Identifying Management Research Priorities
For which topic were research priorities identified?
In which location was the research priority setting conducted?
Europe - Sweden
Why was it conducted at all?
However, the purely academic origin of an agenda is no guarantee against criticism that it is too anxiously ‘relevant' to the industry. We suspect that the implementation of a management research agenda is more difficult if actual managers have been unable to contribute to its development. Also, the issue of researcher viewpoints is a recognized theoretical problem for construction management research (Seymour et al., 1997). Therefore it is tempting to minimize the academic influence on the agenda.
What was the objective?
to describe a model for collecting, structuring and analyzing practitioner views on what should be the priorities for construction management research
What was the outcome?
a ranking list of 20 research topics
How long did the research prioritization take?
October 2003 - June 2004
Which methods were used to identify research priorities?
focus group; survey
How were the priorities for research identified exactly?
Step 1: focus groups: initial list of research priorities prepared based on literature review, 114 individual suggestions for research priorities made in focus groups, ideas then clustered and their importance discussed, participants then asked to select one idea, longlist reduced to 20 topics. Step 2: survey: participants were asked to rate each topic. Step 3: preliminary report distributed to comment
Which stakeholders took part?
Focus group: 11 representatives of the Swedish construction sector: 3 contractors, 3 consultants, 1 architect, 1 real estate owners and 1 materials supplier. Survey: individuals in a broad range of Swedish firms in the sector: 140 participants.
How were stakeholders recruited?
Representatives of the Swedish construction sector were chosen as participants for the focus group because of their sector experience and their known interest in the development of the sector. The survey was distributed by post to 260 individuals in a broad range of Swedish firms in the sector.
Were stakeholders actively involved or did they just participate?
Stakeholders were mere participants of the research prioritization process; they were not actively involved in the process.