YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Construction Engineering—Reinvigorating the Discipline

    Source: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management:;2011:;Volume ( 137 ):;issue: 010
    Author:
    Gregory A. Howell
    ,
    Glenn Ballard
    ,
    Iris Tommelein
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000276
    Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
    Abstract: Construction engineering is all about production, and producing something useful is the very reason for projects to exist. How then to explain why construction engineering has progressively fallen out of focus in construction project management education and research? For an answer, the development of the discipline of construction management since the 1950s must be understood, a development that yielded a non-production-oriented approach to project management, one that provides the currently accepted operating system for managing the work in projects. This paper first traces the history of the development of the traditional operating system and related commercial terms and organizational practices. It argues that traditional practices rest on an assumption that careful development of a project schedule, managing the critical path, and maximizing productivity within each activity will optimize project delivery in terms of cost and duration. Subsequently, an alternative operating system, developed and proposed by the Lean Construction community, is described. In contrast to the traditional approach, lean defers detailed planning until closer to the point of action, involves those who are to do the work in designing the production system and planning how to do it, aims to maximize project performance (not the pieces), and exploits breakdowns as opportunities for learning. The history of this development will be traced in broad strokes.
    • Download: (505.9Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Construction Engineering—Reinvigorating the Discipline

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/58429
    Collections
    • Journal of Construction Engineering and Management

    Show full item record

    contributor authorGregory A. Howell
    contributor authorGlenn Ballard
    contributor authorIris Tommelein
    date accessioned2017-05-08T21:39:16Z
    date available2017-05-08T21:39:16Z
    date copyrightOctober 2011
    date issued2011
    identifier other%28asce%29co%2E1943-7862%2E0000282.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/58429
    description abstractConstruction engineering is all about production, and producing something useful is the very reason for projects to exist. How then to explain why construction engineering has progressively fallen out of focus in construction project management education and research? For an answer, the development of the discipline of construction management since the 1950s must be understood, a development that yielded a non-production-oriented approach to project management, one that provides the currently accepted operating system for managing the work in projects. This paper first traces the history of the development of the traditional operating system and related commercial terms and organizational practices. It argues that traditional practices rest on an assumption that careful development of a project schedule, managing the critical path, and maximizing productivity within each activity will optimize project delivery in terms of cost and duration. Subsequently, an alternative operating system, developed and proposed by the Lean Construction community, is described. In contrast to the traditional approach, lean defers detailed planning until closer to the point of action, involves those who are to do the work in designing the production system and planning how to do it, aims to maximize project performance (not the pieces), and exploits breakdowns as opportunities for learning. The history of this development will be traced in broad strokes.
    publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
    titleConstruction Engineering—Reinvigorating the Discipline
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume137
    journal issue10
    journal titleJournal of Construction Engineering and Management
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000276
    treeJournal of Construction Engineering and Management:;2011:;Volume ( 137 ):;issue: 010
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian