Measuring the level of supply chain robustness during construction mega-projects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Too often mega-projects are completed late and over budget. Nevertheless, there is no holistic model, nor any solid-proof framework, nor theories which measures performance and productivity pertaining to the construction activities. One solution proposed by the researcher, is the formulation of an artifact or design, known as the Construction Performance & Productivity Model (CPPM), which integrates a supply chain framework. The Construction Performance & Productivity Model seeks to attenuate the managerial problematic in the industry with the vision to develop a design that would make the Canadian construction industry more competitive. The framework of the model has a supply chain approach, provides real-time measurement with performance attributes and metrics that are pertinent to the construction industry. It is also friendly to users and covers all phases of construction mega-projects. The research over the years evolved from the freedom of adopting various methodologies and theories. The paradigm of Design-Science Research (DSR) was selected because it espouses this academic freedom in design, science and real-life environment. Through a Participant Observation (engineering phases) and Action Research (construction activities), using the SCOR Model as its base, enriched and minimised through a series of semi-structures interviews and one survey, the research found the most important performance attributes and metrics that performed best in the model (CPPM) were the ones belonging to the categories of EPCM Agility, followed by Project Controls and Procurement Reliability. The researcher believes this doctoral thesis has permitted the science to progress because its model (CPPM) relates its seven (7) constructs to megaprojects, reinforced by four (4) years of observations, is validated through a series of principles, processes, evaluation, contribution and justification knowledge. Moreover, the model’s originality and inventiveness are different from the ones found in construction literature. Finally, the researcher concludes the CPPM has achieved a level of consistency for the construction site it was only tested to it. Understanding the model’s limitations, this research offer opportunities to other scientists to further the model validity by testing it in different construction sites.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".