Winch, G M (2006) Towards a theory of construction as production by projects. Building Research & Information, 34(2), pp. 164-174. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
This paper responds to the invitation to debate the theory of production in construction from the advocates of lean construction. In particular, it is a response to Koskela and Ballard's critiques of the theory of project management represented in the Project Management Institute's (PMI) PMBoK, and the 'economics-based approach to construction project management presented by Winch. The paper reviews the theoretical and practical contributions of lean construction before addressing the specific criticisms made. It then suggests that lean construction theory has its own limitations and requires further development in the areas of the definition of process, the concept of organization, the theorization of risk and uncertainty, and its unitary concept of value.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | lean construction; project management; risk management; transaction cost economics; uncertainty; value |
| Index terms: | lean construction, transaction cost, critique, risk management, construction project management, project management, theory of production |
| Subjects: | financial analysis, building construction, project management theory and practice, economic analysis, risk assessment, evaluation and assessment methods |
| Topics: | Site Management, Risk Management, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Project Management, Research Practice |
| 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