An activity theoretical approach to BIM-research

eWork and eBusiness in Architecture, Engineering and Construction - Proceedings of the European Conference on Product and Process Modelling 2012, ECPPM 2012

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 777-781

  Miettinen, R ^a   Kerosuo, H ^a   Korpela, J ^a   Maki T ^a   Paavola, S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN; PROCESS ENGINEERING;

CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS; FINNISH; THEORETICAL APPROACH; TOOL USE;

ENGINEERING RESEARCH;

EID: 84863519647     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1201/b12516-124     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (33)

1. Abdelmohsen, S. 2011. An Ethnographically informed analysis of design intent communication in BIM-enabled architectural practice.A Dissertation. Georgia Institute of Technology.
2. Björk, B-C. & Laakso, M. 2010. CAD standardization in the construction industry-A process view. Automation in Construction 19(4): 398-406.
3. Bucciarelli, L. L. 1988. An ethnographic perspective on design engineering. Design Studies 9(3): 159-168.
4. Chesbrough, H. 2003. Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
5. Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., & Liston, K. (2nd ed.) 2011. BIM Hand-book. A guide to building information modeling for owners, managers, designers, engineers and contractors. New Jersey: JohnWiley & Sons.
6. Engeström, Y. 1987. Learning by expanding: An activity theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-konsultit.
7. Engeström, Y. 2001. Expansive Learning at Work: toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education andWork 14(1): 133-156.
8. Engeström, Y. 2005 Developmental work research. Expanding activity theory in practice. Berlin: Lehmanns.
9. Engeström, Y. & Miettinen, R: & Punamäki, R. (eds), 1999. Perspectives on Activity Theory: 1-16. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10. Gu, N. & London, K. 2010. Understanding and facilitating BIM adoption in the AEC industry. Automation in Construction 19: 988-999.
11. Hartmann, A.&Bresnen, M. 2011.The emerging partnership in construction practice: An activity theoretical perspective. The Engineering Project Organization Journal 1: 41-52.
12. Harty, C. & Whyte, J. 2010. Emerging Hybrid Practices in Construction Design Work: Role of Mixed Media. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 136(4): 468-476.
13. Henderson, C. 1999. On line and on paper: visual representations, visual culture, and computer graphics in design engineering?. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
14. von Hippel, E. 2005. Democratizing Innovation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
15. Howell, I. & Batcheler, B. 2005. Building Information ModelingTwoYears Later-Huge Potential, Some Success and Several Limitation. The Laiserin Letter May, 2005.
16. Hughes, T.P. 1987. The evolving of large technological systems. In W. E. Bijker, T. Hughes & T. Pinch (eds), The social construction of technological systems: 51-82. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
17. John-Steiner, V. 1985. Notebooks of mind. Explorations of thinking. NewYork: Harper & Row.
18. Kaptelinin, V. & Nardi, B.A. 2009. Acting with technology: Activity theory and interaction design. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
19. Kerosuo, H. Miettinen, R. Mäki, T. Paavola, S. Korpela, J. & Rantala, T. 2012. Expanding uses of building information modeling in life-cycle construction projects.Work 41(1): 114-119.
20. Leont'ev, A.N. 1978. Activity, consciousness and personality. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
21. Miettinen, R. 2009. Dialogue and Creativity. Activity theory in the study of science, technology and innovations. Berlin: Lehmanns Media.
22. Miettinen, R. & Virkkunen, J. 2005. 'Epistemic objects, artifacts and organizational change'. Organization 12(3): 437-456.
23. Moum, A. 2010, Design teams stories. Exploring interdisciplinary use of 3D object models in practice. Automation in Construction 19(5): 554-569.
24. Morgan, M. & Morrison, M. (eds), 1999. Models as Mediators. Perspectives on Natural and Social Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Neff, G., Fiore-Silfast, B.&Dossick, C.S. 2010.A case study of the failure of digital communication to cross knowledge boundaries in virtual construction. Information, Communication and Society. 13(4): 556-573.
26. Paavola, S., Kerosuo, H., Mäki, T., Korpela, J.&Miettinen, R. 2012. BIM technologies and collaboration in a life cycle project. A paper at the ECPPM 2012 Conference.
27. Perez, C. 2002. Technological Revolution and Financial Capital: The Dynamics of Bubbles and Golden Ages. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Cheltenham.
28. Sacks, F., Koskela, L, Dave, B. A. & Owen, R. 2010. Interaction of lean and building information modeling in construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 136(9): 968-980.
29. Succar, B. 2009. Building information modeling framework: Aresearch and delivery foundation for industry stakeholders. Automation in Construction, 18(3): 357-375.
30. Tan, S. & Melles, G. 2010. An activity theory focused case study of graphic designers' tool-mediated activities during the conceptual design phase. Design Studies 31(5): 461-478.
31. Van Lente, H. & Rip, A. 1998. The Rise of Membrane Technology: From Rhetorics to Social Reality. Social Studies of Science 28(2): 221-254.
32. Vygotsky, L. S. 1986. Thought and language. Translated and newly revised byAlexKozulin. Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press.
33. Zuboff, S. 1990. The age of smart machine: The Future Of Work And Power. NewYork: Basic Books.