Hamerski, D C; Tarcisio Abreu, S; Carlos Torres, F and Isatto, E L (2024) The contributions of the last planner system to resilient performance in construction projects. Construction Management and Economics, 42(4), pp. 328-345. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Although the Last Planner System (LPS) has been successfully used in complex construction projects, previous studies have not investigated how it supports resilient performance (RP), which is crucial for the construction industry. To address this gap, a case study of using the LPS in refurbishment building projects was conducted. The implementation of LPS was analysed in light of seven principles for the design of resilient systems. Sources of data for this analysis involved documents, semi-structured interviews, participant observation, and secondary data. The results pointed out 25 production planning and control practices that contributed to RP, including well-established LPS practices, formalised in the planning standards of the company (32% of the total); formal practices not usually considered as elements of LPS (20%); and informal practices not anticipated by company standards (48%). These findings indicate that although LPS contributes to RP, it must be complemented by other practices, either formal or informal. A set of well-established practices (e.g. hierarchical planning, identification and removal of constraints, collaborative meetings, and use of lagging and leading indicators) are those most logically connected to the principles of design for RP. This study also offers insights into some LPS limitations (e.g. low control frequency and overemphasis on production in relation to other functional dimensions), which indicate opportunities for the development of new production planning and control approaches supportive of RP.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Last Planner System; construction projects; complexity; resilience; production planning and control |
| Index terms: | interview, observation, production planning, documents, construction project, last planner system, lagging and leading indicator, complexity, case study, secondary data, dimension, implementation, construction industry |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, systems engineering, project controls, production management, professional development, contractual arrangements, project delivery, economic analysis, health monitoring assessment and metrics, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Time Control, Procurement, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Project Management, Health and Safety |
| 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