Soliman-Junior, J; Tzortzopoulos, P and Kagioglou, M (2022) Designers' perspective on the use of automation to support regulatory compliance in healthcare building projects. Construction Management and Economics, 40(2), pp. 123-141. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Automation has been long explored to improve regulatory compliance during building design. Despite substantial research efforts on developing means to enable this process, there has been limited success in practical implementations. Designers' inputs are often undervalued in such developments, leading to solutions that are not effectively incorporated into the design process. This issue is even more difficult in healthcare projects due to their complexity and convoluted regulatory frameworks. In this paper, we describe how designers perceive the use of automation to support regulatory compliance in healthcare projects, through the analysis of a series of semi-structured interviews. We found that regulatory documents have a large influence on design and their compliance often consists of an unformalised process in practice. Furthermore, we identified that subjectivity is perceived in requirements as needed due to the creativity involved in design, whereas automation can be understood as liberating in this context depending on how it is used. Improvement needs focussing on the revision of the regulatory framework as well as on software development have been highlighted by participants during the interviews, which led to the proposition of recommendations to help achieve their benefits in practice.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | automation; compliance checking; healthcare design; regulatory requirements |
| Index terms: | creativity, building design, designer, automation, implementation, design process, software development, interview, compliance, subjectivity, documents, regulatory compliance, complexity |
| Subjects: | innovation and creative processes, systems engineering, automation and robotics, health safety and environment, professional development, software systems, contractual arrangements, architectural design, environmental policy, human factors and perception, design methods, data collection methods, profession |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Research Practice, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Sustainability, Design Practice, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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