“Lean” Comparison Using Process Charts of Complex Seismic Retrofit Projects
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 135, Issue 4
Abstract
This paper compares the delivery of two retrofit projects where seismic isolation bearings were installed. The comparison is retrospective. The design teams on these projects did not implement “lean” thinking to develop their approach, nevertheless, observed process differences are characterized using a “lean” process evaluation and optimization tool, and then gauged and rationalized from that perspective. Cross-functional process charts identify functional parties with interrelated material or information handoffs. They help to identify (un)necessary steps or complexity as measured by number of handoffs and interacting parties. Analysis of these charts shows that project value may stem from the owner integrating design development with product procurement and construction method selection. On one project, integration was made possible by structural engineers evaluating the impacts of product procurement on overall project performance, expert consultants providing construction process reviews, and experienced contractors participating in installation sequence development. This paper illustrates the value of developing a symbiotic relationship between designers and suppliers in a niche market. It stresses the need for work structuring early on in the delivery process, integrating process with product development, to improve project delivery.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
Thanks are due to Forell/Elsesser Engineers for graciously sharing years of design insights and strategies on the AAM and PCH projects; to the City of Pasadena, D.M.J.M., and Clarke Construction Group, LLC, for allowing ample access to the construction site and personnel during our field visit; and to anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful feedback. This paper stems in part from coursework completed at U.C. Berkeley in Spring 2006. We would like to thank our project partner Zakiya Seymour for her significant contributions to the original presentation of this material and the Construction Employers Association (CEA) for funding our travel to the PCH site.
References
Asian Art Museum (AAM). (2006). “AAM website.” ⟨http://www.asianart.org/building.htm⟩ (April 2, 2006).
Ballard, G. (2000a). “The Last Planner system of production control.” Ph.D. dissertation, The Univ. of Birmingham, Birmingham, U.K., 18–20.
Ballard, G. (2000b). “Positive vs negative iteration in design.” Proc., 8th Ann. Conf. of the Int. Group for Lean Construction (IGLC8), Science and Technology Policy Research, Brighton, U.K.
Ballard, G., and Reiser, P. (2004). “The St. Olaf college fieldhouse project: A case study in designing to target cost.” Proc., 12th Ann. Conf. of the Int. Group for Lean Construction (IGLC 12), Elsinore, Denmark, Lean Construction Denmark, Helsingor, Denmark.
Ballard, G., Tommelein, I., Koskela, L., and Howell, G. (2002). “Lean construction tools and techniques.” Design and construction: Building in value, R. Best and G. de Valence, eds., Chap. 15, Butterworth Heinem, Elsevier Science Ltd., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 227–255.
Cox, A. (2001). “Managing with power: Strategies for improving value appropriation from supply relationships.” J. Supply Chain Manage., 37(2), 42–47.
Damelio, R. (1996). The basics of process mapping, Productivity Press, Portland, Ore.
Earthquake Protection Systems (EPS). (2006). “EPS website.” ⟨http://www.earthquakeprotection.com⟩ (March 17, 1996).
Elsesser, E., Jokherst, M., and Naaseh, S. (1997). “Historic upgrades in San Francisco.” Civ. Eng. (N.Y.), 67(10), 50–53.
Howell, G., Laufer, A., and Ballard, G. (1993). “Interaction between sub-cycles: One key to improved methods.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 119(4), 714–728.
Koskela, L. (1992). “Application of the new production philosophy to construction.” Technical Rep. No. 72, Center for Integrated Faculty Engineering (CIFE), Stanford Univ., Stanford, Calif.
Koskela, L. (2000). “An exploration into a production theory and its application to construction.” Publication No. 408, VTT Building Technology, Espoo, Finland, ⟨http://www.inf.vtt.fi/pdf/publications/2000/P408.pdf⟩.
Koskela, L. (2004). “Making do- The eighth category of waste.” Proc., 12th Ann. Conf. of the Int. Group for Lean Constr. (IGLC 12), Elsinore, Denmark, Lean Construction Denmark, Helsingor, Denmark.
Koskela, L., Howell, G., Ballard, G., and Tommelein, I. (2002). “The foundations of lean construction.” Design and construction-Building in value, R. Best and G. de Valence, eds., Chap. 14, Butterworth Heinem, Elsevier Science, Ltd., Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 211–226.
Koskela, L., and Vrijhoef, R. (2000). “The prevalent theory of construction is a hindrance for innovation.” Proc., 8th Ann. Conf. of the Int. Group for Lean Construction (IGLC 8), Science and Technology Policy Research, Brighton, U.K.
Lam, P., Kumaraswamy, M., and Ng, S. (2001). “The multiple roles of specification in lean construction.” Proc., 9th Ann. Conf. of the Int. Group for Lean Constr. (IGLC 9), The Professional Activities Centre, Faculty of Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Liker, J. K. (2003). The Toyota way: 14 management principles from the world’s greatest manufacturer, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Mar, D. (2005). Proc., Lean Design Forum, Lean Construction Institute, Berkeley, Calif., Project Production Systems Laboratory, Berkeley, Calif.
Molenaar, K., and Johnson, D. (2003). “Engineering the procurement process to achieve best value.” Leadership Manage. Eng., 3(3), 137–141.
Nova (2000). “Friction pendulum seismic isolation bearings.” 2000 Nova Award Winner, Nomination 8, ⟨http://www.cif.org/Nom2000/Nom08_00.PDF⟩ (April 15, 2008).
Ohno, T. (1988). Toyota production system: Beyond large scale production, Productivity Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Parrish, K., Wong, J.-M., Tommelein, I. D., and Stojadinovic, B. (2007). “Proof-of-concept of set-based design for reinforced concrete structures.” Proc., 15th Ann. Conf. of the Int. Group for Lean Constr. (IGLC 15), Michigan State Universiy Printing Services, East Lansing, Mich.
Pasadena City Hall (PCH). (2008). “Pasadena City Hall seismic upgrade & rehabilitation project.” ⟨http://www.ci.pasadena.ca.us/cityhall/⟩ (April 2, 2008).
Sobek, D., Ward, A., and Liker, S. (1999). “Toyota’s principles of set-based concurrent engineering.” Sloan Manage. Rev., 40(2), 67–83.
Tavistock Institute. (1966). Independence and uncertainty, London.
Tommelein, I. D. (1998). “Pull driven scheduling for pipe-spool installation: Simulation of a lean construction technique.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 124(4), 279–288.
Tommelein, I. D., Riley, D., and Howell, G. A. (1999). “Parade game: Impact of work flow variability on trade performance.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 125(5), 304–310.
Tsao, C. C. Y., Tommelein, I. D., Swanlund, E., and Howell, G. A. (2004). “Work structuring to achieve integrated product-process design.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 130(6), 780–789.
Tuholski, S. J., and Rodler, P. E. (2004). “Asian art museum retrofit.” Proc., 73rd Ann. Convention, Structural Engineers Association of Northern California (SEAONC), Monterey, Calif., Mira Digital Publishing, Vancouver.
Ward, A., Liker, J., Cristiano, J., and Sobek, D. (1995). “The second Toyota paradox: How delaying decisions can make better cars.” Sloan Manage. Rev., 36(3), 43–61.
Womack, J. P., Jones, D. T., and Roos, D. (1990). The machine that changed the world, HarperCollins, New York.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 135 • Issue 4 • April 2009
Pages: 330 - 339
Copyright
© 2009 ASCE.
History
Received: Jul 10, 2007
Accepted: Nov 14, 2008
Published online: Apr 1, 2009
Published in print: Apr 2009
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.