A mixed method for measuring incompatibilities between manufacturing approaches and off-site construction

Luo, J; Zhang, H and Sher, W (2021) A mixed method for measuring incompatibilities between manufacturing approaches and off-site construction. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(9), pp. 2516-2548. ISSN 0969-9988

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this research is to measure incompatibilities between the manufacturing approaches (MA) used by the manufacturing industries, and those used for the off-site construction (OSC) of buildings. The aim is to explore which of these approaches could be integrated into OSC in a precise manner as viewed by architects as well as how this might occur. Design/methodology/approach: An empirical research and empirical cycle (EC) was adopted as a methodological framework to measure incompatibilities. A combination of quantitative and qualitative mixed methods was explored through a literature-based case study of prefabricated houses and cars, nine real-life projects built by the second author's research team and the first-named author's practical experiences of leading these projects, based on a logic framework derived from the authors' reflections of their architectural practices. Findings: The findings quantitatively present the incompatibilities between cars (automobile bodies) and prefabricated houses. Design-related aspects have the most potential for integration (42.3% increment). The key lessons were identified as specific design philosophies and related guidelines for architects. Research limitations/implications: The findings are limited to single types of products (cars) and buildings (prefabricated houses) in particular regions. The key lessons just present a preliminary evaluation of the application of the design philosophies and related guidelines in nine real-life projects to comply with word limit constraints. Practical implications: This study could help architects and other practitioners to locate and target and alleviated incompatibilities between MA and OSC. It could also precisely identify integration shortcomings to optimize decision-making as well as technical pathways for possible and effective breakthroughs. Social implications: This study provides fundamental research as a starting point for further discussion and development. A series of additional in-depth investigations combined with case studies are planned for the future. These could provide alternative study approaches to develop more appropriate architectural design methodologies and more streamlined processes. Originality/value: The research contributes an alternative architectural perspective when measuring incompatibilities between MA and OSC. The results highlight the implications of precise measurement and provide guidance for architects. These facilitate the effective and successful integration of MA into OSC of buildings and promote the uptake of lean construction (LC) in OSC.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: case study; integration; manufacturing approaches; measurement incompatibilities; off-site construction
Index terms: architectural design, practitioner, integration, decision-making, methodology, philosophy, manufacturing industry, lean construction, prefabricated house, off-site construction, investigation, architect, reflection, architectural practice, mixed method, case study
Subjects: practitioner, business, data collection methods, profession, philosophical studies, industry analysis, building construction, decision analysis, organizational analysis, professional development, research methods, construction integration, design practice
Topics: Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Construction Technology, Business Strategy, Information Management, Research Practice, Site Management, Organizational Design, Design Practice
Descriptive scope: 5 PCTEA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here