N. Scala, V. Schiavone, Hylton Olivieri, O. Seppänen, T. Alves, Min Liu, A. D. Granja
{"title":"巴西、芬兰和美国关键路径法、末次规划系统和基于位置技术的规划比较分析","authors":"N. Scala, V. Schiavone, Hylton Olivieri, O. Seppänen, T. Alves, Min Liu, A. D. Granja","doi":"10.1080/10429247.2022.2069981","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Critical Path Method (CPM), the Last Planner System (LPS) and location-based methods, such as the Line of Balance (LB), are discussed extensively in the technical literature about schedules. However, no discussion exists focusing on the differences and similarities of these methods in terms of their use in different countries. Using chi-squared and Fisher’s exact tests, this research compared three countries (Brazil, Finland, and United States) and the methods to evaluate both intra- and inter-country implementation to gain additional insights about their use. Results suggest statistically significant intra- and inter-country differences regarding how these methods are used, with a specific focus on mechanics in the countries, offering important information to address their various scheduling needs. The results reflect the current state of practice; engineering and construction managers should understand different ways of understanding scheduling. Such understanding can lead to more efficient communication with collaborators and when incorporating foreign teams in projects. The study identifies the need for further scientific explanation as to why these methods are used in the manner they are intra-country as well as adaptions made in inter-country relationships.","PeriodicalId":54353,"journal":{"name":"Engineering Management Journal","volume":"35 1","pages":"237 - 256"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Analysis of Planning with the Critical Path Method, Last Planner System, and Location-Based Techniques in Brazil, Finland, and the United States\",\"authors\":\"N. Scala, V. Schiavone, Hylton Olivieri, O. Seppänen, T. Alves, Min Liu, A. D. Granja\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10429247.2022.2069981\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The Critical Path Method (CPM), the Last Planner System (LPS) and location-based methods, such as the Line of Balance (LB), are discussed extensively in the technical literature about schedules. However, no discussion exists focusing on the differences and similarities of these methods in terms of their use in different countries. Using chi-squared and Fisher’s exact tests, this research compared three countries (Brazil, Finland, and United States) and the methods to evaluate both intra- and inter-country implementation to gain additional insights about their use. Results suggest statistically significant intra- and inter-country differences regarding how these methods are used, with a specific focus on mechanics in the countries, offering important information to address their various scheduling needs. The results reflect the current state of practice; engineering and construction managers should understand different ways of understanding scheduling. Such understanding can lead to more efficient communication with collaborators and when incorporating foreign teams in projects. The study identifies the need for further scientific explanation as to why these methods are used in the manner they are intra-country as well as adaptions made in inter-country relationships.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54353,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Engineering Management Journal\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"237 - 256\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Engineering Management Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10429247.2022.2069981\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Engineering Management Journal","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10429247.2022.2069981","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative Analysis of Planning with the Critical Path Method, Last Planner System, and Location-Based Techniques in Brazil, Finland, and the United States
Abstract The Critical Path Method (CPM), the Last Planner System (LPS) and location-based methods, such as the Line of Balance (LB), are discussed extensively in the technical literature about schedules. However, no discussion exists focusing on the differences and similarities of these methods in terms of their use in different countries. Using chi-squared and Fisher’s exact tests, this research compared three countries (Brazil, Finland, and United States) and the methods to evaluate both intra- and inter-country implementation to gain additional insights about their use. Results suggest statistically significant intra- and inter-country differences regarding how these methods are used, with a specific focus on mechanics in the countries, offering important information to address their various scheduling needs. The results reflect the current state of practice; engineering and construction managers should understand different ways of understanding scheduling. Such understanding can lead to more efficient communication with collaborators and when incorporating foreign teams in projects. The study identifies the need for further scientific explanation as to why these methods are used in the manner they are intra-country as well as adaptions made in inter-country relationships.
期刊介绍:
EMJ is designed to provide practical, pertinent knowledge on the management of technology, technical professionals, and technical organizations. EMJ strives to provide value to the practice of engineering management and engineering managers. EMJ is an archival journal that facilitates both practitioners and university faculty in publishing useful articles. The primary focus is on articles that improve the practice of engineering management. To support the practice of engineering management, EMJ publishes papers within key engineering management content areas. EMJ Editors will continue to refine these areas to ensure they are aligned with the challenges faced by technical organizations and technical managers.