Davey, C L; McDonald, J; Lowe, D; Duff, R; Powell, J A and Powell, J E (2006) Defects liability management by design. Building Research & Information, 34(2), pp. 145-153. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
An action learning project was undertaken to empower small- and medium-sized construction companies to define the agenda for performance improvement and to take a leading role in the process of industry change. Whilst achievement of zero defects was an ultimate aim, smaller construction firms identified the shorter-term need to deal effectively with defects during the post-construction phase. Project activities explored problems and identified ways of improving the management of the defects liability period. Proposed solutions ranged from simple modifications to management procedures, through innovative methods of working with tenants to more fundamental changes in design and construction processes. Construction firms and housing associations recognized the importance of working together to improve procedures. Small- and medium-sized construction firms can address performance issues in practical ways and have a potentially valuable role to play in promoting industry improvement. Action learning can support the process of change being instigated by Egan in 1998 and solutions generated by action learning have the potential for wider dissemination and use.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | action learning; defects; learning network; partnership; performance improvement; quality; small and medium-sized enterprises |
| Index terms: | partnership, tenant, construction firm, construction company, action learning, construction phase, housing association, dissemination, defects liability, performance improvement, design and construction |
| Subjects: | partnership management, contractual remedy, knowledge translation, performance measurement, contractual arrangements, project delivery, curriculum design, institutional client, practitioner, organization |
| Topics: | Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Education, Contract Administration, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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