Radosavljevic, M and Horner, M (2007) Process planning methodology: Dynamic short-term planning for off-site construction in Slovenia. Construction Management and Economics, 25(2), pp. 143-156. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Planning is a vital element of project management but it is still not recognized as a process variable. Its objective should be to outperform the initially defined processes, and foresee and overcome possible undesirable events. Detailed task-level master planning is unrealistic since one cannot accurately predict all the requirements and obstacles before work has even started. The process planning methodology (PPM) has thus been developed in order to overcome common problems of the overwhelming project complexity. The essential elements of the PPM are the process planning group (PPG), including a control team that dynamically links the production/site and management, and the planning algorithm embodied within two continuous-improvement loops. The methodology was tested on a factory project in Slovenia and in four successive projects of a similar nature. In addition to a number of improvement ideas and enhanced communication, the applied PPM resulted in 32% higher total productivity, 6% total savings and created a synergistic project environment.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | planning; productivity; project control; project management |
| Index terms: | project complexity, Slovenia, methodology, savings, productivity, project management, project control, off-site construction |
| Subjects: | building construction, project management theory and practice, Geography, organizational theory, research methods, management, economic analysis, control systems |
| Topics: | Construction Technology, Business Strategy, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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