Johansen, D E and Greenwood, D J (1999) Hard, soft or lean? Planning on medium-sized construction projects. In: Hughes, W (ed.) Proceedings of 15th Annual ARCOM Conference, 15-17 September 1999, Liverpool, UK.
Abstract
In a paper presented to the 11th Annual ARCOM Conference, Johansen examined the way that managers and planners in medium-sized construction projects plan in a flexible manner. This was termed 'soft planning' and contrasted with the textbook approach which was termed 'hard' planning. The fundamental components of hard planning are firm dates and critical activities. The reality was found to be quite different from the textbook approach. The conclusion then, was that methods of soft planning methodologies should be developed to support what was actually happening. Here this conclusion is revisited in the light of lean production concepts. After defining these concepts, the authors consider how they can affect the development of planning theories in construction; in particular, how concepts such as “shielding”, “look-ahead planning” and “last planner” can allow managers to overcome the barriers to hard planning.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | hard/soft planning; lean construction; last planner; look-ahead planning |
| Index terms: | shielding, manager, lean construction, lean production, conference, planner, construction project, methodology |
| Subjects: | research dissemination and communication, profession, practitioner, manufacturing engineering, research methods, safety engineering, production management, building construction |
| Topics: | Site Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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