IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/conmgt/v34y2016i11p769-789.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Collaboration through innovation: implications for expertise in the AEC sector

Author

Listed:
  • Erik Poirier
  • Daniel Forgues
  • Sheryl Staub-French

Abstract

Collaboration is key for successful delivery of building projects in the Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) sector. Innovative project delivery approaches developed over the past two decades envision new ways of collaborating and specifically aim at improving the performance of and value generated by this key economic sector. Collaboration, however, remains an ill-defined and highly amorphous concept. This makes it difficult to investigate and consequently develop a body of knowledge, which is central to defining a field of expertise in this area. The aim of this investigation is to explore the notion of an expertise in collaboration in the AEC sector and the implications of these innovative project delivery approaches on this expertise. The concept of collaboration is developed across five core entities: structure, process, agents, artefacts and context. These entities are then framed through a critical realist lens to lay the groundwork for a body of knowledge of collaboration in the AEC sector. The impact of the current shift to these innovative approaches is investigated within this framing. The findings set a course of action to develop a body of knowledge and a field of expertise on collaboration in the AEC sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Erik Poirier & Daniel Forgues & Sheryl Staub-French, 2016. "Collaboration through innovation: implications for expertise in the AEC sector," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(11), pages 769-789, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:34:y:2016:i:11:p:769-789
    DOI: 10.1080/01446193.2016.1206660
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01446193.2016.1206660
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01446193.2016.1206660?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Herbert A. Simon, 1996. "The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262691914, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Saman Davari & Meisam Jaberi & Adam Yousfi & Erik Poirier, 2023. "A Traceability Framework to Enable Circularity in the Built Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-23, May.
    2. Paul Mansell & Simon P. Philbin & Efrosyni Konstantinou, 2020. "Redefining the Use of Sustainable Development Goals at the Organisation and Project Levels—A Survey of Engineers," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-39, August.
    3. Kesidou, Sofia & Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2019. "Supply chain integration for low-carbon buildings: A critical interdisciplinary review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-1.
    4. Liang, Xinning & Liu, Anita M.M., 2018. "The evolution of government sponsored collaboration network and its impact on innovation: A bibliometric analysis in the Chinese solar PV sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1295-1308.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tobias Knabke & Sebastian Olbrich, 2018. "Building novel capabilities to enable business intelligence agility: results from a quantitative study," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 493-546, August.
    2. Sunder Shyam, 2011. "Imagined Worlds of Accounting," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-14, January.
    3. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Changing systems for supporting farmers' decisions: problems, paradigms, and prospects," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 179-220, October.
    4. Basile, Luigi Jesus & Carbonara, Nunzia & Pellegrino, Roberta & Panniello, Umberto, 2023. "Business intelligence in the healthcare industry: The utilization of a data-driven approach to support clinical decision making," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    5. Loris Gaio, 2005. "A diversity-based approach to requirements tracing in new product development," ROCK Working Papers 031, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 13 Jun 2008.
    6. B. A. Huberman & N. S. Glance, "undated". "Diversity and Collective Action," Working Papers _001, Xerox Research Park.
    7. Zhewei Zhang & Youngjin Yoo & Kalle Lyytinen & Aron Lindberg, 2021. "The Unknowability of Autonomous Tools and the Liminal Experience of Their Use," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(4), pages 1192-1213, December.
    8. David Stadelmann & Benno Torgler, 2012. "Bounded Rationality and Voting Decisions Exploring a 160-Year Period," Working Papers 2012.70, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    9. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2021. "A Framework for Post-Project Evaluation of Multicriteria Decision Aiding Processes from the Stakeholders’ Perspective: Design and Application," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1161-1191, October.
    10. H. Christopher Frey & Sumeet R. Patil, 2002. "Identification and Review of Sensitivity Analysis Methods," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 553-578, June.
    11. Marie-Laure Salles-Djelic & Michel Gutsatz, 2000. "Managerial Competencies for Organizational Flexibility: The Luxury Goods Industry between Tradition and Postmodernism," Post-Print hal-01892018, HAL.
    12. Rennard, Jean-Philippe, 2006. "Artificiality in Social Sciences," MPRA Paper 1458, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Luoma, Jukka, 2016. "Model-based organizational decision making: A behavioral lens," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 816-826.
    14. Dalila Cisco Collatto & Aline Dresch & Daniel Pacheco Lacerda & Ione Ghislene Bentz, 2018. "Is Action Design Research Indeed Necessary? Analysis and Synergies Between Action Research and Design Science Research," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 239-267, June.
    15. Nadia Fiorino & Emma Galli & Ilde Rizzo & Marco Valente, 2023. "Public procurement and reputation. An agent‐based model," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(4), pages 806-832, November.
    16. Olivier L. de Weck & Marshall B. Jones, 2006. "Isoperformance: Analysis and design of complex systems with desired outcomes," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(1), pages 45-61, March.
    17. Hippel, Eric von., 1992. "Adapting market research to the rapid evolution of needs for new products and services," Working papers 3374-92., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    18. Konstantinos S. Boulas & Georgios D. Dounias & Chrissoleon T. Papadopoulos, 2023. "A hybrid evolutionary algorithm approach for estimating the throughput of short reliable approximately balanced production lines," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 823-852, February.
    19. Richard Fellows & Anita M.M. Liu, 2012. "Managing organizational interfaces in engineering construction projects: addressing fragmentation and boundary issues across multiple interfaces," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(8), pages 653-671, February.
    20. Tay, Nicholas S.P. & Lusch, Robert F., 2005. "A preliminary test of Hunt's General Theory of Competition: using artificial adaptive agents to study complex and ill-defined environments," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(9), pages 1155-1168, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:34:y:2016:i:11:p:769-789. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RCME20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.