Drivers constraints and the future of off-site manufacture in Australia.

Much has been written on Off-site Manufacture (OSM) in construction, particularly regarding the perceived benefits and barriers to implementation. However, very little understanding of the state of OSM in the Australian construction industry exists. A ‘scoping study' has recently been undertaken to determine the ‘state-of-the-art’ of OSM in Australia. This involved several industry workshops, interviews and case studies across four major states of Australia. The study surveyed a range of suppliers across the construction supply-chain, incorporating the civil, commercial and housing segments of the market. This revealed that skills shortages and lack of adequate OSM knowledge are generally the greatest issues facing OSM in Australia. The drivers and constraints that emerged from the research were, in large measure, consistent with those found in the US and UK, although some Australian anomalies are evident, such as the geographical disparity of markets. A comparative analysis with similar studies in the UK and US is reported, illustrating both the drivers and constraints confronting the industry in Australia. OSM uptake into the future is however dependent on many factors, not least of which is a better understanding of the construction process and its associated costs

Explaining the Increase in the Australian Average House Completion Time:Activity-based versus Workflow-based Approach

The Australian house building industry has been facing an increase in the average house completion time in the last decade. This increase in some states is quite dramatic. For instance, Western Australia has faced a 70 percent increase in the average house completion time during this period. This paper uses two planning approaches to explain this; i) the activity-based planning methods and ii) the workflow-based planning methods. In addition, this research investigates the strengths and weaknesses of these two planning approaches in explaining the behaviour of the house building industry. For this purpose, a national case study and five state case studies including Victoria, Western Australia, New South Wales, Queensland and South Australia have been used. The data related to the key parameters have been collected and their correlation with the average house completion time has been investigated. These key parameters include the average house floor area, the number of house completions and the number of houses under construction. The reasons for the increasing trend of the average house completion time have been postulated in all case studies. According to this research, the increase in the average house completion time cannot be explained using activity-based planning methods. In contrast, by using workflow-based planning methods, it has been shown that the average house completion time is correlated with the number of houses under construction. This paper shows that the average completion time is influenced directly by the workflow in the house building industry and that workflow planning should be the basis for the house building industry planning

Assessing Project Suitability for Off-site Production

Implementation of off-site production on construction projects isoften hindered by a number of specific process and procurementconstraints. These constraints are largely influenced by decisionswithin the control of construction clients, suggesting that theyhave a significant influence over the adoption of off-site productioninto construction projects. However, an appreciation of the effectof these constraints has been lacking. Addressing this need, anoff-site production implementation assessment instrument thatresides within a larger toolkit (IMMPREST) was developed usingquestionnaire survey data and a series of industrial workshops.IMMPREST is an interactive electronic toolkit developed byLoughborough University (UK), in conjunction with eleven industrialpartners, which facilitates the evaluation of benefit arising fromuse of off-site production within construction. It identifies thefactors that need to be considered for an evaluation, the datarequired to assess the effect of these factors, and where therequired data resides within the supply chain. Development ofthe implementation assessment instrument is discussed, whilstalso making reference to the role that clients can play in creatingthe process and procurement conditions that promote rather thanconstrain the adoption of off-site production

OFF-SITE PRODUCTION: EVALUATING THE DRIVERS AND CONSTRAINTS

ABSTRACT The decision making process used to evaluate to what extent a component or building system should be produced off-site is inadequate within the industry. Whilst the potential benefits of off-site production (OSP) are commonly cited when justifying an OSP approach, no clear method for assessing the applicability and overall benefit of these solutions exist. Common methods of evaluation simply take material, labour and transportation costs into account when comparing various options, often disregarding other cost-related items such as site facilities, crane use and rectification of works. These cost factors are usually buried within the nebulous preliminaries figure, with little reference to the building approach taken. Further, softer issues such as health and safety, effects on management and process benefits are either implicit or disregarded within these comparison exercises. Additionally, the factors that affect the suitability of OSP as a design solution are not formally defined, these are the factors that drive and/or constrain the design decision making

Safety climate in conditions of construction subcontracting: a multi‐level analysis

A multi‐level safety climate model was tested in the Australian construction industry. Subcontracted workers’ perceptions of the organizational safety response (OSR) and supervisor safety response (SSR) in their own organization and that of the principal contractor were measured using a safety climate survey administered at a large hospital construction project in Melbourne. One hundred and fourteen construction workers completed the survey, representing nine subcontractors engaged at the project. Two requisite conditions for the existence of group‐level safety climates, i.e. (1) within‐group homogeneity; and (2) between‐group variation were satisfied for perceptions of subcontractors’ OSR and SSR. This supports the contention that subcontractors working in a single construction project exhibit a unique group‐level safety climate. Subcontracted workers also discriminated between group‐level safety climates (i.e. the SSR) in their own and in the principal contractor’s organizations. The results suggest some cross‐level influence. Perceptions of the SSR were positively predicted by perceptions of the OSR in both the principal and subcontractor organizations. Perceptions of the OSR of the principal contractor were also a significant predictor of the perceived OSR and SSR in the subcontractor organizations. Perceptions of the subcontractors’ SSR were a significant predictor of the rate of lost‐time and medical treatment incidents reported by the subcontractor. Although perceptions of the principal contractor’s SSR were not directly related to subcontractors’ injury rates, they were a significant predictor of subcontractors’ SSR, revealing an indirect link. The results suggest that supervisory personnel (e.g. foremen and leading hands) play an important role in shaping safety performance in subcontracted workgroups.Occupational health and safety, organizational safety response, supervisor safety response, lost‐time injuries, medical treatment injuries,

Properties of group safety climate in construction: the development and evaluation of a typology

A safety climate survey was conducted in three Australian construction industry organizations. Workers’ perceptions of their supervisors’ safety response (SSR) and co‐workers’ safety response (CSR) were measured as facets of group safety climate. A two‐dimensional schema was developed based upon the strength and the level of group safety climate. The resulting framework was used to position the 40 workgroups included in the sample within one of four group safety climate types. A non‐parametric Kruskal Wallis test revealed that workgroups in which members share a strong consensus that co‐workers should treat safety as a priority had a significantly lower injury frequency rate than other workgroups in the sample. While no significant differences between the injury frequency rates of workgroups positioned in the four safety climate types were found for the other facets of group safety climate, workgroups with strong and high (i.e. strongly supportive) safety climates related to supervisors’ safety expectations and co‐workers’ actual safety behaviour reported injury frequency rates on average two‐thirds the magnitude of the remaining workgroups in the sample. Although limited by the reliance on retrospective and insensitive measurement for the dependent variable (i.e. injury frequency rates), the research provides preliminary evidence for the importance of considering both the strength and level of group safety climates in the construction industry. Future research should seek to replicate and extend this research by examining the antecedents of group safety climate strength and level in the construction context.Group safety climate, supervisors’ safety response, co‐workers’ safety response, climate strength, climate level,