Gül, L F (2009) Evaluating design behaviour when using emerging collaboration technologies. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 5(3), pp. 107-123. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
The developments in and broad use of computer technologies have brought fundamental changes to the ways in which architecture/engineering/construction (AEC) professionals collaborate and design, partially because the developments in technology achieved the creation of computer tools that are technically and financially feasible to use. Technological developments have not only provided new opportunities and possibilities for design but have also contributed to the complexity of many design processes. In this paper we present an experiment that studies communication between two designers using four different technologies. In addition, their verbal communication activities are compared using protocol analysis. The findings of this study provide a clearer understanding of the implications of working collaboratively in a design team in virtual design contexts. Our studies have shown that designers are able to adapt to different environments, from the traditional face-to-face environment to a variety of virtual environments, and still be able to communicate and collaborate.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | collaborative design; collaborative virtualenvironments; design communication; protocol analysis |
| Index terms: | collaboration, protocol analysis, complexity, collaborative design, design process, virtual environment, design behaviour, experiment, designer, design team, face |
| Subjects: | virtual reality, profession, data collection methods, design methods, psychology, professional practice, research methods, management, cognitive psychology, systems engineering |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Roles and Professions, Design Practice, Digital Applications, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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