Hildreth, J C and Vorster, M C (2010) Learning construction performance improvement through planning. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 6(2), pp. 139-151. ISSN 1557-8771
Abstract
Construction operations can be categorized as either routine and repetitive or unique and complex. Routine and repetitive construction operations can be improved through traditional field operations analysis techniques, while unique and complex operations can be improved through reactively analyzing and proactively planning similar operations. The intent of planning is to assemble the information and knowledge necessary to successfully execute the work. Laboratory exercises were developed as part of both undergraduate and graduate level construction engineering and management education programs to demonstrate the benefits of detailed operations pre-planning for unique and complex construction operations. The undergraduate exercise improved the understanding of the construction requirements, reduced the amount of rework required, and reduced the average construction duration by nearly 30%. The graduate exercise reduced construction duration by approximately 40% and significant improvements were reported in material handling, understanding of responsibilities, and work flow efficiency. In both exercises, the concept of pre-planning and the resulting benefits were realized.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction education; construction improvement; construction planning; planning; site operations |
| Index terms: | construction education, program, material handling, routine, laboratory, repetitive construction, rework, site operation, undergraduate, construction engineering, construction planning, duration, exercise, efficiency, construction operation, construction performance |
| Subjects: | performance assessment, construction planning, project controls, sociology, software systems, engineering methods, performance management, operations management, product delivery, construction operations, curriculum development, health behaviours and lifestyles, building construction, professional education, research management |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Project Management, Health and Safety, Supply Chain Management, Quality Management, Education, Research Practice, Construction Technology, Digital Applications, Time Control, Site Management, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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