Trinder, L (2018) Design for manufacture and assembly: Its benefits and risks in the UK water industry. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 171(4), pp. 152-163. ISSN 17514304
Abstract
A study was undertaken to investigate the impacts of design for manufacture and assembly (DFMA) on one of the UK's largest water companies. The study collected data on historic and new building projects that, in some part, used DFMA principles. This was supplemented by qualitative data from interviews conducted with senior engineers and managers from across the company and its direct tier 1 supply chain. The study shows DFMA to be poorly defined within the UK water industry, and a new definition is presented here. This is supplemented with a scoring tool that enables users to state clearly what they want with regard to DFMA and provides a means of assessing its potential during project tenders. The data support the perception that it can deliver cost, time and quality improvements and show that early DFMA-focused management is essential in delivering these improvements. However, the study also reveals that DFMA carries risks common to the application of new technologies, so risk management tools need to recognise the additional risks associated with it. A method for reviewing specific operational risks typical to the water industry against product uncertainty is presented here.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | infrastructure planning; management; project management |
| Index terms: | quality improvement, engineer, new technology, design for manufacture and assembly, project management, risk management tool, infrastructure planning, interview, manager |
| Subjects: | project delivery, profession, data collection methods, project management theory and practice, innovation and technology management, strategic project management, practitioner, financial risk, manufacturing engineering |
| Topics: | Project Management, Engineering Principles, Quality Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Cost Management |
| 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