Abstracts – Browse Results
Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 18 results ...
Axon, C J, Bright, S J, Dixon, T J, Janda, K B and Kolokotroni, M (2012) Building communities: reducing energy use in tenanted commercial property. Building Research & Information, 40(04), 461-72.
Berker, T and Bharathi, K (2012) Energy and buildings research: challenges from the new production of knowledge. Building Research & Information, 40(04), 473-80.
Bourdic, L and Salat, S (2012) Building energy models and assessment systems at the district and city scales: a review. Building Research & Information, 40(04), 518-26.
Calderon, C and Keirstead, J (2012) Modelling frameworks for delivering low-carbon cities: advocating a normalized practice. Building Research & Information, 40(04), 504-17.
Galardo, L and Trottier, M (2022) How supervisor, co-worker, and spousal social support influences the experience of workload and work-family conflict: results from a survey of construction workers in Québec. Construction Management and Economics, 40(04), 331–42.
Gansmo, H J (2012) Municipal planning of a sustainable neighbourhood: action research and stakeholder dialogue. Building Research & Information, 40(04), 493-503.
Grenzfurtner, W, Rudberg, M, Mayrhofer, R, Loike, K and Gronalt, M (2022) Performance measurement and management practices of on-site activities in industrialized housebuilding. Construction Management and Economics, 40(04), 239–53.
Gupta, R and Gregg, M (2012) Appraisal of UK funding frameworks for energy research in housing. Building Research & Information, 40(04), 446-60.
Khalef, R, Ali, G G, El-adaway, I H and Gad, G M (2022) Managing construction projects impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic: a contractual perspective. Construction Management and Economics, 40(04), 313–30.
Koch, A, Girard, S and McKoen, K (2012) Towards a neighbourhood scale for low- or zero-carbon building projects. Building Research & Information, 40(04), 527-37.
Kohler, N and Hassler, U (2012) Alternative scenarios for energy conservation in the building stock. Building Research & Information, 40(04), 401-16.
Lehtovaara, J, Seppänen, O and Peltokorpi, A (2022) Improving construction management with decentralised production planning and control: exploring the production crew and manager perspectives through a multi-method approach. Construction Management and Economics, 40(04), 254–77.
Li, B and Yao, R (2012) Building energy efficiency for sustainable development in China: challenges and opportunities. Building Research & Information, 40(04), 417-31.
Schweber, L and Leiringer, R (2012) Beyond the technical: a snapshot of energy and buildings research. Building Research & Information, 40(04), 481-92.
Skea, J (2012) Research and evidence needs for decarbonisation in the built environment: a UK case study. Building Research & Information, 40(04), 432-45.
Summerfield, A J and Lowe, R (2012) Challenges and future directions for energy and buildings research. Building Research & Information, 40(04), 391-400.
Vahabi, A, Nasirzadeh, F and Mills, A (2022) Influence of briefing clarity on construction projects: a fuzzy hybrid simulation approach. Construction Management and Economics, 40(04), 278–95.
van der Meer, J, Hartmann, A, van der Horst, A and Dewulf, G (2022) Raising risk awareness in multi-criteria design decisions for integrated design and construction tenders. Construction Management and Economics, 40(04), 296–312.
- Type: Journal Article
- Keywords: Risk awareness; infrastructure tender; multi-criteria decision analysis; decision making;
- ISBN/ISSN: 0144-6193
- URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2022.2030063
- Abstract:
Awareness of design risks is essential for preparing integrated design and construction tenders as decisions in this phase can have serious consequences once the project is awarded. The practice of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) promises to support contractors in dealing with risks in the decision-making process. However, due to limited time and resources in a tender, risks involved in design alternatives are often overlooked and the selection of alternatives is mainly based on the decision-makers’ knowledge and experience. This raises the question how decision makers can become aware of the risks in the tender phase of projects. Following a design science research approach three interventions to raise risk awareness are identified and validated in the context of an infrastructure tender in the Netherlands. These interventions are (1) a general list of defined criteria to identify those criteria that correspond with the characteristics of the tender; (2) mapping identified project risks on criteria and assign a bandwidth score; (3) evaluation of the quality of the decision process by scoring elements of decision quality. Based on these interventions three design rules are proposed to increase the transparency of decision problems and the understanding of choices and, by doing so, create awareness for risks involved in design alternatives.