Taylor, T R B and Ford, D N (2008) Managing tipping point dynamics in complex construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(6), pp. 421-431. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Complex construction projects are vulnerable to tipping points. Tipping points are conditions that, when crossed, cause system behaviors to radically change performance. Previous research identified tipping point dynamics as capable of explaining the failure of some nuclear power plant construction projects. These dynamics can also threaten the success of other large, complex construction projects. The current work uses a dynamic project model to test policies for managing tipping point dynamics. The Limerick Unit 2 nuclear power plant project is used to test model usefulness. Sensitivity analysis reveals the rework fraction, strength of subsystem interdependence, and sensitivity of the project to schedule pressure as potential high-leverage points for policy design. The model is used to test policies for managing tipping points that were used to complete the Limerick Unit 2 nuclear power plant after a tipping point threatened project completion. Implications for construction project design and management and research opportunities are discussed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | change management; dynamic models; errors; nuclear powerplants; project management; simulation models |
| Index terms: | construction project, change management, interdependence, nuclear power, sensitivity analysis, rework, policy design, project management, dynamics |
| Subjects: | energy systems, project management theory and practice, environmental hazards, policy studies, operations management, production management, management, systems engineering, organizational analysis |
| Topics: | Governance, Organizational Design, Sustainability, Project Management, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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