Dilettantes, discipline and discourse: requirements management for construction

Requirements management (RM), as practised in the aerospace and defence sectors, attracts interest from construction researchers in response to longstanding problems of project definition. Doubts are expressed whether RM offers a new discipline for construction practitioners or whether it repeats previous exhortations to adopt a more disciplined way of working. Whilst systems engineering has an established track record of addressing complex technical problems, its extension to socially complex problems has been challenged. The dominant storyline of RM is one of procedural rationality and RM is commonly presented as a means of controlling dilettante behaviour. Interviews with RM practitioners suggest a considerable gulf between the dominant storyline in the literature and how practitioners operate in practice. The paper challenges construction researchers interested in RM to reflect more upon the theoretical debates that underpin current equivalent practices in construction and the disparity between espoused and enacted practice.

On the discourse of construction competitiveness

It is contended that competitiveness is better understood as a discourse rather than as a characteristic that is supposedly possessed. The discourse of competitiveness derives its legitimacy from the enterprise culture that came to dominance during the 1980s. Current popularized theories of competitiveness are constituent parts of this broader discourse, which has had significant material implications for the UK construction sector. The dominant discourse of competitiveness amongst contracting firms is shaped by the need to achieve structural flexibility to cope with fluctuations in demand. Fashionable espoused improvement recipes such as total quality management, business process re-engineering, and lean construction legitimize and reinforce the material manifestations of the enterprise culture. In consequence, the UK industry is characterized by a plethora of hollowed-out firms that have failed to invest in their human capital. While the adopted model may be rational for individual firms, the systemic effect across the sector as a whole equates to a form of anorexia. However, the discourse of competitiveness is by no means monolithic and continues to be contested locally. There have also been numerous counter-discourses that have been mobilized in response to the undesirable externalities of unbridled enterprise. Currently, important counter-discourses promote the ideas of sustainability and corporate social responsibility.

Exploring the construction of social class in educational discourse: the rational order of the nation state versus global uncertainties

This article aims to create intellectual space in which issues of social inequality and education can be analyzed and discussed in relation to the multifaceted and multi-levelled complexities of the modern world. It is divided into three sections. Section One locates the concept of social class in the context of the modern nation state during the period after the Second World War. Focusing particularly on the impact of 'Fordism' on social organization and cultural relations, it revisits the articulation of social justice issues in the United Kingdom, and the structures put into place at the time to alleviate educational and social inequalities. Section Two problematizes the traditional concept of social class in relation to economic, technological and sociocultural changes that have taken place around the world since the mid-1980s. In particular, it charts some of the changes to the international labour market and global patterns of consumption, and their collective impact on the re-constitution of class boundaries in 'developed countries'. This is juxtaposed with some of the major social effects of neo-classical economic policies in recent years on the sociocultural base in developing countries. It discusses some of the ways these inequalities are reflected in education. Section Three explores tensions between the educational ideals of the 'knowledge economy' and the discursive range of social inequalities that are emerging within and beyond the nation state. Drawing on key motifs identified throughout, the article concludes with a reassessment of the concept of social class within the global cultural economy. This is discussed in relation to some of the major equity and human rights issues in education today.