Exploring Knowledge Management In The Practice Of Architecture: A Pilot .

282METU JFA 2009/2NURİ CİHAN KAYAÇETİN and ALİ MURAT TANYERthe practicing organizations of architecture are different from than thoseof the construction industry in terms of its size and conduct of business.Therefore, the issue of how architectural practices manage the sources andprocesses of their knowledge assets is still unknown.In the AEC industry, architectural organizations are responsible fromproviding enormous amount of information in the collaborative projectenvironment. Much of the construction works depends upon the workproduced in the design stages. Architectural organizations organize theflow of knowledge and communication between clients and contractors,engineers and governmental bodies, office and construction site in order toprovide construction site with valid and refined information. Architectureis a knowledge intensive business in that sense and therefore, managingarchitectural knowledge within the whole project life cycle is crucial. Dueto the unique nature of architectural process, there is a need to explore thecharacteristics of knowledge and current strategies utilized in architecturalorganizations in order to develop better approaches.Based on this short introduction, this research aims to identify theknowledge sources and methods of sharing, storing and deployingknowledge in the practice of architecture. Identifying the barriers andbenefits of managing knowledge assets in the architectural practices isanother important aim that was looked after.ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN PROCESS AND KNOWLEDGEArchitectural process is heavily dependent on information about whatis expected and how it can be accomplished. According to Kalay (2006),architectural design is an information-centric activity where currentconditions of a being is analyzed and plans for new and better conditionsof being are devised. Zisko-Aksamija (2008, 216) defines architecturaldesign as a process, based on tacit knowledge, gained through educationand experience. The author notes that architects and engineers also useexplicit knowledge for the design, such as materials databases, buildingcodes and specifications, manufacturer’s catalogs, etc. In this context, thetransmission between tacit and explicit knowledge in architectural designis inevitable and essential.The nature of architectural design is a subjective matter that is contingenton many factors such as the type of project, the project site, the client andthe architect. Many researchers agree that architectural process is the searchfor the best fitted solution for the given design problem which satisfies theclient’s needs, environmental expectations, and architectural standards.Zisko-Aksamija (2008, 223) claims that there is not a single formula totransform the performance requirements into an organizational assemblyof building elements. One of the reasons for that is given by Lawson (2006)who suggests that problems and solutions in architectural design overlapeach other in an unpredictable way. It is suggested that design processis an iterative activity and achieved solutions may generate new designproblems until adequate requirements are satisfied. This cyclical practiceis presented as the Marcus - Maver map of the design process by Lawson(2006, 37) in Figure 1.Collecting data and information about the existing condition of a subjectmatter is imperative to define the constraints and possible solutions for adesign problem. In order to access to the solution, several set of informationsources need to be brought together and processed by the architect.

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN ARCHITECTUREMETU JFA 2009/2283Figure 1. The Marcus - Maver map of thedesign process (Lawson, 2006, 37).Figure 2. Factors affecting architecturaldesign process (adopted from ZiskoAksamija 2008, 224).According to Zisko-Aksamija (2008, 223), the initial stage of architecturaldesign is the collection of information such as a set of spatial, functional,economical requirements, and site conditions. Zunde and Bougdah (2006,89) consider recording all the related material about project constraints inan organized and accessible way as a key activity in architectural design,as the reflection of this data leads to determination of critical internalfactors on the design such as constraints on budget and time, codes andregulations and client requests. In this manner, architectural design can bedefined as the interpretation of collected input into design solutions in thebest possible way. Kalay (2005, 13) describes this process as a relationshipbetween two paradigms: problem solving, where the designer analyzesproblems and generates solutions, and puzzle making, where design isseen as discovery of parts are meant to be synthesized into a meaningfulwhole. Factors affecting the architectural design process are depicted inFigure 2.In the literature, there are several methods of increasing, if notguaranteeing, the possibility of achieving a better design solution. Thesemethods in general are meant to enable the designer to clearly see theexternal and internal constraints of a problem. In Duerk’s study (1993,12), several frameworks for organizing design data are cited. First dividesdesign issues into four categories: form, function, economy, and time.Second categorizes design issues as such: human factors, physical factors,and external factors. Third focuses on building up check lists for facts to befind out about the existing context and utilized the following categories:similar projects, client, financial, codes, planning by related organizations,function, site, climate-growth, and change. Duerk (1993, 12) proposes theuse of design issues as the categories for organizing design informationwith facts, values, goals, performance requirements, and concepts.The subjectivity of project information and the amount of tacit knowledgein the architectural process are challenges against the strategies formanaging knowledge. Also, the seamless transfer of necessary knowledgeto other parties requires a great deal of diligent organization. Duerk (1993,8) claims that the process of managing knowledge in design process isvital for making the right kind of information available at the right timeand stage of the process, and for giving the best possible decisions inthe building design. It is apparent that architectural organizations can

284METU JFA 2009/2NURİ CİHAN KAYAÇETİN and ALİ MURAT TANYERbenefit from systematic approaches towards knowledge consideringthe competitive environment, tight project schedules and the overallsubjectivity which requires flexible organizations with quick decisionmaking ability.RESEARCH MATERIAL AND METHODThis section presents the research material and the methodology used incollecting and analyzing the data. In order to have a clear explanation ofthe concepts, first, the population of the research study and the samplingmethod are explained briefly, and then, the framework which is developedfor this study is given in details.According to a recent research conducted by The Architects’ Council ofEurope (ACE) (ACE, 2008), there are 32300 registered architects and 6497practicing offices in Turkey. The majority (78, 42%) of these offices includeless than 5 people and the majority of the architects are aged under 40(61%). With these figures, Turkey has the 4th largest number of practicingarchitects within the whole Europe.In order to explore how architectural practices manage their knowledgeresources, a questionnaire was prepared and published at the web site ofthe Chamber of Architects of Turkey. In spite of additional informativetelephone conversations by the Secretary Member of the Ankara Branch,only 12 offices returned this questionnaire. In the second attempt, 16 extraresponses were received from the three cities. Considering the numberof practices in the three big cities (İstanbul, İzmir and Ankara) of Turkey(1669, 1127, 937 respectively), the response rate (0.75%) is considered verylow. Therefore, the structured questionnaire approach was abandoned andthe study was decided to be implemented in a more defined population.Even though, conducting the survey in three main cities of Turkey wouldhave provided more generalized findings, the conditions above had ledthe study to a local population. As a result of this, Çankaya District ofAnkara was chosen as the community from which the selection of officeswas to be made due to the high number of its architectural offices. Amongthe sample space of 211 architectural offices that were located in ÇankayaDistrict, 15 architectural offices were randomly selected which constitutesapproximately 8% of the sample space.Figure 3. Number of personnel working inthe selected organizations.

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN ARCHITECTUREMETU JFA 2009/2285The architectural offices were selected from a list which was providedby the Chamber of Architects, Ankara Branch. The offices were arrangedaccording to the registration number on the list and they were assignednumbers from 1 to 211. Then, every 15th office on the list was chosen and aselection of 15 offices was achieved.Majority of the selected organizations had less than 10 staff. To illustrate,5 of the offices include between 1-5 full-time working staff and 7 of theoffices included between 5-10 full-time working staff (Figure 3). Dependingon the literature survey, these offices were categorized according to theirnumber of staff they have, as small (1 to 5), medium (6 to 10) and large(more than 10). Each office in each categorization is also given a numberwhich is given along with the categorization initial (e.g. S1, M1, L1).The selected offices conduct business in different areas of architecturalpractice (Figure 4). All participant organizations have finished residentialprojects. 12 of them have also worked in commercial and public projects.Only 4 of organizations practice in sport facility projects and restoration.Face-to-face interviews were carried out with the selected architecturaloffices in order to retrieve sufficient data on systematic and personalmethods applied in the organizations. The main objectives of this surveywere defined as:1. To examine the knowledge resources of architectural organizations,2. To observe the methods of managing architectural knowledge,3. To evaluate the barriers and benefits of the knowledge managementstrategies.The questionnaire consists of two major parts. The first part is includingquestions about participant information, company background andorganizational setting. The second part is focusing on the management ofknowledge and subdivided into categories as follows:Knowledge sourcesKnowledge sharing, storing and deployment mechanisms,Barriers and benefits of knowledge-based strategies.Figure 4. Scope of design project types bysurvey participants.

286METU JFA 2009/2NURİ CİHAN KAYAÇETİN and ALİ MURAT TANYERThe questionnaire was designed according to a framework which isadopted and altered from the study of Dikmen et al. (2005). The originalframework investigates the impact of organizational learning competencyon the performance of construction companies. Main components of theproposed framework for this research consist of i) knowledge sources, ii)knowledge mechanisms and iii) organizational settings as shown in Figure5. Knowledge sources are divided as internal and external learning sources.Knowledge mechanisms are tools that are used for the acquisition, storing,sharing and deployment of knowledge. Organizational setting consists offactors such as structure, culture and strategies that are developed within.Organizational knowledge is crucial for productivity and innovationin the architectural design process. It is assumed that, employees in anorganization build up individual knowledge repositories prior to anorganizational knowledge can be achieved. Knowledge mechanisms allowthese single repositories to contribute into a more effective organizationalknowledge. In the framework, it was assumed that mechanisms performwell when:the sources are utilized frequently and effectively,necessary mechanisms are used effectively to build theorganizational knowledge,an appropriate organizational setting exists to support learning.The questions in the second part aim to record both qualitative andquantitative data on the related subjects. For a better organization of theresponds, the interviewees are asked to reply in 1-5 Likert-scale implying‘never’ to ‘very often’ for use frequency of knowledge sources, ‘very low’to ‘very high’ for availability of stored knowledge and importance ofknowledge mechanisms and effectiveness of barriers and benefits.In the framework, the vast phenomenon of architectural knowledge isattempted to be categorized in a systematic way which can allow thetypes of knowledge to be identified as tacit or explicit. The architecturalknowledge is broken into three headings such as: (i) design knowledge, (ii)application knowledge and (iii) strategic knowledge.The design knowledge is defined as the knowledge and ability, which aregained through education and practical experience that is necessary forconducting architectural design and generating project ideas and relatedproducts that are created during this process. In this type of knowledge,design constraints, design ideas, schemas, project estimates, drawings etc.are included.The application knowledge is consisting of general building knowledgethat is necessary for realizing the design ideas into real life products. Inthis type of knowledge, unit costs, productivity, equipment and appliedmethods are included.The strategic knowledge is the sum of all knowledge that enablesorganizations to conduct their business which is necessary not only forarchitectural offices but all types of business. In this type of knowledge,information about employees, clients, contractors, competitors andcountry-market are included.The types of knowledge determined in the framework are questionedwhile investigating about knowledge sources and mechanisms. In thearrangement of knowledge acquisition, knowledge sharing, storing of

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN ARCHITECTUREMETU JFA 2009/2287Figure 5. Organizational knowledgemanagement framework (adopted fromDikmen et al., 2005, 170).knowledge and deployment of knowledge, it is aimed to analyze theflow of each knowledge type given as design knowledge, applicationknowledge, and strategic knowledge in the architectural offices. Assumingthe nature of knowledge in the given types range from tacit to explicitin the given order, it is also aimed to observe the effect of nature ofknowledge in the management of knowledge.SURVEY RESULTSThe survey results are examined in three main parts. Part I examines thelearning process in the practice of architecture. Part II investigates theknowledge sharing storage and deployment mechanisms. Lastly, Part IIIidentifies barriers and benefits of managing architectural knowledge.Part I: Knowledge SourcesIn the first part, the individual learning sources, learning from other partiesand organizational learning mechanisms have been examined. Individuallearning and learning from other parties are dependent on external

288METU JFA 2009/2NURİ CİHAN KAYAÇETİN and ALİ MURAT TANYERFigure 6. Individual learning sources.sources or groups. Sources identified for individual learning are seminars,congresses, expositions, tradeshows, printed materials, academics studiesand Internet. Groups identified for learning from other parties are clients,partners, competitors, universities, consultants, governmental and nongovernmental bodies and foreign organizations. Organizational learningincludes activities such as benchmarking and project evaluations whereinformation is derived from internal sources.I-A. Individual Learning SourcesThe survey results (Figure 6) indicate that Internet is considered as themost frequently used individual learning source. 12 out of 15 organizationsagree or strongly agree that the use of Internet is important in collectinginformation on projects, communicating with producers and firms,accessing material knowledge and receiving information on projectapplications. Internet is considered as the most practical resource fororganizations to access information. For example, organizations S1 and S5define Internet as a source of “more information in less time and space”.In spite of its advantages, organizations need to identify how they canbenefit the most from the sources on Internet. It is clear that the amountof time to locate information and the space needed for storage of thisinformation are important issues. On the other hand, Organization M4claims that the comfort of Internet drives individuals through makingnarrow research on issues and be satisfied with those available on Internet.Similar to this opinion, Organization L2 suggests that with the amount ofinformation and orientation, it is not hard to get distracted and end up withless useful information for your cause.Organizations agree on the fact that the emergence of the Internet hashindered the usage of the printed material. When the interviewees areasked to compare the printed material with online sources, OrganizationsS2, M4 and M5 suggest that there is a tendency of not trusting the validityof information on the Internet, so that printed materials prove to be amore dependable source in that sense. 11 out of 15 organizations agree orstrongly agree that printed materials are the main sources of knowledge.Organization M2 mentions that while general information is abundantthroughout the Internet and websites, it is hard to spot information onspecialized issues such as materials and applications. Besides, architectshabitually utilize some of the standard books and catalogues at any phase

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN ARCHITECTUREMETU JFA 2009/2289of the design process, so it is evident that printed materials are valued.It is also observed that, organizations which prefer printed materials asthe main sources of knowledge tend to use Internet as a means of rapidcommunication. Organization L3 gives a brief of this situation by statingthat “in general, we utilize Internet for receiving bidding information andprocedures, find general detailing and applications in websites of otherfirms, and research publications for specialized issues in architecturalprojects”.Other than printed or online sources, tradeshows are observed to bepreferred by 9 out of 15 organizations as useful information sources inorder to “have the feeling” of advances in the AEC industry and “see withtheir own eyes” how the applications are made. 3 organizations emphasizethe importance of experiencing the matter in real life and agree that thisexperience is more valuable in some ways than those of other sources.By 4 organizations, project competition expositions are considered asperfect occasions to interact and share knowledge with colleagues andspecialists. As defined by Organization M4, “architects are a group ofprofessionals who can gather and discuss in a critical manner in ease”. Theorganizations agree that they get the chance to compare themselves withother architects, receive comments and critiques on many dimensions ofprojects and improve themselves at all directions. One of the intervieweeswith a part-time academic position emphasize on the benefits of studentjury seminars by claiming that “one way of keeping yourselves updated isevaluating 80 projects a semester”. The interaction with young candidatesof architecture is considered as an important means of receiving freshinformation.I-B. Learning from Other PartiesArchitectural organizations are regulated by professional andgovernmental bodies, dependent on construction industry and provideservice for clients in public or private sector (Emmitt, 2007, 173). Thesurvey results (Figure 7) are implying these facts as the top three partiesthat organizations are in frequent communication are clients, partners andgovernmental bodies.Clients and partners are considered as essential information sourcesthroughout the whole project processes. 14 out of 15 organizationsconfirm that they communicate with clients frequently and 11 outFigure 7. Learning from other parties.

290METU JFA 2009/2NURİ CİHAN KAYAÇETİN and ALİ MURAT TANYERof 15 organizations suggest partners as a regularly utilized source.Organization S1 and S4 clearly inform that they “record every bit ofinformation received from clients as it is not predictable when you mayneed them”. Organization S3 and M5 add

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN ARCHITECTURE METU JFA 2009/2 279 The Architecture-Engineering-Construction industry has recently been altering the ways of managing its resources. Knowledge is considered to be . Tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995, 59) state that tacit knowledge is personal,