Abdirad, H; Dossick, C S; Johnson, B R and Migliaccio, G (2021) Disruptive information exchange requirements in construction projects: Perception and response patterns. Building Research & Information, 49(2), pp. 161-178. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The current proliferation of custom information exchange initiatives in projects disrupts information exchange routines of design and construction firms. This paper investigates how firms perceive, interpret, and act upon information exchange requirements that do not align with their existing routines. This case study examines a construction project for which the owner specified highly custom requirements for digital production and delivery of project submittals. Using ethnographic methods, the project parties' existing routines and their patterns of perceiving and responding to the requirements were identified. These patterns showed that the parties perceived disruptions to the existing dispositions and rules that guided their routines and shaped their performance across projects. The project parties used a combination of deductive, inductive, and abductive reasoning mechanisms to interpret the requirements, expose the inefficiencies associated with their workflows, and set new ground rules for action. The grounded propositions in this study hold that the limited opportunities for inductive reasoning and reflective assessment of workflows in projects can press project parties into identifying alternative workflows through cognitive search and abductive reasoning. This, in turn, results in highly situated, temporary, and fragmented workflows that are not durable and effective to contribute to refinement of existing information exchange routines.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction projects; disruptive requirements; information exchange; organizational routines |
| Index terms: | design and construction, organizational routine, case study, owner, construction project, submittal, abductive reasoning, workflow, routine, reasoning, information exchange, project party |
| Subjects: | management, professional development, production management, sociology, cognitive psychology, research design and methodology, business, data collection methods, contractual arrangements, data science |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Information Management, Business Strategy |
| 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