The Last Planner System in Construction Projects - Revision history

Tkokotas at 13:59, 18 December 2018

2018-12-18T13:59:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:59, 18 December 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
			''Developed by Ragna Helgadóttir''


	The manufacturing industry has for a long time been dealing with waste and inefficient production. To manage this, lean management has been used to make the production more efficient. The lean ideology has now been adjusted to the construction industry and is called Lean Construction (LC). But LC did not become popular in the construction projects until the Last Planner System (LPS) was introduced as a lean management tool. LPS is a tool that covers both project management and planning in a way that those who do the work also plan it. All managers are activated in the planning process which ensures that teamwork is one of the main focuses. The idea behind LPS is to create a steady flow by minimizing waste and constantly implementing reformation, all in order to increase the value for the customer.		The manufacturing industry has for a long time been dealing with waste and inefficient production. To manage this, lean management has been used to make the production more efficient. The lean ideology has now been adjusted to the construction industry and is called Lean Construction (LC). But LC did not become popular in the construction projects until the Last Planner System (LPS) was introduced as a lean management tool. LPS is a tool that covers both project management and planning in a way that those who do the work also plan it. All managers are activated in the planning process which ensures that teamwork is one of the main focuses. The idea behind LPS is to create a steady flow by minimizing waste and constantly implementing reformation, all in order to increase the value for the customer.

S155273 at 21:13, 26 September 2016

2016-09-26T21:13:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:13, 26 September 2016
Line 13:		Line 13:

	== '''The Last Planner System''' ==		== '''The Last Planner System''' ==
	The LPS tool was custom-made for construction projects by Glenn Ballard and Gregory Howell around last turn of the century. The goal was to reduce waste by using ideology from lean management. The LPS tool is a mix of both project- and production management and is supposed to convert what ''should'' happen to what ''can'' happen by letting those who are closest to the work also plan it. That is why it is called the ''last planner''. That person is supposed to have control over ~~men power~~ and resources because he has the best overview over what can be done with the resources available at the time. In effect, the last planner says that he will work on some specific tasks. This forms the basis for weekly work plans that control the production. Then it needs to be checked what was actually done and while doing that it has to be kept in mind what can be done on order to improve processes, planning and waste. Therefore, it is the change from what ''should'' happen to what ''can'' happen, ''will'' happen and what ''was'' done that makes the foundation of the LPS tool <ref name="ballard">Ballard, G. (2000). ''The Last Planner System of Production Control''. Birmingham: The University of Birmingham</ref>.		The LPS tool was custom-made for construction projects by Glenn Ballard and Gregory Howell around last turn of the century. The goal was to reduce waste by using ideology from lean management. The LPS tool is a mix of both project- and production management and is supposed to convert what ''should'' happen to what ''can'' happen by letting those who are closest to the work also plan it. That is why it is called the ''last planner''. That person is supposed to have control over manpower and resources because he has the best overview over what can be done with the resources available at the time. In effect, the last planner says that he will work on some specific tasks. This forms the basis for weekly work plans that control the production. Then it needs to be checked what was actually done and while doing that it has to be kept in mind what can be done on order to improve processes, planning and waste. Therefore, it is the change from what ''should'' happen to what ''can'' happen, ''will'' happen and what ''was'' done that makes the foundation of the LPS tool <ref name="ballard">Ballard, G. (2000). ''The Last Planner System of Production Control''. Birmingham: The University of Birmingham</ref>.

	=== The Four Phases of the LPS Tool ===		=== The Four Phases of the LPS Tool ===
	The LPS tool consists of four phases. These phases can be seen on Figure 2 and how their internal connection makes the whole LPS process. In the first phase there is a lot of uncertainty which reduces with going down the figure. The same goes for details that have to be ~~reckoned with~~, it is not done much in the first phase but increases with every step down. It is also necessary to keep in mind that when going between phases it is important to revalue what should be done with what can be done <ref name="howell">Howell, G. A. (2002). ''A Guide to the Last PlannerTM for Costruction Foreman and Supervisors''. Arlington, VA: Lean Construction Institute</ref>.		The LPS tool consists of four phases. These phases can be seen on Figure 2 and how their internal connection makes the whole LPS process. In the first phase there is a lot of uncertainty which reduces with going down the figure. The same goes for details that have to be thought of, it is not done much in the first phase but increases with every step down. It is also necessary to keep in mind that when going between phases it is important to revalue what should be done with what can be done <ref name="howell">Howell, G. A. (2002). ''A Guide to the Last PlannerTM for Costruction Foreman and Supervisors''. Arlington, VA: Lean Construction Institute</ref>.

	[[File:Nyttnytt.PNG\|800px\|thumb\|center\|<b>Figure 2:</b> Description of the four phases in the LPS tool <ref name="howell"/>]]		[[File:Nyttnytt.PNG\|800px\|thumb\|center\|<b>Figure 2:</b> Description of the four phases in the LPS tool <ref name="howell"/>]]
Line 40:		Line 40:
	[[File:Mynd 2.PNG\|800px\|thumb\|center\|<b>Figure 4:</b> Lookahead plan; tasks form the pull plan, 6 weeks in advance, are broken down into daily units, put on the weekly work plan and screened.]]		[[File:Mynd 2.PNG\|800px\|thumb\|center\|<b>Figure 4:</b> Lookahead plan; tasks form the pull plan, 6 weeks in advance, are broken down into daily units, put on the weekly work plan and screened.]]

	The subtasks are screened to make sure that everything is or will be ready when the work starts. e.g. the design has to be done, resources have to be available, predecessors have to be done, the work area has to be ready for work with enough ~~men power~~ on site as well as all terms of the contract have to be fulfilled<ref name="howell"/>. If it appears that one or more factor will prevent the task from starting on time, the factor is placed on the ''constraint log''. The constraint log is supposed to solve constraints in a systematic way to ensure a steady production by making someone responsible for solving the constraint in time<ref name="ballard"/>.		The subtasks are screened to make sure that everything is or will be ready when the work starts. e.g. the design has to be done, resources have to be available, predecessors have to be done, the work area has to be ready for work with enough manpower on site as well as all terms of the contract have to be fulfilled<ref name="howell"/>. If it appears that one or more factor will prevent the task from starting on time, the factor is placed on the ''constraint log''. The constraint log is supposed to solve constraints in a systematic way to ensure a steady production by making someone responsible for solving the constraint in time<ref name="ballard"/>.

	Another important part of the lookahead plan is to make detailed plans about how the work should be done in terms of safety, environment and quality issues<ref name="howell"/>. So when a task is put on the lookahead plan, it has to be checked if this detailed plan exists. If not, then a ''first-run study'' has to be made by a cross functional team and those who do the work. The first-run study is based on the ''PCDA-method'', a lean management tool, which is about going through four steps when performing work: planning, doing, checking and acting<ref name="ballard"/>.		Another important part of the lookahead plan is to make detailed plans about how the work should be done in terms of safety, environment and quality issues<ref name="howell"/>. So when a task is put on the lookahead plan, it has to be checked if this detailed plan exists. If not, then a ''first-run study'' has to be made by a cross functional team and those who do the work. The first-run study is based on the ''PCDA-method'', a lean management tool, which is about going through four steps when performing work: planning, doing, checking and acting<ref name="ballard"/>.

S155273 at 21:11, 26 September 2016

2016-09-26T21:11:24Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:11, 26 September 2016
Line 7:		Line 7:
	[[File:productive-time.png\|300px\|thumb\|right\|<b>Figure 1:</b> Percentage of waste and productive time in manufacturing and construction <ref name="multiple"/>]]The construction industry is one of the oldest industries in the world but is still one of the most problematic industries nowadays. It is not known for delivering products that meet the customers’ quality requirements. Low productivity is an ongoing challenge and work safety and working conditions are often deficient <ref>Alarcon, L. (1997). ''Lean Construction''. Rotterdam, Netherlands: A.A.Balkema</ref>.		[[File:productive-time.png\|300px\|thumb\|right\|<b>Figure 1:</b> Percentage of waste and productive time in manufacturing and construction <ref name="multiple"/>]]The construction industry is one of the oldest industries in the world but is still one of the most problematic industries nowadays. It is not known for delivering products that meet the customers’ quality requirements. Low productivity is an ongoing challenge and work safety and working conditions are often deficient <ref>Alarcon, L. (1997). ''Lean Construction''. Rotterdam, Netherlands: A.A.Balkema</ref>.

	In the last couple of years, many construction organisations have changed their management so it is more similar to what is customary in manufacturing industries in order to increase productivity. In most cases it does not work out since there is a fundamental difference between these industries. One of the biggest ~~difference is~~ that manufacturing is based on stability while construction is based on variability. Construction projects have to deal with one-off production with variable resources and projects with long delivery time. They usually have clear start and end point which is usually defined in a signed contract between the contractor and buyer. Another thing that is different between these two is that construction often takes place outside where it is exposed to external influences and it normally requires labour intensive processes. Manufacturing processes are usually planned before fabrication starts while in construction they are usually planned during fabrication <ref>Merschbrock, C. (2009). ''Lean Production Construction – Prospects for the Icelandic Construction Industry''. Reykjavík: Reykjavík University</ref>. This makes it hard for construction managers to learn from mistakes that are made during projects, also since projects are usually one-off. This is not the problem in manufacturing since they have the opportunity to constantly learn from their mistakes during design, process planning and production.		In the last couple of years, many construction organisations have changed their management so it is more similar to what is customary in manufacturing industries in order to increase productivity. In most cases it does not work out since there is a fundamental difference between these industries. One of the biggest differences are that manufacturing is based on stability while construction is based on variability. Construction projects have to deal with one-off production with variable resources and projects with long delivery time. They usually have clear start and end point which is usually defined in a signed contract between the contractor and buyer. Another thing that is different between these two is that construction often takes place outside where it is exposed to external influences and it normally requires labour intensive processes. Manufacturing processes are usually planned before fabrication starts while in construction they are usually planned during fabrication <ref>Merschbrock, C. (2009). ''Lean Production Construction – Prospects for the Icelandic Construction Industry''. Reykjavík: Reykjavík University</ref>. This makes it hard for construction managers to learn from mistakes that are made during projects, also since projects are usually one-off. This is not the problem in manufacturing since they have the opportunity to constantly learn from their mistakes during design, process planning and production.

	There is a lot of waste in the construction industry. Waste can be defined as: ''“Anything different from the absolute minimum amount of resources of materials, equipment and manpower, necessary to add value to the product.”'' <ref name="multiple">[3] Aziz, R. F., & Hafez, S. M. (2013). Applying Lean Thinking in Construction and Performance Improvement. ''Alexandria Engineering Journal'', 52, 679-695</ref> As can be seen in Figure 1, 57% of all the time used in a construction project is not productive and is therefore not value adding for the client, which makes it a waste. At the same time, waste in manufacturing is only around 12%.		There is a lot of waste in the construction industry. Waste can be defined as: ''“Anything different from the absolute minimum amount of resources of materials, equipment and manpower, necessary to add value to the product.”'' <ref name="multiple">[3] Aziz, R. F., & Hafez, S. M. (2013). Applying Lean Thinking in Construction and Performance Improvement. ''Alexandria Engineering Journal'', 52, 679-695</ref> As can be seen in Figure 1, 57% of all the time used in a construction project is not productive and is therefore not value adding for the client, which makes it a waste. At the same time, waste in manufacturing is only around 12%.

S155273 at 21:08, 26 September 2016

2016-09-26T21:08:22Z

S155273 at 15:13, 26 September 2016

2016-09-26T15:13:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:13, 26 September 2016
Line 200:		Line 200:

	== '''Conclusion''' ==		== '''Conclusion''' ==
	As mentioned in the chapter above the most common challenges in implementing the LPS tool are lack of training, resistance to change, lack of leadership and human capital. This makes it clear that the problems are not connected to the structure of the tool itself but more to human factors. Therefore the framework presented in this article is suitable to use when implementing LPS since it seeks to get all managers and planners to understand and accept how the LPS tool works during the implementation.		As mentioned in the chapter above the most common challenges in implementing the LPS tool are lack of training, resistance to change, lack of leadership and human capital. This makes it clear that the problems are not connected to the structure of the tool itself but more to human factors. Therefore the framework presented in this article is suitable to use when implementing LPS since it seeks to get all managers and planners to understand and accept how the LPS tool works during the implementation. Even though these challenges might seem severe, they are not insuperable since the popularity of the LPS tool in construction projects is constantly growing.

S155273 at 15:01, 26 September 2016

2016-09-26T15:01:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:01, 26 September 2016
Line 8:		Line 8:
	[[File:productive-time.png\|300px\|thumb\|right\|<b>Figure 1:</b> Percentage of waste and productive time in manufacturing and construction <ref name="multiple"/>]]The construction industry is one of the oldest industries in the world but is still one of the most problematic industries nowadays. It is not known for delivering products that meet the customers’ quality requirements. Low productivity is an ongoing challenge and work safety and working conditions are often deficient <ref>Alarcon, L. (1997). ''Lean Construction''. Rotterdam, Netherlands: A.A.Balkema</ref>.		[[File:productive-time.png\|300px\|thumb\|right\|<b>Figure 1:</b> Percentage of waste and productive time in manufacturing and construction <ref name="multiple"/>]]The construction industry is one of the oldest industries in the world but is still one of the most problematic industries nowadays. It is not known for delivering products that meet the customers’ quality requirements. Low productivity is an ongoing challenge and work safety and working conditions are often deficient <ref>Alarcon, L. (1997). ''Lean Construction''. Rotterdam, Netherlands: A.A.Balkema</ref>.

	In the last couple of years, many construction organisations have changed their management so it is more similar to what is customary in manufacturing industries in order to increase productivity. In most cases it does not work out since there is a fundamental difference between these industries. One of the biggest difference is that manufacturing is based on stability while construction is based on variability. Construction projects have to deal with one-off production with variable resources and projects with long delivery time. They usually have clear start and end point which is usually defined in a signed contract between the contractor and buyer. Another thing that is different between these two is that construction often takes place outside where it is exposed to external influences and it normally requires labour intensive processes. Manufacturing processes are usually planned before fabrication starts while in construction they are usually planned during fabrication <ref>Merschbrock, C. (2009). ''Lean Production Construction – Prospects for the Icelandic Construction Industry''. Reykjavík: Reykjavík University</ref>. This makes it hard for construction managers to learn from mistakes made during projects, also since projects are usually one-off. This is not the problem in manufacturing since they have the opportunity to constantly learn from their mistakes during design, process planning and production.		In the last couple of years, many construction organisations have changed their management so it is more similar to what is customary in manufacturing industries in order to increase productivity. In most cases it does not work out since there is a fundamental difference between these industries. One of the biggest difference is that manufacturing is based on stability while construction is based on variability. Construction projects have to deal with one-off production with variable resources and projects with long delivery time. They usually have clear start and end point which is usually defined in a signed contract between the contractor and buyer. Another thing that is different between these two is that construction often takes place outside where it is exposed to external influences and it normally requires labour intensive processes. Manufacturing processes are usually planned before fabrication starts while in construction they are usually planned during fabrication <ref>Merschbrock, C. (2009). ''Lean Production Construction – Prospects for the Icelandic Construction Industry''. Reykjavík: Reykjavík University</ref>. This makes it hard for construction managers to learn from mistakes that are made during projects, also since projects are usually one-off. This is not the problem in manufacturing since they have the opportunity to constantly learn from their mistakes during design, process planning and production.

	There is a lot of waste in the construction industry. Waste can be defined as: ''“Anything different from the absolute minimum amount of resources of materials, equipment and manpower, necessary to add value to the product.”'' <ref name="multiple">[3] Aziz, R. F., & Hafez, S. M. (2013). Applying Lean Thinking in Construction and Performance Improvement. ''Alexandria Engineering Journal'', 52, 679-695</ref> As can be seen in Figure 1, 57% of all the time used in a construction project is not productive and is therefore not value adding for the client, which makes it a waste. At the same time, waste in manufacturing is only around 12%.		There is a lot of waste in the construction industry. Waste can be defined as: ''“Anything different from the absolute minimum amount of resources of materials, equipment and manpower, necessary to add value to the product.”'' <ref name="multiple">[3] Aziz, R. F., & Hafez, S. M. (2013). Applying Lean Thinking in Construction and Performance Improvement. ''Alexandria Engineering Journal'', 52, 679-695</ref> As can be seen in Figure 1, 57% of all the time used in a construction project is not productive and is therefore not value adding for the client, which makes it a waste. At the same time, waste in manufacturing is only around 12%.
Line 137:		Line 137:
	Other resources state that implementation of the LPS tool increase safety on the project site and help with managing costs since it gives a better perspective over the project’s progress<ref name="mossman"/>.		Other resources state that implementation of the LPS tool increase safety on the project site and help with managing costs since it gives a better perspective over the project’s progress<ref name="mossman"/>.

	Even though there are a lot of benefits that come with implementation of the LPS tool there are also a lot of challenges that need to be addressed. Results for the challenges can be seen in Table 2. It contains a short description of the challenge and a percentage of how often they were mentioned as a reason in the 26 case studies<ref name="solis"/>. It is interesting to see that most of the challenges are connected to the users and managers but not the tool’s structure~~. This could probably be improved by using the framework presented in chapter 3~~.		Even though there are a lot of benefits that come with implementation of the LPS tool there are also a lot of challenges that need to be addressed. Results for the challenges can be seen in Table 2. It contains a short description of the challenge and a percentage of how often they were mentioned as a reason in the 26 case studies<ref name="solis"/>. It is interesting to see that most of the challenges are connected to the users and managers but not the tool’s structure.

	{\| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"		{\| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
Line 200:		Line 200:

	== '''Conclusion''' ==		== '''Conclusion''' ==
			As mentioned in the chapter above the most common challenges in implementing the LPS tool are lack of training, resistance to change, lack of leadership and human capital. This makes it clear that the problems are not connected to the structure of the tool itself but more to human factors. Therefore the framework presented in this article is suitable to use when implementing LPS since it seeks to get all managers and planners to understand and accept how the LPS tool works during the implementation.

S155273 at 14:06, 26 September 2016

2016-09-26T14:06:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:06, 26 September 2016
Line 48:		Line 48:

	==== Weekly Work Plan ====		==== Weekly Work Plan ====
	The ''weekly work plan'' is the last and most detailed plan in the LPS system. It is the production plan that drives the production and is often called the ''commitment plan'' where the employees promise to perform a specific task on a specific day and place<ref name="bergstrom"/>. It is a list of tasks that are planned to do in a given week and shows how tasks in different parts of the project are connected.		The ''weekly work plan'' is the last and most detailed plan in the LPS system. It is the production plan that drives the production and is often called the ''commitment plan'' where the employees promise to perform a specific task on a specific day and place<ref name="bergstrom"/>. It is a list of tasks that are planned to do in a given week and shows how tasks in different parts of the project are connected. Figure 5 shows how a weekly work plan can look like using the paper ticket format for a 6 day work week.

			[[File:Mynd 3.PNG\|800px\|thumb\|center\|<b>Figure 5:</b> Weekly work plan; basic information regarding setup and follow-up]]

	The weekly work plan for the oncoming week is made on weekly production meetings. When all groups have made their individual plan, the whole plan is screened where the sequence of tasks is checked and changes are made if needed. Then the group has to promise that they will do what says on the plan and the meeting is not dismissed until all groups agree that the plan is achievable. Managers do have permission to do small changes to the plan before the end of the week as long as they inform all groups<ref name="howell"/>.		The weekly work plan for the oncoming week is made on weekly production meetings. When all groups have made their individual plan, the whole plan is screened where the sequence of tasks is checked and changes are made if needed. Then the group has to promise that they will do what says on the plan and the meeting is not dismissed until all groups agree that the plan is achievable. Managers do have permission to do small changes to the plan before the end of the week as long as they inform all groups<ref name="howell"/>.
Line 64:		Line 66:
	The goal is not to have the PPC ratio 100% but to create a working environment that supports learning and continuous improvements. Managers should seek for a PPC around 75-90%<ref name="mossman"/>. On this clearance, resources available are fully being used and problems arise so it is possible to learn from them and improve work processes in the project. A higher PPC indicates though that managers are doing more of good and well defined work with the resources they have and that of course leads to higher productivity and more efficient progress in the project based on the pull plan<ref name="ballard"/>.		The goal is not to have the PPC ratio 100% but to create a working environment that supports learning and continuous improvements. Managers should seek for a PPC around 75-90%<ref name="mossman"/>. On this clearance, resources available are fully being used and problems arise so it is possible to learn from them and improve work processes in the project. A higher PPC indicates though that managers are doing more of good and well defined work with the resources they have and that of course leads to higher productivity and more efficient progress in the project based on the pull plan<ref name="ballard"/>.

	All tasks that are not completed are analysed separately. The managers have to give reasons for why the tasks were not completed, called ''reasons for non-completion''. Examples of reasons for non-completion are: predecessor not done, change in design premises, work area not ready, resources not available, unforeseen circumstances ~~and so on~~. After the managers have announced the reasons for con-completion a ''root cause analysis'' has to be made for all of them. This is done to make sure that the given reason is actually the reason that was responsible for delaying the task. The root cause analysis is supposed to find the real reason so it is possible to learn from the mistakes and prevent it from delaying other tasks in the future. Accumulated statistics of the reasons for non-completion indicate where improvements are most needed in order to improve processes, increase work flow and reduce waste<ref name="howell"/>.		All tasks that are not completed are analysed separately. The managers have to give reasons for why the tasks were not completed, called ''reasons for non-completion''. Examples of reasons for non-completion are:
			*predecessor not done
			*change in design premises
			*work area not ready
			*resources not available
			*unforeseen circumstances.

			After the managers have announced the reasons for con-completion a ''root cause analysis'' has to be made for all of them. This is done to make sure that the given reason is actually the reason that was responsible for delaying the task. The root cause analysis is supposed to find the real reason so it is possible to learn from the mistakes and prevent it from delaying other tasks in the future. Accumulated statistics of the reasons for non-completion indicate where improvements are most needed in order to improve processes, increase work flow and reduce waste<ref name="howell"/>.

	== '''Framework for Implementing the Last Planner System''' ==		== '''Framework for Implementing the Last Planner System''' ==
Line 79:		Line 88:
	By the year 2013, around 200 case studies had been made about implementation of the LPS system in construction projects all over the world. Fernandez-Solis and his companions selected 26 of these cases in order to study the benefits and challenges of LPS implementation. These 26 cases were picked because it was thought that they gave a good transection of different projects and overview of the LPS system.		By the year 2013, around 200 case studies had been made about implementation of the LPS system in construction projects all over the world. Fernandez-Solis and his companions selected 26 of these cases in order to study the benefits and challenges of LPS implementation. These 26 cases were picked because it was thought that they gave a good transection of different projects and overview of the LPS system.

	The results for the benefits can be seen in Table 1. It is important to keep in mind that it is not possible to measure all the benefits with numbers. When that is the case the benefits have been revealed with other methods, e.g. emotions and experience about the implementation<ref name="solis">Fernandez-Solis, J., Porwal, V., Lavy, S., Shafaat, A., Rybkowski, Z., Son, K., and Lagoo, N. (2013). Survey of Motivations, Benefits, and Implementation Challenges of Last Planner System Users. J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 354-360</ref>.		The results for the benefits can be seen in Table 1 where the percentage show how many of the 26 projects considered it a benefit. It is important to keep in mind that it is not possible to measure all the benefits with numbers. When that is the case the benefits have been revealed with other methods, e.g. emotions and experience about the implementation<ref name="solis">Fernandez-Solis, J., Porwal, V., Lavy, S., Shafaat, A., Rybkowski, Z., Son, K., and Lagoo, N. (2013). Survey of Motivations, Benefits, and Implementation Challenges of Last Planner System Users. J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 354-360</ref>.

	{\| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"		{\| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
Line 189:		Line 198:
	\| 8%		\| 8%
	\|}		\|}

			== '''Conclusion''' ==

S155273 at 12:58, 26 September 2016

2016-09-26T12:58:31Z

Show changes

Sveinnis: /* Annotated Bibliography */

2016-09-23T09:32:50Z

Annotated Bibliography

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:32, 23 September 2016
Line 201:		Line 201:

	Fernandez-Solis, J., Porwal, V., Lavy, S., Shafaat, A., Rybkowski, Z., Son, K., and Lagoo, N. (2013). ''Survey of Motivations, Benefits, and Implementation Challenges of Last Planner System Users''. J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 354-360.		Fernandez-Solis, J., Porwal, V., Lavy, S., Shafaat, A., Rybkowski, Z., Son, K., and Lagoo, N. (2013). ''Survey of Motivations, Benefits, and Implementation Challenges of Last Planner System Users''. J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 354-360.
	:This article discusses the challenges and benefits of choosing LPS as a management tool. 26 cases studies on implementation of the LPS are deeply analysed in order to find the main challenges and benefits of the implementation.		:This article discusses the challenges and benefits of choosing LPS as a management tool. 26 cases studies on implementation of the LPS are deeply analysed in order to find the main challenges and benefits of the implementation.

	== '''References''' ==		== '''References''' ==
	<references>		<references>

S155273 at 12:09, 16 September 2016

2016-09-16T12:09:35Z

Show changes

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:08, 26 September 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
	The manufacturing industry has for a long time been dealing with waste and inefficient production. To manage this, lean management has been used to make the production more efficient. The lean ideology has now been adjusted to the construction industry and is called Lean Construction (LC). But LC did not become popular in the construction projects until the Last Planner System (LPS) was introduced as a lean management tool. LPS is a tool that covers both project management and planning in a way that those who do the work also plan it. All managers are activated in the planning process which ensures that teamwork is one of the main focuses. The idea behind LPS is to create a steady flow by minimizing waste and constantly implementing reformation, all in order to increase the value for the customer.		The manufacturing industry has for a long time been dealing with waste and inefficient production. To manage this, lean management has been used to make the production more efficient. The lean ideology has now been adjusted to the construction industry and is called Lean Construction (LC). But LC did not become popular in the construction projects until the Last Planner System (LPS) was introduced as a lean management tool. LPS is a tool that covers both project management and planning in a way that those who do the work also plan it. All managers are activated in the planning process which ensures that teamwork is one of the main focuses. The idea behind LPS is to create a steady flow by minimizing waste and constantly implementing reformation, all in order to increase the value for the customer.

	Before the Last Planner System is described in detail it is important to understand that ~~the~~ construction ~~industry is~~ different from manufacturing and that lean management does not work the same in both. This article will first go over characteristics of ~~the~~ construction ~~industry~~ compared to ~~the~~ manufacturing ~~industry~~. After that, the LPS tool will be described in detail and a framework for its implementation in construction projects will be given. In the end, benefits and challenges due to implementation of the LPS tool are listed.		Before the Last Planner System is described in detail it is important to understand that construction projects are different from manufacturing and that lean management does not work the same in both. This article will first go over characteristics of construction projects compared to characteristics of manufacturing. After that, the LPS tool will be described in detail and a framework for its implementation in construction projects will be given. In the end, benefits and challenges due to implementation of the LPS tool are listed.



Line 19:		Line 18:
	The LPS tool consists of four phases. These phases can be seen on Figure 2 and how their internal connection makes the whole LPS process. In the first phase there is a lot of uncertainty which reduces with going down the figure. The same goes for details that have to be reckoned with, it is not done much in the first phase but increases with every step down. It is also necessary to keep in mind that when going between phases it is important to revalue what should be done with what can be done <ref name="howell">Howell, G. A. (2002). ''A Guide to the Last PlannerTM for Costruction Foreman and Supervisors''. Arlington, VA: Lean Construction Institute</ref>.		The LPS tool consists of four phases. These phases can be seen on Figure 2 and how their internal connection makes the whole LPS process. In the first phase there is a lot of uncertainty which reduces with going down the figure. The same goes for details that have to be reckoned with, it is not done much in the first phase but increases with every step down. It is also necessary to keep in mind that when going between phases it is important to revalue what should be done with what can be done <ref name="howell">Howell, G. A. (2002). ''A Guide to the Last PlannerTM for Costruction Foreman and Supervisors''. Arlington, VA: Lean Construction Institute</ref>.

	[[File:~~howell~~.~~png~~\|800px\|thumb\|center\|<b>Figure 2:</b> Description of the four phases in the LPS tool <ref name="howell"/>]]		[[File:Nyttnytt.PNG\|800px\|thumb\|center\|<b>Figure 2:</b> Description of the four phases in the LPS tool <ref name="howell"/>]]

	The ''shielding production'', shown in Figure 2, is an important part of the LPS tool. It ''“shields”'' the weekly work plan from uncertainty by only letting tasks of good quality through to the weekly plan. Tasks that do not fulfill quality requirements go back to preparation. By doing this, weekly plans get more reliable and the work flow increases <ref>Ballard, G., & Howoll, G. (1998). ''Shielding Production: An Essential Step in Production Control''. Journal of Construction Management, 124(1), 11-17</ref>.		The ''shielding production'', shown in Figure 2, is an important part of the LPS tool. It ''“shields”'' the weekly work plan from uncertainty by only letting tasks of good quality through to the weekly plan. Tasks that do not fulfill quality requirements go back to preparation. By doing this, weekly plans get more reliable and the work flow increases <ref>Ballard, G., & Howoll, G. (1998). ''Shielding Production: An Essential Step in Production Control''. Journal of Construction Management, 124(1), 11-17</ref>.
Line 41:		Line 40:
	[[File:Mynd 2.PNG\|800px\|thumb\|center\|<b>Figure 4:</b> Lookahead plan; tasks form the pull plan, 6 weeks in advance, are broken down into daily units, put on the weekly work plan and screened.]]		[[File:Mynd 2.PNG\|800px\|thumb\|center\|<b>Figure 4:</b> Lookahead plan; tasks form the pull plan, 6 weeks in advance, are broken down into daily units, put on the weekly work plan and screened.]]

	The subtasks are screened to make sure that everything is or will be ready when the work starts. e.g. the design has to be done, resources have to be available, predecessors have to be done, the work area has to ready for work with enough men power on site as well as all terms of the contract have to be fulfilled<ref name="howell"/>. If it appears that one or more factor will prevent the task from starting on time, the factor is placed on the ''constraint log''. The constraint log is supposed to solve constraints in a systematic way to ensure a steady production by making someone responsible for solving the constraint in time<ref name="ballard"/>.		The subtasks are screened to make sure that everything is or will be ready when the work starts. e.g. the design has to be done, resources have to be available, predecessors have to be done, the work area has to be ready for work with enough men power on site as well as all terms of the contract have to be fulfilled<ref name="howell"/>. If it appears that one or more factor will prevent the task from starting on time, the factor is placed on the ''constraint log''. The constraint log is supposed to solve constraints in a systematic way to ensure a steady production by making someone responsible for solving the constraint in time<ref name="ballard"/>.

	Another important part of the lookahead plan is to make detailed plans about how the work should be done in terms of safety, environment and quality issues<ref name="howell"/>. So when a task is put on the lookahead plan, it has to be checked if this detailed plan exists. If not, then a ''first-run study'' has to be made by a cross functional team and those who do the work. The first-run study is based on the ''PCDA-method'', a lean management tool, which is about going through four steps when performing work: planning, doing, checking and acting<ref name="ballard"/>.		Another important part of the lookahead plan is to make detailed plans about how the work should be done in terms of safety, environment and quality issues<ref name="howell"/>. So when a task is put on the lookahead plan, it has to be checked if this detailed plan exists. If not, then a ''first-run study'' has to be made by a cross functional team and those who do the work. The first-run study is based on the ''PCDA-method'', a lean management tool, which is about going through four steps when performing work: planning, doing, checking and acting<ref name="ballard"/>.
Line 76:		Line 75:

	== '''Framework for Implementing the Last Planner System''' ==		== '''Framework for Implementing the Last Planner System''' ==
	The framework presented in this article comes from Hamzeh and Bergstrom. It is based on experience and research from other implementation of the LPS tool in construction projects. They found out that the most common barriers in implementing the LPS tool were lack of leadership, resistance to change and poor implementation planning. Their framework makes the implementation plan take more consideration to philosophical and social matters since the implementation process can be lingering and owners, top managers and all others are required to commit to the process.		The framework presented in this article comes from Hamzeh and Bergstrom. It is based on experience and research from other implementation of the LPS tool in construction projects. They found out that the most common barriers in implementing the LPS tool were lack of leadership, resistance to change and poor implementation planning. Their framework makes the implementation plan take more consideration to philosophical and social matters since the implementation process can be lingering and owners, top managers and all others are required to commit to the process. The framework consist of the following:
	::*Get support from the project’s owner and top management of the construction organisation.		::*Get support from the project’s owner and top management of the construction organisation.
	::*Have a cross-functional group that is responsible for reaching the goal of the implementation.		::*Have a cross-functional group that is responsible for reaching the goal of the implementation.