Laufer, A (1985) On site performance improvement programs. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 111(1), pp. 82-97. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The paper presents the various phases in a comprehensive On Site Performance Improvement Program (OSPIP) of a medium size construction project which includes: problem identification; data collection; data analysis and planning the change content; planning the change process; and measuring and evaluating the results. Methods, techniques, and means to put the various program phases into practice are examined, and the problems likely to be encountered are discussed. An OSPIP case study of a medium size construction project is described in detail. It deals with production rate, safety, and manpower turnover problems, improvement plans to overcome them, and how implementation was realized in each of the problem areas. The paper suggests that OSPIP in medium size projects is not only economically feasible and worthwhile, but highly recommendable.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | data analysis, turnover, construction project, program, case study, performance improvement, implementation |
| Subjects: | software systems, performance measurement, production management, contractual arrangements, data analysis and analytics, business management, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Procurement, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Digital Applications, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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