Criteria for evaluating research: the unique adequacy requirement of methods

The Unique Adequacy requirement of methods (UA) is proposed as a means of evaluating research in construction management. UA addresses the problems stemming from the significance of conscious action in constituting human organization. These may be summarized as: first, that objectivity is a problematic concept in such studies; second, that the determination of meaning is their primary goal; and third, that formal procedures, whether as methods of research or explanation, have significant limitations. The UA requirement has two forms: the weak form demands that the researcher is competent in the research setting; the strong form, that research reports use only concepts originating within the research setting. The consequences of applying these criteria are explored with reference to recent research reports in construction management, including: a questionnaire survey of cultural difference; an exercise in grounded theorizing; a case study of the implementation of a quality management initiative. It is concluded that the UA requirement is a viable tool for evaluating and guiding research. Emphasis is placed on the importance of maintaining a principled distinction between empirical research and theory building.

[1]  R. Bhagat Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations , 2002 .

[2]  M. Lynch Silence in context: Ethnomethodology and social theory , 1999 .

[3]  Andrew R.J. Dainty,et al.  A grounded theory of women's career under-achievement in large UK construction companies , 2000 .

[4]  Hong Zhang,et al.  Heuristic scheduling of resource‐constrained, multiple‐mode and repetitive projects , 2006 .

[5]  K. Roulston Data analysis and ‘theorizing as ideology’ , 2001 .

[6]  S. Hayashi Culture and management in Japan , 1988 .

[7]  Anna Liljestrom,et al.  Analyzing the Researcher's Work in Generating Data: The Case of Complaints , 2001 .

[8]  Clinton A. Spencer,et al.  Six‐sigma as a strategy for process improvement on construction projects: a case study , 2006 .

[9]  John Rooke,et al.  The role of theory in construction management: reply to Runeson , 1998 .

[10]  B. Glaser Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis: Emergence Vs. Forcing , 1992 .

[11]  John Raftery,et al.  Breaking up methodological monopolies: a multi-paradigm approach to construction management research , 1997 .

[12]  Albert P.C. Chan,et al.  Study of attitude changes in people after the implementation of a new safety management system: the supervision plan , 2001 .

[13]  Chris Harriss Why research without theory is not research A reply to Seymour, Crook and Rooke , 1998 .

[14]  D. L. Wieder Language and social reality , 1974 .

[15]  Oskar Lindwall,et al.  Vulgar competence, ethnomethodological indifference and curricular design , 2005, CSCL.

[16]  H. Garfinkel,et al.  Two incommensurable, asymmetrically alternate technologies of social analysis , 1992 .

[17]  Mike Lynch,et al.  Ethnomethodology and the human sciences: Method: measurement – ordinary and scientific measurement as ethnomethodological phenomena , 1991 .

[18]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[19]  Andrew R.J. Dainty,et al.  Project affinity: the role of emotional attachment in construction projects , 2005 .

[20]  John Rooke,et al.  Studies of Work: Achieving Hybrid Disciplines in IT Design and Management Studies , 2005 .

[21]  John Rooke,et al.  Learning, knowledge and authority on site: a case study of safety practice , 2005 .

[22]  J. Rooke,et al.  Planning for claims: an ethnography of industry culture , 2004 .

[23]  Paul ten Have,et al.  Understanding Qualitative Research and Ethnomethodology , 2004 .

[24]  J. Rooke,et al.  The role of theory in construction management: a call for debate , 1997 .

[25]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research : techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory , 1998 .

[26]  David Seymour,et al.  The culture of the industry and the culture of research , 1995 .

[27]  An Invitation to Ethnomethodology: Language, Society and Interaction , 2005 .

[28]  Malik Ranasinghe,et al.  Culture and foreign companies' choice of entry mode: the case of the Singapore building and construction industry , 2001 .

[29]  Goran Runeson,et al.  The role of theory in construction management research: comment , 1997 .

[30]  A. Schutz The Problem of Social Reality , 1996 .

[31]  H. Garfinkel Studies in Ethnomethodology , 1968 .

[32]  G. Ryle,et al.  The concept of mind. , 2004, The International journal of psycho-analysis.

[33]  David Francis,et al.  An Invitation to Ethnomethodology: Language, Society and Social Interaction , 2004 .

[34]  William B. Gudykunst,et al.  Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations [2nd edition]: Geert Hofstede , 2005 .

[35]  C. Brodsky The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research , 1968 .

[36]  John Rooke,et al.  Developing a more empirical approach to culture, attitude and motivation in construction management research: a critique and a proposal , 1997 .

[37]  Attitudes,et al.  The Claims Culture : A Taxonomy of Industry , .

[38]  Andy Crabtree,et al.  Taking technomethodology seriously: hybrid change in the ethnomethodology–design relationship , 2004, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[39]  J. Gosby MEDIA REVIEWS: Basics of Qualitative Research - Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory 2nd Edition by A. Strauss and J. Corbin. Sage Publications, , 2000 .

[40]  S. Rowlinson,et al.  Operationalizing culture in construction management research: a social identity perspective in the Hong Kong context , 2004 .

[41]  J. Rooke,et al.  The claims culture: a taxonomy of attitudes in the industry , 2003 .

[42]  Paul Dourish,et al.  Technomethodology: paradoxes and possibilities , 1996, CHI.

[43]  D. L. Wieder,et al.  Language and social reality , 1974 .

[44]  Anita M. M. Liu,et al.  Organisational culture profiles of construction enterprises in China , 2006 .