Loganathan, S; Forsythe, P and Kalidindi, S N (2018) Work practices of onsite construction crews and their influence on productivity. Construction Economics and Building, 18(3), pp. 18-39. ISSN 2204-9029
Abstract
The nature of construction work processes allow crews and workers to follow their own practices in how they plan, organise and coordinate work. However, there is little research into the nature of crew work practices. This paper aims to unveil the influence of onsite crew work practices on productivity. An exploratory case study investigated work practices on a residential project involving two separate crews (of 18 and 23 workers) engaged in rebar placement for 112 columns each, which included a high-performing and an average-performing crew. A triangulated mixed methods approach to data gathering utilised site observations, individual and group interviews, and time measured work studies, to assess productivity of the crews. The findings indicate that the high-performing crew achieved 44% higher productivity than the average-performing crew and this manifested across specific tasks including rebar cutting, bending, stirrup fabrication and tieing. Five broad work practices were observed to significantly influence the above productivity differences: work preparation and execution strategy; group formation and stability; avoiding duplication of tasks; crew social cohesion; and internal and external leadership practices. These five practices are proposed as dimensions that can be used to measure crew productivity in ongoing research. In-depth understanding of crew based work practices will enable training of foremen and work crews in such practices to systematically develop high-performing crews.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | case study research; construction work crews; mixed methods approach; productivity; time study; work practices |
| Index terms: | mixed method, construction work, case study, stirrup, rebar, social cohesion, crew productivity, work practice, interview, residential project, placement, onsite, fabrication, column, strategy, stability, dimension, work study, productivity |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, health monitoring assessment and metrics, operations management, building materials, structural engineering, management, economic development, manufacturing engineering, sociology, building construction |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Construction Materials, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Construction Technology, Human Resources, Urban Studies, Site Management, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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