Abstract
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to discuss a production planning and control model known as the Lean construction management (LCM) model, which applies a number of visual tools in a systematic way to the planning and control process. The application of the visual tools in this way facilitates the flow of information, thus improving transparency between the interfaces of planning, execution and control.Design/methodology/approachDesign Science research is adopted for this investigation, which analyses the original development of the model and reports on its testing and refinement over different types of projects. The research is divided into three parts, each part focussing on a different stage of development and construction project type.FindingsThe main findings are related to the benefits of visual management in the construction planning and control process, such as maintaining consistency between different planning levels, so that feasible execution plans are created; control becomes more focussed on prevention rather than correction, and creates opportunities for collaborative problem solving. Moreover, the physical display of the visual tools in a discrete planning area on-site encourages a regular exchange between participants on actual work progress as it unfolds, leading to more timely reaction to the problems at hand.Originality/valueThe problem of a lack of transparency in construction planning and control leads to communication issues on-site, poor process orientation and high levels of waste. LCM improves process transparency by making information related to system-wide processes more readily available to project participants. This enables them to foresee problems in a timely manner and to take necessary measures to resolve them or to adapt the process to current circumstances. The LCM model proposes a new way of applying visual tools and controls systematically to improve transparency in construction planning and control.
Highlights
Whether in the public sector, financial markets, factories or construction sites, one of the key concerns of operations management is creating a work environment in which information flows effectively by increasing process transparency (Murata and Katayama, 2010; Steinfield et al, 2011; Tezel et al, 2015; Bititci et al, 2016; Beynon-Davies and Lederman, 2017)
The problem of a lack of process transparency in construction projects often leads to poor communication and co-ordination (Koskela and Howell, 2002c), poor process orientation, ineffective decision making ( Jang and Kim, 2007), unsafe working conditions, worker dissatisfaction and stress (Hewage et al, 2008) and high levels of waste and variability in the construction process (Dainty and Brooke, 2004; Picchi and Granja, 2004; Alarcón, 2005)
This lack of transparency stems from deficiencies in the traditional approach to project management which limit the role of planning and control systems in terms of managing construction (Koskela and Howell, 2002c)
Summary
Whether in the public sector, financial markets, factories or construction sites, one of the key concerns of operations management is creating a work environment in which information flows effectively by increasing process transparency (Murata and Katayama, 2010; Steinfield et al, 2011; Tezel et al, 2015; Bititci et al, 2016; Beynon-Davies and Lederman, 2017). The problem of a lack of process transparency in construction projects often leads to poor communication and co-ordination (Koskela and Howell, 2002c), poor process orientation, ineffective decision making ( Jang and Kim, 2007), unsafe working conditions, worker dissatisfaction and stress (Hewage et al, 2008) and high levels of waste and variability in the construction process (Dainty and Brooke, 2004; Picchi and Granja, 2004; Alarcón, 2005). To support continuous improvement: it is necessary to make process and information flows between the different functions transparent, in order to fully understand the sources of errors, to identify improvements, to correct them and to facilitate communication between the interfaces during implementation (Laufer and Tucker, 1987; Koskela and Howell, 2002a). Five aims of the model were identified under the criterion of usefulness, each providing a distinct sub-criterion: improving daily planning; removing constraints to the planned work; removal of waste; improving transparency; and delivering measurable improvement
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
