Sterry, P and Sutrisna, M (2007) Briefing and designing performing arts buildings: Assessing the role of secondary project stakeholders. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 3(4), pp. 209-221. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
It is recognized that building projects for the performing arts are complex and unique not only because of the need to meet strict technical demands, but also the need to provide a successful venue satisfying the varied and sometimes conflicting needs of clients and stakeholders. It is generally accepted that projects' objectives should mesh with those of their stakeholders, and continue to fit stakeholders' interests as the projects evolve, conditions change and the interdependencies of key systems, stakeholders and their objectives change. In order to achieve these objectives, various guidance and reports from within the industry recommend the appropriate involvement of the projects' stakeholders, and call for the involvement of users, including the audience and general public, as secondary stakeholders. Taking into account the previously developed stakeholders' model for arts projects as the ideal model, the paper reports a recent study of three arts projects in the UK which shed light on current practice of user consultation, particularly with secondary stakeholders. The findings highlight that although consultation was undertaken, these secondary stakeholder groups were often not well defined or representative, with data often not appropriately addressed in the design brief. The paper discusses these issues, conclusions are drawn and recommendations for future projects are presented.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | arts buildings; briefing; design; general public; stakeholders; users |
| Index terms: | design brief, project stakeholder, briefing |
| Subjects: | sociology, technical documentation, scope management |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Stakeholder Management, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 1 P |
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