Doloi, H (2008) Application of AHP in improving construction productivity from a management perspective. Construction Management and Economics, 26(8), pp. 841-854. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Poor productivity of construction workers is one of the major causes of cost overruns and schedule slippages in construction projects. Anecdotal evidence suggests that workers' attitudes towards higher productivity may not be limited to purely financial rewards, but inherently linked to many other latent factors. Some building construction projects in Melbourne are compared to each other to ascertain the factors that influence productivity. The factors and their relative importance impacting on workers' productivity are investigated by using a structured questionnaire survey approach. The survey was formulated with 72 questions covering three broad categories, namely (1) project planning; (2) incentives/disincentives; and (3) job satisfaction. Perceived best practices that impact on improvement of productivity on site were identified from 19 targeted experts. Analytical hierarchy process shows that the biggest influences on productivity are planning and programming. The outcome of this study should assist management decisions in determining the effect on productivity and suggest possible improvements to establish the appropriate management procedures for most productive use of labour resources in construction projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analytical hierarchy process; productivity; site management |
| Index terms: | survey, building construction, relative importance, project planning, management decision, programming, evidence, questionnaire, construction project, job satisfaction, productivity, cost overrun, labour resource, construction productivity, analytical hierarchy process, construction worker, best practice, site management |
| Subjects: | production management, decision-making and reasoning, management, decision-making and optimization, building construction, business economics, practitioner, control systems, programming, business, risk assessment, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, financial and cost management, construction operations, operations management |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Digital Applications, Human Resources, Site Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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