Priven, V and Sacks, R (2016) Impacts of the social subcontract and last planner system interventions on the trade-crew workflows of multistory residential construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(7): 4016013, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Despite empirical evidence of the effects of the Last Planner System. (LPS), the mechanisms by which it works are less well understood. Its strengthening of the social networks within construction projects implies the possibility of enhancing collaboration using means other than or in addition to the LPS. Inspired by Rousseau's Social Contract, a new management artefact called the Social Subcontract (SSub) was devised to test this hypothesis. The impacts of SSub and LPS interventions on the workflow in eight residential construction projects were studied using action research over periods from 7 to 16 months. The results provide anecdotal evidence that application of SSub together with LPS improves coordination and workflow more than application of LPS alone. SSub also appears to motivate the general contractor to perform the make-ready process, which otherwise is often not implemented. The research provides new understanding of how the LPS functions. It contributes to industry and academia by relating theory to practice, potentially strengthening the confidence with which practitioners can apply such interventions to improve production flows.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building construction; collaboration; communication; coordination; last planner system; production control; project planning and design; reliability; workflow |
| Index terms: | general contractor, project planning, academia, collaboration, last planner system, evidence, workflow, action research, production control, strengthening, building construction, subcontract, artefact, construction project, social network, residential construction, coordination, practitioner |
| Subjects: | management, project delivery, data collection methods, building construction, structural engineering, educational institutions, construction integration, evaluation and assessment methods, control systems, practitioner, contract type, project controls, sociology, production management |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions, Contract Administration, Research Practice, Time Control, Education, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Construction Technology |
| 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