Allam, S I G (1988) Multi-project scheduling: A new categorization for heuristic scheduling rules in construction scheduling problems. Construction Management and Economics, 6(2), pp. 93-115. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
After more than two decades of applying CPM as a planning and scheduling technique there is growing doubt about some of the advantages initially attributed to it. It is being discarded by both large and small construction companies, and its use limited to cases where it is required by the clients. Some planners and schedulers have begun to depend on their own experience. The author has developed a heuristic planning and scheduling model which uses two new criteria: the tightness degree of completion due-dates and resource tightness degrees. Throughout the scheduling experiments, the hypothetical relationship between the performance of the proposed heuristic scheduling rules and the degrees of completion due-dates and resource tightness proved to be correct and there is a significant difference between the performance of proposed heuristic scheduling rules in the different scheduling classes. The new classification of scheduling problems proved to be practical, effective and helpful. The scheduling experiments resulted in a new categorization for the performance of the proposed heuristic scheduling rules in the different scheduling classes.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction management; planning and scheduling; project management |
| Index terms: | planner, scheduling, construction company, heuristic, project management, project scheduling, experiment, scheduler, construction scheduling |
| Subjects: | organization, practitioner, risk assessment, data collection methods, project controls, profession, operations research, project management theory and practice |
| Topics: | Time Control, Project Management, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Risk Management |
| 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