Methodological Pluralism: Investigation into Construction Engineering and Management Research Methods
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 146, Issue 3
Abstract
The quantitative methodological–based debate in the 1990s in construction engineering and management (CEM) research resulted in researchers considering alternative methodologies. However, a follow up study in 2007 established that CEM remained dominated by quantitative research, with only 8.4% of the studies surveyed exclusively using qualitative methods. A decade on, this remains a challenge, and an update is overdue. Hence, an investigation to establish the current position regarding methodological pluralism within CEM research was conducted. A total number of 4,166 articles spanning from 2000 to 2017 were examined from three reputable journals and a Tier 1 conference. The articles were categorized by the research methods used. Overwhelmingly, it was found there are acceptable multiepistemologies within CEM research, and there is a shift from a dominance of quantitative to an increased utilization of qualitative methodologies, and the use of mixed methodologies has shown hopeful progression. The demography of the data was also analyzed and discussed. It was concluded that there is an increasing acceptance of methodological pluralism, and CEM and its industry are on the verge of experiencing a competitive advantage, which could result in improved performances with utilization of balanced research methodologies (if applied appropriately).
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data generated or analyzed during the study are available from the corresponding author by request. Information about the Journal’s data-sharing policy can be found here: http://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001263.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank all the senior methodologists in CEM for their constructive feedback received during the evaluation stage to improve this submission; the authors are grateful.
References
Agyekum-Mensah, G. 2013. “The development of an innovative sustainable total planning and control system for construction projects.” Ph.D. thesis, School of Architecture, Design and the Built Environment, Nottingham Trent Univ.
Agyekum-Mensah, G., and A. D. Knight. 2017. “The professionals’ perspective on the causes of project delay in the construction industry.” Eng. Constr. Archit. Manage. 24 (5): 828–841. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-03-2016-0085.
AlSehaimi, A., L. Koskela, and P. Tzortzopoulos. 2012. “Need for alternative research approaches in construction management: Case of delay studies.” J. Manage. Eng. 29 (4): 407–413. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000148.
Azhar, S., I. Ahmad, and M. K. Sein. 2009. “Action research as a proactive research method for construction engineering and management.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 136 (1): 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000081.
Bijleveld, F. R., and A. G. Dorée. 2014. “Method-based learning: A case in the asphalt construction industry.” Constr. Manage. Econ. 32 (7–8): 665–681. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2014.887211.
Bowen, G. A. 2009. “Document analysis as a qualitative research method.” Qual. Res. J. 9 (2): 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027.
Bresnen, M. 2013. “Insights on site: Research into construction project organizations.” In Doing research in organizations, 44–62. New York: Routledge.
Bryman, A., and E. Bell. 2003a. “Breaking down the quantitative/qualitative divide.” Bus. Res. Methods 2 (1): 465–478.
Bryman, A., and E. Bell. 2003b. Business research methods. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Bryman, A., and E. Bell. 2011. Research in business studies, 3rd ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
CIOB (Chartered Institute of Building). 2016. “Productivity in construction: Creating a framework for the industry to thrive.” Accessed January 7, 2017. https://policy.ciob.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/CIOB-Productivity-report-2016-V4_single.pdf.
Creswell, J. W. 2014. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dainty, A. 2008. “Methodological pluralism in construction management research.” In Advanced research methods in the built environment, edited by A. Knight and L. Ruddock, 1–12. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Dainty, A. R. J. 2007a. “A call for methodological pluralism in built environment research.” In Proc., 3rd Scottish Conf. for Postgraduate Researchers in the Built & Natural Environment, edited by C. O. Egbu and M. K. L. Tong, 1–10. Glasgow, UK: Glasgow Caledonian Univ.
Dainty, A. R. J. 2007b. “A review and critique of construction management research methods.” In Proc., Construction Management and Economics 25th Anniversary Conf., edited by W. Hughes, 1533–1543. Reading, UK: Univ. of Reading.
Dainty, R., R. Bagilhole, and R. Neale. 1997. “Analytical strategies for dealing with qualitative data.” Constr. Manage. Res. 2 (1): 15–17.
Dopson, S., L. Fitzgerald, E. Ferlie, J. Gabbay, and L. Locock. 2002. “No magic targets changing clinical practice to become more evidence based.” Health Care Manage. Rev. 27 (3): 35–47. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004010-200207000-00005.
Easterby-Smith, M. P., R. Thorpe, and P. Jackson. 2008. Management research: Theory and research. London: Sage.
Easterby-Smith, M., R. Thorpe, and P. R. Jackson. 2012. Management research. 4th ed. London: Sage.
Fellows, R., and A. Liu. 2015. Research methods for construction. 4th ed. New York: Wiley.
Gunning, J. G., and J. I. C. Hanna. 2001. “The application of risk management principles to crisis management in construction.” In Vol. 1 of Proc., 17th Annual ARCOM Conf., edited by A. Akintoye, 815–824. Salford, UK: Univ. of Salford.
Hallowell, M. R., and J. A. Gambatese. 2009. “Qualitative research: Application of the Delphi method to CEM research.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 136 (1): 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000137.
Harty, C. 2008. “Implementing innovation in construction: Contexts, relative boundedness and actor-network theory.” Constr. Manage. Econ. 26 (10): 1029–1041. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190802298413.
Harty, C., and R. Leiringer. 2017. “The futures of construction management research.” Constr. Manage. Econ. 35 (7): 392–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2017.1306089.
Hughes, W., ed. 2008. “Past, present and future.” In Proc., Inaugural Construction Management and Economic ‘Past, Present and Future’ Conf., 1846. Reading, UK: Univ. of Reading.
Javernick-Will, A. 2018. “Rationale: The necessary ingredient for contributions to theory and practice.” Constr. Manage. Econ. 36 (8): 423–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2018.1487910.
Knight, A., and L. Ruddock. 2008. Advance research method in built environment. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Mootanah, D. P. 1998. “Developing an integrated risk and value management framework for construction project management.” In Vol 2. of Proc., 14th Annual Conf. of the Association of Research in Construction Management, 448–457. Reading, UK: Reading Univ.
Radosavljevic, M. 2001. “Autopoietic organization of firm: an illustration for the construction industry.” In Vol. 1 of Proc., 17th Annual ARCOM Conf., edited by A. Akintoye, 121–131. Salford, UK: Univ. of Salford.
Reichstein, T., A. J. Salter, and D. M. Gann. 2005. “Last among equals: A comparison of innovation in construction, services and manufacturing in the UK.” Constr. Manage. Econ. 23 (6): 631–644. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190500126940.
Robinson, H., and P. Carrillo. 2001. “Linking knowledge management to business performance in construction organisations.” Accessed June 15, 2017. http://www.arcom.ac.uk.
Robson, C. 2011. Real world research. 3rd ed. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Runeson, G. 1997. “The role of theory in construction management research: Comment.” Constr. Manage. Econ. 15 (3): 299–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/014461997373033.
Schweber, L. 2015. “Putting theory to work: The use of theory in construction research.” Constr. Manage. Econ. 33 (10): 840–860. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2015.1133918.
SCImago Journal Rank. 2017. “Journal rankings on building and construction.” Accessed July 1, 2017. http://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php?category=2215.
Seymour, D., D. Crook, and J. Rooke. 1997. “The role of theory in construction management: A call for debate.” Constr. Manage. Econ. 15 (1): 117–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/014461997373169.
Seymour, D., and J. A. Rooke. 1995. “The culture of the industry and the culture of research.” Constr. Manage. Econ. 13 (6): 511–523. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446199500000059.
Treloar, G. J., P. E. D. Love, O. O. Faniran, and U. Iyer-Raniga. 2000. “A hybrid life cycle assessment method for construction.” Constr. Manage. Econ. 18 (1): 5–9.
Van de Ven, A. H. 2007. Engaged scholarship: A guide for organizational and social research. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Volker, L. 2018. “Looking out to look in: Inspiration from social sciences for construction management research.” Constr. Manage. Econ. 37 (1): 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2018.1473619.
Zou, P. X., R. Y. Sunindijo, and A. R. Dainty. 2014. “A mixed methods research design for bridging the gap between research and practice in construction safety.” Saf. Sci. 70: 316–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2014.07.005.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 146 • Issue 3 • March 2020
Copyright
©2020 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Feb 26, 2019
Accepted: Aug 20, 2019
Published online: Jan 8, 2020
Published in print: Mar 1, 2020
Discussion open until: Jun 8, 2020
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.