Nieto-Morote, A and Ruz-Vila, F (2012) Last planner control system applied to a chemical plant construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 138(2), pp. 287-293. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The main difference between the Last Planner production control system developed by Ballard and classical control systems is the way in which projects are controlled and planned. The Last Planner system focuses on controlling production units, workflows, and the quality of the performed work. It also permits the identification of the causes for the noncompletion of planned work and decision making in accordance with the project requirements so that actions are timely and productivity is increased. The objective of this paper is to present the results obtained from implementing the Last Planner system in the construction department of a chemical company. In this department, an information flow problem was detected among its members, in which supervisors lacked knowledge about the work to be performed until the project had been perfectly designed. This problem often led to long delays in the projects. The results from the Last Planner system implementation show that identifying the constraints of the planned work leads to an improvement in the percentage and quality of completed activities.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction project management; last planner; project performance |
| Index terms: | implementation, production control, control system, decision-making, construction project management, supervisor, workflow, information flow, project performance, last planner system, planner, productivity |
| Subjects: | profession, monitoring and control, project management theory and practice, project delivery, contractual arrangements, management, practitioner, project controls, information systems, decision analysis |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Risk Management, Procurement, Digital Applications, Roles and Professions, Project Management, Time Control |
| 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