Levander, E; Engström, S; Sardén, Y and Stehn, L (2011) Construction clients' ability to manage uncertainty and equivocality. Construction Management and Economics, 29(7), pp. 753-764. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
While risk and uncertainty management have received much attention within construction management research, management of information interpretation remains unexplored. Situations that are generally overlooked are those where increased amounts and flow of information are not the solution to the human problem of managing multiple meanings of information and conflicting interpretations, i.e. 'equivocality'. The aim is to identify and differentiate between construction clients' uncertainty and equivocality about industrialized construction in Sweden, and, in the light of those findings, to evaluate clients' current information processing practice on investment decisions in new-build in order to assess and discuss clients' ability to manage uncertainty and equivocality. Based on information processing theory, analysis of aggregated data from three previous studies shows that there is a need to manage both uncertainty and equivocality. At the same time, clients' ability to do this is found to be limited. Consequently, when industrialized construction moves clients beyond their current frame of reference, clients' information processing practice does not support decision making. It is also proposed that differentiating between uncertainty and equivocality will enable a more profound understanding of the sequential order for information processing, i.e. that one must define questions (reduce equivocality) before one can find answers to the questions (reduce uncertainty).
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | client; equivocality; industrialization; information processing; uncertainty |
| Index terms: | Sweden, decision-making, management research, meaning, investment decision, construction client, industrialization, industrialized construction, uncertainty management, information processing |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, practitioner, risk assessment, decision analysis, sociology, Geography, construction type, data science, research design and methodology, economic development |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Sustainability, Research Practice, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Digital Applications, Construction Technology, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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