The Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry is increasingly aware of the need to improve efficiency and effectiveness to thrive in an increasingly competitive marketplace. A key discovery in their search for improvements is the benefits of repeatability in both processes and products. However, although the latter has seen significant advances, such as the adoption of pre-assembly and standardised components and systems, the industry has experienced far greater difficulties identifying ways of capturing, understanding, and replicating work processes. The identification and removal of waste can only be achieved once the process has been captured. Their repeated use and development, combined with analysis by ADePT, enable the improvement of work practices and culture in terms of integration, decision-making and reductions in re-work.

Papers have been presented on the ADePT planning and management approach at DSM Conferences going back to 2000. The approach is now in widespread use in industrial applications, ranging from a US$4M building fit-out project to a £4Bn urban redevelopment project, and a number of practices have been established to ensure design planning and control is undertaken in the most effective way possible. The impacts of the approach’s use have recently been assessed, highlighting a number of areas where benefit is derived and showing a significant return on the investment required to implement the technique.

(1) Department of Civil and Building Engineering, Loughborough University, Loughborough, Leicestershire, LE11 3TU. Telephone 01509 222608. Fax 01509 223981. Email S.A.Austin@lboro.ac.uk (2) The Martin Centre for Architectural and Urban Studies, Department of Architecture, University of Cambridge, 6 Chaucer Road, Cambridge, CB2 2EB, UK. Telephone 01223 331713. Fax 01223 331701. E-mail sgm24@cam.ac.uk

The construction industry is acutely aware of the need to improve the integration, planning and control of its design and production processes. A number of projects undertaken within Loughborough, Salford and Cambridge Universities, in collaboration with a number of construction industry organizations, are addressing this issue by investigating, and developing tools to assist, the design and construction process. Emerging from these projects is the common need for IT systems and support that will facilitate the capture, storage and retrieval of project knowledge. It is only by relating these compatible IT applications to a common and recognizable project process framework that construction industry organizations will be able to make optimum use of the available technological developments. This paper describes the development of techniques and strategies to support the integrated planning and control of design through the collaboration of the main designers, suppliers and contractor working on complex building projects, and discusses the relevance of clustering these in relation to the phases and activities of a generic model of design and construction.

This paper reports the outcome of a 2‐year research project that set out to provide a process map of the concept stage of building projects. From a literature review, comparison of current process maps, and through interviews and case study analyses, a tentative new framework for the concept stage was developed and tested. It comprises 12 activities in five phases. The framework formed the basis of a graphical method used to plot the activities of design teams in a series of workshops. This graphical method illustrates design iteration in a way which we believe has not been undertaken before, and the patterns it reveals are intuitively understood by design team members themselves, helping them reflect on their own design process. We have also constructed a prototype internet‐based decision support tool for the concept stage of design. This is intended to be inherently flexible and supportive of non‐linear routes through concept design, while also offering a structured approach, design tools to broaden the solution space or evaluate competing options, team management advice, and the recording of decision making. Initial testing of this tool showed it to be well‐received, although it was criticized for focusing too much on the gates between activities and too little on the issues and decisions within each activity.

The Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry, like many others, is increasingly aware of the need to improve efficiency and effectiveness to thrive in an increasingly competitive marketplace. A key discovery in their search for improvements is the benefits of repeatability in both processes and products. However, although the latter has seen significant advances, such as the adoption of pre-assembly and standardised components and systems, the industry has experienced far greater difficulties identifying ways of capturing, understanding, and replicating work processes. The identification and removal of waste from the process can only be achieved once the process has been captured. Their repeated use and development, combined with analysis with the Analytical Design Planning Technique, enable the improvement of work practices and culture in terms of integration, decision-making and reductions in re-work.

The rapid and dynamic information and knowledge transfer between designers during the conceptual phase of building projects can result in disorganised behaviour within the team. Team members can become frustrated by the lack of a common understanding of the manner in which the design activity is being performed and the direction in which the process is progressing. Evidence suggests that design teams are better equipped to undertake design activity when in possession of a general programme of events or activities through which they are likely to pass than when no such structuring concept is held. This paper describes the development and verification of a structured framework, which has been generated to aid and support the interdisciplinary team in undertaking conceptual design.

The conceptual design phase of any project is, by its very nature, a vibrant, creative and dynamic period. It can also be disorganised with much backtracking accompanying the exchange of information between design team members. The transfer of information, ideas and opinion is critical to the development of concepts and as such, rather than being recognised as merely a component of conceptual design activity, it needs to be understood and, ultimately, managed. This paper describes an experimental workshop involving fifteen design professionals in which conceptual design activity was tracked, and subsequently mapped, in order to test and validate a tentative design framework (phase and activity model). The nature of the design progression of the various teams is captured and analysed, allowing a number of conclusions to be drawn regarding both the iterative nature of this phase of design and how teams of professionals actually design together.

The Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry is increasingly aware of the need to improve efficiency and effectiveness to thrive in an increasingly competitive marketplace. A key discovery in their search for improvements is the benefits of repeatability in both processes and products. However, although the latter has seen significant advances, such as the adoption of pre-assembly and standardised components and systems, the industry has experienced far greater difficulties identifying ways of capturing, understanding, and replicating work processes. The identification and removal of waste can only be achieved once the process has been captured. Their repeated use and development, combined with analysis by ADePT, enable the improvement of work practices and culture in terms of integration, decision-making and reductions in re-work.

Design activity, particularly at the early stages of a project, is recognised as being dynamic, highly iterative and non-linear. However, under the rigours and pressures of the contemporary project environment, designers are being urged to undertake early design activity in a far more programmable, and thus manageable, fashion. Within this environment iterative, or cyclic, design progression is often criticised, with the concept of ‘going round in circles’ being one that is generally discouraged (Hickling, 1982). However, design is a learning activity and, owing to the complexity of contemporary building projects, it is often only by moving ahead to improve knowledge of the problem, before taking a step back to re-address a problem with improved understanding, that the design process can progress (Lawson, 1980). This is possibly the most commonly recognised type of iterative design progression among design researchers and practitioners. However, there are many other types of iterative design progression that are common to early-stage design activity. For the last two years the MDP (Mapping the Design Process during the conceptual phase of building projects) research project has endeavoured to improve understanding of conceptual design activity. It has been undertaken at the Department of Architecture, University of Cambridge, in close collaboration with Loughborough University and a number of construction industry firms. The research team has gathered empirical evidence which suggests that, although every design project is unique, there are commonalties within the iterative structure of periods of design progression across projects.

This paper builds on work presented at the last two CIBSE conferences, and describes the development of an Internet-based design tool to support interdisciplinary teams during the conceptual phase of the design process. Originally, devised as a paper-based framework comprising five phases and twelve activities, the interactive internet-based version accords well with the richly iterative and often non-linear process which design typically follows. The tool is intended to encourage inspirational concept design without imposing a rigid procedure. As well as offering alternative routes through concept design, the tool contains ‘team thinking tools’ to help designers widen the solution space, set priorities and evaluate options. In addition, drawing on management science literature about effective teamwork practices, it helps a team deal with social interactions. Also, at the user’s option, the system can be used to capture, store and retrieve decisions made, and the reasoning behind them. Overall the system, which exists as a working prototype, offers the combined prospects of decision support, an audit trail, and improved knowledge management. The prototype is available openly on the web, and constructive feedback from users is welcomed. At least one of the collaborating organisations is adapting the system to its individual needs and embedding it within its own operating procedures.

The construction industry is acutely aware of the need to improve the integration, planning and control of its design and production processes. A number of projects undertaken within Loughborough University’s Department of Civil and Building Engineering, in collaboration with other academic institutions and construction industry organisations, are addressing this issue by investigating, and developing tools to assist, the design and construction process. Emerging from these projects is the common need for IT systems and support that will facilitate the capture, storage and retrieval of project knowledge. It is only by relating these compatible IT applications to a common and recognisable project process framework that construction industry organisations will be able to make optimum use of the available technological developments. This paper describes the development of techniques and strategies to support the integrated planning and control of design through the collaboration of the main designers, suppliers and contractor working on complex building projects, and discusses the relevance of clustering these in relation to the phases and activities of a generic model of design and construction.