Producing things or production flows? Ontological assumptions in the thinking of managers and professionals in construction

Rooke, J A; Koskela, L and Seymour, D (2007) Producing things or production flows? Ontological assumptions in the thinking of managers and professionals in construction. Construction Management and Economics, 25(10), pp. 1077-1085. ISSN 1466433X

Abstract

New approaches to production management can be conceptualized as treating production as flow rather than transformation. These alternatives can in turn be regarded as reflecting opposing ontological positions, holding respectively that reality is constituted of temporal process, or atemporal substance. The new production philosophy thus arguably represents a process ontology radically different from the atemporal metaphysics underlying conventional methods and theories. Moreover, research in physics education has identified the disjunction between ontological categories of 'substance' and 'process' as a particularly acute barrier to understanding process phenomena. Studies are presented which demonstrate the possibility of specifying and classifying mental models, with regard to two important management solutions in construction. Thus, procedures typically adopted in quantity surveying and the implementation of structural engineering design are examined. Methods of measurement used in quantity surveying are designed to account primarily for physical, rather than temporal properties. In design, the emphasis is on representing properties of finished structures, rather than the construction processes. The process is then managed by treating the design and its execution as separate products. It is argued here that alternative, more effective management solutions are derived from a process ontology.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: decision making; indexicality; lean construction; learning; management theory; metaphysics; ontological categories
Index terms: management theory, decision-making, ontology, lean construction, manager, indexicality, implementation, construction process, surveying, engineering design, production management, philosophy, transformation, mental model
Subjects: practitioner, semiotics, building construction, design process, business, decision analysis, education and knowledge transfer, contractual arrangements, health monitoring assessment and metrics, philosophical studies, project delivery, management, cognitive psychology
Topics: Procurement, Site Management, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Project Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Digital Applications
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTA

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