Harty, C and Leiringer, R (2017) The futures of construction management research. Construction Management and Economics, 35(7), pp. 392-403. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Construction management is an internationally recognized area of research with an established and growing community of academics. It has grown from largely “research consultancy” activities to additionally attracting significant amounts of academic research funding and has, partially, moved away from its applied, engineering dominated origins to increasingly engage with, and contribute to, mainstream academic debates in business and management, economics and the social sciences. It has, as such, become an academic field in its own right. However, recent dynamics within both university institutions and national economies are changing the landscape of construction management research (CMR). A blurring of traditional university boundaries, reprioritization of research funding and increasing emphasis on national and international rankings have led to increased pressure on individual academics and the community they constitute. Drawing on scenario development we ask what, in the face of a turbulent environment, might the futures of CMR be? Four potential futures for CMR are outlined, depicted as four potential scenarios: convergence, retrenchment, disappearance and hybridization. These describe potential outcomes from the institutional dynamics currently at play. The intention is neither to predict the future, nor to prioritize one scenario over another, but to open a debate on the institutional pressures the field is facing, and what the outcomes might be.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | academic fields; construction management; futures; institutional trends |
| Index terms: | boundaries, dynamics, social science, management research, institutional pressure, drawing, consultancy, face, research funding, national economy, institutional trend, retrenchment |
| Subjects: | systems engineering, property law, research management, sociology, economic analysis, technical documentation, psychology, organization, theoretical framing, research design and methodology |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Legal Issues, Research Practice, Design Practice, Organizational Design, Business Strategy |
| 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