Eldin, N N (1999) Impact of employee, management, and process issues on constructability implementation. Construction Management and Economics, 17(6), pp. 711-720. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
This paper reports the findings of a study that examined five projects in which implementation of constructability concepts was viewed as a schedule reduction tool. The study attempted to determine the benefits, success factors, and implementation barriers across the case studies. The data suggested that adopting constructability concepts has the potential for significantly reducing the project delivery time compared with the historical performance of the participating companies. Success factors, implementation barriers, and lessons learned were viewed as management, employee, and process-related issues. These issues were ranked further according to their apparent significance in the cases studied. When such a ranking is verified by additional studies, the efforts of present and future implementations will focus on the issues that yield the highest payoffs.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | constructability; project delivery time; project management; schedule compression; schedule reduction tools; time to market; value engineering |
| Index terms: | constructability, implementation, project management, project delivery, case study, lessons learned, schedule compression, value engineering, success factor |
| Subjects: | construction integration, professional development, project management theory and practice, data collection methods, value management, operations research, contractual arrangements, project delivery, health monitoring assessment and metrics |
| Topics: | Procurement, Health and Safety, Cost Management, Information Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Time Control, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 CE |
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