https://doi.org/10.24928/2023/0255

Comparison of Takt Planning Methods Used on Projects of Different Types

Iris D. Tommelein¹ & Jon Lerche²

¹Distinguished Professor, Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Director, Project Production Systems Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, USA, [email protected], orcid.org/0000-0002- 9941-6596
²PhD, Dept. of BTech., Aarhus University, Birk Centerpark 15, 7400 Herning, Denmark, [email protected], orcid.org/0000-0001-7076-9630

Abstract

Takt planning has been used to deliver projects of different types and in different industry sectors. We presuppose here that the methods used to develop project takt plans therefore must vary. To test whether this presupposition holds we consider two different project types (wind turbines and healthcare facilities) and compare sample projects of these types in terms of the rationale that was applied when developing their takt plans. We show that the rationale takes into account the relative cycle times and associated resource costs of individual steps in their production processes, considering the dependencies between those steps and between processes. Little has been written in the literature to date about the relative costs of process steps in takt plans, and how these costs affect the opportunities planners have and choices they make when leveling workloads to determine the so-called “operable” takt time. That is done here. This paper contributes to the literature on takt production used to deliver construction projects by describing theoretical concepts that help to differentiate takt planning methods used to plan projects of different types.

Keywords

Production system design, takt production, takt planning, work structuring, flow, complexity, cycle time, cost, Critical Chain, Theory of Constraints

Files

Reference

Tommelein, I. D. & Lerche, J. 2023. Comparison of Takt Planning Methods Used on Projects of Different Types, Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction (IGLC31) , 1605-1616. doi.org/10.24928/2023/0255

Download: BibTeX | RIS Format