Concurrent Engineering in the Construction Industry

Concurrent Engineering https://cer.sagepub.com/ Concurrent Engineering in the Construction Industry Peter E. D. Love and A. Gunasekaran Concurrent Engineering 1997 5: 155 DOI: 10.1177/1063293X9700500207 The online version of this article can be found at: https://cer.sagepub.com/content/5/2/155 Published by: https://www.sagepublications.com Additional services and information for Concurrent Engineering can be found at: Email Alerts: https://cer.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: https://cer.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: https://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: https://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: https://cer.sagepub.com/content/5/2/155.refs.html Downloaded from cer.sagepub.com at Curtin University Library on February 5, 2011 CONCURRENT ENGINEERING: Research and Applications Concurrent Engineering in the Construction Industry* Peter E. D. Love CSIRO Division of Building, Construction and Engineering, Cannon Hill, Queensland 4173, Australia A. Gunasekaran** Department of Manufactunng and Engineering Systems, Brunel University, Uxbndge, Middlesex, Received 14 June 1996, accepted m revised form 24 January UB8 3PH, United Kingdom 1997 Abstract: The construction industry has been suffering from low productivity and poor performance In an attempt to improve its performance, industry practitioners and researchers have looked at the manufacturing industry as a point of reference and a source of innovation Consequently, the industry has acquired and adapted the Concurrent Engineering (CE) approach to manufacturing, to construction Concurrent Construction (CC) The motivation for importing a CE approach to construction is presented in this paper To assist in overcoming the industry’s poor productivity and performance, this paper suggests that construction processes need to be carried out concurrently Furthermore, people involved in the project need to be integrated into a unified development process by becoming a multi-disciplinary team Thus, all downstream aspects of the design and construction process and non-value adding activities (waste) can be considered throughout the design stage of the project Key Words: concurrent construction, downstream aspects, waste, 1. Introduction multi-disciplinary team formance of industry. This can be achieved by adopting a and integrated approach to the design and construction of buildings, by considering the downstream related activities throughout the design process, eliminating non-value adding activities (waste), and creating a multiconcurrent In manufacturing, a great improvement in performance and productivity has been achieved through the application of Concurrent Engineering (CE). This application refers to a design process where all life cycle stages of a product are considered simultaneously, from the conceptual stage through to the detailed design stage [9]. The CE approach to manufacturing aims to increase product quality and reduce cost and development time, by integrating diverse specialties into a unified development process. The CE approach to product development seeks continuous process improvement : increased organisational effectiveness and efficiency, the elimination of non-value added activities (waste), and continuous optimisation or refinement of the entire system which includes design, manufacturing, production and marketing for an improved productivity and quality. Construction industry practitioners and researchers (for example, Koskela [8], Huovila, et al. [6], Mohamed and Yates [17]) have turned to the manufacturing industry as a point of reference and source of innovation. Consequently, the industry has acquired and adapted the CE approach to manufacturing, to construction. This paper suggests that a CE approach to construction can improve the overall per- *The prelinunary version of this paper has been presented 1996, Toronto, Canada **Author to whom correspondence should be addressed at the ISPE Conference disciplinary team. The organization of the paper is as follows: Section 2 deals with the status of the construction industry. The motivation for Concurrent Construction (CC) is discussed in Section 3. Section 4 presents the application of CE to construction industry considering the downstream aspects of the design and construction process, elimination of nonvalue adding activities in construction and multidisciplinary team approach for improving the effectiveness of construction process. The conclusions are presented in Section 5. 2. Status of the Construction The construction Industry is a large and highly diverse It ranges from the construction of multi-million dollar power plants, through to the construction of large residential and non-residential buildings, to small scale renovation or the repair of existing facilities. The industry encompasses different types of work, from the construction of buildings for residential and non-residential use, to the laying of roads and other infrastructure facilities, sector of industrial Volume 5 Number 2 June 1997 1063-293X/97/02 0155-08 $10.00/0 @ 1997 Technomic Publishing Co., Inc. Downloaded from cer.sagepub.com at Curtin University Library on February 5, 2011 industry activity. 155 156 and to the installation in buildings of services (heating, lighting, ventilation, hydraulics, etc.). Moveover, the industry’s scope of construction is widespread ; from new construction to the repair and maintenance of existing facilities which amounts to a significant percent of the total industry output. The public sector is primarily the construction industry’s principal client, accounting for about 60 percent of total expenditure on new and remedial works. The very size of the construction industry means that it has a significant role to play in an economy. This is supported by Hillebrandt [4], who suggests that the construction industry of an industrialised economy contributes over 12 percent to an economy’s gross domestic product (GDP). In the Australian economy in 1990/1991, the con- struction industry’s contribution to GDP amounted to 9 percent, compared to 4.9 percent for mining and 3 percent for agriculture. A further indication of the importance of the construction industry relates to the significant amount of labour employed directly by the industry. For example, in Australia, the construction industry provides employment for over 7 percent of the total available workforce [11]. The construction industry, through the products that it creates, its size and ability to create employment, has the potential to influence an economy’s GDP more than any other service industry. The findings of Stoeckerl and Quirke [18] suggest that a 10 percent increase in the construction industry’s efficiency, would increase an economy’s service industry contribution to GDP by over 2.5 percent. Consequently, it is essential that construction industry operates efficiently and productively. With the above figures in mind, it can be clearly seen that the construction industry is of critical importance to the growth and success of an economy. Nevertheless, while a particular industry such as manufacturing has been increasing its productivity, the construction industry’s productivity has declined. Typical problems contributing to the decline in construction productivity include [10]: · the fragmented nature of the industry · the lack of integration and co-ordination between improving the efficiency of construction processes. This paper specifically addresses the application of CE to construction viz. Concurrent Construction (CC). This can be defined &dquo;as a systematic approach to the integrated, concurrent design and construction of products, the consideration of related downstream aspects and the elimination of nonvalue adding activities. This is achieved through a multidisciplinary team approach, which intends to motivate project participants throughout the design process, to consider all elements of the product’s life cycle from inception through to disposal, taking into account quality, cost, time, function, the client and end user requirements.&dquo; It is suggested that CC can address the problems highlighted herein, during the design process. Typically, during the design process the following are fundamentally established: relationships, communication networks, goals and objectives, and the design and construction methods. Hence, during this process participants including architects, engineers, surveyors, and contractors should focus their energies on becoming a multi-disciplinary team. This could be achieved, by: ~ ~ ~ the integration and concurrent sequencing of activities the extensive use of computer support (CAD/CAM/ Computer-Integrated Construction (CIC), simulation, expert systems and shared databases) the use of computer tools for planning and programming The aim of this paper is to present the need for a concurintegrated design and construction process. Furthermore, this paper suggests that construction industry practitioners and researchers are active in the search for the potential improvement strategies from other industries such as manufacturing and the application of these to construction. The application of CE to construction is in the early stage and therefore the research has been limited. Nevertheless, the research that has been undertaken [6,17] has demonstrated that CC is potentially the elixir for improving the design and construction process. rent and project participants · the poor communication processes · the deviations in quality · the large amounts of non-productive time A number of solutions have been put forward to overcome these inherent problems; for example, industrialisation (i.e., prefabrication and modularisation), computer integrated construction and robotised and automated construction, all of which are generic concepts of manufacturing. These technological solutions have not affected the construction industry as first envisaged, as the problems still remain. To overcome these problems facing the industry, a reengineering philosophy has been suggested embracing the concepts of concurrent engineering, lean production and process redesign [7]. Each of the aforementioned concepts has a role to play in 3. Motivation for Concurrent Construction Generally, the construction industry is comprised of relatively small, independent operators that come together on a one-off basis to procure a construction project. Even the large organisations tend to operate through smaller, autonomous units within the industry. In particular, the industry has been characterised historically by those organisations involved in the design and construction of construction projects [5]. Furthermore, the industry is one in which subcontracting is widespread. This structure allows quick and effective response to external events but makes it difficult for the industry to initiate internal action or act in concert. Moreover, the lack of continuity and the contractual arrangements engendered by this fragmentation discourage the efforts of project teams to improve quality and reduce Downloaded from cer.sagepub.com at Curtin University Library on February 5, 2011 157 cost. Leslie and Mckay [12] state that &dquo;this leaves little incentive to make a facility easier to construct or cheaper to operate, since the rewards of such effort will only benefit others.&dquo; The industry is unlikely to undergo any major structural change, at least in the short term. The industry largely operates in the mode of the industrial revolution with extreme specialisation of activities. Consequently, the management and co-ordination of these activities into a coherent construction process can become a problematic and tedious task. Construction activities are generally divided into sequential activities, which are awarded to different specialists for execution, placing unnecessary constraints on the flow of work. As a result, this inadvertently increases the possibility of conflicts between participants, consequently leading to time waste and rework. The industry must take steps towards assuming that buildings are procured more effectively, by integrating all aspects of the design and construction process, and by simultaneously performing a variety of activities that were previously done sequentially. The organization and management of construction projects invariably involve interlinkages between a number of organisations involved in varying degrees throughout the total project cycle. Thus, a typical construction project is faced with a &dquo;temporary multi-organisation&dquo; where participants have divergent goals and objectives [1]. As a result of this divergence, adversarial relationships between participants have developed. Consequently, it is difficult for organisations to cooperate, communicate and integrate with each other effectively throughout the project development process. Bearing in mind the endemic adversarial nature of the current construction process, it is suggested that current practice is ineffective for both participants and clients. A solution to this problem is that an external project management organisation is required to act as an integrating mechanism for both the client and participants. As mentioned herein, the differentiation1 of participants is a fundamental aspect of the construction process. This latent differentiation is a result of sentience [19]2. Thus, the need for integration is high. Sentience is likely to be strongest where the boundaries of a sentient group and of a task coincide and is a typical feature of the construction process; for instance, architects are normally solely involved in design and builders in building, with little if any overlap. The fragmented nature of the construction industry, particularly the separation of design and construction, the uniqueness of construction projects and the resulting ephemeral nature of the project organisation, places great dependence on the project participants in setting up the construction process and bringing the project to a successful conclusion. As a result of this dependence, the construction industry has become inflexible and unresponsive to the needs of its clients. This is further emphasised by the construction industry’s inability to implement a quality management system. Recent research by CIDA [2] revealed that only 15 percent of the surveyed construction firms in Australia had obtained certification for their quality management system. Furthermore, it was found that only a minority of these firms routinely involved clients and employees in their improvement activities [16]. In an attempt to reduce the overall development time of construction projects, the industry has overlapped design and construction activities. This process is commonly referred to as fast tracking. Fast tracking is a process whereby overall construction time is reduced by starting construction before the design is completed-the construction industry’s attempt at achieving concurrency. However, fast tracking has been typically interpreted as a tool used for program chasing; as a result cost control is lost in the pursuit of time objectives. Program chasing leads to cost and time overruns, poor co-ordination between consultants and contractor, poor morale, and a dissatisfied client. The failures associated with fast tracking are attributable to a lack of teamwork between contractor and designer, ultimately contributing to sub-optimal design solutions [6], lower quality and higher construction cost. This consequently limits the opportunities for innovation and process improvement. Fast tracking has not been successful, in as much as the approach primarily concentrates on the parallel sequencing of activities, rather than the integration of activities. Many construction projects have claimed to be completed on time and within budget. Nevertheless it is widely believed by construction professionals, that estimated time and budget targets do not necessarily reflect the actual or required time and cost. This is primarily because of the intrinsic inefficiency of current practices and mechanisms of the industry that ultimately lead to time waste. An investigation into time waste revealed that the site workforce spends a considerable amount of time waiting for resources or approvals, waiting to work in a particular location, and travelling between places of work to complete an activity. Another investigation showed that through the application of CC, a 25 percent time saving was achievable in a typical construction work package without increasing allocated resources. These findings were essentially concerned with time waste on construction sites. Likewise, the off-site time waste can be of a similar amount. Activities of the construction process are interrelated and as already mentioned herein, carried out by different participants. Every project participant is a user and a customer for the participants’ next dependent activity. Hence, participants are solely interested in activities that add value to the product. ’In Systems terminology, the specialist function of each participant is called differen- tiation. It can be defined in construction terms as the difference in cognitive and emotional orientation among contributors to a project with different specialist skills. Sentience is a group of individuals 2 emotional support [19] prepared to commit themselves and depend upon An attempt to measure the amount of non-value-adding activities, from the end user perspective, revealed that it can be as high as 40 percent of the overall project time, i.e., from inception to completion [17]. Downloaded from cer.sagepub.com at Curtin University Library on February 5, 2011 158 Figure 4. Application 1. The application of CE of CE to Construction The findings from the previous section suggest that there is an urgent need to improve the performance of construction. This can be achieved during the design process by considering all aspects of the project downstream phases concurrently. Incorporating requirements from the construction operation and maintenance phases at an early stage of a project would undoubtedly lead to an overall improvement in project performance. This paper suggests that the following are essential constituents of CC: ~ ~ ~ the identification of associated downstream aspects of design and construction processes the reduction or elimination of non-value adding activities the multi-disciplinary team A conceptual model explaining the application of CE in construction industry is presented in Figure 1. In order to develop a cost effective construction system, there is a need to integrate various activities in contruction industry including design, procurement, accounting and other processes involved in construction. The simultaneous consideration of these activities at the design stage will improve the performance of construction industry by eliminating non-value added activities at the downstream related activities with help of a multi-disciplinary team. The downstream related m construction industry. aspects should include constructability, material selection, project completion time and cost reduction, skills available and safety. Technologies and concepts such as QFD, Design for Manufacturability, TQM can be used for eliminating nonvalue added activities such as rework, scrap, unscheduled maintenance and inventory. The multi-disciplinary teamwork can be achieved by open communication, education and training, empowerment and collective incentive schemes. Various computer tools such as CAD/CAM/CIC, simulation and shared database can be used to obtain a cooperative supported work and to eliminate non-value added activities. Table 1 summarizes the CE strategies to resolve various construction issues. The details of each of the major constituents of CC are discussed hereunder. 4.1 Downstream Aspects of the Construction Process Design and Throughout the development of a construction project, there are numerous downstream aspects which invariably need to be considered. These include constructability,3 material selection, safety, cost, and the overall development C3 onstructability is a system for achieving optimum integration of construction knowledge m the project delivery process and balancing the various project and environmental constraints to achieve maximisation of projects goals and building performance. Downloaded from cer.sagepub.com at Curtin University Library on February 5, 2011 159 Table 1. Improving construction concurrent construction efficiency by strategies. development time and cost. This is supported by Macpherson [15] who adds to this contention stating that &dquo;Reducing cost is not about the quality of architecture; it is about designs and processes that are efficient; 10 percent can be saved by improving the process of designing and building; you have to have either a good client or a well-integrated design team; the real way to reduce cost is to improve communications.&dquo; CC requires an integrated effort from all participants to marketing development and manufacture, by listening to the client needs to create and develop an optimal design solution. This can be primarily achieved by &dquo;radically changing&dquo; the traditional way of organising construction projects and by: both ~ ~ ~ Producing a higher output quality through the systematic consideration of clients’ and end user requirements. Improving the information flow between participants by team-building and pre-active management. Increasing the efficiency of site operations by adopting indepth constructability analysis during the design developphase. Reducing the overall time and ment ~ cost by minitnising poten- of rework and errors that are often attributed to poor design and documentation. Winner [20] found that rework could be reduced by 75 percent through product and process design optimisation. tial causes The construction industry is faced with inflexible procurement’ systems, which cannot handle the interactions complexities of a multi-disciplinary production and manufacturing approach to construction. Traditionally, contractors have not assisted in the design and development of buildings. Moreover, it is uncommon for specialist subcontractors or suppliers to be introduced during the design stage, although their advice would be invaluable. CC advocates the introduction of the contractor, major subcontractors and suppliers during the design phase. These specialist organisations have specific knowledge concerning the capability of the life cycle of materials, the overall products’ performance and the programming of site operations. CC aims to procure a building more efficiently by reducing costs and time with no sacrifices in quality or functionality. Furthermore, by introducing principal subcontractors (e.g., mechanical, electrical and hydraulics services) during the design development phase, project planning can be effectively enhanced. This would evidently reduce the potential for conflicts between activities that may emanate from working concurrently. In essence, CC can be seen to be an alternative procurement system, whereby a project’s structure and the relationships between participants and communication processes are primarily redefined. The responsibility for the implementation of CC ultimately lies with the client. However, clients usually and time. These aspects are represented at various phases throughout a construction project’s life-cycle. Thus, downstream aspects are affected by decisions made during the design phase. Typically, traditional design methodology evaluates the design and construction of a project after each development phase is complete. Consequently, downstream aspects are not taken into account during the design phase and typically results in design variations, rework, lost time and increased costs. It is suggested that downstream aspects should be considered throughout the design process, since more than two thirds of a typical project’s cost is committed within this phase. A design team composed of participants from differing professions are brought together to partake in the design process. These participants are deemed to have knowledge and information about how downstream issues can influence design and construction processes. This has the fundamental advantage of reducing the amount of redesigning and underestimate the crucial role that the committed client can 4A procurement system can be defined as an organisational system that assigns specific responsibilities and authorities to people and organisations, and defines the relationships of the vanous elements In the construction of project (Love [3]) Downloaded from cer.sagepub.com at Curtin University Library on February 5, 2011 160 play in assuming responsibility for initiating, directing and maintaining the momentum of the construction project through all the project development phases and to the eventual monitoring of the product’s performance. Clients generally have a limited knowledge of the dynamics of the design and construction process. Clients and participants both need to be educated about CC concept as it requires major cultural, behavioural, organisational and institutional barriers lifted. CC is a mechanism for both the client and project participants to become a unified team; an interorganisational team approach to construction needs to be adopted. 4.2 The Elimination of Non-Value Adding Activities The traditional approach of the design process divides an activity into a variety of sub-tasks. Each sub-task is apportioned with information and resource flows. Consequently, non-productive time (waste) is created to account for all waiting, moving and inspection periods associated with these sub-tasks. In most successful organisations, the elimination of waste is a prime objective. The problem has always been how to achieve this objective. The elimination of waste was a driving force of the JIT philosophy, and can be defined as &dquo;any activity that does not contribute to the common organisational goal of reducing costs.&dquo; The key to the elimination of waste lies in the ability to develop and maintain a synchronised flow of information (concurrency). The degree to which the information can be synchronised determines the degree to which waste can be eliminated and therefore add value for the client. CC views the design process as separate distinct work packages and as a combination of conversion activities (where inputs are converted to outputs) and flow activities (where resources and information flow from one point to another). Therefore, the design process can be conceptualised with the lean production paradigm. A conversion activity is a value-adding activity and is concerned with adding value to the end product, whereas a flow or non-value-adding activity can be associated with the following: ~ ~ ~ ~ the preparation process required by a conversion activity that consumes time without adding value to the end- product the physical movement of resources (material, labour, equipment, etc.) to and within the site, including resources storage, inspection, etc. the transferring and exchanging of information between various participants involved with the activity the handover between subcontracted trades The of non-value adding activities vary, e.g., design changes, errors and inapproriate information. The design process can be viewed as a value generation. Value is generated through the fulfillment of customer needs and requirements. It is suggested that value consists of two compocauses product performance and freedom of defects. The value obtained is evaluated from the perspective of the next customer and the final customer. There are four possible reasons for value loss: nents : ~ ~ ~ ~ requirements are missed at the beginning of the design process customer requirements are not communicated and are lost during the design process there is a lack of design optimisation solutions there are errors in the final design customer Almost all rework is associated with customer dissatisfaction at the end of a process. This considerably adds to the development’s overall time and cost. The principal causes of rework are variations, errors and time waste. Typically, variations are caused by inadequately capturing and meeting of customer requirements while the rework is caused by the inappropriate application of quality measures. Current quality measures are neither specifically tailored to the needs of the construction industry nor adequately implemented during the design and construction process. More often than not, time is typically wasted on locating the appropriate information, duplicating or rewording documents, providing redundant or too much information for individuals to consume, and providing insuflicient information for critical decisions. In many cases, information is not updated on time or is transferred informally, undermining the value of the content, and impacts on both construction time and cost [14]. The waste can be reduced or eliminated by: ~ detailed analysis of needs and requirements of the cus- tomer ~ ~ ~ systemised management of requirements, e.g., Quality Function Deployment design for manufacturability the application of quality management techniques to eliminate waste [8] Theoretically, CC seeks to improve the overall developprocess by reducing the amount of non-value adding activities contributing to the final design. This can be achieved in construction by changing the way in which construction projects are typically organised. A more unified development process would undoubtedly encourage collaborative decision making, team co-ordination, information sharing and consequently, stimulating participants toward mutual goals and objectives. ment 4.3 Multi-Disciplinary Team Approach multi-disciplinary team approach advocated by CC potentially yield significant short term and long term benefits. These benefits can be categorised as content and process benefits. Potential content benefits are the positive effects on project’s costs, quality, and time and on dealing more promptly with changes. Potential process benefits are The can Downloaded from cer.sagepub.com at Curtin University Library on February 5, 2011 161 the positive effects on reducing adversarial relationships, developing trust and team spirit, open communication, improving co-operation and cohesiveness, and early identification of problems. For the CC approach to be effective, the construction industry has to encourage the adoption of both team buildings and partnering.1 The former is a short term perspective addressing a specific project, whereas the latter is a broader perspective, typically focusing on long term relationships. Nevertheless, the problem solving skills learned and management paradigm experienced as a result of team building remains with participants long after project completion. It is further suggested that these skills and experience become part of the human capital of the participants’ organisations. Team building is essentially used to stimulate initial relations and focus participants toward mutual goals and objectives. It is an inevitable fact that construction project teams are ephemeral and it is therefore difficult to develop trust over such a short period. Furthermore, participants seldom gain the chance to work with each other on more than one occasion. It is suggested that team building is the stepping stone to partnering; once a team has worked together successfully, then partnering should ideally be the long term objective. This is entirely dependent upon the client, as typically most clients in construction procure one-off projects. has For those clients who do build on more than the odd occasion, partnering with and between participants ought to be 1. ultimately encouraged. The partnering process empowers project participants with the authority to accept responsibility to do their jobs. However, partnering is not prevalent in the construction industry. This is mainly due to the lack of commitment, by some participants, to the non-adversarial win-win attitude that is an essential element for the partnering process. Likewise, the current partnering practice in construction is based upon inappropriate principles that hinder the chance of project success [2]. recognised the urgent need for a concurrent and integrated construction process. This paper has identified the motivation for introducing CE into the construction industry. Furthermore, this paper introduces three essential Acknowledgements The authors are most grateful to two anonymous referees for their constructive and helpful comments on the earlier version of this manuscript. References Cherns, A. B. and D. T. Bryant. 1984. "Studying the Clients Role in Construction Management," Construction Management and Economics, 2:177-184. 2. Construction Industry Development Agency (CIDA). 1993. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Team building is a project-focused process that builds and develops shared goals, in5 terdependence, trust and commitment and accountability among team members and seeks to improve the team members’ problem solving skills Partnering is a long term commitment between two or more organisations for the 6 purpose of achieving specific business objectives by maximising the effectiveness of each participant’s resources The relationship is based upon trust, dedication to common goals and an understanding of each other’s goals and values [21] Commonwealth of Australia Publication, Australia. Government of New South Wales. 1992. Royal Commission into Productivity in the Building Industry in New South Wales, Australia, Vols. 1-10. Hillebrandt, P. M. 1988. Analysis of the British Construction Industry. Macmillan Press. House. 1981. Guide to the Construction Industry (1979-1980), 7th Edition. London: Whitefriars Press. Huovila, P., L. Koskela and M. Lautanala. 1994. "Fast or Concurrent—The Art of Getting Construction Improved," Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Lean Construction, Santiago, Chile, September 28-29. Ireland, V. 1994. "The T40 Project: Process Re-Engineering in Construction," Australian Project Manager, 15(1):31-37. Koskela, L. 1992. "Application of the New Production Philos, Center for Inteophy to Construction," Technical Report #72 grated Facility Engineering, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Stanford University. Kusiak, A. 1993. Concurrent Engineering: Automation, Tools, and Techniques . New York: John Wiley & Sons. Latham, M. 1994. Constructing the Team , London, UK: HMSO. Leonard, R. 1992. "Improving the Competitiveness of Building and Construction," Business Council Bulletin, November. Leslie, H. and D. Mckay. 1995. Managing Information to Support Project Decision Making in the Building and Construction Industry, CSIRO, Division of Building, Construction and Engineering and the National Committee on Rationalised Partnering: A Strategy for Excellence, 5. Conclusions Concurrent Engineering is a proven method of achieving dramatic improvements in product performance and cost. The reported successful implementation of CE in the manufacturing industry has inspired construction industry practitioners and researchers to attempt to implement this concept to construction. Interest in this concept is gradually emerging, although it is still not fully understood by both industry practitioners and researchers. Nevertheless, the industry con- stituents believed to play a crucial role in the successful implementation of Concurrent Construction: (1) the identification of associated downstream aspects of design and construction processes, (2) the reduction or elimination of non-value adding activities and (3) the multi-disciplinary team. The success of this approach is highly dependent upon the industry’s ability to eliminate the major cultural, behavioural, organisational and institutional barriers that currently exist between participants. These barriers are being gradually eliminated. 12. Building. 13. Love, P. E. D. 1996. "Fast Downloaded from cer.sagepub.com at Curtin University Library on February 5, 2011 Building: An Australian Perspec- 162 tive," Proceedings of the CIB-W92 Procurement Systems Symposium, North Meets South, Developing Ideas, South Africa, January 14-17. 14. Love, P. E. D. and S. Mohamed. 1995. "Construction Process Re-engineering," Journal of the Australian Institute of Quantity Surveyors, pp. 8-11, December. 15. Macpherson, I. 1995. "Cutting Costs: Better by Half," Building, UK, February 10. 16. Mohamed, S. 1995. "Improving Construction through QFD Application," Proceedings of the 1st Pacific Rim Symposium on Quality Deployment, Sydney, Australia. pp. 238-244. 17. Mohamed, S. and G. Yates. 1995. "Re-engineering Approach to Construction: A Case Study," Proceedings of the 5th EastAsia Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering & Construction, Griffith University, Australia, pp. 775-780. 18. Stoeckerl, A. and D. Quirke. 1992. "Services: Setting the , Services Industries Research Agenda for Reform," Report #2 Program, Department of Industry, Technology and Commerce, Australia. 19. Walker, A. 1990. Project Management in Construction, 2nd . BSP, London. Edn 20. Winner, R. I. 1988. The Role of Current Engineering in Weapons System Acquisition, Institute for Defence Analyses, Report R-388, December. 21. Albanese, R. 1993. "Team Building," Implications for the Design and Construction Process. Construction Industry Institute, The University of Texas at Austin. Peter Love Peter Love is a research officer with the CSIRO Division of Building, Construction and Engineering, and is currently working towards a Ph.D. in construction management at the Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia. Peter graduated with a BSc in Quantity Surveying from the University of Westminster, London, in 1990 and received a MSc in Construction Management from Bath University, Bath, UK, in 1993. He has acquired a range of industrial experience as quantity surveyor and project manager within the construction industry. His research interests include: the organization and management of construction projects and the application of manufacturing techniques to construction. A. Gunasekaran A. Gunasekaran is a Senior Lec- Operations Management in the Department of Manufacturing and Engineering Systems at Brunel University, UK. He was awarded a Ph.D. in Industrial Engineering and Operations Research from Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay turer of 50 articles acin International cepted/published Journal of Production Research, International Journal of Systems SciInternational Journal ence, Operations and Production Production Management, Planning and Control, Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Computers in Industrial Engineering : An International Journal, European Journal of Operational Research, Journal of Operational Research Society, International Journal of Production Economics, Computers in Industry: An International Journal, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, International Journal of Computer-Intgrated Manufacturing, Statistics & Computing, etc. He has presented over 30 papers in conferences and given a number of invited talks in more than 20 countries. He is on the Editiorial Board of many International Journals. He is editing special issues for a number of International Journals. He is currently interested in researching JIT, Manufacturing Strategy, Supply Chain Management, CIM and BPR. Downloaded from cer.sagepub.com at Curtin University Library on February 5, 2011 (India). He has over