Seadon, J and Tookey, J E (2019) Drivers for construction productivity. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(6), pp. 945-961. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: The New Zealand construction sector is similar to many other countries with a few large companies and many small and micro enterprises. It seeks to achieve a 20 per cent increase in productivity by 2020 which requires a step change in how the sector operates and buy-in from key stakeholders. The purpose of this paper is to provide a set of levers to improve productivity in the construction sector and develop an implementation schedule. Design/methodology/approach: This paper adopts a systems approach taking account of the nature of the building sector and the whole life cycle of a building from design to end-of-life. Information gained from the post-construction phases informs the pre-construction and construction phases. Findings: Productivity is an integrated model whereby increases in process efficiency are executed with quality materials and workmanship, in a manner that is affordable for both the client and contractor and sustainable over time. A series of interviews and workshops produced 10 nodal points and 19 crucial levers which were prioritised for implementation. Additionally, indicators were developed to monitor progress over time and provide information for further corrective action to the system. Practical implications: The effect of using a few targeted levers in unison provided significantly more gains than individual applications. Modelling real world responses to process stimuli outlined in this paper is extremely valuable. This provided the opportunity for key construction stakeholders to estimate the effects of decision making during a project. Originality/value: Previous studies identified factors affecting productivity. Piecemeal approaches to improve productivity have resulted in systemic failure. A whole of life approach provides valuable insights to improve productivity in the construction and pre-construction phases which have a flow-on effect through the life cycle. Importantly, this research proposes drivers, an implementation scheme and indicators that provide leverage on nodal points to improve productivity.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | buildings; construction; life cycle management; New Zealand; optimization techniques; system analysis |
| Index terms: | construction phase, construction productivity, estimate, implementation, modelling, whole life cycle, workshop, New Zealand, integrated model, optimization technique, efficiency, micro-enterprise, pre-construction, productivity, life cycle, methodology, decision-making, workmanship, construction sector, step-change, interview, life cycle management |
| Subjects: | innovation studies, value management, data collection methods, construction type, contractual arrangements, business development, analytical methods, financial and cost management, project delivery, operations management, Geography, contractual condition, sustainability assessment, management, research methods, algorithms, performance management, industry analysis, decision analysis |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Digital Applications, Quality Management, Risk Management, Construction Technology, Procurement, Sustainability, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Information Management, Engineering Principles |
| 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