Requirements for developing production planning and control systems for engineer-to-order industrialized building systems

References

• Bagni, G., et al., 2021. Systematic review and discussion of production control systems that emerged between 1999 and 2018. Production planning and control, 32 (7), 511–525.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ballard, G., and Arbulu, R., 2004. Making prefabrication lean. In: Proceedings of the 12th annual conference of the international group for lean construction. Copenhagen: IGLC.
   Google Scholar
• Ballard, G., and Howell, G., 1998. Shielding production: essential step in production control. Journal of construction engineering and management, 124 (1), 18–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ballard, G., and Tommelein, I., 2012. Lean management methods for complex projects. Engineering Project organization journal, 2 (1–2), 85–96.
   Google Scholar
• Ballard, G., and Tommelein, I. D., 2020. 2020 Current process benchmark for the last planner system of project planning and control.
   Google Scholar
• Ballard, G., Harper, N., and Zabelle, T., 2002. An application of lean concepts and techniques to precast concrete fabrication. In: Proceedings of the 10th annual conference of the international group for lean construction, 6-8 Aug 2002, Gramado, Brazil.
   Google Scholar
• Ballard, G., Harper, N., and Zabelle, T., 2003. Learning to see work flow: an application of lean concepts to precast concrete fabrication. Engineering, construction and architectural management, 10 (1), 6–14.
   Google Scholar
• Ballard, H.G., 2000. The last planner system of production control. England: University of Birmingham.
   Google Scholar
• Bataglin, F.S., et al., 2020. Model for planning and controlling the delivery and assembly of engineer-to-order prefabricated building systems: Exploring synergies between lean and BIM. Canadian journal of civil engineering, 47 (2), 165–177.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertrand, J., and Muntslag, D.R., 1993. Production control in engineer-to-order firms. International journal of production economics, 30–31 (0), 3–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertrand, J., and Van Ooijen, H., 2002. Workload based order release and productivity: a missing link. Production planning & control, 13 (7), 37–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bortolini, R., Formoso, C.T., and Viana, D.D., 2019. Site logistics planning and control for engineer-to-order prefabricated building systems using BIM 4D modeling. Automation in construction, 98, 248–264.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulhoes, I. R., and Picchi, F. A., 2008. Continuous flow for structural design in prefabricated concrete structures. In: P. Tzortzopoulos and M. Kagioglou, eds. 16th Annual conference of the international group for lean construction. Manchester, UK, 169–181.
   Google Scholar
• Daget, Y., and Zhang, H., 2018. Evaluation of Experts’ Preferences for Selection of Suitable Industrialized Building Systems. MATEC web of conferences, 206, 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Dallasega, P., Revolti, A., Follini, C., Schimanski, C.P., and Matt, D.T., 2019. BIM-based construction progress measurement of non-repetitive HVAC installation works. In: Proceedings of 27th annual conference of the international group for lean construction (IGLC). Italy: Free University of Bozen-Bolzano.
   Google Scholar
• Elfving, J. A., 2003. Exploration of opportunities to reduce lead times for engineered-to-order products. Dissertation. University of California, Berkeley.
   Google Scholar
• Elfving, J.A., Tommelein, I.D., Ballard, H.G., and Ballard, G., 2004. Improving the delivery process for engineered-to-order products - lessons learned from power distribution equipment. In: S. Bertelsen and C.T. Formoso, eds. 12th Annual conference of the international group for lean construction. Helsingør, Denmark.
   Google Scholar
• Gosling, J., and Naim, M.M., 2009. Engineer-to-order supply chain management: A literature review and research agenda. International journal of production economics, 122 (2), 741–754.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gosling, J., et al., 2014. Principles for the design and operation of engineer-to-order supply chains in the construction sector. Production planning & control, 26 (3), 203–218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamzeh, F., Ballard, G., and Tommelein, I.D., 2009. Is the Last Planner® System applicable to design?-A case study. In: Proceedings of the 17th annual conference of the international group for lean construction. Taiwan: IGLC.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes-Roth, B., and Hayes-Roth, F., 1979. A cognitive model of planning. Cognitive science, 3, 275–310.
   Google Scholar
• Holmstrom, J., et al., 2009. Bridging practice and theory: a design science approach. Decision Sciences, 40 (1), 65–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopp, W., and Spearman, M., 2000. Factory physics. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
   Google Scholar
• Hopp, W., and Spearman, M., 2004. To pull or not to pull: what is the question? Manufacturing and service operations management, 6 (2), 133–148.
   Google Scholar
• Ioannou, G., and Dimitriou, S., 2012. Lead time estimation in MRP/ERP for make-to-order manufacturing systems. International journal of production economics, 139 (2), 551–563.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston, R., and Brennan, M., 1996. Planning or organizing: The implications of theories of activity for management of operations. Omega, 24 (4), 367–384.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerosuo, H., Mäki, T., Codinhoto, R., Koskela, L., and Miettinen, R., 2012. In time at last–adaption of Last Planner tools for the design phase of a building project. In: Proceedings of the 20th annual meeting of the international group for lean construction. San Diego: IGLC.
   Google Scholar
• Kingsman, B., 2000. Modelling input–output workload control for dynamic capacity planning in production planning systems. International journal of production economics, 68 (1), 73–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kjersem, K., and Emblemsvåg, J., 2014. Literature Review on Planning Design and Engineering Activities in Shipbuilding. In: B.T. Kalsaas, L. Koskela, and T.A. Saurin, eds. 22nd Annual conference of the international group for lean construction. Molde, Norway: Logistics Department, Molde University College.
   Google Scholar
• Koskela, L., and Howell, G., 2002. The underlying theory of project management is obsolete. In: Proceedings of the PMI research conference. Seattle: PMI, 293–302.
   Google Scholar
• Koskela, L., 1992. Application of the new philosophy to construction. Finland: VTT Building Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Lidelöw, H., and Olofsson, T., 2016. The structure and predefinition of the industrialized construction value chain. In: ICCREM 2016: BIM Application and Offsite Construction - Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Construction and Real Estate Management. 117–125.
   Google Scholar
• Little, D., et al., 2000. Integrated planning and scheduling in the engineer-to-order sector. International journal of computer integrated manufacturing, 13, 545–554.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matt, D.T., Dallasega, P., and Rauch, E., 2014. Synchronization of the manufacturing process and on-site installation in ETO companies. Procedia CIRP, 17, 457–462.
   Google Scholar
• Powell, D., et al., 2014. A new set of principles for pursuing the lean ideal in engineer-to-order manufacturers. Procedia CIRP, 17, 571–576.
   Google Scholar
• Rosas, E., Rios, L., and Carrera, D., 2011. Implementing last planner in open pit mining projects: case study. In: J. Rooke and B. Dave, eds. 19th Annual conference of the international group for lean construction. Lima.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks, R., Akinci, B., and Ergen, E., 2003. 3D modeling and real-time monitoring in support of lean production of engineered-to-order precast concrete buildings. In: Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, Virginia, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Shingo, S., 1989. A study of the Toyota production system: from an industrial engineering viewpoint. Cambridge: Productivity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Skjelbred, S., Fossheim, M.E., and Drevland, F., 2015. Comparing different approaches to site organization and logistics: multiple case studies. In: Seppänen, O., González, V. A. & Arroyo, P., 23rd annual conference of the international group for lean construction, 13–22.
   Google Scholar
• Soman, C.A., et al., 2004. Combined make-to-order and make-to-stock in a food production system. International journal of production economics, 90 (2), 223–235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevenson, M., Hendry, L.C., and Kingsman, B., 2005. A review of production planning and control: the applicability of key concepts to the make-to-order industry. International journal of production research, 54 (5), 869-898.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suri, R., 1998. Quick response manufacturing: a companywide approach to reducing lead times. Portland, Oregon: Productivity Press Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Tommelein, Iris, Ballard, Glenn, 2020 Current Process Benchmark for the Last Planner® System of Project Planning and Control, Project Production Systems Laboratory (P2SL), University of California, Berkeley, 2021,
   Google Scholar
• Tommelein, I. D., Ballard, G., and Kaminsky, P., 2009. Supply chain management for lean project delivery (Chap. 6). In: W.J. O’Brien, C.T. Formoso, R. Vrijhoef, and K. London, eds. Construction supply chain management handbook. New York: CRC Press, 1–22.
   Google Scholar
• Tommelein, I., 1998. Pull-driven scheduling for pipe-spool installation: simulation of a lean construction technique. Journal of construction engineering and management, 124 (August), 279–288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trebbe, M., Hartmann, T., and Dorée, A., 2015. 4D CAD models to support the coordination of construction activities between contractors. Automation in construction, 49 (Part A), 83–91.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ulrich, K. T., and Eppinger, S. D., 2004. Product design and development. California: University of California, McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
   Google Scholar
• Van Aken, J., 2004. Management research based on the paradigm of the design sciences: the quest for field-tested and grounded technological rules. Journal of management studies, 41 (2), 219–246.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Hoek, R.I., 2000. The thesis of leagility revisited. International journal of agile management systems, 2 (3), 196–201.
   Google Scholar
• Viana, D.D., Bulhoes, I., and Formoso, C.T., 2013. Guidelines for integrated planning and control of engineer-to-order. In: Proceedings of the 21st annual meeting of the international group for lean construction, (September), 549–558.
   Google Scholar
• Wahlers, J., and Cox, J., 1994. Competitive factors and performance measurement: applying the theory of constraints to meet customer needs. International journal of production economics, 37, 229–240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weber, S., 2010. Design science research: Paradigm or approach? In: 16th Americas conference on information systems 2010, AMCIS 2010, 5228–5236.
   Google Scholar
• Wesz, J., Formoso, C.T., and Tzortzopoulos, P., 2018. Planning and controlling design in engineered-to-order prefabricated building systems. Engineering, CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECTURAL MANAGEMENT, 25 (2), 134–152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiendahl, H.-H., Von Cieminski, G., and Wiendahl, H.-P., 2005. Stumbling blocks of PPC: towards the holistic configuration of PPC systems. Production planning & control, 16, 634–651.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wight, O., 1970. Input/output control a real handle on lead time. Production and inventory management, 11 (3), 9–31.
   Google Scholar