DEUDA PÚBLICA

Communication is defined as ‘the action of communicating’ while communicating is defined as ‘to share or exchange information or ideas’ (Oxford, 2013). Emmitt and Gorse (2007, p. 3) offer a more comprehensive alternative: ‘communication is the sharing of meaning to reach a mutual understanding and to gain a response’. Both definitions relate to a basic human action that would suggest that communication in its various forms should be instinctive for humans to carry out effectively. Furthermore, little in-depth research has been carried out into construction communication which may be attributed to communication being considered a ‘soft’ people factor that does not directly contribute to the construction process. However, it underpins all the ‘hard’ processes that are essential to the management of the construction process (Dainty et al., 2006). Furthermore, recognition is

85

required for two forms of communication, ‘internal and external’, which should be viewed with equal importance to avoid problems (Thunberg et al., 2017).

The construction process is complex and temporal, and involves many multidisciplinary actors whose interactions are perceived as adversarial with poor interaction between parties, resulting in a difficult environment in which to promote effective and efficient communication (Emmitt and Gorse, 2007; Emmitt, 2010). Martin et al. (2014) argue that projects that are well organised will reduce the barriers to clear and concise forms of communication.

Aligned with effective communication is interpersonal trust, which resonates from good relationships between the various parties. Conversely, the risk of trust being misaligned will undoubtedly cause a strain on relationships and consequently affect the level of open communication between the parties. The latter situation is more prevalent in a construction context than the former (Ceric, 2014). Adriaanse and Voordijk (2005) suggest that interorganisational communication is affected by three factors: the contract, the terms of reference and the interests of the parties. The contract will detail the project requirements; however, changes are inevitable and this will lead to further tranches of information. The terms of reference identify the various parties, that is, the client, design team, contractors, subcontractors and manufacturers, each with their own way of thinking, operating and communicating. The interests of the parties will inevitably be directed towards themselves: the client will want a quality project for the lowest possible costs and the contractor will wish to gain as much profit as possible. These are all factors that endanger open trusting communication (Adriaanse and Voordijk, 2005; Emmitt and Gorse, 2007). Construction has become a process of outsourcing, at both the design and the construction phases. Architects will outsource parts of the design to either UK or international designers because they consider it more cost effective. The construction phase is divided up into packages, which allow numerous subcontractors and/or sub-subcontractors to execute the works, thus creating a

86

construction team that has varying communication skills, both verbally and in terms of information communication technology (Emmitt and Gorse, 2007; Senaratne and Ruwanpura, 2016). Otter and Emmitt (2007) posit that to achieve effective communication at the design stage requires a strong competent team leader and willingness between the parties to use information communication technology that is compatible to all. Xie et al. (2010) argue further that, to achieve effective communication, six variables should be considered and monitored: accuracy, timeliness, procedures, understanding, barriers and completeness. A case study of a new shopping centre, procured under design and build and embracing partnership practices between the main stakeholders, identified that while partnering relationships do improve communication some variables still impede it, such as clients who make changes by taking advantage of the partnering agreement. Similarly, late involvement of the main contractor and/or specialist subcontractors who fail to impart their knowledge during the design stage often results in late design changes (Xie et al., 2010).

Figure 3.7 succinctly shows the communication mediums that may be used in various locations at varying time zones. Cultural differences need to be factored into the communication mediums. It is the project leader that is central to instigating a culture of trust, good interpersonal skills and speedy procedures for resolution of any areas of conflict (Ochieng and Price, 2010).

87

Figure 3.7: Time/place communication (Otter and Emmitt, 2007)

The top management team in a construction sense refers to the leaders of the clients, design teams and main contractors. A qualitative study of seven international companies, based on one top management interviewee from each organisation, identified the major challenge of communicating between boundaries of organisations, where some team members did not adhere to the team objective of open communication. Moreover, it was identified that informal communication has a worthwhile part to play in the strategy of business success (Hedman and Valo, 2015). While seven interviews would seem to be a small sample, considering the seniority of the interviewees, the findings are worthy contributions to the research into communication.

All construction projects are made up of many stakeholders, some of whom are directly involved in the construction process and others who are positively or negatively affected by the outcome of the project. The chosen procurement route can determine the structure and formal routes of communication between the principal actors involved in a project (Hughes et al., 2015). Furthermore, the resulting relationships will invoke the principal-agent theory, whereby one party will

88

be better informed than the other and both parties will be motivated by self- interest, thus causing challenges to open communication between the parties (Ceric, 2014). However, informal structures will be formed, which will lead to informal communication between groups of actors that will have a significant influence on the project (De Blois et al., 2011). Communication between the client and the architect is paramount for any project, never more so than at the briefing stage.

A study comprising interviews with 18 architects confirmed that architects do not consider that briefing documentation communicates adequately the client’s requirements and therefore recommend face to face communication to explore not only the quantitative requirements but also the qualitative issues of culture, attitude and desires of the client (Bogers et al., 2008). While the recommendations should improve the briefing process, Bogers et al.’s (2008) study would have benefited from inclusion of interviews with clients, to achieve a more balanced result.

Chua and Godinot (2006) attempt to show that better communication between all actors involved in the process would result in improved IM. They offer a model (Figure 3.8) which is split into three distinct areas: IM strategy, common IM issues and remedial action. Each area is further split into the five strategy headings, with communication central to the overall strategy. What is evident from the model is that inadequate forms of communication can contribute to interface problems while effective communication combined with co-operation and co-ordination between parties can play an important part in avoiding or resolving interface problems. In particular, the ‘grey areas’ that prevail in construction projects are an example of items that are normally annotated on working drawings as ‘by others’. This implies incomplete design through a lack of communication. Al-Mousli and El- Sayegh (2016) concur that the lack of communication at the design/construction interface contributes to most problems in construction projects.

89

Figure 3.8: Functional aspects for interface management (Chua and Godinot, 2006)

Shokri et al. (2016) agree that communication has a major influence on IM in construction, adding that by applying a systematic IM practice the detrimental effects of miscommunication can be reduced. Lin (2013) argues that IM is not generally accepted as a management tool by the construction industry and therefore the positive influence of IM on communication is being missed and a valuable tool that can contribute to reducing design problems and rework is lying dormant. While electronic communications systems are now commonplace within construction, unless cognisance is given to IM, the advantages of the system will not be captured and the problems which relate to miscommunication and IM will persist (Lin, 2013).

Offsite construction requires open communication with manufacturers during the design stage. Johnsson and Meiling (2009) argue that poor communication at the design stage will lead to defects in offsite construction, in none more so than bathroom construction. A survey carried out by Pan et al. (2007) to review house

90

builders’ perspectives on the use of various forms of offsite construction identified problems with IM, the current procurement routes and people’s perceptions as barriers to the uptake. However, it was overwhelmingly agreed by the participants that better forms of communication were required, in particular with offsite bathroom construction where there appears to be a willingness within the sector to increase the uptake. A further study of a leading house builder identified that a lack of communication from the design team on the benefits of using various forms of offsite construction inhibits its utilisation (Pan et al., 2012). A study of the European construction industry on the uptake of offsite construction identified the interface of information and the ability to communicate information in real time to all parties as essential factors, thus confirming that soft factors are equally if not more important than hard factors in promoting offsite forms of bathroom construction (Nadim and Goulding, 2011). Luo et al. (2017) posit that the uptake of volumetric (offsite bathrooms) will require architects to adapt more to the language of the manufacturer and accept their changing role, in order to stay relevant in a changing industry. Goulding et al. (2015) argue that training is required to upskill assemblers and installers of offsite products in the language necessary to understand the offsite, onsite and offsite/onsite interfaces that encapsulate the whole process, with the objective of installing a quality product.