Aug 2026· Buildings & Cities· Vol 7, pp. 973-990· 0 citations· 24 references
Abstract
Despite increasing policy attention to circular economy strategies, building component reuse remains limited in mainstream construction practice. Existing research has demonstrated the environmental potential of reuse and identified the importance of material information, assessment and inter-organisational collaboration. However, these dimensions are examined separately, while less attention has been given to material specification as a focal practice that connects them to reclaimed components. A qualitative case study of a large UK commercial refurbishment investigates material specification based on semi-structured interviews (n = 8) with project participants and project documents. Drawing on Schatzki’s practice theory, the analytical framework traces the reorganisation of practical understandings, general understandings, rules and teleoaffective structures, as well as the recomposition of specification doings and sayings. The findings show that specifications were developed differently across three different material vignettes (structural steel, Portland stone, marble) as material conditions emerged and requirements changed. The paper positions material specification as an evolving practice rather than a one-off decision. Information, collaboration and formal requirements alone did not enable reuse; their effectiveness depended on how they were connected and reorganised around particular materials. This explains the varying results within the same project and provides a framework for analysing material specification practices.
PRACTICE RELEVANCE
Component reuse depends on connecting material information, responsibilities and requirements throughout specification and delivery. Project teams should recognise that producing reliable information involves costs for surveys, inventories, testing, certification, tracking and coordination, and they should allocate time and budget for these activities early. The evidence needed at specification should also reflect the material and its intended function. Safety-critical structural components may require early verification of provenance, dimensions, condition and performance, whereas facade and interior components may need provisional specifications supported by staged inspection and agreed criteria for acceptable variation. Responsibility should remain continuous across assessment, dismantling, storage, transport and installation, especially where conditions may change during handling. Specifications should be revised if new evidence affects feasibility, and changes to the intended reuse outcome should be documented. These measures help prevent information gaps, unallocated costs and organisational handovers from reducing reuse potential.
This work presents a systematic framework for transforming an initial area of interest into a coherent, feasible, ethically responsible, and methodologically defensible project proposal. Designed for adaptation across the sciences, engineering, social sciences, humanities, arts, and professional fields, the report treats proposal development as the construction of an integrated research architecture rather than the completion of a series of disconnected sections. Its central organising principles are alignment and traceability: each research activity should bear a demonstrable relationship to an identified problem or knowledge gap, a research question, an objective, an appropriate method, an expected output, and an intended contribution. The report develops this architecture through practical procedures for problem framing, research-question design, objective formulation, methodological justification, work-package planning, dependency analysis, risk management, and the specification of deliverables, milestones, and success criteria. It further integrates ethics, research integrity, inclusion, responsible innovation, data stewardship, open-science practices, quality assurance, impact planning, engagement, and dissemination into the design process from its outset. A traceability matrix serves as a central quality-control instrument, enabling the systematic examination of coherence, completeness, and feasibility across the proposal. A worked interdisciplinary example, student-ready template, submission checklist, and evaluation rubric translate the framework into directly applicable forms. By connecting scholarly reasoning with operational planning, the report offers students, supervisors, researchers, and practitioners a transferable foundation for designing capstone projects whose intellectual ambitions remain proportionate to their evidence, resources, responsibilities, and prospective contributions.
The transition to circular manufacturing challenges product lifecycle management (PLM) systems, which remain optimized for linear workflows and lack integration of reuse logic. This study investigates how returned components can be systematically reintegrated into product configuration to support circularity.
Using a design science research approach, a framework and product variant master (PVM) model were developed through inductive coding of interviews and observations in an industrial pump manufacturing case. The study provides structured guides to support quality governance and system-level integration of reuse logic, enabling firms to translate circularity principles into operational configuration systems.
Findings reveal that reuse requires more granular component treatment than current PLM systems support. Key barriers include fragmented disassembly knowledge and incomplete component histories.
The PVM-based reuse logic enables configuration tools to incorporate reused components alongside new ones, improving traceability and operationalizing reuse, with digital product passports (DPPs) serving as a key facilitator of tacit knowledge management (KM).
Andreas Christensen, A. Jakobsen, Verena Stingl et al.· Journal of Manufacturing Tec...· 0 citations
A critique of organisational and management research concerns the limited practical relevance of scientific knowledge. While research excels at describing and explaining phenomena, it often falls short of enabling concrete action in practice. In response, the notion of actionable knowledge (AK) has emerged as a way to characterise knowledge that informs and supports decision-making and organisational change. However, the term remains conceptually ambiguous and is used inconsistently with definitions varying across disciplines. This lack of clarity hampers both theoretical advancement and the systematic identification of AK in empirical contexts. This paper addresses this issue by refining the concept of AK and developing a structured conceptual approach for its identification. Drawing on a review of existing literature, key similarities and differences between prevailing definitions of AK are analysed. Building on this, the paper proposes a set of nine criteria, grouped into three conceptual dimensions: (1) contextual relevance and quality, (2) accessibility and usability, and (3) impact potential and adaptability. These criteria provide a consistent basis for assessing whether knowledge can be considered actionable. Furthermore, the paper introduces a distinction between actionable knowledge and potential actionable knowledge, as well as the Actionable Knowledge Transformation Framework (AKTF), a conceptual framework which outlines how knowledge can be systematically transformed into AK. The proposed framework contributes to improved conceptual clarity and offers practical guidance for enhancing the usability of knowledge in organistions.
M. Müller, Georg-Friedrich Göhler· European Conference on Knowl...· 0 citations
A novel holistic theory of requirements engineering (RE) quality is proposed that can serve as a coherent theoretical framework for understanding the success or failure of RE processes and artifacts, and it is envisioned that the theory can serve as a coherent theoretical framework for understanding the success or failure of RE processes and artifacts.
Question: How can Lean Construction principles, and Value Stream Mapping (VSM) in particular, be applied to visualize and improve the façade engineering delivery process?
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to develop and apply current-state and future-state Value Stream Maps to the façade engineering delivery process to identify sources of workflow inefficiency and propose Lean-based improvements.
Research Method: The study applies a Design Science Research approach to a representative façade engineering case, combining semi-structured interviews with 15 international façade experts and a systematic literature review to define process phases and consultant–contractor interfaces, and develop current and future-state VSMs.
Findings: The current-state VSM reveals significant inefficiencies related to fragmented communication, late contractor involvement, design rework, approval delays, and information handoff discontinuities. The future-state VSM demonstrates that early contractor involvement and digital collaboration platforms can substantially reduce workflow fragmentation and non-value-added activities, with expert informed estimates indicating up to a 60% reduction in non-value-added time.
Limitations: The VSM was developed using a generic façade case and expert judgment rather than project-specific quantitative data; therefore, the results indicate potential improvements requiring empirical validation.
Implications: The study demonstrates that Lean principles and VSM can be effectively adapted to engineering intensive, iterative delivery processes, extending their application beyond traditional linear construction workflows.
Value for practitioners: The proposed VSM framework enables façade stakeholders to visualize workflows, diagnose delays and rework, and improve coordination, predictability, and delivery performance.
Keywords: Lean Construction, Value Stream Mapping, façade engineering, workflow variability, early contractor involvement, process optimization.
Paper type: Full paper
M. Georges, I. Srour, Hisham Abou Ibrahim· Lean Construction Journal· 0 citations
Collaboration is widely acknowledged as essential for project success; however, its structured implementation across project phases remains poorly understood. Existing research emphasizes principles such as trust and governance but offers limited guidance on translating them into operational practices. This study aims to develop an empirically grounded framework for structuring collaboration across project phases. To achieve this, a dual-layered framework for collaborative project delivery is presented. The first layer organizes empirically derived operational mechanisms into six strategic categories: external requirements, project management methodology, implementation strategy, collaboration methodology, concretization of quality, and health, safety, and environment. The second layer links these categories to three theoretical dimensions—strategic alignment, governance mechanisms, and managerial practices—thereby explicitly linking practical mechanisms to their conceptual foundations. Data were collected through case studies of four large-scale Norwegian public construction projects, using semistructured interviews, document analysis, and a follow-up survey to support triangulation and cross-check the categorization of collaborative mechanisms. The findings reveal how collaboration is operationalized through phase-specific mechanisms, where early-stage alignment and governance arrangements shape subsequent coordination practices and managerial activities during project execution. The study contributes by providing a structured explanation of how collaboration is operationalized across project phases and by linking practical mechanisms to established theoretical dimensions, showing how collaborative mechanisms collectively function and vary across project stages. The resulting framework offers a structured basis for understanding and organizing collaboration across project phases and may inform how collaborative mechanisms are considered and applied across project stages.
A. Shiferaw, Mathew Azarian, T. K. Stevik· Journal of Management in Eng...· 0 citations