O'Connor, J T and Mock, B D (2019) Construction, commissioning, and startup execution: Problematic activities on capital projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 145(4): 04019009, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The commissioning and startup (CSU) stage of industrial capital projects is made up of a large number of discrete activities. These activities are executed across the construction, precommissioning, commissioning, and startup (CCSU) project phases by a host of organizations and disciplines. CCSU activities are often fraught and have adverse consequences which may broadly impact overall project success. This research sought to discover which activities are commonly problematic across industrial sectors, and how these activities are characterized. A better understanding of commonly problematic activities (so-called Hot Spots) will give insight into how best to address problems when or before they arise. Contributions made by this research include a list of 20 of the most common problematic CCSU activities, characterizations of 7 attributes for each of the 20 Hot Spots, an analysis of themes recurring among the characterizations, and a model for implementation of research findings on projects. These contributions will provide perspective on common CCSU shortcomings and guidance on how to remedy them.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | commissioning; hot spots; industrial capital projects; mitigation strategies; prevention strategies; problematic activities; startup |
| Index terms: | commissioning, mitigation, implementation, prevention, capital project, startup, strategy, project success, hot spot |
| Subjects: | business, project management theory and practice, completion, management, contractual arrangements, financial risk, strategic project management, environmental science |
| Topics: | Project Management, Business Strategy, Quality Management, Cost Management, Procurement, Sustainability |
| 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