Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2018-10
  • 2018-11
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2019-12
  • 2020-01
  • 2020-02
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-04
  • 2020-05
  • 2020-06
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2020-09
  • 2020-10
  • 2020-11
  • 2020-12
  • 2021-01
  • 2021-02
  • 2021-03
  • 2021-04
  • 2021-05
  • 2021-06
  • 2021-07
  • 2021-08
  • 2021-09
  • 2021-10
  • 2021-11
  • 2021-12
  • 2022-01
  • 2022-02
  • 2022-03
  • 2022-04
  • 2022-05
  • 2022-06
  • 2022-07
  • 2022-08
  • 2022-09
  • 2022-10
  • 2022-11
  • 2022-12
  • 2023-01
  • 2023-02
  • 2023-03
  • 2023-04
  • 2023-05
  • 2023-06
  • 2023-07
  • 2023-08
  • 2023-09
  • 2023-10
  • 2023-11
  • 2023-12
  • 2024-01
  • 2024-02
  • 2024-03
  • 2024-04
  • 2024-05

    • Under the Managing the Stakeholders component the surveyed p

    2018-10-22

    Under the Managing the Stakeholders component, the surveyed professionals ranked Stakeholder Identification and Management of Requirements as the two most important functions for their architectural firms (4.31 and 4.23, respectively). These activities were followed by Educating Clients and Guarding their Interests (4.20), Managing Sustainability (4.10), Public Relations Management (4.05), Conflict Management (4.02), Value Management (3.97), Stakeholder Analysis (3.95), Stakeholder Involvement (3.86), and Managing the Social Responsibility of the Firm (3.77). Despite the fact that these managerial functions have varying degrees of importance, they mass calculator still maintain a high degree of importance. The relative importance indexes for these items are shown in Figure 7. Under the Managing the AM Learning component, the surveyed professionals ranked the elements in the following order: Business Realization (4.29), Reality Simulation (4.13), Industry Feedback (4.13), Academic Staff (4.07), Management Inclusion (4.03), Continuous Professional Development Programs (4.00), Multidisciplinary Collaboration (3.95), Interventions of Professional Bodies (3.58), Analogical Comparisons (3.53), and Admission and Graduation Issues (3.05). All of the proposed strategies had relatively high degrees of importance ranging between 3.5 and 4.29, except for Admission and Graduation (3.05). The relative importance indexes for these items are shown in Figure 8. The importance of all AM components was ranked by calculating the mean importance indexes of the four components of AM using Eq. (2). The results are shown in Figure 9.(adopted from Kirk, 2008; Healey, 2011) where: Figure 9 confirms the high and relatively similar degrees of importance of the four components of AM. Managing the Business, highlighted by Brunton et al. (1964) and Emmitt (1999a), was the most important component of the AMTF (4.27), followed by Managing the Stakeholder (4.05), Managing Learning (3.88), and Managing the Projects (3.09). The results for the Stakeholders and Learning components confirmed that recent AM publications shifted their focus toward other components that had to be realized and captured within AM. Similarly, in the questionnaire survey, the respondents were asked to state their degree of agreement with some issues associated with the nature and application of AM. These issues were provided in the form of textual statements. The respondents were asked to indicate their degree of agreement with each issue on a five-point scale (5=strongly agree and 1=strongly disagree). The majority of the surveyed principals (84%) expressed agreement that the decision to adopt AM should be taken at the strategic level of the firm (Figure 10). Similarly, 67.3% confirmed the view of Emmitt (1999a), who suggested that adopting AM would improve the competitiveness of its users (Figure 11) and was associated with the continuous improvement of the architectural office (79.8%, Figure 12). Around 67.9% of the respondents believed that AM can be utilized by any architectural firm regardless of size (Figure 13). This result is in accordance with those of Emmitt (1999a) and Littlefield (2005), who suggested that despite the size of their organizations (measured by the number of employees), architects could adopt and apply AM successfully in their practices. The majority of the surveyed principals agreed that the successful application of AM in practice would require an effective leadership (81.1%, Figure 14), strong organizational culture (75.8%, Figure 15), effective communication (89.5%, Figure 16), and effective collaboration (74.5%, Figure 17). These results confirm the findings from the qualitative testing stages of the framework and are consistent with those reported by Emmitt (1999a, b, 2007). The overall feedback from the three testing sessions was mostly positive, with only few corrective comments from the participants that were subsequently implemented. Based on vascular system feedback, a table was added to the graphical version of the framework, thus improving clarity by illustrating the activities subsumed under Level 4. The final version of the AMTF is illustrated in Figure 18.