Radtke, M W and Russell, J S (1993) Project-level model process for implementing constructability. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 119(4), pp. 813-831. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper presents a model process for implementing constructability at the project level. The model is the result of input from Construction Industry Institute’s Constructability Implementation Task Force and an investigation into constructability programs currently used in industry. Data used in the creation of the model included: (1) Literature review; (2) questionnaire survey; (3) 62 personal interviews with industry representatives; and (4) four in-depth case studies. Of eight constructability-implementation approaches identified in the investigation, three approaches were primarily used to develop the model. The model consists of milestones, steps, and activities. Three milestones are described: (1) Obtaining constructability capabilities; (2) planning constructability implementation; and (3) implementing constructability. Within each milestone specific steps are described, and each step is further described by activities. The timing of the milestones within facility delivery process is discussed. The model process provides a benchmark for owners to use for enhancing constructability. This benchmark can assist owners in reaping the maximum benefits stemming from constructability.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | case study, Construction Industry Institute, owner, investigation, implementation, constructability, interview, survey, literature review, questionnaire, program |
| Subjects: | software systems, construction integration, sociology, data collection methods, research organizations, contractual arrangements, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Procurement, Research Practice, Design Practice, Digital Applications |
| 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