Managing the process of interdisciplinary design: identifying, enforcing, and anticipating decision-making frames

Žerjav, Vedran; Hartmann, T.; Achammer, Christoph

doi:10.1080/17452007.2013.775106

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This would suggest that the architect was setting the context of the interactions, mediated by means of a drawing as a representation of the spatial layout for the facility. The architect's role in this specific workshop can, as a result, be formulated as the activity of setting the decision-making frame for subsequent critical evaluation and problem-solving (Zerjav et al, 2013).We moreover suggest that the interplay between cognitive framing and leadership-as-practice is yet another notion that arises from this study and deserves further conceptual and empirical work.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

A leadership-as-practice perspective on design in architecture, engineering and construction projects: interaction analysis of a collaborative workshop

Žerjav¹,

Hartmann²,

Amstel³

2014

Engineering Project Organization Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper proposes an alternative perspective on the role of leadership in the context of collaborative practices in architecture, engineering and construction design. While most of current leadership literature is focused on outstanding individuals with abilities to influence others, the aim of this study is to focus on leadership as a set of emergent interactive practices. To this end, the paper presents a video-based interaction analysis of a collaborative design workshop for a medical imaging centre in the Netherlands. Findings suggest that leadership-as-practice emerged through specific patterns of domain knowledge ownership, frequency of interactions, actor responsiveness and cross-disciplinary knowledge brokering. The paper calls for further empirical studies in the domain of interaction-focused leadership practices.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

A leadership-as-practice perspective on design in architecture, engineering and construction projects: interaction analysis of a collaborative workshop

Žerjav¹,

Hartmann²,

Amstel³

2014

Engineering Project Organization Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More recently, design has been defined through the concepts of cognitive problem-framing leading up to the corresponding problem-solving activity (Dorst, 2011). Drawing upon this body of design research, we can talk about design activity in practical terms as a combination of problem formulation, solving and decision-making practices leading up to distinct courses of action on projects (Zerjav et al, 2013).…”

Section: Making Sense Of Design Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design boundary dynamics in infrastructure projects: Issues of resource allocation, path dependency and problem-solving

Žerjav

2015

International Journal of Project Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to their complexity and high social impact, urban infrastructure projects often face challenges in managing the design decision-making processes across disparate disciplinary and knowledge domain boundaries. This paper introduces the notion of design boundary dynamics to describe the various cross-boundary coordination phenomena associated with organising the design of infrastructure projects. Taking a practicebased theoretical stance, the paper presents findings of qualitative research on the nature and genesis of design boundaries and their relation to the strategic decision-making on a transportation infrastructure project. Findings illustrate the entangled processes, through which the disciplinary, knowledge-domain and stage-based design boundaries emerged as a result of unfolding project practices. Paper identifies the key role of resource allocation constraints, path dependency of project decisions, and problem-solving nature of design and concludes with strategic recommendations for upstream operational integration to mitigate the impact of design boundary dynamics on infrastructure projects.

show abstract

“…Lawson (2010) outlined a decision support tool called ASPECT—“A Staff and Patient Environment Calibration Tool” believing that the “process of briefing [ programming ] is itself interactive…and current thinking suggests that problem and solution emerge together in a good design process rather than one totally preceding the other” (Lawson, 2010, p. 104). Zerjav, Hartmann, and Achammer (2013) reviewing a complex railway station project proposed that reflective practice assists in making decisions in an interdisciplinary design team setting, especially where many complex issues require resolution, with issues “framed” consecutively as manageable pieces of work that move a project forward. It seems likely that the user group process supports similar framing of the major issues that drive a healthcare project toward a design solution.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interdisciplinary User Groups and the Design of Healthcare Facilities

Carthey

2019

HERD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: This Australian research explores how “user group” participants from diverse professional discipline backgrounds understand, define, perform their roles, and assess the outcomes of the healthcare design process. Background: Part of the design process in Australia and New Zealand, the purpose of interdisciplinary user group consultation is to design the best healthcare facilities possible within the parameters set by project clients and funding bodies. Method: An online survey was used to explore how user group participants viewed the process, including how well informed they felt they were about their role/s in it, its success in achieving specific outcomes for their project, and how they felt their project client, owner, or funding body assessed these same issues. It included both closed and open-ended questions, and data were then analyzed using an interpretative methodology by an architect researcher based in practice. Results: Emergent issues identified include governance of the process, knowledge asymmetries between participants, missed opportunities for innovation, composition and workloads of user groups, and the quality of resources available to guide the process. Conclusions: The interdisciplinary user group process could be improved, and future research will look at how drawing on participatory design methods used in sectors such as urban planning may support the development of new techniques for conducting user groups.

show abstract

Managing the process of interdisciplinary design: identifying, enforcing, and anticipating decision-making frames

Cited by 13 publications

References 24 publications

A leadership-as-practice perspective on design in architecture, engineering and construction projects: interaction analysis of a collaborative workshop

A leadership-as-practice perspective on design in architecture, engineering and construction projects: interaction analysis of a collaborative workshop

Design boundary dynamics in infrastructure projects: Issues of resource allocation, path dependency and problem-solving

Interdisciplinary User Groups and the Design of Healthcare Facilities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About