Search results

Quality failures in grid infrastructure construction would cause large-scale collapses in power supply and additional expenditures by reworks and repairs. Learning from quality failures (LFQF) extracts experience from previous quality events and converts them into preventive measures to reduce or eliminate future construction quality issues. This study aims to investigate the influence factors of LFQF in the construction of grid infrastructure.

The related factors of LFQF, including quality management (QM) practices, quality rectification, and individual learning, were identified by reviewing literature about organizational learning and extracting experience from previous failures. A questionnaire survey was distributed to the grid companies in North, Northeast, Northwest, East, Central, and Southwest China. 381 valid responses collected and analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM) to test the influence of these factors on LFQF.

The SEM results support that QM practices positively affect individual learning and LFQF. Quality rectification indirectly impacts LFQF via individual learning, while the results did not support the direct link between quality rectification and LFQF.

The findings strengthen practical insights into extracting experience from poor-quality issues and continuous improvement. The contributory factors of LFQF found in this study benefit the practitioners by taking effective measures to enhance organizational learning capability and improve the long-term construction quality performance in the grid infrastructure industry.

Existing research about the application of LFQF still stays at the explorative and conceptual stage. This study investigates the related factors of LFQF, including QM practices, quality rectification, and individual learning, extending the model development of learning from failures (LFF) in construction QM.

The purpose of this essay is to explore the opportunities and challenges that early-career researchers (ECRs) face when they seek to contribute to academic knowledge production through research activities “other than” those directly focused on making progress with their own, to-be-published, research papers in a context associated with the “publish or perish” (PoP) mentality.

Drawing broadly on the notion of technologies of humility (Jasanoff, 2003), this reflective essay develops upon the experiences of the authors in organizing and participating in a series of nine workshops undertaken between June 2013 and April 2021, as well as the arduous process of writing this paper itself. Retrospective accounts, workshop materials, email exchanges and surveys of workshop participants provide the key data sources for the analysis presented in the paper.

The paper shows how the organization of the workshops is intertwined with the building of a small community of ECRs and exploration of how to address the perceived limitations of a “gap-spotting” approach to developing research ideas and questions. The analysis foregrounds how the workshops provide a seemingly valuable research experience that is not without contradictions. Workshop participation reveals tensions between engagement in activities “other than” working on papers for publication and institutionalized pressures to produce publication outputs, between the (weak) perceived status of ECRs in the field and the aspiration to make a scholarly contribution, and between the desire to develop a personally satisfying intellectual journey and the pressure to respond to requirements that allow access to a wider community of scholars.

Our analysis contributes to debates about the ways in which seemingly valuable outputs are produced in academia despite a pervasive “publish or perish” mentality. The analysis also shows how reflexive writing can help to better understand the opportunities and challenges of pursuing activities that might be considered “unproductive” because they are not directly related to to-be-published papers.