Sexton, M and Barrett, P (2005) Performance-based building and innovation: Balancing client and industry needs. Building Research & Information, 33(2), pp. 142-148. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
One reason for the interest in performance-based building is that it is commonly advocated as a powerful way of enhancing innovation performance by articulating building performance outcomes, and by offering relevant procurement actors the discretion to innovate to meet these performance requirements more effectively and/or efficiently. The paper argues that the current approach to performance-based building assumes that relevant actors have the capacity, ability and motivation to innovate from a business perspective. It is proposed that the prevailing conceptualization of PBB is too restrictive and should be broadened explicitly to accommodate the required business logic that must be in place before actors will innovate. The relevant performance-based building and innovation literature is synthesized to support the assertion. The paper concludes with an innovation-focused definition of performance-based building.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building performance; business logic; innovation; performance-based building; procurement |
| Index terms: | performance-based, innovation performance, motivation, building performance |
| Subjects: | psychology, quality assurance, performance measurement |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Human Resources |
| Descriptive scope: | 1 C |
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