posted on 2013-02-18, 10:17authored byDerek ThomsonDerek Thomson, Simon Austin, Grant R. Mills, Hannah Devine-Wright
Purpose: For over a decade, UK public sector construction policy and industry rhetoric has
advanced a value agenda that advocates the development of project-specific understanding of
value. This study examines construction practitioners’ collective cognition of value to determine
how their facilitation may bias this intent. A value continuum is contributed.
Design/methodology/approach: Critique of the Design Quality Indicator (the primary value
agenda instrument) finds that it overemphasises objective value, confirming the need for
practitioners to help stakeholders develop broader understanding of value. The freelisting
technique of cultural anthropology is used to model practitioners’ collective cognition of value
and, thus, their bias over this process. The standard freelisting protocol is followed.
Findings: Practitioners’ collective understanding is found to comprise related concepts that
resolve to a one dimensional ‘value continuum’ with subjective and objective terminals and which
fully embodies value agenda intent. In contrast, the concepts articulated by the Design Quality
Indicator are biased towards the objective value continuum terminal, confirming the need for
practitioners to facilitate stakeholder exploration of the full continuum if the value agenda is to be
fully addressed.
Research limitations/implications: The value continuum only reflects the views of a small but
typical sample of construction practitioners. Further work must characterise model
completeness and consistency through the supply chain.
Originality/value: This is the first work to derive an empirical model of construction practitioners’
collective understanding of value. It achieves this by the novel linking of a cognitive modelling
technique from cultural anthropology with an emic interpretation of the results.
History
School
Architecture, Building and Civil Engineering
Citation
THOMSON, D.S. ... et al, 2013. Practitioner understanding of value in the UK Building Sector. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 20 (3), pp.214 - 231.