Contextualist research: Iterating between methods while following an empirically grounded approach

An alternative approach to research is described that has been developed through a succession of significant construction management research projects. The approach follows the principles of iterative grounded theory, whereby researchers iterate between alternative theoretical frameworks and emergent empirical data. Of particular importance is an orientation toward mixing methods, thereby overcoming the existing tendency to dichotomize quantitative and qualitative approaches. The approach is positioned against the existing contested literature on grounded theory, and the possibility of engaging with empirical data in a “theory free” manner is discounted. Emphasis instead is given to the way in which researchers must be theoretically sensitive as a result of being steeped in relevant literatures. Knowledge of existing literatures therefore shapes the initial research design; but emergent empirical findings cause fresh theoretical perspectives to be mobilized. The advocated approach is further aligned with notions of knowledge coproduction and the underlying principles of contextualist research. It is this unique combination of ideas which characterizes the paper's contribution to the research methodology literature within the field of construction management. Examples are provided and consideration is given to the extent to which the emergent findings are generalizable beyond the specific context from which they are derived.

The construction industry and its resources: a research agenda

The desirable coverage of the journal is considered including the need to focus on research which can lead to positive action. Criteria for establishing the desirability of research projects are proposed and these are then applied first, to four broad issues and, secondly, to the inputs and other requirements for a well functioning industry. Some conclusions are drawn as to the research most likely to enable action to be taken to improve the industry. It is found that certain other difficulties can sometimes be dealt with by experimentation with actual projects or, where there is consensus on desirable action, by bringing pressure to bear on those able to initiate change.

Making sense of research quality assessment

Purpose – For many academics in UK universities the nature and orientation of their research is overwhelmingly determined by considerations of how that work will be graded in research assessment exercises (RAEs). The grades awarded to work in a particular subject area can have a considerable impact on the individual and their university. There is a need to better understand those factors which may influence these grades. The paper seeks to address this issue. Design/methodology/approach – The paper considers relationships between the grades awarded and the quantitative information provided to the assessment panels for the 1996 and 2001 RAEs for two subject areas, built environment and town and country planning, and for three other subject areas, civil engineering, geography and archaeology, in the 2001 RAE. Findings – A simple model demonstrating strong and consistent relationships is established. RAE performance relates to numbers of research active staff, the production of books and journal papers, numbers of research studentships and graduations, and research income. Important differences between subject areas are identified. Research limitations/implications – Important issues are raised about the extent to which the new assessment methodology to be adopted for the 2008 RAE will capture the essence of good quality research in architecture and built environment. Originality/value – The findings provide a developmental perspective of RAEs and show how, despite a changed methodology, various research activities might be valued in the 2008 RAE. The basis for a methodology for reviewing the credibility of the judgements of panels is proposed.