Value to the end customer is an important aspect of the lean thinking philosophy [Womack, Jones, and Roos 1991; Womack and Jones 1996]. Lean thinking and tech- niques borrowed and adapted from lean manufacturing can provide a useful array of tools through which the value of the design can be enhanced, and waste reduced. Although developed specifi cally for manufacturing and mass-produced products, the philosophy is relatively robust and can, with some interpretation, be applied to a project environment. In the context of this study, the fi ve principles of lean thinking have been interpreted and adapted to design management to:
Specify value: clearly and precisely identify the client’s values and require- ments, and then identify the specifi c functions required to deliver a solution Identify the value stream: identify the most appropriate processes to deliver the building through the integration of the functions identifi ed when specify- ing value
Enable value to fl ow: remove any unnecessary or redundant cost items from the design to get to the optimal solution (as agreed by the major project stakeholders)
Establish the “pull” of value: this means frequently listening to the client and other key stakeholders during the project and responding iteratively
Pursue perfection: incorporate process improvement methods into the organi- zational culture and practices of the project participants’ fi rms
Th ese fi ve principles underpin the workshop method, starting with the defi nition of value and continuing through the entire process, as described below. Lean thinking can be applied at diff erent levels in the product development process, from the entire project to distinct phases and substages, which can assist the planning and scheduling
• • • • • 47450_C005.indd 4 47450_C005.indd 4 8/12/08 11:48:46 AM8/12/08 11:48:46 AM
Collaboration and Communication in the Design Chain 5-5
of the various work packages. Approaching design from a lean thinking perspective also helps to emphasize the need for designers to understand how design value is physically realized and the associated production costs; that is, they need to understand the supply chain. Again this is addressed within the workshops. Depending on the type of project and the approach adopted by the design team, this may involve a greater understanding of craft techniques, or manufacturing production techniques, and the associated cost and time parameters. Th e fi ve principles also underpin the development of the 7 Cs model, which is used by the case study organization and described below.
5.2.3 Interaction
Th e philosophy behind the approach used is that to explore values and implement lean thinking requires face-to-face interaction within the project team, and the primary mechanism for this is a series of facilitated workshops. Th e goal is to improve the inte- gration and realization of project values, with the ultimate goal of delivering better value to the customer. Th is is not a new idea, for example, architects Konrad Wachsmann and Walter Gropius introduced a teamwork method for the development of complex building concepts in the 1940s [Gropius and Harkness 1966], and Caudill (1971) promoted archi- tecture by team in a book of the same title. What has changed is that groupwork and teamwork have taken on more signifi cance with the promotion of relational forms of contracting and integrated supply chain management.
Integration of supply chain members in the product development process brings to the project the skills, knowledge, and experience of a wide range of specialists, oft en working together as a virtual team from diff erent physical locations. Th is requires social parity between actors, which means that professional arrogance, stereotypical views of professionals, and issues of status have to be put to one side or confronted through the early discussion of values. To do this eff ectively, all actors must engage in dialogue to explore and then confi rm a set of values that form the basis of the project. Th e most eff ective way of doing this is through face-to-face meetings that recognize the value of group process [Luft 1984]. Interactions within groups, power relationships, leadership, and decision making are extremely complex matters, and contradictory views exist as to the ability of a group to reach its defi ned goals [e.g., Stroop 1932; Yoshida, Fentond, and Maxwell 1978; Emmitt and Gorse 2007]. However, the authors of this chapter strongly believe that unless interaction is addressed from the very start of projects in a profes- sional and ordered manner, then it can be very diffi cult to achieve very high value in the design chain.
5.3 Value-Based Model
Th e focus on value and attempts to explore the values held by members of the supply chain has led to a method that relies on facilitating the interaction of the project stake- holders. Th is is achieved through a series of workshops in which the focus is on the client’s “value universe,” and the interaction practices within interdisciplinary groups [see Emmitt and Gorse 2007].
47450_C005.indd 5
5-6 Construction Supply Chain Management Handbook
Th e literature on value management and value engineering overlaps, therefore it is necessary to state how the two terms are interpreted and applied in relation to this case study. Value-based management attempts to control values, primarily through value management [see Kelly and Male 1993] to “create” value in the early stages of the project. Value engineering techniques [see Miles 1972] are used to “deliver” value in the production stage. Value-based management uses face-to-face workshops as a forum to allow actors to discuss, explore, challenge, disagree, and eventually agree to commonly shared project values. Th ese values are then defi ned in a written document as a set of value parameters, and prioritized in order of importance to the project team. Th is forms part of the project briefi ng (also known as architectural programming) documentation. Getting to know each other, and thus establishing common values and/or knowing why values diff er between the stakeholders is crucial to the method. It is about how to work together, and how to keep agreements between the client and the delivery team.
In Denmark, it is also common to diff erentiate between the values of the client (external values), and values of the delivery team (internal values), and these are not to be confused [Christoff ersen 2003b]. External values are further separated into: (a) process values, and (b) product values. Process values comprise both “soft ” and “hard” v alues. Th e soft values include work ethics, communication, confl ict solving, trust, etc., between the client and the delivery team. Th ese are intangible and diffi cult to measure objectively. Th e hard values include the delivery team’s ability to keep agreed time limits, cost estimates, quality of the product, workers’ safety, etc. Th ese are tangible and can be measured objectively to assess project performance. Primary product values comprise beauty, functionality, durability, suitability for the site and community, sustainability, and buildability. As the understanding of values improves and evolves through the design process, we are dealing with a learning process that relies on the development of trust and eff ective interpersonal communication.