Search results

Seeks to find methods of delivering service to a valued component of society, the elderly. Utilizes a large scale, participatory research design to include employees in designing and implementing a new service system in the face of downtrending human and capital resources.

Growing emphasis on meeting client needs and improving project performance within the construction industry has led to increasing use of fully integrated “design and build” (D&B) construction project teams. Advocates of the D&B system contend that integrating design and construction this way leads to a seamless procurement process, improved team relationships, and a more efficiently delivered product. This article reports on research which explored the operational efficiency of such integrated project teams. The findings suggest that despite the benefits of integration, cultural and professional interfaces remain which impair team performance and undermine structural change management protocols. This effectively leaves the team operating as work‐groups in a similar way as they would under a traditionally procured contract, with the construction team excluded from the change management process. A methodology is proposed for exploring these discontinuities in detail, and addressing intra‐work‐group conflicts which threaten the continued development of D&B within the sector.

The design of work has been shown to influence a host of attitudinal, behavioral, cognitive, well-being, and organizational outcomes. Despite its clear importance, scholarly interest in the topic has diminished over the past 20 years. Fortunately, a recent body of research has sought to reenergize research into work design by expanding our view of work design from a narrow set of motivational work features to one that incorporates broader social and contextual elements. In this chapter we seek to review the literature on work design and develop a framework that integrates both job and team design research. We begin by briefly reviewing the history of work design in order to provide needed historical context and illustrate the evolution of job and team design. We then define work design, particularly as it relates to incorporating job and team design elements and transitioning from a view of jobs to one of roles. Following this, we identify a comprehensive set of work design outcomes that provide the basis for understanding the impact that different work characteristics can have on individuals and teams. We then offer an extended discussion of our integrative model of work design, which includes three sources of work characteristics (task, social, and contextual) and the worker characteristics implied by these characteristics. Having defined the range of work and worker characteristics, we then discuss some of the fit and composition issues that arise when designing work, as well as discuss the mechanisms through which the work characteristics have their impact on outcomes. Finally, we discuss research into informal forms of work design.

This chapter reports on a longitudinal quasi-experimental field study within an organizational design of a global consumer products manufacturer moving toward high-performance work systems (HPWSs) in North America by integrating business centers and self-directed work teams (SDWTs) coupled with 13 other action-levers within an integrated and bundled high-performance organizations (HPOs) re-design. The results of this organizational design effort are assessed using different types and levels of organizational outcomes (hard record data, behavioral, and attitudinal measures) along a 5-year temporal dimension punctuated by multiple time periods (baseline, during, and after). The organization, which was “built to change” (Lawler & Worley, 2006), in this research had already highly superior or “exemplar” (Collins, 2001) levels of organizational performance. Consequently, the real research question becomes: “What effect does state of the art organizational design and development have on an exemplar organization?” The study also calls into question the field's ability to truly assess exemplar organizations with existing measures of organizational change and development.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the conditions under which a co-design team comprised of in-house professionals and leading-edge service users can generate innovative service design concepts.

The investigation used a field-experimental design to conduct two studies. Observations and open-ended questionnaires were used to examine cross-comparison matrices with experts rating the generated outcomes and t-tests being used to compare the outcome ratings between teams of different compositions.

The outcomes produced by a co-design team seem to be linked to the team diversity – process facilitation relationship. Bringing a variety of knowledge and skills into the team can lead to original outcomes, while a high disparity between members’ backgrounds can require extensive efforts to facilitate a collaborative process. Separation between users’ objectives can result in a user-driven process and outcomes that are too specific for the broader marketplace. Co-design teams that characterize minimum separation, maximum variety, and moderate disparity are likely to produce the most promising results.

The research was restricted to a narrowly defined study setting and samples. Future research should replicate the current study in other service contexts using different team compositions.

Co-design requires the careful selection of users based on their background and motivations, as well as the facilitation of a process that enables the team to collaboratively transform relevant knowledge into innovative outcomes.

The research contributes to a better understanding of the team composition – process facilitation relationship affecting innovation outcomes. Doing so provides a more fine-grained picture of the co-design team composition and the facilitation requirements for service design.

The purpose of this paper is to present a pedagogical practice in the project-based assessment of architectural, engineering and construction (AEC) students’ interdisciplinary building design work adopting BIM. This pedagogical practice emphasizes the impacts of BIM, as the digital collaboration platform, on the cross-disciplinary teamwork design through information sharing. This study also focuses on collecting students’ perceptions of building information modeling (BIM) effects in integrated project design. Challenges in BIM adoption from AEC students’ perspective were identified and discussed, and could spark further research needs.

Based on a thorough review of previous pedagogical practices of applying BIM in multiple AEC disciplines, this study adopted a case study of the Solar Decathlon (SD) residential building design as the group project for AEC students to deliver the design work and construction planning. In total 13 different teams within the University of Nottingham Ningbo China, each group consisting of final year undergraduate students with backgrounds in architecture, civil engineering, and architectural environmental engineering, worked to deliver the detailed design of the solar-powered residential house meeting pre-specified project objectives in terms of architectural esthetics, structural integrity, energy efficiency, prefabrication construction techniques and other issues such as budget and scheduling. Each team presented the cross-disciplinary design plan with cost estimate and construction scheduling together within group reports. This pedagogical study collected students’ reflective thinking on how BIM affected their design work, and compared their feedback on BIM to that from AEC industry professionals in previous studies.

The case study of the SD building project showed the capacity of BIM in enabling interdisciplinary collaboration through information exchange and in enhancing communication across different AEC fields. More sustainable design options were considered in the early architectural design stages through the cross-disciplinary cooperation between architecture and building services engineering. BIM motivated AEC student teams to have a more comprehensive design and construction plan by considering multiple criteria including energy efficiency, budget, and construction activities. Students’ reflections indicated both positive effects of BIM (e.g. facilitating information sharing) as well as challenges for further BIM implementation, for example, such as some architecture students’ resistance to BIM, and the lack of existing family types in the BIM library, etc.

Some limitations of the current BIM pedagogy were identified through the student group work. For example, students revealed the problem of interoperability between BIM (i.e. Autodesk Revit) and building energy simulation tools. To further integrate the university education and AEC industry practice, future BIM pedagogical work could recruit professionals and project stakeholders in the adopted case studies, for the purpose of providing professional advice on improving the constructability of the BIM-based design from student work.

To further integrate the university education and AEC industry practice, future BIM pedagogical work could recruit professionals and project stakeholders in the adopted case study, for the purpose of providing professional advice in improving the constructability of the BIM-based design from student work.

This work provides insights into the information technology applied in the AEC interdisciplinary pedagogy. Students gained the experience of a project-based collaboration and were equipped with BIM capabilities for future employment within the AEC job market. The integrated design approach was embedded throughout the team project process. Overall, this BIM pedagogical practice emphasized the link between academic activities and real-world industrial practice. The pedagogical experience gained in this BIM course could be expanded to future BIM education and research in other themes such as interoperability of building information exchange among different digital tools.

Effective teams use a balance of synchronous and asynchronous communication. Team communication is dependent on the communication acts of team members and the ability of managers to facilitate, stimulate and motivate them. Team members from organizations using different information systems tend to have different understanding, opinions, and rates of adoption and skills levels regarding specific IT tools. The purpose of this paper is to explore the effective use of tools for communication in design teams and the strategies for the use of specific tools.

A review of the potential effectiveness of synchronous and asynchronous communication means and tools for team communication leads to a review of research conducted into the use of two relatively new electronic tools for team communication by design teams in The Netherlands.

The research results revealed that a collective framework for team communication and collaboration using electronic tools was missing. There was also evidence of a lack of understanding by the users of the proper use of the tools, a lack of training, poor management competences to stimulate proper use. There was also evidence that the rivalry of tools tended to hinder, rather than improve, effectiveness of team communication.

The findings are limited to the cases investigated; however, they tend to support earlier findings into construction team communication. There is a need for a better collective understanding of team communication, which should be supported with training to develop appropriate skills, both for the use of new technologies and for the use of team rules.

The results provide information and advice for design and project managers concerned with improving communications in design and construction projects.

Through the study of visualizations, virtual worlds and information exchange, the purpose of this paper is to reveal the complex connections between technology and the work of design and construction. The authors apply the sociotechnical view of technology and the ramifications this view has on successful use of technology in design and construction.

This is a discussion paper reviewing over a decade of research that connects three streams of research on architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) teams as these teams grappled with adapting work practices to new technologies and the opportunities these technologies promised.

From studies of design and construction practices with building information modeling and energy modeling, the authors show that given the constructed nature of models and the loose coupling of project teams, these team organizational practices need to mirror the modeling requirements. Second, looking at distributed teams, whose interaction is mediated by technology, the authors argue that virtual world visualizations enhance discovery, while distributed AEC teams also need more traditional forms of 2D abstraction, sketching and gestures to support integrated design dialogue. Finally, in information exchange research, the authors found that models and data have their own logic and structure and, as such, require creativity and ingenuity to exchange data across systems. Taken together, these streams of research suggest that process innovation is brought about by people developing new practices.

In this paper, the authors argue that technology alone does not change practice. People who modify practices with and through technology create process innovation.

The purpose of the paper is to study the influence of procurement on the performance of integrated design teams.

The research paradigm is based on Russian socio‐constructivist approach to activity theory. Activity theory, as opposed to natural or social science, is a design science approach that focuses on the context aspect of project. A triangulation of qualitative research methods is used to investigate the dynamic of integrated teams in two different procurement contexts.

The paper is conclusive regarding the influence of procurement on team efficiency. It demonstrates that traditional procurement processes reinforce socio‐cognitive barriers that hinder team efficiency. It also illustrates how new procurement modes can transform the dynamic of relationships between the client and the members of the supply chain, and have a positive impact on team performance.

The paper demonstrates first that problems with integrated design team efficiency are related to context and not process – they are not technical but socio‐cognitive; second that fragmented transactional contracting increases socio‐cognitive barriers that hinder integrated design team performance; third that new forms of relational contracting may help to mitigate socio‐cognitive barriers and improve integrated design team performance, fourth that changing the context through procurement does not address the problem of obsolete design practices.

The paper brings together theories of production in lean construction and social learning as a rival approach to traditional project management theory for demonstrating the importance of context on team performance.

The purpose of this paper is to suggest that translating a design theory (DT) into practice (e.g. creating an instance design artifact (IDA)) is hardly straight-forward and requires substantial creativity. Specifically the authors suggest that adopting a DT embodies a creativity passdown effect in which the creative thinking of a team of design theorist(s) inherent in DT invokes a creative mind of a team of artifact instance designer(s) in creating an IDA. In this study, the authors empirically investigate the creativity passdown effect through an action case in which a DT (DT nexus) was applied in creating an IDA (multi-outsourcing decision-making tool).

The case methodology applied here is described as an action case. An action case is a hybrid research approach that combines action research and interpretive case approaches. It combines intervention and interpretation in order to achieve both change and understanding. It is a form of soft field experiment with less emphasis on iteration and learning and more on trial and making. The approach is holistic in philosophy, and prediction is not emphasized. The intervention in the case was that of an instance designer team introducing a previously published DT as a basis for creating an IDA.

The experience in the action case suggests that using a DT in creating an IDA may encourage design thinking, and in certain way increase its power and practical relevance by fostering the creative mind of instance designers. Indeed, DTs provide a scientific basis for dealing with an instance problem, and this evokes the creativity mind of instance designers. Without such a scientific basis, it is a lot more challenging for instance artifact designers to deal with instance problems.

This study contributes to the literature concerning design science research, as it challenges the notion that adopting scientific design knowledge limits creativity inherent in creating IDA by illustrating creative elements involved in adopting DT as a basis for creating IDAs.

This study offers implications to practice, as it provides new insights regarding how DT can be used in instance design activities.

A report of this research previously appeared as a conference paper. However, the attached journal version has been completely rewritten to additionally contribute to the literature concerning design science research beyond the conference version. More specifically, in this version, the authors conceptualize adopting a DT to build an IDA as a theoretical basis, and the authors challenge the notion that adopting scientific design knowledge limits creativity inherent in creating IDA by illustrating creative elements involved in executing DT as a basis for creating IDAs.