Hamzeh, F R; Zankoul, E and Rouhana, C (2015) How can 'tasks made ready' during lookahead planning impact reliable workflow and project duration? Construction Management and Economics, 33(4), pp. 243-258. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The goal of lookahead planning is to make a plan more realistic as construction tasks move closer to execution. To improve the reliability of lookahead planning, the construction industry has benefited from implementing the Last Planner® System (LPS) which emphasizes improved workflow during construction. Lookahead planning involves transforming work that 'should be done' into work that 'can be done'. This is accomplished by breaking down activities into the level of operations, designing operations, and making tasks ready by removing task constraints. The purpose of this research is to study, through computer simulation, the relationship between improving tasks made ready (TMR) in lookahead planning and the reliability of weekly work planning expressed as percent plan complete (PPC) and their impact on project duration. Results show that a high TMR can result in a reduced project duration but the same cannot be said about PPC, making a case for TMR serving as a better indicator for project duration than PPC.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | constraints; construction planning; last planner system; lookahead planning; simulation |
| Index terms: | duration, construction industry, percent plan complete, construction planning, PPC, planner, workflow, last planner system, computer simulation |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, project controls, management, construction planning, modelling and simulation, profession, standard forms of contract |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Digital Applications, Time Control, Site Management |
| 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