Emmitt, S (1999) Architectural management: An evolving field. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 6(2), pp. 188-196. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
The term architectural management has been in use since the 1960s and forms an essential part of this journal's title. However, the evolution of the architectural management field has not been a smooth affair, coming into, out of, and then back into fashion; and concise definitions continue to be illusive. Architectural management is a powerful tool that can be applied to the benefit of the professional service firm and the total building process, yet it continues to receive scant attention in the professional journals, seen as little more than a specialist interest. This paper charts the development of the architectural management field and takes a critical look at the field in relation to current research and its applicability to those who stand to gain the most from architectural management, the professional service firms. The paper concludes that architectural management is a cultural issue.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | architectural management; culture; definition; professional service firm |
| Index terms: | professional service firm, evolution, building process, architectural management, journal |
| Subjects: | environmental science, research dissemination and communication, organization, building construction, practice management |
| Topics: | Site Management, Organizational Design, Design Practice, Sustainability, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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