Choi, J O; Shrestha, B K; Kwak, Y H and Shane, J (2022) Exploring the benefits and trade-offs of design standardization in capital projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 29(3), pp. 1169-1193. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: Facility design standardization strategy has considerable advantages, highlighted by its widespread and consistent use in the shipbuilding and manufacturing industries. However, capital projects have failed to realize these benefits. The primary rationale behind this problem is the lack of proper understanding of design standardization, more specifically the benefits and equally importantly, the trade-offs of design standardization in capital projects. Therefore, this study highlights 13 benefits and six trade-offs of standardization in connection to design standardization, along with specific examples. Design/methodology/approach: To achieve the study objectives, the researchers identified the most impactful benefits and trade-offs in terms of economic impact by surveying prominent players in the industry. Furthermore, the researchers examined 43 actual case projects (a case study) executed with the standardization strategy to evaluate the industry's status in terms of the levels of advantage achievement and disadvantage incurrence. Findings: The results of this survey show that design once, reuse multiple times and design and procurement in advance are the most impactful benefits. Similarly, susceptible to changes in the market conditions is one of the top trade-offs that can be incurred in capital projects when implementing standardization. The results also highlight that design once, reuse multiple times is one of the most achieved benefits in standardized capital projects today, while cost of establishing the design standard is the most incurred trade-off. Originality/value: This study provides important insight into how standardization strategy can be advantageous while also enriching the literature about pitfalls expected from standardization. Moreover, this study's results will help the industrial sector achieve higher levels of design standardization by providing a better understanding of the benefits and trade-offs of design standardization.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | advantages; business strategy; case study; design once; disadvantages |
| Index terms: | surveying, design standard, survey, market condition, manufacturing industry, strategy, business strategy, economic impact, methodology, case study, shipbuilding, standardization, capital project |
| Subjects: | economic and policy analysis, business, data collection methods, health monitoring assessment and metrics, strategic project management, technical documentation, research methods, performance measurement, management, financial analysis, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Quality Management, Health and Safety, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Project Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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