Whyte, J; Bouchlaghem, N; Thorpe, A and McCaffer, R O N (1999) A survey of CAD and virtual reality within the house building industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 6(4), pp. 371-379. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
A survey of computer use in the British house building industry was conducted by means of a postal questionnaire to 100 house builders followed-up by in-depth interviews. The research shows widely variant levels of computer use and expertise in different house building companies amongst both regional developers and the nationwide volume builders. Some housing developers have sophisticated information technology strategies and are well placed to successfully implement advanced techniques whilst many have very little or no computer use for design and visualization and rely more on traditional competitive strategies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | CAD; design process; house building; industry survey; IT strategy; visualization |
| Index terms: | strategy, builder, survey, interview, information technology strategy, design process, visualization, competitive strategy, housing developer, questionnaire, virtual reality, building industry |
| Subjects: | design practice, management, sociology, data management, industry analysis, virtual reality, data collection methods, practitioner, design methods, economic analysis |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Design Practice, Digital Applications |
| 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