Salvatierra, J L; Gálvez, M Á; Bastías, F; Castillo, T; Herrera, R F and Alarcón, L F (2019) Developing a benchmarking system for architecture design firms. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(1), pp. 139-152. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: The construction industry’s business model is mainly based on the interaction among the architecture office, the engineering office and the construction company. The performance and practices of architects' offices, unlike those of the other actors, are difficult to characterize and there have been few studies on these issues. To better understand architects' performance, the purpose of this paper is to develop a benchmarking tool based on real practices identified by managers of Chilean architecture offices. Design/methodology/approach: The research method includes a complete literature review, followed by a study of a sample of nine Chilean architecture offices, with whom a series of four workshops was developed, to establish both performance indicators and relevant management practices. Finally, these metrics were applied in an architectural office as a pilot case. Findings: Four management dimensions were defined: client management, external coordination, internal organization and human resources. Key performance indicators were divided into process, financial and quality indicators. The workshops carried out with the architectural offices demonstrated the relevance of benchmarking tools such as the one developed, which enables the systematic measurement of both management practices and performance indicators. Originality/value: Although there have been several efforts to create benchmarking tools for the construction industry, few efforts have focused on architecture offices. Therefore, this research aims to explicitly identify management practices that can be used for this type of organization and to coordinate among multiple actors to find the best way to measure their performance, other than the fulfilment of schedules and budgets.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | architecture; architecture offices; benchmarking system; design management; key performance indicators; management; management practices; organization; productivity; questionaire survey; workshops |
| Index terms: | design management, methodology, management practice, human resource, benchmarking, performance indicator, manager, survey, construction company, literature review, architect, business model, architecture design firm, quality indicator, coordination, interaction, construction industry, dimension, key performance indicator, workshop, productivity |
| Subjects: | practitioner, data collection methods, profession, construction type, business, organization, data analysis and analytics, project delivery, health monitoring assessment and metrics, design process, management, performance measurement, research methods, performance management, industry analysis, behavioral psychology |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Organizational Design, Design Practice, Quality Management, Human Resources |
| 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