Patterns of interaction in construction team meetingsξ

Sir John Egan’s 1998 report on the construction industry (Construction Task Force 1998) noted its confrontational and adversarial nature. Both the original report and its subsequent endorsement in Accelerating Change (Strategic Forum 2002) called for improved working relationships—so-called ‘integration’—within and between both design and construction aspects. In this paper, we report on our observations of on-site team meetings for a major UK project during its construction phase. We attended a series of team meetings and recorded the patterns of verbal interaction that took place within them. In reporting our findings, we have deliberately used a graphical method for presenting the results, in the expectation that this will make them more readily accessible to designers. Our diagrams of these interaction patterns have already proved to be intuitively and quickly understood, and have generated interest and discussion among both those we observed and others who have seen them. We noted that different patterns of communication occurred in different types of meetings. Specifically, in the problem-solving meeting, there was a richness of interaction that was largely missing from progress meetings and technical meetings. Team members expressed greater satisfaction with this problem-solving meeting where these enriched exchanges took place. By making comparisons between the different patterns, we are also able to explore functional roles and their interactions. From this and other published evidence, we conclude that good teamworking practices depend on a complex interplay of relations and dependencies embedded within the team.

Grand Challenges for Data Sensing and Analysis

A diverse group of experts proposed the 9 grand challenges outlined in this booklet. This expert task force was assembled by the ASCE TCCIT Data Sensing and Analysis (DSA) Committee and endorsed by the TRB AFH10(1) Construction IT joint subcommittee at the request of their membership. The task force did not rank the challenges selected, nor did it endorse particular approaches to meeting them. Rather than attempt to include every important goal for data sensing and analysis, the panel chose opportunities that were both achievable and sustainable to help people and the planet thrive. The panel’s conclusions were reviewed by several subject-matter experts. The DSA is offering an opportunity to comment on the challenges by contacting the task force chair via email at becerik@usc.edu.

TOPS (Task optimization in the presence of signal-dependent noise) model

This paper proposes a movement trajectory planning model, which is a maximum task achievement model in which signal-dependent noise is added to the movement command. In the proposed model, two optimization criteria are combined, maximum task achievement and minimum energy consumption. The proposed model has the feature that the end-point boundary conditions for position, velocity, and acceleration need not be prespecified. Consequently, the method can be applied not only to the simple point-to-point movement, but to any task. In the method in this paper, the hand trajectory is derived by a psychophysical experiment and a numerical experiment for the case in which the target is not stationary, but is a moving region. It is shown that the trajectory predicted from the minimum jerk model or the minimum torque change model differs considerably from the results of the psychophysical experiment. But the trajectory predicted from the maximum task achievement model shows good qualitative agreement with the hand trajectory obtained from the psychophysical experiment. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Evaluating the impacts of iteration on PD processes by transforming task network models into System Dynamics models

Iteration is unavoidable in the design process and should be incorporated when planning and managing projects in order to minimize surprises and reduce schedule distortions. However, planning and managing iteration is challenging because the relationships between its causes and effects are complex. Most approaches which use mathematical models to analyze the impact of iteration on the design process focus on a relatively small number of its causes and effects. Therefore, insights derived from these analytical models may not be robust under a broader consideration of potential influencing factors. In this article, we synthesize an explanatory framework which describes the network of causes and effects of iteration identified from the literature, and introduce an analytic approach which combines a task network modeling approach with System Dynamics simulation. Our approach models the network of causes and effects of iteration alongside the process architecture which is required to analyze the impact of iteration on design process performance. We show how this allows managers to assess the impact of changes to process architecture and to management levers which influence iterative behavior, accounting for the fact that these changes can occur simultaneously and can accumulate in non-linear ways. We also discuss how the insights resulting from this analysis can be visualized for easier consumption by project participants not familiar with simulation methods. Copyright © 2010 by ASME.