China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Benchmarking Measures for TBM and DBM Tunnelling
Published in S.P. Kaushish, T. Ramamurthy, Tunnelling Asia’2000, 2020
Establishment of benchmarking measure is an important aspect to realize the performance of tunnelling. If measures are created properly, they will provide valuable information about the performance. They can help tunnelling community to determine the effectiveness of the typical technique so that appropriate actions may be taken in the beginning to ensure the realization of established goals. The selection of appropriate tunnelling technique based on performance benchmarking measure is of paramount importance, particularly in developing countries like India to get tangible and intangible benefits. While identifying metrics, project objectives should be kept in mind. Benchmarking measures, which include hard and soft metrics that, encompass quantitative and qualitative data are presented. These metrics enable a systematic appraisal of performance that is not possible at present. Although performance benchmarks presented here are based on specific case, the methodology is applicable for all variety tunnelling projects.
® System (LPS) metrics for construction planning and control
Published in Lincoln H. Forbes, Syed M. Ahmed, Lean Project Delivery and Integrated Practices in Modern Construction, 2020
Farook R. Hamzeh, Salam Khalife, Ghali El Samad, Lynn Rizk, Hisham Abou-Ibrahim, Malak Al Hattab, Samir Emdanat
For proper management and communication among project stakeholders, the use of metrics is usually accompanied with the use of tools such as dashboards. Dashboards are substantial when multiple metrics are employed to measure and track progress on projects. Construction dashboards are thus a control tool used to facilitate communication on construction projects and to share the monitored metrics for control purposes. Such dashboards convert raw data into meaningful information regarding project performance by highlighting its weaknesses and strengths (Song et al. 2005; Suk et al. 2012). The conveyed information is used to aid planners in making responsible decisions on projects (Kerzner 2013). Furthermore, planners base such decisions on an evaluation process which considers the different metrics used and several accompanied factors. However, most metrics fall short when considering the activities’ status. In fact, El Samad et al. (2017) demonstrated that many metrics assume that all activities are equally import when they are not. Therefore, in order to take precise decisions, planners need to have advanced metrics that reflect a deeper understanding of activities and their statuses.
Contract and Performance Management and Ethics
Published in Paul Myerson, Lean Demand-Driven Procurement, 2018
Some of the metrics are the same as those used in supplier performance measurement, such as on-time delivery, vendor cycle times, and quality. However, there are also other more internally focused metrics used, such as: Savings on the purchase price.Reduced inventory levels.Procurement cycle time.Cost of change.Cost of placing orders.
The (α X , β X )-precise estimates of production systems performance metrics
Published in International Journal of Production Research, 2022
Pooya Alavian, Yongsoon Eun, Kang Liu, Semyon M. Meerkov, Liang Zhang
This paper provides an analytical characterization of the number of measurements required for evaluating various production systems performance metrics, which are necessary for managerial decision-making and evaluating efficacy of potential continuous improvement projects. As far as the metrics are concerned, they are machine efficiency, throughput (with and without taking into account parts quality), production lead time, and work-in-process. As far as the measurements are concerned, they are duration of machines' up- and downtime, as well as parts quality. Both quantitative and qualitative characterizations of these critical numbers are provided. The quantitative ones are represented by closed formulas for the precision of the performance metrics as functions of their arguments (i.e. measurements). The qualitative ones are formulated in terms of variability of performance metrics as compared with variability of their arguments. In this regard, it is shown that under practice-inspired conditions, the variability contracting metrics are machine efficiency and throughput, while the throughput of non-defective parts produced, lead time, and work-in-process are variability expanding.
Occupant-Centric key performance indicators to inform building design and operations
Published in Journal of Building Performance Simulation, 2021
Han Li, Zhe Wang, Tianzhen Hong
In addition, although the field of building performance usually uses the terminologies – ‘metrics’, ‘measures’, and ‘indicators’ as synonyms (de Wilde 2018), they do have different implications. ‘Metrics’ usually represent how performance changes over time or in different dimensions. ‘Measures’ are the values or quantities that represent the performance. ‘Indicators’ are usually combined values that reflect the performance with easy-to-understand information rather than raw operational measurements. Originating from the business world, key performance indicators (KPIs) are critical navigational instruments that monitor performance and draw attention when a project is veering off the right path. Good KPIs not only measure the performance, but are also objective and actionable (“What Gets Measured Gets Done: Key Performance Indicators” 2010), which help managers measure what matters the most in their business. In this study, we review existing occupant-centric metrics, measures, and indicators, and synthesize them as KPIs. The objective is to help stakeholders identify the reasons and solutions of problems in building performance field from the occupant-centric perspective. It should be noted that the occupant-centric KPIs are not proposed to replace the existing building performance metrics but rather to provide an integrative set of KPIs focusing on the occupant perspectives for use cases that emphasize human factors and related performance.
A Systematic Mapping Study of HCI Practice Research
Published in International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 2019
Abiodun Afolayan Ogunyemi, David Lamas, Marta Kristin Lárusdóttir, Fernando Loizides
For researchers, various issues such as adaption of HCI techniques to context, integration of usability requirement in software architecture design, incorporating user feedback in Agile UCD, among others present some opportunities for future research. As efforts are geared toward proposing solutions that could be deployed in practice, there is a need to validate these proposals. Some topics such as cross-cultural design, postdeployment activities and software maintenance, and domain and knowledge have also received little attention and they need to be considered by future research. There is sparse consideration for research on metrics. Metrics are important measurement standards or functions for determining whether a software system has certain properties or meets certain design thresholds. There appears to be a lack of focus on how HCI concepts are being implemented in design of software systems. HCI researchers could also be interested to know why HCI research results are used or not used in industry.