Martinez Lagunas, A J and Nik-Bakht, M (2024) Process mining, modeling, and management in construction: A critical review of three decades of research coupled with a current industry perspective. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 150(11): 04024158, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The so-called digital transformation of the construction industry is essential to overcoming long-standing global productivity stagnation. This transformation aims to adopt the latest technological developments and methodologies to improve construction productivity while supporting data-informed decision-making. However, the construction sector has fallen short of meeting the fast-growing population's demands for sustainable quality infrastructure at the required pace as it has not yet taken full advantage of these advancements. Despite broad experience in managing projects, when it comes to modeling, monitoring, and re-engineering processes, the construction industry has fallen behind several other industries. To overcome these challenges, efficient construction processes and operational strategies are essential to keeping organizations competitive and meeting market demands. In this regard, even though several studies on process modeling and management in construction exist, research on construction process improvement and automation through data-driven process mining remains understudied. Moreover, the literature lacks a comprehensive review of process-oriented studies with practical industry insights. To fill these gaps, this paper aims to provide an exhaustive analysis of process mining, modeling, and management as reported by the most current state of the literature in the architecture, engineering, construction/facility management (AEC/FM) domain coupled with a current industry perspective. As a result, the authors: (1) propose a conceptual process classification framework that considers the broad spectrum of process-oriented studies in the existing literature; (2) identify construction processes commonly present across a project's life cycle; (3) design and conduct structured interviews with subject matter experts to validate identified processes and get industry insights about them; (4) spot major literature gaps describing future research opportunities; and (5) develop a business process model canvas template that supports construction organizations in improving their corporate memory and pursuing construction productivity growth by better managing, monitoring, and automating construction processes.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | business process management; construction management; data-informed process analytics; digital transformation; process automation; process improvement; process mining; process modeling; process transparency |
| Index terms: | construction organization, productivity, life cycle, transformation, monitoring, mining, automation, construction productivity, construction industry, modelling, interview, process transparency, process improvement, process modelling, strategy, population, methodology, decision-making, construction process, process management, construction sector |
| Subjects: | management, industry analysis, decision analysis, geotechnical engineering, control systems, value management, business, data collection methods, automation and robotics, research methods, building construction, demography, organization, analytical methods, operations management, design analysis |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Site Management, Design Practice, Urban Studies, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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