Lean Methodologies and Techniques For Modular Construction: Chronological and Critical Review

Lean Methodologies and Techniques for
Modular Construction: Chronological and Critical Review

Filomena Innella 1; Mehrdad Arashpour, M.ASCE 2; and Yu Bai 3
Abstract: Modular construction uses building modules manufactured inside the controlled environment of factories to be transported and
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by The University of Adelaide on 05/20/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
assembled on site. Modular construction can be considered as a hybrid of manufacturing and construction, and in many ways lends itself to
lean production. Lean production, originating in the automotive industry, permits significant improvements in terms of productivity and
quality. The latest challenge of lean production is its implementation in the modular building industry, where the full potential in terms
of productivity is yet to be achieved. The paper discusses the implementation of lean techniques in the modular building industry, including
all the production process stages (i.e., design, manufacturing, transportation, assembly on site, and supply chain) through a systematic review.
Moreover, the paper provides a chronological and comprehensive review of lean methodologies and tools in manufacturing and traditional
construction industries to further investigate the interface of lean and modular construction. This may assist practitioners with an overview
of lean strategies and associated potential benefits and obstacles for future case studies. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001712.
© 2019 American Society of Civil Engineers.
Author keywords: Lean production; Lean construction; Modular building; Prefabrication; Waste.
Introduction (Pennisi Real Estate 2017), and the SOHO Tower in Darwin with
29 levels completed in 2014 (Gardiner 2015).
Modular buildings have become a new trend in construction, at- Modular construction systems are characterized by three differ-
tracting interest from industry worldwide. Modular construction ent principles: prefabrication, standardization, and dimensional
is based on the use of panelized members or full volumetric units, coordination (Yu et al. 2013). Prefabrication, in particular, allows
produced off-site in factories and transported to the intended site construction to move from a craft base to a manufacturing base.
for assembly (Ferdous et al. 2019). Fig. 1 shows building modules However, it has been acknowledged that substantial differences do
in different stages, from realization inside the factory up to the in- exist between manufacturing and construction practices. These dif-
stallation phase. Prefabricated modules have a wide range of appli- ferences are categorized into site production (or site construction),
cations due to their versatility. They can be made using different one-of-a-kind product, temporary multiorganization (Bertelsen
materials (e.g., timber, steel, concrete, and composites) and they 2003; Koskela 1992, 2000; Vrijhoef and Koskela 2005), and com-
can be designed for multiple intended uses (e.g., residential build- plexity (Bertelsen 2003). In terms of site production, construction
ings, schools, and hospitals). It has been realized and promoted that is not a fixed-base industry, unlike production in areas such as au-
modularization is not just construction using modules, but a com- tomotive, airplane, or ship manufacturing. In addition, construction
pletely new construction process (Bertelsen 2005). The benefits de- is a one-of-a-kind production. This means exclusive and unique
rived from the use of modular construction rather than traditional building products are designed in order to comply with the different
construction are related to the reduction of material waste (Nikmehr requests of clients. Repetitiveness is not featured in traditional con-
et al. 2017), improved safety (Arashpour et al. 2016), minimization struction. Although modular buildings are characterized by a higher
of building time (Ahmadian et al. 2016), and improved quality degree of standardization, they may still have access to a high level
(Boyd et al. 2013). All of these reasons have led the construction of customization. Moreover, the construction process is always dif-
industry to move its commercial interests from stick-built con- ferent depending on the location and environment of the building
struction toward modular construction. Examples of structures site, the economic situation of the country, and the skills of con-
constructed with this technique include the 24-level building tractors (Vrijhoef and Koskela 2005).
designed by O’Connell East Architects in Wolverhampton, UK Temporary organization is also a differentiating feature for
(Modular Building Institute 2009), completed in 27 weeks, the construction in comparison with manufacturing. The realization
One9 apartment with 9 stories in Melbourne installed in 5 days of different projects in construction is based on the assembly and
cooperation of various parts (Vrijhoef and Koskela 2005). The
organization is on a temporary scale, strictly related to the execution
1
Ph.D. Candidate, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Monash Univ., and finalization of the project. The construction system becomes
Melbourne, VIC 3800, Australia. Email: filomena.innella@monash.edu more unpredictable in comparison with manufacturing because of
2
Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Monash Univ., the continuous changes to which it is subjected. Finally, complexity
Melbourne, VIC 3800, Australia. Email: mehrdad.arashpour@monash.edu is another peculiarity of the construction industry. Indeed, construc-
3
Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Monash Univ., Melbourne, VIC
tion is a dynamic system (Bertelsen 2003) subjected to uncertanities
3800, Australia (corresponding author). Email: yu.bai@monash.edu
Note. This manuscript was submitted on November 15, 2018; approved and unforeseen events in comparison with manufacturing, and more
on March 19, 2019; published online on September 25, 2019. Discussion difficult to control and manage.
period open until February 25, 2020; separate discussions must be sub- At first glance, construction and manufacturing seem to be a
mitted for individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Construc- poor match. However, relevant improvements may be achieved
tion Engineering and Management, © ASCE, ISSN 0733-9364. in the construction industry through the proper application of the
© ASCE 04019076-1 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

Fig. 1. Building modules: (a) inside the factory; (b) during relocation on truck for transportation; and (c) completed structure. (Images by authors.)
manufacturing initiatives such as lean principles (Mostafa et al. chain also becomes critical. The supply chain is the set of activities
2016). For example, existing lean manufacturing techniques can that involve the delivery of raw materials from producers to the end
be modified for adaptation to construction, such as the utilization users (Handfield and Nichols 1999). In Fig. 2, the production flow
of the mistake-proofing device for promptly detecting the occur- for a modular construction industry is presented. As a result, it is
rence of production defects (Sadri and Ghavam 2011; Santos and possible to distinguish between (1) lean design management, (2) lean
Powell 1999) or the application of the Kanban method for manag- supply chain management, (3) lean production management, (4) lean
ing material supply (Arbulu et al. 2003). Other research has focused transportation management, and (5) lean site-assembly manage-
on design of specific methodologies for the construction industry, ment. Such efforts have led to the realization of construction projects
such as the last-planner system (Ballard 1997, 2000; Ballard and that have exhibited the effectiveness to different extents of the
Howell 1997), which is an organizational system devised for man- implementation of lean techniques for specific production process
aging construction activities. Even building information modeling stages.
(BIM) has become increasingly used in conjunction with lean tech- However, the full potential in terms of productivity is yet to be
niques (Moghadam et al. 2012). achieved, and additional benefits are expected when the lean ap-
Later on, efforts have been further directed toward promoting proach is fully integrated in the production process, from the design
solutions for the modular building industry. It is noted that the phase to the site installation. Existing works are still limited with
modular building industry has a good affinity with the manufactur- respect to implementation of a lean integrated approach in the
ing industry (Winch 2003). However, the modular building industry modular construction industry. Therefore, it becomes essential to
has to face challenges for lean implementation, such as flexibility conduct a review of lean techniques and tools employed for differ-
for product customization (Höök 2006), variable market demand, ent production stages and assess their effectiveness based on case
and more complex supply chain management in comparison with studies and comparative studies.
the manufacturing industry (Höök and Stehn 2008a). Moreover, the The paper contributes to the body-of-knowledge by discussing
production process of building modules is more articulated, com- the implementation of lean techniques into the modular building
prising different stages, i.e., design, manufacturing, transportation, industry, including all the production process stages through sys-
and assembly on site. In addition, the optimization of the supply tematic review on the topic.
Fig. 2. Production flow for modular construction.

3. Surplus of end products 4. Worthless capital
1. Surplus of production
Associated with investment
resources
2. Overproduction -Increase of storehouse Determining
(workers, material,
dimension Increase of the production
goods,etc.)
-Necessity of extra workers costs
Fig. 3. Waste chain. (Data from Monden 1983.)
In order to further investigate the interface of lean and modular To pursue the waste-reduction objective, the concepts of just-in-
construction, this paper aims to identify key theories and method- time (JIT) and the flexible workforce were devised. JIT means pro-
ologies of lean manufacturing (LM) through an extended review duction of only what is necessary, when it is necessary, and where it
of relevant topics, and to subsequently examine the applicability is necessary. As Ohno (1988) states, “In Just-In-Time production, a
of such techniques for lean construction through comparative stud- later process goes to an earlier process in the operation flow and
ies and case studies. After the introduction section, initial develop- withdraws only the number of parts needed, when they are needed,”
ments of lean production are discussed to illustrate the bridge from JIT and pull production are key concepts of the TPS and of modern
lean manufacturing to lean construction (LC). The major concepts LM theory. The flexible workforce rather than a specialized one is a
and methodologies in lean manufacturing are explained and the re- revolutionary concept in mainstream management theories. Work-
sulting achievements of lean construction are examined. Finally, force is trained to be multiskilled and capable of moving between
the implementation of techniques from lean construction into the different workstations. In this way, the improvement of production
modular building industry are discussed through a systematic re- efficiency is guaranteed, whereas operators being able to work with
view on the topic. In addition, this work includes practical recom- different machines can be relocated to different workstations when
mendations in general for considerations by practitioners regardless necessary (theory of one operator, many processes).
of the specific features of the production process (e.g., size of the Zero-defect production can be achieved through autonomation
company, technology profile, factory layout). This work may also (in Japanese, jikoda). Autonomation enables rapid address, identi-
assist practitioners with an overview of lean strategies and associ- fication, and correction of mistakes that occur in a process. Through
ated potential benefits and obstacles for future case studies. inspection, it is possible to reduce and/or avoid defective items,
which if left in the manufacturing in-line process would cause de-
lays with a domino effect. Another original concept of the TPS is
Lean Manufacturing supporting creativity, which means taking into account suggestions
from operators and being open to new proposals coming from the
Lean Manufacturing Theories and Methodologies workforce. When workers start to play an active role inside the fac-
tory and through their major involvement, performance improve-
LM was originated in Japan in the automotive industry after World ments can be achieved (Monden 1993).
War II with the development of the Toyota production system Production is considered to be a set of processes and operations
(TPS) (Ohno 1988). By applying lean principles, Toyota achieved (Shingo and Dillon 1989). Through processes raw material is con-
“the advantages of craft and mass production, while avoiding the verted into intermediate stages until the end product is realized.
high cost of the former and the rigidity of the latter” (Womack et al. Operations are the actions that need to be executed either by work-
1990). The evolvement of LM over the years has been widely in- ers or machines in order to complete a certain process. In Fig. 4 the
vestigated in previous research (Bhamu and Singh Sangwan 2014; flow of processes for transforming raw material into end product is
Hines et al. 2004; Martínez-Jurado and Moyano-Fuentes 2014). In
this section, key concepts are highlighted in order to give an over-
Raw material
view of the primary principles of modern LM theory. Taking TPS
as an example, its main goals are to perform zero-defect production
and to minimize waste, and these goals form the foundation of lean
manufacturing theory. Waste (or muda in Japanese) is the first to Transportation
minimize for optimizing the production and has four major sources:
(1) surplus of production resources, (2) overproduction, (3) surplus Waiting
of inventory, and (4) worthless capital investment (Monden 1983).
PROCESS
When there is one source of waste, the others are activated in a

OPERATION of Processing
ripple effect. Producing more than what people need implies cost
increases without additional value to the final product. The first Workers Machines
waste leads to the second one—overproduction—that occurs when Waiting
working operations never stop. As a consequence, the overproduc-
tion causes the excess of final products (excess of inventory) that
requires more room to store the goods, additional workers and, con- Inspection
sequently, worthless capital investment. In Fig. 3 wastes are repre-
sented as a chain, confirming that wastes are all indissolubly related
leading to increased production costs as a final consequence. Other End product
waste causes were further explored in Ohno (1988), with inclu-
Fig. 4. Processes according to Shingo and Dillon (1989). (Adapted
sion of overproduction, waiting, transport, inappropriate process-
from Shingo and Dillon 1989.)
ing, unnecessary inventory, unnecessary motion, and defects.

reported. It comprises transportation (the relocation of the material 4. Manufacturing resource planning (MRP II) can be considered
from one place to another), processing (the transformation process the evolutionary stage of MRP; it is a programme that manages
of the material into something substantially different), and inspect- information regarding all the aspects of a manufacturing produc-
ing (control phase for assuring the respect of quality requirements). tion (Burns et al. 1991);
There is a view that operations and processes need to be analyzed 5. Optimized production technology (OPT) is a software that
separately and improved individually (Shingo and Dillon 1989). through an algorithm permits scheduling optimization (Fry et al.
This view is important in encouraging others to analyze production 1992);
processes with more of an engineering perspective. 6. Total quality management (TQM) is a set techniques to enhance
The five key concepts of lean thinking are as follows (Womack production organization and end-product quality (Spencer 1994);
and Jones 1996): 7. Concurrent engineering envisages “the integration of the design
1. Specify the value of the end product from the customer point process and manufacturing activities” for improving the quality
of view; and reducing the cost (Broughton 1990);
2. Identify the value stream of the product, analyzing all the pro- 8. 5S (sort, straighten, standardize, shine, and sustain), is a set of
cesses from the design stage to the delivery; daily practices that guarantees the maintenance of a transparent
3. Perform flow production, minimizing waste; and safe job site (Monden 1983); and
4. Use a pull system that means producing only the amount of pro- 9. Computer integrated manufacturing (CIM) is a technology
ducts required by the market demand; and system that allows management and control of the entire pro-
5. Aim for perfection. duction process, from the design stage to the realization of the
In the following section, the main LM techniques and tools are end product (Teicholz 1984).
explored and discussed as more specific applications of the theories The applications of a few of these techniques, such as JIT, CIM
and methodologies aforementioned. or 5S, have been introduced in lean construction as discussed in the
following.
Lean Manufacturing Techniques and Tools

To implement the TPS theory, different techniques have been de- Lean Construction
veloped. Kanban, Japanese for card or sign, is a system devised for
supporting JIT. It is used inside the Toyota factories, or between the Lean Construction Theories and Methodologies
factories and Toyota’s partners, to share information concerning the
quantities of product required. Kanban is a card that indicates both Theories of production management were introduced by Koskela to
the number of parts that need to be taken to start a given production the construction industry (Koskela 1992, 1994, 1997), where con-
process and the number of final products. When the number of pro- struction production was analyzed based on three different points of
duction activities is estimated, the required inventory is communi- view: transformation, flow, and value generation. This is also called
cated through the sign circulation, thus the factory productivity TFV theory. Production can be seen as a transformation process
level is controlled and JIT is achieved (Monden 1993). Leveling from an input (raw material) to an output (end product). In this man-
the production (in Japanese, heijunka) is one important step of TPS. agement theory, each production process might be further divided
The production line, in terms of inventory and workforce, needs to into subprocesses. The production management aims to improve
be calibrated in accordance with market demand. The production each subprocess, making them as efficient as possible. Production
line should look like a continuous flow, with products pulled from can also be seen as a flow, and in this case it consists of differ-
one station to another at a constant rhythm. Oscillation of the pro- ent operations: processing, inspecting, waiting, and moving. Only
duction quantity has to be avoided. Only then can waste, in terms of processing is considered a profitable operation, whereas inspecting,
buffer time, be minimized. The reduction of setup time is essential waiting, and moving are considered operations that need to be mini-
to achieve production leveling. Depending on the variety of prod- mized to avoid waste. Lastly, from the value generation point of
ucts being manufactured, the production line will need to be recon- view, the operations for input conversion are distinguished as value-
figured with the capability of agile switching between different adding or non–value-adding. Value-adding operations consist of
product classes (Monden 1993). conversion activities that contribute to fully satisfy the customers’
To achieve autonomation, the mistake-proofing (or poka-yoke in needs and respond to their requirements. Thus, according to the flow
Japanese) device was introduced by Shingo (1986), by means of perspective, only processing operations add value to the product, by
which machines could shut down automatically when defects occur, converting raw material into an end product with specified features.
freeing workers of the control activity. To support creativity, the On the contrary, inspecting, waiting and moving are non–value-
workforce participated in an active way in company improvement adding operations, because they need time, money, human resour-
(kaizen in Japanese). Regular meetings were organized to favor the ces, and space, but don’t contribute to the creation of additional
gathering of ideas, and group discussions regarding problems ob- value. In Fig. 5, the three different production views (transformation,
served in the production line were promoted in order to find new flow, and value generation) are summarized through the use of a flow
solutions. A vast range of other techniques and tools have been pro- diagram, highlighting the main focus of each conceptualization.
posed during the development of LM, including (but not limited to) Therefore, the aim of lean production is to improve value-adding
the following: operations and to reduce non–value-adding operations (or waste).
1. Single-minute exchange of die (SMED) is a technique applied However, the improvement of value-adding operations is considered
for reducing the setup time (Ohno 1988); more important than reducing waste (Ballard et al. 2001). Although
2. Total productive maintenance (TPM) focuses on the mainte- these three perspectives (transformation, flow, and value generation)
nance of manufacturing equipment enabling the increase of fac- seem to be distinct, their separation is only formal and all of these
tory efficiency (Tsuchiya 1992); three aspects coexist in a production process (Koskela 2007). In a
3. Material resource planning (MRP) is an information system later work (Bertelsen and Koskela 2004), these three aspects were
supported by the use of technology for managing material pur- investigated from the management point of view. These three as-
chases (Cooper and Zmud 1989); pects (transformation, flow, and value generation) were respectively

Conceptualization Main focus
of production as
Optimization of each process

T Transformation INPUT TRANSFORMATION END PRODUCT
(value-adding operations)
TRANSFORMATION+
Minimization of non-value-
INSPECTING
F Flow INPUT END PRODUCT adding operations
MOVING
(Inspecting, moving, waiting)
WAITING
TRANSFORMATION+ Increase of the value of the end

INSPECTING END PRODUCT
V Value generation INPUT product through customer
MOVING & ITS VALUE
needs' satisfaction
WAITING
Fig. 5. TFV theory. (Adapted from Koskela 2000.)
related to the concepts of autonomous agents, undefined values, and layout in order to facilitate the relocation of products from one area
nonlinearity in Bertelsen (2003). Although particular aspects of LC to another, making movement activities quicker, and simplifying the
were investigated in the literature, in general four main goals were scheduling activity (Stalk and Hout 1990). In particular, data from
concluded to make construction lean, as follows. In what follows, an six case studies carried out between Brazil and England show that
effort has been made to group existing work under four goals: benefits such as flow improvement and shortening of transportation
1. Reducing or eliminating waste, after identification thereof; routes may be encountered upon reduction of batch size (Santos and
2. Improving flow and reducing variability; Powell 2001).
3. Adding value to the final product from the customer’s point The immediate identification of defects is very important to
of view; and avoid the rise of time waste in a domino effect. It has been reported
4. Striving for perfection and continuous improvements. that in Australia up to 35% of the total project cost is wasted due
to rework (Love et al. 2003). Through the increase of transparency
Identifying and Reducing Waste in inspection operations, defective parts are separated and pro-
Elimination of waste is the first goal of lean production. In the con- duction flow is restored. The whole process has to be monitored,
struction industry, waste can be caused by delays in delivery of and information-sharing through visual communication needs to be
materials or tools, poor design, rework, environmental conditions, promoted in the workplace (Santos et al. 1998). Having a full and
nonfunctional working layout, equipment inefficiency, and defects shared control of the process helps to avoid errors and develop ad-
(Alarcón 1997; Formoso et al. 2002b; Mastroianni and Abdelhamid ditional improvements.
2003; Serpell et al. 1997). The root causes of waste should be iden-
tified in an initial stage and in a systematic way, with the support Improving Flow and Reducing Variability
of an appropriate flow diagram (Lee et al. 1999). The traditional Both the flow and conversion processes need to be improved ac-
hierarchical organization is considered as another source of waste. cording to Koskela (2000). Improving flow means having less con-
Splitting each process to subprocesses, for which different people version processes, and there has to be a balance between the two
are responsible, increases non–value-adding components of the improvements. Usually flow improvement is predominant, because
flow process (Koskela 2000). Moreover, coordination problems be- it can be achieved with less investment. Another key concept, as
tween different contractors in the project may lead to waste such as focused on in Ballard (1999), is production variability. Workflow
schedule delays (Song and Daan 2011). reliability and increased productivity can be pursued by minimizing
The elimination of waste is the most effective strategy to im- variability (Ballard 1999). Less variability means a production with
prove the productivity of industries (Katayama and Bennett 1996). optimized processes and minimized idle times. The priority, how-
Construction can be considered similar to production where non– ever, is always meeting client demands, which is often very variable
value-adding activities are preponderant. Experimental data from a and fluctuating.
Swedish construction project show that 30%–35% of construc- The management of production in construction is critical,
tion costs are used for non–value-adding activities (Forsberg and mostly because workflow is affected by uncertainties (Arashpour
Saukkoriipi 2007). Thus, considerable improvements can be made et al. 2016). Delays in delivery, uncompleted tasks, and availability
through the reduction of these types of activities. To this end, it is of workforce all contribute to generate uncertainties. A proposed
essential to reduce the cycle time (i.e., the time that is needed to solution was to shield production from uncertainties by only defin-
complete a conversion process from an input to an output). The total ing tasks that can be completed, responding to the requirements
cycle time is the sum of processing time with waiting, inspecting, of definition, soundness, sequence, size, and learning (Ballard and
and moving time. The aim is to compact the waiting, moving, and Howell 1998). Later efforts led the conception of the last planner
inspecting times because they are considered non–value-adding ac- system (LPS) (Ballard 2000) (further discussed in the “Techniques
tivities. To shorten the cycle time, different techniques have been for Improving Flow and Reducing Variability” section). Flow
proposed, such as reducing the batch size, improving the factory complexity has to be reduced to promote standardization and to

simplify the processes (Koskela 2000). Tending toward standardi- exploited. For instance, the benefits in applying computer integrated
zation of products and consequently the standardization of routine manufacturing (CIM) to construction was examined in an early
operational activities leads to reduced uncertainties. It is believed work (Crowley 1998), coining the term computer integrated con-
that modularization is one of the key solutions to simplify construc- struction (CIC). In the following, different lean techniques with their
tion (Bertelsen 2005). Simplification of a process is possible by corresponding methodologies are grouped together as shown in
reducing both the number of components and simultaneously the Table 1, where specific tools used to achieve the four goals are also
number of subprocesses needed to produce final products. Another included. Some of the following lean techniques are further dis-
strategy to simplify construction production is the implementation cussed in detail.
of a rate-driven production that shields the level of production
against fluctuating market demand. This strategy demonstrated to Techniques for Reducing Waste
be effective in improving the flow by avoiding the incurrence Value stream mapping (VSM) is a technique that can be adopted to
of errors, facilitating higher control of the production, and limiting eliminate waste in terms of non–value-adding activities in construc-
the shortage of resources under peak demands (Arashpour et al. tion projects (Mastroianni and Abdelhamid 2003). Benefits encoun-
2015a). tered upon VSM implementation in a construction site in Brazil

were reduction of lead time, flow improvement, and increase of pro-
Adding Value to the Final Product ductivity (Pasqualini and Zawislak 2005). More recently VSM has
Identifying needs of clients and analyzing their expectations are been also used to reduce environmental waste and increase project
other goals of lean production (Koskela 1992). The final product sustainability (Rosenbaum et al. 2013). It develops the current state
needs to have features that can attract demand and thus increase map (CSM), where the time linked to each activity is expressed, and
sales. Although the definition of customer value, from a theoretical the division between value-adding and non–value-adding activities
perspective, can appear to be a straightforward task, it is in fact is clear. The CSM is then analyzed for possible modifications to
challenging in practice. The building industry produces structures reduce waste, and this leads to the second step of the future state
that have a long lifespan. Because of that, the value must be evalu- map (FSM) (Rother and Shook 1999). A work plan is developed
ated considering the entire life of the building and the multiple and improvements are quantified, and the cost saving difference be-
users that can benefit from it, and consequently the definition of tween the CSM and the FSM is evaluated.
value becomes articulated and complex (Jørgensen and Emmitt The kanban, or pull, system, is another lean technique support-
2008). A good design strategy is fundamental (Ballard et al. 2001) ing JIT theory. It is used in material management with the idea to
and flexibility is the key with regard to clients’ expectations. Larger get what it is needed only when it is needed. Major delays in con-
flexibility means covering a broader range of demands. Construc- struction can be caused by inefficient product supply and raw
tion should attempt to create standard products but with a design material delivery (Assaf and Al-Hejji 2006). Kanban was adopted
considering the possibility of being assembled in different ways, in the house construction industry (Khalfan et al. 2008) and during
therefore creating extensive output flexibility (Koskela 2000). the construction of a transportation site in the United Kingdom
(Arbulu et al. 2003). In the latter case study, five guideline rules
Continuous Improvements were established at the time: (1) raw material should better be pro-
Continuous improvements is the attempt to steadily improve pro- vided upon request; (2) raw material, in the right amount, must
duction processes and products. Continuous improvements (kaizen reach the intended site in time; (3) material supply is organized
in Japanese) are related to the concept of supporting creativity according to customers’ requests; (4) the shortest path for vehicles
(Monden 1993). Essential key elements to foster continuous im- has to be planned; and (5) tactics that can improve the workflow
provements are: (1) making the labor force feel responsible for their have to be prioritized. For this particular implementation, kanban
work, (2) establishing goals in the production line, (3) regularly was implemented as a tag attached on top of specific bins. Fig. 6
checking the results achieved, and (4) increasing monitoring and shows a kanban card that can be used to promote the circulation of
control (Koskela 2000). Moreover, it is essential for each industry information regarding inventory. In the case study of Arbulu et al.
to have a deep knowledge of its own production process. Good les- (2003), material was transported from the suppliers to the intended
sons can be learned through monitoring the activity and analyzing it site into bins carried by appropriate vehicles through defined routes.
against benchmarks adopted by other industry competitors. Indeed, The right quantity of materials should always be established accord-
when a good practice has been detected, it can be modified and ing to the site forecast. The implementation of kanban brought con-
introduced in its own process production (benchmark), only then siderable benefits to the production process. A further development
can improvements be constantly achieved and perfection can be is the E-kanban; in this case information transfer is supported by
striven for (Camp 1989). the use of network for increased precision and velocity (Guo et al.
2012).
Lean Construction Techniques and Tools
Techniques for Improving Flow and Reducing Variability
Specific techniques and tools have been developed according to the The LPS is a production and design management technique devised
four main goals discussed in the foregoing, allowing LC to move by Ballard (1997, 2000) and Ballard and Howell (1997) in order to
from a theoretical level to a practical one. The implementation of improve flow and reduce variability in managing complex produc-
these techniques in hundreds of projects has permitted an under- tion activities. This technique is based on two basic principles: a
standing of their effective applicability, and through each implemen- mindful planning of all tasks at the beginning, and monitoring
tation these techniques have been perfected. An extensive number to ensure that plans have been respected and expected results have
of lean construction techniques exist as case studies (Alarcón et al. been achieved during execution. The last planner is the person—or
2011; Alinaitwe 2009; Mohan and Iyer 2005; Senaratne and group—responsible for defining the tasks to be completed. It is a
Wijesiri 2008). Other interesting works, in addition to proper imple- process to accomplish the commitments (will) that is necessary to
mentation of techniques in real-case scenarios, have also carried do (should) considering only tasks that can be effectively executed
out simulations to assess their effectiveness (Balbontín-Bravo 1998; (can) (Ballard and Howell 1997). The technique is articulated in
Jeong et al. 2006; Tommelein 1998; Yang and Al-Sudairi 2007). two steps: production unit control and workflow control. First, the
Technology systems for supporting lean production have been overall project is planned and milestones are established in the

Table 1. LC methodologies, techniques and tools
Goals Methodologies Techniques Tools References
Reducing Reducing cycle time Reduction of batch size — Plossl (1991), Santos and Powell (2001), and Stalk Jr
waste and Hout (1990)
Improving factory layout — Mehrotra et al. (2005)
Reduction of work-in-progress — Stalk Jr and Hout (1990)
Value stream mapping (VSM) Current state map Mastroianni and Abdelhamid (2003), Pasqualini and
Future state map Zawislak (2005), Rosenbaum et al. (2013), Tommelein
and Weissenberger (1999), and Yu et al. (2009)
Increasing of transparency Increasing of visual control Boards, signs Formoso et al. (2002a) and Santos et al. (1998)
Increasing process inspection Light displays Santos et al. (1998)
Keeping workplace safe and Sort, straighten, Mastroianni and Abdelhamid (2003), Salem et al.
tidy (5S) shine, standardize, (2005), and Salem et al. (2006)
sustain
Improving material Kanban Bins, boxes, tags Arbulu et al. (2003), Aziz and Hafez (2013), Guo et al.
management (2012), and Khalfan et al. (2008)
Improving Reducing flow variability Last planner system (LPS) Master schedule Alarcón et al. (2011), AlSehaimi et al. (2014), Aziz and
the flow Six-week look ahead Hafez (2013), Ballard (1997), Ballard and Howell
Weekly work plan (1997), Ballard et al. (2002), Ballard (2000),
PPC graphs Mastroianni and Abdelhamid (2003), Salem et al.
(2005, 2006), and Song and Daan (2011)
Quality at source (QAS) TTC sheets Marosszeky et al. (2002)
Completion matrix
Quality league table
Reducing process Poka-yoke Electronic/mechanic Salem et al. (2005), Sadri and Ghavam (2011), Salem
variability devices et al. (2006), Santos and Powell (1999), and Santos
et al. (1998)
Leveling the production Promoting standardization Worksheet with Koskela (2000)
standard procedures
Accomplishing customers’ Set a design strategy — Ballard et al. (2001)
requirements Design for all life cycle — Jørgensen and Emmitt (2008)
Increasing product flexibility — Koskela (1992)
Continuous Promoting employee Daily work crew huddle Meetings Aziz and Hafez (2013), Mastroianni and Abdelhamid
improvements involvement, measuring Discussions (2003), and Salem et al. (2005, 2006)
and setting goals
Aiming to perfection, Benchmark — Camp (1989) and Koskela (2000)
incremented gains
divided by the total number of planned activities” (Ballard 2000).

Product description
Smoke detector
Using PPC, the causes of failure can be identified and responsibil-
ities for the planning and execution phases can be differentiated. It is
Supplier Client claimed that LPS uses the scientific experimentation model of con-
X company Y company trol from a theoretical point of view (Koskela and Howell 2002).
Quantity Lead time Location
Fig. 7 shows in a flow diagram how the LPS operates, from the
30 1 week Shelf n.3 planning phase up to the control phase.
Experimental data have shown that problem of uncompleted
tasks is preponderant (Ballard and Howell 1997). It was found from
Fig. 6. Example of a kanban card for inventory management. (Adapted
from Arbulu et al. 2003.)
analysis of several case studies that approximately 35% of planned
tasks were uncompleted and the main causes of uncompleted tasks
is the shortage of resources, mostly drawings and materials. The
LPS was firstly implemented by Ballard (2000) in various construc-
master schedule. Then the six-week look-ahead period is specified, tion projects and case studies including the CCSR Project, Next
when all the operations that should be done are identified for a cer- Stage Development, Pacific Contracting, Old Chemistry Building
tain number of weeks. After all the planned operations are checked Renovation Project and Zeneca Project. Remarkable results were
for effective execution, weekly work plans are developed for each achieved in the last two projects (the PPC level tracked was more
operation precisely. In the next step, the execution order is estab- than 85%), demonstrating the potential benefits of LPS. Later ap-
lished, and the related affordable amount of work is elucidated plications of LPS in a large number of case studies confirmed that
(Ballard and Howell 1997). The planning is an initial stage, after remarkable results can be achieved. AlSehaimi et al. (2014) regis-
which the workflow has to be monitored to check that the plans tered increased productivity after LPS implementation in a con-
have been successfully followed. The control phase permits iden- struction project in Saudi Arabia, in another case study in Chile
tification of the failure causes and, based on that, the last planner major flow stability and increased PPC level were documented
can make new decisions in order to avoid future repetition. Results (Alarcón et al. 2001).
are quantified through the measure of the percentage of planned ac- Quality at source (QAS) is a management technique, imple-
tivities (PPC). The PPC is the tool used to quantify the productivity mented for the first time in the construction of the Sydney metro-
level, calculated as “the number of planned activities completed politan area. This technique aims “to help people do their job,

Last Planner System
place clean and tidy, and consequently safe (Monden 1983). The
5S include specific indications for workers about material and
1. Master schedule equipment disposal and cleaning procedures (Salem et al. 2006).
Planning 2. Six-week lookahead This becomes an essential tool to support LC (Mastroianni and
3. Weekly work plans
Abdelhamid 2003; Nakagawa 2005) allowing changing of workers
Avoid their future
repetition habits into best practices.
Production
Techniques for Continuous Improvements
Short meeting and brainstorming sessions were reported as an effi-
Completed tasks
Percentage of cient way to emphasize the point of the day and to give participants
Checking results planned daily goals (Mastroianni and Abdelhamid 2003; Salem et al. 2006).
activities (PPC)
Uncompleted tasks These meetings are opportunities to promote the exchange of ideas.
Through discussions, the weaknesses of the production line emerge
Identification of and solutions can be identified to strive for improvements.

failure causes
Fig. 7. Last planner system. (Data from Ballard and Howell 1997.) Implementation of LC Techniques in
Modular Construction
rather than to tell them how to do it” (Marosszeky et al. 2002). QAS Research Methodology
is based on the use of three tools including task complete check
A systematic research method has been adopted in this review pa-
(TCC) sheets, completion matrix, and quality league table. The
per. This is considered an effective method to execute extensive
TCC is a list of the most relevant things to be checked and it needs
review and identify the research gaps. The systematic review con-
to be efficient and to be short and focused on actual problems.
sists of three main stages: (1) definition of research parameters
A score is assigned to the checklist after it has been submitted (i.e., keywords and field limit) and research of the articles, (2) scan-
and a reward is envisaged in order to promote quality improve- ning of the articles and identification of relevant literature, and
ments and competition between workers. The completion matrix (3) review of articles’ contents.
shows the number of completed tasks, as an indispensable tool For the literature research, the Scopus database was employed as
in detecting the roots of problems. The quality league table is used one of the most accurate and broad databases (Falagas et al. 2008).
to give a positive evaluation to the work, stimulating motivation and The research was conducted through the use of keywords in the
self-improvement. ‘Article title, Abstract, Keywords’ field and limited to articles and
The mistake-proofing (also known as poka-yoke in Japanese) review papers. The full code implemented in the research field was
uses mechanical or electronic devices used for preventing or de- “Lean AND Modul* OR Industrial OR off-site OR prefab* OR
tecting in real time the occurrence of defects in the production line. panel* OR precast AND Construct* OR Hous* OR Build*”. The
These devices can be used for stopping the process in an auto- research was also limited for publication years between 2000 and
mated way when anomalies occur (Shingo 1986). If defects can be 2018 to ensure relevant literature for modular construction. The
identified early, they can be removed and the flow can be rapidly first search found 420 articles matching the research parameters.
restored. Despite the potential advantages of their adoption for de- The research was further refined considering only two relevant
fects control and reduction, not many examples of application of subject areas for the topic, namely “Engineering” and “Business,
mistake-proofing devices in construction industry have found in management and accounting” reducing the number of articles to
existing literature. Tommelein (2008) pointed out the suitability of 290. At this stage, all the articles were scanned to identify the rel-
such devices for construction industry showing practical examples evant literature. The scanning operation was conducted by inspect-
of such applications. It was demonstrated that mistake-proofing de- ing the title and the abstract with the aim of finding relevant articles
vices can be effectively used to reduce variability based on obser- focusing on the application of lean techniques to modular construc-
vations of six case studies in Brazil and England (Santos and Powell tion industry. Through the scanning operation a total number of 30
1999) and to support visual communication (Santos et al. 1998). In articles were selected. Additionally, 5 articles were also identified
a later work, the main features of mistake-proofing for applicability as relevant from the inspection of the reference lists of such papers.
in construction industry were identified, i.e., inexpensive, with lim- The selected articles, 35 in total, are reported in Table 2, where
ited dimension and extensively adopted in the construction process country, type of manufactured structure, and article type (e.g., case
(Sadri and Ghavam 2011). The authors also proved that reduction of study and survey) are specified. The articles were considered suf-
cost and increase of productivity are gained upon mistake-proofing ficient to do a complete review of the topic. In the last stage, the full
employment based on case study. content of each article was analyzed and their contribution to the
A good level of communication in a work space is a prerequisite topic estimated. The overall research approach adopted in this pa-
to have a transparent job site. Different instruments can be used per is summarized in Fig. 8.
for this purpose. For instance, light displays visible to everyone
can be used to share information related to the production line, ad-
vising when errors occur. In Formoso et al. (2002a) and Santos et al. Findings and Discussion
(1998), it is pointed out the importance of visual communication Modular construction industry can be distinguished in (1) prefabri-
rather than verbal or written, when information have to be shared cation of parts and material, (2) prefabrication of components, and
with a group of people. Boards can also be used simply to inform (3) prefabrication of full house volumes where 80% of the produc-
workers about the project status or construction schedule, showing tion is completed inside the factory (Höök and Stehn 2008b). The
the list of tasks to be accomplished with expected completion time. production process of building modules is articulated in different
The 5S (sort, straighten, standardize, shine, and sustain) are daily stages, i.e., design, manufacturing, transportation, and assembly on
practices that workers must follow in order to keep the working site. The optimization of each stage through the implementation of

Table 2. List of selected articles for systematic review
Authors Country Structure type Research method
Arashpour et al. (2015a) Australia Volume unit Case study
Arashpour et al. (2015b) Australia Precast tank Case study
Arashpour et al. (2015c) Australia Volume unit Case study
Arashpour et al. (2017) Australia Precast panel Case study
Arashpour et al. (2018) Australia Volume unit Case study
Ballard et al (2003) UK Precast element Case study
Barriga et al. (2005) US Volume unit Survey
Erikshammar et al. (2013) Sweden Volume unit Survey
Gustaffson et al. (2012) Sweden Volume unit Case study
Han et al. (2012) US Volume unit Case study
Heravi and Firoozi (2017) Iran Prefab. steel frame Case study
Hook and Stehn (2008a) Sweden Volume unit Survey

Hook and Stehn (2008b) Sweden Volume unit Survey and case study
Ikuma et al. (2011) US Volume unit Case study
James et al. (2014) US Volume unit Survey
Jansson et al. (2016) Sweden Volume unit Survey
Ko (2013) Taiwan Precast element Case study
Li et al. (2017) Hong Kong Volume unit Case study
Mehrotra et al. (2005) US Volume unit Case study
Meiling et al. (2012) Sweden Volume unit Survey
Nahmens and Ikuma (2009) US Volume unit Survey
Nahmens and Ikuma (2011) US Volume unit Case study
Nahmens et al. (2012) US Volume unit Case study
Nahmens and Mullens (2011) US Panelized structure Case study
Nahmens and Mullens (2009) NA Volume unit Case study
Naim and Barlow (2010) UK Volume unit Technical
Nasereddin et al. (2007) US Volume unit Case study
Ng et al. (2016) Hong Kong Volume unit Case study
Peng and Pheng (2011) Singapore Precast element Survey
Pheng and Chuan (2001) Singapore Precast element Survey
Sacks et al. (2007) NA Volume unit Case study
Sandberg and Bildsten (2011) Sweden Volume unit Case study
Shewchuk and Guo (2011) US Panelized structure Case study
Velarde et al. (2009) US Volume unit Case study
Yu et al. (2013) US Volume unit Case study
lean management techniques is essential to achieve waste minimi- Solutions investigated for the waste identification involve exten-
zation and final value increase. In addition, the optimization of sup- sive use of simulation tools to map the production process, identify
ply chain becomes also critical for waste minimization. the weak parts, and understand how to improve them (Nasereddin
Table 3 shows a comprehensive picture of the LC tools and tech- et al. 2007; Senghore et al. 2004; Velarde et al. 2009); however it is
niques used in each case study as well as the main goals pursued. argued that despite the enormous advantages of simulation tools
In the following sections, identification of waste, implementation exploitation, they may also be highly time consuming and often
of lean approach for different production phases, and benefits and their use is restricted to academic applications (Erikshammar et al.
obstacles of lean are discussed based on the literature review. 2013). To enhance waste reduction, instead, autonomous produc-
tion proved to be effective to detect mistakes on time in the pro-
Identification of Waste duction flow (Arashpour et al. 2015b) as well as integration of
One of the main objectives of lean production is to identify waste information communication technology (ICT) with lean techniques
and minimize/remove it from the production flow. Fig. 9 pres- in factory plants (Li et al. 2017; Ng et al. 2016). The employment
ents the entire production flow for modular building production of ICT, e.g., building information building (BIM), global position-
in which value-adding activities are identified and distinguished ing system (GPS), and radio frequency identification (RFID) in
from non–value-adding activities highlighted with a grey color. case studies (Han et al. 2012; Li et al. 2017; Sacks et al. 2009)
The use of the VSM tool has been detected in several case studies showed major communication ease and consequently uncertainties
(Erikshammar et al. 2013; Gustafsson et al. 2012; Han et al. 2012; reduction.
Heravi and Firoozi 2017; Peng and Pheng 2011; Sandberg and
Bildsten 2011; Yu et al. 2013). It is argued that although traditional Lean Design and Manufacturing Management
construction is not the ideal application field for VSM, the modular Modules have a high level of customization and each module may
industry is more suitable for such a type of practice due to more be different according to finishing and material choices. To reduce
repetitive processes and higher monitoring ease (Yu et al. 2009). complexity, the minimization of customization and increase in
Sandberg and Bildsten (2011) identified the major sources of standardization are essential. Moreover, the process complexity is
waste based on a case study and analysed their relationship with strictly related to the preliminary phase of product design. To re-
activities coordination. Findings from the case study show that duce production complexity, design and production phases need
overproduction, waiting, and unnecessary movements are the result to be integrated and the product has to be designed in order to sim-
of a bad coordination between all the actors of different stages. plify production activities (Höök and Stehn 2005). The relationship

START
i) Research of ‘Article or review’ using Scopus

1. Search through keywords
2.Limiting the research to ‘Subject
area’
ii) Scanning of articles full title, abstract, keywords 3. Limiting research for publications
year 2000-2018
4. Limiting research to articles and
review papers
NO
RELEVANT?
YES
Scanning of reference list of

iii) Review of the paper content
chosen articles
YES NO
RELEVANT?
END
Fig. 8. Systematic review research approach.
between design of customized products and lean production is distance and area dimension requirements of factory stations
further analysed in Nahmens and Mullens (2009). The study high- (Mehrotra et al. 2005). The employment of multiskilled workers
lights that effectiveness of lean management strategies is reduced has been suggested to gain more efficient workflow (Arashpour
when highly customized buildings are produced in the manufactur- et al. 2018) and minimized idle times (Arashpour et al. 2015c) and
ing line and consequently the entire supply chain flow becomes the optimum configuration was also assessed based on real case
very inefficient due to the variable demand for raw materials. More- studies through simulation modeling.
over, the layout of the manufacturing line needs to be re-arranged, Moreover, the implementation of a pull-driven control system,
creating parallel production lines to separate the production of that requires that the production of a new building module cannot
standard products from customized products. The need for design start unless all the other production activities have been completed,
standardization enabling product variability is also explored in proved to be effective for reduction of work-in-progress without
Jansson et al. (2016) and Sandberg and Bildsten (2011). lowering the productivity capability (Arashpour et al. 2015a).
Typically, a modular plant can be divided into five areas:
(1) floors, (2) walls, (3) roof, (4) exterior finishing, and (5) interior Lean Supply Chain, Transportation and On-Site Assembly
finishing (Barriga et al. 2005; Senghore et al. 2004). Building mod- Management
ules are realized in sequence in the production line. The production The management of the supply chain translates in the management
line of modules consists of different workstations and can have dif- of two main activities, i.e., material flow and inventory control man-
ferent layout configurations (U or L shape, straight line, etc.). In the agement (Barriga et al. 2005). Whereas material management is re-
assembly, line activities are planned in order to have a continuous lated to the movement and storage of materials in the factory plant,
flow. Usually between 40 and 60 activities are performed in the inventory management establishes the amount of stock material re-
assembly line, and each one requires a different type of location, quired. The authors propose the use of a dependent inventory system
workforce, and equipment (Nasereddin et al. 2007). Unlike tradi- through implementation of material requirement planning and JIT.
tional construction production, in which the realization of a build- In this approach, the quantity of material needed is based on the
ing happens at one site and all the activities are coordinated in one production scheduling in order to minimize stock. The efficacy of
location, in modular construction production modules need to be the implementation of such management approach is strictly related
moved from one station to another and optimal layout management to the accurate planning and communication between the actors in-
is fundamental in facilitating module relocation operations and in volved. Arashpour et al. (2017) investigated the employment of a
avoiding any time waste (Mehrotra et al. 2005). multisupplier scheme to minimize the possibility of disruptions.
In modular construction, the labor force, divided into differ- Erikshammar et al. (2013) suggest integrating VSM with a simula-
ent teams, works concurrently at different workstations and worker tion tool, also called discrete event simulation (DES), to enhance
management becomes more complicated than in traditional con- increase of flexibility and reduction of time. The proposed model
struction. Enhancement of facility layout design in the industry for supply chain management proved to be highly effective. Further-
was developed using a qualitative approach considering the mutual more, Naim and Barlow (2010) propose the integration of lean and

Table 3. LC tools and techniques implemented in case studies and pursued goals
Design Supply chain Production
© ASCE
Master
LC Reduction sched./ Multi-
techniques Stand. 3D batch Master Pull Sim. 3D Reg. Visual Stand. op. Look- Auto. Pull Simulation skilled Lean +
and tools prods. mod. size sched. sys. JIT VSM tool vis. mtgs. planning sheets ahead prod. system JIT VSM tool 5S workers SLIK LPS ICT
Arashpour et al. (2015a) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — X — — X — — — — —
Arashpour et al. (2015b) — — — — — — — — — — — — — X — — — X — — — — —
Arashpour et al. (2015c) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — X — X — — —
Arashpour et al. (2017) — — — — — — — X — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Arashpour et al. (2018) — — — — — — — X — — — — — — — — — — — X — — —
Ballard et al (2003) — X X — — — — — — X — X — — — — — — X — — — —
Barriga et al. (2005) — — — X X X — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Erikshammar et al. (2013) — — — — — — X X — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Gustaffson et al (2012) — — — — — — X — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Han et al. (2012) — — — — — — — — X — — — — — — — X X — — — — —
Heravi and Firoozi (2017) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — X X — — — — —
Hook and Stehn (2008a) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hook and Stehn (2008b) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Ikuma et al. (2011) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — X — —
James et al. (2014) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Jansson et al. (2016) X — — — — — — — — X X X X — — — — — — — — — —
Ko (2013) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Li et al. (2017) — — — — X X — — — — — X — — — — — — — — — X X
Mehrotra et al. (2005) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — X — — — — —
Meiling et al. (2012) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Nahmens and Ikuma (2009) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — X — — — — —
04019076-11
Nahmens and Ikuma (2011) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — X — —
Nahmens et al. (2012) — — — — — — — — — X — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Nahmens and Mullens (2011) — — — — — — — — — — — X — — — — — — — — — — —
Nahmens and Mullens (2009) X — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Naim and Barlow (2010) X — — — X X — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Nasereddin et al. (2007) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — X — — — — —

Ng et al. (2016) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — X
Peng and Pheng (2011) — — — — — — X — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Pheng and Chuan (2001) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sacks et al. (2007) — — X — — — — — — — — — — — X — — X — X — — —
Sandberg and Bildsten (2011) — — — — — — X — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Shewchuk and Guo (2011) — — — — — — — — — — — — — X — — — — X — — — —
Velarde et al. (2009) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — X — — — — —
Yu et al. (2013) — — — — — — X X — X — X — — — — — — X X — — —
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

Table 3. (Continued.)
Logistic and Assemb. Goals
© ASCE
Adding
LC value to
techniques Waste Improving final Continuous
and tools JIT Simulation reduction the flow product improvements
Arashpour et al. (2015a) — — — X — —
Arashpour et al. (2015b) — — X — — —
Arashpour et al. (2015c) — — — X X —
Arashpour et al. (2017) — — — X — —
Arashpour et al. (2018) — — X X — —
Ballard et al (2003) — — X X — —
Barriga et al. (2005) — — — X — —
Erikshammar et al. (2013) — — — X — —
Gustaffson et al (2012) — — X — — —
Han et al. (2012) — — — X — —
Heravi and Firoozi (2017) — — X X — —
Hook and Stehn (2008a) — — — — — —
Hook and Stehn (2008b) — — — — — —
Ikuma et al. (2011) — — — — — X
James et al. (2014) — — — — — X
Jansson et al. (2016) — — — X — —
Ko (2013) — — — — — X
Li et al. (2017) — — — X — —
Mehrotra et al. (2005) — — — X — —
Meiling et al. (2012) — — — — — X
Nahmens and Ikuma (2009) — — — — — X
04019076-12
Nahmens and Ikuma (2011) — — — — — X
Nahmens et al. (2012) — — — — — X
Nahmens and Mullens (2011) — — X — — —
Nahmens and Mullens (2009) — — — X — —
Naim and Barlow (2010) — — X — — —
Nasereddin et al. (2007) — — X X — —

Ng et al. (2016) — — X — X —
Peng and Pheng (2011) — — X — — —
Pheng and Chuan (2001) X — X — — —
Sacks et al. (2007) — — X X X —
Sandberg and Bildsten (2011) — — X — — —
Shewchuk and Guo (2011) — X — X — —
Velarde et al. (2009) — — — X — —
Yu et al. (2013) — — X X — —
Note: Stand. prods. = Standard products; 3D mod. = 3D modelling; Master sched. = Master schedule; Pull sys. = Pull system; Sim. tool = Simulation tool; 3D vis. = 3D visualization; Reg. mtgs. = Regular meetings;
Stand. op. sheets = Standard operation sheets; Auto. prod. = Autonomous production.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

Waste
Design Raw material Production Transportation Assembly
Inspection Inspection Inspection
Delivery Stock
Stock
Fig. 9. Building modules production flow with non–value-adding activities highlighted in gray.
agile principles to increase the final value and lower the waste in the In addition, increase of safety was also reported in different case
supply chain. studies (Ikuma et al. 2011; James et al. 2014; Nahmens and Ikuma
In addition to lean supply chain management, lean transportation 2009) as a result of a combined application of continuous improve-
and on-site assembly management are essential for productivity en- ments methods in synergy with safety procedures. The method de-
hancement. Modular construction practices revealed that the trans- veloped in such case studies is called safety and lean integrated
portation phase may significantly contribute to waste production; kaizen (SLIK), and details are reported in Ikuma and Nahmens
indeed, structural damages are often detected during the transporta- (2010). Minimization of waste, decrease of working hours as well
tion process causing additional costs (Innella et al. 2018; Gustafsson as increase of safety [i.e., decrease of incident rates (Nahmens and
et al. 2012). However, still very limited studies have been carried in Ikuma 2009)], and reduction of hazards were the benefits encoun-
this direction. Moreover, the study of transportation of precast ele- tered in a factory upon lean implementations. In Peng and Pheng
ments in Singapore showed that unnecessary stock arose when the (2011) it was found that application of lean principles can lead to
production is not coordinated with the delivery phase (Pheng and reduction of waste in general as well as reduction of carbon emis-
Chuan 2001). Ideally, JIT should be implemented so that each pre- sion for factories producing precast elements.
fabricated element reaches the construction site just before the in- Finally, it was demonstrated that lean has a positive effect on
stallation process. However, due to delays during the transportation, workers’ job satisfaction. The introduction of continuous improve-
such as traffic congestion, bad weather conditions, issues with site ment approach in the manufacturing line determined besides eco-
access, etc., it was believed that the optimal solution is to implement nomic advantages also change of workers attitudes and habits with
JIT with inclusion of a buffer stock of maximum two days. evident overall job satisfaction increase (Nahmens et al. 2012).
The optimal sequence for paneling assembly for panelized Fig. 10 shows the major benefits of lean management and the way
structures has been explored in Shewchuk and Guo (2011). The they are interconnected.
main objectives were minimization of panels piling, diminution There are still several obstacles for lean implementation in
of distances for panels’ relocation, and reduction of manpower dur- modular construction industry. The study of employment of lean
ing installation phase. Such objectives were achieved through im- management practices into modular building factories in Sweden
plementation of 5S principles, keeping the flow smooth and steady, showed that the main obstacles are increased variability causing
and early error detection and prompt correction. reduced workflow reliability (Höök and Stehn 2008a) and the
change in mentality of all the actors involved in the production pro-
Benefits and Obstacles of Lean cess (Höök and Stehn 2008a, b). It was argued that such obstacles
Lean management for modular construction implies numerous were caused by the typical culture of traditional construction, still
benefits of different types. Economic advantages are well docu- strong and hard to change.
mented in numerous case studies, such as increase of productivity
up to 40%–50% (Ballard et al. 2003; Nahmens and Mullens
2011; Velarde et al. 2009; Yu et al. 2013), reduction of lead time
(Ballard et al. 2003; Heravi and Firoozi 2017; Ikuma et al. 2011;
Nahmens and Mullens 2009), reduction of waste (Barriga et al.
2005; Nahmens and Mullens 2009), reduction of cost and increase Job Economic
of throughput (Heravi and Firoozi 2017). However, other benefits satisfaction
associated with lean are major sustainability, increase of safety, and
major job satisfaction.
In Nahmens and Ikuma (2011), the relationship between lean LEAN
construction and sustainability is analyzed. It is suggested that
the implementation of lean techniques in the modular industry pro-
duces the collateral effect of sustainability increase from the eco-
Safety Sustainability
nomic, environmental, and social perspective. Benefits associated
with the waste reduction objective, in terms of material, resources,
or more in general of non–value-adding activities, are either eco-
nomic (cost reduction) or environmental (pollution reduction).
Moreover, the application of lean principles assures a safer work-
Fig. 10. Benefits of lean management in the modular construction
place and better work conditions demonstrating to be a sustainable
industry.
solution even from the social point of view.

The main problems associated with such a mentality are lack of may cause inefficiencies in the supply chain and production line
worker motivation, resistance of workers and managers to radical due to the variable demand. Lean manufacturing management
changes, lack of responsibility toward quality and error proofing, for building modules production is further examined, presenting
and no interest for continuous improvements or improving the flow several approaches, such as optimal layout design, workforce man-
(Höök and Stehn 2008a). To overcome such issues, it is suggested agement, and autonomous production employment to enhance pro-
to increase worker motivation and responsibility through manage- duction flow optimization.
ment strategies that are able to standardize working operations and Lean strategies for supply chain, transportation, and assembly
improve factory layout and maintenance. management are investigated. It was found that adoption of a de-
These observations are in accordance with findings from a case pendent inventory system based on the JIT principle, integration of
study in the United States (Yu et al. 2013). In the aforementioned simulation tools with VSM, and integration of lean and agile prin-
case study, the 5S was introduced as first lean technique into the ciples may help to lower the waste in the supply chain. Lean strat-
production line. The decision to introduce first the 5S method was egies, such as JIT with inclusion of a buffer stock, were found to be
based on the evaluation of two different aspects (technical and effective for transportation management. In the final assembly,
psychological). It was suggested by Productivity Press (2005) to instead, it was shown that 5S principles, keeping the flow smooth
first introduce the 5S to train people in good conduct and disci- and steady, early error detection, and prompt correction may be
pline, as 5S is a tool that can give tangible results in a short time. effective solutions for waste reduction.
Resistance of people to radical changes was observed. However, The main obstacles and benefits of lean implementation in
if improvements are immediate and visible, people tend to be modular construction are also investigated. The traditional construc-
more inclined to the introduction of other changes. To overcome the tion mind set and reluctance to changes proved to be the main ob-
challenge of change from the old mentality, it was proposed in stacles for lean implementation. In terms of benefits, economic
Popescu (2015) to establish a team dedicated for identification advantages such as increase of productivity and reduction of cost
of production flow weaknesses and potential improvements, as well are explored by evidences from case studies. In addition, other
as identification of end product value from the customer perspec- benefits encountered upon lean implementations such as major sus-
tive. Such a team should consist of people covering different func- tainability, increase of safety, and job satisfaction increment are
tional areas of the company, from the labor force to managers. The highlighted.
modification in mentality at all levels is a preliminary requirement Although lean implementation for modular construction proved
to implement lean techniques with effectiveness. to be effective for waste reduction and profit increase, further re-
search and case studies on lean applicability to modular construc-
tion industry seem still necessary to explore its full potential. In
Concluding Remarks particular, lean strategies ad hoc for transportation and installation
processes need to be further explored. Additional benefits are ex-
Modular construction is an emerging technique that differentiates pected when the lean approach is fully integrated in the production
from traditional construction due to the use of prefabricated mod- process, from the design phase to the site installation. Moreover,
ules, fully realized and equipped in a controlled environment. In this further research needs to be conducted to examine the use of ad-
way, significant improvements in terms of productivity and quality vanced technology in support of lean techniques to achieve the full
may be achieved through modular industry. However, to develop the potential of the modular construction industry.
full potential of modular construction, principles and techniques in
lean production need to be considered. In the paper a digression of
lean production theories and main techniques as well as their appli- Data Availability Statement
cability to different sectors (manufacturing, traditional construction)
is reviewed and presented. It is further discussed the implementation Data generated or analyzed during the study are available from the
of lean techniques into the modular building industry including all corresponding author by request. Information about the Journal’s
the production process stages (i.e., design, manufacturing, transpor- data-sharing policy can be found here: http://ascelibrary.org/doi/10
tation, assembly on site, supply chain), as well as potential benefits .1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001263.
and associated obstacles. A review of the key concepts of lean
manufacturing and main techniques devised for manufacturing in-
dustry is reported.
Acknowledgments
Moreover, the goals of lean construction are identified, i.e., re- The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support of
duction of waste, flow improvement, increase of product final value, the industry partners of the Modular Construction Codes Board
and continuous improvements. The fundamental methodologies, and the State Government of Victoria through the Manufacturing
theories, and tools to achieve such goals are revised with a focus on Productivity Networks program.
traditional and modular construction applications. The waste iden-
tification problem for modular construction is addressed and effec-
tive techniques are proposed to distinguish value-adding activities References
from non–value-adding activities during the entire production flow.
Solutions for waste reduction such as standardized working proce- Ahmadian, F. F. A., A. Akbarnezhad, T. H. Rashidi, and S. T. Waller.
dures and visual control are explored based on findings from case 2016. “Accounting for transport times in planning off-site shipment of
studies. construction materials.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 142 (1): 04015050.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001030.
The relationship between design management and lean pro-
Alarcón, L. F. 1997. “Modeling waste and performance in construction.”
duction is analyzed. The impact of product design in terms of In Lean construction, edited by L. Alarcón. 51–66. New York: Taylor &
manufacturing plant management, transportation, and assembly Francis.
management is discussed and lean strategies for managing the de- Alarcón, L. F., S. Diethelm, O. Rojo, and R. Calderon. 2011. “Assessing the
sign phase are explored. It is found that effectiveness of lean is as- impacts of implementing lean construction.” Rev. Ing. Construcción
sociated with product standardization. High product customization 23 (1): 26–33.

Alinaitwe, H. M. 2009. “Prioritising lean construction barriers in Uganda’s Barriga, E. M., J. G. Jeong, M. Hastak, and M. Syal. 2005. “Material
construction industry.” J. Constr. Developing Countries 14 (1): 15–30. control system for the manufactured housing industry.” J. Manage.
AlSehaimi, O. A., P. Tzortzopoulos Fazenda, and L. Koskela. 2014. Eng. 21 (2): 91–98. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2005)
“Improving construction management practice with the Last Planner 21:2(91).
System: A case study.” Eng. Constr. Archit. Manage. 21 (1): 51–64. Bertelsen, S. 2003. “Construction as a complex system.” In Proc., Int.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-03-2012-0032. Group for Lean Construction 11th Annual Conf. (IGLC-11), 11–23.
Arashpour, M., Y. Bai, G. Aranda-mena, A. Bab-Hadiashar, R. Hosseini, Blacksburg, VA: International Group for Lean Construction.
and P. Kalutara. 2017. “Optimizing decisions in advanced manufactur- Bertelsen, S. 2005. “Modularisation: A third approach to making construc-
ing of prefabricated products: Theorizing supply chain configurations in tion lean?” In Proc., Int. Group for Lean Construction 13th Annual
off-site construction.” Autom. Constr. 84 (Dec): 146–153. https://doi Conf. (IGLC-13), 81–88. Sydney, Australia: International Group for
.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2017.08.032. Lean Construction.
Arashpour, M., V. Kamat, Y. Bai, R. Wakefield, and B. Abbasi. 2018. Bertelsen, S., and L. Koskela. 2004. “Construction beyond lean: A new
“Optimization modeling of multi-skilled resources in prefabrication: understanding of construction management.” In Proc., Int. Group
Theorizing cost analysis of process integration in off-site construction.” for Lean Construction 12th Annual Conf. (IGLC-12), 1–11. Elsinore,
Autom. Constr. 95 (Nov): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2018.07 Denmark: International Group for Lean Construction.
.027. Bhamu, J., and K. Singh Sangwan. 2014. “Lean manufacturing: Literature
Arashpour, M., R. Wakefield, N. Blismas, and B. Abbasi. 2015a. “Quanti- review and research issues.” Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manage. 34 (7):
tative analysis of rate-driven and due date-driven construction: Produc- 876–940. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-08-2012-0315.
tion efficiency, supervision, and controllability in residential projects.” Boyd, N., M. M. A. Khalfan, and T. Maqsood. 2013. “Off-site construction
J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 142 (1): 05015012. https://doi.org/10.1061 of apartment buildings.” J. Archit. Eng. 19 (1): 51–57. https://doi.org/10
/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001032. .1061/(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000091.
Arashpour, M., R. Wakefield, N. Blismas, and T. Maqsood. 2015b. Broughton, T. 1990. “Simultaneous engineering in aero-gas turbine design
“Autonomous production tracking for augmenting output in off-site and manufacture.” In Proc., 1st Int. Conf. on Simultaneous Engineer-
construction.” Autom. Constr. 53 (May): 13–21. https://doi.org/10.1016 ing, 25–36. London: Status Meetings Ltd.
/j.autcon.2015.03.013.
Burns, O. M., D. Turnipseed, and W. E. Riggs. 1991. “Critical success
Arashpour, M., R. Wakefield, N. Blismas, and J. Minas. 2015c. “Optimi- factors in manufacturing resource planning implementation.” Int. J.
zation of process integration and multi-skilled resource utilization in
Oper. Prod. Manage. 11 (4): 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1108/014435791
off-site construction.” Autom. Constr. 50 (Feb): 72–80. https://doi.org
10136221.
/10.1016/j.autcon.2014.12.002.
Camp, R. C. 1989. Benchmarking: The search for industry best practices
Arashpour, M., R. Wakefield, E. W. M. Lee, R. Chan, and M. R. Hosseini.
that lead to superior performance. Milwaukee, WI: Quality Press.
2016. “Analysis of interacting uncertainties in on-site and off-site
Cooper, R. B., and R. W. Zmud. 1989. “Material requirements planning
activities: Implications for hybrid construction.” Int. J. Project Manage.
system infusion.” Omega 17 (5): 471–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305
34 (7): 1393–1402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.02.004.
-0483(89)90043-1.
Arbulu, R., G. Ballard, and N. Harper. 2003. “Kanban in construction.” In
Crowley, A. 1998. “Construction as a manufacturing process: Lessons from
Proc., Int. Group for Lean Construction 11th Annual Conf. (IGLC-11),
16–17. Blacksburg, VA: International Group for Lean Construction. the automotive industry.” Comput. Struct. 67 (5): 389–400. https://doi
.org/10.1016/S0045-7949(97)00147-8.
Assaf, S. A., and S. Al-Hejji. 2006. “Causes of delay in large construction
projects.” Int. J. Project Manage. 24 (4): 349–357. https://doi.org/10 Erikshammar, J., W. Lu, L. Stehn, and T. Olofsson. 2013. “Discrete event
.1016/j.ijproman.2005.11.010. simulation enhanced value stream mapping: An industrializedconstruc-
Aziz, R. F., and S. M. Hafez. 2013. “Applying lean thinking in construction tion case study.” Lean Constr. J. 10: 47–65.
and performance improvement.” Alexandria Eng. J. 52 (4): 679–695. Falagas, M. E., E. I. Pitsouni, G. A. Malietzis, and G. Pappas. 2008.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2013.04.008. “Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, web of science, and Google scholar:
Balbontín-Bravo, E. 1998. “Simulation of large precast operations.” Strengths and weaknesses.” FASEB J. 22 (2): 338–342. https://doi.org
In Proc., Winter Simulation Conf., 1311–1317. New York: IEEE. /10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF.
Ballard, G. 1997. “Lean construction and EPC performance improvement.” Ferdous, W., Y. Bai, T. D. Ngo, A. Manalo, and P. Mendis. 2019. “New
In Lean construction, edited by L. Alarcón. 79–91. New York: Taylor & advancements, challenges and opportunities of multi-storey modular
Francis. buildings–A state-of-the-art review.” Eng. Struct. 183 (Mar): 883–893.
Ballard, G. 1999. “Improving work flow reliability.” In Proc., Int. Group https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.01.061.
for Lean Construction 7th Annual Conf. (IGLC-7), 275–286. Berkeley, Formoso, C. T., A. D. Santos, and J. A. Powell. 2002a. “An exploratory
CA: International Group for Lean Construction. study on the applicability of process transparency in construction
Ballard, G. 2000. “The last planner system of production control.” sites.” J. Constr. Res. 3 (01): 35–54. https://doi.org/10.1142/S16099451
Ph.D. thesis, School of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Birmingham. 02000102.
Ballard, G., N. Harper, and T. Zabelle. 2003. “Learning to see work Formoso, C. T., L. Soibelman, C. De Cesare, and E. L. Isatto. 2002b.
flow: An application of lean concepts to precast concrete fabrication.” “Material waste in building industry: Main causes and prevention.”
Eng. Constr. Archit. Manage. 10 (1): 6–14. https://doi.org/10.1108 J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 128 (4): 316–325. https://doi.org/10.1061
/09699980310466505. /(ASCE)0733-9364(2002)128:4(316).
Ballard, G., and G. Howell. 1997. “Implementing lean construction: Forsberg, A., and L. Saukkoriipi. 2007. “Measurement of waste and
Stabilizing work flow.” Lean construction, edited by L. Alarcón. productivity in relation to lean thinking.” In Proc., Int. Group for Lean
101–110. New York: Taylor & Francis. Construction 15th Annual Conf. (IGLC-15), 67–76. East Lansing, MI:
Ballard, G., and G. Howell. 1998. “Shielding production: Essential step in International Group for Lean Construction.
production control.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 124 (1): 11–17. https://doi Fry, T. D., J. F. Cox, and J. H. Blackstone. 1992. “An analysis and discus-
.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1998)124:1(11). sion of the optimized production technology software and its use.”
Ballard, G., L. Koskela, G. Howell, and T. Zabelle. 2001. “Production sys- Prod. Oper. Manage. 1 (2): 229–242. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937
tem design in construction.” In Proc., Int. Group for Lean Construction -5956.1992.tb00355.x.
9th Annual Conf. (IGLC-9), 1–15. Singapore: International Group for Gardiner, P. 2015. “The construction of a high-rise development using
Lean Construction. volumetric modular methodology.” In Proc., Council on Tall Build-
Ballard, G., I. Tommelein, L. Koskela, and G. Howell. 2002. “Lean con- ings & Urban Habitat (CTBUH) Conf.: The Future of Tall, 136–143.
struction tools and techniques.” In Design and construction: Building New York: Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat.
in value, edited by R. Best and G. De Valence. 27–255. Oxford: Guo, J. L., J. Y. Teng, S. Q. Li, D. Y. Wan, and X. Jiang. 2012. “Study on
Butterworth Heinemann. electronic kanban management system in steel structure engineering of

an international expo centre.” Adv. Mater. Res. 621: 375–380. https:// of Engineering Construction and Management, Univ. of New South
doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.621.375. Wales.
Gustafsson, Å., J. Vessby, and L.-O. Rask. 2012. “Identification of potential Koskela, L. 2007. “Foundations of concurrent engineering.” In Concurrent
improvement areas in industrial housing: A case study of waste.” Lean engineering in construction projects, edited by C. Anumba, J. M.
Constr. J. 2011: 61–71. Kamara, and A. F. Cutting-Decelle, 12–29. New York: Routledge.
Han, S. H., M. Al-Hussein, S. Al-Jibouri, and H. Yu. 2012. “Automated Koskela, L. 1992. Application of the new production philosophy to con-
post-simulation visualization of modular building production assembly struction. CIFE Technical Rep. No. 72. Standford, CA: Stanford Univ.
line.” Autom. Constr. 21 (Jan): 229–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j Koskela, L. 1997. “Lean production in construction.” In Lean construction,
.autcon.2011.06.007. edited by L. Alarcón. 1–9. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Handfield, R. B., and E. L. Nichols. 1999. Introduction to supply chain Koskela, L. 2000. An exploration towards a production theory and its
management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. application to construction. VTT Publications 408. Espoo, Finland:
Heravi, G., and M. Firoozi. 2017. “Production process improvement of Technical Research Centre of Finland.
buildings’ prefabricated steel frames using value stream mapping.” Koskela, L., and G. Howell. 2002. “The theory of project management:
Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 89 (9–12): 3307–3321. https://doi.org/10 Wxplanation to novel methods.” In Proc., Int. Group for Lean Con-
.1007/s00170-016-9306-9. struction 10th Annual Conf. (IGLC-10), 1–11. Gramado, Brazil:

Hines, P., M. Holweg, and N. Rich. 2004. “Learning to evolve: A review International Group for Lean Construction.
of contemporary lean thinking.” Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manage. 24 (10): Lee, S.-H., J. E. Diekmann, A. D. Songer, and H. Brown. 1999. “Identify-
994–1011. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570410558049. ing waste: Applications of construction process analysis.” In Proc.,
Höök, M. 2006. “Customer value in lean prefabrication housing consider- Int. Group for Lean Construction 7th Annual Conf. (IGLC-7), 63–72.
ing both construction and manufacturing.” In Proc., Int. Group for Lean Berkley, CA: International Group for Lean Construction.
Construction 14th Annual Conf. (IGLC-14), 583–94. Santiago, Chile: Li, X., G. Q. Shen, P. Wu, H. Fan, H. Wu, and Y. Teng. 2017. “RBL-PHP:
International Group for Lean Construction. Simulation of lean construction and information technologies for pre-
Höök, M., and L. Stehn. 2005. “Connecting lean construction to prefabrication housing production.” J. Manage. Eng. 34 (2): 04017053.
fabrication complexity in Swedish volume element housing.” In https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000577.
Proc., Int. Group for Lean Construction 13th Annual Conf. Love, P. E., Z. Irani, and D. J. Edwards. 2003. “Learning to reduce rework
(IGLC-13), 317–325. Sydney, Australia: International Group for in projects: Analysis of firm’s organizational learning and quality prac-
Lean Construction.
tices.” Project Manage. J. 34 (3): 13–25. https://doi.org/10.1177
Höök, M., and L. Stehn. 2008a. “Applicability of lean principles and prac- /875697280303400303.
tices in industrialized housing production.” Constr. Manage. Econ.
Marosszeky, M., R. Thomas, K. Karim, S. Davis, and D. McGeorge. 2002.
26 (10): 1091–1100. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190802422179.
“Quality management tools for lean production-moving from enforce-
Höök, M., and L. Stehn. 2008b. “Lean principles in industrialized housing
ment to empowerment.” In Proc., Int. Group for Lean Construction
production: The need for a cultural change.” Lean Constr. J. 2008:
10th Annual Conf. (IGLC-10), 87–99. Gramado, Brazil: International
20–33.
Group for Lean Construction.
Ikuma, L. H., and I. Nahmens. 2010. “Slik operations: Making modular
Martínez-Jurado, P. J., and J. Moyano-Fuentes. 2014. “Lean management,
homebuilding lean and safe.” Ind. Eng. 42 (10): 26–32.
supply chain management and sustainability: A literature review.”
Ikuma, L. H., I. Nahmens, and J. James. 2011. “Use of safety and lean
J. Cleaner Prod. 85: 134–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013
integrated kaizen to improve performance in modular homebuilding.”
.09.042.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 137 (7): 551–560. https://doi.org/10.1061
Mastroianni, R., and T. Abdelhamid. 2003. “The challenge: The impetus
/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000330.
for change to lean project delivery.” In Proc., Int. Group for Lean
Innella, F., F. J. Luo, and Y. Bai. 2018. “Capacity of screw connections
Construction 11th Annual Conf. (IGLC-11), 418–426. Blacksburg,
between plasterboard panels and cold-formed steel for modular build-
ings.” J. Archit. Eng. 24 (4): 04018031. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE) VA: International Group for Lean Construction.
AE.1943-5568.0000338. Mehrotra, N., M. Syal, and M. Hastak. 2005. “Manufactured housing pro-
James, J., L. H. Ikuma, I. Nahmens, and F. Aghazadeh. 2014. “The impact duction layout design.” J. Archit. Eng. 11 (1): 25–34. https://doi.org/10
of kaizen on safety in modular home manufacturing.” Int. J. Adv. .1061/(ASCE)1076-0431(2005)11:1(25).
Manuf. Technol. 70 (1–4): 725–734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170 Meiling, J., F. Backlund, and H. Johnsson. 2012. “Managing for continuous
-013-5315-0. improvement in off-site construction: Evaluation of lean management
Jansson, G., E. Viklund, and H. Lidelöw. 2016. “Design management using principles.” Eng. Constr. Archit. Manage. 19 (2): 141–158. https://doi
knowledge innovation and visual planning.” Autom. Constr. 72 (Dec): .org/10.1108/09699981211206089.
330–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.08.040. Modular Building Institute. 2009. “O’Connell East Architects design
Jeong, J. G., M. Hastak, and M. Syal. 2006. “Supply chain simulation mod- 24—Story modular.” Accessed August 05, 2017. http://www.modular
eling for the manufactured housing industry.” J. Urban Plann. Dev. .org/htmlPage.aspx?name=24_story_modular.
132 (4): 217–225. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9488(2006) Moghadam, M., A. Alwisy, and M. Al-Hussein. 2012. “Integrated BIM/
132:4(217). Lean base production line schedule model for modular construction
Jørgensen, B., and S. Emmitt. 2008. “Lost in transition: The transfer of lean manufacturing.” In Proc., Construction Research Congress 2012:
manufacturing to construction.” Eng. Constr. Archit. Manage. 15 (4): Construction Challenges in a Flat World. Reston, VA: ASCE.
383–398. https://doi.org/10.1108/09699980810886874. Mohan, S. B., and S. Iyer. 2005. “Effectiveness of lean principles in con-
Katayama, H., and D. Bennett. 1996. “Lean production in a changing com- struction.” In Proc., Int. Group for Lean Construction 13th Annual
petitive world: A Japanese perspective.” Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manage. Conf. (IGLC-13), 421–429. Sydney, Australia: International Group
16 (2): 8–23. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443579610109811. for Lean Construction.
Khalfan, M., P. McDermott, A. Oyegoke, M. Dickinson, X. Li, and Monden, Y. 1983. Toyota production system: Practical approach to
D. Neilson. 2008. “Application of kanban in the UK construction in- production management. Norcross, GA: Industrial Engineering and
dustry by public sector clients.” In Proc., Int. Group for Lean Construc- Management Press.
tion 16th Annual Conf. (IGLC-16), 347–359. Manchster, UK: Monden, Y. 1993. Toyota production system: An integrated approach to
International Group for Lean Construction. just-in-time. Norcross, GA: Industrila Engineering and Management
Ko, C. H. 2013. “Diagnosis for introducing lean production systems in Press.
precast fabrication.” J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 8 (3): 75–80. Mostafa, S., N. Chileshe, and T. Abdelhamid. 2016. “Lean and agile inte-
Koskela, L. 1994. “Lean construction.” In Proc., National Construction gration within offsite construction using discrete event simulation:
and Management Conf., edited by R. R. Wakefield and D. G. A systematic literature review.” Constr. Innov. 16 (4): 483–525. https://
Carmichael, 205–217. Kensington, Australia: E Aust/UNSW Dept. doi.org/10.1108/CI-09-2014-0043.

Nahmens, I., and L. H. Ikuma. 2009. “An empirical examination of the Sacks, R., M. Treckmann, and O. Rozenfeld. 2009. “Visualization of work
relationship between lean construction and safety in the industrialized flow to support lean construction.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 135 (12):
housing industry.” Lean Constr. J. 2009: 1–12. 1307–1315. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000102.
Nahmens, I., and L. H. Ikuma. 2011. “Effects of lean construction on sus- Sadri, R., and H. Ghavam. 2011. “Improving productivity through mistake-
tainability of modular homebuilding.” J. Archit. Eng. 18 (2): 155–163. proofing of construction processes.” In Vol. 5 of Proc., CST, Int. Conf.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000054. on Intelligent Building and Management (ICIBM), 280–284. Singapore:
Nahmens, I., L. H. Ikuma, and D. Khot. 2012. “Kaizen and job satisfaction- IACSIT Press.
A case study in industrialized homebuilding.” Lean Constr. J. Salem, O., J. Solomon, A. Genaidy, and M. Luegring. 2005. “Site imple-
2010: 91–104. mentation and assessment of lean construction techniques.” Lean
Nahmens, I., and M. Mullens. 2009. “The impact of product choice on lean Constr. J. 2 (2): 1–21.
homebuilding.” Constr. Innov. 9 (1): 84–100. https://doi.org/10.1108 Salem, O., J. Solomon, A. Genaidy, and I. Minkarah. 2006. “Lean
/14714170910931561. construction: From theory to implementation.” J. Constr. Eng. Man-
Nahmens, I., and M. Mullens. 2011. “Lean homebuilding: Lessons learned age. 22 (4): 168. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2006)
from a precast concrete panelizer.” J. Archit. Eng. 17 (4): 155–161. 22:4(168).
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000037. Sandberg, E., and L. Bildsten. 2011. “Coordination and waste in industri-
Naim, M., and J. Barlow. 2010. “An innovative supply chain strategy for alised housing.” Constr. Innov. 11 (1): 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1108
customized housing.” Constr. Manage. Econ. 21 (6): 593–602. https:// /14714171111104646.
doi.org/10.1080/0144619032000134129. Santos, A. D., and J. Powell. 1999. “Potential of poka-yoke devices
Nakagawa, Y. 2005. “Importance of standard operating procedure to reduce variability in construction.” In Proc., Int. Group for
documents and visualisation to implement lean construction.” In Lean Construction 7th Annual Conf. (IGLC-7), 51–62. Berkeley,
Proc., Int. Group for Lean Construction 13th Annual Conf. CA: International Group for Lean Construction.
(IGLC-13), 207–215. Sydney, Australia: International Group for Santos, A. D., J. Powell, J. Sharp, and C. Formoso. 1998. “Principle of
Lean Construction. transparency applied in construction.” In Proc., Int. Group for Lean
Nasereddin, M., M. A. Mullens, and D. Cope. 2007. “Automated simulator Construction 6th Annual Conf. (IGLC-6), 16–23. Guaruja, Brazil:
development: A strategy for modeling modular housing production.” International Group for Lean Construction.
Autom. Constr. 16 (2): 212–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon Santos, A. D., and J. A. Powell. 2001. “Reduction of cycle-time through
.2006.04.003. smaller batch sizes in English and Brazilian construction sites.” In
Ng, S., W. Zou, K. Wong, and G. Huang. 2016. “Lean construction of pub- Proc., CIB World Building Congress, 1–11. Wellington, New Zealand:
lic housing production in Hong Kong: A process-based approach.” Int. Branz.
J. Housing Sci. Appl. 40 (3): 171–180. Senaratne, S., and D. Wijesiri. 2008. “Lean construction as a strategic
Nikmehr, B., M. Reza Hosseini, R. Rameezdeen, N. Chileshe, P. option: Testing its suitability and acceptability in Sri Lanka.” Lean
Ghoddousi, and M. Arashpour. 2017. “An integrated model for factors Constr. J. 2008: 34–48.
affecting construction and demolition waste management in Iran.” Eng. Senghore, O., M. Hastak, T. Abdelhamid, A. AbuHammad, and M. Syal.
Constr. Archit. Manage. 24 (6): 1246–1268. https://doi.org/10.1108 2004. “Production process for manufactured housing.” J. Constr. Eng.
/ECAM-01-2016-0015. Manage. 130 (5): 708–718. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364
Ohno, T. 1988. Toyota production system: Beyond large-scale production. (2004)130:5(708).
New York: Productivity Press. Serpell, A., A. Venturi, and J. Contreras. 1997. “Characterization of waste
Pasqualini, F., and P. A. Zawislak. 2005. “Value stream mapping in in building construction projects.” In Lean construction, edited by
construction: A case study in a Brazilian construction company.” L. Alarcón, 68–80. New York: Taylor & Francis.
In Proc., Int. Group for Lean Construction 13th Annual Conf. Shewchuk, J. P., and C. Guo. 2011. “Panel stacking, panel sequencing, and
(IGLC-13), 117–125. Sydney, Australia: International Group for stack locating in residential construction: Lean approach.” J. Constr.
Lean Construction. Eng. Manage. 138 (9): 1006–1016. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO
Peng, W., and L. S. Pheng. 2011. “Lean production, value chain and sus- .1943-7862.0000520.
tainability in precast concrete factory-a case study in Singapore.” Lean Shingo, S. 1986. Zero quality control: Source inspection and the poka-yoke
Constr. J. 2010: 92–109. system. Cambridge, MA: Productivity Press.
Pennisi Real Estate. 2017. “One9 apartments—Home.” Accessed August Shingo, S., and A. P. Dillon. 1989. A study of the Toyota production system:
15, 2017. http://one9apartments.com.au/. From an industrial engineering viewpoint. Tokyo: Japan Management
Pheng, L. S., and C. J. Chuan. 2001. “Just-in-time management in precast Association.
concrete construction: A survey of the readiness of main contractors in Song, L., and L. Daan. 2011. “Lean construction implementation and its
Singapore.” Integr. Manuf. Syst. 12 (6): 416–429. https://doi.org/10 implication on sustainability: A contractor’s case study.” Can. J. Civ.
.1108/EUM0000000006107. Eng. 38 (3): 350–359. https://doi.org/10.1139/L11-005.
Plossl, G. W. 1991. Managing in the new world of manufacturing: How Spencer, B. A. 1994. “Models of organization and total quality manage-
companies can improve operations to compete globally. Englewood ment: A comparison and critical evaluation.” Acad. Manage. Rev.
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Direct. 19 (3): 446–471. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1994.9412271807.
Popescu, D. 2015. “Kaizen-driven approach while managing industrial Stalk Jr. G., and T. M. Hout. 1990. “Competing against time.” Res.
projects. A Scandinavian company succeeds in Eastern Europe.” Technol. Manage. 33 (2): 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308
Manage. Prod. Eng. Rev. 6 (1): 26–35. .1990.11670646.
Productivity Press. 2005. Visual tools: Collected practices and cases. Teicholz, E. 1984. “Computer integrated manufacturing.” Datamation
New York: Productivity Press. 30 (3): 169–170.
Rosenbaum, S., M. Toledo, and V. González. 2013. “Improving envi- Tommelein, I. D. 1998. “Pull-driven scheduling for pipe-spool installation:
ronmental and production performance in construction projects using Simulation of lean construction technique.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
value-stream mapping: Case study.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 140 (2): 124 (4): 279–288. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1998)
04013045. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000793. 124:4(279).
Rother, M., and J. Shook. 1999. Learning to see: Value stream mapping Tommelein, I. D. 2008. “Poka-Yoke or quality by mistake proofing design
to add value and eliminate muda. Brookline, MA: Lean Enterprise and construction systems.” In Proc., Int. Group for Lean Construction
Institute. 16th Annual Conf. (IGLC-16), 195–205. Manchster, UK: International
Sacks, R., A. Esquenazi, and M. Goldin. 2007. “LEAPCON: Simulation Group for Lean Construction.
of lean construction of high-rise apartment buildings.” J. Constr. Tommelein, I. D., and M. Weissenberger. 1999. “More just-in-time:
Eng. Manage. 133 (7): 529–539. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733 Location of buffers in structural steel supply and construction
-9364(2007)133:7(529). processes.” In Proc., Int. Group for Lean Construction 7th Annual

Conf. (IGLC-7), 109–120. Berkeley, CA: International Group for Lean Womack, J. P., and D. T. Jones. 1996. Lean thinking. New York: Simon and
Construction. Schuster.
Tsuchiya, S. 1992. Quality maintenance: Zero defects through equipment Womack, J. P., D. T. Jones, and D. Roos. 1990. Machine that changed the
management. Cambridge, MA: Productivity Press. world. New York: Macmillan.
Velarde, G. J., D. E. Saloni, H. van Dyk, and M. Giunta. 2009. “Process Yang, J., and A. A. Al-Sudairi. 2007. “Evaluating the effect of construction
flow improvement proposal using lean manufacturing philosophy process characteristics to the applicability of lean principles.” Constr.
and simulation techniques on a modular home manufacturer.” Lean Innov. 7 (1): 99–121. https://doi.org/10.1108/ci.2007.33307aaa.001.
Constr. J. 2009: 77–93. Yu, H., M. Al-Hussein, S. Al-Jibouri, and A. Telyas. 2013. “Lean trans-
Vrijhoef, R., and L. Koskela. 2005. “Revisiting the three peculiarities of formation in a modular building company: A case for implementation.”
production in construction.” In Proc., Int. Group for Lean Construction J. Manage. Eng. 29 (1): 103–111. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME
13th Annual Conf. (IGLC-13), 19–27. Sydney, Australia: International .1943-5479.0000115.
Group for Lean Construction. Yu, H., T. Tweed, M. Al-Hussein, and R. Nasseri. 2009. “Development
Winch, G. 2003. “Models of manufacturing and the construction process: of lean model for house construction using value stream mapping.”
The genesis of re-engineering construction.” Build. Res. Inf. 31 (2): J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 135 (8): 782–790. https://doi.org/10.1061
107–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613210301995. /(ASCE)0733-9364(2009)135:8(782).

Lean Methodologies and Techniques For Modular Construction: Chronological and Critical Review

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lean Methodologies and Techniques For Modular Construction: Chronological and Critical Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lean Methodologies and Techniques for

Modular Construction: Chronological and Critical Review

© ASCE 04019076-1 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

Fig. 2. Production flow for modular construction.

© ASCE 04019076-2 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

Fig. 3. Waste chain. (Data from Monden 1983.)

When there is one source of waste, the others are activated in a

© ASCE 04019076-3 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

Lean Manufacturing Techniques and Tools

© ASCE 04019076-4 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

Optimization of each process

TRANSFORMATION+ Increase of the value of the end

Fig. 5. TFV theory. (Adapted from Koskela 2000.)

© ASCE 04019076-5 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

2015a). tered upon VSM implementation in a construction site in Brazil

© ASCE 04019076-6 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

divided by the total number of planned activities” (Ballard 2000).

© ASCE 04019076-7 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

Identification of and solutions can be identified to strive for improvements.

© ASCE 04019076-8 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

Hook and Stehn (2008a) Sweden Volume unit Survey

© ASCE 04019076-9 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

i) Research of ‘Article or review’ using Scopus

Scanning of reference list of

Fig. 8. Systematic review research approach.

© ASCE 04019076-10 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

Design Raw material Production Transportation Assembly

Inspection Inspection Inspection

© ASCE 04019076-13 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

© ASCE 04019076-14 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

© ASCE 04019076-15 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

.1007/s00170-016-9306-9. struction 10th Annual Conf. (IGLC-10), 1–11. Gramado, Brazil:

© ASCE 04019076-16 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

© ASCE 04019076-17 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

107–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613210301995. /(ASCE)0733-9364(2009)135:8(782).

© ASCE 04019076-18 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2019, 145(12): 04019076

You might also like