IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i19p12030-d923254.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Digital Last Planner System Whiteboard for Enabling Remote Collaborative Design Process Planning and Control

Author

Listed:
  • Ergo Pikas

    (Building Lifecycle Research Group, Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Tallinn University of Technology, 19086 Tallinn, Estonia)

  • Bárbara Pedó

    (Innovative Design Lab (IDL), School of Arts and Humanities, University of Huddersfield, Queensgate, Huddersfield HD1 3DH, UK)

  • Algan Tezel

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Aston University, Aston Street, Birmingham B4 7ET, UK)

  • Lauri Koskela

    (Innovative Design Lab (IDL), School of Arts and Humanities, University of Huddersfield, Queensgate, Huddersfield HD1 3DH, UK)

  • Markus Veersoo

    (Building Lifecycle Research Group, Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Tallinn University of Technology, 19086 Tallinn, Estonia)

Abstract

The coronavirus outbreak forced design companies to consider how the flow of information and work processes could be managed in the context of remote design work. This research aims to put a digital Last Planner System (LPS) whiteboard to the test in support of remote collaborative design process planning and control and identify its benefits and challenges. The synergies between lean and digital practices were explored by developing solutions in two different case studies, one in the UK and the other in Estonia. Research results were interpreted, and the main lessons learned were articulated. The digital LPS whiteboard enabled and supported the remote planning and control of design projects and processes. The digital LPS whiteboard had the following process-related benefits, including, for example, increased transparency, understanding, engagement, flexibility, and continuous improvement. Challenges in the use of the digital whiteboard were generally due to an excess of information and meetings, the social limitations of virtual meetings, and a lack of relevant IT competencies. Recommendations for individuals interested in planning, developing, and testing a digital whiteboard for remote implementation of the LPS are made. Further research on the entangled nature of digital whiteboard functionality and LPS behaviors is needed.

Suggested Citation

  • Ergo Pikas & Bárbara Pedó & Algan Tezel & Lauri Koskela & Markus Veersoo, 2022. "Digital Last Planner System Whiteboard for Enabling Remote Collaborative Design Process Planning and Control," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-27, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:12030-:d:923254
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/12030/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/12030/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eppinger, Steven D. & Browning, Tyson R., 2012. "Design Structure Matrix Methods and Applications," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262017520, December.
    2. Daria Zimina & Glenn Ballard & Christine Pasquire, 2012. "Target value design: using collaboration and a lean approach to reduce construction cost," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(5), pages 383-398, March.
    3. Simon Austin & Andrew Baldwin & Baizhan Li & Paul Waskett, 2000. "Analytical design planning technique (ADePT): a dependency structure matrix tool to schedule the building design process," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 173-182.
    4. Ergo Pikas & Lauri Koskela & Olli Seppänen, 2020. "Improving Building Design Processes and Design Management Practices: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-18, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jeeeun Kim & Sungjoo Lee, 2017. "Forecasting and identifying multi-technology convergence based on patent data: the case of IT and BT industries in 2020," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(1), pages 47-65, April.
    2. Geyer, Philipp & Singaravel, Sundaravelpandian, 2018. "Component-based machine learning for performance prediction in building design," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 1439-1453.
    3. Uwe Beyer & Oliver Ullrich, 2022. "Organizational Complexity as a Contributing Factor to Underperformance," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-15, March.
    4. Morgan Dwyer & Bruce Cameron & Zoe Szajnfarber, 2015. "A Framework for Studying Cost Growth on Complex Acquisition Programs," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(6), pages 568-583, November.
    5. Félicia Saïah & Diego Vega & Harwin de Vries & Joakim Kembro, 2023. "Process modularity, supply chain responsiveness, and moderators: The Médecins Sans Frontières response to the Covid‐19 pandemic," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(5), pages 1490-1511, May.
    6. Junguang Zhang & Xiwei Song & Hongyu Chen & Ruixia (Sandy) Shi, 2016. "Determination of critical chain project buffer based on information flow interactions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(9), pages 1146-1157, September.
    7. Maria Mercanti-Guérin, 2021. "From Perceived Creativity To Status Quo Bias The Case Of Digital Twins In The Home," Post-Print hal-03450262, HAL.
    8. Hosang Hyun & Hyunsoo Kim & Hyun-Soo Lee & Moonseo Park & Jeonghoon Lee, 2020. "Integrated Design Process for Modular Construction Projects to Reduce Rework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, January.
    9. Liu, Zhixue & Ding, Ronggui & Wang, Lei & Song, Rui & Song, Xinyi, 2023. "Cooperation in an uncertain environment: The impact of stakeholders' concerted action on collaborative innovation projects risk management," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    10. Robert Schmidt & Kasper Sanchez Vibaek & Simon Austin, 2014. "Evaluating the adaptability of an industrialized building using dependency structure matrices," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1-2), pages 160-182, February.
    11. Subarna Basnet & Christopher L Magee, 2017. "Artifact interactions retard technological improvement: An empirical study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, August.
    12. Kaushik Sinha & Seok‐Youn Han & Eun Suk Suh, 2020. "Design structure matrix‐based modularization approach for complex systems with multiple design constraints," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 211-220, March.
    13. David A. Broniatowski, 2018. "Building the tower without climbing it: Progress in engineering systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(3), pages 259-281, May.
    14. Gökhan Demirdöğen & Nihan Sena Diren & Hande Aladağ & Zeynep Işık, 2021. "Lean Based Maturity Framework Integrating Value, BIM and Big Data Analytics: Evidence from AEC Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-27, September.
    15. Samina Karim & Chi‐Hyon Lee & Manuela N. Hoehn‐Weiss, 2023. "Task bottlenecks and resource bottlenecks: A holistic examination of task systems through an organization design lens," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(8), pages 1839-1878, August.
    16. Jyh-Rong Chou, 2021. "A Scoping Review of Ontologies Relevant to Design Strategies in Response to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-27, September.
    17. Mark P. De Lessio & Michel‐Alexandre Cardin & Angel Astaman & Valerie Djie, 2015. "A Process to Analyze Strategic Design and Management Decisions Under Uncertainty in Complex Entrepreneurial Systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(6), pages 604-624, November.
    18. Walid F. Nasrallah & Charbel J. Ouba & Ali A. Yassine & Issam M. Srour, 2015. "Modeling the span of control of leaders with different skill sets," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 296-317, September.
    19. Juntao Zhang & Cecilia Haskins & Yiliu Liu & Mary Ann Lundteigen, 2018. "A systems engineering–based approach for framing reliability, availability, and maintainability: A case study for subsea design," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(6), pages 576-592, November.
    20. Nazarizadeh, Farzaneh & Alemtabriz, Akbar & Zandieh, Mostafa & Raad, Abbas, 2022. "An analytical model for reliability assessment of the rail system considering dependent failures (case study of Iranian railway)," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:12030-:d:923254. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.