Nesensohn, C; Bryde, D; Ochieng, E and Fearon, D (2014) Maturity and maturity models in lean construction. Construction Economics and Building, 14(1), pp. 45-59. ISSN 2204-9029
Abstract
In recent years there has been an increasing interest in maturity models in managementrelated disciplines; which reflects a growing recognition that becoming more mature and having a model to guide the route to maturity can help organisations in managing major transformational change. Lean Construction (LC) is an increasingly important improvement approach that organisations seek to embed. This study explores how to apply the maturity models to LC. Hence the attitudes, opinions and experiences of key industry informants with high levels of knowledge of LC were investigated. To achieve this, a review of maturity models was conducted, and data for the analysis was collected through a sequential process involving three methods. First a group interview with seven key informants. Second a follow up discussion with the same individuals to investigate some of the issues raised in more depth. Third an online discussion held via LinkedIn in which members shared their views on some of the results. Overall, we found that there is a lack of common understanding as to what maturity means in LC, though there is general agreement that the concept of maturity is a suitable one to reflect the path of evolution for LC within organisations.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction; lean construction maturity; lean enterprise self-assessment tool; maturity models; project management |
| Index terms: | interview, evolution, lean construction, maturity model, becoming, project management |
| Subjects: | philosophical process, environmental science, building construction, project management theory and practice, evaluation, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Site Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Sustainability |
| 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