Improving Construction Meeting Effectiveness: Trade-Offs between Reactive and Proactive Site-Level Planning Discussions

Abstract

Despite the adage “hope for the best, plan for the worst,” site-level proactive plans produced by construction planning meetings show planning for the best. Planning meetings comprise both proactive and reactive discussions. Although not all the information provided during meetings is useful, limited efforts have been made to measure the amount of useful information embedded in reactive versus proactive discussions. This research aims to determine the appropriate trade-offs between the number of reactive and proactive discussions at each site-planning level. By utilizing information theory and the Chow–Liu tree, the authors demonstrate to what extent and in what order meeting participants should address site-planning level reactivity and proactivity to obtain more useful information effectively through a case study. The results indicate that proactive planning discussions improve percent plan complete (PPC) 20% more than reactive ones in general. However, missing information due to not undertaking reactive planning could put PPC at greater risk (2% more) than proactive planning, implying high uncertainty at the lowest level of site planning. This research contributes to the body of knowledge by innovatively developing an information theory-based approach to quantify the uncertainty in proactive and reactive discussions for construction planning. Using the information theory approach, this research enables project managers to quantify the uncertainty in reactive and proactive planning discussions. By adjusting the framework and parameters, the approach can have general applications in planning meetings.