Mansfield, J R (2009) The use of formalised risk management approaches by UK design consultants in conservation refurbishment projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 16(3), pp. 273-287. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the extent and nature of use of formalised risk management tools and techniques by UK design consultants - chartered architects and chartered building surveyors - in conservation refurbishment projects. Design/methodology/approach - Following a review of risk management literature, a detailed questionnaire is prepared and considered by a focus group. Post-revision, nearly 700 postal questionnaires are distributed to chartered architects and chartered building surveyors specialising in conservation work in the UK. The questionnaire contains Likert-scale and closed-end questions. Response data is analysed using SPSS software. Findings - The results highlight the divergent approaches employed by UK chartered architects and chartered building surveyors specialising in conservation refurbishment work, suggesting that a harmonised risk model would be appropriate and should be developed. Originality/value - The results make an important contribution to understanding the dynamics within this under-researched area of professional activity.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building conservation; risk management; structural design; United Kingdom |
| Index terms: | structural design, methodology, questionnaire, United Kingdom, building surveyor, focus group, refurbishment project, risk management tool, conservation, dynamics, architect, risk management, refurbishment work |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, architectural engineering, risk assessment, profession, environmental policy, financial risk, infrastructure engineering, Geography, research methods, renovation and retrofit, systems engineering |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Cost Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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