Archive
19. august 2013
The CLIBYG Annual Workshop 2013
Søren Houen Schmidt
The CLIBYG Annual Workshop 2013
Building the bounds of academic research on construction management:
What is worth knowing? What is possible to know?
Copenhagen, November 20 – 22, 2013
UPDATE: Registration is now closed.
The number of participants is limited to 30 and the organizers have taken responsibility for selecting the participants in the workshop. The final selection has been announced.
-------
Background and theme:
In previous years, the CLIBYG annual workshop has been devoted to sharing research results and preparing publications. Now we sense that it is time to convene around more fundamental issues of academic work with the aim of sharing and fostering new visions and ideas for future research. A shared research agenda is not envisioned as an outcome of the workshop since it is cross-fertilization and mutual inspiration of our individual agendas that is the aim.
It could be claimed that not all present research produces knowledge that is worth knowing and theories worth sustaining. According to Brian Loasby, we make theories about things (e.g. the future) that we cannot know in order to get to know about them. To do this, “… we know by setting bounds to what we seek to know, and ignoring … what lies beyond” (Loasby 1998: 4). It is not the bounds as such, but the conventionalized bounds characterizing our field in general which occasionally (perhaps even often) result in uninteresting knowledge and research. A few examples of what it is that is being ignored in present conventional research to the detriment of the knowledge produced are: values, meaning, and uncertainty. Values are often reduced to a matter of minimizing costs; meaning is often reduced to a matter of choice; and uncertainty is often reduced to a matter of calculable and controllable risk. What would have to change in our academic ambitions and practices to allow such values, meaning, and uncertainty to be within the bounds of our theorizing, not beyond them?
Many of the things that – as a matter of convention – are pushed beyond the bounds of our current theorizing are legitimately ignored in the interest of objective science. Clearly, that is true for e.g. individuality, imagination and passion. But in Arnold Pacey’s words, “… mind-numbing philosophies of technology, and the attempt to deny passion, are not a source of objectivity but of distortion” (Pacey 1999: 196). In our empirical work, we meet, observe, and interview people with feelings, ideas, frustrations, etc., but they often disappear (or are considered unfortunate, harmful, disruptive, or superfluous contingencies) when we theorize our observations. What would our field look like, and which research agendas would be pertinent to pursue, if we adopted a more people-centred outlook, acknowledging the perspectives and feelings of the growing number of participants in the construction processes? Presumably, our research could be enriched by the perspectives of e.g. the users of buildings; the yardstick for assessing the worth of a building and the relevance of a project could become more dynamic and multi-dimensional as new actors, passions and concerns are taken into account. Presumably, new types of meaning could be discovered if it was conceived as an outcome of processes of learning, negotiation, and socialization. Presumably, new roles and uses of our theories in practice would result if we started to take uncertainty more seriously as a fundamental condition for acting in the world. How could we envisage academic ambitions and strategies, were such questions and concerns to be regained for reflection and theorizing?
The above reflections are given only as an illustration of the kinds of debates we want to foster at the workshop. They suggest a scaffolding for our debates, but are in no way meant as proposals for or indications of preferred agenda points. It will be completely up to the participants to suggest other types of new issues and concerns – and for the workshop to explore the potentials and implications of such new bounds of theorizing.
We are well aware that the bounds and paradigms of scientific work have regularly been subject to controversy, and that discussions concerning where to build the bounds of knowing in order to increase e.g. academic relevance and impact are taking place on the fringe of many academic disciplines. We still think that creating an occasion for addressing these issues in relation to construction work and the building process in general would potentially inspire new types of research effort and collaboration.
Workshop format
The format of the workshop is academic in a classical sense, i.e. informal discussions and collective reflections. As input to these discussions and reflections, two special provisions are planned:
1. A few key note addresses will be invited. The organizers will invite people who may not necessarily belong to our own field, but who may nevertheless inspire and provoke new conversations at the workshop.
2. Each participant is asked to submit, or to bring, a short (1-4 pages) “inspiration paper” with one or a few new aspects and concerns for research and a brief reflection on the ways the academic agenda might be impacted. All inspiration papers will be reproduced and distributed at the start of the workshop.
The participants will be distributed into smaller discussion groups that will reconvene in plenary at regular intervals for sharing ideas, insights and visions.
Venue
The venue will be announced later. Transportation by bus from CBS to the workshop venue will be provided, leaving on Wednesday, November 20 at 4 pm, returning to arrive in Copenhagen Friday, November 22 at 3 pm.
Costs
Participants will be required to arrange and pay for their own travel to Copenhagen and for accommodation beyond the duration of the workshop.
CLIBYG will cover all expenses during workshop, including room and board.
Participants travelling on their own to the workshop venue will not be reimbursed.
Procedure
Please sign up for the workshop as soon as possible and no later than September 15, 2013.
The number of participants is limited to 30 and the organizers will take responsibility for selecting the participants in the workshop. The final selection will be announced no later than September 20, 2013, at which date participation is formally confirmed.
Organizers
The workshop will be organized by:
• Lise Justesten (lj.ioa@cbs.dk)
• Kristian Kreiner (kk.ioa@cbs.dk)
• Jan Mouritsen (jm.om@cbs.dk)
• Kjell Tryggestad (kt.ioa@cbs.dk)
Please feel free to contact any of the organizers for clarification and further details.
References:
Loasby, B. J. (1998). How do we know? In Economics as the Art of Thought: Essays in Memory of G. L. S. Shackle.S. Boehm, S. F. Frowen and J. Pheby (Eds.). London, Routledge.
Pacey, A. (1999). Meaning in Technology. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
Building the bounds of academic research on construction management:
What is worth knowing? What is possible to know?
Copenhagen, November 20 – 22, 2013
UPDATE: Registration is now closed.
The number of participants is limited to 30 and the organizers have taken responsibility for selecting the participants in the workshop. The final selection has been announced.
-------
Background and theme:
In previous years, the CLIBYG annual workshop has been devoted to sharing research results and preparing publications. Now we sense that it is time to convene around more fundamental issues of academic work with the aim of sharing and fostering new visions and ideas for future research. A shared research agenda is not envisioned as an outcome of the workshop since it is cross-fertilization and mutual inspiration of our individual agendas that is the aim.
It could be claimed that not all present research produces knowledge that is worth knowing and theories worth sustaining. According to Brian Loasby, we make theories about things (e.g. the future) that we cannot know in order to get to know about them. To do this, “… we know by setting bounds to what we seek to know, and ignoring … what lies beyond” (Loasby 1998: 4). It is not the bounds as such, but the conventionalized bounds characterizing our field in general which occasionally (perhaps even often) result in uninteresting knowledge and research. A few examples of what it is that is being ignored in present conventional research to the detriment of the knowledge produced are: values, meaning, and uncertainty. Values are often reduced to a matter of minimizing costs; meaning is often reduced to a matter of choice; and uncertainty is often reduced to a matter of calculable and controllable risk. What would have to change in our academic ambitions and practices to allow such values, meaning, and uncertainty to be within the bounds of our theorizing, not beyond them?
Many of the things that – as a matter of convention – are pushed beyond the bounds of our current theorizing are legitimately ignored in the interest of objective science. Clearly, that is true for e.g. individuality, imagination and passion. But in Arnold Pacey’s words, “… mind-numbing philosophies of technology, and the attempt to deny passion, are not a source of objectivity but of distortion” (Pacey 1999: 196). In our empirical work, we meet, observe, and interview people with feelings, ideas, frustrations, etc., but they often disappear (or are considered unfortunate, harmful, disruptive, or superfluous contingencies) when we theorize our observations. What would our field look like, and which research agendas would be pertinent to pursue, if we adopted a more people-centred outlook, acknowledging the perspectives and feelings of the growing number of participants in the construction processes? Presumably, our research could be enriched by the perspectives of e.g. the users of buildings; the yardstick for assessing the worth of a building and the relevance of a project could become more dynamic and multi-dimensional as new actors, passions and concerns are taken into account. Presumably, new types of meaning could be discovered if it was conceived as an outcome of processes of learning, negotiation, and socialization. Presumably, new roles and uses of our theories in practice would result if we started to take uncertainty more seriously as a fundamental condition for acting in the world. How could we envisage academic ambitions and strategies, were such questions and concerns to be regained for reflection and theorizing?
The above reflections are given only as an illustration of the kinds of debates we want to foster at the workshop. They suggest a scaffolding for our debates, but are in no way meant as proposals for or indications of preferred agenda points. It will be completely up to the participants to suggest other types of new issues and concerns – and for the workshop to explore the potentials and implications of such new bounds of theorizing.
We are well aware that the bounds and paradigms of scientific work have regularly been subject to controversy, and that discussions concerning where to build the bounds of knowing in order to increase e.g. academic relevance and impact are taking place on the fringe of many academic disciplines. We still think that creating an occasion for addressing these issues in relation to construction work and the building process in general would potentially inspire new types of research effort and collaboration.
Workshop format
The format of the workshop is academic in a classical sense, i.e. informal discussions and collective reflections. As input to these discussions and reflections, two special provisions are planned:
1. A few key note addresses will be invited. The organizers will invite people who may not necessarily belong to our own field, but who may nevertheless inspire and provoke new conversations at the workshop.
2. Each participant is asked to submit, or to bring, a short (1-4 pages) “inspiration paper” with one or a few new aspects and concerns for research and a brief reflection on the ways the academic agenda might be impacted. All inspiration papers will be reproduced and distributed at the start of the workshop.
The participants will be distributed into smaller discussion groups that will reconvene in plenary at regular intervals for sharing ideas, insights and visions.
Venue
The venue will be announced later. Transportation by bus from CBS to the workshop venue will be provided, leaving on Wednesday, November 20 at 4 pm, returning to arrive in Copenhagen Friday, November 22 at 3 pm.
Costs
Participants will be required to arrange and pay for their own travel to Copenhagen and for accommodation beyond the duration of the workshop.
CLIBYG will cover all expenses during workshop, including room and board.
Participants travelling on their own to the workshop venue will not be reimbursed.
Procedure
Please sign up for the workshop as soon as possible and no later than September 15, 2013.
The number of participants is limited to 30 and the organizers will take responsibility for selecting the participants in the workshop. The final selection will be announced no later than September 20, 2013, at which date participation is formally confirmed.
Organizers
The workshop will be organized by:
• Lise Justesten (lj.ioa@cbs.dk)
• Kristian Kreiner (kk.ioa@cbs.dk)
• Jan Mouritsen (jm.om@cbs.dk)
• Kjell Tryggestad (kt.ioa@cbs.dk)
Please feel free to contact any of the organizers for clarification and further details.
References:
Loasby, B. J. (1998). How do we know? In Economics as the Art of Thought: Essays in Memory of G. L. S. Shackle.S. Boehm, S. F. Frowen and J. Pheby (Eds.). London, Routledge.
Pacey, A. (1999). Meaning in Technology. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.