Barlow, J; Childerhouse, P; Gann, D; Hong-Minh, S; Naim, M and Ozaki, R (2003) Choice and delivery in housebuilding: Lessons from Japan for UK housebuilders. Building Research & Information, 31(2), pp. 134-145. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Using the example of Japan's factory-based housing industry where firms supply customized homes which are pre-assembled from standardized components or modular systems, it is argued that 'mass customization' can be supported by several generic supply-chain models. The paper discusses these models and provides a case study of a Japanese housing supplier. Conclusions are then drawn on the implications of these lessons for the UK's speculative housebuilding industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | consumer choice; customer focus; housebuilding; Japan; mass customization; pre-assembly; standardization; supply-chain management |
| Index terms: | housebuilder, Japan, speculative housebuilding, consumer choice, standardization, case study, housebuilding, housing, mass customization |
| Subjects: | performance measurement, Geography, economic development, data collection methods, construction integration, practitioner, construction type, manufacturing engineering, consumer economics |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Quality Management, Geographical Context, Design Practice, Business Strategy, Stakeholder Management, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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