2. The Context
- The most appropriate use of information technology.
- The proper organization to be constituted.
- The roles of participants in the new value chain and the management of the whole process.
3. Literature Review
3.1. The Change in the Design Environment
3.2. The Complex Interaction of Participants
3.3. Lack of Communication
- The use of information technology
- Team organization
3.4. Communication Troubles
- Lack of fine communication means. Short of suitable mechanisms to motivate the members to communicate energetically is the main problem. The conflicts of awareness between the participants and the privileges and obligations of every party are clearly written in the contract, and this makes the most of its own interests and drives each member to maintain the information with no motivation to communicate. To avoid violations of its own benefits, each member leans to take care of information as “confidential” rather than “sharing”. Thus, as the survey shows, each party is unwilling to interconnect their computer system or arrangement. In fact, through the use of advanced communication technologies to improve coordination; added value can be produced . Because of the lack of “extra benefits” sharing device, the participants avoid active communication with the others.
- Fragile managerial structure of construction team. The usual form of construction team is a linear structure. There are a lot of middle-level employees from the owner at the top, to the lowest construction member of staff. Prior to reaching the planned recipients, communicated messages have to go through an extended and tortuous process of transformation. This leads to the deformation of information .
- Lack of consistent principles for construction information. As a project’s size and the complexity of technology increase, construction projects frequently engage hundreds of professionals. Moreover, hundreds of firms may unite the construction team at different times. Organizations can have a different understanding and knowledge of the identical building projects, and similar construction information may have dissimilar forms of expression. A lack of consistent information standards across the entire industry is an additional barrier to communications .
- Lack of maintenance of highly developed communication technologies. As a labor-intensive industry with comparatively low levels of information, the request of new information technologies, compared with the manufacturing industry, has been delayed. Regardless of the introduction of computer technology in the building industry in the 1960s as limited component analysis and CAD, it is mostly used for the reason of generating information .
4. Team Organizational Factors
5. IT Integration Factors
6. Research Design
6.1. Data Collection Methods:
6.2. Case Study Analysis
6.3. The Results Are Summarized in the Below Figure:
7. The Characteristic Categories of Communication Are Summarized as Follows:
7.1. P1: The Impact of Team Structure on Communication Links
7.2. P2: The Impact of the Use of IT on Communication Links
7.3. P3: The Impact of Information Management on Communication Links
7.4. P4: The Impact of Project Delivery System on Communication Links
7.5. P5: The Impact of Working at a Distance on Communication Links
8. Major Contributions
8.1. Information Technology and its Appropriate Usage
8.1.1. Eliminating Geographic Barriers: Boundary-Less Communication
8.2. Building the Team
8.2.2. Team Communications
8.2.3. Organizational Structure
8.3. Improve Communication through Innovation: Client’s Innovation Along with the Designer’s Innovation
9. Further Discussion
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Questionnaire Sample
- What is the cost of project involved in?more than 5 million dollars
- What is the scale of project handled?large size project
- Does the scale of project affect the organization structure (design team structuring)? If yes, in what sense?Yes, the organization structure is highly affected by the scale of the project since the tasks and the number of expertise increase with the increase in scale and therefore the project becomes more complex and difficult to manage.
- Does the scale of project affect the number of participants involved? If yes, draw the relation between project’s scale and members.Yes, as mentioned before, the increase in project’s scale automatically increases the number of participants involved.
- What is the kind of the project achieved?commercial
- How long is the project’s complete process of design drawings (design and construction)?more than 3 years
- How long is the implementation (construction phase) of the project?more than 5 years
- What phases of the project were you involved in?a- Design drawings b- Construction drawings c- implementation and completiona&b a&c b&c a,b&c
- Was the client involved in any phase? What phase:Yes, his involvement was throughout the whole process.B-Members involved in the communication process
- What is the number of members involved in the design phase?More than 10 members.
- What is the number of members involved in the construction phase?team of more than 10 engineers involved in construction and on site implementation.
- Are the members involved specialists in specific phases of the project?Yes, especially in the phases related to hotel details, retailing issues and cinema construction.
- Do the members involved come from different cultural backgrounds?No, it was limited to local parties.
- How does the culture of parties affect the communication process?NA
- Are the members involved located in the same region or country?In this case study, the members were located in the same region.
- How does the geographical location affect the communication process?The members were located in the same region, therefore they communicate continuously with each other at different intervals of the project in hand. This made the nature of communication an f2f process and digital one too.
- To what extent are you involved in the communication process?100%C-The Structure of Organization (Communication model)
- What is the structure of organization?
- center oriented
- How are tasks assigned?Tasks are assigned according to the work breakdown structure of the project.
- Who manages the whole process?Project manager
- Are you the sender or receiver?Both the sender and receiver
- Does the nature of project affect the organization structure? How?Yes, since this project is a commercial one, the organization structure took a linear arrangement.D-The nature of communication
- Why do you communicate in architecture firms in Lebanon?
you may circle more than one condition
- when you do not know: the need for expertise
- when you do not want to do something
- when you do not have time
- when you do not have the resources
- when you want to enhance your skills
- What is the nature of collaboration maintained?
E-Factors that affect communication in architecture project management
- Face 2 face communication-Oral
- Technological and IT integration
- List the major factors that enhanced communication in this project?Flexible project managerClear objectivesDirect operationManaging all phases in parallel
- List the major factors that inhibited communication in this project?Overlapping rolesExcessive interference of clientUnfamiliar technologyHow do you collaborate in an F2F design construction environment?
- Who are the members involved?Suppliers, sub consultants, project design director, design architects, architecture teams and engineering staff, draftsmen.
- How is the team structure maintained?All involved members refer to the project manager.
- How are tasks assigned?Tasks are assigned by the project manager.
- Who manages the process?The design consultant in collaboration with the project manager.
- Is this system efficient? Does it make communication between participants easy and clear?The system needs a more developed structure of organization that handles well the collaboration between participants and enhances the flow of information.
- List 3 of the obstacles you faced using the F2F communication system:
How do you collaborate in a digital design construction environment?
- Loss of information
- Still needed digital communication to deliver all data
- Not official since there isn’t any documented files.
- Who are the members involved?Suppliers, sub consultants, design director, design architect, project coordinator, architecture team and engineering staff.
- What means of digital communication is being used?
- web based software
- Is this system efficient? Does it make communication between participants easy and clear?a-Yes b-No
- Is the database of the web-based software placed locally?a-Yes b-No
- Is the communication affected by different time zone?a-Yes b-No
- No difference in time.
- List 3 of the obstacles you faced using the digital communication system:
- Error in receiving emails
- Disconnection of network
- Client’s interference in every exchange of digital documents
- How long have you been involved in the digital communication system?6 years and aboveE-Project delivery system
- What is the project delivery system maintained?
- Blyth, K.; Lewis, J.; Kaka, A. Developing a framework for a standardized works programme for building projects. Constr. Innov. 2004, 4, 193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, A. Key performance indicators for measuring construction success. Benchmark. Int. J. 2004, 11, 203–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kog, Y.C.; Loh, P.K. Critical Success Factors for Different Components of Construction Projects. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2012, 138, 520–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed.; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Cole, R. Building environmental assessment methods: Assessing construction practices. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2000, 18, 949–957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gadde, L.E.; Dubois, A. Partnering in the construction industry—Problems and opportunities. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 2010, 16, 254–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Emmitt, S.; Otter, A. Exploring effectiveness of team communication. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2007, 14, 408–419. [Google Scholar]
- Eriksson, P.E.; Westerberg, M. Effects of cooperative procurement procedures on construction project performance: A conceptual framework. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2011, 29, 197–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eriksson, P.E. Exploration and exploitation in project-based organizations: Development and diffusion of knowledge at different organizational levels in construction companies. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2013, 31, 333–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Foster, D.; Jonker, J. Stakeholder relationships: The dialogue of engagement. Corp. Gov. Int. J. Bus. Soc. 2005, 5, 51–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harty, C. Implementing innovation in construction: Contexts, relative boundedness and actor-network theory. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2008, 26, 1029–1041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Higgin, G.; Jessop, N. Communication in the Building Industry; Tavistock Publications: London, UK, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Hughes, S.W.; Tippett, D.D.; Thomas, W.K. Measuring Project Success in the Construction Industry. Eng. Manag. J. 2004, 16, 31–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iyer, K.; Jha, K. Factors affecting cost performance: Evidence from Indian construction projects. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2005, 23, 283–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeng, T.S. Towards a Process-Centric, asynchronous collaborative design environment. In Proceedings of the Fifth Conference on Computer Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia, Singapore, 18–19 May 2000; pp. 15–24. [Google Scholar]
- Zavadskas, E.K.; Turskis, Z.; Tamošaitiene, J. Risk assessment of construction projects. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 2010, 16, 33–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kerzner, H. Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling and Controlling, 9th ed.; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Ling, Y.Y.; Lau, B.S.Y. A case study on the management of the development of a large-scale power plant project in East Asia based on design-build arrangement. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2002, 20, 413–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S. Challenges in Building Design and the Construction Industry: The Future of Design and Construction in the Internet Age. Comput. Sci. 2001, 2105, 225–236. [Google Scholar]
- Leung, M.Y.; Ng, S.T.; Cheung, S.O. Measuring construction project participant satisfaction. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2004, 22, 319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manley, K. Implementation of innovation by manufacturers subcontracting to construction projects; Engineering. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2008, 15, 230–245. [Google Scholar]
- Mansfield, N.R.; Ugwu, O.O.; Doran, T. Causes of delay and cost overruns in Nigerian construction projects. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2004, 12, 254–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matsushima, S. Collaboration in Architectural Design: An IT Perspective. Ph.D. Thesis, Harvard Design School, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Maher, M.L.; Simoff, S.J.; Cicognani, A. Understanding Virtual Design Studios; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Meng, X. Assessment framework for construction supply chain relationships: Development and evaluation. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2010, 28, 695–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mezher, T.; Nasrallah, W.; Alameddine, A. The management of technological innovation in Lebanese industry. Int. J. Arab Cult. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2008, 1, 5–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Molenaar, K.; Javernick-Will, A.; Bastias, G.A.; Meredith, A. Construction Project Peer Reviews as an Early Indicator of Project Success. J. Manag. Eng. 2013, 29, 327–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pilanawithana, N.M.; Sandanayake, Y.G. Positioning the facilities manager’s role throughout the building lifecycle. J. Facil. Manag. 2017, 15, 376–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ng, S.T.; Rose, T.M.; Mak, M.; Chen, S.E. Problematic issues associated with project partnering: The contractor perspective. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2002, 20, 437–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Phua, F.; Rowlinson, S. How important is cooperation to construction project success? A grounded empirical quantification. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2004, 11, 45–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahmawati, Y.; Anwar, N.; Utomo, C. A Concept of Successful Collaborative Design towards Sustainability of Project Development. Int. J. Soc. Hum. Sci. Eng. 2013, 7, 1042–1048. [Google Scholar]
- Rwamamara, R. Planning the Healthy Construction Workplace through Risk Assessment and Design Methods. Ph.D. Thesis, Civil, Mining, and Environmental Engineering, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Rutten, M.; Doree, A.; Halman, J. Innovation and inter-organizational cooperation: a synthesis of literature. Constr. Innov. 2009, 9, 285–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Serpell, A.; Ferrada, X.; Rubio, N.L. Fostering the effective usage of risk management in construction. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 2017, 23, 858–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, L.Y.; Tam, V. Implementation of environmental manage-ment in the Hong Kong construction industry. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2002, 20, 535–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tai, S.; Wang, Y.; Anumba, C.J. A survey on communications in large-scale construction projects in China. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2009, 16, 136–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thompson, J.D. Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory, 1st ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Tseng, S.M. The effects of information technology on knowledge management systems. Expert Syst. Appl. 2008, 35, 150–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Serrador, P.; Turner, R. The Relationship between Project Success and Project Efficiency. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2014, 25, 150–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zwikael, O.; Shimizu, K.; Globerson, S. Cultural differences in project management processes: A field study. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2005, 23, 454–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|In Terms of Team Organization||In Terms of Information Technology|
|1- Team structure||1- Electronic data transfer|
|2- Innovation||2- Design technology|
|3- Learning curve||3- IT for working at a distance (geographical boundaries)|
|Categories||Information technology||Team structure||Innovation||People||Roles and responsibilities||Learning curve||Common language|
|Summation of values||15||12||11||11||9||12||4|
© 2019 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).