If we look upon construction as a
complex process near the edge of chaos – or in some cases chaotic – we get a
new understanding of its nature. This understanding may explain why some tools
and initiatives work while others don't. It may also explain why the building
industry is so short in improvements compared to the manufacturing industry.
Is construction a complex phenomenon?
The construction process is a complex
system from several points of view. Being a one-of- a-kind production of a
complicated product makes the process with its multiple activities a complex
system. Having a different team undertaking each project must – by its
organization – make the actual production a complex situation. And the
structure of the industry, where all the participants in the production system
also work on other projects at the same time, makes the whole industry a very
close network, i.e. a complex system.
Besides, the temporary production
facilities, the uncertainty of the processes and the changes in the product
specifications that building is so rich in, make this complexity highly dynamic
as well, and bring thus the whole situation to the edge of chaos.
The last planner takes hand of this
situation by distributing process control and decision power to the lowest level
possible. By using a very short horizon in the work plan – normally one week
– the system makes the reliability as high as possible in respect of the
system's chaotic nature.
The success of this approach supports
the hypothesis of construction being a complex, near chaotic system. A further
and more formal proof might be the existence of a power law in the frequencies
and size of events in construction, either unforeseen events or changes in the
system in general. The Santa Fee researchers have shown that such a law can be
found in for instance the extinction of species, in the fluctuation at the stock
markets and in the frequency of the Californian earthquakes; all complex
systems.
Changes in complex systems
Kurzweil claims
that the time between salient events in a chaotic system decreases as the system
gets more ordered. The system develops at an increasing speed.
I think we can recognize some of the
characteristics of construction here. The time between changes in the
construction system, its organizational pattern or its methods is indeed very
long compared to manufacturing.
So, by making the process more ordered
not only increases in productivity can be made, but also increase of the rate of
changes towards a more efficient undertaking might be obtained. And opposite:
without a more ordered – industrialized – process, we may never change the
industry into an efficient operation.
But not too ordered, please
Society is a complex system. The
construction sector is a complex subsystem of society. The sector consists of a
network of agents – firms and individuals – who co-operate in ever changing
patterns, even though some stable groups emerge from time to time. Often stable
groups emerge in the form of the organization for a specific job, but it can
also happen as a long-term co-operation.
The construction task is of a wicked
nature, and the process becomes even more complex because of its one-of-a-kind
nature. Is the proper organization to undertake this an even more complex
organization?
We talk about the build environment. If we really believe that we are
building our own and the next generations' environment, we should be very
conscious about being too efficient and ordered. The next generation might hate
our output.
Too much order in the construction
sector will decrease the individuality of the output. Look for instance at the
manufactured homes. One car can be nice, several cars are traffic, and standing
still at the manufacturer's backyard, they generate a monotony we hate.
Questions
·
Where should we look for a power law in
construction, how and through which data source?
·
Is Kurzweil right in claiming that more order
shortens the time between radical changes?
·
How ordered should construction – or at least
Building – be?
Sven Bertelsen
