Fieldwork was carried out within two multidisciplinary project teams, employed by a leading Hong Kong property developer to develop two island based infrastructure and residential projects. The choice of construction and real estate sectors for a study on knowledge creation was influenced by their huge effect on the local economy. Table 3.1 tabulates the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) o f construction and real estate between 1990 and 1999. Projects in the construction industry are prime generators of knowledge creation. Through past successes and failures, they are continually great resources for construction professionals to learn from. They also provide an ideal environment for new and unproven ideas and concepts to be considered as long as health and safety issues are not compromised. Altogether they harbour appropriate conditions to actively promote knowledge creation.
Table 3.1 GDP by detailed economic activity, 1990-1999
Year
Construction Real Estate
% Distribution to GDP HK$ million % Distribution to GDP HK$ million 1990 5.4 30,220 9.7 54,068 1991 5.5 34,659 9.5 60,181 1992 5.1 37,337 10.3 75,558 1993 5.2 43,089 11.0 91,581 1994 4.9 46,325 12.4 117,698 1995 5.4 54,761 9.9 100,480 1996 5.8 65,058 10.2 115,326 1997 5.8 71,650 10.9 134,186 1998 6.0 69,937 9.7 112,842 1999®’ 5.8 66,111 7.6 86,241
- Figures are subject to revisions later on as more data become available. Source: Census and Statistics Department (2001)
The choice of case organisation was primarily driven by the consideration of what the company represents to Hong Kong within the construction and real estate sectors. It is one of the most high profile firms, a leader in Hong Kong’s construction and real estate markets. During the financial year 2000/01, the company completed over 400.000 square metres of attributable gross floor area, with a total property sales amounting to over HKS19 billion. As one of the Hong Kong’s largest private landowners, the company currently has a total land bank exceeding 5 million square metres. Its property development portfolio is one of the largest, with a great number of on-going projects at different stages of development. Furthermore, during the period of study, the company was undergoing significant stress due to the financial turmoil in Asia and fierce competition within the construction and real estate sectors. Although, for the purpose of this study, the recession and competition themselves are not explicitly put under scrutiny, they nonetheless have to be considered as significant background influences to knowledge creation. The resultant need for dynamic flexibility, streamlining the design and construction processes or lowering the development costs, and innovation provided fertile opportunities for the observation of knowledge creation and collective learning processes. Finally, the selection of the two fieldwork projects was aimed at introducing variations in context when they were examined by the research questions. The rationale for the selection of the cases is explained in detail in the next section.
3.3.1
Selection o f the Research Cases
Two project teams - infrastructural and residential - with diverse design concepts, discipline and knowledge bases, skills and possibly attitudes towards knowledge creation, were considered. Both cases shared common involvement in the construction
of two large-scale projects on a ‘green field’ site. In addition, the nature o f the work is information and knowledge intensive, requiring the teams to develop new or utilise existing technologies, techniques and processes to achieve their work goals. Further details of the nature and scope of work will be given in Chapter Four. The nature of project team at work is both intellectual and interactive. It is intellectual in that it requires the team to find novel or hidden solutions to complex problems, and it is interactive as it requires constant co-operation between all participants in the design development process. However, these two projects differed in many respects. The nature of the tasks was different, as were the personnel involved and the ways in which design knowledge was created. The selection of the cases hoped to gain further insight into the multiple and divergent phenomena fuelling the different modes of knowledge creation during design development. All the while, the study views knowledge as a dynamic phenomenon.
The selection o f the residential development project recognises the large reservoir of idiosyncratic knowledge developed by the company over the years. It also recognises the crucial innovating dynamics behind the need to compete on the market with other residential developments. The infrastructure project presented alternative opportunities for knowledge creation and learning, unique in several respects. Firstly, it was a complex operation, distinguished by an extraordinary multiplicity of consultants being employed. Secondly it was rare to find such a project, usually managed by government, in private hands. Finally, the technical challenges presented in this project made it an interesting arena for knowledge creation and absorption within the team.
3.3.2
Negotiating Access
Initial access to the company was provided after contacting the head of Project Management - the ‘gatekeeper’, to use Becker’s (1970) term - to express an interest in learning more about the processes of knowledge creation within the setting of a multidisciplinary project team. After an explanation of all research details, he became interested in the proposal to host a doctoral candidate within the firm. He emphasised the confidentiality of company information, stressing the need for strict anonymity. My need was expressed for formal interview access to a wide cross section o f project team members, with all interviews to be recorded and transcribed. I requested observer status in any meetings, events or planning sessions that involved the project teams. Other organisations approached had found this very sensitive as it approved unfettered access to their discussions, possibly of a very sensitive and confidential nature. In terms of secondary data sources, I requested access to any relevant project documentation and archival records.
In negotiating access, it became clear that such extensive, all consuming research would only be acceptable within the confines of one company, because of a considerable anxiety within the industry about the risks of communicating confidential knowledge to competitors. Additionally, by focusing on comparative analyses between two different projects within the one firm, any possible ambiguity could be avoided that might arise from company differences. A deep understanding of the dynamics of knowledge creation in the two project teams could be developed and through this, a foundation possibly established for future cross-organisational studies of firms that might differ in terms of strategic objectives and underlying economics.
The senior project manager was nominated to familiarise me with the research environment and to introduce the participants in both developments. He provided advice on practical, organisational and project-related issues, suggesting whom to consult when wanting to study project team members. He proved to be a key informant throughout the project and gave me access to a rich variety of internal documents. In particular, he helped furnish the background history to both projects and he detailed the strategic transformations his company was going through. He listed the project team members, which assisted selecting personnel for interview.
All participants provided immense help by giving access to the relevant project documentation. Over the 14-month period, full licence was extended to visit the projects and to attend all team meetings whenever needed. The collaborative attitude of both management and team members ensured ample opportunity to fine-tune and regularly check the results emerging from the study, responding to any gaps in the findings as perceived. The resultant close connection with the two teams was critical in view of the challenging and complex research topic. Table 3.2 highlights some pertinent aspects of the case projects and details the sources made available by each of the projects.
Table 3.2 Sources of evidence
Source of evidence INF Protect Team RDA Protect Team N o . o f i n te r v ie w s 1 6 15 A v . L e n g t h o f i n t e r v i e w 8 0 m i n u t e s 1 0 0 m i n u t e s M e e t i n g s a t t e n d e d ( t e a m F o r m a l - 12 F o r m a l - 1 6 m e e t i n g o b s e r v a t i o n ) I n f o r m a l - 15 I n f o r m a l - 19 A c c e s s to c o m p a n y d a ta O p e n O p e n A c c e s s t o p r o j e c t d o c u m e n ta tio n O p e n O p e n I n fo r m a l d i s c u s s i o n s 3 5