Causality and interpretation: a new design model inspired by the Aristotelian legacy

References

• Agarwal, J., et al., 2012. Robustness of structures: lessons from failures. Structural Engineering International, 22 (1), 105–111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, C., 1971. The state of the art in design methods. DMG Newsletter, 5 (3), 3–7.
   Google Scholar
• Åman, P., Andersson, H., and Hobday, M., 2017. The scope of design knowledge: integrating the technically rational and human-centered dimensions. Design Issues, 33 (2), 58–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andreasen, M.M., Hansen, C.T., and Cash, P., 2015. Conceptual design. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Argyris, C., 1996. Actionable knowledge: design causality in the service of consequential theory. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32 (4), 390–406.
   Google Scholar
• Aristotle., 2009. The basic works of Aristotle. Modern library classics. New York, NY: Random House Publishing Group.
   Google Scholar
• Aristotle., 2012. The art of rhetoric. London, UK: Harper Press.
   Google Scholar
• Arroyo, P., 2014. Exploring decision-making methods for sustainable design in commercial buildings. PhD Thesis. UC Berkeley.
   Google Scholar
• Asano, K., 1997. Mathematics and Dialectic in Plato’s Republic VI-VII. PhD Thesis. University of Texas.
   Google Scholar
• Badke-Schaub, P. and Eris, O., 2013. A theory of design intuition: does design methodology need to account for processes of the unconscious such as intuition. In: A. Chakrabarti and L. Blessing, eds. An anthology of theories and models of design: philosophy, approaches and empirical explorations. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 351–368.
   Google Scholar
• Bailer-Jones, D.M., 2002. Models, metaphors and analogies. In: S.M. Cahn, ed. The Blackwell guide to the philosophy of science. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers, 108–127.
   Google Scholar
• Ballard, G., 2012. Target value design. In: DS 70: Proceedings of Design 2012, Dubrovnik. Amsterdam The Netherlands: Design Society, 12.
   Google Scholar
• Ballard, G. and Koskela, L., 2013. Rhetoric and design. In: U. Lindemann, S. Venkataraman, Y. Kim, W. Lee, J. Clarkson, and G. Cascini, eds. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED13: design for harmonies, 19–22 August 2013, Seoul. Amsterdam The Netherlands: Design Society, 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Ballard, H.G., 2000. The last planner system of production control. PhD Thesis. University of Birmingham.
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, P.S., Hudson, J., and Stanley, C., 1999. Good practice in briefing: the limits of rationality. Automation in Construction, 8 (6), 633–642.
   Google Scholar
• Bayazit, N., 2004. Investigating design: a review of forty years of design research. Design Issues, 20 (1), 16–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bedny, G. and Meister, D., 2014. The Russian theory of activity: current applications to design and learning. applied psychology series. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Behm, M., 2005. Linking construction fatalities to the design for construction safety concept. Safety Science, 43 (8), 589–611.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Booth, D.W., 1996. Mathematics as a design tool: the case of architecture reconsidered. Design Issues, 12 (3), 77–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Browning, T.R., 2002. Process integration using the design structure matrix. Systems Engineering, 5 (3), 180–193.
   Google Scholar
• Bucciarelli, L.L., 2002. Between thought and object in engineering design. Design Studies, 23 (3), 219–231.
   Google Scholar
• Bucciarelli, L.L. and Bucciarelli, L.L., 1994. Designing engineers. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Buchanan, R., 1985. Declaration by design: rhetoric, argument, and demonstration in design practice. Design Issues, 2 (1), 4–22.
   Google Scholar
• Buchanan, R., 2009. Thinking about design: an historical perspective. In: A. Meijers, ed. Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences, handbook of the philosophy of science. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier, 409–453.
   Google Scholar
• Bybee, M.D., 1991. Abduction and rhetorical theory. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 24 (4), 281–300.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cash, P., Hicks, B., and Culley, S., 2015. Activity theory as a means for multi-scale analysis of the engineering design process: a protocol study of design in practice. Design Studies, 38, 1–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chakrabarti, A. and Blessing, L.T.M., eds., 2014. An anthology of theories and models of design. London, UK: Springer Science & Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• Channell, D.F., 2009. The emergence of the engineering sciences: An historical analysis. In: A. Meijers, ed. Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier, 117–154.
   Google Scholar
• Christensen, B.T. and Ball, L.J., 2019. Building a discipline: indicators of expansion, integration and consolidation in design research across four decades. Design Studies, 65, 18–34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Churchman, C., 1970. The artificiality of science. Contemporary Psychology: A Journal of Reviews, 15 (6), 385–386.
   Google Scholar
• Çıdık, M.S. and Boyd, D., 2020. “Shared sense of purposefulness”: a new concept to understand the practice of coordinating design in construction. Construction Management and Economics, 38 (1), 18–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Codinhoto, R., 2013. Evidence and design: an investigation of the use of evidence in the design of healthcare environments. PhD Thesis. The University of Salford.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, H.F., 1994. The scientific revolution: a historiographical inquiry. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J.W. and Creswell, J.D., 2017. Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. London, UK: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Crilly, N., et al., 2008. Design as communication: exploring the validity and utility of relating intention to interpretation. Design Studies, 29 (5), 425–457.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cross, N., 2001a. Designerly ways of knowing: design discipline versus design science. Design Issues, 17 (3), 49–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cross, N., 2001b. Design cognition: results from protocol and other empirical studies of design activity. In: Design knowing and learning: cognition in design education. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier, 79–103.
   Google Scholar
• de Figueiredo, A.D., 2017. Qualitative research and the challenges of complexity. In: Computer supported qualitative research. New York, NY: Springer, 14–27.
   Google Scholar
• de Figueiredo, A.D., and da Cunha, P.R., 2007. Action research and design in information systems. In: N. Kock, ed. Information systems action research: an applied view of emerging concepts and methods. New York, NY: Springer, 61–96.
   Google Scholar
• Deutsch, D., 1997. The fabric of reality. London, UK: The Penguin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dilnot, C., 2018. Thinking design: a personal perspective on the development of the Design Research Society. Design Studies, 54, 142–145.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dixon, B., 2019. Experiments in experience: towards an alignment of research through design and John Dewey’s pragmatism. Design Issues, 35 (2), 5–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubin, R., 1978. Theory development. New York, NY: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eastman, C., 2001. New directions in design cognition: studies of representation and recall. In: C. Eastman, M. McCracken, and W. Newstetter, eds. Design knowing and learning: cognition in design education. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science, 147–198.
   Google Scholar
• Engwall, M., Kling, R., and Werr, A., 2005. Models in action: how management models are interpreted in new product development. R and D Management, 35 (4), 427–439.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eppinger, S.D. and Browning, T.R., 2012. Design structure matrix methods and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Evbuomwan, N.F.O., Sivaloganathan, S., and Jebb, A., 1996. Survey of Design Philosophies, Models, Methods and Systems. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture. 210 (4), 301–320. doi:https://doi.org/10.1243/PIME_PROC_1996_210_123_02
   Google Scholar
• Eynon, J., 2013. The design manager’s handbook. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, M., et al., 2017. Integrating project delivery. New York, NY: Wiley Online Library.
   Google Scholar
• Forsberg, K., Mooz, H., and Cotterman, H., 2005. Visualizing project management: models and frameworks for mastering complex systems. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Frigg, R. and Hartmann, S., 2006. Models in Science. In: E.N. Zalta, ed. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Palo Alto, CA: Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.
   Google Scholar
• Galle, P., 2008. Candidate worldviews for design theory. Design Studies, 29 (3), 267–303.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garver, E. and Buchanan, R., 2000. Pluralism in theory and practice: Richard McKeon and American philosophy. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gentner, D. and Stevens, A.L., 2014. Mental models. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gero, J.S., 1990. Design prototypes: a knowledge representation schema for design. AI Magazine, 11 (4), 26–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gero, J.S. and Kannengiesser, U., 2004. The situated function–behaviour–structure framework. Design Studies, 25 (4), 373–391.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giacomin, J., 2014. What is human-centred design? The Design Journal, 17 (4), 606–623.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greca, I.M. and Moreira, M.A., 2000. Mental models, conceptual models, and modelling. International Journal of Science Education, 22 (1), 1–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haase, L.M. and Laursen, L.N., 2019. Meaning frames: the structure of problem frames and solution frames. Design Issues, 35 (3), 20–34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halstrøm, P.L., 2017. Rhetorical design studies: the art of making design choices explicit. PhD Thesis. The Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts.
   Google Scholar
• Hatchuel, A. and Weil, B., 2003. A new approach of innovative design: an introduction to C-K theory. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED 03, 19–21 August, Stockholm. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Design Society; 109–110.
   Google Scholar
• Heidegger, M., 1996. Being and time: a translation of Sein und Zeit. New York, NY: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Herrick, J.A., 2017. The history and theory of rhetoric: an introduction. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hestenes, D., 2006. Notes for a modeling theory of science, cognition and instruction. In: Proceedings of the 2006 GIREP Conference, August 2006, Amsterdam. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: University of Amsterdam, 27.
   Google Scholar
• Hintikka, J. and Remes, U., 1974. The method of analysis: its geometrical origin and its general significance. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Hubka, V. and Eder, W.E., 2012. Design science: introduction to the needs, scope and organization of engineering design knowledge. London, UK: Springer Science & Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• Huppatz, D.J., 2015. Revisiting Herbert Simon’s ‘science of design’. Design Issues, 31 (2), 29–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iivari, J., Hirschheim, R., and Klein, H.K., 1998. A paradigmatic analysis contrasting information systems development approaches and methodologies. Information Systems Research, 9 (2), 164–193.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, J. and Henderson, A., 2011. Conceptual models: core to good design. synthesis lectures on human-centered informatics. London, UK: Morgan & Claypool Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, D. and Gregor, S., 2007. The anatomy of a design theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8 (5), 312–335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, J.C., 1977. How my thoughts about design methods have changed during the years. Design Methods and Theories, 11 (1), 48–62.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, J.C., 1992. Design methods. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Kärnä, S. and Junnonen, J.-M., 2017. Designers’ performance evaluation in construction projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 24 (1), 154–169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleinsmann, M., et al., 2012. Development of design collaboration skills. Journal of Engineering Design, 23 (7), 485–506.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koskela, L., 2000. An exploration towards a production theory and its application to construction. Doctoral Dissertation. VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland.
   Google Scholar
• Koskela, L. and Ballard, G., 2013. The two pillars of design theory: Method of analysis and rhetoric. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED13: Design for Harmonies, 19–22 August 2013, Seoul. Amsterdam The Netherlands: Design Society, 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Koskela, L. and Kroll, E., 2020. Demonstration, extension, and refinement of the re-proposed notion of design abduction. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design Analysis and Manufacturing, 34 (2), 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Koskela, L., et al., 2014. The Aristotelian proto-theory of design. In: A. Chakrabarti and L.T.M. Blessing, eds. An anthology of theories and models of design. London, UK: Springer, 285–303.
   Google Scholar
• Koskela, L., et al., 2019. Epistemological explanation of lean construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 145 (2), 04018131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kranakis, E., Bijker, W.E., and Pinch, T., 1997. Constructing a bridge: An exploration of engineering culture, design, and research in nineteenth-century France and America. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kroll, E. and Koskela, L., 2016. Applying the proto-theory of design to explain and modify the parameter analysis method of conceptual design. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 4 (1), 1–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kroll, E. and Weisbrod, G., 2020. Testing and evaluating the applicability and effectiveness of the new idea-configuration-evaluation (ICE) method of conceptual design. Research in Engineering Design, 31 (1), 103–122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lefèvre, W. and Buchwald, J.Z., 2004. Picturing machines 1400-1700. How technical drawings shaped early engineering practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lloyd, P., 2019. You make it and you try it out: seeds of design discipline futures. Design Studies, 65, 167–181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Losee, J., 2001. A historical introduction to the philosophy of science. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Love, P.E. and Li, H., 2000. Quantifying the causes and costs of rework in construction. Construction Management and Economics, 18 (4), 479–490.
   Google Scholar
• Love, P.E., Edwards, D.J., and Irani, Z., 2008. Forensic project management: an exploratory examination of the causal behavior of design-induced rework. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 55 (2), 234–247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Love, T., 2000. Philosophy of design: a meta-theoretical structure for design theory. Design Studies, 21 (3), 293–313.
   Google Scholar
• Love, T., 2002. Constructing a coherent cross-disciplinary body of theory about designing and designs: some philosophical issues. Design Studies, 23 (3), 345–361.
   Google Scholar
• Love, T., 2003. Design as a social process: bodies, brains and social aspects of designing. Journal of Design Research, 3 (1), 45–54.
   Google Scholar
• Lurås, S., 2016. Systems intertwined: a systemic view on the design situation. Design Issues, 32 (3), 30–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maier, A.M., et al., 2014. Perceiving design as modelling: a cybernetic systems perspective. In: A. Chakrabarti and L.T.M. Blessing, eds. An anthology of theories and models of design. London, UK: Springer, 133–149.
   Google Scholar
• Margolin, V. and Margolin, S., 2002. A ‘social model’ of design: issues of practice and research. Design Issues, 18 (4), 24–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKeon, R.P., 1968. Discourse, demonstration, verification, and justification. Logique et Analyse, 11 (41–42), 37–92.
   Google Scholar
• McKeon, R.P., 1998. Selected writings of Richard Mckeon: volume one: philosophy, science, and culture. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Melles, G., 2008. An enlarged pragmatist inquiry paradigm for methodological pluralism in academic design research. Artifact, 2 (1), 3–13.
   Google Scholar
• Menn, S., 2002. Plato and the method of analysis. Phronesis, 47 (3), 193–223.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, P., 2017. Design research: aesthetic epistemology and explanatory knowledge. She Ji, 3 (2), 117–132.
   Google Scholar
• Netz, R., 2003. The shaping of deduction in Greek mathematics: a study in cognitive history. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nicholas, E. and Patrick, D., 2014. Spatial analysis of building collapse in Nigeria: a study of the causes and problems. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 5 (25), 95–107.
   Google Scholar
• Niiniluoto, I., 1999. Abduction and geometrical analysis: notes on Charles S. Peirce and Edgar Allan Poe. In: L. Magnani, N.J. Nersessian, and P. Thagard, eds., Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery. Boston, MA: Springer. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-4813-3_15.
   Google Scholar
• Norman, D.A., 1988. The psychology of everyday things. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Ormiston, G.L. and Schrift, A.D., 1990. The hermeneutic tradition: from ast to ricoeur. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Parry, R., 2003. Episteme and Techne. In: E.N. Zalta, ed. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Palo Alto, CA: Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.
   Google Scholar
• Piccolo, S.A., et al., 2019. Iterations as the result of social and technical factors: empirical evidence from a large-scale design project. Research in Engineering Design, 30 (2), 251–270.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pikas, E., 2019. Causality and interpretation: integrating the technical and social aspects of design. Doctoral Dissertation. Aalto University.
   Google Scholar
• Pikas, E., Koskela, L., and Seppänen, O., 2020. Improving building design processes and design management practices: a case study. Sustainability, 12 (3), 911.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plochmann, G.K., 1990. Richard McKeon: a study. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rankine, W.J.M., 1872. A manual of applied mechanics. London, UK: Charles Griffin and Company.
   Google Scholar
• RIBA., 2020. RIBA plan of work 2020 overview. London, UK: Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA).
   Google Scholar
• Rittel, H.W.J. and Webber, M.M., 1973. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730
   Google Scholar
• Rittel, H.W.J., 1980. APIS, a concept for an argumentative planning information system. Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban & Regional Development, University of California.
   Google Scholar
• Rittel, H.W. J., 1987. The reasoning of designers. Boston, MA: IGP, 11.
   Google Scholar
• Roochnik, D., 2004. Retrieving the ancients: an introduction to Greek philosophy. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Roozenburg, N.F. and Eekels, J., 1995. Product design: fundamentals and methods. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Rylander, A., 2012. Pragmatism and design research - an overview. Stockholm, Sweden: Royal Institute of Technology, 42.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks, R., et al., 2015. Safety by design: dialogues between designers and builders using virtual reality. Construction Management and Economics, 33 (1), 55–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanders, E.B.-N. and Stappers, P.J., 2008. Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. Co-design, 4 (1), 5–18.
   Google Scholar
• Schofield, R., 2016. RICS professional guidance: global lessons learned. London, UK: Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), 28.
   Google Scholar
• Shields, C., 2016. Aristotle. In: E.N. Zalta, ed. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Palo Alto, CA: Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H.A., 1969. The sciences of the artificial. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Snodgrass, A. and Coyne, R., 2013. Interpretation in architecture: design as way of thinking. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Stevens, R., 1974. James and Husserl: the foundations of meaning. Hague, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
   Google Scholar
• Stumpf, S.C. and McDonnell, J.T., 2002. Talking about team framing: using argumentation to analyse and support experiential learning in early design episodes. Design Studies, 23 (1), 5–23.
   Google Scholar
• Suh, N.P., 2001. Axiomatic design: advances and applications. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Taura, T. and Nagai, Y., 2017. Creativity in innovation design: the roles of intuition, synthesis, and hypothesis. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 5 (3–4), 131–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tenkasi, R.R.V. and Hay, G.W., 2007. Following the second legacy of Aristotle: the scholar-practitioner as an epistemic technician. In: A.B. Shani, S.A. Mohman, W.A. Pasmore, B. Stymne, and N. Adler, eds. Handbook of collaborative management research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 49.
   Google Scholar
• Torraco, R.J., 2005. Writing integrative literature reviews: guidelines and examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4 (3), 356–367.
   Google Scholar
• Torraco, R.J., 2016. Writing integrative literature reviews: using the past and present to explore the future. Human Resource Development Review, 15 (4), 404–428.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uusitalo, P., Seppänen, O., Peltokorpi, A., and Olivieri, H., 2019. A lean design management process based on planning the level of detail in BIM-based design. In: Proceedings of the 35th CIB 2018 Conference: IT in Design, Construction, and Management, 1–3 October, 2018, Chicago. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 147–152.
   Google Scholar
• Van Gelder, T., 1998. Monism, dualism, pluralism. Mind and Language, 13 (1), 76–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Inwagen, P., 2019. Metaphysics. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Vermaas, P.E., 2013. The coexistence of engineering meanings of function: four responses and their methodological implications. AI Edam, 27 (3), 191–202.
   Google Scholar
• Vermaas, P.E., 2014. Design theories, models and their testing: on the scientific status of design research. In: A. Chakrabarti and L.T.M. Blessing, eds. An anthology of theories and models of design. London, UK: Springer, 47–66.
   Google Scholar
• Whetten, D.A., 1989. What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 14 (4), 490–495.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynn, D.C. and Clarkson, P.J., 2018. Process models in design and development. Research in Engineering Design, 29 (2), 161–202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynn, D.C. and Eckert, C.M., 2017. Perspectives on iteration in design and development. Research in Engineering Design, 28 (2), 153–184.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeiler, W. and Savanovic, P., 2009. Integral morphological C-K design approach for multidisciplinary building design. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 5 (4), 193–214.
   Google Scholar
• Zimina, D., Ballard, G., and Pasquire, C., 2012. Target value design: using collaboration and a lean approach to reduce construction cost. Construction Management and Economics, 30 (5), 383–398.
   Google Scholar