Blueprinting construction logistics services for quality improvement

Figures & data

Figure 1. The relationship between a construction project, the construction process and the supply process, based on Friblick (2000) and Thunberg (2016).

A model of a construction project, showing the needed coordination between the supply process and the construction process and how these two processes converge at the on-site production.

Table 1. Example of studies on modularity in construction.

Reference	Purpose	Focus	Method	Key findings
Voordijk et al. (2006)	“to assess the applicability of Fine’s three-dimensional modularity concept as a tool to describe and to analyse the alignment of product, process, and supply chain architectures”	Application of the concept of modularity to describe and analyse alignment of product, process, and supply chain architectures. Focus on building’s interior and exterior components and coordination between actors.	A three-company case study, all case companies are contractors in the construction industry.	To provide value in construction modularity of products needs a more detailed specified product architecture e.g. separating different hierarchical layers, process modularity needs to have specified system boundaries and supply chain modularity should focus networks and ICT enabled connecting within the networks.
Pero et al. (2015)	“the objective of this research lies in investigating the concept of modularity within ETO [Engineering To Order] sectors, particularly focussing on the construction and shipbuilding industries. The goal is to cast light on the relationship between modularity and SC [supply chain] management, mainly in terms of collaboration and information—sharing between SC partners”.	How modularity can impact supply chain integration, identifying cases in three clusters: modular products and loosely coupled SCs, traditional (non-modular) products and integrated SC, and pre-assembled products and modular SC.	An explorative case study approach with five organisations (four in construction industry and one in ship building), data collected through interviews.	Proposes a definition of product modularity in construction, showing that as product modularity increased there is less integration in the supply chain, and that modularity has a positive impact on supply chain performance. Further, a number of contingent variables were identified, e.g. customisation and product size.
Peltokorpi et al. (2018)	“to develop a framework for identifying and classifying modularisation strategies in construction according to their suitability for attaining the specific objectives set for a building investment”.	Shifting focus from the effects of modularisation on project-level, e.g. improved productivity, reduced costs, and fewer onsite activities to its effect on reaching investment objectives, e.g. flexibility in use and maintenance.	A multiple case study where primary and secondary data was collected from nine construction firms in three countries.	Argues that modularisation can aid in achieving investment objectives, but that ways to achieve this vary from modularisation strategies being project organisation-driven to collaborative, integrated or supplier-driven.
Maxwell et al. (2019)	to "show how logistics strategies for IHB [Industrialised House Building] might emerge as design-led ‘logistics platforms’ that utilise the principles of standardisation, modularity, and reusability in order to achieve the flexibility demanded by construction”.	Focus on logistic strategies supportive of IHB, identifying different construction logistics strategies apt for different projects and business models.	Two case studies from the Swedish construction industry, data collected through correspondence and interviews.	Design-thinking as a useful approach to documenting and organising modular solutions on a logistics platform. This approach would support a re-usable and flexible logistic strategy for IHB, feasible for the changing nature of construction,
Gravina et al. (2021)	“to examine how work structing can be applied to address the trade-off between value and flow in repetitive construction projects”.	Problematizing the trade-off between production flow and individual customer value and developing a production system based on modularisation.	A “traditional” production system and five different system designs are identified based on literature and the authors’ experience: Traditional, Information flow, Lean Management Model, Delayed Product Differentiation, Fit-Out Company, and Ecosystem Platform.	Proposing a new system design labelled product/process modularisation. This design builds on identified strength of best functioning system designs such as application of a platform concept (standardised to which customised parts are added), and application of product modularisation.

Figure 2. Research design; data collection stages and their focus. Arrows indicate how the different stages are linked and how their results feed into each other and combined contribute towards the purpose.

Tree stages of data collection based on key respondent interviews, concept mapping, and service blueprinting. These three together supports a focus on quality improvements in construction logistics by identifying enablers of improvements as well as by illustrating service modularity. Altogether the data collection methods and their focus support fulfilling the purpose.

Table 2. Quality criteria applied to enhance validity and reliability.

Criteria	Actions taken
Credibility	Adoption of appropriate, well recognised research methods (interviews, concept mapping, workshop format with practitioners) Research team with good knowledge about the topic studied Triangulation via use of different methods, different types of informants, and different sites (services as multi-actor phenomena studied through a multi-actor research design) Iterative questioning in data collection dialogues (interviews, workshops) Member checks of data collected, and interpretations formed by presenting preliminary findings at two CMB community meetings Data coding and analysis following established methods
Dependability	Employment of “overlapping methods” Thorough methodological description to allow study to be repeated Use of common questions/research protocol, as e.g. the predefined interview questions exemplified in this paper
Confirmability	Triangulation to reduce effect of investigator bias Methodological description to allow study to allow integrity of research results to be scrutinised
Transferability	Use of multiple respondents from multiple actors involved in logistics services in a construction project Verification of initial framework with practitioners (early on, mid-project, and end-of-project presentation in the CMB group) Validation of the assessment in the priority matrix by a representative from a practitioner involved in the illustrative CLS Provision of data to establish context of study and detailed description of phenomenon in question to allow comparisons to be made

Figure 3. Nine clusters of aspects critical for improvement work.

Nine clusters of enablers of improvements of construction logistics services in a plot of data points, the placing of the data points show how closely related they are to each other, thereby forming clusters.

Table 3. Enablers of improvements of construction logistics services – description and examples.

Enabler	Description	Examples of responses: To work with improvements of construction logistics services and their results we need…
Directive outlining requirements	Clear, formal expectations and intended direction for using CLS.	… efficient logistics handling formally demanded from the client; … to involve all actors in the supply chain by interest and demand stipulated already in the client’s procurement.
Envisioning and buy-in	Visionary, forward-oriented approach and for management to see potential in CLS not only as a present phenomenon but also in the future.	… a will to invest in construction logistics services despite benefits not being direct but following later when having established efficient flows; … support from top management, as well as project management.
Holistic approach	Understand CLS as a multi-actor phenomenon that needs to be followed up and agreed on long-term and cross actors.	… the sector to view efficient construction logistics as an enabler of productivity improvements and not solely as a problem solver; … the possibility to weight increased resources/costs in some parts against decreased resources/costs in other parts of the project or supply chain.
Practices and forums for learning	Practices and processes supporting consolidation of transfer of learnings and improvements between projects.	… better methods to spread learnings between projects; … better forums to spread learnings between projects; … an improvement forum discussing results from improvements and deciding on further improvement work.
Joint approach	Collaborative and open relations cross actors.	… long-term collaboration between actors; … collaboration and openness between multiple actors/steps on the supply chain.
Roles, mandates, and responsibilities	Clear roles and mandates in relation to CLS. Taking long-term responsibility for CLS cross actors.	… clear allocation of roles and mandates in the area of construction logistics services; … an ”owner” of all work with construction logistics throughout the entire construction process.
Digitalised transparency	Digital systems supporting collaboration and follow-up/control.	… digital systems with standardised coding that supports the flow throughout the process; … digital solutions supporting optimisation, collaboration, and assessments of, for example, climate related requirements.
Data measurement	Tangible effects measured on many dimensions allowing assessment, as well as multidimensional comparisons.	…data collection and continuous reporting of key performance indicators; …more measurements to make comparisons of different construction logistics services easier.
Managing performance	Making measurements and analytics actional for specific CLS.	…concrete quantified examples of benefits or savings; …feedback to project management about the construction

Figure 4. Service blueprint of the studied CLS.

Activities in a construction logistics set-up displayed as boxes, placed on the vertical axis based on them being: physical evidence, customer action, on stage visible action, backstage invisible action, or support processes. Activities are places chronologically on the horizontal axis. The activities are clustered into four service modules: customer adaptation, back-office, on-site interface, and co-ordination interface.

Table 4. Prioritisation matrix for the improvement of construction logistics services based on the CLS blueprinted in Figure 4.

Principles of quality management		Customer focus		Continuous improvements
						Teamwork
Enablers for improvement work		Envisioning and buy-i	Managing performance	Directive outlining requirements	Data measurement	Practices and forum for learning	Digitalised transparency	Holistic approach	Joint approach	Roles, mandates, and responsibilities
Service modules	SM1: Customer adaptation	H	M	H	L	H	L	M	H	M
	SM2: Back-office	L	H	H	M	L	M	L	L	H
	SM3: On-site interface	H	L	M	H	L	L	L	L	H
	SM4: Co-ordination interface	M	H	M	H	M	M	M	H	M

Enablers are considered being present to a low (L) extent, medium (M) extent, or high (H) extent.

Friblick, F., 2000. Supply chain management in the construction industry – opportunity or Utopia? Degree licentiate in engineering. Lund University.

 Google Scholar

Thunberg, M., 2016. Developing a framework for supply chain planning in construction. Doctoral thesis. Linköping University.

 Google Scholar

Voordijk, H., Meijboom, B., and de Haan, J., 2006. Modularity in supply chains: a multiple case study in the construction industry. International journal of operations & production management, 26 (6), 600–618.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Pero, M., Stößlein, M., and Cigolini, R., 2015. Linking product modularity to supply chain integration in the construction and shipbuilding industries. International journal of production economics, 170, 602–615.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Peltokorpi, A., et al., 2018. Categorizing modularization strategies to achieve various objectives of building investments. Construction management and economics, 36 (1), 32–48.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Maxwell, D., et al., 2019. Logistics strategy for industrialised house building. In: Modular and offsite construction (MOC) summit proceedings, 259–267.

 Google Scholar

Gravina da Rocha, C., Korb, S., and Sacks, R. 2022. Work structuring and product design for customized repetitive projects. Construction Management and Economics, 40(7–8), 526–547.

 Google Scholar

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the first author, upon reasonable request.