4.5 Article

Comparing Qualitative Analysis Techniques for Construction Engineering and Management Research: The Case of Arctic Water Infrastructure

Journal

Publisher

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0002313

Keywords

Qualitative methods; Constant comparative analysis; Content analysis; Method comparison; Water infrastructure; Operations and maintenance

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [2127353/2022666, 2029692]
  2. National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program [DGE-1762114]
  3. Div Of Civil, Mechanical, & Manufact Inn
  4. Directorate For Engineering [2029692] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Construction is a sociotechnical process that involves interactions between people and the built environment. Qualitative methods have been increasingly used in construction engineering and management (CEM) research, but there is a lack of resources on qualitative method selection and implementation in this field. This paper provides an overview and comparison of three qualitative data analysis techniques applied to a case study on water infrastructure in rural Alaska. The findings show that different analysis techniques can be chosen based on the specific research objectives.
Construction is a dynamic sociotechnical process, consisting of ongoing interdependencies between people and the built environment. Accordingly, finding solutions to construction challenges when they arise requires understanding the interactions between social and technical factors. Over the past three decades, qualitative methods have been increasingly applied in construction engineering and management (CEM) research to understand challenges within this industry. However, there remains a lack of resources in the CEM literature on qualitative method selection and implementation specifically applicable to this domain. Without such guidance, it can be challenging to choose the most appropriate research methods, which can limit theoretical and practical contributions. To begin to address this gap, this paper offers an overview and comparison of three qualitative data analysis techniques-ranging in their use of induction, prevalence in CEM research, and ability to answer different types of research questions. These analysis techniques are applied to the same semi-structured interview data drawn from a case study on water infrastructure in rural Alaska. Insights gained from each method are compared to illustrate the utility of each technique. To the authors' knowledge, this study is the first qualitative method-comparison paper published for a CEM audience. Based on the comparison findings, choosing a deductive content analysis can allow for full characterization and quantification of a data set and discussion of results in relation to a predefined framework, such as a framework based on design and construction standards. A hybrid content analysis can expose new, detailed insights for an existing framework by allowing emergent themes to arise and be quantified. Conversely, a constant comparative analysis can reveal emergent trends and uncover the reasons why these trends occur based on connections between prominent themes, which can help CEM researchers develop new theories. Overall, this study helps advance the sociotechnical side of CEM research by enabling the discipline to better address the industry's complex challenges.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available