Abstracts – Browse Results
Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 9 results ...
Apollo, M and Burkacki, D (2024) Key success factors for small design offices in the bidding process. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 20(01), 32–46.
Gamal, A, Nashaat, B, Shahda, M M and Nosier, S R (2024) Ten questions concerning the integration of digital fabrication techniques into the architectural design process. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 20(01), 120–49.
Goncikowski, M (2024) Research by design – determining the form of the initial architectural concept of a skyscraper building in Warsaw. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 20(01), 1–31.
Lotfabadi, P and Iranmanesh, A (2024) Evaluation of learning methods in architecture design studio via analytic hierarchy process: a case study. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 20(01), 47–64.
Mahmoudi Motahar, M, Hosseini Nourzad, S H and Rahimi, F (2024) Integrating complete disassembly planning with deconstructability assessment to facilitate designing deconstructable buildings. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 20(01), 150–67.
Rapheal, O, Adedeji, A, Opeyemi, O and Olugbenro, O (2024) Modelling client and construction firm barriers hindering social client relationship management system implementation in the built environment. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 20(01), 102–19.
Rizi, R A, Bagherzadeh, F, Schnabel, M A and Bakshi, N (2024) A design methodology to consider occupants’ spatial adjustment and manage view content in adaptive façade design for improving visual comfort. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 20(01), 168–90.
Tabarroki, S, Nazari, A and Banihashemi, S (2024) Risk stages and factors in architectural design- A structural equation modelling. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 20(01), 79–101.
Van Nguyen, M and Ha, K D (2024) A corporate social responsibility implementation index for architectural design firms in Vietnam. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 20(01), 65–78.
- Type: Journal Article
- Keywords: Architectural design firms (ADFs); Construction industry; Corporation social responsibility (CSR); Fuzzy synthetic evaluation (FSE);
- ISBN/ISSN: 1745-2007
- URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2023.2166008
- Abstract:
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become a popular concept in the construction industry because of the growing concerns over sustainable development. While architectural design firms (ADFs) hold an essential role in construction projects, there is a lack of studies examining CSR implementation (CSRI) in these organizations. This research aims to identify common CSR activities and to develop a CSRI index that enables practitioners to understand the importance of each CSR group. Through literature review and semi-structured interviews, critical CSR activities were first identified. Through factor analysis, 24 CSR activities were then organized into six groups. The fuzzy synthetic evaluation (FSE) technique was employed to value the importance of each group, which then be normalized to determine the CSRI index. The findings highlight that CSRI in Vietnamese ADFs is at a pretty high level. The clients’ interest CSR group ranks as the most critical position, followed by employees’ interest, community engagement, ethics, shareholders’ and partners’ interest, and environment preservation, respectively. This research is one of the first studies that examine and evaluate CSRI in ADFs. The CSRI index is a robust formulation that provides Vietnamese ADFs with a practical tool to allocate scarce organizational resources to gain competitive business advantages properly.