Zeng, N; Liu, Y; Wang, C; Chen, Q; Liu, Y and Li, Q (2026) On- and off-site coordination in a modular construction supply chain: Domain-spanning production flow framing and evaluation. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 152(2): 04025245, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
As modular construction becomes more popular, the synchronization of off-site manufacturing and on-site construction becomes crucial in influencing project timelines, budget adherence, and overall success. This paper aims to frame a domain-spanning production flow to conceptually analyze and practically enhance the coordination in the modular construction supply chain (MCSC). The qualitative-quantitative mixed method is applied to formulate a four-stage MCSC coordination context, including disruption prevention, response preparation, response execution, and postdisruption recovery, and demonstrate the validity of the domain-spanning production flow and the applicability of the coordination degree measurement method through industry practice and expert validation. The dynamics of the coordination degree underscore that higher coordination levels during response preparation and execution reflect the importance of tight subsystem integration. However, it decreases in postdisruption recovery, highlighting the need to maintain active coordination to stabilize production and resume normal operations. The proposed production flow framing approach extends production theory and synergy theory in construction, and the coordination degree evaluation method can contribute to practical MCSC scenarios, especially in situations affected by disruptions.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | coordination; modular construction supply chain; off-site; on-site; production flow |
| Index terms: | dynamics, prevention, modular construction, recovery, measurement method, coordination, validity, validation, integration, synergy, mixed method, framing, off-site manufacturing |
| Subjects: | organizational analysis, financial and cost management, professional development, systems engineering, manufacturing engineering, data collection methods, building construction, partnership management, operations management, evaluation and assessment methods, financial risk, management, conceptual models |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Project Management, Construction Technology, Organizational Design, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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