Editor’s Note

Although this journal includes papers on generic topics related to failures and performance problems, the most interesting and useful articles are often case studies based on investigations of specific failures in actual constructed projects. The Publications Committee encourages the submission of such manuscripts, but we request authors to be mindful of the guidelines used to review them. Our purpose in publishing papers on specific case studies is to focus on the lessons that can be learned from an unfortunate event. This can be done in an ethical manner, but only if certain guidelines are carefully followed. When the journal was established in 1986, Glenn R. Bell proposed a set of guidelines that were adopted by the Publications Committee. From time to time it is appropriate to remind our readers of these guidelines, and I have again drawn much of this Editor’s Note from Glenn Bell’s original document.

The ASCE Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities deviates from other ASCE journals in two significant respects:

A key purpose of the journal is to provide a vehicle for dissemination of information on the causes of performance problems of 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 the 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 errors is a sensitive task, but one that the Publications Committee feels strongly is important to address, because procedural errors appear to account for a large fraction of performance problems. However, if inaccurate information (or even accurate information) is carelessly disseminated, not only will the journal fail to fulfill its purpose, but more importantly, the reputations of innocent parties may be damaged.

The Publications Committee recognizes that complete accuracy of findings cannot be ensured in every case. Required, however, are the highest possible professional and ethical standards in disseminating information on failures. It is, in part, up to both the author and our reviewers to ensure that these standards are met.

The cornerstones of a professional and ethical approach to dealing with failure are the following:

The Publications Committee recognizes that it may be impossible to completely remove bias from the discussion of a failure. Honest and competent investigators may not reach the same conclusions from the facts in the case. It is entirely possible for reasonable and honest people to disagree. This is why open discussion and dissenting points of view are strongly encouraged in this journal. The Publications Committee is quite liberal in accepting Discussions submitted to the journal. All readers are encouraged to submit Discussions, either to express a contrary view or to further extend the topic of the published paper.

Articles on specific performance case studies should contain, as appropriate, the following information:

Discussion of the procedural cause 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 allowed. 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 essential to the findings. Methods of repair of failed or damaged structures are of interest, but only as a secondary part of an article on a reported performance problem.

Articles may address any aspect of performance problems in constructed facilities. They need not be restricted to civil engineering issues. They should be written with the interdisciplinary audience of the journal in mind. All aspects of performance problems may be addressed, including minor failures, near failures, and serviceability problems, as well as catastrophic failures. Articles on failures caused by extreme natural hazards (e.g., hurricanes, tornados, floods, and earthquakes) are considered on a case-by-case basis, but may be more appropriate for inclusion in other publications, ones that focus on specific natural hazards.

Reviewers of manuscripts for the journal are asked to look for conformance to the general requirements of the ASCE Author’s Guide. In addition, when the article reports on a specific case study, the reviewer must examine the purpose and procedure of the investigation reported to ensure, insofar as possible, the accuracy and impartiality of findings. The following supplementary questions specific to the Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities are carefully considered by the reviewers:If these guidelines are carefully considered by the author, and the opportunity to submit dissenting viewpoints is respected, the valuable lessons inherent in a failure can be ethically communicated to the design and construction community. The goal of this journal is not to criticize the unfortunate parties involved with an unfortunate event, but rather to enhance the process of learning the lessons. I would be pleased to discuss potential manuscripts at any time. I can be contacted by mail: Kenneth L. Carper, School of Architecture and Construction Management, College of Engineering & Architecture, P.O. Box 642220, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-2220; by phone: (509) 335-1229; by FAX: (509) 335-6132; or by email: [email protected].