Case-based analysis in user requirements modelling for knowledge construction

Context: Learning can be regarded as knowledge construction in which prior knowledge and experience serve as basis for the learners to expand their knowledge base. Such a process of knowledge construction has to take place continuously in order to enhance the learners’ competence in a competitive working environment. As the information consumers, the individual users demand personalised information provision which meets their own specific purposes, goals, and expectations. Objectives: The current methods in requirements engineering are capable of modelling the common user’s behaviour in the domain of knowledge construction. The users’ requirements can be represented as a case in the defined structure which can be reasoned to enable the requirements analysis. Such analysis needs to be enhanced so that personalised information provision can be tackled and modelled. However, there is a lack of suitable modelling methods to achieve this end. This paper presents a new ontological method for capturing individual user’s requirements and transforming the requirements onto personalised information provision specifications. Hence the right information can be provided to the right user for the right purpose. Method: An experiment was conducted based on the qualitative method. A medium size of group of users participated to validate the method and its techniques, i.e. articulates, maps, configures, and learning content. The results were used as the feedback for the improvement. Result: The research work has produced an ontology model with a set of techniques which support the functions for profiling user’s requirements, reasoning requirements patterns, generating workflow from norms, and formulating information provision specifications. Conclusion: The current requirements engineering approaches provide the methodical capability for developing solutions. Our research outcome, i.e. the ontology model with the techniques, can further enhance the RE approaches for modelling the individual user’s needs and discovering the user’s requirements.

Learning across business sectors: Knowledge sharing between aerospace and construction

This report addresses the extent that managerial practices can be shared between the aerospace and construction sectors. Current recipes for learning from other industries tend to be oversimplistic and often fail to recognise the embedded and contextual nature of managerial knowledge. Knowledge sharing between business sectors is best understood as an essential source of innovation. The process of comparison challenges assumptions and better equips managers to cope with future change. Comparisons between the aerospace and construction sectors are especially useful because they are so different. The two sectors differ hugely in terms of their institutional context, structure and technological intensity. The aerospace sector has experienced extensive consolidation and is dominated by a small number of global companies. Aerospace companies operate within complex networks of global interdependency such that collaborative working is a commercial imperative. In contrast, the construction sector remains highly fragmented and is characterised by a continued reliance on small firms. The vast majority of construction firms compete within localised markets that are too often characterised by opportunistic behaviour. Comparing construction to aerospace highlights the unique characteristics of both sectors and helps explain how managerial practices are mediated by context. Detailed comparisons between the two sectors are made in a range of areas and guidance is provided for the implementation of knowledge sharing strategies within and across organisations. The commonly accepted notion of ‘best practice’ is exposed as a myth. Indeed, universal models of best practice can be detrimental to performance by deflecting from the need to adapt continuously to changing circumstances. Competitiveness in the construction sector too often rests on efficiency in managing contracts, with a particular emphasis on the allocation of risk. Innovation in construction tends to be problem-driven and is rarely shared from project to project. In aerospace, the dominant model of competitiveness means that firms have little choice other than to invest in continuous innovation, despite difficult trading conditions. Research and development (R&D) expenditure in aerospace continues to rise as a percentage of turnovers. A sustained capacity for innovation within the aerospace sector depends crucially upon stability and continuity of work. In the construction sector, the emergence of the ‘hollowed-out’ firm has undermined the industry’s capacity for innovation. Integrated procurement contexts such as prime contracting in construction potentially provide a more supportive climate for an innovation-based model of competitiveness. However, investment in new ways of working depends upon a shift in thinking not only amongst construction contractors, but also amongst the industry’s major clients.

Visualizing knowledge in project-based work

This article considers how visual practices are used to manage knowledge in project-based work. It compares project-based work in a capital goods manufacturer and an architectural firm. Visual representations are used extensively in both cases, but the nature of visual practice differs significantly between the two. The research explores the kinds of knowledge that are (and aren't) developed and made visible in strategizing and planning activities. For example, whereas the emphasis of project-based work in the former firm is on exploitation of knowledge and it visualizes its project context largely in commercial and processual terms, the emphasis in the latter is on exploration and it uses a wide range of visual materials to understand physical interdependencies across the project boundary. We contend particular kinds of visual tools can help project teams step between exploration and exploitation within a project, and articulate the types of representations, foci of attention and patterns of interaction involved. The findings suggest that business managers can make more deliberate choices about how knowledge is made visible, and can change visual practice to align the project with exploring and exploiting opportunities. It raises the question: What don't you see within your organization? The work contributes to academic debates about managing through projects, strategising and organizing, while the focus on visual representation disrupts the tacit-codified dichotomy in the broad debate on knowledge and learning, and highlights the craft skills central to strategizing and organizing.

Knowledge transfer processes in PFI/PPP: critical success factors

Successful knowledge transfer is an important process which requires continuous improvement in today’s knowledge-intensive economy. However, improving knowledge transfer processes represents a challenge for construction practitioners due to the complexity of knowledge acquisition, codification and sharing. Although knowledge transfer is context based, understanding the critical success factors can lead to improvements in the transfer process. This paper seeks to identify and evaluate the most significant critical factors for improving knowledge transfer processes in Public Private Partnerships/Private Finance Initiatives (PPP/PFI) projects. Drawing upon a questionnaire survey of 52 construction firms located in the UK, data is analysed using Severity Index (SI) and Coefficient of Variation (COV), to examine and identify these factors in PPP/PFI schemes. The findings suggest that a supportive leadership, participation/commitment from the relevant parties, and good communication between the relevant parties are crucial to improving knowledge transfer processes in PFI schemes. Practitioners, managers and researchers can use the findings to efficiently design performance measures for analysing and improving knowledge transfer processes.

Creative participation in construction firms: bridging creativity and innovation

An intricate evolution of mainstream theories follows the growing need to explain employees’ commitment and engagement. Our understanding of these work-related phenomena and behaviour has improved but creativity and innovation as desired indicators are still often treated as coexisting constructs with very little attention given to a state of willingness of an individual to even consider contributing ideas. In this research we investigate the influence of knowledge and understanding, perceived radicality, personality dimensions, and favouring of ideas on employee willingness to creatively participate in order to trace its existence in propagation of ideas. A total of 76 construction and non-construction professionals participated in between-subject quasi-experiments. We also proposed IPO-based radicality of ideas construct from the viewpoint of employees involved in the processes of transformation. The research findings show that experts with deep understanding of the work are more likely to contribute highly radical ideas to decision-makers than less knowledgeable employees. Furthermore, personal factors that impact employee willingness to creatively participate have been valued higher than organisational factors. Personality dimensions by The BigFive Inventory have shown no effect on willingness to contribute ideas, while favouring of ideas showed a significant effect. In general, the findings show similarities with some studies of consumer willingness to participate in co-creation processes and thus indicate that firms may be studied as dynamic internal markets of ideas.

Identifying key knowledge needs for evidence-based conservation of wild insect pollinators: a collaborative cross-sectoral exercise

In response to evidence of insect pollinator declines, organisations in many sectors, including the food and farming industry, are investing in pollinator conservation. They are keen to ensure that their efforts use the best available science. We convened a group of 32 ‘conservation practitioners’ with an active interest in pollinators and 16 insect pollinator scientists. The conservation practitioners include representatives from UK industry (including retail), environmental non-government organisations and nature conservation agencies. We collaboratively developed a long list of 246 knowledge needs relating to conservation of wild insect pollinators in the UK. We refined and selected the most important knowledge needs, through a three-stage process of voting and scoring, including discussions of each need at a workshop. We present the top 35 knowledge needs as scored by conservation practitioners or scientists. We find general agreement in priorities identified by these two groups. The priority knowledge needs will structure ongoing work to make science accessible to practitioners, and help to guide future science policy and funding. Understanding the economic benefits of crop pollination, basic pollinator ecology and impacts of pesticides on wild pollinators emerge strongly as priorities, as well as a need to monitor floral resources in the landscape.