Wild, A (2004) Re-interpreting the building industry communications research project. Construction Management and Economics, 22(3), pp. 303-310. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The archives of the Building Industry Communications Research Project (BICRP) 1963-66 are reviewed. Established by important construction interests, this project explored problems of co-ordination in UK construction. The research was undertaken by the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations. The archives record both an evolving appreciation of construction and the conflicts within the Communications Research Committee, which oversaw the research and represented construction and its dominant client, the public sector. The changing outer context and shifting interpretation of the researchers destabilized the BICRP. It became caught up in the turbulence of its environment, de-stabilizing the consensus which had led to the project. Schön's concept of the Situation, and systems ideas of under-boundedness and under-organization, underpin the re-interpretation and establish the current relevance of the BICRP. This exemplifies the recurring, institutional difficulties of UK construction. A suggestion for further inquiry is made including cross-cultural comparisons around themes of uncertainty and information.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | communications research; reinterpretation; situation; uncertainty; under-boundedness |
| Index terms: | human relation, turbulence, public sector, building industry |
| Subjects: | fluid mechanics, industry analysis, administrative law, management |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Legal Issues, Human Resources |
| Descriptive scope: | 1 C |
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