Peltokorpi, A; Olivieri, H; Granja, A D and Seppänen, O (2018) Categorizing modularization strategies to achieve various objectives of building investments. Construction Management and Economics, 36(1), pp. 32-48. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Modularization has recently attracted considerable interest among academics and practitioners. In the construction industry, several modular solutions have been introduced and examined; however, hardly any study comprehensively classifies the different modularization strategies according to their possibility to achieve various objectives of building investments. This research aims to develop a framework for identifying and classifying modularization strategies in construction according to their suitability to achieve the specific outcomes intended for a building or its subsystem. Using the literature on product modularity, product platforms and production strategies as a basis, this study has developed a theoretical framework that proposes connections between the main objectives of a building investment and the dimensions of modularization strategies. The framework is elaborated by testing the propositions, based on an empirical analysis of nine real-life case studies. The findings reveal that modularization can be a suitable approach to develop an innovative design solution; improve a project’s quality, cost and schedule performance; and enable flexibility in building use and maintenance. However, suggestions for achieving these objectives vary from project organization-driven to collaborative, integrated or supplier-driven modularization strategies. Developers, owners, contractors and module suppliers can use the framework when positioning and developing their roles in the construction supply chain.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building investment; modularization strategy; product architecture; product platform; production system |
| Index terms: | suitability, product platform, practitioner, strategy, modularity, project organization, production system, schedule performance, dimension, testing, construction industry, modularization, construction supply chain, module, product architecture, owner, building investment, production strategy, case study |
| Subjects: | practitioner, design methods, construction logistics, data collection methods, health monitoring assessment and metrics, professional practice, innovation and technology management, organizational theory, architectural elements, manufacturing engineering, management, industry analysis, design criteria, design flexibility, asset management, sociology, building construction, project controls |
| Topics: | Supply Chain Management, Design Practice, Time Control, Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Construction Technology, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions |
| 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