Re-engineering construction: going against the grain

Green, Stuart; May, Susan C.

doi:10.1080/09613210301992

Cited by 65 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Green & May (2002) for instance argue that promotion of OSP serve to justify shifts towards labour-only sub-contracting and the associated reduction of employment rights. Such 'mechanistic' attitudes have implications on labour, businesses and society at large.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constraints to the Use of Off-site Production on Construction Projects

Blismas¹,

Pendlebury²,

Gibb³

et al. 2005

Architectural Engineering and Design Management

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Offsite production (OSP) has been promoted as one of the solutions to the industry's performance problems. Numerous works have demonstrated the possible benefits from adopting such approaches to construction projects, yet uptake has been slow. Addressing these concerns a series of factors were identified that affect the use of OSP within construction projects. From these factors a pattern emerged in which some factors drove OSP adoption, whilst others constrained its implementation. These constraints were investigated further using a questionnaire survey that was sent to all major stakeholders, ranging from clients through to end manufacturers. The extent to which the constraints inhibit the use of OSP were ascertained, scored and ranked. Four broad constraint themes emerged from the findings, namely process, value, supply-chain and knowledge constraints. A model illustrating the relationship between the four themes provides further insight into the constraints to OSP uptake. The authors further suggest that a broader understanding of the constraints is required, arguing that while OSP can contribute to change in the industry, it itself depends on change in order to be widely adopted.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constraints to the Use of Off-site Production on Construction Projects

Blismas¹,

Pendlebury²,

Gibb³

et al. 2005

Architectural Engineering and Design Management

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This mutually reinforcing image of the construction industry as a low performing, yet highly performative, sector, is shared by both mainstream (Harris, 2006) and the far smaller number of critically-orientated studies of construction (Clarke, 2006;Clegg, 1975;Fletcher and Watson, 2007;Green, 2003;Green et al 2008;Styhre, 2006). Conceivably, this highly performative image of construction contributes to the rather modest number of critical studies of construction work despite its sizeable socio-economic influence: perhaps this sector is simply too managerially performative for interesting critical study?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since the 1980s, construction has witnessed the spread of standardized PM knowledge, methods and tools (e.g. Critical Path Analysis, PERT, TQM, BPR and lean) to enable better control and efficiency in the invariably unpredictable act of building (Applebaum, 1982;Green, 2003;Green et al 2008;Styhre, 2006). The penetration of distinct PM knowledge beyond middle management at site-level remains debatable (Green, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The penetration of distinct PM knowledge beyond middle management at site-level remains debatable (Green, 2006). However, amongst most construction management (CM) researchers and senior managers, the development of generic PM tools grounded on a positivist-functionalist epistemology to understand and control the complex causes of unpredictability in building has become the mantra by which the future of the industry can be secured (Green, 2003(Green, , 2006Green et al 2008). Partly due to the spread of PM as the performance solution, from mega projects (Flyvbjerg, 2003) to home kitchen installation (Moben, 2010), failure increasingly becomes viewed in construction in terms of the failure of management to achieve expected outcomes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A critical argument in favor of theoretical pluralism: Project failure and the many and varied limitations of project management

Sage

Dainty

Brookes

2014

International Journal of Project Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In project management, failure is often assumed to be evidence of deficient management: a problem that can be overcome by better management. Drawing on qualitative research within UK construction projects we examine how four different theoretical approaches (positivism, structural Marxism, interpretivism and actor-network theory) all challenge this managerial assumption. Each theoretical perspective enables a specific analysis of empirical data that critiques the notion that project failures are easily, simply, or largely, associated with the failure of project management. In so doing, our pluralist analysis reveals the social and political contextualization of performance in project management. We thus conclude by proposing that practitioner and scholarly concerns with project failure (and success), can actively contribute to attempts to reflect upon various matters of political concern as developed within the Making Projects Critical community, and by extension Critical Management Studies. Thus, we propose greater interaction between critical and mainstream project research communities.

show abstract

“…Whether as a response to uncertainty or complexity (Eccles, 1981a), subcontracting within construction and the emergence of 'hollowed out' firms (Green and May, 2003), has and continues to dominate the structure of the industry. At the centre of concerns with subcontracting has been the issue of how subsequent networks of boundary-spanning organisations (Üsdiken et al, 1988), exchange relationships, risks and costs can be controlled.…”

Section: Construction Supply Chain Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

The non-adoption of supply chain management

Fernie

Tennant

2013

Construction Management and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Largely taken for granted within the UK construction sector has been a view that supply chain management theory is robust, relevant and reliable. As such it has formed a substantial aspect of previous and contemporary policy and government funded research. Despite this, the prevailing view of its development and diffusion over the last 15 years within the construction industry has been problematic.Coincidentally, prevailing debates within the supply chain management academic community point to the lack of unified theory, models of diffusion and strong connections to organisation theory. Using Straussian grounded theory; iterations between data and organisation theory provided a fresh perspective on the development and diffusion of supply chain management in construction. This inductive research provided contextually rich explanations for development and diffusion that explicitly connected with and drew upon robust, relevant and reliable theories of institutions, innovation diffusion, triads, quasifirms and mechanisms of organizational governance. These explanations challenge the simplistic assumption that chains and networks of organisations are holistically managed and controlled by any single organisation or institution in the construction industry. The paper therefore shifts the debate away from proselytising supply chain management towards research that explores rigor, relevance and reliability of supply chain management assumptions in construction. The paper also exposes the gap between industry practice and policy and, questions the extent to which policy and practice do, or should, constitute a recursive relationship.

show abstract

Re-engineering construction: going against the grain

Cited by 65 publications

References 24 publications

Constraints to the Use of Off-site Production on Construction Projects

Constraints to the Use of Off-site Production on Construction Projects

A critical argument in favor of theoretical pluralism: Project failure and the many and varied limitations of project management

The non-adoption of supply chain management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About