Karim, J A; Demian, P; Baldwin, A and Anumba, C (2014) An empirical study of the complexity of requirements management in construction projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 21(5), pp. 505-531. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate in-depth the current approach of managing client requirements in construction and to highlight the significant factors, which contribute to the complexity of managing the requirements in order to define a better approach. Design/methodology/approach - A case study of a leading international global built asset and engineering consultancy organization was conducted over two years. The case study was conducted principally using semi-participant observations supplemented with other qualitative data collection methods (i.e. interviews, questionnaires and document analysis). Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data. Findings - The results highlight major factors associated with the complexity of managing client requirements information, which include: mechanisms for documentation, storage and access, distribution of requirements information between stakeholders and across lifecycle phases of a project, traceability management and the provision of effective change management incorporating dependency checking and impact analysis. Research limitations/implications - The main limitation of the research is the use of an in-depth study of a single organization, which applied the same project management method across all the projects they managed. Further work is planned to develop the proposed framework fully, and develop a software platform to operationalize and evaluate its industrial applicability with construction projects. Practical implications - The implications of this research is that a better approach to managing requirements information is needed, which will facilitate the design, construction and operations of buildings within budget and time. An integrated framework and an associated tool are suggested to implement the approach. Originality/value - This study identifies major research gaps and problems in the architecture, engineering, construction and facilities management industry; proposes and presents Electronic Requirements Information Management framework to facilitate lifecycle management of the requirements.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | information management; construction project; client requirements; requirements management |
| Index terms: | requirements management, empirical study, lifecycle, client requirements, project management, platform, case study, document analysis, construction project, methodology, questionnaire, thematic analysis, built asset, facilities management, consultancy, impact analysis, complexity, interview, observation, traceability, change management, documentation |
| Subjects: | data science, data analysis and analytics, project delivery, supplier oversight, data collection methods, organization, systems engineering, asset management, production management, methods and analysis, professional development, digital design, project management theory and practice, management, research methods |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Supply Chain Management, Digital Applications, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Business Strategy |
| 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