Using Last Planner and a Risk Assessment Matrix to Reduce Variation in Mechanical Related Construction Tasks
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 138, Issue 4
Abstract
Variation, defined for this research as the time difference between what was planned and what actually happened, is important as it can affect the productivity performance of construction tasks. The construction process is complex and consists of a large number of interdependent tasks. When the starting time and/or duration of one task varies, it can affect other downstream tasks and result in disruptions to the schedule and/or decreased productivity. This research examined the effect of using a risk assessment matrix in conjunction with the Last Planner System (LPS) method to reduce and/or eliminate task duration variation. A case study was conducted involving a mechanical contractor who specializes in plumbing, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning. The company compared the performance of two separate, but similar projects. The LPS method was used with one of the projects and the company’s traditional planning system was used with the other (i.e., not using the LPS system). A total of 16 weeks’ worth of data was collected for each project. Variation, productivity, and cost savings were analyzed using a risk assessment matrix and benefit–cost procedures. The project that used the LPS method had a 35% higher productivity performance than the traditionally planned project and resulted in a benefit–cost ratio of . The research findings fill a gap in the body of knowledge by analyzing how planning can reduce variation with real project data. The results of this research illustrate the effect the LPS method can have on reducing variation and improving project productivity performance. The findings also serve as an example of an effective planning strategy for project managers and field managers in their efforts to improve project performance.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to recognize and thank the reviewers for their insight and suggestions. Their feedback contributed immensely to the quality of this paper.
References
Alarcón, L. F., et al. (2005). “Assessing the impacts of implementing lean construction.” Proc. of the 13th Annual Conf. of the International Group for Lean Construction, Swinburne Univ. of Technology, Melbourne, Australia, 387–393.
Ballard, G. (1997). “Lookahead planning: The missing link in production control.” Proc. of the 5th Annual Conf. of the International Group for Lean Construction, Griffith Univ., Gold Coast, Australia.
Ballard, G. (2000). “The last planner system of production control.” Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Ballard, G., and Howell, G. (1998). “Shielding production: Essential step in production control.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 124(1), 11–17.JCCEAZ
Choo, H. J., Tommelein, I. D., Ballard, G., and Zabelle, T. R. (1999). “Workplan: Constraint-based database for work package scheduling.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 125(3), 151–160.JCEMD4
Dai, J., Goodrum, P. M., and Maloney, W. F. (2009). “Construction craft workers’ perceptions of the factors affecting their productivity.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage.JCEMD4, 135(3), 217–226.
Erlang, A. K. (1909). “The theory of probabilities and telephone conversations.” Nyt Tidsskrift for Matematik B, 20, 33–39.
Farid, F., and Koning, T. L. (1994). “Simulation verifies queuing program for selecting loader truck fleets.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 120(2), 386–404.JCEMD4
González, V., Alarcón, L. F., Maturana, S., Mundaca, F., and Bustamante, J. (2010). “Improving planning reliability and project performance using the reliable commitment model.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 136(10), 1129–1139.JCEMD4
Horman, M. J., and Thomas, H. R. (2005). “Role of inventory buffers in construction labor performance.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 131(7), 834–843.JCEMD4
Howell, G. A., and Ballard, G. (1994). “Implementing lean construction: Reducing inflow variation.” 2nd Annual Conference of the international group for Lean Construction, Catolica Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Howell, G. A., Ballard, G., and Hall, J. (2001). “Capacity utilization and wait time: A primer for construction.” Proc. of the 9th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, National Univ. of Singapore, Singapore.
Liu, M., and Ballard, G. (2009). “Factors affecting work flow reliability—A case study.” Proc. of the 17th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, National Pingtung Univ. of Science & Technology, Taiwan, 657–666.
Meredith, J. (1998). “Building operations management theory through case and field research.” J. Oper. Manage.JOTMES, 16(4), 441–454.
Ohno, T. (1988). Toyota Production System: Beyond large-scale production, Productivity Press Inc., Cambridge, MA.
Thomas, H. R., Horman, M. J., Lemes de Souza, U. E., and Zavrski, I. (2002). “Reducing variability to improve performance as a lean construction principle.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 128(2), 144–154.JCEMD4
Thomas, H. R., Horman, M. J, Minchin, R. E., and Chen, D. (2003). “Improving labor flow reliability for better productivity as lean construction principle.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage.,129(3), 251–261.JCEMD4
Wambeke, B. W., Hsiang, S. M., and Liu, M. (2011). “Causes of variation in construction project task starting times and duration.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage.JCEMD4, 137(9), 663–677.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2012. American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Dec 6, 2010
Accepted: Jun 29, 2011
Published online: Mar 15, 2012
Published in print: Apr 1, 2012
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.