The use of freelisting to elicit stakeholder understanding of the benefits sought from healthcare buildings

Thomson, D; Kaka, A; Pronk, L and Alalouch, C (2012) The use of freelisting to elicit stakeholder understanding of the benefits sought from healthcare buildings. Construction Management and Economics, 30(4), pp. 309-323. ISSN 1466433X

Abstract

The process of elicitation and synthesis of the collective understanding of a cultural domain held by a group of stakeholders is challenging. This problem typifies the pre-project activity from which a coherent understanding of the benefits sought from infrastructure investment must emerge to inform the business case rationale. The anthropological freelisting method is evaluated as a solution by determining its ability to be operationalized in a practical form for project application. Using data from the stakeholders of a large NHS Scotland building project, the use of multidimensional scaling for data analysis is compared with participatory pilesorting to determine which freelisting protocol balances insight with practicality. Neither approach is found to offer an ideal method of characterizing sought benefits. The social construction of pilesorting promotes reliability while the analytical rigour of multidimensional scaling remains attractive to auditors. Their distinct insights suggest that both approaches should be combined in future and used alongside further post-elicitation devices from anthropology such as cultural consensus modelling or structured conceptualization.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: benefits realization; freelisting; healthcare; stakeholder
Index terms: infrastructure investment, modelling, social construction, scaling, Scotland, benefits realization, data analysis, business case
Subjects: analytical methods, strategic project management, economic analysis, data analysis and analytics, organization, value management, sociology, Geography
Topics: Engineering Principles, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Procurement
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTA

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