Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management Announcements
ECAM 17.5
A comparative study of truck cycle time prediction methods in open pit mining
E K Chanda and S Gardiner
Comparative analysis of operational coefficients’ impact on excavation operations
A Panas & J P Pantouvakis
Dynamic modelling of construction and demolition waste management processes: an empirical study in Shenzhen, China
Jane L J Hao, Vivian W Y Tam, H P Yuan, J Y Wang and J R Li
Case study analysis of construction excavator H&S overturn incidents
Authors: David J Edwards and Gary D Holt
Highway work zone safety audits for safety improvements
Zongzhi Li
ECAM 17.5
Twelve authors have combined to produce the five papers in this issue. Three of these authors were based in
The predominate research approach in this issue is modelling and this appeals to the engineer in me and indeed the papers presented have a strong engineering focus. The topics include predicting the truck cycle times in open cast mining, productivity estimating in excavation operations, the management of construction waste, the overturning of excavators and safety in highway work zones.. These paper have also clearly targeted practical outcomes: the management of trucks in mining; the improvement of excavation productivity; the improvement of waste management; the prevention of excavator accidents; and improving safety in work zones in highways.. The overall impression is that this group of authors and academic researchers are enthusiastic about seeing their work having a practical impact and I believe this is to be greatly encouraged.
The papers in this issue are:
Chanda and Gardiner offer computer simulation models for predicting truck cycle times in open pit mining. The authors comment on the relative accuracy of the different modelling approaches e.g. regression and neural networks. Overall the accuracy of the models is +/- 5% of actual records. The authors could have made a much stronger case on the proposed use of the models and the advantages to be gained.
Panas and Pantouvakis provide an approach for comparing productivity estimation methods in excavation operations. The sensitivity to variations is also explored. The importance of operational conditions, e.g. digging depth and swing angle to the dumping point, is featured in the analysis. The output from this modelling is fed into determining truck fleet size and the unit cost of excavation.
Having, a very long time ago, produced an automated estimating system for trench excavation this paper was of particular interest.
Hao, Tam, Yuan, Wang and Li use a system dynamics modelling approach to integrate three sub-systems to simulate construction and demolition waste management. The data to populate the model was acquired through literature, official reports and questionnaires. The authors claim to have produced an experimental simulation platform to investigate the interdependencies of the factors in the management of construction waste. The model illustrates the need for effective measures and the need for waste reduction and for new landfill sites.
The authors claim that the model deepens the participants understanding of waste management and offers an effective tool for planning waste management. This seems a worthy contribution to a very real problem and hopefully the authors will work with their planning authorities to implement the model in practice.
Edwards and Holt present case studies of incidents of excavator overturns. These two authors are dedicated to health and safety in the use of construction plant and previously had offered a test to identify the risk of overturns of mini-excavators. In this paper they investigate the factors that contribute to overturning. Comprehensive documentation from eight case studies and anecdotal evidence from a further three provide the data for this analysis.
The results were presented to experts for comment. The authors list the factors that contribute to overturning. From this they re-emphasise the need for operator and banksman training and argue that site managers also need to be aware of the risks so that they can implement risk control. I’ve no doubt that the information presented here is already embedded in training programmes by the authors.
Li reviews road safety audits worldwide and investigates the perceptions of experts on highway work zone safety in the
The conclusions are that road safety audits have been successful and with respect to work zone safety this work has clarified the leading causes of problems.
This information should be used to prepare strategies for developing guidelines for work zone safety. This paper offers a very practical approach to the problem of work zone safety on highways.
Finally the editorial team of ECAM wish to acknowledge the contribution of Professor Dave Langford of
www.mccaffer.com
The publishers ECAM web site can be found at Emerald
ECAM EDITORIAL 17.4
Measuring project risk management process for construction contractors with statement indicators linked to numerical scores
Grant Keeble Kululanga, and Witness Shaibu Kuotcha
Simulating the effect of risks on equity return for concession-based public-private partnership projects
S. Thomas Ng, Jessie J Xie and Mohan Kumaraswamy
Using Analytic Network Process to Assess Business Failure Risks of Construction Firms
Dikmen, Irem, Birgonul, M. Talat Ozorhon, Beliz Egilmezer Sapci
The Survival Strategies of Singapore Contractors in Prolonged Recession
Benson Teck Heng Lim, Bee Lan Oo, and Florence Yean Yng Ling,
Dispute causation: Identification of pathogenic influences in construction
Peter E.D Love, Peter Rex Davis, Joanne M Ellis, and Sai On Cheung,
Bid Mark-up Selection Using Artificial Neural Networks and an Entropy Metric
E Symeon Christodoulou.
ECAM issue 17.4 has relied on 16 authors from 6 countries to produce these 6 papers. One paper has 1 author, one paper has 2 authors, three papers have 3 authors and one paper had 4 authors. The distribution of authors by country are 2 from Malawi, 4 from Hong Kong, 2 from Singapore, 4 from Australia, 1 from Cyprus and 3 from Turkey. Two papers span national boundaries namely Singapore and Australia, and Hong Kong and Australia. Interestingly there are no Europeans other than Cyprus or North Americans in our list of authors in this issue.
The two overriding features of this set of papers are the focus on risk and the focus on numerical analysis and modelling. The first three papers directly address risk in the management process of projects, in rates of returns in PPP projects and in business failures. These three all use numerical analysis and modelling approaches. The fourth paper is a description in response to risks brought on by the recession. The fifth paper is dealing with a different variation of risk by identifying the ‘pathogens’ of contract disputes. Avoid the pathogens to avoid disputes does seem like a risk management approach. The sixth paper is another variation on risk by attempting to optimise the bid mark-up and thereby reduce the risk of a contractor acquiring a loss making contract. I have strong views on this topic which are addressed in my summary below. This paper is also based on modelling. So modelling and numerical analysis is a strong feature of this issue which is welcomed as a shift towards understanding processes and underlying mechanisms rather than simply collecting descriptive data by questionnaire.
Kululanga and Kuotcha are unhappy about the approach to risk management and they believe that this leads to poor project performance. Like good engineers they wish to introduce some measurability in the process by way of numerical scores relating to statement indicators. These statement indicators were devised to characterise a series of steps in the risk management process. The researchers surveyed 51 registered Malawian construction contractors to test their approach. Their findings are that all the small and medium sized companies had low implementation of the various required steps. The application of project risk management was greatly influenced by the size and experience of the construction company. The intention of this work is to measure the management processes and then to uncover the root causes. This should provide a framework for developing better processes. Arguable the University of Malawi should be providing training programmes to upgrade the skills of the small and medium sized contractors who seem deficient in the process of risk management. Maybe that is why they are still small. These researchers have set out on a course of action that is only partly completed. Having established their management measuring tool they must use it as they develop a better industry.
Ng, Xie and Kumaraswamy have been simulating the risks on equity returns for concession based Public Private Partnerships. In Public Private Partnerships a large portion of risk is carried by the private partner and so the private partner or franchisee has a great interest in understanding the risks. The research team developed a simulation model to generate the probability distributions on the two factors of ‘cash flow’ and ‘outcome’. This simulation model generates probability, distributions in net present value and rate of return. This is a tool for judging investment. The authors offer what they call a ‘simple’ case study. This work now needs a much more robust case study giving evidence of guiding an investment. This is a good sound engineering approach to financial management.
Diken, Birgonul and Ozorhon offer us an approach to assessing business failure risks of construction firms. The researchers wish to identify the determinants of business failure and to predict the likelihood of a construction company failing. The authors have designed a conceptual model based on analytical process network with interviews and discussions giving the weights to the variables incorporated.
The results place importance on organisational and managerial factors. The authors admit that the work is limited to three professionals and tested in only five companies. However they have an intention of developing the approach by drawing on the diverse experiences of a large group of companies. The important question to address is how the companies respond to the model’s outputs. Do they redesign their organisation and managerial approach? How do the researchers promote this? Do they develop training courses based on the model’s findings to assist the companies in development?
Lim, Oo and Ling examine the currently relevant topic of survival strategies in a prolonged recession. The researchers conducted thirty four interviews with senior executives of large Singaporean construction companies. They categorise their findings into actions related to:
i. Contractors
ii. Cost control
iii. Financial
In summary the contractors’ responses are that: they bid for more contracts; they tightened up on cost control and wastage, froze salaries, stopped hiring staff; and managed their cash flow with great care. This is a useful insight to the companies responses to difficult times. The paper seemed weak on the companies’ planning for the emergence from recession. Where do they see the market going, what will be their position. This planning goes on and for the optimist in me it’s more interesting than the cost cutting.
Love, Davies, Ellis and Cheung examine the cause of disputes in construction and identify what they describe as pathogenic influences. The declared aim of the paper is to identify the underlying pathogens that clients and contractors perceive to contribute to disputes. The authors used case law and focus groups in Western Australia to determine the pathogens. One set of pathogens is ‘points of law’. For the clients the pathogens are ‘failure to detect and correct errors’ and ‘failure to oblige by contractual requirements’. For the contractors the main pathogen was ‘unforeseen scope changes’. The cause of disputes is a much researched and written about topic and this paper adds to that body of knowledge. What it attempts is to create a different perspective on the framework of causes. How do we use this framework to develop a system without disputes? This seems currently to reside in those trying to develop relationally integrated value networks designed to create more mutually supportive and collaborative construction teams. Perhaps the information in this paper will help that work.
Christodoulou offers us another approach to bid mark up optimisation. Interestingly the author begins with the original papers on the subject by Friedman and Gates dated in the fifties and sixties. There have been many papers since and the goal of being able to optimise a ‘bid mark up’ still seems illusive. My view, formed a long time ago and unchanged is that in the equation BID = ESTIMATED COST + MARK-UP, the biggest quantity with the biggest variability across all contractors bidding is the ESTIMATED COST and the size of the estimated cost and the size of its variability overwhelms any marginal contribution by the MARK UP. So I argue for examining the ‘total bid’ not simply one element of it and this means improving the estimating processes. Nevertheless Christodoulou makes a contribution to a topic that is still intriguing to many researchers.
ECAM ISSUE 17.3
Empirical Research on Competitiveness Factors Analysis of Real
Estate Industry of
Hui Sun, Zhiging Fan, Ying Zhou and Ye Shi
Client recommendations for Financial incentives on construction projects
Timothy Rose and Karen Manley
Barriers to Women in the
Lisa Worrall, Katy Harris, Roy Stewart, Andrew Thomas and Peter McDermott
A multi-attribute ranking method for bridge management
Saleh Abu Dabous &
Suitability of Procuring Large Public Works by PPP in
Esther Cheung, Albert P C Chan and Stephen Kajewski
Technology Implementation Strategies for Construction Organisations
James Henderson and Kirti RuikarECAM 17.3
ECAM 17.3 has six papers from a total of 17 authors, the distribution of authors across these papers are three papers with two authors, one paper with three authors and two papers with four authors.
The distribution of authors by country is four from
The range of topics in this issue is once again varied including competitive factors in the real estate industry in China, clients financial incentives in large projects, barriers to women in construction, models for allocating budgets in bridge maintenance, the possible use of Public Private Partnerships in Hong Kong and a study of what industry-specific factors influence the adoption of technology. All of these papers offer promise of developments that could influence the industry, this will need more work by the authors to push their research closer to adoption. The final test of research is did it work, was it applied, did it make a difference.
Looking at synergies the paper on ranking methods for bridge maintenance budgeting is the closest to offering new technology, well at least a new approach. The paper on industry specific factors that influence technology adoption offers advice on how to get technology adopted . Perhaps there is a case for some joint work to build on the concept of technological development linked to get technology adopted. It would be challenging work but it would certainly be interesting and valuable.
The paper that intrigued me most was the one on clients’ financial incentives in projects which provides the means for clients taking strategic decisions to manage their projects. I am sure this paper or its successors on this topic have a lot to offer.
The papers in this issue are:
Sun, Zhiging, Zhou and Shi report on competiveness factors in the real estate industry in
The authors believe their work provides a more comprehensive understanding of the interactions between the competitiveness factors. The question it leaves me with is what can be done with this understanding? Can it be used to re-structure the industry, to re-focus in a way that will make it better, more efficient or more service orientated?
Rose and Manley introduce us to the interesting topic of clients’ financial incentives in construction projects. The authors examined four large Australian building projects commissioned by government clients between 2001 and 2005. This has produced, in effect, a set of guidance notes on how to apply Financial Incentives and to manage these financial incentives.
The paper focuses on the practical benefits of financial incentives.
This is a good area and if the authors recommendations are taken up it would be good to receive a future paper reporting on that. Also it would be interesting to learn of work in this topic from other countries. This seems to me to be address issues of how clients manage and influence projects in a very practical way.
Worrall, Harris, Stewart, Thomas and McDermott address the barriers that lead to the under-representation of women in the
Funded by ‘Construction Skills’ the authors explore the issues that women face and the potential positive impact of construction professional development. Data sources are 231 interviews, and nine focus group meetings drawn from a range of professional occupations.
The findings? Male dominated organisational cultures and inflexible working hours remain the main barriers and this has been well established over many years and many studies, so this is a continuing problem. The authors therefore argue for a sea-change expansion of CPD opportunities for women.
I am tempted to argue that we need a sea-change and expansion of CPD for the male managers that predominate which would seem to be the problem.
Dabous and Alkass take us into the field of bridge management. Bridge being major capital assets require continued investment to maintain their serviceability. Distribution of maintenance budgets are notoriously difficult and usually rely on ranking methods. Weaknesses in existing methods have been identified so these authors propose multi-attribute ranking methods for bridge management. This is intended to allow for the inclusion of multiple and conflicting criteria to be incorporated. The authors proposed framework includes the development of a hierarchy structure defining objectives and decision criteria. The applicability is demonstrated using a case study.
This paper takes the proposed method as far as a case study but the real test is will it be used in practice. Hopefully the authors are working on the transportation departments to run their ranking models in parallel with existing procedures. A paper on that test would be welcomed.
Cheung, Chan and Kajewski address the issue as to whether Public Private Partnerships should be used in
The paper presents the results. What is interesting, at least to me, was the difference in views from
Well, I am not sure, this research has processed opinion and that very much depends on the respondents who provided that opinion. I wonder what a trend of opinion over years in the
Henderson and Ruikar examines what industry specific factors influence the success of technology implementation in construction organisations. The research method was semi structured interviews.
The conclusion is that technology implementation within construction organisations is not so much a technological problem as a behavioural one. This means that it is a managerial problem. Management problems are more difficult to solve than technological ones. The authors should consider how to develop their findings into guidance as to how to implement technology. Technology adoption is a multi-organisational challenge usually touching many organisations and it is here that the biggest challenges lies. If any guidance is produced it should address the issues across the boundaries of many organisations.
Ronald McCaffer
www.mccaffer.com
ECAM ISSUE 17.2
The role of exogenous factors in the strategic performance of construction companies
Z Isik, D Arditi, I Dikmen and T M Birgonul
Prioritization of Rural Roads: AHP in Group Decision
J Dalal, P K Mohapatra and G C Mitra
IT enhanced communication protocols for building project management
V Ahuja, J Yang and R Shankar
Sustaining Architects and Engineers’ Motivation in Design Firms:
An investigation of critical success factors
L O Oyedele
Critical, manifest variables in virtual construction project delivery
O Barima and
Development of 4D based Performance Indicators in Construction Industry
ECAM 17.2
ECAM 17.2 has six papers from 14 authors from
The papers again offer a rich variety of topics including strategic performance, rural roads programmes, the use of ICT in project management, the motivation of architects and engineers, managing the virtual project and 4D planning.
If any theme dominates it must be IT which features in three papers in communication in project management and in managing the virtual project as well as in 4D planning.
The research methods favoured in this edition are modelling and questionnaire surveys.
The papers in this edition are:
Isik, Arditi, Dikmen and Birgonul examines exogenous factors affecting the strategic performance of construction companies. Their model explores strategic performance as influenced by market conditions and strategic alliances. The source of data for the modelling exercise is 73 construction companies who responded to a questionnaire. The influences on strategic performance are economic, political, legal, social, competition and demand. The paper leaves an impression that these exogenous factors are so powerful that company management is secondary. This may not have been the authors’ intention and the counters available to management described are relationships with Government Agencies, Clients and Labour Unions together with innovative construction methods, these counters seem much weaker than the external pressures.
Dalal, Mohapatra and Mitra offer an approach to prioritising the rural road programmes using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) modelling. AHP is frequently used by researchers in situations of decision making seeking to make choices and it is indeed designed for that purpose. Whether it is always the most appropriate approach is something rarely explored. This paper presents yet another example of using AHP and can be added to the collection. I am sure some researcher somewhere will collect together the many examples of using AHP and give us the definitive guide as to where it works and where it does not. I think the answer to this lies in the quality of the data supporting the choices.
The interesting point of this paper was the description of the issues in the rural roads programme which relates to 178 rural roads in Orissa. It would be good to have a follow up paper describing what actually happened to this programme and if this AHP analysis had any influence.
Ahuja, Yang and Shankar return us to the issue of improving communications in project management through IT. These authors offer their contribution by addressing the issues of protocols. The issues of communications are well documented, the need for communications in real time, the separate development of IT by the various participants, the implications of the small companies involved etc. The authors researched these issues in the Indian context and examined and proposed protocols that would go someway to meet these difficulties. A case study of these protocols in use in a real project would be required as convincing evidence.
Oyedele is interested in sustaining the motivation of architects and engineers in design firms. I have never previously considered this as an issue, the fees the company earns I saw as the company motivation and the salaries to the to the architects and engineers together with the excitement of working on a new project I saw as the motivation for the staff. Perhaps this is a view of life that is too prosaic for modern times. The author surveyed design practices in design firms in
I think the researcher needs to go further and compile this data into a guide for work force management and development that can be tested against the harsh realities of the market place. This is a subject worth developing but I would still start with the salary scales!
Barima and Rowlinson take us onto a area that is visited from time to time and that is the management of the virtual construction project. The virtual construction project is the use of all the ICT tools to allow the various contributors and companies in a project to operate independently. I am not sure I would call this a virtual project, I would still call it a virtual enterprise which was the expression we used some ten or more years ago when these issues were emerging and less developed. The expression enterprises, to me, implies the organisation delivering the project. The project being constructed seems more real than virtual whereas the organisation of the project management team may well be virtual.
The authors’ study is intended to identify the critical variables and they go on the disentangle these critical variables so that the delivery of the construction project is enhanced. The authors’ conclude that further studies may be required to develop the concepts presented here.
Dawood addresses the development of 4D based performance indicators in construction.
Arguing that the uptake of 4D planning is slow and there is a need to demonstrate its value the author sets out to do that. The data sources are from practioners using questionnaires, interviews and site records. The analysis identifies and quantifies the 4D based key performance indicators and claims greater efficiency and benefits from the use of 4D planning. The technology enhances the visualisation of the project and therefore aids the thinking that is part of the planning process.
The author is clearly on a mission to promote 4D planning. What is to be done next? Using the evidence from this research the author needs to find a demonstrator project that will use 4D planning.
Ronald McCaffer
www.mccaffer.com
ISSUE 17.1
What empowers individuals and teams in projects? A critical incident analysis
Martin Morgan Tuuli and Steve Rowlinson
the Education of innovative Engineers
Iain A MacLeod
EXCELLENT CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE IN THE
Dave C A Butcher and Michael J Sheehan
Innovations from the
J C Martin, K Akande and R A Falconer
STUDY OF LIGHT - MULTILAYERED FACADES
Ruiz Letzai, Gómez Eva, García
Strategies for managing innovation in
Wei Pan
TRANSFORMATION OF A RESEARCH CENTRE TOWARD AN INNOVATION PARTNER IN THE CONSTRUCTION SECTOR
Heli Koukkari
Concrete Prefabricated Housing via Advances in Systems Technologies – Development of a technology roadmap
Nick Blismas, Ron Wakefield and Brian Hauser
ECAM 17.1
In September 2009 a conference entitled ‘Global Innovation in Construction’ was held in the Department of Civil and Building Engineering at
Referees identified papers that might be worthy of recognition and this long short list of papers was ranked by the Conference’s International Committee. This edition of ECAM 17.1 presents the best 8 papers selected from the conference.
A sea change has been underway in academic research for some time now. Not all Universities or departments or individual researchers have recognised it. Historically academic research has concentrated on ‘knowledge acquisition’ and ‘knowledge contribution’. The sea change is the expectation that it is the researchers who are now the drivers of ‘knowledge exploitation’. The exploitation of new knowledge from research is our umbrella definition of innovation.
This sea change has come about by pressure from the funding bodies, and in most countries - for Universities at least - that means Governments. In the
The UK Research Assessment Exercise 2008 included a ‘ commentary box’ in which to record the ‘value’ of the research paper offered for assessment. This box arose because of pressures from funders, i.e. Government, to recognise those whose research had ‘value’ in their terms to the economy.
In the current development of the forthcoming Research Evaluation Framework for the
The
quality of life and culture.
Taken together it can be seen as a relentless march towards valuing academic research by its practical impact. Historically, too often research has stopped short of practical impact.
The other pressures for this change are coming from industry itself. Ten or fifteen years ago the words ‘Knowledge Management’ meant little to our industry colleagues. When asked what was their company’s most important asset the reply, after consideration, would be ‘knowledge’. When asked did the companies have a Director of Knowledge or a management structure managing this most important asset the answer was usually a confused ‘no’. The companies would have Finance, Production, Design and Commercial Directors but no Knowledge Directors. In the intervening years, companies have come to learn how to manage knowledge. The extent of this can be debated. However they are more comfortable at managing ‘explicit’ knowledge i.e. hard facts rather than their ‘implicit’ knowledge, i.e. their knowledge how to do things. Having accepted the importance of knowledge and the need to manage it, the point they are at now is developing the structures to generate ‘new’ knowledge. Without ‘new’ knowledge companies don’t develop and advance. The source of this ‘new’ knowledge is research. It is interesting that in parallel there has been a step change in companies approach to training with many large companies establishing ‘academies’, this is their answer to managing their implicit knowledge.
Governments’ searching for practical outputs from the research and companies searching for ‘new’ knowledge is now enshrined in the word ‘innovation’.
Governments seek innovation. Companies seek innovation. Academic research should produce innovation. The opportunity for academic researchers have never been better. This is the richest, best funded era for academic research in the practical subjects that has ever existed in history.
So it seemed timely for the conference, entitled ‘Global Innovation in Construction’.
The themes were organised as follows:
This demonstrates how these themes interrelate and how collectively they should stimulate the level of innovation activity.
Many people were due thanks for the conference organisation. But the reason we were able to hold such a conference was because of the considerable effort of the global research community made up of many researchers conducting their research addressing the issues of today and being enthusiastic about presenting their papers.
So the biggest thanks goes to all the researchers who participated.
The first paper included in this edition is the paper awarded the ‘Emerald Best Paper Prize’ by Martin Morgan Tuuli and Steve Rowlinson for their paper entitled ‘What Empowers Individuals and Teams in Projects? A Critical Incident Analysis’.
Using the critical incident technique a total of 122 critical incidents based on the experiences of 30 construction professionals were studied. This interesting and stimulating paper identifies the key factors operating at individual level, team level and project level. The study provides targets for interventions by leaders and organisations fostering empowerment in project teams.
As an advocate of a wider range of richer research methodologies this paper is a delight as it establishes the value of this interesting research methodology, CIT.
Other papers in this best 8 list are:
MacLeod who seriously questioned the established and traditional approach to engineering education of ‘engineering science’ first downgrading the ‘practice’ of engineering to sometime later. In his presentation he amusingly described it as teaching the theory of music to an aspirant piano player and not letting them near a piano until they understood the theory.. This paper provides a challenge to Universities and Professional Engineering Institutions which should be addressed. The object of the paper is to produce innovative engineers not engineering scientists. We need more engineers capable of applying their engineering knowledge rather than just understanding the engineering science. Indeed the arguments that MacLeod is advancing seem to be accepted by the large companies that are forming academies to train their staff on how they apply there knowledge.
Butcher and Sheehan addressed the measurement of contractor performance in the
Martin, Akande, and Falconer described how Halcrows and
Ruiz , Gómez , García and Vega presented their innovative work in multilayered façade systems. These new systems offer favourable characteristics for energy consumption. The paper demonstrates great advancement over traditional systems.
Pan tackled the issue of how to manage innovation in
Koukkari describes the transformation of a research centre into an innovation partner with the construction industry. This has led to a process model of a multidisciplinary commercialised research-based consultancy as a new way of operating a research centre.
Blismas,
These 8 papers took 17 authors from
The contributors enjoyed the conference and plans are being made to update progress in innovation in Calgary 2011.
As ECAM 17.1 is the first edition of 2010 may I wish all our authors, readers and especially our referees a happy and productive new year
Ronald McCaffer
