Gidado, K I (1996) Project complexity: The focal point of construction production planning. Construction Management and Economics, 14(3), pp. 213-225. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Construction production planning is a paramount preoccupation of contractors and the process is rapidly increasing in difficulty with a continuous loss in confidence by clients. Today, one of the difficult issues facing practitioners in planning is that of a continuous increase in the complexity of construction projects. There seems to be no available tool or technique for assessing project complexity; consequently practitioners tend to neglect or subjectively assume its effect on project managerial objectives. This paper proposes an approach that measures the ' complexity of the production process in construction. The approach enables the construction practitioner to focus his or her attention on the issue of project complexity from the beginning through to the end of a project. By using a literature search and structured interviewing of practitioners, the paper has defined project complexity and identified the factors that influence its effect on project success in relation to estimated production time and cost.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | disaggregate systems; production time and cost; project complexity; work flow |
| Index terms: | construction production, project success, practitioner, construction project, complexity, project complexity, construction practitioner, production process |
| Subjects: | practitioner, operations management, manufacturing engineering, production management, organizational theory, professional development, project management theory and practice, systems engineering |
| Topics: | Site Management, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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