Simister, S J and Green, S D (1997) Recurring themes in value management practice. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 4(2), pp. 113-125. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
This paper reports on a survey of 17 value management exercises recently carried out within the UK construction industry. Twelve leading value management practitioners were asked to describe an example of a value management study which worked well' and one which did not work well'. They were further asked to explain the underlying factors which they considered had influenced the eventual outcome of the value management study. The subsequent analysis of the interview transcripts reveals six recurring themes which were held to have had a significant influence: expectations, implementation, participation, power, time constraint and uncertainty. Whilst caution is necessary in extracting the themes from their individual contexts, they do provide a valuable insight into the factors which influence the outcome of value management studies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | case study; ideographic interpretation; practitioner; project; value management |
| Index terms: | practitioner, survey, interview, construction industry, implementation, value management, exercise, case study |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, management, contractual arrangements, data collection methods, health behaviours and lifestyles, practitioner |
| Topics: | Value Management, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Procurement |
| 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