Share This Article:

A Prototype Master Code of Accounting Structure to Facilitate Accurate Measures of Construction Labor Productivity across Multiple Projects

Full-Text HTML Download Download as PDF (Size:169KB) PP. 49-59
DOI: 10.4236/tel.2014.41008    3,651 Downloads   4,880 Views   Citations

ABSTRACT

The United States National Academies identified several recommendations for the construction industry in 2009 to improve industry performance. One of the key recommendations was the development of reliable productivity measures to improve the efficiency and support of developing new construction innovations. Difficulty in measuring real output in the industry is a challenge that has prevented reliable productivity metrics. An alternative approach would be to consistently measure activity productivity across multiple construction projects throughout the United States and develop an aggregate measure accordingly. However, activity measures are inconsistent across both construction projects and even projects within the same company. Identifying an industry standard code of accounting would be a critical first step towards improving industry performance. The authors collected code of accounts from six large construction firms to identify the impact that code structure has on the ability to accurately measure labor productivity on a current along with the ability to estimate it on future projects as well. This paper focuses on mechanical piping code structure and productivity comparisons to the widely used industry estimating manuals produced by RSMeans Building Construction Cost Data and Richardson’s Process Plan Construction Cost Estimating Standards (PPCES). The paper’s contribution to the overall body knowledge illustrates the significance and degree of the impact that piping and conduit code structures related to diameter size, material type, and installation location have on accurately measuring productivity rates. The methods can be applied to other trade activities to develop an industry-wide standard code structure.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cite this paper

G. Dadi, P. Goodrum and D. Bonham, "A Prototype Master Code of Accounting Structure to Facilitate Accurate Measures of Construction Labor Productivity across Multiple Projects," Theoretical Economics Letters, Vol. 4 No. 1, 2014, pp. 49-59. doi: 10.4236/tel.2014.41008.

References

[1] Business Roundtable (BRT), “More Construction for the Money,” The Business Roundtable, New York, 1983.
[2] National Research Council (NRC), “Advancing the Competitiveness and Efficiency of the US Construction Industry,” The National Academies Press, Washington DC, 2009.
[3] H. Stokes, “An Examination of the Productivity Decline in the Construction Industry,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 63, No. 4, 1981, pp. 495-502.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1935844
[4] S. G. Allen, “Why Construction Industry Productivity Is Declining,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 117, No. 4, 1985, pp. 661-665.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1924811
[5] P. Teicholz, “Discussion on US Construction Labor Productivity Trends, 1970-1998,” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 127, No. 5, 2001, 427-429.
[6] J. Triplett and B. Bosworth, “Productivity in the US Services Sector: New Sources of Economic Growth,” Brookings Institution Press, Washington DC, 2004.
[7] P. Goodrum and C. Haas, “Partial Factor Productivity and Equipment Technology Change at the Activity Level in the US Construction Industry,” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 128, No. 6, 2002, pp. 463-472.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2002)128:6(463)
[8] D. Dacy, “Productivity and Price Trends in Construction since 1947,” Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 47, No. 4, 1965, pp. 406-411.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1927769
[9] R. Gordon, “A New View of Real Investment in Structures, 1919-1966,” Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 50, No. 4, 1968, pp. 417-428.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1926807
[10] S. Rosefielde and M. D. Quinn, “Is Construction Technologically Stagnant?” In: J. Lange and D. Mills, The Construction Industry: Balance Wheel of the Economy, Lexington Books, Lexington, Massachusetts, 1979, pp. 83-114.
[11] P. Pieper, “The Measurement of Construction Prices: Retrospect and Prospect,” In: E. Berndt and J. Triplet, Fifty Years of Economic Measurement: The Jubilee of the Conference on Research in Income and Wealth, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1990, pp. 239-272.
[12] W. Gullickson and M. Harper, “Bias in Aggregate Productivity Trends Revisited,” Monthly Labor Review, 2002, pp. 32-40.
[13] D. Zhai, P. Goodrum, C. Haas and C. Caldas, “Relationship between the Automation an Integration of Construction Information Systems and Productivity,” ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 135, No. 8, 2009, pp 746-753.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000024
[14] P. Goodrum, C. Haas and R. Glover, “The Divergence in Aggregate and Activity Estimates of US Construction Productivity,” Journal of Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 20, No. 5, 2002, pp. 415-423.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01446190210145868
[15] P. Goodrum and C. Haas, “The Long-Term Impact of Equipment Technology on Labor Productivity in the US Construction Industry at the Activity Level,” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 131, No. 1, 2004, pp. 124-133.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2004)130:1(124)
[16] P. Goodrum, D. Zhai and M. Yasin, “The Relationship between Changes in Material Technology and Construction Productivity,” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 135, No. 4, 2009, pp. 278-287.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2009)135:4(278)
[17] P. Pieper, “Construction Price Statistics Revisited,” In: D. Jorgenson and R. Landau, Technology and Capital Formation, The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1989, pp. 293-330.
[18] T. E. Dielman, “Applied Regression Analysis: A Second Course in Business and Economics Statistics,” 4th Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason, 2005.

  
comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2018 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.