EDITOR’S NOTE

At a recent publications committee meeting, discussion focused on the primary mission of the Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities (the Journal), and the desirability of reaffirming its intended scope, content, and outcome. The audience of the Journal is interdisciplinary and the majority of our readers is practice oriented. Manuscripts written for the Journal should address this audience, and must be written so as to be useful to this audience.

The principal purpose of the Journal is to disseminate information on failures and performance deficiencies of constructed facilities. The term “failures” in this context may mean catastrophic events, but also includes any performance deficiency from which a significant lesson can be learned. Both the technical causes and procedural causes of failures are of interest. Procedural causes include human errors in design, construction, and/or operation that allow the failures to occur.

The Journal welcomes manuscripts that deal with failures, methods of investigation of failures, special techniques for failure investigations, reconstruction and repair, and issues of ethics. Also of interest are manuscripts on topics related to litigation or dispute resolution, construction insurance, and construction practices that could lead to or have led to failures. Manuscripts discussing risk management and failure prevention techniques are also encouraged. In addition, manuscripts on monitoring the performance of existing facilities and maintenance of the infrastructure are within the intended scope of the Journal.

The editorial review board for the Journal is interdisciplinary. While the Journal is published by ASCE, a number of other professional organizations are represented on the editorial review board and our readership. The supplementary guidelines given below reflect the types of manuscripts desired by the Journal’s editorial review board. These supplementary guidelines are divided into three principal sections:

The supplementary guidelines are for use by authors and reviewers. All authors and reviewers should carefully consider these criteria. It is our intention to provide prominent links to these guidelines on the Journal’s Web page in Editorial Manager.

The most important factor an author should consider is the intended audience. As stated earlier, the audience of the Journal is interdisciplinary and includes many practice-oriented readers. The Journal’s Editorial Manager software asks each author and reviewer to indicate his/her areas of interest and expertise when the author or reviewer first registers. In parallel, when an author submits a manuscript, the author should specify, in the transmittal letter, the area of interest or specialization of the audience he/she expects to reach. This statement can also be included in the introduction to the manuscript. Reviewers are selected by the editor to match the areas of interest or specialization cited by the author.

The author should also consider the practice significance of the manuscript. The author should stipulate in the manuscript, either in the introduction or in a separate section, the specific practice significance of the manuscript. Pure research manuscripts should be submitted to other journals. However, research manuscripts with practical applications are welcome. In these manuscripts, the research should be summarized and explained, with basic references only. The emphasis of the manuscript should be the practical application.

Important statements regarding theory, fact, or opinion need to be supported by more than references, except when such theory, fact, or opinion is broadly known throughout the audience the author is attempting to reach. The author should summarize the essential aspects of the references, with pertinent formulas, so the audience will understand what is being presented without having to refer to the references themselves. Lengthy lists of references that are not essential to explain the theory, fact, or opinion should not be included.

Manuscripts are expected to provide new information, innovation, or original thinking. Manuscripts consisting only of literature reviews or research surveys, without original thinking or original research should not be submitted.

Authors bear the responsibility, after manuscripts have been accepted for publication, to verify that their photographs and figures are submitted with sufficiently high resolution, in grayscale, and with proper contrast and brightness. Authors also need to specify the minimum size that is acceptable for their figures. When the author receives the print proof during production, the author must verify that the size and appearance of the figures are satisfactory. (Note in this regard that once the editor and reviewers accept the manuscript, it is no longer under their control. Communications during this period are between the author and production staff.) Color figures may be published in the print version of the Journal, but the substantial cost of color reproduction is charged to the author. Authors may choose to submit two sets of figures, one set in grayscale for the print version, and one set in color for the online version. (There is no cost for color in the online version.)

The quality of manuscripts in many cases can be improved by the contributions of thoughtful and constructive reviewers. Even in the best of manuscripts, the author may not realize that certain aspects are unclear, or should be further developed. A critical review can point out these deficiencies.

A key purpose of the Journal is to provide a vehicle for dissemination of information on the causes and costs of performance problems in constructed facilities so that the profession may learn from its failures and the incidence of future problems may be mitigated. Implicit in the concept of learning from failures is examination of not only the technical causes of failures, but also the procedural causes (the human errors or shortcomings in the design and construction process that allow failures to occur). Addressing procedural issues is a sensitive task, but one that is of critical importance, as procedural issues appear to account for a large proportion of performance problems. However, if inaccurate information is carelessly disseminated, not only will the Journal fail to fulfill its purpose, but more important, the reputations of innocent parties may be damaged. The publications committee recognizes that complete and totally unbiased accuracy of findings cannot be ensured in every case. What is required, however, is the highest possible professional and ethical standards in disseminating information on failures, and an open discussion following publication of the manuscript. It is, in part, the responsibility of the author and reviewer to ensure that these standards are met.

The cornerstones of a professional and ethical approach to writing about specific failure case histories are:

The Journal includes manuscripts on individual performance case histories, as well as generic failure related topics. Case history manuscripts should contain, as appropriate, the following information:

Discussion of the procedural causes of a failure should be included wherever possible, but only when founded on an appropriate investigation. Authors should carefully discriminate between fact and speculation. Speculation or biased points of view will not be knowingly permitted. Names of individuals or firms involved in the design and construction, or in litigation, should not be included. Product names should be included only when necessary to the findings. Methods of repair of failed or damaged structures are of interest, but only as a secondary part of a manuscript on a reported performance problem.

Manuscripts may address any aspect of performance problems in constructed facilities. They need not be restricted to civil engineering issues. They should be written to address the interdisciplinary and practice orientation of the readership. Minor failures, near failures, and serviceability deficiencies may be included, as well as the more dramatic catastrophic collapse incidents. Manuscripts on failures caused by extreme events (e.g., hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and earthquakes) are considered on a case-by-case basis, particularly if they focus on performance of a specific facility or type of construction. General discussions of analytical issues or design strategies related to extreme events may be more appropriate in other publications focused on natural or human-caused hazards.

Reviewers should bear in mind that the format of the review comment submittal is a standard format used for all ASCE journals. When a manuscript reports on a case history, the reviewer must carefully examine the purpose and procedure of the investigation reported, to ensure, insofar as possible, the accuracy and impartiality of findings. Consider the following supplementary questions specific to the Journal when presenting your review comments:A negative response to any of these questions should influence your review decision.

Landmark historic failures illustrate the connection between forensic investigations and advances in engineering design theory and practice. Manuscripts that review such failures are useful to educators and to the profession. These manuscripts should conform with the ASCE general instructions to authors and with supplementary guidelines for the Journal. Specifically, manuscripts presented on historic failures should address the guidelines that follow.