Ng, S T; Zheng, D X M and Xie, J Z (2013) Allocation of construction resources through a pull-driven approach. Construction Innovation, 13(1), pp. 77-97. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose - Construction resources are often limited, and there is a need to ensure resources are carefully allocated to avoid resource wastage and/or project delay. While mathematical and heuristic models were developed to resolve the conflicts between activities, none of them has been proven to be totally satisfactory. The aim of this paper is to explore this. Design/methodology/ approach - In this paper, a novel heuristic method known as a pull-driven approach (PDA) is proposed; and this approach encourages a lean consideration of resource supply and partnering between activities. Two case studies are presented to illustrate how PDA can be applied. A comparison with another heuristic approach, namely the ranked positional weight method is conducted to illustrate the efficiency of the proposed approach. Findings - Using the PDA approach, all the activities strive to find matching partners to pull resources to their sides. The resources are, therefore, no longer passively pushed to a single activity with high ranking but a combination of activities that can demonstrate their superiority in resource utilisation will actively win the necessary resources. Originality/value - This approach has an ability to deal with intermittent activities and locate the lean (no-waste) supply level of each resource.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction industry; lean construction; lean production; partnering; pull-driven approach; ranked positional weight method; resource allocation |
| Index terms: | construction industry, case study, heuristic, resource allocation, partnering, efficiency, resource utilization, project delay, methodology, lean production, lean construction |
| Subjects: | risk assessment, data collection methods, site logistics, resource management, manufacturing engineering, performance management, research methods, industry analysis, project controls, partnership management, building construction |
| Topics: | Site Management, Time Control, Quality Management, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles |
| 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