Gil, N and Tommelein, I D (2003) Using product and process flexibility to cope with project delivery uncertainty. In: Greenwood, D J (ed.) Proceedings of 19th Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2003, Brighton, UK.
Abstract
Three factors – technical complexity of the product design, need to compress project delivery, and external-driven changes in design criteria – make the project delivery of semiconductor fabrication facilities (fabs) a challenging problem. Empirical findings on strategies to cope with this problem support a comparative study of two project management principles: the principle of investing upfront on a flexible product design and the principle of structuring a more flexible project development process. The project delivery problem is first articulated by outlining the extent of the overlap between the critical steps in the fab development process and by interpreting data to exemplify real-world profiles of external-driven uncertainty. Various strategies that implement the two principles are then analyzed. Specifically, the pros and cons are compared of committing early on by overdesigning with those of postponing critical project decisions by employing modular design definitions and by pre-fabricating building components. The study shows that the two principles are complementary. Managers may find it useful to adopt strategies that implement both principles whenever they have to deliver challenging projects.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | flexibility; uncertainty; postponement; project management; facility delivery |
| Index terms: | manager, strategy, project management, product design, project development, complexity, building component, modular design, comparative study, project delivery, semiconductor, postponement, fabrication |
| Subjects: | manufacturing engineering, management, practitioner, innovation and technology management, project controls, systems engineering, design methods, research design and methodology, electrical systems, project management theory and practice, project delivery, architectural elements |
| Topics: | Time Control, Project Management, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Design Practice, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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