Plemmons, J K (1995) Materials management process measures and benchmarking in the industrial construction industry. PhD thesis, Clemson University, USA.
Abstract
As the industrial construction industry is slow to change existing methods and implement new technologies, a need exists to measure the effectiveness of the materials management process and to provide a basis for analyzing current performance and process improvements. To date, the effectiveness of the materials management process, or the extent to which the process meets the needs and expectations of construction operations, has not been adequately defined or measured. Also, no mechanism exists to operationalize uniform measures within the industry. This research identifies the key effectiveness measures of the materials management process and proposes a mechanism for benchmarking these measures. A set of 35 materials management effectiveness measures was deduced from a sample of materials-related measures currently in use within the construction industry. A classification scheme, consisting of six categories (accuracy, quality, quantity, cost, timeliness, and availability) was applied to organize and label the measures. The 35 measures were incorporated into a questionnaire designed to evaluate each measure and to identify the key effectiveness measures. From a mailing of 56 questionnaires, 37 responses were received, representing 24 separate companies or organizations. Each response contained the opinion of an expert of one or more materials management functions. The responses were analyzed to identify the key effectiveness measures recommended for lump-sum and cost-plus contracts. Ancillary data for each measure related to five areas: usage; importance in communicating effectiveness; practicality to implement; barriers to implementation; and potential for benchmarking internally and externally to the company. To facilitate the implementation of the effectiveness measures within the construction industry, a benchmarking mechanism is proposed to support a construction company's formal benchmarking activities. The mechanism was evaluated based on other operational clearinghouses and its acceptance by construction industry professionals.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Bell, L C |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accuracy; benchmarking; construction operations; cost-plus; materials management |
| Index terms: | questionnaire, benchmarking, materials management, process improvement, construction company, accuracy, effectiveness, cost-plus, construction industry, industrial construction, implementation, new technology, construction operation |
| Subjects: | management, performance measurement, performance management, professional development, industry analysis, data collection methods, building construction, organization, operations management, innovation and technology management, construction operations, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Site Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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