William W. Badger

Ranking Construction Programs: The Academic Debate Begins

The authors propose a methodology for the ranking of Construction programs and to use The Associated Schools of Construction as the forum to debate. Professional organizations, such as ACCE, AGC, NAHB, and ENR, are interested in ranking construction programs. U.S. News has ranked colleges, but not construction. Programs are transforming to more traditional academic programs with graduate education, research, fundraising, and faculty member production. The discipline needs to address these changes, and creation of a ranking system may be a means to discuss common issues. Participating in a ranking process will provide benchmark data for self analysis, identification of shortcomings, and information to justify change. The ranking system must be complicated enough to seem scientific and the results must match, more or less, peoples nonscientific prejudices. First, it is necessary to establish a theoretical World Class goal and benchmark program against the standard before comparing rankings between programs. A series of “strawmen” rankings needs to be conducted before establishing a final set of metrics. The ranking model must be validated by a number of test runs. Papers about controversial topics provide new ideas and concepts, which need to be discussed and which may drive change.

Leadership Transition and Growth

The concepts of leadership and leadership principles have been studied extensively. We know that the application of leadership principles is strongly determined by the personality and style of the individual exercising such leadership, the leaders hierarchical level, and the surrounding environment. Less clarity exists, however, about how to apply and understand leadership under diverse circumstances, and how to transition ones own leadership style during a lifetime of growth and professional progression. After developing an “action card game” (as a participatory experience) to teach leadership to construction Project Managers (PM), the authors decided to address the leadership transition need with a second set of “action cards.” This second set of cards vividly illustrates the different, as well as highly challenging, demands imposed by a corporate Senior Executives perspective and environment. The Senior Executive Magic Action Cards (SEMAC) game is also played with a deck of 52 cards that describe plausible executive actions. During 12 discussion rounds, each member of a four or five person “Senior Executive” team proposes an action based on his/her personal preference. Team members then vigorously advocate, negotiate, and compromise to reach a decision on the best action that, in their view, addresses internal or external events that have profound impact on the companys future. Although leadership awareness, education, and wisdom are programmed into the action cards, events, and procedures, the participants receive the greatest benefit from the insights gained during team discussions where personal experience and knowledge are shared. By playing first the PM and then the Senior Executive game, participants eventually are forced to ask themselves if they are prepared for, and willing to take on, such responsibilities and challenges. Feedback from past participants clearly indicates that the desired learning objectives are achieved.