Construction management methods

For some time now, the construction industry has been accused of limited cooperation between actors, low levels of trust and ineffective communication. This, it is argued, results in low levels of process performance. In fact, how to improve the performance of construction processes remains one of...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Tadeo Baldiri Salcedo Rahola
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Delft University of Technology 2015-11-01
Series:A+BE: Architecture and the Built Environment
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journals.open.tudelft.nl/abe/article/view/6604
_version_ 1811154453221343232
author Tadeo Baldiri Salcedo Rahola
author_facet Tadeo Baldiri Salcedo Rahola
author_sort Tadeo Baldiri Salcedo Rahola
collection DOAJ
description For some time now, the construction industry has been accused of limited cooperation between actors, low levels of trust and ineffective communication. This, it is argued, results in low levels of process performance. In fact, how to improve the performance of construction processes remains one of the key issues in the construction sector, including projects for social housing. Reports by the Construction Industry Institute (1991) in the US, and Latham (1994) and Egan (1998) in the UK have been much publicised wake-up calls to the need for different working practices in the construction sector, and others, too, have made similar claims. For example, in Australia the ‘Building for Growth’ Report (Industry Science Resources 1999) identified the need for integration in the construction supply chain in order to achieve the technical and financial capacity that will lead to international levels of competitiveness. In Hong Kong the ‘Construct for Excellence’ Report (Construction Industry Review Committee, 2001) highlighted that fragmentation within the sector and the low levels of cooperation is preventing improvements in buildability, safety and life cycle costs. And in the Netherlands, the ‘Van raad naar daad’ (From Advice to Action) Report (Regieraad Bouw, 2004) describes similar fragmentation within the construction sector and proposes learning the lessons from best practice in other countries and renewing processes and systems to achieve higher levels of innovation, creativity and quality.
first_indexed 2024-04-10T04:15:52Z
format Article
id doaj.art-3db4126f5c264b71ba795b74ff0ddca0
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2212-3202
2214-7233
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-10T04:15:52Z
publishDate 2015-11-01
publisher Delft University of Technology
record_format Article
series A+BE: Architecture and the Built Environment
spelling doaj.art-3db4126f5c264b71ba795b74ff0ddca02023-03-11T23:03:18ZengDelft University of TechnologyA+BE: Architecture and the Built Environment2212-32022214-72332015-11-01512Construction management methodsTadeo Baldiri Salcedo Rahola0TU Delft, Architecture and the Built Environment For some time now, the construction industry has been accused of limited cooperation between actors, low levels of trust and ineffective communication. This, it is argued, results in low levels of process performance. In fact, how to improve the performance of construction processes remains one of the key issues in the construction sector, including projects for social housing. Reports by the Construction Industry Institute (1991) in the US, and Latham (1994) and Egan (1998) in the UK have been much publicised wake-up calls to the need for different working practices in the construction sector, and others, too, have made similar claims. For example, in Australia the ‘Building for Growth’ Report (Industry Science Resources 1999) identified the need for integration in the construction supply chain in order to achieve the technical and financial capacity that will lead to international levels of competitiveness. In Hong Kong the ‘Construct for Excellence’ Report (Construction Industry Review Committee, 2001) highlighted that fragmentation within the sector and the low levels of cooperation is preventing improvements in buildability, safety and life cycle costs. And in the Netherlands, the ‘Van raad naar daad’ (From Advice to Action) Report (Regieraad Bouw, 2004) describes similar fragmentation within the construction sector and proposes learning the lessons from best practice in other countries and renewing processes and systems to achieve higher levels of innovation, creativity and quality. https://journals.open.tudelft.nl/abe/article/view/6604constructionsocial housing
spellingShingle Tadeo Baldiri Salcedo Rahola
Construction management methods
A+BE: Architecture and the Built Environment
construction
social housing
title Construction management methods
title_full Construction management methods
title_fullStr Construction management methods
title_full_unstemmed Construction management methods
title_short Construction management methods
title_sort construction management methods
topic construction
social housing
url https://journals.open.tudelft.nl/abe/article/view/6604
work_keys_str_mv AT tadeobaldirisalcedorahola constructionmanagementmethods