Naar, L; Nikolova, N and Forsythe, P (2016) Innovative construction and the role of boundary objects: A Gehry case study. Construction Management and Economics, 34(10), pp. 688-699. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Physical objects have long been used in addressing the challenges involved in constructing innovative buildings, yet their significance for collaborative problem solving in inter-organizational projects is rarely acknowledged. The aim of this research is to investigate what happens when a project team has to collaboratively innovate to address radical design challenges in a construction setting. We focus on the role of a full-scale mock-up of a façade in transforming the design intent for a building by Frank Gehry into design realization. The concept of boundary objects is used as an analytical lens via a case study methodology utilizing non-participant observation of weekly meetings and workshops over a period of 10 months covering client, consultant and contractor involvement. The research shows the role of mock-ups in radical construction settings is in tension along three delivery dimensions: performance, aesthetic and technical construction. Task completion competed with the requirements for experimentation around innovative problem solving with the how to construct it problem left unresolved. The findings suggest that co-location and synchronicity are critical conditions for collaborative and innovative problem solving in radical construction contexts. Project teams need to create open-ended 'moments' for iterating critical objects and the interactions that take place around them.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | boundary objects; construction innovation; gehry; inter-firm collaboration |
| Index terms: | methodology, problem solving, construction innovation, Gehry, observation, inter-firm collaboration, experiment, boundary object, co-location, inter-organizational project, dimension, interaction, project team, workshop, case study, aesthetic |
| Subjects: | business, construction type, data collection methods, operations management, health monitoring assessment and metrics, architectural and construction history, project delivery, research methods, decision-making and reasoning, factor and component analysis, organizational theory, building construction, behavioral psychology, collaborative management |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Construction Technology, Design Practice, Site Management |
| 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