Scott Fernie

Knowledge sharing: context, confusion and controversy

Project managers in the construction industry increasingly seek to learn from other industrial sectors. Knowledge sharing between different contexts is thus viewed as an essential source of competitive advantage. It is important therefore for project managers from all sectors to address and develop appropriate methods of knowledge sharing. However, too often it is assumed that knowledge freely exists and can be captured and shared between contexts. Such assumptions belie complexities and problems awaiting the unsuspecting knowledge-sharing protagonist. Knowledge per se is a problematic esoteric concept that does not lend itself easily to codification. Specifically tacit knowledge possessed by individuals, presents particular methodological issues for those considering harnessing its utility in return for competitive advantage. The notion that knowledge is also embedded in specific social contexts compounds this complexity. It is argued that knowledge is highly individualistic and concomitant with the various surrounding contexts within which it is shaped and enacted. Indeed, these contexts are also shaped as a consequence of knowledge adding further complexity to the problem domain. Current methods of knowledge capture, transfer and, sharing fall short of addressing these problematic issues. Research is presented that addresses these problems and proposes an alternative method of knowledge sharing. Drawing on data and observations collected from its application, the findings clearly demonstrate the crucial role of re-contextualisation, social interaction and dialectic debate in understanding knowledge sharing.

Making sense of supply chain management: a comparative study of aerospace and construction

Current recipes for learning across business sectors too often fail to recognize the embedded and contextual nature of management practice. The existing literature gives little emphasis to the symbiotic relationship between supply chain management and the broader dynamics of context. The aerospace and construction sectors are selected for comparison on the basis that they are so different. The UK aerospace sector has undergone extensive consolidation as a result of the imperatives of global competitive pressures. In contrast, the construction industry has experienced decades of fragmentation and remains highly localized. An increasing proportion of output in the aerospace sector occurs within a small number of large, globally orientated firms. In contrast, construction output is dominated by a plethora of small firms with high levels of subcontracting and a widespread reliance on self‐employment. These differences have fundamental implications for the way that supply chain management is understood and implemented in the two sectors. Semi‐structured interviews with practitioners from both sectors support the contention that supply chain management is more established in aerospace than construction. The introduction of prime contracting and the increasing use of framework agreements within the construction sector potentially provide a much more supportive climate for supply chain management than has traditionally prevailed. However, progress depends upon an improved continuity of workload under such arrangements.

Exploring change in construction: supply chain management

Purpose – The purpose of the paper is to explore the process of change within organisations in the construction sector related to the content of change called for by reformers such as Egan, Latham, Constructing Excellence and the “rethinking construction” movement. The concept of supply chain management is used within the research to facilitate this kind of exploration.Design/methodology/approach – The broad framework adopted in the paper is contextual in nature and informed by structuration theory and new institutionalism. The approach followed is a case study method that looks for literal replication across a number of cases.Findings – Supply chain management is found to be both synonymous with the concept of partnering and particularly problematic for organisations to implement within the construction sector due to specific contextual factors.Research limitations/implications – All methodological positions have limitations. Like all research this piece of work is the product of choices that could have ...

Knowledge based facilities management

Purpose – Facilities management has inherited the understanding of how organisations work as value creators from various management models such as Porters, where value is created through “primary” and “support” activities. The gap between the aspiration of strategic relevance and reality has prompted the facilities management profession to begin to address the question of whether facilities management is a legitimate discipline with attendant theories, research and practice. This paper attempts to bring an alternative theoretical perspective to such aspirations.Design/methodology/approach – Facilities management arrangements and their value as a key organisational competence are outlined. Finally knowledge‐based functional competency is described that encapsulates the new perspective.Findings – The paper provides an alternative perspective that will facilitate its acceptance as a strategically placed corporate function. A new knowledge‐based legitimisation for facilities management is proposed, marking a...

The non-adoption of supply chain management

Largely taken for granted within the UK construction sector has been a view that supply chain management theory is robust, relevant and reliable. As such it has formed a substantial aspect of previous and contemporary policy and government funded research. Despite this, the general view of its development and diffusion over the last 15 years within the construction industry has been problematic. Coincidentally, prevailing debates within the supply chain management academic community point to the lack of unified theory, models of diffusion and strong connections to organization theory. Using Straussian grounded theory, iterations between data and organization theory provided a fresh perspective on the development and diffusion of supply chain management in construction. This inductive research provided contextually rich explanations for development and diffusion that explicitly connected with and drew upon robust, relevant and reliable theories of institutions, innovation diffusion, triads, quasifirms and mechanisms of organizational governance. These explanations challenge the simplistic assumption that chains and networks of organizations are holistically managed and controlled by any single organization or institution in the construction industry. The debate therefore shifts away from proselytizing supply chain management towards research that explores the rigour, relevance and reliability of supply chain management assumptions in construction. The gap between industry practice and policy is exposed and the question is posed: to what extent policy and practice do, or should, constitute a recursive relationship.

Dilettantes, discipline and discourse: requirements management for construction

Requirements management (RM), as practised in the aerospace and defence sectors, attracts interest from construction researchers in response to longstanding problems of project definition. Doubts are expressed whether RM offers a new discipline for construction practitioners or whether it repeats previous exhortations to adopt a more disciplined way of working. Whilst systems engineering has an established track record of addressing complex technical problems, its extension to socially complex problems has been challenged. The dominant storyline of RM is one of procedural rationality and RM is commonly presented as a means of controlling dilettante behaviour. Interviews with RM practitioners suggest a considerable gulf between the dominant storyline in the literature and how practitioners operate in practice. The paper challenges construction researchers interested in RM to reflect more upon the theoretical debates that underpin current equivalent practices in construction and the disparity between espoused and enacted practice.

Theory to practice: A typology of supply chain management in construction

Supply chain management in construction continues to attract considerable academic and industry interest. With its origin in manufacturing, successful implementation of supply chain management is argued to enhance customer value whilst simultaneously reducing business costs. In the UK construction industry, supply chain management strategies remain largely synonymous with best practice initiatives such as construction partnering, strategic alliances and more recently construction framework agreements. In contrast to this arguably misleading and impoverished viewpoint, the purpose of this research is to develop fresh perspectives and present a contextually sympathetic typology of supply chain management in construction. Drawing on new organizational institutionalism, economic governance and transactional cost economics (TCE), the utility and performance of supply chain management in construction is portrayed as rational choice among multiple strategies, instrumentally bound by contract and context. This contextually sensitive interpretation of supply chain management captures complex, diverse and often unique characteristics of construction practice. Challenging mainstream assessment of supply chain management can clearly help construction stakeholders focus attention on discrete supply chain strategies that best suit their organizational and project needs.

National Qualification Frameworks: Developing Research Perspectives

Abstract Arguments for National Qualification Frameworks (NQF) are compelling. Indeed, such frameworks are now an international phenomenon. Yet, few studies take a critical perspective and challenge the broad assumptions underpinning NQF. Arguments presented in this paper attempt to open a debate within the higher education community that draws attention to conflicts and tensions regarding the diffusion and use of NQF. The emphasis of the debate is on the use of the Scottish Credit and Qualification Framework (SCQF) within higher education. The SCQF is used in this paper as an exemplar to explore and highlight these conflicts and tensions. The critique is based on a historical and managerialist view that forms the basis of a number of research propositions regarding the future of NQF. Specifically, four distinct yet interrelated research perspectives requiring future attention are proposed: political; innovation–diffusion; normative; and consistency. Such perspectives are argued to provide a more robust and reliable basis for developing NQF. The paper thus contextualises the SCQF within the recent ‘global tsunami’ of NQF and uses the SCQF as an exemplar to open up a wider debate about NQF.

Organizational learning in construction supply chains

Purpose – Learning within the supply chain is widely considered to provide the basis for enhanced competitive advantage. The purpose of this paper is to explore the theory and current practice of organizational learning in UK construction supply chains.Design/methodology/approach – A qualitative research strategy is followed for this exploration of supply chain management and organizational learning. Research enquiry draws on semi‐structured interviews with key construction supply chain stakeholders. The semi‐structure interviews are recorded, transcribed and analysed via qualitative data analysis software.Findings – Careful examination of the transcripts reveal that whilst supply chain management practice in construction is limited, key schools of organizational learning are similarly underdeveloped. Findings disclose construction supply chain organizations routinely employ learning strategies that are best described as reactionary and interventionist.Research limitations/implications – Research was limi...

BIM and the small construction firm: a critical perspective

ABSTRACT The need for technological and administrative innovation is a recurrent theme in the UK construction-reform agenda, but generic improvement recipes are beginning to give way to a more focused prescription: building information modelling (BIM). The current strategy is to mandate the use of BIM for government projects as a way of integrating the design, construction and operation of publicly procured buildings. This aspiration represents a partial turn away from a focus on managerialist agendas towards a belief in the power of digital practices to achieve the aspiration of integrated working, collaboration and innovation, a trend that is being reflected globally in relation to both national and firm-level policy interventions. This paper subjects this so-called ‘BIM revolution’ to critical scrutiny. By drawing on theories of the digital divide, a critical discourse is developed around the ways in which political reform agendas centred on BIM might not stimulate innovation on a wider scale, but could act to disenfranchise small firms that are unable (or unwilling) to engage with them. This critical analysis presents important new research questions around the technocratic optimism that pervades the current reform discourse, the trajectory of industry development that it creates and the policy process itself.