Thomson, C S and El-Haram, M A (2019) Is the evolution of building sustainability assessment methods promoting the desired sharing of knowledge amongst project stakeholders? Construction Management and Economics, 37(8), pp. 433-460. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Building sustainability assessment methods (BSAM’s) seek to help project stakeholders understand the predicted and actual sustainability performance of their buildings but are often applied reactively and isolated from project decisions. The last decade has seen BREEAM at the forefront of evolving assessment practice towards a framework approach to help shape project decisions and promote stakeholder learning. The research explores the nature and extent this transition is being realized in practice within four case studies applying BREEAM spanning a 15-year period. Process and knowledge mapping techniques are applied to explore the flow of knowledge required to enable sustainable decisions, stimulate the sharing of understanding, mediation of views and to promote learning amongst stakeholders. Evidence suggested that when applied in progressive projects that the flow of knowledge is strongest when supported by sustainability leadership, a framework approach aligned with project management, an improvement and engagement culture and a strategy for promoting knowledge flow. As practice matures care is needed to ensure engagement remains high and stakeholders are not isolated from the flow of knowledge as projects increasingly rely on sustainability advisors thus losing the opportunity to learn and shape decisions.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | knowledge management; project management; sustainability assessment; sustainability leadership |
| Index terms: | evolution, BREEAM accreditation, strategy, building sustainability, sustainability assessment, knowledge flow, sustainability performance, evidence, mediation, case study, project stakeholder, project management, knowledge management, mapping |
| Subjects: | environmental policy, sustainability assessment, project management theory and practice, spatial and geospatial analysis, sustainability and energy, management, evaluation and assessment methods, knowledge management, professional development, environmental science, data collection methods, dispute resolution, sociology |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Stakeholder Management, Information Management, Legal Issues, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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