Thunberg, M; Fredriksson, A; Danielsson, J; Hyll, H; Sandberg, E and Westin, A (2017) Planning in construction: How are the different planning processes linked? In: Chan, P W and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 33rd Annual ARCOM Conference, 4-6 September 2017, Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge, UK.
Abstract
There is an ongoing debate on the need for knowledge and information sharing between projects in contractor companies. The construction industry has tight couplings in individual projects, however loose couplings in the permanent network, i.e. the companies. The lack of interconnection between project and company level decrease knowledge and information sharing, which negatively affect coordination and resource utilisation. In other industries, successful companies use structured planning processes such as manufacturing planning and control (MPC) systems to improve communication and shared goals within the companies. Within MPC planning is seen as hierarchical, with processes at different planning levels; strategic, tactical and operative. These planning levels have different horizon, planning object and frequency. This way of planning allow better coordination and utilisation of resources as the planning horizon is prolonged and several projects can be included. However, there is a need to understand MPC from a construction perspective in order to reap the benefits. For example, what current planning processes within construction correspond with the different processes in the hierarchical structure of MPC? Therefore the purpose is to study how a MPC perspective on planning can be utilised in the construction industry. The study contributes by identifying how different planning processes within construction are linked in a hierarchical structure. What are the necessary input to the processes, who controls the input, what are the outcomes of the processes? Furthermore, what should horizon, planning object and frequency be to fit with the context of construction? The study is based on a Swedish Vinnova financed project. Data is collected via a case study of the planning processes at two Swedish contractors. One case focus on improving utilisation of labour resources over several projects while the other focus on improving the coordination of material supply with resources and activities on-site.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction planning, material planning and control, project management, resource coordination, tactical planning. |
| Index terms: | information sharing, construction industry, project management, coordination, operative, construction planning, labour resource, planning process, resource utilization, case study, coupling |
| Subjects: | construction planning, site logistics, data collection methods, practitioner, business economics, project controls, systems engineering, industry analysis, data exchange, management, project management theory and practice |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions, Digital Applications, Time Control, Organizational Design, Site Management |
| 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