Search

Trust is a prerequisite in all endeavours concerning uncertainty and interdependencies. By studying the development of a sustainable, high performing building this paper report on such an endeavour. The client implemented a collaborative project delivery method where key actors were brought together to collaboratively develop the project in the design phase. For the participants to collaborate, and thus work as a high-performance team, there was a need for trust. Therefore, this study addresses the following research questions: what was perceived as the key elements for building trust in this project? and, how did the key elements impact the trust-building in this project? The study is based on observations of weekly design meetings (so-called Big-Room sessions), as well as secondary data from a document study, and a supplementary questionnaire. Trust was essential as the participants were able to rely on each other's expertise and work interdependently towards a common goal. The most prominent elements that affected trust were the start-up seminar, team composition, shared interest, support from management, joint problem solving, and the use of integrated concurrent engineering. These elements built and sustained trust due to their ability to create or positively impact the experiences, problem-solving, shared goals, reciprocity, and reasonable behaviour of the project team. The insight into how the collaborative project delivery method build trust may be valuable for practitioners and researchers alike. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) industry has experienced the declining productivity and some of this is due to deficiencies in building design. The focus on energy efficiency and sustainability makes it even more important to reduce such deficiencies. The managing of building design phases might be one of the most challenging forms of management in the AEC industry, i.e. it involves managing both outputs as drawings and creativity as minds. There must be enough room for creativity so that a building project can evolve to serve clients’ needs. There are pooled, sequential, reciprocal and intensive interdependencies in building design that need to be handled or coordinated differently.A particular building design phase most likely consists of all the four types, yet dominance shifts between them through sub-phases. The logic of creative processes is difficult to understand and, therefore, to manage properly.In this paper,thesefour interdependencies and their coordination are described based on the literature review. The key findings indicate that the reliance on the same management approach to handle both reflective and sequential dependencies might be contra productive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The building project development approval process is increasingly complex and fraught with conflict due to the rise of the sustainable urban development movement and inclusive decision making. Coupled with this, government decision-making decentralization has resulted in a fragmented and over-regulated compliance system. Problems arising from the process include wasted resources, excessive time delays, increased holding and litigation costs, inadequate planning coordination, high levels of advocacy costs and a divisive politicized approval process. In Australia, despite attempts by government and industry associations, numerous problems are still unresolved. Design managers increasingly assume a liaison role during the approval phase. There is a long tradition of planning theory literature which provides context for understanding the knowledge-power-participation relationship for this paper. This study investigated the policy, process and practice conflicts during the approval stage in achieving sustainable urban developments. Three regional local government areas within one state jurisdiction and observations from detailed structured focus group interviews involving 23 stakeholders, proposers and assessors were analysed to explore this conflictual environment. As a result of regulatory fragmentation and excessive consultation, various persuasion tactics have been developed by all stakeholders of which 'reciprocity' and 'authority' were identified as the most common. Two challenges for design managers were thus identified: first, the emergence of the role of a by default central informal arbitrator across conflicting planning instruments; and, second, as a navigator through a set of persuasion tactics. An inclusive knowledge-based design management framework for sustainable urban development is proposed considering Habermas' communicative planning theory, Foucaltian governance and discursive powers thesis and Cialdini's persuasion theory, as well as being grounded in the key empirical results from this study, using various types and sources of knowledge as an authoritative persuasion tactic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]