Frequently, the supply of building materials to the construction site is fraught with difficulties which can have a significant effect on productivity. Major productivity gains are possible, particularly if the building process is planned from a logistics perspective. The concept of logistics was developed initially within the manufacturing industry, and now constitutes an important management tool to ensure an overall strategic perspective on the flow of materials in the production process. This paper contends that logistics are relevant also to the construction industry, and describes the development of a logistics model to manage the flow of materials from suppliers to installation on-site and its application to a Danish house building project. The case study evidence suggests that the primary focus of the logistics concept in construction is to improve coordination and communication between project participants during the design and construction phases, particularly in the materials flow control process. The logistics concept requires accurate scheduling of materials to programmed delivery dates keyed to actual site layout and storage arrangements. The logistics approach also involves a new role for materials suppliers, including early involvement in the design phase and overall responsibility for the flow of information relating to materials.Logistics, Materials Flow Control, House Building, Denmark,
This paper shows that the adoption of flexible manufacturing techniques by firms leads to a tougher price regime. However, consumers may not benefit since the tougher regime deters entry. Flexible manufacturing’s ability to deter entry is moderated by two factors: non‐prohibitive costs of re‐anchoring flexible manufacturing processes and the possibility that entrants choose to produce niche products using designated technologies rather than adopt flexible manufacturing. Market preemption that deters entry will be characterized by excessive product variety. Alternatively, flexible manufacturers may prefer to accommodate entry by small‐scale, niche firms. Moreover, ownership matters in determining equilibrium product configurations.
Builders merchants are an integral part of the construction industry, yet rarely are they consulted when discussions take place on the future of the construction industry. Throughout history, builders merchants have played a dominant role in the construction industry, initially as an intermediary between the artisan and the buyer, and more recently as a source of working capital for contracting firms. The merchanting industry currently is undergoing considerable change. The depressed construction market and the failure of the housing repair and maintenance sector to recover in the first half of the 1990's as activity in the private non-housing repair and maintenance sector has increased, has raised competition between merchants. The major building merchants are becoming larger by acquisition and merger, the smaller merchants are seeking niche areas, and the medium-size firms are under serious threat from acquisition by the larger merchanting firms. The trend towards consolidation in the sector, driven by the need to reduce costs, has meant that the large merchanting firms now control around 60% of the building materials market sales. Factoring is a growing trend, particularly with smaller companies sourcing goods from the cheapest source. The larger merchants have to respond by sourcing goods from the lowest cost base, irrespective of whether they buy from overseas markets. This paper analyses the UK builders merchants sector and evaluates the important role played in the supply chain.Building Materials, Builders' Merchants, Components;Imports,
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.