Construction Industry And Data Management Construction Essay

turn repulse And data anxiety whirl EssayMany issues profess the victor of a intercommunicate, yet in that location is sure proof of success based on efficient dialogue and cooperation and collaborationism amidst police squad-members. send and receiving information is conversation this enables understanding of one a nonher. Common definitions of discourse disposed by Hoyland et al., 1953 and Ruesch and Bateson, 1961 quoted in Miller, 2004 depicts that communication is the unlesst on by which an individual transmits stimuli to shift the behavior of other(a) individuals. Another definition p allures that, Communication does not revive to verbal, explicit and intentional transmission of messages alone. The concept of communication would include e genuinely those processes by which people influence one another, Ruesch and Bateson, 2004.The guess on communication defines three account fixingss of communication. These three genes create to be relegate for c ommunication these be the sender, the receiver, and the presence of a message. The message mustiness be conveyed done a medium epoch the receiver must interpret the sure message so as to understand its meaning. The medium use is grand to communication since it affects the process of decoding. Decoding the message correctly is chief(prenominal) since it stands to give the meaning as is intended by the sender. It is important to realize at this point that everyone is disparate with several(predicate) perceptions and interpretations of situations (Miller, 2004).Since people adopt different perceptions, team members of a couch do diverse ways oral and scripted communication team players also listen and comprehend situations in conglomerate ways, solely leading to communication problems (Koskinen, 2004). Certain obstacles and filters may remove key authoritys in comprehending the actual message. Barriers or obstacles usually root from the existing mind-state of the someb ody receiving the message these barriers to correct interpretation of the message might be biasness, preconceived notion or emotions, it may very soundly be the lack of technological and educational understanding needed (Thomas et al., 1998).Eliminating all human and technical barriers or obstacles is rather impossible in fiat to incur effective communication, precisely creating prescribed, systemized communication set-up tail much enhance take to performance. This go forth everywhereall minimize or al or so mitigate distortions in effective communication. skillful collaboration is dependant on effective communication. Communication may be necessary for collaboration nevertheless the reverse is not necessarily true up communication still takes place in absence of collaboration amid team members, this message collaboration advances to realize prevalent closings through extra-durable relationships and in presence of complete commitment of team-members (Laepple, 2005) . Collaboration fag be haunting if ad hoc issues exist as part of the relation. Laepple, 2005 quotes Lorenz et al and says that collaboration constitutes in the first place the presence of a common goal or objective, a stick paradigm, the existence of respect among and crosswise all members, and of course the major element that is effective communication to be present.In understand to look projects, common goal or subr give awayine would be safe and timely instruction execution of the project within the bounds of the tending(p) budget and fiber. Collaboration means nothing without purpose. Joint paradigm, though points to the methods and practices generally acceptable to all teams and team-members exhausting to realize common goals. Here, it is noteworthy that everyone sh ars different prizes and these values must also be widely accepted within the working teams.It is important that collaboration exists before the rise of disputes or discordments and problems in a pro ject it should, therefore be the foundational element of a project so as to avoid the afore-mentioned issues or any others that may come up (Larson, 1997). For this to be done team-building processes that conjoin the associated parties so as to give a clean-cut picture of two the communication strategies as well as collaboration strategies and to make clear ways in which conflicts and disputes can be avoided well before they arise (Larson, 1997). One more essential factor for successful collaboration is the stead of the circumspection when faced by serious problem(s) (Larson, 1997). The commissions attitude and behavior must be in conformance with the principles of collaboration, namely trust, nudeness and combined teamwork (Larson, 1997).When harvestingivity deficiencies occur, the first culprits be communication and collaboration (FMI, 2004). FMI conducts the CIPS- grammatical construction Industry Productivity Survey which states communication and/or collaboration issues as major challenges for the improvement of levels of productivity. This paper uses Widemans (1991) terminologies suggesting that buyer g everywherenance corresponds to project admirer, and seller/implementer presidency corresponds to project manager. These terms will be synonymously used end-to-end the study, i.e. buyer/seller and project sponsor or manager.Inter-firm Relationship TheoriesTo ingest with the complicated matter of research in inter- organizational relationships it is useful to refer to present theories that clarify the dynamics governing these relationships. The introduction section of this paper summarizes the studys element of investigation as communication existing between the project sponsor and the project manager at the time of IT project executing where buyer-seller relationships exist. traditionalistic inter-firm/organizational relationship theories conferring to such analysis ar namely the feat Cost Economics Theory and the Agency Theory (Williamson 1995). These theories argon prone as follows. performance Cost Economics (TCE)The TCE theory centers near the tip of individual transaction that trans of lates input to call for output, for instance the establishment of an IT-based system for the improvement of an organizations internal talent. TCE roots in political economy it gives rationales on whether to make a product or buy it from the market. at that place atomic number 18 dickens situations whether either there is more control qualification a fit for purpose in reducing unwanted be associated to a product but having higher tolls of focus or the other situation where prices ar trim back by economies of scale as well as competing by price.Williamson (1975) argues for the make or buy decisions these argon carryed by various implications like The level of specificity of an asset is a major influencing factor. It relates to the degree of the transacted object based on how explicit/ droll it is. What value does it hold in terms of individual transaction and whether or not it can be redeployed for future transactions? The level of ambiguity that arises fromIn-apt communication or deliberate in-correct and misleading signals that pr horizontalt decision-makers from discovering plans made by others snarled in the business transaction.The common indecisiveness present in human behavior.The transactions frequency.Initially, TCE was human bodyed for recurring, routine transactions, undertaken by traditionally managed organizations both in functional as well as hierarchical set-ups. Recurring transactions do not require a specific governance structure, though in contrast transactions that argon passing unique require more specialized management structures. For this very purpose TCE considers firms governance structures and not specifically work functions (Willimason, p. 387, 1985). Costs involved in these transactions are aptly called transaction addresss, here exercise costs are minimized by turning over transactions (each with different attributes) to governance structures (each with different capacities and different costs) (Williamson 1985, p. 18). TCE suggests that firms adjust their governance structures in order to attain lowest possible transaction costs. Resistance in physical systems corresponds to transaction costs in economic mount Transaction costs arise from daedality of buyer-seller relationship and the impracticality of developing and agreeing on contracts that are well-detailed enough to aptly form this relationship. For reducing transaction costs, the TCE theory suggests a high degree of asset specificity, and get on suggests that incomplete contracts grade towards make product decisions, while lower degree of asset specificity bet towards buy product decisions (Adler et al. 1998).No matter about Agency theoryCONSTRUCTION fabrication DATA MANAGEMENTThe turn business relies rugged on information. The information used can generally be categori sed as merged data and amorphous data (Caldas et al., 2005). Database systems are used to generate structured data the database system uses structures and formats that are predetermined (Caldas et al., 2005). organise data brings about standardization while improving interoperability of computational systems (Caldas et al., 2005). PMCS-the redact Management and Collaboration Systems contain different modules which use both structured and unstructured data structured data is present in the cost control module. The PCMS users do not have much control of the system, though realistically, most documents generated by the system (for kink projects) can be sort as unstructured data based on text-documents like contracts, reports and amendment orders and so on (Froese, 2003). Although such documents are classified as unstructured data, but most PMCS that are web-based classify them as partially structured. Constructware, a web-based PMCS( range Management Control Systems presents sta ndard modules to create and track daily reports and change orders as well as RFIs.( Request for Information ) Through this team-members can discriminate and edit a standard document, which allows for interoperability between different computers. Despite this, researchers disagree that it is un come with a reproduction of the text document on different computer systems and does not offer an actual solution to handle complex data (Maoa et al., 2006). A lot of studies have been conducted where common data seats have been actual so as to regularize and form one customary methodology to handle structured as well as unstructured data within the edifice effort. IFC, the Industry Foundation Class (IFC) has been developed by AII-the International Alliance for Interoperability (Froese, 2003). CAD drawings are present in AutoCAD format, these are used by widely in the construction attention two kinds of informational documents are supported by such formats these are beget DocumentsProj ect Management Documents (Zhu et al., 2001).DRIVERS OF TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRYProject success is impacted by outer factors like the credence and the diffusion of engineering advancement in certain industries (Chan et al., 2004). Nonetheless, traditionally, the construction patience is seen as rather obtuse and reluctant to the credence and implementation of rising engineering science in comparison to other industries (Laborde Sanvido, 1994). Some important barriers in the adoption of technology by the construction industry are explained by Haas et al. (1999). These barriers include different standards, fragmentation, the type of business cycles, and ways in which guess is avoided. The construction industry survives on low labor costs in majority of regionsthis is also a factor discouraging the invention of r exploitationary technology and its adoption. Technology in-acceptance is mainly out-of-pocket to technological and financial chances matt-u p by the employees who work in the construction industry (Tatum 1989). In-acceptance of technology construction companies poses a major threat to the construction industry. This is touch productivity levels widely and supporting the culture that is already change-resistant. A comparison of US and Korea in terms of information technology adoption is under-taken by Williams et al. (2007). These researchers reflect on how IT technologies are almost obsolete in over 150 US-based construction companies. Almost 50% or more have no fashion of web conferencing or web portals. These companies have never used barcode examine and do not have k at presentledge of e-learning or e-bid convertiblely they have never used geographic information systems-GIS or geographic position systems-GPS.An article named Forces whimsical adoption of new information technologies by Mitropoulos and Tatum pen in the year 2000 aims at identifying and analyzing internal and external factors that affect technol ogy adoption within the construction industry. Internal factors arise within the organization and external factors come from the project owner or arise from competition. They have studied eight different companies three of those are mechanical contractors whereas two of them are general contractors. These companies are large with even larger revenues averaging over US$100M. Technologies chosen by the authors are the CAD and the EDI, Electronic Data Interchange technologies and Radio Frequency Identification( RFID cards are important requirements of warehouses so that the stores available for issue are automatically updated in project ) Mitropoulos and Tatum have defined four important triggers for adopting technology these areCompetitive improvementProcess ProblemTechnological OpportunityExternal RequirementsCompetitive gain is improved only if new technology helps improve an he organizations comminuted capability and also if competitors have not already adopted similar technolog y. On the other hand, process problems originate from(a)Added need for improved shade and also detailed drawings(b) Existing technologies have become insufficient for see communication(c) Growth of a company that requires soften technologies in order to better supply larger-scale, complex projects demanding higher degree of detail. Opportunities in technology have been defined as improved capabilities because of the availability engineers having technology-based backgrounds, presence of gratuitous technology, and affordability of up-and-coming technologies. External requirements are those that result from technology changes and are better known as client specifications or external competitor/ extend to pressure, and legal or regulatory enforcements.Besides these triggers for the adoption of technology, a great change has taken place within the construction industry that has unnatural practices within project management (Alshawi Ingirige, 2003). The changes that have taken plac e are marketplace globalization, economic forces, increased project compl happeny, a demand for fast results, changing scopes of projects, changing procurement practices, and sophistication of clients (Alshawi Ingirige, 2003). The construction industry is now heavily commit in IT in response to these internal and external factors. By average construction contractor companies are now investing some US$334,241 in information technology.BARRIERS TO TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRYThe use of IT helps overcome time-taken to perform tasks and helps perform tasks that are difficult or impossible to be done by human being (Allen et al., 2005). Though IT has contributed greatly to the success of business organizations yet there exit barriers for diffusing or adopting IT into businesses. (Becerik,2006). Construction businessmen feel lack of collaboration within the industry, lack of training, and high implementation costs are all barriers to the success of IT in this indu stry. On the full-page, though, barriers may be classified as technical barriers, behavioral barriers, cost-related barriers, organizational barriers, and legal barriers (Bjork, 2003). The barriers include1. Communication and hard and soft documentation2. Information ownership3. Returns on investment that are indistinguishable4. Construction site technological limitations5. Risks, both financial and organizational learning related risks6. Change resistance and organizational inertia7. law of intellectual property and concerns regarding mistrust8. System security, system reliability and the degree of confidentiality the system offersThe construction industry is being affected in a number of ways by all these given factors lowering chances of adoption of technology to this industry these factors are individually studied and analyzed. (Bjork, 2003).You asked for refrences here they were given at start of paraFrameworks of Knowledge tape transportMultiple studies have created good e xamples to transfer knowledge, for learning and for diffusing new innovations into different areas of the construction industry (Egbu, 2005 Maqsood et al., 2007 Walker et al., 2004 Chinowsky et al., 2007 Anumba et al., 2005 Chinowsky and Carrillo, 2007). Nonetheless, these fabrics are especially focused and set to a process lacking in consideration of their effect on project management and societal relationships. An obstacle to knowledge transfer, its learning or innovations may be connectered with certain characteristics of construction industry like short-term labor contracts fragmentation of a project by functions short-term coalitions of teams contract arrangements slimy coordination between project partners adversarial relationships etc. (Slaughter, 1998 DoreeandHolmen,2004 Dubois and Gadde, 2002). Ling (2003) states four factors having vital set up on technological innovations in construction. They areThe interest level of team-members (of the project) name environmentCre ating task-groupsIndividual capabilities of members involved with innovationAdditionally, Walker Peasupap (2005-a/b 2009) state that management technology, work environment and team-members are all elemental factors affecting the diffusion of innovation, since they can adversely affect delivery costs of a project, time constraints and limits and quality of the project. These limitations, though may be resolved by integration of humans into project management (Huemann et al., 2007). Studies have been conducted to find out how knowledge management (KM) can be implemented in construction organizations. Different Knowledge Management Frameworks have been developed, some of which are discussed briefly belowIn 2002 Whelton et al. proposed a knowledge management framework for projects this ensample works on soft systems methodology in order to serve up group cognition, group learning and generate solutions. One drawback however is that this framework may prolong negotiation between st akeholders whilst trying to reach vulgar agreement when faced by a problem or a situation this may overall prolong time limitations of the project, causing it withal start later than anticipated or finish later than anticipated.A frame-work called cross-sectoral learning has been developed by Al-Ghassani in 2002, in virtual opening move for helping organizations set up a Knowledge Management strategy. Construction companies need to set-up KM systems in order to preserving knowledge and more specifically to integrate learning into the companies workings both into processes as well as practices which will in turn enhance performance and organizational competitiveness in the global market (Wetherill et al., 2002).Bronn Thi-Le in 2007 created an abstract get that facilitates the contracting of problems related to transfer of know-how in large construction related projects. This model aims to identify knowledge break-downs while presenting the best solutions to promote learning an d transferring knowledge. Nevertheless, creating kind relationships between project teams can prove to be critical in promoting sharing of knowledge in collaborative environments.A project named e-COGNOS, created by Wetherill et al. in 2002 attempts to specify and develop an nucleotide that is an open model this infrastructure works (in collaborative environments) at KM to create, disseminate, retrieve and capture or store information. e-COGNOS can be effective if there are well-bound social relationships to promote knowledge exchange users must be prompt and trained on the use of this frame-work.Another example is that of the knowledge transfer framework created by Carrillo et al. in 2006 which is used to help companies manage product-related knowledge. This framework works in three stages, though the maturity level of KM is important as to how the framework may be implemented. Also cultural issues exist when knowledge is being transferred across different territories or across national borders.Another approach called cross-organizational learning approach developed by Franco et al. in 2004 deals with the shortage of processes required for everyday inter-organizational assessment of construction projects so as to facilitate learning while adding value to projects. This approach allows for exchanging feedback on project performance which is useful for learning and improving performance.In 2007 Chinowsky created a learning organization maturity model with a built-in automated tool called Learning Organization Rapid Diagnostic that assists in assessing and the implementation of continuous learning. Nonetheless, for implementation of the multiple characteristics of a learning organization, it can be time-consuming because of the sole reason much coordination and management is required to link together the entire organization. Overall this is an elicit support to use communication systems infrastructure for organizational learning.The CONDOR project is explai ned by Vakola and Rezqui -2000. They explain how it can support in defining work practices, work processes, commonly-used techniques, tools as well as aid in supporting the technical infrastructure of construction organizations. It even comes with an evaluation tool that assists in gathering of information it helps in organizing learnt information by distributing it so that organizational learning takes place, and the learnt knowledge can be implemented in future projects. CONDOR continuously creates knowledge, interprets it and distributes it in order to declare knowledge.In 2007, Chinowsky and Carrillo (2007) propose how organizations shit from focusing on KM over to learning organizations based on a STEPS model that is a KM model. STEPS stands for Start-up-Take-off-Expansion stage-Progressive stage-Susta inability, it also has a learning maturity model that is based on leadership, processes and organizational infrastructure, organizational communication collaboration, education and at long last culture(s).If KM strategies are successfully initiated, organizations can successfully progress from only KM to having a learning culture. Learning alone cannot necessarily lead to improving performance (Crossan et al., 1995). Good practices in management and knowledge management have a deep correlation (Leseure and Brookes-2004). Various studies show the importation of innovation in construction industries (Egbu, 2004 Latham, 1994 Slaughter, 1998 Gann, 2000 Dubois and Gadde, 2002 Vakola and Rezqui, 2000 Kumaraswamy et al.,2004 Ling, 2003 Dulaimi et al., 2005 Eaton et al., 2006 Egan, 1998 Winch, 1998). PPP/PFI has positive outcomes for innovation (Eaton et al.-2006). Eaton further explored stimulants and barriers against innovation in PPP/PFI projects. Impediments and stimulants related to human relationships are social and organizational variables. This will help in improving PPP/PFI that can in turn affect project performance in regard of project quality, costs , and time management.Concurrent EngineeringConcurrent engineering desing is a doctrine in management which has largely being used in the manufacturing industry while less of it has been employed in the construction engineering. The main aim of the philosophy is to reduce timelines in the activities so that the overall project time in terms of cost can be cut back For completion of these activies Concurrent engineering projects parallel and concurrent functions that are overlapped so that the delay in sequential conduct of the activites can be reduced . It is pertininet to mention that the common areas between concurrent activies between engineering production and construction industry has been highlighted by many researchers (de la Garza et al. 1994).In construction industry the the concurrent engineering has primarily defines as the integration of both design , planning and construction processes including the main aim of integration is to reduce construction time and cost and to ensure through various checks that the product is meting the expectations of the consumer . (Noble 1993).One of the main aims of the concurrent engineering methodlogy is to identify which all activites can overlap and which cannot . Furthermore the amount twp activities can overlap in a process mormally depend upon the typr of activities . (Prasad 1996).Concurrent Engineering and Integrated Project learningIntegrated project developemnt can be described as the evolution of the concurrent engineering into a full scale methodogical process .Since due to the complexity and the increasing processes involved in the contruction industry of today it is very important evolve the integrated approach for the completion of the task . We will now discuss the IPD in the backdrop of concurrent engineering .I need more information about concurrent engineeringIPDConstruction structures are change state increasingly complex while this industry is becoming more specialized a new approach called Integrated Project Delivery or IPD has been introduced. This approach has been developed in the U.S. for the improvement of cost and the quality of projects as well as enabling better management of project schedules compared to traditional methods. The IPD method attempts to improve the outcomes of a project by collaboration in streamlining the bonuss in addition to team goals (ADTF 2006).Though there are a number of organizations that support progression of IPD for instance AIACA Council and the AGC, and while some projects benefited from its use, yet projects using IPD are relatively few in number (Post 2007, Sive 2009). in that respect are reasons for its slow adoption. Some reasons include business of risk related to IPD (time, money, and innovation) other reasons include the close partnerships that IPD demands and legal frameworks required for incorporating IPD approaches. Furthermore, stakeholders of the construction industry think that new competencies, skills and KM will be needed for collaborating IPD into an organization (Auto-desk White Paper 2008). Still there is no noteworthy research that investigates the existing adoption status of IPD or reasons for its slow adoption within the industry (Sive 2009). Gathering IPD incident-studies reflecting best practices would motivate professionals unfamiliar with(predicate) with IPD in getting assurance of IPD benefits and how its profits play a role in both successful and unsuccessful projects. Here, this paper provides an example of a project implementing IPD for project delivery. In this paper, we define IPD and discuss BIM-Building Information casting in context of IPD. To make further understanding of IPD clear, a case study is discussed to see how IPD may be applied in commercial building projects. The conclusion section will give recommendations for education as well as future research projects both in the context of IPD.Though IPD may be the industry buzz word but there exist no standard defini tion that is acceptable to all. Differing definitions accompanied by greatly varying approaches of different sophistication levels suggest that IPD describes well diverse contract arrangements as well as team processes, (Sive-2009). There are prominent similarities among IPD projects and IPD definitions. IPD is defined by various principles like the adjacent in the context of this paper(1) Multi-party Agreement(2) Parties Early intimacyIt is not necessary that IPD is constituted by these principles.Multi-Party AgreementOne contract exists for the whole project, which involves the general contractor, the project owner, and the architect, or may even involve other parties (if the contract is between more than just two parties) when IPD is used. The prime goal of IPD is maximizing collaboration and coordination throughout the entire project. The contracts are a driving force that allows goals to be attained productively without getting complicated by use of separate contracts since separate contracts can produce opposing motives among the stake-holders and team members. (Post 2007) please attach this ref in ref please share Risk and RewardA majority of IPD contracts incorporate elements designed for supporting(a) teamwork while promoting project success. IPD, in contrast to traditional projects, combines the risks rewards to reach project goals. (Scarnati, 2001) The goals may differ but are related to cost, project schedules and the quality metrics used in measuring success of a project. Associated risk examples include budget over-costs with different entitys overheads and profits, though on the other hand if a project is below budget a team may be compensated. Risk-reward sharing can be based on value, incentive pool, innovation outstanding performance, performance bonuses and profit sharing.Based on value-Project teams are given incentives bonuses that are given based on how much value is added by a member to a project.Incentive pool-It will control som e share of the teams fees (that increases and decreases based on certain pre-agreed criteria) before it is split and shared among team membersInnovation and outstanding performance-As the name already indicates, teams are rewarded for their hard work or creativityPerformance bonuses-These bonuses are awarded on the basis of qualityProfit sharing-Based on group performances, profits are gained collectively for the whole team/group rather than individually.Early Involvement of All PartiesOne fundamental benefit of IPD is that it provides all parties the ability to be part of the project and be involved with the project from the start of the design phase. Collaborating from the start can easily address problems of fragmentation existing between the designing professionals and construction professionals which results in work mal-practices or cost changes during the late construction phase. (Scarnati, 2001) Although early collaboration does not need technological tools, but information technology like BIM-Building Information Modeling greatly increases efficiency of collaboration taking place during all project phases.There do, though exist constrains and complexities in implementing IPD. New contracts are using IPD but are not tried tested, and so, are not completely approved and understood. IPD is pricy and insurance companies will not cover financial losses incurred as a result of IPD. Moreover the construction industry is accustomed to schematic leadership methods responsibility, and opportunity while change is not very evident. (Baiden et al., 2003)The inability to restructure procurement processes for enabling IPD is the area where a majority of agencies and formal institutions are deficient. On the other hand, IPD is correctly and successfully implemented itHelps in facilitating the sharing of rewards as well as risks amongst stakeholdersIt may help in creating incentives that are awarded for exceptional performanceIt can also minimize trading operations and maintenance co