Gray, C and Flanagan, R (1984) US productivity and fast tracking starts on the drawing board. Construction Management and Economics, 2(2), pp. 133-144. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Although much has been written about the rapid rate of construction in the USA compared with the UK, very little investigation has been undertaken to determine exactly how the rates of construction are achieved. This paper briefly describes the differences between the UK and US construction industries, and then uses a case study of a US construction project to examine the relationship between the design of an element and the construction on site. The US designer pays attention to the way the components will be assembled on site, being concerned with the overlap of work packages undertaken by specialty subcontractors. Because each of the work packages is clearly defined and isolated from other work packages, the contractor has better control over the rate of production on site.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contracts; international comparison; Productivity |
| Index terms: | productivity, designer, case study, package, construction industry, investigation, drawing, international comparison, subcontractor, construction project, fast-tracking |
| Subjects: | technical documentation, contractual arrangements, data analysis and analytics, data collection methods, profession, practitioner, project controls, industry analysis, management, production management |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Procurement, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Time Control, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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