Process improvement and automation in construction: Opposing or complementing approaches?

It is widely recognized that there must be wide-ranging changes in construction before automation can be implemented in practice. On the other hand, the innovation rate of construction is rather low, and thus it is unclear, how the steps necessary for automation could be realized. It is argued, that an insufficient attention to process improvement is a major barrier to automation and other technological progress of construction.

[1]  Lauri Koskela.  Automation and Robotics in Construction - State of the Art in Finland , 1991 .

[2]  Computer Staff,et al.  The Machine That Changed the World , 1992 .

[3]  Hannu Lehtinen,et al.  Outlines of Two Masonry Robot Sytems , 1989 .

[4]  Pierre Béranger.  Les nouvelles règles de la production : vers l'excellence industrielle , 1987 .

[5]  Thomas Martineau.  Future Uses of Robotics and other Forms of Automation in Onsite Construction Applications , 1990 .

[6]  Joseph A. Heim,et al.  Manufacturing systems : foundations of world-class practice , 1992 .

[7]  Paul Fazio,et al.  Automation index for evaluation of robotics implementation in construction , 1989 .

[8]  Lauri Koskela,et al.  The Feasibility of Construction Robotics in Finland and Norway , 1989 .

[9]  Blaxill Mf,et al.  The fallacy of the overhead quick fix. , 1991 .

[10]  David Stockton,et al.  Flexible Manufacturing Technologies and International Competitiveness , 1993 .

[11]  Tatsuo Terai.  Administrative Measures to Take in Advancement of Electronics-Oriented Building Construction Technology , 1988 .

[12]  Laura Demsetz.  Task Identification for Construction Automation , 1989 .

[13]  Javier Ibanez-Guzman,et al.  A New Direction in Automating Construction , 1989 .

[14]  T. Hout,et al.  The fallacy of the overhead quick fix. , 1991, Harvard business review.

[15]  John G. Everett.  Back to Basics in Construction Automation , 1990 .

[16]  Yukio Hasegawa,et al.  One Decade of Robotics in Construction , 1991 .