This LEAN Construction Guide outlines fundamentals, tools, and frameworks for the implementation of LEAN Construction Project Delivery Systems.
“The role of management is to change the process rather than badgering employees to do better” – W. Edwards Demming
Construction Lean Project Delivery Systems
In the realm of construction, Lean Construction can often be shrouded in confusion and misinformation. However, the essence of a Construction Lean Project Delivery System is straightforward.
Optimal facilities better fit for purpose can be provided at less cost through detailed project definition and robust, integrated planning, procurement, and project delivery.
A Construction Lean Project Delivery System serves as a structured process that harmonizes Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery Teams to achieve mutually beneficial results efficiently within a collaborative and transparent environment. While most LEAN construction tools and philosophies narrowly focus upon improving “productivity”, defined as amount of output for hour, achieving best value outcomes requires all preconstruction, construction, and post constructon activities.
Key frameworks like Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and Collaborative Job Order Contracting exemplify the essence of lean construction delivery, encompassing core characteristics, activities, goals, and elements:
– Emphasis on “value stream mapping” to comprehensively understand the construction process from both the client’s and delivery teams’ perspectives. This aids in recognizing value addition, pinpointing inefficiencies, and eradicating errors and waste through continuous evaluation. This includes full technical and cost visibility (For more information on actionable data see: Verifiable Construction Task Data.)
– Cultivation of a culture centered on “respect for people” by involving all stakeholders and promoting early and consistent information sharing for collaborative issue resolution.
– Implementation of thorough training for all involved parties.
– A multi-party relationship-based contract with an integral written execution guide or operations manual.
– Utilization of Quantitative Metrics & Continuous Improvement strategies.
– Advocacy for Early and Ongoing Information Sharing to facilitate seamless problem-solving.
– Adoption of Pull Planning to align task scheduling with actual demand, ensuring adaptability.
– Focus on optimizing workflow for uninterrupted progress.
– Client-Centric, Service-Oriented Approach prioritizing client needs for optimal project outcomes.
Consistent achievement of best value construction outcomes is only possible with the collaboration of all project participants (Owners, A/Es, Contractors, Facility Managers, End-users) at the earliest possible stages and throughout the planning, procurement, and project delivery lifecycle.
Core LEAN principles were first introduced to contemporary markets by Henry Ford (focus on the outcomes, leverage the experience and knowledge of those doing the work, continuous improvement), and later associated with Toyota (the Toyota Production System, TPS), and subsequently adopted many manufacturing and service sectors.
‘Lean’ Construction is both a philosophy and associated processes and tools to minimize waste of materials, time, cost, and effort in order to generate the maximum possible amount of value.
A great deal has been written about LEAN and LEAN construction, much of which has not kept pace with innovations over the past several years.
The concept has evolved significantly. Robust frameworks are now readily available. Thus, implementing Lean can result in substantial cost savings, improved quality, faster project delivery, and enhanced team relationships.
Many of the core principles of LEAN date back centuries to the concept of “Master Builders”, then were advanced by Henry Ford, Toyota’s TPS, and specific to construction, implemented to various levels of sophistication by Integrated Project Delivery, Collaborative Job Order Contracting, and Alliance Partnering among others.
LEAN construction offers the real possibility of 30%-40% cost savings (not remarkable when you consider 50%+ waste is common), higher quality, faster project delivery times, and improved team relationships.
“Eighty-five percent of the reasons for failure are deficiencies in the systems and process rather than the employee. The role of management is to change the process rather than badgering individuals to do better.” – W. Edward Deming
A few things to consider:
#1. When considering Lean construction, it’s essential to be cautious of self-proclaimed “experts” as Lean is a continuous journey. Everyone is learning and evolving!
#2. There is no need to learn new languages or odd names such as Kaizen, Poko-Yoke, 5S, Andon, Gemba, Heijunka…. Certainly review all Lean philosophies and methods, however, do not overcomplicate things. LEAN itself is simple!
#3. The Last Planner System (LPS) is not a comprehensive LEAN solution, rather a component or tool that can be used within a broader LEAN construction framework. Understanding concepts like the Last Planner System (LPS) is key, as they are vital within the broader Lean framework, especially with respect to planning and production control.
#4. Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and Job Order Contracting (JOC) are pivotal Lean construction frameworks. IPD is ideal for new construction, while collaborative JOC suits repair, renovation, maintenance, and “minor” new construction projects. Accurate local market granular cost data and collaborative delivery methods are crucial for Lean implementation, aligning with its core principles of waste reduction and value enhancement.
#5. Progressive Design Build (PDB) is not “better” than Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) or Job Order Contracting (JOC).
For example, Job Order Contracting (JOC) requires a high level of collaboration between the owner and the contractor, similar to Progressive Design-Build (PDB). Both methods encourage partnership early in the project cycle, but JOC’s focus on using an objective, current, and locally researched cost book provides a clear advantage in terms of cost visibility and transparency. This allows JOC to have much more verifiable and precise cost management.
In contrast, PDB often lacks this kind of granular cost control unless explicitly integrated into the process. Without standardized, localized cost data, PDB relies on evolving cost estimates, which can lead to less visibility and accuracy compared to the structured cost management approach of JOC.
It is noteworthy, that PDB contracts operate under open-book accounting, meaning the owner has visibility into the contractor’s costs and margins. This can help ensure that the contractor isn’t squeezed by unrealistic expectations. While this promotes fair compensation for the team, it doesn’t guarantee profit because external factors like market changes or scope creep can still erode profitability.
These comprehensive frameworks align with LEAN’s focus on reducing waste, improving efficiency, and ensuring value through better planning, collaboration, and data-driven decision-making.
LEAN METHODOLOGY White Paper: LEAN Facilities O & M Planning:
Strategy, Objectives, & Methods – 2023 and Beyond (Download)
The first step is transformation of the individual.
Once the individual understands the system of profound knowledge, he will apply its principles in every kind of relationship with other people. He will have a basis for judgment of his own decisions and for transformation of the organizations that he belongs to. The individual, once transformed, will:
– Set an example
– Be a good listener, but will not compromise
– Continually teach other people
– Help people to pull away from their current practice and beliefs and move into the new philosophy without a feeling of guilt about the past.
– Deming
The Master Builder concept is an ancient approach to construction, where a single individual or entity is responsible for both the design and the construction of a project. This role encompasses all aspects of planning, architecture, engineering, and building, integrating both creative and technical responsibilities. Historically, the master builder was seen as a highly skilled craftsman and a leader who had deep expertise in all areas of construction, overseeing projects from inception to completion.
Key Characteristics:
- Unified Responsibility: The master builder held ultimate responsibility for the project, ensuring it met design intent, functioned properly, and was built to high-quality standards.
- Integration of Design and Construction: Unlike modern construction, where design (architecture) and construction are often separate entities, the master builder concept integrates both, allowing for seamless communication between design intent and execution.
- Holistic Vision: Master builders had a comprehensive understanding of the entire construction process, from material selection to structural integrity, which allowed them to create cohesive, well-executed projects.
- Historical Examples: Many iconic structures from ancient times including medieval cathedrals, Roman aqueducts, were built under the master builder model.
Modern Context
In modern construction, the master builder concept has evolved into initial concepts such as design-build, where a single entity manages both design and construction. While specialization and complexity have grown over time, the core idea of integrating design and construction to ensure quality, efficiency, and cohesion remains valued.
Today the Master Builder concept has evolved into frameworks like Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), where a single entity or team is responsible for both the design and construction of a project, and Advanced Job Order Contracting (example OpenJOC(TM) Open Job Order Contacting. Although today’s construction processes are more specialized and fragmented than in ancient times, the underlying goal of integrating planning, design, procurement and project delivery/construction remains, aimed at improving efficiency, reducing conflicts, and enhancing project outcomes.
Key Modern Construction Frameworks Based on the Master Builder Idea:
- Design-Build (Partial Lean solution):
- Single Entity Responsibility: In the design-build model, one company or a team is contracted to handle both the design and construction aspects of a project. This contrasts with the traditional design-bid-build approach, where design and construction are handled by separate entities.
- Advantages: This integration helps to streamline communication, reduce delays, manage costs more effectively, and minimize disputes between designers and builders.
- Collaboration and Efficiency: The design-build process fosters collaboration from the start, as the design team works directly with the construction team to ensure the design is feasible, constructible, and cost-efficient.
- Integrated Project Delivery (IPD):
- Shared Risk and Reward: IPD is a highly collaborative approach that brings together the owner, designers, contractors, and often key subcontractors under one contract. All parties share the risks and rewards, fostering greater collaboration and innovation.
- Technology Integration: The use of advanced technology, such as Building Information Modeling (BIM), enables better coordination between design and construction teams, echoing the holistic control the master builder once had over a project.
- Focus on Outcomes: IPD aims to optimize project results, increase value to the owner, reduce waste, and maximize efficiency, aligning with the master builder’s role in ensuring the best possible outcomes.
- Lean Construction Principles: Modern construction methods, especially those involving Lean principles, emphasize waste reduction, collaboration, and continuous improvement, which are aligned with the holistic vision of the master builder.
- Advanced Job Order Contracting (JOC):
- Integrated Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery: While JOC has been traditional used primarily as a method to speed procurement, when deployed more holistically, as a Broader Integrative Tool it can serve as a comprehensive tool that integrates planning, procurement, and project delivery, leveraging granular cost data to enhance overall cost management and project outcomes. JOC can synchronize internal planning (like project scheduling and resource allocation) with external factors such as contractor selection and supply chain management. This creates a cohesive framework for managing projects, ensuring that all steps align with the broader organizational goals.
- Single Source of Responsibility: In a JOC, like in the Master Builder concept, there is a single point of responsibility for executing the construction projects. The contractor is on-call for various jobs under a pre-negotiated contract, making them the go-to for all construction-related tasks within the scope. The JOC contractor is responsible for managing and delivering construction outcomes, similar to how a Master Builder would oversee and manage the entire building process.
- Efficiency and Streamlined Processes: JOC is designed to allow for quick mobilization and execution of smaller, repetitive construction tasks without the delays of traditional bidding. This reflects the Master Builder’s ability to directly execute or oversee work without the inefficiencies caused by fragmented responsibilities. The pre-established pricing models and workflows in JOC resemble how a Master Builder might rely on standardized processes to maintain efficiency and quality over a series of projects. The costs data used however must me current, objective, granular, and directly based upon locally researched labor, material and equipment costs and not based upon national averages and/or cost factoring.
- Ongoing Relationship and Collaboration: In JOC, the contractor maintains an ongoing relationship with the client (often public instituion) over time, addressing multiple projects under a single contract. This ongoing collaboration is akin to the long-term relationship a Master Builder might have had with a patron or community, handling multiple construction tasks as needed. The contractor becomes familiar with the owner’s needs and preferences, which can improve project outcomes—similar to how a Master Builder’s understanding of the client and their vision would contribute to success.
- Objective, Granular Cost Data: One of the significant advantages of JOC is its ability to leverage current, verifiable cost data. The use of unit price books (UPBs) or other cost databases provides a transparent, accurate picture of costs for various tasks. This aligns with the need for cost visibility and transparency you mentioned earlier, which is crucial for effective cost management, especially in a Lean construction context.
- Enhanced Cost Management: By using real-time, detailed cost information, JOC enables better cost prediction, tracking, and control. This can help avoid the common pitfalls of cost overruns or inaccuracies seen in more traditional models. The availability of such data also helps improve decision-making during the design and construction phases, similar to how the Master Builder’s deep knowledge ensured efficient project delivery.
- Project Delivery Improvement: By fostering a streamlined and collaborative environment, JOC can help integrate project delivery processes with cost data and procurement in a way that improves efficiency, reduces waste, and leads to better project outcomes. This approach creates a feedback loop where data from completed projects inform future planning, creating continuous improvement in the process.
- Efficiency and Control: Like the Master Builder, JOC allows for efficient execution, particularly for recurring or similar types of projects. The focus on efficiency and managing resources well, without the delays of traditional procurement methods, is a shared characteristic.
- Continuity and Expertise: The long-term relationship between the JOC contractor and the client is somewhat analogous to the ongoing role of a Master Builder, who would have been relied upon for various construction needs over time.
- Modern Applications of JOC Reflecting Master Builder Concepts:
In summary, JOC shares some aspects of the Master Builder concept, particularly in terms of efficiency, single-source responsibility, and continuity. It focuses on efficient, pre-planned construction tasks, often based on existing designs or minor modifications, and collaboration between owners and design-builders. When implemented fully, JOC can integrate planning, procurement, and project deliver professionals. JOC’s ability to integrate these elements makes it a powerful tool not only for procurement but also for project delivery and cost management, much like the holistic oversight of a Master Builder in modern terms.
Comparison with Historical Master Builder:
- Specialization: Modern projects often involve highly specialized roles (architects, engineers, contractors, etc.), unlike the generalist master builder of the past. However, these specializations are now more integrated under frameworks like design-build or IPD or advanced Job Order Contracting
- Collaborative Tools: The use of robust processes, actionable data, and advanced technology enables a level of precision and collaboration that the historical master builder could only achieve through deep personal expertise and oversight.
In essence, the modern construction industry’s shift toward more integrated, collaborative delivery models mirrors the holistic approach of the ancient master builder, but leverages modern technology and organizational frameworks to manage the complexity of today’s projects.
A Brief History of Lean – Timeline and Major Events
- Early and ongoing collaboration among all participants and stakeholders
- Integration of internal and external planning, procurement, and project delivery teams
- Relationship-based best value procurement
- Focus upon client requirements and best value outcomes
- Clearly defined and documented roles, responsibilities, workflows
- Shared, performance-based risk/reward
- Decision support based upon current and actionable information (i.e. locally researched granular information versus contractor or subcontractor lump sum quotes)
- Common terms, definitions, & data formats — Common data environment (CDE)
- Mutual trust and respect among participants
- Continuous improvement
- Mandatory initial and ongoing training
- Owner leadership and support
- Quantitative metrics
LEAN practices provide a framework to integrate and maximize the capabilities of available people, processes, information, and technology to address ongoing new and facilities requirements.
Promoting awareness and education of LEAN facilities management and sustainment best management practices leads to improved outcomes. LEAN equally applies to new construction, repair, renovation, operations, and maintenance.
Download: LEAN Construction Framework – A White Paper
LEAN Practices Asset Competency Model
LEAN Considerations
MULTIPLE COMPETENCIES, BUSINESS PROCESSES, AND ACTIVITIES
Facilities management spans multiple competencies (core skills), business processes (asset management practices/industries), and activities, such as the following:
Activities
- Strategic planning
- Cost estimating
- Procurement/bidding
- Construction
- Space planning
- Operations
- Maintenance
- Programming
Business Processes
- Capital planning and management
- Construction project delivery methodology
- Space management
- Operations & Maintenance
- Inventory and maintenance disposition management
Life-cycle Management
NOTE: The term “Big Data” describes the multiple sources, formats, and uses of data that can be leveraged to monitor and improve organizational performance. The Construction Operations Building information exchange (COBie) has become one of the most widely known data formats. COBie is an information exchange specification for the life-cycle capture and delivery of information needed by facility managers. It can be viewed in design, construction, and maintenance software as well as in simple spreadsheets. Equally important data formats include MasterFormat, Uniformat, and Omniclass.
SUPPORTING TECHNOLOGY AND TOOLS
Technology and tools used to lower the cost of implementing and managing LEAN O&M best management practices (BPMs) include the following:
Technologies
- Application Software
- Building Automation Systems (BAS)
- Building Information Modeling (BIM) (Model & Management Systems)
- Capital Planning and Management Systems (CPMS)
- Computer-aided Facilities Management Systems (CAFM)
- Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (CMMS)
- Cost Estimating, Procurement, & Construction Project Delivery and Management Systems
- Geographical Information Systems (GIS)
- Integrated Workplace Management Systems (IWMS)
Tools
- Construction code databases
- Industry specific glossaries
- Industry Standards (ISO, NIST)
- O&M Plan
- O&M Manuals
- Standardized data architectures (Cobie, Masterformat, Uniformat, Omniclass)
- Technical construction specifications
EDUCATION, TRAINING, AND SUPPORT SERVICES
Building the capabilities of internal and external O&M teams involves an ongoing commitment to education and training. From an educational standpoint, both traditional educational institutions and ongoing professional education are increasing their focus upon life-cycle management and the role of O&M.
Robust methods that integrate planning, procurement, and project delivery leveraging LEAN principles include LEAN Job Order Contracting and Integrated Project Delivery.
Both require a multi-party contract and associated Operations Manual/Execution Guide. The need for and level of training requirements, including training aids and manuals, should be clearly defined. The type of training (introductory, advanced, certification), format (online/virtual, classroom, self-taught), and frequency is dependent upon each organization’s requirements, types of systems and equipment, and amount of work performed by in-house staff versus that to be outsourced.
Support services may include outsourcing certain requirements, independent and/or peer-based audits of practices, and various consulting services.
METRICS/KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (KPIs)
Ongoing performance measurement supports informed, information-based, decision making and helps to maximize the use of available resources.
From a generic perspective, an effective measurement system includes the following:
- Clearly defined, actionable, and measurable goals
- Key performance indicators that monitor the overall administration of the program, as well as individual projects / task orders, and all associated workflows, deliverables, and outcomes
- Established baselines enabling measurement of historical and current progress
- A basis of timely, accurate, repeatable, and verifiable information based upon standardized terms, definitions, and data architectures
- Applicable reporting and feedback systems to support continuous improvement of processes, practices, and outcomes
- Leading Indicators (forecast future trends inside and outside the organization) as well as lagging indicators
- Objective and unbiased information (not subject to manipulation) that is normalized (can be benchmarked against other organizations, departments, locations)
- Statistically reliable
- Unobtrusive (not disruptive of work or trust)
- Appropriate (measures the right things)
- Quantifiable
- Verifiable/auditable
The importance of performance measurement cannot be understated. It is a fundamental element of any successful program.
Performance indicators include the following:
- Annualized Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) per building per gross area = Rate per square foot
- Annualized TCO per building/Current replacement value = Percent of Current Replacement Value (CRV)
- Annualized TCO per building/Net assignable square feet = Cost rate per net assignable square feet per building
- Annualized TCO per building/Non-assignable square feet = Cost rate per non-assignable square feet per building
- Annualized TCO per building/Building Interior square feet = Cost rate per interior square foot per building
- Churn Rate
- Utilization Rate
- AI (Adaptation Index) or PI (Programmatic Index) = PR (Program Requirements)/CRV (Current Replacement Value)
- Uptime or Downtime = Defined in percent, as amount of time asset is suitable for the program(s) served
- Facility Operating Gross Square Foot (GSF) Index (SAM Performance Indicator: APPA 2003)
- Custodial Costs per square foot
- Grounds Keeping Costs per square foot
- Energy Usage is expressed as a ratio of British Thermal Units (BTUs) for each Gross Square Foot (GSF) of facility, group of facilities, site or portfolio = BTUs / Gross Area GSF
- Utility Costs per square foot
- Waste Removal Costs per square foot
- Facility Operating Current Replacement Value (CRV) Index = Facility Operating CRV Index = Annual Facility Maintenance Operating Expenditures ($)/Current Replacement Value ($) (SAM Performance Indicator: APPA 2003)
- Facility Operating GSF Index = Annual Facility Maintenance Operating Expenditures ($)/Gross Area (GSF)
- Planned/Preventive Maintenance Costs per square foot
- Emergency Maintenance Costs as a percentage of Annual Operations Expenditures
- Unscheduled/Unplanned Maintenance Costs as a percentage of Annual Operations Expenditures
- Repair costs (man hours and materials) as a percentage of Annual Operations Expenditures
- FCI (Facility Condition Index) = DM (Deferred Maintenance) + CR (Capital Renewal)/CRV (Current Replacement Value)
- Recapitalization Rate, Reinvestment Rate
- Deferred Maintenance Backlog
- Facilities Deterioration Rate
- AI (Adaptive Index) or PI (Programmatic Index) = PR (Program Requirements)/CRV (Current Replacement Value)
- FQI (Facility Quality Index) or Quality Index or Index = FCI (Facility Condition Index)+ AI (Adaptive Index)
- Capital Renewal Index = Annual Capital Renewal and Renovation/Modernization Expenditure ($)/Current Replacement Value ($)
CHALLENGES AND OBSTACLES
While obtaining adequate facilities funding for efficient life-cycle management remains an elusive goal for many, the most significant challenge is change management and consistent, competent owner leadership.
Facilities span the careers of individuals, and facilities management transcends generations. As a result, known future impacts may be postponed until “someone else’s watch.”
Further, the impact of new strategies and processes can take years to show measurable improvements. Within a society that seeks instant gratification and financial payback periods sometimes measure in months versus years, the need for leadership and commitment of property owner management is paramount.
Additionally, the importance of facilities in the minds of senior management may not be fully appreciated, thus creating the need to better inform them of associated risks and benefits of various FM strategies. A somewhat pervasive focus upon first-costs versus lifecycle costs must be addressed and altered. Communicating the fact that an emergency repair will have ten times (10x) the cost of an appropriate maintenance operation is an ongoing need, as well as providing cost multi-year cost impacts of alternative strategies.
Historically, sharing information has also been somewhat problematic for a variety of reasons, especially in areas involving costs and or techniques. In reality there is no “secret sauce” and everyone should share information. AEC is relatively simple. Yet the largely cultural obstacles to information sharing, endemic to the AECOO sector, result in higher costs and marginalized capabilities.
The level of collaboration and transparency required is a change in the way most organizations currently operate on a day-to-day business. We can only hope the obstacle is not insurmountable.
Guide to LEAN Construction – This Simple Guide to Lean Construction introduces a proven path to best value facilities repair, renovation, maintenance, and new construction outcomes through the integration of People, Process, Information, and Technology.
Business and operating models need to change to transform from a legacy of waste to the consistent delivery of best value outcomes.
LEAN is a philosophy dating back as far as Henry Ford. At it’s core, LEAN is quite simple. LEAN is a way of thinking that bases decisions on long-term objectives rather than short-term wins, builds leaders and teams that thoroughly understand the work and share information and learnings to everyone involved, and “walk the talk”.
“Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success.” – Henry Ford
Tools and services are readily available to more consistently deliver BEST VALUE outcomes for all “construction” program/project participants and stakeholders.
Value management, however, requires a detailed, well communicated scope of work inclusive of final desired outcomes and associated task/labor, material, schedule, quality, and cost information. Without the definition and documentation of requirements at this level of granularity, best value attainment is compromised.
Value, like any construction related activity is dynamic and must be constantly optimized. While actionable, detailed information can establish parameters, it is critical to recognize that the on-site team must be given authority for day to day implementation. It is their knowledge and real-time decision-making that will deliver value… or not.
To address economic and environmental imperatives, organizations must execute on strategic enterprise-wide programs that generate value and desired outcomes.
LEAN Construction Solutions – Value creation
LEAN construction solutions aid in consistent achievement of best value repair, renovation, and new construction outcomes by integrating People, Process, Information, and Technology.
Main features and characteristics include…
- Focus of all participants upon mutually beneficial best value outcomes
- Multi-year, Multi-party Collaborative Contracts and associated Operations Manuals/Execution Guides
- Shared risk/reward
- Mandatory early and ongoing information sharing
- Common data environment including locally researched unit price cost data
- Key performance indicators
- Regular third-party audit
- Enabling technology
What is LEAN Construction?
LEAN construction is people working together on multidisciplinary projects and multiple, but integrated teams. It includes construction planning, procurement, and project delivery.
Simple Introduction to LEAN Construction
Tools and technology are readily available to help any organization work in an integrated and mutually beneficial way with others and drive best value outcomes.
Traditional planning, procurement, and project delivery methods are incompatible with best value outcomes and remain the primary cause for AECOO waste and dysfunction. Until organizations, especially real property owners understand this fundamental fact, technology offers little respite.
90-Day-Job-Order-Contract-Implemenation-Guide
These accumulated best practices guideline is intended to provide public owners and contractors information on overall methods and processes in procuring, awarding and managing a typical Job Order Contract (JOC)
While the AECOO Community (Architecture, Engineering, Construction, Operations, and Owner) has traditionally been mired in low productivity and waste, the solution, LEAN Construction Procurement and Delivery, has been available for over thirty years.
Today,… integrated tools, information sets, and services enable any real property owner and their AEC service providers to consistently deliver quality repair, renovation, maintenance, sustainability, and new construction projects on-time and on-budget and to everyone’s satisfaction. All that is needed is owner leadership and competency.
Integral Aspect of LEAN Job Order Contracting & Integrated Project Delivery
“Lookahead planning involves bringing all stakeholders together, creating sub-tasks
from the milestone schedule, identifying and assigning responsibility to constraints and
commitment from workers in removing these constraints.” (Ballard 2000).
There is an alphabet soup of terms associated with LEAN or LEAN construction…. “blackbelt, kaizen, last planner”, pull strategy, value engineering, value stream, six sigma, and the list goes on. Learning about these terms certainly has value. In reality, however, LEAN construction comes down to the below core elements.
Basic Elements of LEAN Construction
LEAN construction reduces waste by assuring a full understanding and sharing of roles, responsibilities, needs, requirements, values, documentation, communication formats…thereby reducing variation and associated negative consequences (stressing people/equipment/systems, change orders, delays…).
Lean is a fundamental business philosophy—one that is most effective when shared throughout the value stream. “Base your management decisions on a long-term philosophy, even at the expense of short-term financial goals” and “Grow leaders who thoroughly understand the work, live the philosophy, and teach it to others”
– ROADMAP FOR LEAN IMPLEMENTATION AT THE PROJECT LEVEL, 2007, Ballard et al
Basic Elements of LEAN Construction
- Focus upon outcomes
- Early and ongoing participation of all stakeholders and service providers
- Mutual trust and respect
- Engaging and leverage the expertise of participants actually doing the work
- Financial and task level transparency via locally researched detailed line item unit price book
- Required collaboration
- Shared risk/reward
- Metrics/key performance indicators
- Continuous improvement
- Mandatory initial and ongoing multi-level/multi-format training
While successful implementation typically requires a fundamental change in how you and your internal and external teams conduct your day-to-day activities and share information, there is nothing highly complex involved. All that is needed is a minimum threshold of competency and leadership on the part the real property owner and the appropriate selection of construction procurement and delivery method and service associated service providers.
Become a LEAN leader and leverage existing LEAN construction procurement and project delivery methods such as Integrated Project Delivery, IPD, for major new construction, and Job Order Contracting, JOC, for repair, renovation, sustainability, maintenance and minor new construction (Remember however that even here, all implementation are not the same… do your homework!). Properly designed, implemented, and managed LEAN construction procurement and delivery methods identify, model, embed, and encourage/require LEAN behaviors, thereby driving measurably improved outcomes.
Continually challenge the status quo!
It all starts with you. LEAN leadership requires listening, listening, and listening…until you truly understand what your “customer” wants, needs, and values. Also, you must be an problem solving evangelist. Engage all participants, especially those performing the work, to assure appropriate problem definition, cause, and resolution. When resolving problems…go to the actual source/place… observe the actual product, process or service and gather actual facts! Many, if not most problems are process-based, so seek associated improvement to mitigate future improvement. Continually challenge the status quo!
The Importance of a Locally Researched Detailed Unit Price Book
Any repair, renovation, or construction project and value stream includes specific activities/tasks, materials, people, labor, equipment, and information that must integrate together to provide your customer the value they want, when they want it and how they want it.
Defining an optimal definition of, and path meeting these requirements is virtually impossible without detailed line items and associated task definitions… inclusive of labor, crew, material, and equipment descriptions and associated costs.
Hundreds of books, white papers, and presentations talk about creating a “value-stream map”. Think about it, in construction, what is a value stream map, other than a clear, detailed description of construction requirements, activities, labor and material requirements, costs, and associated timeline interrelationships? (Flow efficiency versus resource efficiency)
Using a locally researched unit price book, based upon a CSI standardized data architecture, you can add significant detail to your map of requirements and processes upfront, before finalization, and better identify issues, miscommunications, errors, and omissions.
Are you ready to become a LEAN construction leader?
| Fundamentals of LEAN Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery |
| What? The principles, processes, functions, tools, and methods consistent with LEAN construction planning, procurement, and project delivery. Why? The Fundamentals of Efficient Public Sector Construction LEAN Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery are important to professionals hoping to improve their stewardship of taxpayer funds, and better meet fiduciary responsibilities to taxpayers. The importance of this information is non-trivial. If the information is understood and applied property, the consistent delivery of quality repair, renovation, maintenance, sustainability, and new construction projects on-time and on-budget becomes the norm versus the exception. How? The concept of collaborative transparency simply involved the early and ongoing sharing of information throughout a project life-cycle. This is achieved when detailed plans at every level of construction task breakdown, inclusive of labor, material, and equipment descriptions and costs, are shared by all participants and stakeholders. The most common and proven tool for this is a detailed, locally researched unit price book. The tasks should be organized using a common data architecture such as CSI Masterformat in order to maximize efficient use and reuse of information. Collaborative transparency can only occur when all parties have agreed to a multi-party agreement and associated operations manual/ execution guides that drives toward mutually beneficial outcomes. Look ahead planning and continuous improvement are virtually impossible without collaborative transparency and associated systems/frameworks that embedded the process. Collaborative transparency is just one of several fundamentals serving a building blocks for Efficient Public Sector Construction Planning, Procurement, and Project Delivery. As this is simply and introduction to the concept, further insight into Collaborative Transparency will be reserved for other communications. |
LEAN PRINCIPLES
Lean principles are separate from, but related to, LEAN methodologies or LEAN solutions. Here is a listing of Lean principles from literature.
Koskela (1992)
Reduce the share of non value-adding activities
Increase output value through consideration of customer requirements
Reduce variability and cycle time
Simplify by minimizing the number of steps, parts and linkages
Increase output flexibility and process transparency
Focus control on the complete process
Build continuous improvement into the process and benchmark
Balance flow improvement with conversion improvement
Melles (1997)
Multifunctional task groups and co-maker ship
Simultaneous engineering
Kaizen/ Continuous improvement
Customer orientation
Information, communication and process structure
Koskela & Leikas (1997)
Process oriented, team based, flat organization
Reduction of variability
Process charting for identification of non value adding activities
Simplification and increased flexibility
Focus on whole processes
Miles (1997)
Multi-tasking, multi-discipline, self-managing working groups
Mutual respect and team performance incentives
Risks are fairly allocated
Egan (1998)
Continuous improvement and annual target
Reduce waste and increase value
Howell (1999)
Focus on the complete process
Aligned stakeholder interests
Concentrate on the whole product life cycle
Combining project design with process design
Downstream players are involved in upstream work
Innovative and lean environment
Reduction of variability
Eliminate buffer and pull production
Salem & Zimmer (2005)
Customer focus
Culture and people
Workplace organization and standardization
Elimination of waste
Continuous improvement and built-in quality
Pinch (2005)
Establishing integrated team
Combining project design with process design
Quality assurance
Decentralizing decision-making
Requiring a simple, direct handoff between tasks in the work stream
Diekmann, et al (2005)
Customer focus
Culture/people
Work place organization/ standardisation
Waste elimination
Continuous improvement with built-in quality
Lichtig (2005)
Collaborate, improve networks of commitments
Optimise the project, not the pieces
Tightly couple learning with action
Increase relatedness
Johansen & Walter (2007)
Information transparency and work flow management
Initiating improvement strategies and benchmarking
Reduction of variability and uncertainty
Long term contractual agreements
Concurrent design
Early involvement of downstream players in the upstream process
Participation and dedication culture
Supply chain integration
Senaratne et al. (2008)
Elimination of non value adding activities
Making conversion activities more efficient
Chua & Shen (2008)
Manage hidden flows and reduce waste
Smooth pace of production
Terms commonly associated with LEAN construction delivery:
• best value • best value procurement • best value outcomes • best value focus • benchmarking • benchmarking client focus • change management • common data environment, CDE • collaborative working environments • construction culture • construction performance measures • construction process benchmarking • cultural barriers • customer focus • owner requirements management • customer needs analysis • construction cost data • construction cost management • cost information • cost management • cost performance • cost reduction • cost visibility • best value • detailed line item construction cost data • education • execution guide • independent audits • internal quality audits information-based decision-making • integrated project delivery, IPD • job order contracting, JOC • locally researched cost data • organization development • organizational change • organizational culture • organizational learning • lean design • leadership • lean procurement • lean planning • lean construction • lean leadership behavior • motivation • mutual trust/respect • mutually beneficial outcomes • project financial management • return on investment • target cost • strategies of implementation • transaction cost • job order contracting • key performance indicators, KPIs • • lean construction delivery methods • operations manual • performance measurements • performance metrics • performance tracking • production control • production improvement • production planning • production planning and control • production/operations management • project production • project production system project management • project and planning control • project control • project controls • project organization • project planning quality • quality assignment • quality assurance • quality control • quality management • quality management systems • total quality management • coordination • cross-functional teams • distributed scheduling • multi-disciplinary team • multi-skilled workers • • multi-tasking • planning • planning and control • planning system • schedule planning • supply chain management • construction supply chain management • construction supply chains • logistics planning • supply chain • supply chain analysis • supply chain integration • supply chain management in construction • supply chain mapping • supply chain strategies • supply chains • total supply chain value • total cost of ownership • customer value • value based management • value chain • value chain management • value creation • value generation • value loss • value management • value parameters • value stream • value stream analysis • value stream mapping • value stream maps • value-added time • value-based management • value-stream mapping waste • materials waste • time waste • waste causes • waste control • Early Involvement of Key Participants • Shared Risk and Reward • Multi-Party Contract • Collaborative Decision Making and Control • Jointly Developed and Validated Project Goals • Mutual Respect and Trust Among Participants • Collaborative Innovation • Intensified Early Planning • Open Communication within the Project Team • Technology Leveraged as a Collaboration Tool and Used by All Parties • Lean Principles of Design, Procurement, Project Delivery, Construction, and Operations • Co-Location of Teams Physically and Virtually • Transparent Financials (Locally researched detailed Unit Price Book)
All the tools are ready… are you?
Frameworks such as the LEAN OpenJOC Solution consider people and technical needs. While workflows are well defined it is recognized that planning and execution are dynamic processes. Local team members must be provided with the ability to make appropriate changes/corrections. The combined knowledge of those performing the work as well as technical “experts” and management needs to be leveraged. It is precisely the degree of planning and preparation, teamed with on the job decision-making that drives overall project performance. Conversely, failure to invest in appropriate planning, preparation, and team building commonly results in project failure.
Sharing information and driving toward outcomes that benefit all parties significantly improves the likelihood of overall project success. Participants are much more likely to deliver on commitments. Communication and collaboration between all parties…owners, builders, AEs, building users… is enhanced and teams share information in a manner to best coordinate resources.
REFERENCES
Abdelhamid, T. (2007). Lean Construction Reading Primer. Retrieved July 12, 2010, from
https://www.msu.edu/user/tariq/Learn_Lean.html
Alinaitwe, H. M. (2008). An assessment of clients’ performance in having efficient building
process in Uganda. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 14(2), 73–78.
Arndt, R. H. (2000). Is Build-Own-Operate-Transfer a Solution to Local Governments
Infrastructure Funding Problems? (1440-7027). Victoria, Australia: The University of
Melbourne.
Australian Constructors Association. (1999). Relationship contracting- optimising project
outcomes. North Sydney: Australian Constructors Association.
Ballard, G., & Howell, G. (1997). Implementing lean construction: Reducing inflow variation.
In L. Alarcon (Ed.), Lean Construction (pp. 110-117). Rotterdam, Netherlands:
Balkema publishers.
Barrett, P. (2005). Revaluing Construction -A global CIB agenda. CIB report. International
Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction.
Bayfield, R., & Roberts, P. (2005). Contract or co-operation? Insights from beyond
construction: collaboration. Lean Construction Journal 2(2), 22-50.
Bramble, B. B. (2003). Design-Build Contracting Claims: Cumulative Supplement. NY:
Aspen Publishers.
Cain, C. T. (2004). Profitable partnering for LC. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Cheng, E. W. L., & Li, H. (2001). Development of a conceptual model of construction
partnering. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 8 (4,), 292-
303.
Chua, D. K. H., & Shen, L. (2008). Application of lean principles and theory of constraints in
project management. Paper presented at the meeting of the Project Management Asia
Conference, Kent Ridge Crescent, Singapore.
Cullen, P. A., Butcher, B., John, K., & Richard, H. (2005). The Application of lean principles
to in-service support: A comparison between construction and the aerospace and
defence sectors. Lean Construction Journal 2(1), 87-103.
Diekmann, J. E., Krewedl, M., Balonick, J., Stewart, T., & Wonis, S. (2004). Application of
lean manufacturing principles to construction: The University of Texas at Austin.
Diekmann, J. E., Krewedl, M., Balonick, J., Stewart, T., & Wonis, S. (2005). Application of
lean manufacturing principles to construction. Lean Construction Journal, 2(2), 51-54.
Egan, J. (1998). Rethinking construction. Crown: London: The construction task force. Green, S. D., & May, S. C. (2005). Lean Construction: arenas of enactment, models of diffusion and the meaning of ‘leanness’. Building Research and Information, 33(6), 498-511.
Halpin, D. W. (1990). International competition in construction technology. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 116(4), 351-359.
Hook, M., & Stehn, L. (2008). Lean principles in industrialized housing production: the need for a cultural change. LC Journal 4(1), 20-33.
Howell, G. A. (1999). What is lean construction? LC Institute. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the International Group for Lean Construction (IGLC)-7, California, USA.
Howell, G., & Ballard, G. (1997). Lean production theory: Moving beyond “can do”. In L. Alarcón (Ed.), Lean Construction (pp. 17-23). Rotterdam, Netherlands: A. A. Balkema Publishers.
Johansen, E., & Walter, L. (2007). LC: Prospects for the German construction industry. Lean Construction Journal 3, 19-32.
Joosten, T., Bongers, I., & Janssen, R. (2009). Application of lean thinking to health care. International Journal for Quality in Health Care 21(5), 341-347.
Jorgensen, F., Matthiesen, R., Nielsen, J., & Johansen, J. (2007). Lean Maturity, Lean Sustainability. MA, USA: Springer
Koskela, L. (1992). Application of the new production philosophy to construction (CIFE technical report): Stanford University.
Koskela, L. (1997). Lean production in construction. In L. Alarcón (Ed.), Lean Construction (pp. 14-23). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Balkema Publishers.
Koskela, L. (1999). Management of production in construction: a theoretical view Lean Construction Institute. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the International Group for Lean Construction (IGLC)-7, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Koskela, L. (2000). An exploration towards a production theory and its application to construction, PhD. Thesis, Helsinki University of Technology.
Koskela, L., & Leikas, J. (1997). Lean manufacturing of construction components. In L. Alarcón (Ed.), Lean Construction (pp. 289-298). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Balkema Publishers.
Koskela, L., Howell, G., Ballard, G., & Tommelein, I. (2002). The Foundations of lean construction. In Best, R. & Valence, V. D. (Eds.), Design and Construction: Building in Value. Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann, Elsevier.
Lichtig, W. A. (2005). Sutter Health: Developing a contracting model to support lean project delivery Lean Construction Journal 2(1), 105-112.
Liker, J. K., & Wu, Y. C. (Eds.). (2006). Japanese automakers, US suppliers and supply-chain superiority”, Sloan Management Review 42, pp. 81-93. MA, USA: Blackwell publishing.
Ling, F. Y. Y., Chan, S. L., Chong, E., & Ee, L. P. (2004). Predicting performance of design-build and design-bid-build projects. Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, 130(1), 75-83.
Love, P. E. D. (2002). Influence of project type and procurement method on rework costs in building construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 128, 18.
Love, P. E. D., Skitmore, M., & Earl, G. (1998). Selecting a suitable procurement method for a building project. Construction Management and Economics, 16(2), 221-233.
Masterman, J. W. E. (2005). An introduction to building procurement systems. NY, USA: Spon press.
Mawdesley, M. J., & Long, G. (2002). Prefabrication for lean building services distribution. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the International Group for Lean Construction (IGLC)-10, Gramado, Brazil.
McGrath-Champ, S., & Rosewarne, S. (2009). Organizational change in Australian building and construction: rethinking a unilinear ‘learning’ discourse. Construction Management and Economics, 27(11), 1111-1128.
McIntyre, I. (2005). Project alliance contracts harness commercial imperatives symposium conducted at the meeting of the Australian construction industry conference. Sydney, Australia.
Melles, B. (1997). What do we mean by lean production in construction? In L. Alarcón (Ed.), Lean Construction (pp. 24-29). Rotterdam, Netherlands: A. A. Balkema Publishers.
Miles, R. S. (1997). Ultra fast-track project delivery: 21st century partnering and the role of ADR. In L. Alarcón (Ed.), Lean Construction (pp. 335-356). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Balkema Publishers.
Mossman, A. (2009). Why isn’t the UK construction industry going lean with gusto? Lean Construction Journal, 5(1), 24-36.
Naim, M., & Barlow, J. (2003). An innovative supply chain strategy for customized housing. Construction Management and Economics, 21(6), 593-602.
Naoum, S. (2003). An overview into the concept of partnering. International Journal of Project Management, 21(1), 71-76.
Ng, S. T., & Skitmore, R. M. (2002). Contractors’ risks in design, novate and construct contracts. International Journal of Project Management, 20(2), 119-126.
Oyegoke, A. S. (1993). UK and US construction management contracting procedures and practices: a comparative study. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 8(5/6), 403-417.
Özgen, C. (2007). A statistical approach to lean construction implementations of construction companies in Turkey, M.Sc. Thesis, Middle East technical university.
Parry, G., Mills, J., & Turner, C. (2010). Lean competence: integration of theories in operations management practice. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 15(3), 216-226.
Pinch, L. (2005). LC – Eliminating the waste. Construction Executive, 34-35.
Quick, R. (2002). Introduction to Alliancing and relationship contracting symposium conducted at the meeting of the QLS/BAQ symposium Queensland, Australia.
Rashid, A., Taib, M., Ahmad, W., Basiron, W., Nasid, M., Ali, W., et al. (2006). Effect of procurement systems on the performance of construction projects. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the International Conference on Construction Industry 2006 (ICCI 2006), Padang, Indonesia.
Sakal, M. W. (2005). Project Alliancing: A relational contracting mechanism For dynamic projects. Lean Construction Journal 2(1), 67-79.
Salem, O., & Zimmer, E. (2005). Application of lean manufacturing principles to construction. Lean Construction Journal, 2(2), 51-54.
Sanchez, L. M., & Nagi, R. (2001). A review of agile manufacturing systems. International Journal of Production Research, 39(16), 3561-3600.
Senaratne, S., & Wijesiri, D. (2008). Lean construction as a strategic option: Testing its suitability and acceptability in Sri Lanka. Lean Construction Journal 4(1), 34-48.
Serrano, I., Ocho, C., & De Castro, R. (2006). Evaluation of value stream mapping in manufacturing system redesign. International Journal of Production Research, 46(16), 4409-4430.
Shah, R., & Ward, P. T. (2007). Defining and developing measures of lean production. Journal of Operations Management, 25(4), 785-805.Simonsson, P. (2008). Industrial bridge construction with cast in place concrete, M.Sc. thesis. Lulea University of Technology.
Solomon, J. A. (2004). Application of the principle of lean production to construction, M.Sc. thesis. University of Cincinnati, Ohio.
South East Centre for the Built Environment. (2004). An introductory guide to best practice in construction. London,UK: South East Centre for the Built Environment Limited. Retrieved from www.secbe.org.uk
Tookey, J. E., Murray, M., Hardcastle, C., & Langford, D. (1993). Construction procurement routes Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 8(1), 20-30.
Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (1996). Lean thinking: Banish waste and create wealth in your corporation. London: Simon & Schuster.
The LEAN timeline:
#1 “…rigorous process thinking in manufacturing all the way back to the Arsenal in Venice in the 1450s, the first person to truly integrate an entire production process was Henry Ford.” ( https://lnkd.in/gWnMw23w )
#2 In the early 20th century, Frederick Winslow Taylor developed the principles of scientific management, emphasizing efficiency and productivity through time and motion studies. Taylor’s work laid the groundwork for systematic analysis and improvement of work processes.
#3 Henry Ford furthered these ideas by creating the moving assembly line in 1913. Ford’s innovations in mass production and his focus on reducing waste and improving efficiency were early examples of Lean principles in action.
#4 Kiichiro Toyoda and the Founding of Toyota:
In the 1930s, Kiichiro Toyoda, the founder of Toyota, and Taiichi Ohno, an engineer at Toyota, drew inspiration from Ford’s assembly line methods. They also studied American supermarket restocking techniques, which influenced their development of the Just-In-Time (JIT) production system. It focuses on eliminating waste (Muda), improving quality, and ensuring efficient workflow.
Just-In-Time (JIT) production minimizes inventory costs and reduces waste by producing only what is needed, when it is needed. Shigeo Shingo, another prominent figure at Toyota, developed the concept of mistake-proofing (Poka-Yoke) and emphasized continuous improvement (Kaizen), which are central to Lean thinking. Toyota also emphasized respect for people, involving employees at all levels in problem-solving and decision-making processes.
The core priniciples, learning, and processes of LEAN have been leveraged and further developed to apply specifically to the construction including frameworks such as Integrated Project Delivery, open Job Order Contracting, alliance contracting/partnering, lifecycle total cost of owenership asset management…