Rathnayake, A; Murguia, D and Middleton, C (2024) Measuring activity-level construction productivity. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 150(8): 04024099, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Activity-level productivity measurement often overlooks losses due to poor construction flows - that is, the flows of workers, materials, and equipment. Using data from 138 locations and 33 crews, correlation and regression analyses were conducted on several flow metrics. The results showed that excess work-in-progress time, representing handoffs among crews, and work discontinuities, representing stoppages between locations, had the most significant association with productivity. These findings led to the development of a novel framework for measuring activity-level construction productivity. In this framework, productivity is decomposed into efficiency (measured through work sampling) and effectiveness (measured as increased output). We applied our framework to a building construction project featuring four structural work crews operating across multiple levels. The results indicate that productivity losses due to crew handoffs and work discontinuities decrease as work becomes more repetitive. Additionally, inefficiencies or idling occur when moving equipment is unavailable, whereas ineffectiveness occurs with high rework. Our framework enables the identification of various sources of productivity loss. It also helps understand that the direct work rate is just one component of overall productivity.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction; flow; lean; measurement; productivity |
| Index terms: | rework, building construction, efficiency, productivity, sampling, effectiveness, regression analysis, construction productivity |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, operations management, management, performance management, statistical analysis, building construction |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Construction Technology, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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