Unlocking silos and unleashing synergies

Citation

Kumaraswamy, M. (2014), "Unlocking silos and unleashing synergies", Built Environment Project and Asset Management, Vol. 4 No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1108/BEPAM-02-2014-0010

Unlocking silos and unleashing synergies

Article Type: Editorial From: Built Environment Project and Asset Management, Volume 4, Issue 2.

The first BEPAM editorial, i.e., in our inaugural BEPAM issue in 2011, aimed to encapsulate our core objective in its title as: “Integrating ‘Infrastructure Project Management’ with its ‘Built Asset Management’”. Subsequent editorials aspired to capture the editorial mood, if not the state of play of the journal, arguably invoking some degree of editorial latitude in any slight over-stating of status While subjective in any case, the BEPAM trajectory was mapped with the following editorial titles: “Overtaking Targets and Marking Milestones” (issue 1.2, 2011), “Making a Mark and Carving a Niche” (issue 2.1, 2012), Digging in and Drilling deeper (issue 2.2, 2012), “Joining Hands and Advancing Together” (issue 3.1, 2013), a Special Issue on “PPP in Transport: Theory and Practice” (3.2, 2013) and “Spreading Wings and Soaring Higher” (issue 4.1, 2014).

The present editorial title as above, reconnects to our core objective in linking project management principles, practices and supply chains to those in built asset management. The silos within which our designers, constructors and operators work, must be unlocked and linked to enable the exchange of experiential knowledge. For example, we hope to trigger and facilitate the development of a relevant body of linked knowledge, as well as to energise and synergise those working and researching in project management with their counterparts built facility/asset management, in order to target better value and more sustainable built assets.

BEPAM is accelerating on many fronts. Examples are our move to four issues per year this year and the three forthcoming special issues at various stages of development. Following on from our first special issue on PPP in transport in 2013, the next one on “Project Management and Asset Management in Emerging Economies” is building up well under the able leadership of Florence Ling with support from Carlos Formoso, with a couple of papers already accepted and others being processed. While we have two guest editors, one must take the lead to co-ordinate the editorial management system. Florence’s proven efficiency is now proving valuable in her conscientious processing of the unexpectedly high number of submissions received under this theme.

Similarly Alex Opoku is steering what will be our third special issue, under the theme of “Leadership, Culture and Sustainable Built Environment”, with support from Vian Ahmed and Heather Cruickshank. Vian's experience with special issues in many journals is surely valuable to draw on too. The other special issue on which submissions are just coming in, is on “BIM for Built Asset Management” (BIM for BAM). Peter Love is co-ordinating this with Jane Matthews from Curtin University, along with their joint guest editors Steve Lockley in the UK and Ian Simpson. It is refreshing to have a leading practitioner such as Ian in a guest editorial team, particularly in such a practical realm as BIM development and applications.

Our worldwide reach and recognition continues on its upward trend. We are pleased to have been classified as one of the 12 “breakthrough” journals in the prestigious “academic breakthroughs” hub for construction engineering and management researchers worldwide, hosted by Purdue University, as in http://rebar.ecn. purdue. edu/phd2/ and http://rebar.ecn.purdue.edu/phd2/journals.aspx. Living up to our reputation as a breakthrough journal, we are always on the lookout for paradigm shifting breakout theories and innovative breakaway practices. We welcome rigorous theory building papers, as well as well justified and documented industry breakthroughs.

For example, in the current issue, the paper on “Stretching risk management standards: Multi-organizational perspectives” by Liisa Lehtiranta and Juha-Matti Junnonen breaks out from traditional risk management frameworks, to a multi-organisational viewpoint. One wonders if another research exercise may investigate if this could also feed into the “joint risk management” between project participants that is increasingly expected in collaborative contractual arrangements, e.g., in partnering, alliancing or integrated project delivery modalities. The paper on “Industrial innovation: Case study of the Claerwen Dam” by Gary Holt drills into and documents a series of historical innovations in dam design, technology and management, which can inspire and help justify other useful innovations, including some important “breakthroughs”.

The three papers on PPPs in this issue are from different continents, while probing three different topics that can be of interest in all continents. Zhen Hu, Shu Chen, Xueqing Zhang focus on a basic driver for PPP in “Value for Money” based on an empirical study in Japan. Bryan Tyrone Adey, Nam Lethanh, Andreas Hartmann and Francesco Viti evaluate intervention strategies, based on a Road Link in the Netherlands. This is an area where complexities and special challenges abound, e.g., in adjusting to unexpected needs and constraints over long time-frames, hence innovative approaches are needed. Job Taiwo Gbadegesin and Bioye Tajudeen Aluko dig into another PPP driver, i.e., funding needs, in the context of tertiary institutions in Nigeria. Readers may relate comparable elements, e.g., the methodologies, if not some basic findings, to their own domains, possibly even triggering thoughts for specific studies elsewhere.

All in all, BEPAM 4.2 offers as in previous issues, a range of significant, if not breakthrough research findings from various countries and authors with diverse backgrounds. We trust that each of our readers will find substantial elements in the current package in this issue to both interest and inspire.

Mohan Kumaraswamy