Dynamic Planning for Fast-Tracking Building Construction Projects
This article has a reply.
VIEW THE REPLYPublication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 127, Issue 6
Abstract
The fast-tracking delivery method has received considerable attention over the last decade, and its time saving feature has placed it as a possible alternative to the traditional more sequential method. Along with its benefits, however, fast-tracking also has greater potential to impact the project development process than the traditional method. In the literature, this is usually attributed to the increased level of uncertainty and research on fast-tracking has mainly focused on uncertainty reduction but without explicit study of the feedback processes involved in fast-tracking. However, closer observations of the project development process suggest that to effectively handle uncertainty and minimize the negative impact of fast-tracking, the feedback processes involved in fast-tracking need to be identified, and the dynamic behavior of construction resulting from those feedback processes needs to be dealt with in a systematic manner. As an effort to meet these needs, this paper presents the Dynamic Planning Methodology, a planning methodology based on system dynamics. Focusing on the dynamic behavior of fast-tracking construction, the Dynamic Planning Methodology aims to improve the planning and management of fast-tracking building construction projects by providing overlapping strategies, workforce control policies, and schedule adjustments that will minimize the negative impact of fast-tracking.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Bernold, L. E. (1989). “Simulation of nonsteady construction processes.”J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., ASCE, 115(2), 163–178.
2.
Fazio, P., Moselhi, O., Theberge, P., and Revay, S. ( 1988). “Design impact of construction fast-track.” Constr. Mgmt. and Economics, 6(2), 195–208.
3.
Ford, D., and Sterman, J. ( 1997). “Dynamic modeling of product development processes.” Working Paper 3943-97, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass.
4.
Huovila, P., Koskela, L., and Lautanala, M. ( 1994). “Fast or concurrent: The art of getting construction improved.” Proc., 2nd Workshop on Lean Construction, Santiago, Chile, 143–158.
5.
Kwak, S. ( 1995). “Policy analysis of Hanford Tank Farm operations with system dynamics approach.” PhD thesis, Dept. of Nuclear Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass.
6.
Richardson, G. ( 1985). “Introduction to the system dynamics review.” Syst. Dyn. Rev., 1(1), 1–5.
7.
Russell, A., and Ranasinghe, M. ( 1991). “Decision framework for fast-track construction: A deterministic analysis.” Constr. Mgmt. and Economics, 9(5), 467–479.
8.
Sterman, J. ( 1992). “System dynamics modeling for project management.” Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 〈http://web.mit.edu/jsterman/www/〉.
9.
Sterman, J. ( 2000). Business dynamics: System thinking and modeling for a complex world, McGraw-Hill, New York.
10.
Tighe, J. ( 1991). “Benefits of fast tracking are a myth.” Int. J. Proj. Mgmt., 9(1), 49–51.
11.
Turek, M. ( 1995). “System dynamics analysis of financial factors in nuclear power plant operations.” MS thesis, Dept. of Nuclear Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass.
12.
Williams, G. ( 1995). “Fast-track pros and cons: Considerations for industrial projects.”J. Mgmt. in Engrg., ASCE, 11(5), 24–32.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
History
Received: May 2, 2000
Published online: Dec 1, 2001
Published in print: Dec 2001
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.