Feasibility Study of an Automated Tool for Identifying the Implications of Changes in Construction Projects
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 134, Issue 2
Abstract
Because of the fragmented nature of project information, decisions on changes in construction projects are usually based on project design instead of project requirements. This research proposes a new approach for coping with changes in construction projects: A change control tool (CCT) that will identify implications of a change as soon as it is proposed. The tool will ensure that the stakeholders involved in the decision process in which change proposals are evaluated will know in advance if a change could cause the project to stray from its original goals, as expressed in the requirements. The proposed CCT uses the building program as a link between client requirements and the building design and traces the different relationships that exist between the requirements in the project. The relationships are traced using requirement traceability capabilities on the level of a specific space in the project and on the level of the entire project. A preliminary CCT model was developed and pilot studies implementing the model have been conducted. The pilot studies have given positive results, indicating that the CCT could identify the scope of the proposed changes’ implications.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Barrett, P. S., Hudson, J., and Stanley, C. (1999). “Good practice in briefing: The limits of rationality.” Autom. Constr., 8(6), 633–642.
Clarke, S., Harrison, W., Ossher, H., and Tarr, P. (1999). “Subject-oriented design: Towards improved alignment of requirements, design and code.” Proc., Conf. on Object-Oriented Programming: Systems, Languages, and Applications, ACM, New York, 325–339.
Froese, T., Grobler, F., and Yu, K. (1998). “Development of data standards for construction: An IAI perspective.” Proc., CIB Working Com-mission W78, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, 395–406.
Froese, T., Rankin, J., and Yu, K. (1997). “Project management application models and computer-assisted construction planning in total project systems.” Int. J. Constr. Inf. Tech., 5(1), 39–62.
Her Majesty’s Treasury. (1997). The Green Book: Appraisal and evaluation in central government, Stationary Office, London.
Ibrahim, M., and Krawczyk, R. (2003). “The level of knowledge of CAD objects within the building information model.” Proc., 2003 Annual Conf. of the Association for Computer-Aided Design in Architecture, 173–177.
Kamara, J. M., Anumba, C. J., and Evbuomwan, N. F. O. (2000). “Establishing and processing client requirements: A key aspect of concurrent engineering in construction.” Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 7(1), 15–28.
Kiviniemi, A., Fischer, M., Bazjanac, V., and Paulson, B. (2004). “Premiss: Requirements management interface to building product models: Problem definition and research issues.” CIFE Working Paper 92, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif.
Lee, S., Peña-Mora, F., and Park, M. (2006). “Reliability and stability buffering approach: Focusing on the issues of errors and changes in concurrent design and construction projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 132(5), 452–464.
Liston, K., Kunz, J., and Fischer, M. (2000). “Requirements and benefits of interactive information workspaces in construction.” Proc., 8th Int. Conf. on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering, ASCE, Reston, Va.
Lo, T. Y., Fung, I. W. H., and Tung, K. C. F. (2006). “Construction delays in Hong Kong civil engineering projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 132(6), 636–649.
Love, P. E. D., and Li, H. (2000). “Quantifying the causes and costs of rework in construction.” Constr. Manage. Econom., 18(4), 479–490.
Manavazhi, M. R., and Xunzhi, Z. (2001). “Productivity-oriented analysis of design revisions.” Constr. Manage. Econom., 19(4), 379–391.
Othman, A. A. E., Hassan, T. M., and Pasquire, C. L. (2004). “Drivers for dynamic brief development in construction.” Eng., Constr., Archit. Manage., 11(4), 248–258.
Ozkaya, I., and Akin, O. (2005). “Use of requirement traceability in collaborative design environments.” CoDesign, 1(3), 155–167.
Pennanen, A., Whelton, M., and Ballard, G. (2005). “Managing stakeholder expectations in facility management using workplace planning and commitment making techniques.” Facilities, 23(13/14), 542–557.
Russel, A., and Froese, T. (1997). “Challenges and a vision for computer-integrated management systems for medium-sized contractors.” Can. J. Civ. Eng., 24(2), 180–190.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 134 • Issue 2 • February 2008
Pages: 139 - 145
Copyright
© 2008 ASCE.
History
Received: Jun 29, 2006
Accepted: Feb 22, 2007
Published online: Feb 1, 2008
Published in print: Feb 2008
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.