Holt, G D; Goulding, J S and Akintoye, A (2016) Enablers, challenges and relationships between research impact and theory generation. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 23(1), pp. 20-39. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose - Perceptions drawn from the construction management research (CMR) community regarding research impact (RI) and its relationship to theory generation (TG) are examined. Investigative emphasis is on RI and TG enablers and challenges (within an academic context). The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach - Qualitative narrative data accrued from open-ended questions within a structured questionnaire survey are analysed using frequency, quantitative content analysis, and graphical methods. A model of the RI/TG interface is presented and discussed. Findings - Principal RI enablers are “facilitation” (industry engagement, time); while principal constraints include “internal factors” (the academic, the university) and “external factors” (collaboration, funding). Respective TG enablers are “resources” (competence, time, funding) and corresponding challenges include “external factors” (market forces, compliance). RI is considered a minor challenge to TG. Research limitations/implications - The study adds empirical evidence to the ongoing RI debate within the UK generally and with regard to the CMR discipline more specifically. Originality/value - RI research is relatively sparse, while the findings in regard to CMR are entirely novel.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | research; theory; impact; construction management; ref; research evaluation |
| Index terms: | questionnaire, evidence, methodology, narrative, competence, collaboration, survey, content analysis, management research, compliance, research evaluation, funding |
| Subjects: | qualitative and interpretive research, health safety and environment, personnel development, management, research methods, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, research design and methodology, data analysis and analytics, economic analysis |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Human Resources, Organizational Design |
| 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