Kendall, S H (1990) Control of parts: Parts making in the building industry. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA.
Abstract
The thesis advances a diagramming tool called PAct. Each diagram is a model of a "value adding" enterprise, representing materials processing, parts manipulation and assembly, and the agents involved. Its purpose is to support analysis of the interactions of agents and parts in production flows which are too complex to be held intuitively in mind. In exercising the tool in simple demonstrations of both conventional and "innovative" instances of parts production, two basic diagram patterns appear: "dispersed" patterns in which agents control (make) parts independently, and "nested" or "overlapping" patterns where some agents control and others indirectly control (design). Descriptive power of complex making processes is increased by putting both "processes" (changes made by agents) and "products" (parts) together in the same diagrams. Designing is found to be vital but not the only or even the dominant relation between agents in value added flows. PAct grew out of questions regarding difficulties the design professions often have, when trying to improve conventional house building practices. However, the tool is more generally useful to product manufacturers, building industry researchers, historians of technology, and designers who need accurate descriptions of value added flows of any parts making enterprise, to supplement present analysis tools.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Habraken, N J |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | house building |
| Index terms: | agent, building practice, manufacturer, interaction, profession, building industry, designer |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, profession, behavioral psychology, building construction, practitioner, institututions |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Construction Technology, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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