Today’s Course Schedule
Time
Session
Topic/Activity
–
Welcome and Orientation
1
Pull Planning
10:00–10:15 AM
–
Break
10:15–11:15 AM
2
Lean Workstructuring Basics
11:15–11:300 AM
–
Break
11:30 AM–12:30PM
3
Last Planner® System
12:30 PM
–
Course Conclusion
8:00–10:00 AM
1-2
Welcome to Lean Workstructuring
• Your facilitator
• Orientation
• Participant introductions
– Your name, company, and position
– What is your level of Lean Construction experience?
– Does anyone have any experience with Lean
Workstructuring and the Last Planner® System?
– What do you want to get out of this course?
• Closing forms and evaluations
1-3
AGC’s Lean Construction
Education Program Overview
• A series of courses that progressively cover a range
of topics in Lean Construction including:
–
–
–
–
–
Variation and pull in production
Lean Workstructuring, supply chains, and assembly
Production management
Management by values
Problem-solving principles and tools
• For more information, including information on
credentialing, visit www.agc.org/LCEP.
1-4
AGC’s Lean Construction
Education Program Overview
• The overall aims of the LCEP are to:
– Develop Lean Construction champions within
construction firms
– Advance the use of lean practices in
construction through development of a
consistent nomenclature and practices
– Provide an industry-recognized credential that
creates a common standard of knowledge
1-5
Course Learning Objectives
Following this course, you will be able to:
• Apply the methods and tools utilized in pull
planning
• Describe the concept of Lean Workstructuring
• Outline the desired products of Lean
Workstructuring
• Describe the characteristics and application of
the Last Planner® System
1-6
Session 1 Learning Objectives
Following this session, you will be able to:
• Describe the basic characteristics of the push
planning approach
• Describe the pull planning process
• Distinguish pull planning from push planning
1-8
Q What We’ve Learned So Far
• The goal of Lean Construction is to eliminate:
– Workers waiting for work
– Work waiting for workers
• The way to do this is to:
– Reduce variation
– Eliminate waste
– Improve workflow reliability
1-9
Q
Review of Unit 1: Variation in
Production Systems
• Define the different types of variation
• Explain the concept of throughput
• Distinguish the concepts of throughput and work
•
•
•
•
in progress
Describe the role of variation in production
operations
List sources of variation in construction settings
Explain variation mitigation techniques
Contrast variation mitigation techniques
1-10
Q Review of Unit 2: Pull in Production
• Compare batch-and-queue and continuous-flow
production systems
• Distinguish push systems from pull systems
• Describe the impact of pull on production
systems
• Explain pull strategies in construction operations
1-11
The Last Planner® System (LPS)
LPS
Workstructuring
Production Control
Achieve reliable workflow
using production system
design and rapid learning
Figure 1.1: The Last Planner System
1-12
Push Planning Defined
• The traditional planning system is a push system.
– In this system work is pushed into production:
• Based on predetermined completion dates
• Regardless of whether workers are ready to start work
– It is an assumption-based vision of how the work will
take place
– It confuses planning with prediction, leading to local
optimization
1-13
Push Planning Discussion
• Share and discuss your company’s push
planning practices:
– When is planning typically done for projects?
– Who is involved?
– What format does your company use to
communicate the plan?
– Is the plan typically followed?
– How are updates typically managed?
1-14
Pull Planning Defined
• Pull planning depends on an understanding of the
levels of readiness of downstream activities.
• Work is scheduled for when it can be properly
performed, not based on predetermined dates, by
those who will execute the work.
• Pull planning is used heavily in creating phase
schedules in the LPS.
• In pull planning you start from a milestone and work
your way backward
1-15
Pull Planning Process
Watertight
Mechanical &
Plumbing
Rough-in
What do we need
completed
in order to reach
the watertight
milestone?
Direction of
Milestone
planning
Pulled Activities
Figure 1.2: Pull Planning Concept2
Figure 1.3: Pull Planning
Proceeding Backward3
1-16
z
Pull Planning Process:
Collaborative Planning Sessions
Figure 1.4: Pull Planning Session4
1-17
Pull Planning Process: Discussions
Figure 1.5: Developed Pull Plan
Leads to Discussions5
1-18
Pull Planning Simulation6:
Before You Begin
• We will plan, and then build, a structure using a pull
planning process.
• Your facilitator will divide you into groups of four
– Each person will be assigned:
• Blocks of a specific color
• An “I Get/I Give” card, matching your assigned block color
– Each group gets a site plan and milestone note
• The site plan is used to indicate which side of the building is
the front
• The milestone note is used to indicate the end of the building
process where the building is complete.
• Clear off your tables to have room for building
1-19
Pull Planning Simulation:
Projects as Networks of Commitments
•
Team members
– Ask for what they need from their suppliers
– Commit to provide what their customers need
GET
GIVE
GET
Architect
GIVE
GET
HVAC
GIVE
GET
Plumbing
GIVE
GET
Framer
GIVE
PRODUCTION
TARGET
Electrical
Figure 1.6: Projects as Networks
of Commitments
1-20
Pull Planning Simulation:
“I Get/I Give” Card
• “I get” = what you need to
begin
• “I give” = what you will give
to the next person
• Each card can only have
one “give”
• You may need more than
one “give” to achieve your
“get”
– A “get” can be a constraint
of the “TIMMESS” type
• Time, information,
material, manpower,
equipment, safety, and
space
Figure 1.7: “I Get/I Give” Card
1-21
Card Numbering and Placement
• Maintain order and clarity
– Always place the supplier card to the left of the
customer card
– Keep the cards visible by placing them in columns
• Build the network as you go
–
Give each card a unique number as it is placed
•
–
You may want to count down from the milestone
Write the number of the customer card which you
are supplying in the “For #” space
1-22
Pull Planning Simulation:
Example “I Get/I Give” Card
Figure 1.8: Example “I Get/I Give”
Card for Simulation
1-23
Pull Planning Simulation:
Building Schematic
Figure 1.9: Schematic Front
and Side Elevation
1-24
Pull Planning Simulation:
The Building
Figure 1.10: Actual Views
1-25
Blocks for the Simulation
Figure 1.11: Blocks for the Simulation
1-26
Pull Planning Simulation:
The Customer Invitation Method
1. The customer invites their supplier(s) to place
a card representing delivery of what they need
when they need it
2. The customer signs off when they have
everything they need to deliver their work
3. Each supplier becomes the customer and does
the same thing
1-27
Pull Planning Simulation:
Pre-Planning Discussion
• Who should go first?
• What is the best sequence — building
from the inside or outside?
• Where and how should the pieces be
placed? Quality?
• What if a piece is delivered late? What can
you do?
1-28
Pull Planning Simulation:
Planning
• The red contractor lays the last block on the
structure so he/she completes the first “I
Get/I Give” card, placing it on the far right of
the table.
• The red contractor invites the next
contractors to fill out their cards.
– They place their cards to the left of the red
contractor’s, and the process continues.
– Each contractor must be invited by the previous
• The plan is complete when all the blocks are
accounted for.
• Do not begin the building process
Figure 1.10: Actual Views
1-29
Pull Planning Simulation:
Building
• The facilitator will signal groups to begin.
• Build using the “I get/I give” cards you created
during the planning process, ending at the
milestone sticky note.
• Use the site plan to orient your building
• You can only touch your blocks
• You must build only from your plan. You cannot
look at the pictures of the building
1-30
Pull Planning Simulation:
Post-Building Discussion
• What are some of the issues that came up as
you began building?
– How could you have avoided some of these issues?
• How is this like the real world?
• What are the key points or lessons for you?
• Can this process be used during the design
phase to plan for construction? Why?
1-31
Session 1 Summary
• Push plans:
– Are typically produced by a single entity with little to no
involvement of those executing the work
– Result in a plan full of assumptions about means and
methods that usually is not reflective of what really will
take place
• Pull plans:
– Are produced by those who will execute the work
• The executors will engage in production system design by
virtue of being present and the clear need for coordination.
– Are developed by working backward from a target
completion date, with tasks defined and sequenced so that
their completion releases work to begin on a subsequent
task
1-32
Session 2 Learning Objectives
Following this session, you will be able to:
• Define Lean Workstructuring
• Describe the products of Lean Workstructuring
• Distinguish between Lean Workstructuring and
Work Breakdown Structure
2-2
Lean Workstructuring Defined
• Lean Workstructuring (LWS)
develops the project’s
process design while trying to
align:
–
–
–
–
Engineering design
Supply chain
Resource allocation
Assembly efforts
• LWS considers production
Waste
(Muda)
Flow
Variation
Overburden
(Mura)
(Muri)
workflow during design and
project planning.
Figure 2.1: Influences on Workflow8
2-3
View of Lean Workstructuring
Product Design
Process Design
(What will be built)
(How to assemble)
Workstructuring
Supply
Chain
(How to buy/fabricate)
Figure 2.2: A View of Lean
Workstructuring9
2-4
Scope of Lean Workstructuring
Workstructuring
Pre-Construction
Construction
Phase
Phase
Production system
design
Figure 2.3: Scope of Lean
Workstructuring10
Master, phase, and
make-ready schedules
using pull planning
2-5
How Is LWS Different?
• Much of what we do now is workarounds
• First Run Studies
– A cross-functional team tries to establish a standard to meet or
beat execution of that operation
– Follows the Shewhart plan-do-check-act cycle
• LWS vs. Constructability
– Constructability is a reaction to design, LWS is an influence on
design
• LWS vs. Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
– WBS is the progressive breaking down of a project into its
component parts
– It assumes that optimizing the parts will optimize the whole
• LWS is concerned with the whole, not the individual parts
2-6
Products of Lean Workstructuring
• A process represents the flow of material and/or information in time
Operation
and space as it is being transformed.
• An operation represents the work performed to complete the
transformation (changes in form, shape, and/or function) of materials.
Inspections
Inspections
Inspections
Processing
Processing
Processing
Wait
Wait
Wait
Handling
Handling
Handling
Install Studs
Install Electrical
Hang Drywall
Process
Figure 2.4: Process vs. Operation12
2-7
Products of LWS: Process Level
•
•
•
•
Global sequencing/master schedule
Phase schedules
Make-ready schedules
Weekly work plans
2-8
Focus of LWS: Process Level
Figure 2.5: LWS Focus at
Process Level13
2-9
LWS at the Process Level:
Exterior Wall Workstructuring
•
•
•
•
Gets/gives
Production rates
Handoffs
Conditions of satisfaction
Joint Sealants
1-2 Days
Figure 2.6: Exterior Wall
LWS Example14
Exterior Metal
Studs and
Sheathing
1- 2 Days
Masonry
Veneer
1-2 Days
Exterior
Waterproofing
1 Day
Install
Windows
1 Day
2-10
LWS at the Process Level:
Concrete Framing Workstructuring
•
•
•
•
•
Gets/gives
Production rates
Handoffs
Conditions of satisfaction
Columns
1-2 Days
Figure 2.7: Concrete Framing
LWS Example15
Frame &
Deck
1–2 Days
Place
Rebar
1-2 Days
Set
Sleeves
1 Day
Pour
1 Day
2-11
LWS at the Process Level:
Drywall Operation WBS
• Is this the right order?
• Should it be built another way?
• Should these elements be broken down further?
Head
Track
1-2 Days
Overhead
MEP
Rough-in
1-2 Days
In Wall
Rough-in
1-2 Days
Figure 2.8: Drywall Operation WBS16
Install HM
Frames
and Metal
Studs
1 Day
One Side
Gypsum
Board
1 Day
Second
Side
Gypsum
1-2 Days
TFF
3 Days
Paint
1-2 Days
2-12
Lean Workstructuring Participants
• Who should be doing this?
– General and specialty contractors
• Project manager
• Foreman
• Team leader
– Supplier
– Owner (contract permitting)
– Architect (contract permitting)
2-13
Products of LWS: Operation Level
• Rough cut operations designs
– Decision to cast-in-place vs. precast
• Detailed operations designs
– How to form, rebar, and pour basement walls
– First run studies are utilized:
• Sequencing
• Material availability
• Video taping
2-14
LWS and LPDS
Figure 2.9: Lean Project Delivery
System with DBB, CM at-Risk,
and IPD17
2-15
Hollow Metal Door Frames Case Study18
Foundation
Precast
Figure 2.10: Simplified Building Schedule
Top Slab
Doors
Paint
2-16
Case Study: Door Frame and
Wall Panel Detail
INSIDE
EDGE OF
CONCRETE
PANEL
SECURITY
CAULKING
ANCHOR
BOLT
DOOR FRAM E
Figure 2.11: Door Detail
GROUT
LATEX
CAULKING
OUTSIDE
EDGE OF
CONCRETE
PANEL
2-17
Case Study: Door Installation
Figure 2.12: Grinding Door Opening
2-18
z
Case Study: Layout and Drilling
Figure 2.13: Laying Out Frame
Figure 2:14 Drilling
2-19
Case Study: Shimming and
Trimming the Shim
Figure 2.15: Shimming
Figure 2:16: Trimming the Shim
2-20
Case Study: Backer Rods
Figure 2.17: Backer Rods
2-21
Case Study: Caulking and
Feathering the Caulk
Figure 2.18: Caulking
Figure 2.19: Feathering the Caulk
2-22
Case Study:
Keeping the Grout In
WOODEN
SHIM S
PLYWOOD
ON INSIDE
FRAME
PLYWOOD
ON OUTSIDE
FRAME
PLYWOOD
C-CLAMPS
Figure 2.20: Keeping the Grout In
2-23
Case Study Discussion
• How would you characterize this operation? Is it
•
•
•
•
effective? Is it efficient?
Why wasn’t this operation flagged?
What practices lead to the reoccurrence of such
operations?
What would you do differently in this operation?
Share an example of a similar situation you have
experienced.
2-24
Case Study:
Applying the LWS Approach
Architects
Constructor
Industries
Doors
Erection
Caulking
Caulking Fix
Grout Fix
Foam Fix
Hydrostatic Pressure Fix
Plywood Fix (Actual Fix)
Bungee Cord Fix
On-site Weather Stripping Fix
Off-site Weather Stripping Fix
Combine
Panels Manage Eliminate
Cracks Grouting
and
Frames
Prevent Grout
Leakage
Prevent Caulking
Blowout
Fixes
Figure 2.21: Possible Fixes
Solid Frame Fix
Concrete Lip Fix
Field Sequencing Fix
Tolerance Fix
Precast Fix
2-25
Case Study: Bungee Cord Fix
WEATHER STRIPPING
BUNGEE
CORD
Figure 2.22: Bungee Cord Fix
2-26
Case Study: Tighter Tolerance Fix
LAFORCE
1/32"
TOLERANCE (0.08 cm)
SPANCRETE
1/8"
(0.32 cm) TOLERANCE
SPANCRETE PLANNED
DOOR OPENING
VENTURE SPECIFIED
DOOR OPENING
and
LAFORCE PLANNED
DOOR FRAME EDGE
20" (50.8 cm)
20-1/4" (51.4 cm)
Figure 2.22: Tighter Tolerance Fix
2-27
Case Study: Lip Fix
INSIDE EDGE OF
CONCRETE PANEL
NO GROUT NECESSARY
ANCHOR
BOLT
PRE-CAST
CONCRETE LIP
DOOR FRAME
Figure 2.24: Lip Fix
WEATHER
STRIPPING
OUTSIDE EDGE OF
CONCRETE PANEL
2-28
Other Products of LWS
• Project organizational/contractual structure
– Each “chunk” of work is designed so that it:
• Can be produced rapidly and for a low cost
• Supports optimizing at the project level
• Delivers value to the customer and producer
• Supply chain configurations
– Look at how the project is connected to the external
production systems — Will it support just in time
delivery?
2-29
Supply and Contractual Relationships
Figure 2.25: Supply Chain and
Contractual Relationship Fix for the
Hollow Metal Door Frames Case Study19
2-30
Session 2 Summary
• Lean Workstructuring is the process of
determining who will do what, when, and how.
– The most benefit occurs when those decisions are
made during early design stages.
• Constructability is a reactive process to
established designs.
• Work Breakdown Structure is good for
understanding a project but not for planning its
execution.
2-31
Session 3 Learning Objectives
Following this session, you will be able to:
• Describe the Last Planner System
• Define percent plan complete
• Identify the levels of the Last Planner System
3-2
The Last Planner System Defined
• Planning is a conversation and not a scripted
performance.
• The Last Planner System (LPS):
– Is a collaborative, commitment-based planning system
– Integrates should-can-will-did planning
• Pull planning, make-ready planning with constraint analysis,
weekly work planning
– Is based upon reliable promises
– Integrates learning based upon analysis of PPC and
reasons for variance
3-3
Why Use the LPS?
• It improves workflow reliability by improving the way
action is coordinated between specialists.
• It engages all work executors in waste removal
through innovation.
• It allows rapid learning so:
– Mistakes are not repeated
– Out-of-sequence work is significantly reduced
– Workflow is more predictable and reliable
• Developed as a result of identifying that the average
completion rate of planned weekly tasks was 54%
3-4
Percent Plan Complete (PPC)
PPC =
Completed Weekly Assignments
Total Weekly Promised Assignments
3-5
Workflow Without LPS
Figure 3.1: PPC Chart for a
Project Not Using the LPS21
3-6
LPS Productivity Evolution
Productivity (Budget / Actual)
1.40
Below Budget (Making $$)
1.20
86%
At Budget
1.00
65%
0.80
0.60
Over Budget (Losing $$)
0.40
0.20
Average Productivity
before LPS
Last Planner System Implemented;
PPC increasing
0.00
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Months
Figure 3.2: PPC Chart for a
Project Using the LPS22
3-7
Who Is the Last Planner?
• The Last Planner is the person or group that
directs workers by assigning them their tasks.
– “Squad boss” and “discipline lead” are common
names for last planners in design processes.
– “Superintendent” (if a job is small) or “foreman” are
common names for last planners in construction
processes.
3-8
LPS Simplified
Figure 3.3: LPS Simplified23
3-9
Levels of the LPS
Master
Scheduling
• Are we confident we can deliver the project within the set limits?
• Who holds the promise to make this happen?
Milestones
Phase Scheduling
Specify handoff
Make-Ready
Planning
Look ahead & launch
Weekly Work
Planning
Make-ready & launch
Daily Huddles
Measure PPC, act on reasons
for failure to keep promises
Figure 3.4: LPS Levels24
• Do we understand how we are going to do the work?
• Have we designed the network of commitments to make it
happen?
• Are we confident we can deliver the milestones?
• Is the network of commitments active?
• Are reliable promises in place to make work ready in the right
sequence and amounts to deliver the milestone?
• Are we confident the work will begin and end as planned?
• How will we coordinate and adjust?
• Have we promised our tasks will be done as planned or said no?
• What have we learned?
• What needs changing so we can improve our performance?
3-10
Master and Phase
Schedules
Master
Scheduling
Phase
Scheduling
• Crews work on the master and phase schedules
to collaboratively validate them.
Figure 3.5: Phase Plan at
Construction Site25
3-11
Make-Ready Planning
MakeReady
Planning
• Where the “shoulds” are screened to become the “cans”
Figure 3.6: Make-Ready Planning26
Figure 3:7: Another Make-Ready
Planning Example27
3-12
Make-Ready Planning
Spreadsheet
Figure 3.8: A Tabular Form of
Make-Ready Planning28
MakeReady
Planning
3-13
Constraints Analysis
Spreadsheet
Figure 3.9: Detailed Constraints
Analysis29
MakeReady
Planning
3-14
Weekly Work Planning
Figure 3.10: Weekly Work Planning
Session on Site30
Weekly
Work
Planning
3-15
Weekly Work Planning
Figure 3.11: Weekly Work
Plan Commitments31
Weekly
Work
Planning
3-16
Weekly Work Planning
Spreadsheet
Figure 3.12: Weekly Work Plan —
Tabular Form32
Weekly
Work
Planning
3-17
Daily Huddles
Figure 3.13: Daily Huddle33
Daily
Huddles
3-18
Tracking PPC
Figure 3.14: Detailed Constraints
Analysis34
Daily
Huddles
3-19
Tracking PPC
Figure 3.15: Charting PPC35
Daily
Huddles
3-20
Reasons Analysis
for PPC
Figure 3.16: PPC Reasons Analysis36
Daily
Huddles
3-21
Session 3 Summary
• The Last Planner System (LPS) is a project planning and
production control system.
– It is based on a collaborative and commitment-based process
that addresses should-can-will-did planning.
• LPS is comprised of different levels of planning:
–
–
–
–
–
Master schedule
Phase schedule
Make-ready plan
Weekly work plan
Daily huddles
• PPC is a measure of the production planning reliability of
the entire site, not only a particular trade.
3-22
Unit 3 Course Summary
• Pull planning allows each party to make its own
construction commitments rather than being told what
they are.
• Assumptions and constraints come out in pull planning
sessions, leading to better understanding of the project.
• Lean Workstructuring develops and aligns the project’s
process design with:
–
–
–
–
Engineering design
Supply chain capability
Resource allocation strategies
Assembly efforts
• Lean Workstructuring is production system design.
3-23
Unit 3 Course Summary
• The LPS uses pull planning and Lean Workstructuring
to develop different levels of detailed work plans.
– Master, phase, make-ready, and weekly work
• The LPS results in more reliable workflow and can be
used in design and in construction.
– Coordinates action between specialists who will execute the
work
• Percent plan complete (PPC) is an important metric to
measure the reliability of the production planning system.
3-24
Closing Activities
• Please be sure to go online and fill out your Unit 3: Lean
Workstructuring Participant’s Registration and Evaluation
Form at www.agc.org/LCEP/Evaluation.
– This form must be completed for you to obtain credit for
attending this course.
• Learn more about AGC’s Lean Construction efforts at
www.agc.org/LCEP and www.agcleanforum.org.
• Thank you for your participation. We hope to see you at
another Lean Construction Education Program course
soon!
3-25