FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2573632674> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2573632674 abstract "The focus of this research project is on the effectiveness of Collaborative Design activities of practitioners. More specifically, the research project focuses to interaction and knowledge exchange between two specific practitioners, Architects and Contractors, with a different educational background working together to create Integral Designs for roofs. Integral Designs are designs that can fulfill the requirements from the built environment and comprise realization-knowledge. The contribution of realization-knowledge in the design is necessary because it will prevent failures, realization costs and affects durability of the building and the built environment. The choice for roofs is based on the fact that roofs became an important location for the placement of ‘innovative’ renewable energy systems and solutions to improve the performance and sustainability of buildings. However, despite the growing importance of the roof to the building design, there is a lack of practical knowledge about roofs by Architects, and Collaborative Design scenes were practitioners, Architects and Contractors, work together and interact to exchange the necessary knowledge. So, a knowledge gap between design and construct exists that prevent the creation of Integral Designs for roofs. The Problem Definition for this research project is therefore formulated as follows: there is a lack in practice of Collaborative Design scenes were practitioners – Architects and Contractors – can interact and exchange object- and realization-knowledge working on design tasks to produce Integral Designs that comprise realization knowledge. The need for this research project is twofold: First; widely published studies on practice point to a general lack of Collaborative Design teams working on complex building projects. Second, when multidisciplinary Collaborative Design teams have worked on complex building projects, the final design concepts often proved inadequate to deliver an integral designed solution. The result of this unsatisfactory practice is the risk to an increasing amount of failure costs in the Dutch Building & Construction Industry. Recent studies of Collaborative Design teams in the Netherlands show that poor interaction and knowledge exchange are key factors contributing to the failures mentioned above. This is especially true for Collaborative Designs for roofs as shown by literature-studies and the Case Studies presented in this research project. Previous research and literature studies about Design Teams confirmed that workshops are suitable practical scenes for practitioners to be used for observation and analyses in executing semi-experimental research. The contention of this research project is that a specific scene for Collaborative Design - the Collaborative Design Workshop – leads; first: to interaction and knowledge exchange between the practitioners involved and second: stimulates interaction and knowledge exchange for Integral Designs for roofs by incorporating realization knowledge. The Design Research Methodology (DRM) is used for this research project to observe, analyze and find possibilities to stimulate interaction and knowledge exchange between Architects and Contractors in a Collaborative Design scene. The DRM is suitable for this research project because of its iterative nature that allows the researchers to improve their research method during the research process and producing a Technological Design as a result. A workshop with a specific setting: a Collaborative Design Workshop was developed and tested in a Practice Setting. Key-components were identified that affect the design activities in such a workshop: the Design Task, the Collaborative Design Team, the Practice Setting and the Design Support Tool. As Design Support Tool, the Morphological Overview (MO) is used because it provides an opportunity to design teams to collect, notate and discuss all aspects of the design task, like function-types and related sub-solutions with different levels of abstraction, in a methodical and structured way. During the DRM research process, which is executed in four stages, analyzing formats were developed for the data of observation of the design activities and the interaction and knowledge exchange between the two practitioners: Architects and Contractors. The output of the Collaborative Design Workshops was evaluated with the participants using specific evaluation forms and questionnaires developed by the researchers. This evaluation took place directly after the workshop and six months later to observe the affect of the workshop and the use of the MO on Architects and Contractors in practice. Based on the outcomes of analyzes and evaluations the, so called: Definitive Collaborative Design Workshop was defined and finally tested in the last stage of the DRM. In this final stage also the four analyzing and evaluation formats were tested: the Video Observation Format, the Video Interaction Format, the Morphological Analyzing Format and Evaluation Formats. The results of this research project show that a variety of media was used by both Architects and Contractors throughout the different design-task settings in the Definitive Collaborative Design Workshops. To determine the type of knowledge that is necessary a reference-list was compiled based on the competence-profiles of the practitioners. The outcomes show a wide variety of objectand realization-knowledge that is notated by the practitioners in such a Collaborative Design scene, notated as so called function-types and sub-solutions related to the reference-list. The outcomes show that realization-knowledge was used by notations in the MO of both practitioners: Architect and Contractor in three out of seventeen Collaborative Teams. This indicates that the MO, when being loosely introduced in a design team, is suitable as a supportive tool to stimulate interaction and knowledge exchange however its effect decreases after using the MO for the second time. Regarding collaboration aspects, the outcomes show that in some Design Task Settings the Architects play a more dominant role compared to the Contractors. However, the analyses of the Contractors role in design tasks showed they could communicate a substantial amount of function-types and subsolutions in all settings. Significant about this is that although the Architect’s notations showed a majority, the Contractors could put forward additional notations. These outcomes indicate and provide some evidence that the developed Collaborative Design Workshop can provide for Architects and Contractors, an effective scene to interact and exchange realization-knowledge besides objectknowledge. The final result of this research project is the Technological Design as presented: the Collaborative Design Workshop and the CD Protocol for its use. This CD Protocol consists of two parts: The first part concerns the organizing and management aspects for executing the Collaborative Design Workshop. The second part concerns the description for the observation and analyzes to execute and the judgment of the outcomes of the analyzes using the formats that are developed. These formats are: the VOF (Video Observation Format), the VIF (Video Interaction Format), the MAF (Morphological Analyzing Format) and Evaluation Formats. Finally it might be concluded that the outcomes of this research project, using the DRM and a design support, provide evidence that, by the application of the Technological Design guided by the CD Protocol, it is possible to stimulate interaction and knowledge exchange – especially realizationknowledge – between Architects and Contractors to realize Integral Designs in the early design phase." @default.
• W2573632674 created "2017-01-26" @default.
• W2573632674 creator A5011544438 @default.
• W2573632674 date "2013-01-01" @default.
• W2573632674 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2573632674 title "Collaborative design support : workshops to stimulate interaction and knowledge exchange between practitioners" @default.
• W2573632674 doi "https://doi.org/10.6100/ir750600" @default.
• W2573632674 hasPublicationYear "2013" @default.
• W2573632674 type Work @default.
• W2573632674 sameAs 2573632674 @default.
• W2573632674 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2573632674 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2573632674 hasAuthorship W2573632674A5011544438 @default.
• W2573632674 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2573632674 hasConcept C56739046 @default.
• W2573632674 hasConceptScore W2573632674C41008148 @default.
• W2573632674 hasConceptScore W2573632674C56739046 @default.
• W2573632674 hasLocation W25736326741 @default.
• W2573632674 hasOpenAccess W2573632674 @default.
• W2573632674 hasPrimaryLocation W25736326741 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W1474252150 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W1492014683 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W151715021 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W1524807772 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W1804415306 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W1976558299 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W2075781225 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W2101944855 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W2140236679 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W2162327247 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W2185050314 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W234825850 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W2467650415 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W2518222433 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W2746467373 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W2913502346 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W3086087608 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W3122601906 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W2111457635 @default.
• W2573632674 hasRelatedWork W2951916792 @default.
• W2573632674 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2573632674 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2573632674 magId "2573632674" @default.
• W2573632674 workType "article" @default.