Search results

Prefabricated products are continually entering the building construction market; yet, the decision to use prefabricated products in a construction project is based mostly on personal preferences and the evaluation of direct costs. Researchers and practitioners have debated appropriate measurement systems for evaluating the impacts of prefabricated products and for comparing them with conventional on-site construction practices. The more advanced, cost–benefit approach to evaluating prefabricated products often inspires controversy because it may generate inaccurate results when converting non-monetary effects into costs. As prefabrication may affect multiple organisations and product subsystems, the method used to decide on production methods should consider multiple direct and indirect impacts, including nonmonetary ones. Thus, this study aims to develop a multi-criteria method to evaluate both the monetary and non-monetary impacts of prefabrication solutions to facilitate decision-making on whether to use prefabricated products.

Drawing upon a literature review, this research suggests a multi-criteria method that combines the choosing-by-advantage approach with a cost–benefit analysis. The method was presented for validation in focus group discussions and tested in a case involving a prefabricated bathroom.

The analysis indicates that the method helps a project’s stakeholders communicate about the relative merits of prefabrication and conventional construction while facilitating the final decision of whether to use prefabrication.

This research contributes a method of evaluating the monetary and non-monetary impacts of prefabricated products. The research underlines the need to evaluate the diverse benefits and sacrifices that stakeholder face when considering production methods in construction.

This chapter explores genderwashing in the context of exclusive talent management (ETM) and defensive diversity management (DDM). It makes the counter intuitive argument that ETM is a misnomer in that it privileges maintenance of an organizational hierarchy based on social identity over the development of talent. Further, DDM is a genderwashing tool, enabling organizations to fend off criticism through symbolic diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives while enacting discourses that legitimate structures, practices, and norms that produce a status hierarchy based on social identities. A genderwashing perspective reveals this contradiction and spotlights the uncomfortable reality of workplace inequalities. It also shows that operating within boundaries set by the status quo renders DDM ineffective in removing the real career impediments faced by women and members of minoritized groups (MMG). A transformative diversity management (TDM) approach is needed to confront these realities and enable organizations to support the career aspirations of women and MMG.