Antunes, R; González, V A; Walsh, K; Rojas, O; O'Sullivan, M and Odeh, I (2018) Benchmarking project-driven production in construction using productivity function: Capacity and cycle time. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 144(3): 04017118, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Despite being inaccurate, linear models are often used by construction managers to describe production, which limits the development and application of a production theory. The objective of this study is to formulate and test new equations comprehending the non-steady-state conditions of repetitive project-driven processes in construction to calculate cycle time and capacity based on productivity function models. The algebraic calculations were developed from Little's Law to estimate cycle times and capacity and then tested on productivity function models of 11 construction processes (two cases arranged in a supply chain). It has been reaffirmed that the transient time negatively impacts process productivity. The transient time and theoretical average cycle time showed a proportional relationship to the average cycle times of the samples, resulting in a benchmarking ranking close to the one measured. This study contributes to the body of knowledge by introducing equations for capacity and cycle time based on a process productivity function model that can be used on processes in any state. It can be an alternative to three-point estimation, for instance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cost and schedule; lean construction; production management; productivity function |
| Index terms: | lean construction, production management, estimate, construction process, benchmarking, repetitive project, construction manager, estimation, productivity, body of knowledge |
| Subjects: | knowledge management, performance measurement, project delivery, financial and cost management, management, building construction, profession, production management |
| Topics: | Information Management, Quality Management, Project Management, Cost Management, Site Management, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions |
| 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