Priven, V and Sacks, R (2015) Effects of the last planner system on social networks among construction trade crews. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 141(6): 04015006, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Lean system thinking concerning the mechanics of construction production systems suggests that the Last Planner System (LPS) improves workflow by creating pull flow and by filtering work packages for maturity. However, empirical evidence shows that even where implemented only partially, LPS can still improve workflow. The authors hypothesize that the LPS engenders a social network among the subcontractors, which enhances coordination. Twelve residential construction projects were studied using action research over periods from 7 to 16 months to measure the impact of the LPS on social networks. Centrality degrees of trade crews rose significantly and the number of active essential communication channels roughly doubled when comparing projects with low and high planning best-practice index scores, showing that where the LPS is more thoroughly implemented, social networks are strengthened. The results contribute new understanding of the LPS and its mechanism. The LPS not only functions on the technical level to improve production control, it also has social impact, building relationships among construction teams that can contribute to improved coordination.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building construction; communication; coordination theory; last planner system; production control; project planning and design; social network analysis |
| Index terms: | action research, social network, social network analysis, building construction, evidence, last planner system, project planning, subcontractor, workflow, package, construction team, production control, residential construction, coordination, construction production, social impact |
| Subjects: | research methods, construction integration, management, sociology, building construction, project controls, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, practitioner, control systems, operations management, project delivery, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Time Control, Site Management, Organizational Design, Procurement, Construction Technology, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Project Management, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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