespread perception that the challenges facing the construction industry are shared by many countries and that considerable scope exists for international exchange and collaboration in this area. Relatively low emphasis has been given to technology issues such as prefabricarion and information technology in meeting these challenges.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | business process re-engineering; international collaboration; re-engineering construction; revaluing construction |
| Index terms: | information technology, construction industry, implementation, collaboration, survey, international construction industry, strategy, revaluing, workshop, business process re-engineering |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, management, real estate economics, contractual arrangements, business, data collection methods, strategic management, construction type, computing systems |
| Topics: | International Construction, Urban Studies, Digital Applications, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Procurement, Construction Technology |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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