Performance measurement has received substantial attention from researchers and the construction industry over the past two decades. This study sought to assess UK practitioners' awareness of the importance of the use of appropriate performance measures and its role in supporting the application of Lean Construction (LC) concepts. To enable the study to achieve its objectives, a review of a range of measurements developed to evaluate project performance including those devoted to support LC efforts was conducted. subsequently a questionnaire survey was developed and sent to 198 professionals in the UK construction industry as well as a small sample of academics with an interest in LC. Results indicated that although practitioners recognise the importance of the selection of nonfinancial performance measures, it has not been properly and widely implemented. The study identified the most common techniques used by UK construction organisations for performance measurement, and ranked a number of non-financial key performance indicators as significant. Some professed to have embraced the Last Planner System methodology as a means for performance measurement and organisational learning, while further questioning suggested otherwise. It was also suggested that substance thinking amongst professionals could be a significant hidden barrier that militates against the successful implementation of LC.

There is a broad consensus among social and economic researchers that ‘institutions’ matter. Institutions influence beliefs, norms and actions; thus they shape performance and outcomes. Interestingly, the concept of institutions is not well established in construction economics or management research, specifically in waste-related literature. This paper presents discussions on the impact of imperfect regulations, norms and cultural/cognitive assumptions that exist within the construction procurement context, and how this has translated into the institutionalisation of wasteful behaviours and practices in construction projects. Based on a critical review of extant literature, the ultimate objectives of this study are to: (1) contribute to the overall understanding of waste in construction by suggesting a novel perspective to the generation and persistence of waste in construction projects; (2) demonstrate how the neo-institutional theory, a branch of organizational sociology, can potentially be applied as an analytical lens to deliver a more explicit theory of waste that relates cause and effect within the wider aspects of construction procurement systems and relationships; (3) highlight a number of widely accepted regulations, norms and meanings that impede efficiency and improvement efforts in construction; and (4) formulate propositions on institutional waste in the process of construction procurement that will be fundamental to the future trajectory of this study.

It has been argued that Lean Construction (LC) offers the conceptual basis and the appropriate methods and tools needed for helping the construction industry meet the challenges of sustainable development. Since 1998, a growing body of knowledge has been emerging from the IGLC community, in relation to synergies between LC and Sustainability. Both seek to reduce waste and maximise value, but through different approaches and perspectives. The most common mistake, however, is a tool-focused framework for integration, which overlooks the conceptual differences between these two initiatives. The aim of this study, therefore, is to review the progress made in understanding the linkages and inconsistencies between the two initiatives, through conducting a critical systematic literature review (SLR) and synthesising the findings of 'LC and Sustainability' studies published in IGLC conferences over the past 25 years. The findings of the study provide an overview of previous studies about the topic, reveal major limitations in approaches to LC and Sustainable Construction (SC), and divulge significant opportunities for further work that remain unexplored.

The aim of this study is to explore how offsite fabrication (OSF) can be tightly coupled with production and assembly on-site. Prefabrication is a production method that has potential to yield significant productivity and sustainability improvements in the construction industry. Failure to synchronise production in the factory with on-site production can lead to financial losses for the client/owner, main contractor and subcontractors as well as to delays in the construction schedule. The study draws on two case-studies and the authors’ experiences in the context of a critical review of literature on the concepts of flow and Just-in-time (JIT) construction delivery. The findings show the value of a buffer between suppliers, fabricators and the site as a way to help the whole supply team create production flow and more environmentally friendly results. A buffer can help while the team is learning to use collaborative short-term planning to create predictable production. The paper recommends ways to synchronise OSF with on-site production. The paper provides practitioners with ideas to reduce both work waiting for workers (or robots) and workers (or robots) waiting for work – and it contributes to theory by raising more questions for further research.

Purpose-The construction industry has been subject to substantial criticism for its short term "hitand-run" relationships which are focused on win-lose situations. Despite the wide recognition of these problems the industry persistently resists the radical demanded of it. Therefore, the main purposes of this study are twofold. First, to investigate why this might be the case by reviewing the governance problem confronting clients and decision makers in construction procurement, as conceptualised in Transaction Cost Economics (TCE). Secondly, to critically analyse and question the efficiency and effectiveness of various safeguarding approaches, insight into various imperfect procurement and contractual arrangements, which are takenfor-granted and impede efficiency and improvement efforts in construction. The findings presented provide a theoretical anchor and rationale for developing alternative approaches to the design and delivery of capital projects.