Development of high reliability construction work systems: Lessons from production practices of high performance work crews

Memarian, B (2012) Development of high reliability construction work systems: Lessons from production practices of high performance work crews. PhD thesis, Arizona State University, USA.

Abstract

The construction industry faces important performance problems such as low productivity, poor quality of work, and work-related accidents and injuries. Creating a high reliability work system that is simultaneously highly productive and exceptionally safe has become a challenge for construction practitioners and scholars. The main goal of this dissertation was to create an understanding of high reliability construction work systems based on lessons from the production practices of high performance work crews. High performance work crews are defined as the work crews that constantly reach and maintain a high level of productivity and exceptional safety record while delivering high quality of work. This study was conceptualized on findings from High Reliability Organizations and with a primary focus on lean construction, human factors, safety, and error management. Toward the research objective, this dissertation answered two major questions. First, it explored the task factors and project attributes that shape and increase workers' task demands and consequently affect workers' safety, production, and quality performance. Second, it explored and investigated the production practices of construction field supervisors (foremen) to understand how successful supervisors regulate task and project demands to create a highly reliable work process. Employing case study methodology, this study explored and analyzed the work practices of six work crews and crew supervisors in different trades including concrete, masonry, and hot asphalt roofing construction. The case studies included one exceptional and one average performing crew from each trade. Four major factors were considered in the selection of exceptional crew supervisors: (1) safety performance, (2) production performance, (3) quality performance, and (4) the level of project difficulty they supervised. The data collection was carried out in three phases including: (1) interview with field supervisors to understand their production practices, (2) survey and interview with workers to understand their perception and to identify the major sources of task demands, and (3) several close field observations. Each trade's specific findings including task demands, project attributes, and production practices used by crew supervisors are presented in a separate chapter. At the end the production practices that converged to create high reliability work systems are summarized and presented in nine major categories.

Item Type: Thesis (Doctoral)
Thesis advisor: Bashford, H
Uncontrolled Keywords: reliability; masonry; lean construction; safety; productivity; case study; interview
Index terms: error management, human factor, safety performance, roofing, work practice, methodology, face, construction practitioner, survey, interview, lean construction, injury, dissertation, supervisor, construction industry, quality performance, construction work, productivity, case study
Subjects: practitioner, research dissemination and communication, operations management, psychology, research methods, building construction, data collection methods, project delivery, professional development, design practice, management, industry analysis, health conditions and diseases, occupational health and safety management
Topics: Information Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions, Design Practice, Site Management, Organizational Design, Project Management, Health and Safety, Quality Management
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTE

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