The role of team leadership in achieving LEED certification in a green building project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – Leadership of the project team is vital for green building projects in achieving LEED certification. Literature findings confirm the need for managing green building projects differently from ordinary projects. The team leader should be able to work with the project team to manage the general project activities while following the LEED certification procedure to finally achieve LEED certification. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – This paper presents a research project which was aimed to explore the role of team leadership in achieving LEED certification in a green building project through a case study research approach. Findings – The research findings revealed the importance of utilizing the appropriate leadership roles of project team members in addition to the project leader’s role to achieve LEED certification for green building projects successfully. The research proposed four team leadership processes required to meet the LEED challenges; namely, proactive planning and visualization; collective implementation; teamwork for win-win; and, continuous learning and knowledge sharing. Originality/value – Based on these findings, the research suggests a new project team environment enabled by effective team leadership to meet the LEED challenges. It is argued that the team leadership role of every team member is unique and best suited when used synergistically to achieve LEED certification for the project. The research is original in applying team leadership concepts to green building projects in a real-life setting.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".