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.

Facilitation of learning induced by both random and gradual visuomotor task variation.

Motor task variation has been shown to be a key ingredient in skill transfer, retention, and structural learning. However, many studies only compare training of randomly varying tasks to either blocked or null training, and it is not clear how experiencing different nonrandom temporal orderings of tasks might affect the learning process. Here we study learning in human subjects who experience the same set of visuomotor rotations, evenly spaced between -60° and +60°, either in a random order or in an order in which the rotation angle changed gradually. We compared subsequent learning of three test blocks of +30°→-30°→+30° rotations. The groups that underwent either random or gradual training showed significant (P < 0.01) facilitation of learning in the test blocks compared with a control group who had not experienced any visuomotor rotations before. We also found that movement initiation times in the random group during the test blocks were significantly (P < 0.05) lower than for the gradual or the control group. When we fit a state-space model with fast and slow learning processes to our data, we found that the differences in performance in the test block were consistent with the gradual or random task variation changing the learning and retention rates of only the fast learning process. Such adaptation of learning rates may be a key feature of ongoing meta-learning processes. Our results therefore suggest that both gradual and random task variation can induce meta-learning and that random learning has an advantage in terms of shorter initiation times, suggesting less reliance on cognitive processes.