Baxendale, A T (1992) Construction management information systems for production control. PhD thesis, Bristol Polytechnic, UK.
Abstract
Existing information systems used by contractors and subcontractors are found in surveys to be flawed in modelling the requirements for control of production time and cost. Structured systems development is carried out to devise models based on data flow diagrams that represent the practice of project planning, monitoring and control. A case study on information systems used by a design and build organisation is included. Prototyping is recommended to further the development of information systems. Criteria are developed for concept models of building project information. Design and build procurement methods that allow the contractor to prepare data are considered, where information can be coordinated. Data coding and phraseology are developed in relation to activity-based schedules and a work breakdown structure. The use of a coding system is illustrated by a case study and criteria for coding system and work breakdown requirements given. Master Lists for activity coding are tested on site managers. The monitoring and integration of both planning and job cost accounting is shown in a case study and criteria given for control in relation to integration. Main contractor requirements are considered, in relation to accounting, valuation and cost value reconciliation. A project case study compares valuations based on programme progress with those of the surveyor. The use of computer systems is reviewed for project and production control. Directly employed resource and subcontract requirements for integration are analysed and a case study develops site based weekly time and cost control. Proposed systems are designed for main and subcontractor control and illustrated by data flow diagrams. The contributions made to the knowledge of the subject are: (i) An activity coding system that combines and rationalises existing systems. (ii) A set of criteria for the analysis of coding systems and for project control models that are unique. (iii) Models developed for main contractor control and for subcontracted or directly employed resource control, based on activity descriptions which are in advance of existing systems.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cost control; design and build; information system; monitoring; project control; project planning; resource control; site manager; valuation; contractor; subcontractor; case study; prototype testing |
| Index terms: | project control, testing, modelling, management information system, site manager, monitoring, production control, case study, resource control, main contractor, procurement method, design and build, project planning, subcontractor, information system, accounting, prototyping, integration, cost control, survey, programme, prototype, subcontract, computer system |
| Subjects: | information systems, data management, project controls, organizational analysis, contractual arrangements, professional practice, innovation and technology management, economic analysis, analytical methods, project delivery, financial and cost management, modelling and simulation, computing systems, practitioner, control systems, data collection methods, contract type |
| Topics: | Time Control, Contract Administration, Site Management, Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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