Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorJohn Riker Haymaker
dc.contributor.authorJohn Marvin Chachere
dc.contributor.authorReid Robert Senescu
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-08T21:33:27Z
dc.date.available2017-05-08T21:33:27Z
dc.date.copyrightSeptember 2011
dc.date.issued2011
dc.identifier.other%28asce%29ae%2E1943-5568%2E0000041.pdf
dc.identifier.urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/56043
dc.description.abstractThis paper measures and improves the clarity of design rationale on an architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) project and observes the effects. The rationale clarity framework (RCF) defines decisions in terms of components of rationale—managers, stakeholders, designers, gatekeepers, objectives (constraints and goals), alternatives, and analyses (impacts and assessment of stakeholder value). RCF defines relations and conditions of clarity for each component—coherent, concrete, connected, consistent, credible, certain, and correct. Using RCF, the rationale clarity of decisions was observed and documented on an industry case project. A decision-assistance methodology that seeks to clarify rationale, called MACDADI, was then implemented and costs and benefits from each team member’s perspective were observed. Future work is identified that can lower costs and increase benefits of clarifying rationale.
dc.publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
dc.titleMeasuring and Improving Rationale Clarity in a University Office Building Design Process
dc.typeJournal Paper
dc.journal.volume17
dc.journal.issue3
dc.journal.titleJournal of Architectural Engineering
dc.identifier.doi10.1061/(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000041
dc.treeJournal of Architectural Engineering:;2011:;Volume ( 017 ):;issue: 003
dc.contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record