Managing on-site production using an activity and flow-based construction model

Garcia-Lopez, N P and Fischer, M (2024) Managing on-site production using an activity and flow-based construction model. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 150(1): 04023144, ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

Schedule conformance depends on construction activities starting and finishing on time. However, construction activities are often delayed because construction flows necessary to start their execution are unavailable. Construction flows can be classified into: labor, equipment, workspace, materials, precedence, information, and external. Current construction models do not formally represent, measure, and track all flow types. Hence, field managers lack formal methods for managing flows and instead rely on their intuition and experience managing them. This paper presents a construction model based on activities and flows called the activity-flow model (AFM). The AFM formally represents the activities, the flows, and their interactions. The AFM was validated prospectively through its implementation on three building projects that were in different phases (foundations, core and shell, and finishing), at different geographic locations (Bogota, Copenhagen, and Lima), and used different planning and control methods (master schedule and weekly planning, last planner system, and location-based management system). The AFM was able to represent all the activities and flows in the test projects, track variations of activities and flows, and quantify activity and flow variability. Field managers can use the metrics enabled by the AFM to plan and control the project. Such proactive flow management can help field managers improve flow readiness, which should reduce activity delays and improve schedule conformance.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: construction model; flow; lean construction; production control; production planning; variability; workflow
Index terms: location-based management system, construction activity, production control, workspace, control method, variability, interaction, implementation, foundations, production planning, manager, lean construction, intuition, workflow, last planner system, variation
Subjects: control systems, practitioner, construction operations, contractual arrangements, project delivery, structural engineering, management, contractual condition, monitoring and control, project controls, building construction, cognitive psychology, statistical analysis, behavioral psychology
Topics: Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Business Strategy, Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Site Management, Time Control, Contract Administration
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