Pheng, L S and Hui, M S (1999) The application of JIT philosophy to construction: A case study in site layout. Construction Management and Economics, 17(5), pp. 657-668. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The just-in-time QIT) philosophy has been used in the manufacturing industry for some forty to fifty years. This system increased not only the productivity of the industry but also the quality of its products. Explorative studies have been completed in recent years to see how JIT can be applied into the construction industry to reap the benefits of the system. Most of these studies have concluded that it is possible to apply the techniques of JIT in the construction industry with some modifications. Taking into consideration that one of the key components of site management is concerned with waste management (i.e. bringing wastage down to the minimum), this study focuses on applying JIT for site layout to improve productivity and quality. By eliminating waste on site, controlling the movement of inventory coming into the site and within the site, and controlling the usage of mechanized plant and equipment, smooth work flow can be achieved.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction management; just-in-time; productivity; quality; site layout |
| Index terms: | construction industry, plant and equipment, site management, productivity, inventory, case study, waste management, just-in-time, manufacturing industry, philosophy, site layout, movement |
| Subjects: | management, manufacturing engineering, inventory management, lean logistics, industry analysis, philosophical studies, data collection methods, waste management, health behaviours and lifestyles, construction operations, site logistics |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Site Management, Supply Chain Management |
| 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