(pressing HOME will start a new search)

 

Back Next

ASC Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference
California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo, California
April  1988              pp  116-124

 

CONSTRUCTION RESEARCH TOPICS

 

Greg Howell
University of New Mexico

Troy McQueen
Tuskegee University

Albert Pedulla
Texas A&M University

 

The Research Committee was established as a new committee of the ASC in early 1986. This paper is the first effort to realize some of that committee's proposed functions. Primarily the paper is concerned with providing a forum for discussion of topics re­lated to construction research. A number of committee members have been involved in and contributed to the preparation of this paper. Issues that are addressed include the following: (1) What is construction research? (2) Is there a research agenda? (3) Proposal writing, and (4)A proposed framework to organize current construction research. These topics need to be addressed from the broad perspective of the total ASC membership. Collective actions can be taken to improve the involvement of both individuals and schools in construc­tion research activities. What is needed in order to become productive in this arena is an agenda and a means of accomplishing the expected objectives of the research committee.

KEY WORDS:  Construction research topics, research problem identification, writing research proposals, framework for current construction research.

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

An emphasis on research activities has not been a focal point of concern by the broad membership of ASC. While individuals and certain schools have engaged at times in research, most schools of construction are not major research centers. Only recently, at the 22d Annual Conference, was a Research Committee of the ASC formed.

At that time the committee functions were determined as follows: (1) fostering construction-related research; (2) providing for dissemination of information about construction related research; (3) providing a forum for discussion of important topics related to construction research. These activities were an out-growth of discussion at the formative meeting by ASC members from many schools. A key issue was that of identifying construction research problems, especially those that can be addressed by ASC member schools.

 

Other issues that remain to be fully ad­dressed are the following: (1) identifying funding sources, both government and private agencies; (2) cataloging research interests and current research projects; (3)exploring ways to allow ASC schools to act collectively to search research opportunities; (4)exploring creation of an ASC seed money fund. All of these issues, as well as others, need to be viewed in a framework of collective effort by the ASC to establish a construction research orientation. At the same time, effort must be made by individuals and schools to realize their research potentials.

 

 

WHAT IS CONSTRUCTION RESEARCH?

 

Research is an important element in advancing the state of the art in any industry or business. The major breakthroughs that have occurred in any field of study and the development of new products have had their roots in the field of investigation we call "research."

 

Research should be an integral part of the educational environment. It is needed for intellectual growth and to maintain a current awareness of the state of the art in all disciplines.

 

Universities have played an active role in this area and, in fact, stress research activities as a major activity of involvement for their facilities. The "publish or perish" syndrome most often involves the publication of findings related specifically to some research undertaking associated with the expected duties of the faculty member.

 

The systematic investigation in a field of knowledge to discover or establish facts or principles is a good definition of the general research activity. Modifying terms, such as basic and applied, have been appended to the general term in an attempt to differentiate kinds of research. More appropriate, the term fundamental research has been adopted by researchers in engineering disciplines to describe those activities that have broad general results. This activity appears to be preferred, as it has the potential for a greater impact on design and current practices.

 

Research in an academic environment can provide a number of benefits. These include the following:

·           improves an instructor's effectiveness

·           complements other research efforts, e.g., government, private industry, etc.

·           maintains an up-to-date educational framework

·           encourages interdisciplinary activity and innovation

·           provides a potential supporting budget structure

·            assists in graduate-level training.

 

Sponsored research can support graduate study programs as well as faculty. Overhead from research contracts have been used in support of university services such as libraries and computer centers.

 

While it is not always favorably viewed, un-sponsored research can be as worthwhile as sponsored research. Both activities can make contributions to the development of new knowledge and practice in a discipline. Obviously, it should be the quality and the results of research that determine the value of a project.

 

In order for research activities to become an important part of most construction pro­grams, the faculty reward system has to recognize and respond positively to performance in this area. However, a balanced view of all demands placed on a construction educator must be the basis for the reward system. Excellence in teaching, service to the academic community, and other creative activity, even unique indus­trial experiences, along with research performance, should form the basis for the total faculty reward system in a particular institution.

 

Traditionally academic involvement in construction research has been, to some degree, limited. One major obstacle to be overcome is the question of what to do-selection of a specific research topic or direction. In his paper, "A Procedure for Identifying Research Potentials in Construction," Roger Killingsworth (Auburn University) ably addresses the identification of topics and funding sources. The key steps in his outline of the procedures are the following: (1) review of current literature to identify major problems in the construction industry; (2) break down the problems into their component parts; (3) use the components to suggest possible topics for research; and (4) identify the segments of the industry affected to contact as possible sources of funds.

 

There is no doubt that problem-focused research applications are the first step in an overall research orientation plan. Suc­cessful research must be structured around specific problems. This research effort is vital if research discoveries are to be ap­plied in a clearly demonstrable, beneficial way. In the past federal agencies, such as NSF, have found that when programs are focused on problem-related objectives that determine the nature of the problem and set up and end-point application for the re­search, these research programs have the following characteristics: (1) recognizable and measurable benefits will accrue from these activities; (2) there is wide geo­graphical and social applicability; (3) re­sults from many disciplines and professions are required in these applications; (4) problem solution is the usual result rather than simply an increase of knowledge in any discipline; (5) results are useful to both public and private sectors, especially where market incentives limit research initiatives.

 

RESEARCH AGENDA

 

For both individual researchers and larger organizations, a research agenda can be a useful devise in giving a sense of direction to all research activities. Each individual researcher must eventually develop a personal agenda to guide his activities over time. Collective action by groups can be enhanced greatly by a framework that will guide these activities over a time horizon.

 

A research agenda should be designed to identify fundamental research topics in the discipline of construction and may, in part, overlap with other disciplines such as architecture and engineering. An interdis­ciplinary effort may prove to be a useful approach to the creation of a broad-based research agenda relating the built environment, in general, and the various segments of the industry that creates the total built environment.

 

the holistic approach being proposed. It is proposed that representatives of the various construction industry organizations be invited to a roundtable discussion with representatives of the ASC Research Committee. At this meeting, ASC will present its concept of an holistic approach to attempting to deal with the problems of the industry in a way that will ultimately benefit the industry. Opinions from the various organizations will be sought to determine their perceptions of how research can benefit them and what areas of research should be pursued.

 

While ASC's involvement in research is in its infancy, the research record of many of its members and the educational institution each represents is well established and impressive. It is this credibility and the unbiased thinking inherent in university research undertakings that made ASC a viable organization for pursuing the approach suggested herein.

 

This proposal represents an ambitious un­dertaking that can only be accomplished over a relatively lengthy period of time. However, it is one that ASC should pursue in order that the capabilities of. the various member schools be extended to the public sector and that a great area of need by the construction industry is addressed.

 

 

PREPARING A PROPOSAL

 

University faculty who are seeking competitive grant support, especailly those unaccustomed to the research grant process, need advice and assistance. Writing a pro­posal, like any other publication effort, is not a simple task. The preparation of a successful grant proposal requires many skills and attributes as well as some assistance from individuals having considerable "grantsmanship" experiences. We can learn from others' experiences, insights, and concerns regarding the total process.

 

Typical Proposal [1]

 

In general, a proposal should include (1) the objectives and scientific or educational significance of the proposed work; (2) suitability of the methods to be employed; (3) qualifications of the investigator and the grantee organization; (4) effect of the activity on the infrastructure of science, engineering, and education in these areas; and (5) amount of funding required. It is recommended that a proposal should be prepared with the same care and thoroughness of a paper to be presented for publication. Reviews by several individuals or groups can ensure that all necessary information has been included, or at least, summarized. Use of a checklist can assist in the reduction of omissions.

 

Perhaps it is time for the various construc­tion organizations to recognize the benefit that can be derived from a common effort aimed at developing new technologies and improving existing ones. In these days when the construction industry is attempting to deal with problems such as declining local and world markets, poor workmanship, inefficiency of workers, and escalating costs, it may be time for the construction industry to look at the potential benefits that may be derived from an intense program to support independent research.

 

It is a well-recognized axiom of the business world that no organization can survive without reinvesting some of its earnings in its future. This generally translates into an investment into areas that will maintain the viability of the business or industry for years to come. Unfortunately, the construction industry has not yet recognized this aspect of the business world which, if pursued on an industry-wide basis, could lead to significant benefits for the industry at large.

 

As representatives of institutions that proffer knowledge and seek new understanding and meaning for bettering our society through education, the Associated Schools of Construction should play a significant role in promoting research. ASC has at its disposal the capability to create the necessary infrastructure through which nonproprietary, meaningful research that is useful to the construction industry at large can be conducted.

 

The ASC should exert a concerted effort to seek the cooperation of the major organizations that represent the construction industry in pursuing such research efforts. Constructors and the organizations they support must be made to see beyond the fallaciously perceived notion that their investment in research will be more beneficial to the com­petition than to themselves.

 

In order to accomplish this, ASC must first develop its own credibility as a viable research organization. This should be accomplished by undertaking locally funded investigative research studies to identify perceived or previously identified problems. that exist in the construction industry, solutions to which will result in significant benefit to the industry. These studies should be of an interdisciplinary nature and the results disseminated to the various construction-related organizations, nonaffili­ated constructors, as well as product manufacturers. Simultaneous with these studies. coordinating efforts should be pursued with the various organizations that represent the construction industry to identify their perception of needs that should be addressed by the research studies. Efforts should also be made to solicit their support for

 

Complete proposals will help the granting agency review and process a proposal with a minimum of delay in the procedure. Most agencies provide a complete list of the necessary ingredients for a complete proposal submission.

 

Following is a brief outline of a typical proposal. Remember that a proposal is a presentation of your understanding of a problem, your interpretation of what is to be done, and a delineation of your method­ology to do it. Specific areas to be ad­dressed in the research proposal should include the following:

 

Abstract

One or two page summary that presents a concise report of your research propos­al--including problem statement, gen­eral objectives, procedures, and anti­cipated results.

 

Understanding of the problem / background

bulletInvolves a search into the subject area to familiarize yourself with current thinking, trends, and state of the art.

 

Statement of the problem

bulletA clear statement of your interpreta­tion of the problem.

Statement of the need:

bulletA justification for the project.
bulletConditions that necessitate the under­
bullettaking of the proposed study.
bulletSignificance of proposed study.

 

 

Overall goals and objectives

bulletBased on the problem previously identi­fied and the statement of need, deline­ate the specific goal(s) of your pro­posal.

 

Methodology

bulletA detailed elaboration of the procedures to be followed in carrying out the prosed research effort:

o       Identify research strategies/approach.

o       Delineate the specific phases/stages in which the work is to be accomplished.

bulletIdentify the variables that will be investigated so that the objectives of the research will be achieved.

o       Identify the specific data that is to be collected and in what format.

o       Delineate methods for ordering/ manipulating the data.

o       Identify the format to be employed in presenting the data.

o       Indicate methodologies to be employed

bulletin disseminating findings from the study.
bulletPrepare a time flow chart showing each major activity and its duration within the framework of the entire study.

 

·       List the key personnel who will be in­volved in the research study and iden­tify the principle (co-principle) investigator:

o       Provide bio-data information on all participants.

 

 

 

·       Prepare a detailed budget for:

o       Professional/support personnel

o       Materials/supplies/equipment

o       Travel

o       Consultants

o       Communications

o       Fringe benefits/overhead

 

 

·           Prepare a time flow chart' showing:

o        Each activity and its duration.

o        Overlapping activities.

o        Interrelationships of activities.

o        Milestones showing dates for com­

o        pleting key activities, and

o        product(s) to be delivered.

o         Project completion date.

 

Evaluation of Proposals

 

As part of a grant process, many agencies have established criteria for the review and evaluation of proposals submitted either as solicited or unsolicited project proposals. The four criteria used by the National Science Foundation [ii and the elements that constitute each criterion are as follows:

1. "Research performance competence.
This criterion relates to the capability of the investigator(s), the technical soundness of the proposed approach, and the adequacy of the institutional resources available.
 

2.Intrinsic merit of the research.

This criterion is used to assess the likelihood that the research will lead to new discoveries or fundamental advances within its field of science or engineering, or have substantial impact on progress in that field or in other scientific and engineering fields.
 

3.       3. Utility or relevance of the research. This criterion is used to assess the likelihood that the research can contribute to the achievement of a goal that is extrinsic or in addition to that of the research field itself, and thereby serve as the basis for new or improved technology or assist in the solution of societal problems.

 
4. Effect of the research on the infrastructure of science and engineering. This criterion relates to the potential of the proposed research to contribute to better understanding or improvement of the quality, distribution, or effectiveness of the nation's scientific and engineering research, education, and manpower base."
 

 

While most criteria are not as thorough or as well articulated, many sponsors desire similar results for the research effort. The bottom line is, can the task be accom­plished in a workmanlike manner by an individual or group that is competent. The task results must be a solution to a "real" (perceived) problem and use resources wisely.

 

 

CONSTRUCTION RESEARCH: A SYSTEMS OVERVIEW

 

Answering the question, "Is construction research working on the areas that the industry feels is most important?" can be done if there is a way to organize and illustrate how research is covering the subject. This section of the paper proposes a framework to organize current construction research. It places construction research within a model of the construction process. The concept is in four parts. The first describes the model. The second places research on the model. The third places industry problems as perceived by various groups on the model. The last presents a brief discussion.

 

Part 1: A Systems Model of Construction  Construction projects are complex processes that transform ideas and money into completed facilities. This section describes a systems/task model of that process. The model is useful for organizing thinking about construction management, improvement, education, and research because it provides a comprehensive systems view of the construction process.

 

The model describes tasks within the overall system. Systems are the focus of the model. A construction organization coordinates specialists to accomplish three basic tasks:

 

Conceptualization and Feasibility, Detail Design, and Construction Operations. Typically, these tasks are carried out by an organization of people who work for three different companies: the Owner, the Designer, and the Contractor. In some cases all of the tasks are completed by people who work for a single corporation or organiza­tion. While the model is not based on contractual boundaries, it is possible to identify the type of company that usually does a specific task.

 

A quick pass through the model (Figure 1) provides an overview. Project Concepts are translated into detail Design after the Concept and Feasibility have been determined. The Construction Operations part of the organization provides the basic elements of work to the foreman and crew. The elements: materials, tools, place, information, and people, are required for work to be done. Different support systems supply each element. The crew uses a work method to combine the elements of work into a finished project.

 

Control is based on two types of information, formal and informal. The formal feedback system provides data with an identified source, an identified target, and a standard format. The drawing of the formal control system closely resembles a typical cost control system. In this model it may handle quality and timeliness data as well. Formal feedback from either source to the Concept level (the owner) during each phase depends on the nature of the contract. The usefulness of the formal information depends upon the extent to which the system is designed to monitor factors within the control of the parties, the quality of the in­formation entered into the system, and the extent of editing that occurs.

 

The informal feedback side is rich in non-numerical information but subject to sub­stantial filtering at every level. In the drawing, it is represented as a column of information with filters between levels. Each level provides and takes information from the column. The usefulness of the information depends upon the level of trust between the two parties.

 

There is subtlety in the drawing. Note the two-headed arrows between the Concept, Design, and Operations tasks. These arrows represent both the systems that develop and maintain agreement between the organizations and the systems that transmit needed resources. The money arrow, like all resource arrows, has one head. Money only goes one way.

 

The resource systems that supply the basic elements of work to the crews are well defined. The resource systems that support the efforts of the Detail Design and the Operations tasks are not well defined.

 

The "Method" figure is irregular. It was drawn this way to emphasize the wide variations in the way work takes place. Work methods are determined by many factors:

 

(1)      by nature, supply, and location of work elements;

(2)      by the effectiveness of planning at all levels;

(3)      by the experience and motivations of the formen and crew.

 

Supply files and the crew uses files. Supply did grinders and they use grinders. Leave scaffold frames across site and the pieces will be carried one at a time.

 

The systems perspective of the model makes the source of some fundamental problems apparent. The feedback loops are often inadequate to provide information for ef­fective control. The formally collected cost data provides inadequate information to identify the source of quality, timeliness, or cost problems. For example, in the construction phase it is impossible to use cost data to determine the cause of a cost overrun. It could be that performance is limited by some resource supply system, an ill-trained or poorly motivated worker, or because of an ineffective work method.

 

Information about the source and nature of the problem may be available in the informal network. The extent and nature of the filters determine what action is taken. An adversarial project atmosphere assures that people will work to limit their apparent responsibility. This usually results in not taking corrective action.

 

(There is a belief that the formal data are not subject to filters. Experience has shown that people can draw different information from the same numerical data. In other cases they manipulate the data to support their requirements or preconceptions.)

 

The model also suggests why it is hard to improve the rate, quality, or cost of construction. Some examples: Improvements or changes in the work method puts new loads on the support systems. Increasing the crew level performance requires improved support systems--materials and consumable tools must be brought to the work face more quickly. Space to work may become unavailable unless the leading crew also picks up speed.

 

The interdependence between support systems and work methods or production systems is one key to finding improvements. Total Performance is limited by the performance of some sub-system. It may be the work method or it may be the output of some support system. Performance improves when the limiting system is found and appropriate effort and investment made to change it.

 

Each improvement results in some new limit to performance. Rational management would invest in systems improvement until the value of the change in performance was less than that received from other available investments. Unfortunately the part of the system receiving the benefit of the investment is often in a different cost code or corporation from that which must make the investment.

 

Part 2: Locatinq Research on the Model The focus of the construction research efforts currently underway was identified using the model as an organizing framework (Figure 2). The source was a package of research summaries made available at the Construction Industry Institute (CII) Summer Conference. Each research project is identified by number. A complete tabu­lation is available that details the Institution and Investigator contacts.

 

The author assigned each research project to a location based on reading the abstract. In some cases there might well have been two locations for any project. Key words were assigned to provide another basis for sorting. The Investigators may wish to modify the location or key word assignments. The file is in a database format and easily corrected. Additional research can be quickly placed on the model, if this approach is useful.

 

Part 3: Problems and Opportunities The model was used to introduce the concept of systems, teams, and leadership at the Construction Executive Program at Stanford. Each delegate was asked to mark his position on the model. The marks represented the Owner, Designer, and Constructor functions. The delegates were then ask to mark a P where they saw problems and an 0 where they say opportunities. A problem was defined as something that causes trouble but may not be curable. An opportunity was something that appears possible to improve given some resources. The results of this exercise are recreated on Figure 3.

 

Problems and opportunities were located in two basic areas. The most noticeable cluster was on the arrows between the Owner, Designer, and Constructor. The class described these as relationship or organizational problems. Further discussion led to the idea that these organizational problems were related to the failure of key contracting and design systems. A change order system that has become the project battle ground is an example. The shop drawing system at the Kansas City Hyatt Regency Hotel is another.

 

The second cluster of P's and O's were located on the formal information systems. The class put great faith in the belief that formal systems could provide the information needed to control the project system. There were few marks in the informal network area.

 

 

Part 4: Discussion The placement of the research projects on a comprehensive model provides an easy way to compare research emphasis with perceived problems. There is substantial work in the area of formal control systems that was seen as important by the CEPS delegates. There appears to be little work addressing the relationships or systems that tie the principal parties together, which was identified as a major concern by the CEPS delegates.

 

Figure 1. Proposed Model of the Construction Process.

 

Figure 2. Current Construction Research Projects Related to Proposed Model.

 

Figure 3. Problems and Opportunities.

 

The data base format of the research files allows further insight within the various locations. There were 137 research pro­jects in the CII compilation. There were 11 research projects underway that fell within the "Projects" location. Of these, 5 involved risk and 3 were directed toward claims. Within the 29 projects in the "Design" location, 18 were technical studies of materials, 8 studied design operations, and three were directed toward measuring design. Within the 24 projects in the "methods" location, 9 were directed to measurement of performance and 9 to robotics, 5 toward operations. Of 33 projects studying the "Constructor," operations accounted for 13, planning for 15, estimating for 4, and training for 1.

 

Computers were not a location, but they are directly involved with 39 studies. This makes this the largest area of study. Expert systems are the subject of 17 separate studies.

 

The questions to be answered appear straight forward: Are there major areas inadequately covered? Is the research working on the important areas for either short term or long term results? What part of the construction system is most likely to offer the greatest improvement for the least investment?

 

Perhaps this framework can be used to stimulate and guide this important discus­sion.

 

 

SUMMARY

 

The concepts and issues presented here are only a beginning point in the effort of ASC member schools to develop their full research potential.. The 1988 ASC Annual Meeting provides an opportunity to present these and other concerns to the faculty representatives of the various member schools. An open discussion is expected to further clarify the significant issues and to focus on the next step that the ASC Research Committee should take to assist in the development of construction research.

 

Construction research has the potential to meet the needs of the construction industry in developing economical, productive processes and the academic environment to maintain an essential educational framework that complements industry's progress. To be successful in these efforts those involved in the academic arena must identify research potentials, develop realistic research proposals, search out possible sources for funding, and, finally, produce quality products that meet the construction industry's current demand for new knowledge and technology.

 

The ASC Research Committee along with faculty from member schools should work to develop an agenda to guide research activities for the immediate and long-range future. This collective action can be more effective if a suitable framework can be developed and accepted. The systems model proposed by Greg Howell can be an excellent starting point. Others, such as Roger Killingworth, have shown ways to identify both construction research topics and funding sources. What remains to be done is for faculty members, individually or in interdisciplinary groups, to take aggressive action to generate research pro­posals and to pursue funding from a wide variety of public and private sources. The ASC Research Committee needs to find ways to provide advice, assistance, and guidance to those seeking to reach a research potential.

 

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

 

This paper is the result of a collective -effort by various members of the ASC Research Committee. A primary purpose of the paper was to assist the committee and the broad membership of the ASC in focusing on research issues and problems, both potentials and limitations. The content of the paper was determined by conversations and correspondence with Ray Perreault, Gene Farmer, Brenda Ryan, and Steve Easterly. Albert Pedulla developed the portion of the paper concerning writing research proposals as well as some of the thoughts on construction research topics, in general. Greg Howell contributed the material included in the section on a systems overview of construc­tion research. The organization and final editing of the paper was done by Troy M. McQueen. These efforts are but a beginning step in the development of a research thrust that will encourage the active participation of each member of ASC. Ultimately, the goal is to fully realize the functions of the research committee.

 

 

REFERENCE

 

1. NSF 83-57 "Grants for Research and Education in Science and Engineering. National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C. 20550, revised 1987.