He, C; Liu, M; Alves, T D C L; Scala, N M and Hsiang, S M (2022) Prioritizing collaborative scheduling practices based on their impact on project performance. Construction Management and Economics, 40(7-8), pp. 618-637. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Collaborative scheduling (CS) and related practices impact the performance of construction projects which can be measured by key performance indicators (KPIs). However, little is known about which of these practices are implemented and how their combined implementation might impact KPIs. The objectives of this research are to identify perceptions of CS practices that drive project performance, define CS practices used by industry that impact KPIs, and establish practices that are more commonly implemented and have a higher potential to positively impact KPIs. The research team conducted a nationwide survey in the United States and obtained 241 usable responses. Utilizing an information theory approach to measure the uncertainty of implementation and impact of each practice, the research built a set of Chow–Liu tree models to determine the most efficient sequence of actions to improve CS. Results indicate that meeting owners' expectation throughout the life-cycle of the project from design through construction and commissioning, using the schedule to support a strong project culture, and an effective communication plan were the top CS levers for overall KPI improvement. An innovative method was developed to help construction project managers discover the value of each CS practice, the relation between CS practices, and CS practices' influence to project KPIs so that managers can improve KPIs efficiently by prioritizing their CS practices according to their own project needs.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | collaborative scheduling; information theory; practice; survey; uncertainty |
| Index terms: | implementation, project performance, owner, prioritizing, key performance indicator, information theory, commissioning, construction project, survey, communication plan, scheduling, United States, manager |
| Subjects: | operations research, project delivery, knowledge organization and systems, contractual arrangements, data collection methods, practitioner, decision analysis, sociology, completion, professional development, project management theory and practice, production management, Geography |
| Topics: | Time Control, Quality Management, Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Information Management |
| 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