Kalu, U G (2003) Optimizing the participation of suppliers and subcontractors in managing construction projects using concurrent engineering philosophy. PhD thesis, Golden Gate University, USA.
Abstract
The construction industry suffers from a fairly high rate of inefficiency that is caused partly by the industry's inability to collaborate effectively with its supply chains. Excluding suppliers and subcontractors in the early phases of construction projects is endemic in the industry. Also, when compared to the other business sectors, the rate of adoption of modern management techniques, particularly in relation to planning and managing large projects, continues to be relatively low. For a long time, the field of construction management has subscribed to highly structured and rigid methodologies. Its approach to planning is controlled by few knowledgeable team members. Frequently, team members such as suppliers and subcontractors who know more about the work they do than other team members are excluded from the design and planning activities. Instead, they are narrowly employed at specific points in the construction process, resulting in exclusion of their skills and competencies from the design process. The overall result of this approach is higher-than-necessary project costs and preventable delays. Although “traditional” construction models have provided valuable contributions to the construction process, these models have not substantially increased efficiency levels. So far, the industry has not had a recognized framework on which to base a construction process improvement initiative. Hence, the intent of this research is to evaluate and design a framework for an integrated project management model that explores the impact and the degree of early suppliers' and subcontractors' participation on the success of construction projects. Since the current literature does not offer integrated solutions to overcome the inefficiencies, this research develops an integrated model that involves the participation of suppliers and subcontractors in the concept development process. Four projects, varying in the extent of suppliers' and subcontractors' participation, were identified and analyzed. Research findings led to the conclusion that key suppliers and subcontractors should be involved during the definition of project requirements. Integrating suppliers' and subcontractors' expertise into the design will help identify downstream problems earlier, when they are easier and less expensive to correct.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Rageh, N |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | skills; concurrent engineering; participation; construction project; project cost; subcontractor; supplier |
| Index terms: | construction process, methodology, construction project, subcontractor, design process, philosophy, project cost, integrated solution, concurrent engineering, project management, construction industry, efficiency, integrated model |
| Subjects: | performance management, economics, research methods, engineering methods, production management, project management theory and practice, building construction, philosophical studies, industry analysis, design methods, practitioner, innovation studies, analytical methods |
| Topics: | Site Management, Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Research Practice, Information Management, Quality Management, Project Management, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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