Codification vs personalisation: A study of the information evaluation practice between aerospace and construction industries

In the emerging digital economy, the management of information in aerospace and construction organisations is facing a particular challenge due to the ever-increasing volume of information and the extensive use of information and communication technologies (ICTs). This paper addresses the problems of information overload and the value of information in both industries by providing some cross-disciplinary insights. In particular it identifies major issues and challenges in the current information evaluation practice in these two industries. Interviews were conducted to get a spectrum of industrial perspectives (director/strategic, project management and ICT/document management) on these issues in particular to information storage and retrieval strategies and the contrasting approaches to knowledge and information management of personalisation and codification. Industry feedback was collected by a follow-up workshop to strengthen the findings of the research. An information-handling agenda is outlined for the development of a future Information Evaluation Methodology (IEM) which could facilitate the practice of the codification of high-value information in order to support through-life knowledge and information management (K&IM) practice.

The effect of BREEAM on clients and construction professionals

The effects and influence of the Building Research Establishment’s Environmental Assessment Methods (BREEAM) on construction professionals are examined. Most discussions of building assessment methods focus on either the formal tool or the finished product. In contrast, BREEAM is analysed here as a social technology using Michel Foucault’s theory of governmentality. Interview data are used to explore the effect of BREEAM on visibilities, knowledge, techniques and professional identities. The analysis highlights a number of features of the BREEAM assessment process which generally go unremarked: professional and public understandings of the method, the deployment of different types of knowledge and their implication for the authority and legitimacy of the tool, and the effect of BREEAM on standard practice. The analysis finds that BREEAM’s primary effect is through its impact on standard practices. Other effects include the use of assessment methods to defend design decisions, its role in both operationalizing and obscuring the concept of green buildings, and the effect of tensions between project and method requirements for the authority of the tool. A reflection on assessment methods as neo-liberal tools and their adequacy for the promotion of sustainable construction suggests several limitations of lock-in that hinder variation and wider systemic change.

Learning across business sectors: facets of innovation in aerospace and construction

Innovation is notoriously difficult to define and is invariably intertwined with issues of knowledge creation, continuous improvement and organisational change. An extensive literature classifies numerous types of innovation and militates against any simplistic attempt at definition. It is widely accepted that innovation is at least partly dependent upon the surrounding environment. Industry recipes and institutionally embedded practices shape the environment within which innovation occurs. Recent research directions have addressed the diffusion of innovation and its dependence upon social and institutional structures. In this respect, it is highly pertinent to compare the way that innovation is interpreted and enacted in different industrial sectors. The comparison between UK aerospace and construction is especially revealing because the two sectors are so different and therefore constitute radically different climates for innovation. Empirical research is reported based on semi-structured interviews with practitioners from both sectors. Interpretations of innovation are found to differ dramatically between aerospace and construction. Within the context of an ongoing struggle to define innovation, both industries are striving to become more innovative. The aerospace sector is found to emphasise technical innovation whereas the construction sector emphasises process innovation. An overriding cultural bias in Western economies towards technological innovation results in the common perception that aerospace is much more innovative than construction. The experienced realities of practitioners in the two sectors are much more complex.

The extrapolation problem and how population modeling can help

We argue that population modeling can add value to ecological risk assessment by reducing uncertainty when extrapolating from ecotoxicological observations to relevant ecological effects. We review other methods of extrapolation, ranging from application factors to species sensitivity distributions to suborganismal (biomarker and "-omics'') responses to quantitative structure activity relationships and model ecosystems, drawing attention to the limitations of each. We suggest a simple classification of population models and critically examine each model in an extrapolation context. We conclude that population models have the potential for adding value to ecological risk assessment by incorporating better understanding of the links between individual responses and population size and structure and by incorporating greater levels of ecological complexity. A number of issues, however, need to be addressed before such models are likely to become more widely used. In a science context, these involve challenges in parameterization, questions about appropriate levels of complexity, issues concerning how specific or general the models need to be, and the extent to which interactions through competition and trophic relationships can be easily incorporated.

Making sense of supply chain management: acomparative study of aerospace and construction

Current recipes for learning across business sectors too often fail to recognize the embedded and contextual nature of management practice. The existing literature gives little emphasis to the symbiotic relationship between supply chain management and the broader dynamics of context. The aerospace and construction sectors are selected for comparison on the basis that they are so different. The UK aerospace sector has undergone extensive consolidation as a result of the imperatives of global competitive pressures. In contrast, the construction industry has experienced decades of fragmentation and remains highly localized. An increasing proportion of output in the aerospace sector occurs within a small number of large, globally orientated firms. In contrast, construction output is dominated by a plethora of small firms with high levels of subcontracting and a widespread reliance on self-employment. These differences have fundamental implications for the way that supply chain management is understood and implemented in the two sectors. Semi-structured interviews with practitioners from both sectors support the contention that supply chain management is more established in aerospace than construction. The introduction of prime contracting and the increasing use of framework agreements within the construction sector potentially provide a much more supportive climate for supply chain management than has traditionally prevailed. However, progress depends upon an improved continuity of workload under such arrangements.

Articulation of information requirements for personalised knowledge and construction

The quality of information provision influences considerably knowledge construction driven by individual users’ needs. In the design of information systems for e-learning, personal information requirements should be incorporated to determine a selection of suitable learning content, instructive sequencing for learning content, and effective presentation of learning content. This is considered as an important part of instructional design for a personalised information package. The current research reveals that there is a lack of means by which individual users’ information requirements can be effectively incorporated to support personal knowledge construction. This paper presents a method which enables an articulation of users’ requirements based on the rooted learning theories and requirements engineering paradigms. The user’s information requirements can be systematically encapsulated in a user profile (i.e. user requirements space), and further transformed onto instructional design specifications (i.e. information space). These two spaces allow the discovering of information requirements patterns for self-maintaining and self-adapting personalisation that enhance experience in the knowledge construction process.