Sutrisna, M and Goulding, J (2019) Managing information flow and design processes to reduce design risks in offsite construction projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(2), pp. 267-284. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: Following the increasing need for faster construction, improved quality and evidence value propositions, offsite construction is increasingly being proffered as a viable contender to “traditional” construction approaches. However, whilst evidence supports the move towards offsite, its uptake has been lower than expected. Whilst the precise reasons for this seem to be influenced by a number of issues, including contextual drivers and market maturity; some project stakeholders also view offsite as carrying greater risks. The purpose of this paper is to report on the quality of information flow, in particular, the impact and influence of this on design risks in offsite construction projects. Design/methodology/approach: An existing design risk framework is used as the point of departure for this research. This is further expanded into a specific model for evaluating offsite construction projects design risks, the rubrics of which were informed by two case studies of offsite construction projects in Australia and the UK analysed with a process-tracing technique. Whilst these cases were geographically separated, the constructs were aligned to uncover fundamental design information requirements and concomitant risks associated with offsite. Findings: The findings of the research reported in this paper include the crucial information feeding into the design process emanating from the lifecycle of offsite construction projects, namely, design, offsite (manufacturing), handling and transporting, site works and installation and also occupancy. These are contextualised within the four categories, namely, client requirements, project requirements, regulation aspects and social aspects and the final outcomes were summarised into a holistic diagram. Originality/value: Given that the offsite construction has shifted the working paradigm into assigning a significant level of efforts and emphasis at the front end of the construction projects, the importance of its design process and hence design risks management has gone up significantly in construction projects delivered using this technique. This research and paper contributes significantly to the built environment domain by identifying the crucial aspects along the project lifecycle to be considered to minimise the potential occurrence of design risks and hence increasing the confidence of project stakeholders in adopting offsite construction techniques in their projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | design management; design risks; offsite construction; project management; quality of information; risk management |
| Index terms: | site work, project management, lifecycle, risk management, built environment, client requirements, paradigm, Australia, project lifecycle, case study, social aspect, evidence, design risk, project stakeholder, regulation, construction project, methodology, design management, information flow, design process |
| Subjects: | design methods, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, risk assessment, project completion, project delivery, site logistics, production management, Geography, professional development, financial risk, project management theory and practice, design process, education and knowledge transfer, research methods, infrastructure and transport systems, information systems, political science, sociology |
| Topics: | Site Management, Design Practice, Urban Studies, Digital Applications, Governance, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Information Management, Cost Management |
| 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