Nima, M A; Abdul-Kadir, M R; Jaafar, M S and Alghulami, R G (2001) Constructability implementation: A survey in the Malaysian construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 19(8), pp. 819-829. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Twenty-three constructability concepts are identified. Based on these, an industry-wide questionnaire was administrated in Peninsular Malaysia. The respondents were the engineers working with owners, consultants, contractors, subcontractors and construction management firms. The importance, from the viewpoint of the Malaysian engineers, of the constructability concepts and the degree of the actual application of those concepts in the Malaysian Construction Industry is presented so that an insight on constructability implementation can be established. Fieldwork results revealed that the Malaysian engineers showed high acceptance of 22 concepts and rejected the one that relates to the fast-track method of construction. Those engineers accepted the constructability concepts from the theoretical point of view but generally they did not apply these concepts in their practices. The study also concludes that the Malaysian engineers show a wide understanding of the majority of the concepts. However, they did not link those concepts under the umbrella of constructability.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | buildability; constructability implementation; construction knowledge; construction management; fast track |
| Index terms: | buildability, survey, questionnaire, subcontractor, Malaysia, engineer, owner, implementation, construction industry, constructability |
| Subjects: | Geography, construction integration, industry analysis, design efficiency, sociology, practitioner, profession, data collection methods, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Geographical Context, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Procurement, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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