Case Analysis LITERATURE REVIEW

185 According to the results obtained by changing the level of the architect’s experience from High to Medium rework 12.8 days to 18.23days, coordination 22.63 to 30.43 and decision wait 14.70 to 22 increase. Statistics also shows that by changing the skill level of the architect from High to low, duration increases from 11 days to 13.5 days and the total work cost increases from 98941 to 120324 Table 5.4. The right side column of Table 5.4 shows the amount of increase in the percentage resulting from changing the architect’s skill. Indeed, Table 5.4 refers to hypotheses 1 and 2 that are related to the skill level of team members. The considerable effect of changing the architect’s skill level on the parameters of the project performance is revealed after comparing project parameters with one another. Table 5.4. Effect of changing architect skill level on project performance parameters Affected Item Parameters’ Value Base on Architect Skill Level Difference -Arising from Changing Level of Skill High Medium Work Duration 11 13.5 22.7 Total work cost 98941 120324 21.6 Rework 12.8 18.23 42.4 Coordination 22.63 30.43 34.5 Decision wait 14.70 22 49.6 186 The abovementioned results are related to the first and second hypothesis of this study which pertains to the characteristics of the tacit dominant area. We claimed that changing the skill of the experts involved in the project could affect the performance of team members while dealing with tacit knowledge. The diagram of differences resulting from changing the architect’s skill is shown in Figure 5.4. This diagram shows that there is a relation between the level of the architect’s skill and project parameters. By changing the skill level from High to Medium value of parameters i.e. work duration, rework, coordination and decision wait increase. In other words, the completeness of sent received knowledge by the architect depends on hisher skill. Architect’s awareness of the type of the knowledge required to be sent or received, considerably decreases the parameters of the project. Figure 5.4. Parameter Changes Arising from Changing Architect Skill 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 High Skill Architect Medium Skill Architect 187 As mentioned earlier, the last simulation was for setting duration of “identifying knowledge” activities to 0 which stemmed from explicating the required knowledge. This simulation was related to the third hypothesis. We made three more simulations in connection with the properties of the explicit dominant area. According to the third hypothesis, adding knowledge to Macmillan 2001 framework for conceptual design phase eliminated the need for identifying the required knowledge. The obtained results from this simulation are shown in Table 5.5. In this table “Base Case” column contains the simulation values for Macmillan conceptual design framework. Next right side column is for changing “Identify Knowledge” activities to 0. Comparing these two columns indicates that work duration and total work cost have decreased considerably. Referring to the results it becomes clear that adding knowledge flow to the work flow in Macmillan model reduces work duration by 33.6, total work cost by 33.3 and also FRI by 3.3. For instance, work duration of base case decreases from 11 days SD=0.5 to 7.3 days SD=0.3. Although functional risk has increased by 3.3, its value is still under 0.5. Based on SimVision FRI0.5 is an acceptable range for this parameter. Values above 0.5 indicate a very high likelihood of project component or task quality failures if the facility developer does not take any action to lower the risks. FRI and PRI values of above 0.4 mean that many failures are not going to be reworked, and values that are above 0.7 are unacceptable level of risk for any organization. More discussion about the results will be presented in the next section. 188 Table 5.5. Effect of removing “Identify Knowledge” activities due to adding knowledge flow to Macmillan 2001 conceptual design process Affected Item Base Case “0” Duration for “Identify Knowledge” Activities Difference Value SD Value SD Work duration 11 days o.5 7.3 days 0.3 -33.6 Total work cost 98941 0.0 65967 0.0 -33.3 Process quality risk 0.28 0.027 0.29 0.033 +3.6 Product quality risk 0.15 0.014 0.15 0.018 Functional risk index 0.30 0.029 0.29 0.036 -3.3 Note: SD stands for Standard Deviation for simulation trials Indeed, Table 5.5 contains the values to prove hypothesis 3 whereby we claimed that explicating the required knowledge during the conceptual design phase can improve project performance. As demonstrated, work duration and total work cost have reduced considerably.

5.4 Discussion and Conclusion

Recalling chapter 2 we had two propositions: Proposition 1: Knowledge capture can be improved when design professionals know what the required knowledge are and when they are needed during conceptual design phase. 189 Proposition 2: With improved knowledge capture, design professionals can improve their knowledge transfer and application during conceptual design phase. From the case study we elicited the knowledge such as the proper space between the blocks for proper ventilation which is required to be exchanged among experts for the purpose of concept design. In this way, we found out that specifying the proper space between blocks is an essential mechanical consideration by which the need for proper ventilation is satisfied. Also, responsible experts have been identified to provide and apply this knowledge. Therefore, by knowing the entity of knowledge -such as the required space for rainwater storage tank- and also by identifying the responsible expert -architect or mechanicalelectrical engineers- who can provide it, the necessary considerations can be made at the proper time. For instance, sun path is a mechanical requirement which must be noticed by architects for orienting buildings and openings. The proposed pattern shows that this knowledge has to be sent from the mechanical side to the architect side in the third step - to identify problems through the existing solutions- of Macmillan 2001 model. In such a situation, we are able to elicit the expert tacit knowledge. In other words, by this we can convert expert tacit knowledge to explicit type. Therefore, this study claims that by explicating the entity of the required knowledge during the conceptual design phase – according to Macmillan 2001 framework-, movement of knowledge between architects and mechanicalelectrical experts is facilitated. Thus, project team performance is improved.