Modelling, collaboration and integration : a case study for the delivery of public buildings

An evolution in the use of digital modelling has occurred in the Queensland Department of Public Works Division of Project Services over the last 20 years from: the initial implementation of computer aided design and documentation (CADD); to experimentation with building information modelling (BIM); to embedding integrated practice (IP); to current steps towards integrated project delivery (IPD) including the active involvement of consultants and contractors in the design/delivery process. This case study is one of three undertaken through the Australian Sustainable Built Environment National Research Centre investigating past R&D investment. The intent of these cases is to inform the development of policy guidelines for future investment in the construction industry in Australia. This research is informing the activities of CIB Task Group 85 R&D Investment and Impact. The uptake of digital modelling by Project Services has been approached through an incremental learning approach. This has been driven by a strong and clear vision with a focus on developing more efficient delivery mechanisms through the use of new technology coupled with process change. Findings reveal an organisational focus on several areas including: (i) strategic decision making including the empowerment of innovation leaders and champions; (ii) the acquisition and exploitation of knowledge; (iii) product and process development (with a focus on efficiency and productivity); (iv) organisational learning; (v) maximising the use of technology; and (vi) supply chain integration. Key elements of this approach include pilot projects, researcher engagement, industry partnerships and leadership.

Strategic capability development : a multi-level case study of the role of knowledge integration within product innovation

Capability development is at the heart of creating competitive advantage. This thesis intends to conceptualise Strategic Capability Development as a renewal of an organisation's existing capability in line with the requirements of the market. It followed and compared four product innovation projects within Iran Khodro Company (IKCO), an exemplar of capability development within the Iranian Auto industry. Findings show that the maturation of strategic capability at the organisational level has occurred through a sequence of product innovation projects and by dynamically shaping the learning and knowledge integration processes in accordance with emergence of the new structure within the industry. Accordingly, Strategic Capability Development is conceptualised in an interpretive model. Such findings are useful for development of an explanatory model and a practical capability development framework for managing learning and knowledge across different product innovation projects.

Extension of constructability to include operation and maintenance for infrastructure projects

This project was a step forward in developing an extension of the concept of constructability to include the post-occupancy stages of operation and maintenance. This was through an in-depth study of Australian health projects and interviews with professionals in the field. The thesis investigated how the operation and maintenance stakeholders can enter the initial planning, design and construction phases resulting in more efficient and effective delivery of infrastructure projects.

Navigating the social dimension of sustainability decision making of mega-projects

Until recently, sustainable development was perceived as essentially an environmental issue, relating to the integration of environmental concerns into economic decision-making. As a result, environmental considerations have been the primary focus of sustainability decision making during the economic development process for major projects, and the assessment and preservation of social and cultural systems has been arguably too limited. The practice of social impact and sustainability assessment is an established and accepted part of project planning, however, these practices are not aimed at delivering sustainability outcomes for social systems, rather they are designed to minimise ‘unsustainability’ and contribute to project approval. Currently, there exists no widely recognised standard approach for assessing social sustainability and accounting for positive externalities of existing social systems in project decision making. As a result, very different approaches are applied around the world, and even by the same organisations from one project to another. This situation is an impediment not only to generating a shared understanding of the social implications as related to major projects, but more importantly, to identifying common approaches to help improve social sustainability outcomes of proposed activities. This paper discusses the social dimension of sustainability decision making of mega-projects, and argues that to improve accountability and transparency of project outcomes it is important to understand the characteristics that make some communities more vulnerable than others to mega-project development. This paper highlights issues with current operational level approaches to social sustainability assessment at the project level, and asserts that the starting point for project planning and sustainability decision making of mega-projects needs to include the preservation, maintenance, and enhancement of existing social and cultural systems. It draws attention to the need for a scoping mechanism to systematically assess community vulnerability (or sensitivity) to major infrastructure development during the feasibility and planning stages of a project.

The effect of procurement on competition and flexibility : determining the suitability of public-private partnerships in major infrastructure projects

A procurement decision-making model is developed based on a novel integration of leading-edge microeconomic theory and empirically tested in major road and health projects. The model provides a more reliable approach to identifying projects suited to Public-Private-Partnerships (PPPs) and it is expected that the model will enable government to deliver improved value-for-money from their portfolio of PPP projects.

Challenges to ES Success : A Critical Need for Knowledge Integration

Recent literature on Enterprise System (ES) implementation projects highlights the importance of Knowledge Integration (KI) for implementation success. The fundamental characteristics of ES - integration of modules, business process view, and aspects of information transparency - necessitate that all frequent end-users share a reasonable amount of common knowledge and integrate their knowledge to yield new knowledge. Unfortunately, the importance of KI is often overlooked and little about the role of KI in ES success is known. In this chapter, the authors study the KI impact on ES success that is relevant to the ES post-implementation in support of organizations' returns on their ES investments. They adopt the ES post-implementation segment of ES utilization to explore whether the KI approach is causally linked to ES success. The research model was tested in a multi-industry sample in Malaysia from which data was gathered from managerial and operational employees spread across six large organizations. Consistent with the explanation by knowledge-based theory, the results show that KI was valid and significantly related to the outcome of ES that relates to an organization's performance, which the authors refer to as ES success. The KI positive impact on the success of ES drives one to highlight the importance of ontological KI in the complexity of the ES environment. The authors believe that focusing on an ontology through the KI perspective can make significant contributions to current ES problems.

'Means to ends': Integration for stakeholder engagement.

In project management today, sustainability considerations are becoming increasingly necessary as an inclusion into project discovery, design and delivery phase methodologies. However, sustainability cannot always be tacked on to traditional project management approaches and still achieve the best project outcomes. Throw in the particular considerations for a culturally specific project, as for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and the traditional project management approach is at risk of not meeting the needs of stakeholders or their engagement. In this presentation, we will briefly demonstrate how from beginning with sustainability considerations and integrating both project management principles and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander va lu es that QUT's Oodgeroo Unit is actioning a 'means to ends' integration approach for stakeholder engagement in two national Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander projects. The iterative discovery and design of the federally Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program (HEPPP) funded Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Higher Education Social Marketing Strategy (Strategy) and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Higher Education Portal (Portal) projects is being informed through a 'means' to 'ends' user- and design -led project management approach for inclusivity, visioning, and participation informing these projects for susta inable national deliverables. This approach draws upon the integration of Sustain ability Development Pillars and Project Management Pillars with the contextual lens of our proposed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Pillars as the underpinning methodology of the Strategy and Portal Project's Communication and Collaboration Plan and approach with stakeholders. These th ree Pillars are integrated further through participatory consideration and inclu sion of comparative models: Daly's Sustainability Triangle, Walker's Object Design, Maslow's Hierarchy of Human Needs, Olsen's Four Layers of Communication,Project Management In stitute's (PMI's) Integrated Framework for Organisational Project Management, with the Aborig inal and Torres Strait Islander six core research ethics values. This presentation invites participants to join us in envisioning the 'ultimate means' of Environment, Del ivery and Sovereignty, through Economy, Design and Self-determination to the 'ultimate ends' of Social, Discove ry and Cultural Safety principles through stakeholder engagement.

A conceptual analysis of strategic capability development within product innovation projects

Strategic capability development refers to the renewal of the organisational capabilities which are sources of competitive advantage. The aim of this paper is to examine how strategic capability and competitive advantage build up over time. Recent literature points to the integration of dynamic capability and ambidexterity perspectives in explaining organisational capability development. Literature analysis reveals the role of knowledge integration and product innovation in integrating dynamic capability and ambidexterity. However, little attention has yet been paid to knowledge integration within innovation projects as a context for capability development. Accordingly, this paper aims to develop a conceptual framework for strategic capability development focusing on the role of knowledge integration within product innovation projects. This framework contributes to identifying and emphasising the role of micro processes in capability renewal which in turn enhances our understanding of strategic capability development.

Social and cultural drivers of incentive effectiveness in infrastructure projects

Formal incentives systems aim to encourage improved performance by offering a reward for the achievement of project-specific goals. Despite argued benefits of incentive systems on project delivery outcomes, there remains debate over how incentive systems can be designed to encourage the formation of strong project relationships within a complex social system such as an infrastructure project. This challenge is compounded by the increasing emphasis in construction management research on the important mediating influence of technical and organisational context on project performance. In light of this challenge, the research presented in this paper focuses on the design of incentive systems in four infrastructure projects: two road reconstructions in the Netherlands and two building constructions in Australia. Based on a motivational theory frame, a cross case analysis is conducted to examine differences and similarities across social and cultural drivers impacting on the effectiveness of the incentive systems in light of infrastructure project context. Despite significant differences in case project characteristics, results indicate the projects’ experience similar social drivers impacting on incentive effectiveness. Significant value across the projects was placed on: varied performance goals and multiple opportunities to across the project team to pursue incentive rewards; fair risk allocation across contract parties; value-driven tender selection; improved design-build integration; and promotion of future work opportunities. However, differences across the contexts were identified. Results suggest future work opportunities were a more powerful social driver in upholding reputation and establishing strong project relationships in the Australian context. On the other hand, the relationship initiatives in the Dutch context seemed to be more broadly embraced resulting in a greater willingness to collaboratively manage project risk. Although there are limitations with this research in drawing generalizations across two sets of case projects, the results provide a strong base to explore the social and cultural influences on incentive effectiveness across different geographical and contextual boundaries in future research.

An empirical study of capability development within product innovation projects

The objective of this paper is to develop insights into firms’ strategic capability development processes within product innovation projects. In particular, the research aims at investigating the interactions among product innovation, knowledge processes, and capability development within firms. Building on qualitative data from the auto-industry, our analysis reveals that across four product innovation projects, the case company developed architectural knowledge and capability. Findings reveal that, along with changes at each level of product architecture, “design knowledge” and “design capability” have been developed at the same level of product architecture, leading to capability development at that level. Furthermore, findings suggest that such capability transformation resulting from knowledge and capability creation over the course of case projects leads to modularization of product architecture. Overall, the research contributes to identifying and emphasizing the role of micro processes in capability development and renewal, which in turn enhances our understanding of strategic capability development processes.

Managing knowledge to promote sustainability in Australian transport infrastructure projects

To deliver tangible sustainability outcomes, the infrastructure sector of the construction industry needs to build capacities for the creation, application and management of ever increasing knowledge. This paper intends to establish the importance and key issues of promoting sustainability through knowledge management (KM). It presents a new conceptual framework for managing sustainability knowledge to raise the awareness and direct future research in the field of transport infrastructure, one of the fast growing sectors in Australia. A holistic KM approach is adopted in this research to consider the potential to “deliver the right information to the right person at the right time” in the context of sustainable development of infrastructure. A questionnaire survey among practitioners across the nation confirmed the necessity and identified priority issues of managing knowledge for sustainability. During infrastructure development, KM can help build much needed industry consensus, develop capacity, communicate decisions, and promote specific measures for the pursuit of sustainability. Six essential elements of the KM approach and their priority issues informed the establishment of a conceptual KM framework. The transport infrastructure sector has come to realise that development must not come at the expense of environmental and social objectives. In practice however, it is facing extensive challenges to deliver what has been promised in the sustainability agenda. This research demonstrates the importance of managing sustainability knowledge, integration of various stakeholders, facilitation of plans and actions and delivery of tangible benefits in real projects, as a positive step towards meeting these challenges.

The role of knowledge integration in innovation and capability development

Purpose This paper investigates the interrelationships between knowledge integration (KI), product innovation and capability development to enhance our understanding of how firms can develop capability at the firm level, which in turn enhances their performance. One of the critical underlying mechanisms for capability building identified in the literature is the role of knowledge integration, which operates within product innovation projects and contributes to dynamic capability development. Therefore, the main research question is “how does the integration of knowledge across product innovation projects lead to the development of capability?” Design/methodology/approach We adopted a case-based approach and investigated the case of a successful firm that was able to sustain its performance through a series of product innovation projects. In particular this research focused on the role of KI and firm-level capability development over the course of four projects, during which the firm successfully managed the transformation of its product base and renewal of its competitive advantage. For this purpose an in-depth case study of capability development was undertaken at the Iran Khodro Company (IKCO), the key player in the Iranian auto industry transformation. Originality/value This research revealed that along with changes at each level of product architecture “design knowledge” and “design capability” have been developed at the same level of product architecture, leading to capability development at that level. It can be argued that along the step by step maturation of radical innovation across the four case projects, architectural knowledge and capability have been developed at the case company, resulting in the gradual emergence of a modular product and capability architecture across different levels of product architecture. Such findings basically add to extensive emphasis in the literature on the interrelationship of the concept of modularity with knowledge management and capability development. Practical implications Findings of this study indicate that firms manage their knowledge in accordance with the level of specialization in knowledge and capability. Furthermore, firms design appropriate knowledge integration mechanisms within and among functions in order dynamically align knowledge processes at different levels of the product architecture. Accordingly, the outcomes of this study may guide practitioners in managing their knowledge processes, through dynamically employing knowledge integration modes step-by-step and from the part level to the architectural level of product architecture across a sequence of product innovation projects to encourage learning and radical innovation.

Integration of Geospatial and Built Environment - National Data Policy

Digital technology offers enormous benefits (economic, quality of design and efficiency in use) if adopted to implement integrated ways of representing the physical world in a digital form. When applied across the full extent of the built and natural world, it is referred to as the Digital Built Environment (DBE) and encompasses a wide range of approaches and technology initiatives, all aimed at the same end goal: the development of a virtual world that sufficiently mirrors the real world to form the basis for the smart cities of the present and future, enable efficient infrastructure design and programmed maintenance, and create a new foundation for economic growth and social well-being through evidence-based analysis. The creation of a National Data Policy for the DBE will facilitate the creation of additional high technology industries in Australia; provide Governments, industries and citizens with greater knowledge of the environments they occupy and plan; and offer citizen-driven innovations for the future. Australia has slipped behind other nations in the adoption and execution of Building Information Modelling (BIM) and the principal concern is that the gap is widening. Data driven innovation added $67 billion to the Australian economy in 20131. Strong open data policy equates to $16 billion in new value2. Australian Government initiatives such as the Digital Earth inspired “National Map” offer a platform and pathway to embrace the concept of a “BIM Globe”, while also leveraging unprecedented growth in open source / open data collaboration. Australia must address the challenges by learning from international experiences—most notably the UK and NZ—and mandate the use of BIM across Government, extending the Framework for Spatial Data Foundation to include the Built Environment as a theme and engaging collaboration through a “BIM globe” metaphor. This proposed DBE strategy will modernise the Australian urban planning and the construction industry. It will change the way we develop our cities by fundamentally altering the dynamics and behaviours of the supply chains and unlocking new and more efficient ways of collaborating at all stages of the project life-cycle. There are currently two major modelling approaches that contribute to the challenge of delivering the DBE. Though these collectively encompass many (often competing) approaches or proprietary software systems, all can be categorised as either: a spatial modelling approach, where the focus is generally on representing the elements that make up the world within their geographic context; and a construction modelling approach, where the focus is on models that support the life cycle management of the built environment. These two approaches have tended to evolve independently, addressing two broad industry sectors: the one concerned with understanding and managing global and regional aspects of the world that we inhabit, including disciplines concerned with climate, earth sciences, land ownership, urban and regional planning and infrastructure management; the other is concerned with planning, design, construction and operation of built facilities and includes architectural and engineering design, product manufacturing, construction, facility management and related disciplines (a process/technology commonly known as Building Information Modelling, BIM). The spatial industries have a strong voice in the development of public policy in Australia, while the construction sector, which in 2014 accounted for around 8.5% of Australia’s GDP3, has no single voice and because of its diversity, is struggling to adapt to and take advantage of the opportunity presented by these digital technologies. The experience in the UK over the past few years has demonstrated that government leadership is very effective in stimulating industry adoption of digital technologies by, on the one hand, mandating the use of BIM on public procurement projects while at the same time, providing comparatively modest funding to address the common issues that confront the industry in adopting that way of working across the supply chain. The reported result has been savings of £840m in construction costs in 2013/14 according to UK Cabinet Office figures4. There is worldwide recognition of the value of bringing these two modelling technologies together. Australia has the expertise to exercise leadership in this work, but it requires a commitment by government to recognise the importance of BIM as a companion methodology to the spatial technologies so that these two disciplinary domains can cooperate in the development of data policies and information exchange standards to smooth out common workflows. buildingSMART Australasia, SIBA and their academic partners have initiated this dialogue in Australia and wish to work collaboratively, with government support and leadership, to explore the opportunities open to us as we develop an Australasian Digital Built Environment. As part of that programme, we must develop and implement a strategy to accelerate the adoption of BIM processes across the Australian construction sector while at the same time, developing an integrated approach in concert with the spatial sector that will position Australia at the forefront of international best practice in this area. Australia and New Zealand cannot afford to be on the back foot as we face the challenges of rapid urbanisation and change in the global environment. Although we can identify some exemplary initiatives in this area, particularly in New Zealand in response to the need for more resilient urban development in the face of earthquake threats, there is still much that needs to be done. We are well situated in the Asian region to take a lead in this challenge, but we are at imminent risk of losing the initiative if we do not take action now. Strategic collaboration between Governments, Industry and Academia will create new jobs and wealth, with the potential, for example, to save around 20% on the delivery costs of new built assets, based on recent UK estimates.

Integration of natural hazards, risk and climate change into spatial planning practices

Most countries of Europe, as well as many countries in other parts of the world, are experiencing an increased impact of natural hazards. It is often speculated, but not yet proven, that climate change might influence the frequency and magnitude of certain hydro-meteorological natural hazards. What has certainly been observed is a sharp increase in financial losses caused by natural hazards worldwide. Eventhough Europe appears to be a space that is not affected by natural hazards to such catastrophic extents as other parts of the world are, the damages experienced here are certainly increasing too. Natural hazards, climate change and, in particular, risks have therefore recently been put high on the political agenda of the EU. In the search for appropriate instruments for mitigating impacts of natural hazards and climate change, as well as risks, the integration of these factors into spatial planning practices is constantly receiving higher attention. The focus of most approaches lies on single hazards and climate change mitigation strategies. The current paradigm shift of climate change mitigation to adaptation is used as a basis to draw conclusions and recommendations on what concepts could be further incorporated into spatial planning practices. Especially multi-hazard approaches are discussed as an important approach that should be developed further. One focal point is the definition and applicability of the terms natural hazard, vulnerability and risk in spatial planning practices. Especially vulnerability and risk concepts are so many-fold and complicated that their application in spatial planning has to be analysed most carefully. The PhD thesis is based on six published articles that describe the results of European research projects, which have elaborated strategies and tools for integrated communication and assessment practices on natural hazards and climate change impacts. The papers describe approaches on local, regional and European level, both from theoretical and practical perspectives. Based on these, passed, current and future potential spatial planning applications are reviewed and discussed. In conclusion it is recommended to shift from single hazard assessments to multi-hazard approaches, integrating potential climate change impacts. Vulnerability concepts should play a stronger role than present, and adaptation to natural hazards and climate change should be more emphasized in relation to mitigation. It is outlined that the integration of risk concepts in planning is rather complicated and would need very careful assessment to ensure applicability. Future spatial planning practices should also consider to be more interdisciplinary, i.e. to integrate as many stakeholders and experts as possible to ensure the sustainability of investments.

STEM education K-12: perspectives on integration

This commentary was stimulated by Yeping Li's first editorial (2014) citing one of the journal's goals as adding multidisciplinary perspectives to current studies of single disciplines comprising the focus of other journals. In this commentary I argue for a greater focus on STEM integration, with a more equitable representation of the four disciplines in studies purporting to advance STEM learning. The STEM acronym is often used in reference to just one of the disciplines, commonly science. Although the integration of STEM disciplines is increasingly advocated in the literature, studies that address multiple disciplines appear scant with mixed findings and inadequate directions for STEM advancement. Perspectives on how discipline integration can be achieved are varied, with reference to multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary approaches adding to the debates. Such approaches include core concepts and skills being taught separately in each discipline but housed within a common theme; the introduction of closely linked concepts and skills from two or more disciplines with the aim of deepening understanding and skills; and the adoption of a transdisciplinary approach, where knowledge and skills from two or more disciplines are applied to real-world problems and projects with the aim of shaping the total learning experience. Research that targets STEM integration is an embryonic field with respect to advancing curriculum development and various student outcomes. For example, we still need more studies on how student learning outcomes arise not only from different forms of STEM integration but also from the particular disciplines that are being integrated. As noted in this commentary, it seems that mathematics learning benefits less than the other disciplines in programs claiming to focus on STEM integration. Factors contributing to this finding warrant more scrutiny. Likewise, learning outcomes for engineering within K-12 integrated STEM programs appear under-researched. This commentary advocates a greater focus on these two disciplines within integrated STEM education research. Drawing on recommendations from the literature, suggestions are offered for addressing the challenges of integrating multiple disciplines faced by the STEM community.