aalborg universitet making the long tail work thuesen...
TRANSCRIPT
Aalborg Universitet
Making the long tail work
Reflections on the development of the construction industry the past 25 years
Thuesen, Christian; Jensen, Jens Stissing; Gottlieb, Stefan Christoffer
Published in:Proceedings 25th Annual ARCOM Conference
Publication date:2009
Document VersionPublisher's PDF, also known as Version of record
Link to publication from Aalborg University
Citation for published version (APA):Thuesen, C., Jensen, J. S., & Gottlieb, S. C. (2009). Making the long tail work: Reflections on the developmentof the construction industry the past 25 years. In A. Dainty (Ed.), Proceedings 25th Annual ARCOM Conference:7-9 September 2009 (Vol. 2, pp. 1111-1120). Nottingham, UK: ARCOM - Association of Researchers inConstruction Management.
General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.
? Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. ? You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain ? You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ?
Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us at [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access tothe work immediately and investigate your claim.
Downloaded from vbn.aau.dk on: January 01, 2020
Thuesen, C., Jensen, J.S. and Gottlieb, S.C. (2009) Making the long tail work - reflections on the development of the construction industry the past 25 years. In: Dainty, A. (Ed) Procs 25th Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-9 September 2009, Nottingham, UK, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 1111-20.
1111
MAKING THE LONG TAIL WORK - REFLECTIONS ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY THE PAST 25 YEARS
Christian Thuesen1, Jens Stissing Jensen2 and Stefan Christoffer Gottlieb3 1 Management DTU, Bygning 424 rum 118, DK 2800 Lyngby 2 Management DTU, Bygning 424 rum 117, DK 2800 Lyngby 3 Danish Building Research Institute, Dr. Neergaards Vej 15, DK 2970 Hørsholm, Denmark
The paper discusses the development and impact of construction research the past 25 years. Theoretically, the paper builds on two fundamental insights: The Pareto principle (the 80-20 rule) and the Thomas theorem: "If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences" (Thomas and Thomas 1928: 572) - a fundamental sociological principle. The Pareto principle is applied using the concept “The long tail” (Anderson 2006). Based on “the long tail” the three different production paradigms of mass production, mass customisation, and individual customisation are identified. The paper argues that construction in the 1950s and 1960s was driven by a “mass production” paradigm that from the beginning of the 1980s was replaced by an “individual customisation” paradigm in which construction became a matter of tailoring unique buildings to each customer. These two different paradigms have been driven by two more or less unarticulated myths. In the 1960s buildings were viewed as standardised while they from the 1980s onwards have been viewed as unique. Based on the Thomas theorem it is argued that these myths have had a substantial impact on the way we build. Consequently, today’s predominant view of buildings – as unique – implies that: 1) the nature of the construction processes is chaotic, 2) the buildings are realised through onsite project work rather than through offsite production; and 3) project management is the fundamental management principle. The paper further identifies how attempts to develop new construction practices like partnering and lean implicitly reproduce this myth. The result is that construction research the past 25 years has been constructing the long tail in a way that hinders radical development of the construction industry. The paper concludes that if we allow ourselves to view buildings as both unique but also as standardised we can create a new platform for developing the construction industry – a Mass Customisation paradigm.
Keywords: customisation, industrialisation, long tail.
INTRODUCTION The ambition of this paper is to reflect upon the development of the construction industry the past 25 years and try to outline a new agenda for research in construction. Acknowledging this is a very ambitious goal, the paper will of cause be a target for substantial critique. We hope the critique can give input to the further development of the paper and the thoughts behind. As our intention with the paper is to open a debate
Thuesen,
1112
regardinargumen
The funthe conslarge dea concepmechan
We acknconstruccan creaand whecompangoverna
The papfundamframewparadigmhave dehave treThe papparadigmparadigm
THE CBased o“The Loof Businmarket bvariantsproductindividucustomiaccordin
Figure 1
Figure 1customifigure shprimary
Jensen and G
ng the histornt will cons
ndamental wstruction indegree is unept for under
nisms, which
nowledge thction industate new insiere it is hea
ny perspectiance perspec
per opens wmental frame
ork is subsems in the co
eveloped simemendous inper concludem that bridgm - Individu
CONCEPon the Paretoong Tail” anness Is Selliby juxtaposs. The Longt variants repualised sociised producng to Ander
1: The long ta
1 relates theisation and hould be re
y focus is re
Gottlieb
rical and prsequently be
wondering isdustry, whicxplored andrstanding thh for good a
hat there extry. This papights on whding. In parve while wective.
with an introework for unequent usedonstruction multaneouslnfluence ones with an iges the tradual Custom
PT OF THo principle nd developeing Less of sing the volug Tail refers present onlyety and as nts - the tail rsen is sellin
ail and produ
e long tail toindividual cad as a concgarding var
resent devele held at a c
s that there ch is not supd taken for ghis particulaand bad are
xists a varietper, howeve
here the consrticular, we e in another
duction to tnderstandind for underst
industry. Itly with a par
n the way controduction
ditional Masmisation.
HE LONG(the 80-20 r
ed it furtherMore” (Anume/populato the tail o
y 20 % of thnew technolpart gets intng less of m
uction parad
o different pcustomisatioceptualisatiriation and m
lopment of tconceptual l
seem to be pported by granted. Thar developm
structuring
ty of perspeer, is dedicastruction inwill addres
r paper will
the concept g different ptanding the t is argued thrticular view
onstruction in to Mass Cuss Productio
G TAIL rule) Ander
r in the booknderson 200arity of prodof the Paretohe market. Alogies enablteresting. T
more.
digms
production pon) exemplion of wheremarket size
the construclevel.
an ongoingresearch – ais paper intr
ment and indg the constru
ectives on thated to expldustry is tod
ss the develodiscuss the
of the long production developmehat these prw or myths is practiced ustomisatio
on with toda
rson (2004)k ”The Long6). It gives ducts with tho distributioAs we live ile productio
That’s why t
paradigms (ified by the e each produ.
ction indust
g developmeand which troduces the
dentifies somuction indus
he developmore how theday, where opment frome trend from
tail, which paradigms.
ent of produroduction paof buildingand develo
on as a produay's construc
termed the g Tail: Whyan overviewhe number oon - that 80 in an increaon and distrthe future of
(mass producar industr
uction para
try, the
ent/drift in to a very e long tail asme of the stry.
ment of the e long tail it has been
m a m a
is our This
uction aradigms
gs, which oped today. uction ction
concept y the Futurew of a of product % of the
asingly ibution f business
uction, massry. The digm's
s
e
s
Traditionalthat are the paradigm leModel T, wstandardiselong as it is
However, thyears. By ththe well kncustomer tacompany caal. 2000). Iand bigger,
The last prostrategy, whindustry thiAston Mart
THE LOBut what do
Back in theof Europe, developmenCorbusier. industrialisconstructio
Buildings wthe new buiequipped wwindows ar
Figure 2: Th In the beginfrom upcom(BoxenbaumJean Nouveand they de
ly, industriamost popul
everaging ewhich in the ed product. As black”
he developmhe use of prow example
ailored cars an still leven this way, by applyin
oduction pahere every pis paradigmtin.
NG TAILoes the long
e 1950s and was driven nt was initiaBy his workation and thn industry b
were erectedildings were
with the latesreas, etc.
he long tail of
nning of theming architem and Daudel and Frankeveloped a t
al companielar, as theseconomies obeginning
As Henry F
ment of car roduct platfoes from VWincreases th
erage the ecocar manufa
ng mass cust
aradigm of tproduct is r
m is only ada
L OF THEg tail of con
1960s the bby a “Mass
ated as earlyk and blessihe implemenbegan (Boxe
d for the groe an increasst technolog
of the buildin
e 1980s the ects against digeous 200k Gehry chatrend to pro
es have focue can be delof scale. Theonly was pr
Ford put it: “
manufacturorms, custo
W, Skoda, Ahe customeronomies of acturers havtomisation s
he long tailealised uniq
apted for cer
E BUILDnstruction in
building inds Productiony and in theing, it becamntation of menbaum and
owing popuse in the sizgies such as
ng industry
mass markethe results
07). In this nallenged Le duce buildin
D
ussed on theivered, basee most well roduced in o“You can ha
ring has evomers can to
Audi and Sears’ perceivescale of ma
ve addressedstrategies.
is the “indiquely for eartain extrem
DING INDndustry look
dustry in Den” paradigme 1920s fuelme legitimamass producd Daudigeou
ulation in thee of the apa
s refrigerato
et for housinof the massnew postmoCorbusier's
ngs which w
Development o
e small amoed on the mknow exam
one variant ave all the c
olved dramaoday design at. This caped value of tass productid the long ta
ividual custach customeme luxury ca
DUSTRY k like?
enmark, as wm (Bertelsenlled by the iate for architction principus 2007).
e cities. A vartments andors, large ba
ng decreases productionodern moves ideas of "lwere sensiti
of constructio
ount of prodmass productmple is the F
– an extremcolors you w
atically ovetheir own c
pability to dethe car whilion (Kruschail, making
tomisation” er. Within thars such as t
well as in thn 1997). Thiideas of Le tects to thinples in the
valued qualid they were
athrooms, la
ed and a revn paradigm ment architliving machive to the co
n industry
1113
ducts tion Ford mely want, as
er the cars like eliver le the
hwitz et it longer
he car the
he rest is
nk of
ity of e further arge
volution evolved tects as hines" ontext in
Thuesen, Jensen and Gottlieb
1114
which they were built. Consequently, construction became a matter of tailoring unique buildings to each customer and location. Figure 2 illustrates this paradigm shift.
Still today we are predominately and tacitly following this “individual customisation” paradigm as every project starts from scratch trying to satisfy the customer’s individual needs. The result is that the long tail in the construction industry is extraordinary long.
THE DRIVING MYTHS OF CONSTRUCTION "If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences" (Thomas and Thomas 1928: 572).
The two paradigms treated above, mass production and individual customisation, have co-evolved with two more or less unarticulated myths which are discussed further below. First, we will however briefly explain the notion of myths, as it is used in this paper.
The concept of myths We adopt a Laclaudian reading of the concept. According to Laclau a myth can be seen as: “…a space of representation which bears no relation of continuity with the dominant 'structural objectivity'. Myth is thus a principle of reading of a given situation, whose terms are external to what is representable in the objective spatiality constituted by the given structure.” (Laclau 1990: 61).
Departing from this definition a myth can be seen as a discourse which has been institutionalised to such an extent that its contingency is forgotten – i.e. as a discourse which was become objective. Objectivity in this sense should be seen as an extension of the political as a concept referring to the continuous constitution of the social in specific ways, which excludes other alternatives; the political takes precedence in the construction of social configurations. Objectivity can thus be seen as a historical result of political processes and struggles; as sedimented discourse, being the institutionalisation of certain rationalities and power in such a way that other alternatives are forgotten (Laclay 1990).
On the other hand, we have the concept of reactivation of the political, which takes place as new antagonisms dislocate existing structures and reveal the objective world as fundamentally contingent and constituted on basis of previous political struggles. Pedersen (1993) argues that antagonisms are the very basis for talking about political processes: “The political struggle consists of overcoming or eliminating these antagonisms hereby weaving together the ruptured social (dis)order in a new stable order” (Pedersen 1993: 42, own translation).
According to Laclau, this happens as various political groups advocate a specific critical version of a situation based on their own interests and perspectives. This process of weaving together the ruptured social order through the constitution of a new discourse (that is forming a new objectivity by means of rearticulation) is referred to by Laclau as proposing a myth. In this light, a myth can also be understood as a hegemonic intervention, a ‘dissolver’ of antagonisms, and “…a critique of the lack of structuration accompanying the dominant order” (Laclau 1990: 62, in Pedersen, 1993: 42). Thus, myths are on the one hand a misconception of the nature of reality and on the other hand a necessary horizon for our actions.
The myths
We suggestoperated asbuildings wnotably from
Figure 3: Th
We contendproducts an
Recently thwhat some
As an exambuilding promore or lesPlanner Sysenables ma
Lean Constgoverned bmanagemen1991). Thisnavigating realising buis still the psummarisesTable 1 Con
Societal framPerceived natprocess Production paValue chain Vehicle for re
Management
Cost
Implementati
s of the Stan
t - as figures horizons fowere viewedm the 1980
he constructi
d that these nd practices
he myth of Ihave come
mple, the “Locess is cha
ss impossiblstem (LPS)
anagers to co
truction wery the myth nt as the strs project main a chaotic
uildings – anpredominants the differe
nstruction in
me ture of the bu
aradigm
ealisation
paradigm
on of Lean
ndardised a
3 illustrateor action. D
d as standards onwards)
ion of myths
myths have in each per
Individual Cto define as
Lean Construaotic and cole. It is withfor short te
ope with a c
re thus transof Individuategy for m
anagement dc and imperfnd project mt way organences of thethe light of M
StanMod
uilding Com
MasIntegPrefa
Scien
Low
LongBala
and the Un
es - that the During the mdised while have been v
in modern an
e had a definriod.
Customisatios the “natur
uction” comonsequently hin this undeerm planninchaotic buil
slated into aual Customismanaging condiscourse gefect world. managemennising the bu two paradi
Mass Produc
ndardised dern mplex - but kno
s productiongrated fabrication
ntific Manage
w
g term planninance)
D
nique myths of th
modernist pethey in the
viewed as u
nd postmode
nitive impa
on has thus re” of the bu
mmunity oftit follows t
erstanding tg should beding proces
an expressiosation, whicnstruction (enerated tooThe “projec
nt became thuilding procigms ction and Ind
own
ement
ng (Line of
Development o
he Standardieriod (up intpost-moder
unique.
ern construct
act on the co
been implicuilding proc
en states thathat long terthe developme understoodss.
on of a broach focussed(Kreiner andols and stratct” thus beche managemcess today.
dividual Cust
Unique PostmodeChaotic
IndividuaFragmentProject
Project m
High
Short termSystem)
of constructio
ised and theto the 1960rn era (mos
tion industry
onstruction
citly embedcess.
at the naturrm planningment of thed, as LPS ex
ader strategid on project d Christensetegies for came the vehment principTable 1
tomisation
ern
al Customisatited
management
m planning (L
n industry
1115
e Unique s) t
y
dded in
e of the g is Last xactly
ic field,
en
hicle for ple. This
ion
Last Planer
Thuesen,
1116
In this wbeen re-to suppothey hav
A limitaimproviof the uindustryargue ththe root
Howevelook (fras uniquThe ansprocessereprodumyth.
From anvisible aOne couThe shocalled “interestithat ourreactivabeing bobecomeindustry
THE R
Figure 4
Jensen and G
way, concep-shaped by ort the perceve been put
ation, as weing the perf
unique and cy still strugghat most of tt courses to
er, despite tom an outsiue and in a cswer could pes where th
uce the domi
n industrialiand hidden uld thus raisort answer is“nature” of ting point is r view of buate the sedimoth standard
e possible toy – a platfor
ROAD AH
4: Optimisati
Gottlieb
pts that werethe logics oeived chaott to use in th
e see it in thformance in chaotic natugling with inthe initiativthe problem
the prevailinider's perspechaotic wayperhaps be f
he different pinant order
ised perspecsimilaritiesse the quests that this isthe buildinghence not w
uildings havmented socidised and uno create a nerm which co
HEAD
ion of cost/va
e originallyof the myth tic nature ofhe construct
is perspectithe constru
ure of constrnefficiency,
ves have beems of the co
ng myth aboective) paray, when in tfound in theprofessions(Thuesen 2
ctive it is ho as benefits
tion whethers dependentg process is whether the
ve consequenal strata; to nique (insteew “platformould be term
alue related t
y developed of the Uniqf the “indivition industry
ive, is accoruction indusruction. Con, high costs en symptomonstruction i
out the uniqadoxically ththe end it loe institution in their mu
2007) and ar
owever absus of economr there existt on the cultsocially conre exists a “nces. This iexperiment
ead of eitherm” for the dmed “Mass C
to the long ta
to support mqueness of bidual customy.
rdingly that stry implicitnsequently ietc. To be p
m treatment windustry.
queness of bhe same. Hooks like the
nalised practutual interacre shaped in
urd not to tamies of scale
ts a “right” tural settingnstructed ba“right” way implies that t with our vr standardisdevelopmenCustomisati
ail (based on
mass produbuildings anmisation” pa
most initiattly reproducis the constrprovocativewhile not ad
buildings, thow come it e adjacent butice-based lctions continn the image
ake advanta could be acway to view. In this wayased on the to view buif we are ab
view of builsed or uniqunt of the builion”.
n Andersen 2
uction have nd tailored aradigm as
tives for ce the myth ruction e one could ddressing
he buildingsis produceduilding? earning nuously of the
age of these chieved. w buildingsy the so myths. Theildings, butble to dings as
ue), it will lding
2006)
s d
.
e
F
The concepfurther devin Business
TraditionalMass produon the othergenerally mindustry’s c
The basic idthe cost/valas "produciproduction
The interesin the makilike the (no
Especially tBoth Skanscoordinatedand platform
Thuesen anand the Gercustomisatitwo initiativbenefit fromthe Germanon deliverin
Figure 5: NC As illustratNCC Kompindeed deveradical innocompared tDecember 2managed towhile still osegment.
Figure 4: Op
pt Mass Cuseloped by Js Competitio
ly, customisuction provir hand, char
made it a pricustomers to
dea of Masslue ratio - asing goods anefficiency"
ting point ising. Variousow discontin
the large coska and NCCd purchasingms, etc.
nd Jonsson (rman platfoion paradigmves - being m flexibilityn platform wng value to
CCs flirting w
ed in figureplett™ seemeloped a proovation throto their norm2007 to aboo reduce theoffering a hi
ptimisation o
stomisationJoseph Pine on (Pine 19
sation and lided low coracterised thivilege of thoday are stu
s Customisas illustratednd services .
s that the fies actors are nued) Danis
ontractors arC have laung, supply ch
(2009) haverm for housm. They foutheir point
y through inwas to manathe custome
with Mass C
e 5 was theirmed to do alofound newoughout the mal construcolish the inve productionigh quality
of cost/value
was first coin his book93).
low cost havst but at thehe productshe rich. (It isuck with thi
ation is to bd in the figur
to meet ind
eld of Massexperiment
sh initiative
re moving tnched initiathain manage
e evaluated tsing), whichund that theof departure
ndustrialisedage flexibiliers and to re
Customisation
r point of dell the right t
w approach findustry. H
ction practicvestment. Con cost with mproduct car
related to th
D
oined by Stak Mass Cust
ve been pere expense of of designers tempting tis privilege
bridge these re 4. Tseng
dividual cus
s Customisating with mBuilding L
owards mastives for levement, deve
two NCC inh both have ere exists a ke. While NCd manufactuity in traditieduce costs
n
eparture difhings theorfor building
However, theces and the ompared to more than 3refully targe
he long tail (b
Development o
an Davis in tomisation -
rceived as mf uniformityrs and craftsto state that despite thei
two paradigand Jiao (2
stomer's nee
ation in consass customi
Lab DK (ww
ss customisveraging theelopment of
nitiatives (Naimed to im
key differenCC Kompleuring procesional constru.
fferent, and etically spe
g – a well ceey lost contNCC Boardthis, the Ge
30 % over theted at a spe
based on And
of constructio
Future Perf- The New F
mutually excy. Customissmen and itthe constru
ir income).
gms by opti2001: 685) deds with nea
struction is isation strat
ww.building
ation strategeir size throf standard s
NCC Komplmplement thnce betweenett™ was trysses, the effruction - foc
so was the eaking and telebrated catrol of the cod decided inerman platfohe past 10 yecific marke
dersen 2006)
n industry
1117
fect, and Frontier
clusive. sation, ts cost uction
imising define it ar mass
already tegies glab.dk).
gies. ugh olutions
lett™ he mass n the ying to fort of cusing
result. hey
ase on osts n form has years et
)
Thuesen,
1118
The Gerhigh degCompartech as ipractice
The twoa challeanalysisthat thercustomi
On a geseen as in figuresimilaritowardsreduce t
Figure 6
A prereoperatinpartnersto followvalue-ch
Today tis therefaware odiscusse
RESEDespiteconstrucboth fai
Jensen and G
rman case igree of manred to NCC it takes its s
es.
o NCC initiaenge. Salvads of 200 comre is no bestisation] to a
eneric level,a developme 6. The figty and still
s mass produthe flexibili
6: Leveraging
quisite for lng with masships and mw the develhain have th
the institutiofore of outm
of what kinded in Jensen
ARCHIN an increasiction and thilures and su
Gottlieb
s interestingnufacturing
Komplett™starting-poin
atives showdor, Holan ampanies wot way to do
an existing b
the movemment focusingure should maintain thuction the mity towards
g similarity i
leveraging sss customisa
maybe even nopment of Ahe organisat
onal setup hmost importd of structurn et al. (fort
NG THE Ring interest he existenceuccesses – t
g as it contris the way f
™ the Germant in existin
w that findinand Piller (2orking with m
mass custobusiness - ra
ment towardng on leverabe read as h
he necessarymore you stathe market.
in the long ta
similarity isation presupnew types oAEC compational capab
however hinance that th
res they are thcoming).
ROAD AHin applying
e of plenty othe moveme
radicts the pforward foran platform
ng, predomi
ng a success2009) reachmass custom
omise, but thather than v
ds Mass Cusaging similahow to integy flexibility.andardise y
ail - a “stair
s an integratppose the deof companieanies, whichbilities for w
nders the aphe regulatorenacting w
HEAD g mass custoof cases of ient is more
predominantr the constru
m is extremenant in-situ
ful mass cua similar co
misation. Thhat "Managvice versa" (
stomisationarity - a “stagrate the ab. The more y
your process
model”
ted value chevelopmentes. Here it ish due to theworking wit
plication ofs of the induithin the ind
omisation prmplementator less unsu
t understanduction indusly practical
u constructio
ustomisationonclusion inheir conclusers must tai(p79)
in construcair model” aility to leveyou move tses and prod
hain. This imt of strategics extremelyeir position ith mass cust
f mass custoustry is stardustry. This
rinciples in tions - encoupported by
ding that a stry. and low-
on
n strategy isn the sion was ilor [mass
ction can be as illustratederage to the left ducts and
mplies that c
y interestingin the tomisation.
omisation. Irting to be s further
ompassing y research.
s
d
It
Development of construction industry
1119
The only example in Denmark is the work of Center for Industrial Architecture (Cinark) which looks upon this field from an architectural perspective.
Existing research within this field (including Cinark and Manubuild1) share the belief, that the road ahead for the development of construction is increased off site production. This however seems like a too rigid conclusion as NCCs German platform for housing has showed that substantial results can be achieved by on site production.
There is an urgent need for supporting the development with research. There is however no reason for reinventing the wheel. There is a large potential for exploring the existing body of knowledge (e.g. Hvam, Mortensen and Riis (2008); Cooper and Slagmulder (1999)) regarding traditional development, planning and realisation of products and the possibilities for application in the construction industry. This includes tools and practices like:
• Modularisation • Configuration • Platform thinking • Purchasing activities, volume concentration and internationalisation. • Postponement strategies • Target costing and value engineering
In developing a new field of research it is important to be aware what kind of reality we are constructing by our research. As mentioned, construction is not driven by its own nature – although it sometimes could appear so. As practitioners and researchers we are constructing this nature ourselves while we are at the same time also constructed by it. Accepting this introduces a dilemma in terms of the validity of the research. A way forward is to legitimate research within construction in two ways – a constructive and deconstructive way. Within the constructive area focus should not be on “finding the truth”, but in what kind of “truth” we are creating with the research. Research within this area should be driven by the impact of the research.
But this paradigm can’t live without a deconstructive paradigm continuously operating to deconstruct the developed solutions and the nature/culture of construction. It is within the dialog between these two paradigms – a fruitful research agenda for construction can be developed.
CONCLUSION This paper has introduced the concept of the long tail as a framework for understanding the development of the building industry. It is argued that most of the construction industry today is driven by the myth of uniqueness of building. This myth is inherently disabling the possibilities for fundamentally changing the construction industry into an effective and systematically innovative industry. The paper argues further that if we allow ourselves to look at buildings as both unique but also similar we can create a new platform for developing the construction industry – a platform within the Mass Customisation paradigm. The industry is already developing and implementing strategies inspired by this approach, but research to backup and question this development is missing.
1 An industry-led collaborative research project on industrialised construction, part-funded by the EU (www.manubuild.org).
Thuesen, Jensen and Gottlieb
1120
REFERENCES Anderson, C. (2004) The Long Tail Wired Magazine, 12(10),
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/tail.html.
Anderson, C. (2006) The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business Is Selling Less of More New York: Hyperion.
Bertelsen, S. (1997) Bellahøj, Ballerup, Brøndby Strand - 25 år der industrialiserede byggeriet. Hørsholm: By og Byg.
Boxenbaum, E. and Daudigeos, T. (2007) Concrete innovations: Prefabrication in Denmark and France. In Managing the Construction of Buildings Conference, 15-16 November 2007, Copenhagen Business School, Denmark.
Cooper, R. and Slagmulder, R. (1999) Supply Chain Development for the Lean Enterprise Montvale New Jersey: FAR Institute of Management Accountants.
Davis, Stan (1996) Future Perfect. 10th anniversary edition. Harlow England : Addison-Wesley Pub Co.
Hvam, L., Mortensen, N. H., Riis, J., (2008) Product Customisation, Berlin : Springer.
Jensen, J. S. (forthcoming) A governance approach to systemic innovation in the Danish construction industry, Working paper, DTU Management.
Kreiner K. and Christensen S. (1991) Projektledelse i løst koblede systemer – ledelse og læring i en ufuldkommen verden København: DJØF.
Kruschwitz, R., Schettler-Köhler, R. And Hoch, C. (2000) Product development and Platform Strategy at Volkswagen, Slides, IBC Euroforumkonferens, Effektiv Produktutveckling med Modularisering, Sweden.
Laclau, E. (1990) New reflections on the Revolution of Our Time. London: Verso
Pedersen, K. (1993) Om Politikken og det Sociale – Aktøren og Strukturen. Teoretiske overvejelser for politisk Strategi, Arbejdspapir nr. 16, Institut for Miljø, Teknologi og Samfund, Roskilde Universitetscenter: TEK-SAM-Forlaget.
Pine, B. Joseph II (1993) Mass Customisation - The New Frontier in Business Competition. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press
Salvador, Fabrizio, Holan, Pablo Martin de and Piller, Frank (2009) Cracking the Code of Mass Customisation MIT Sloan Management Review, 50(3).
Thuesen, C. (2006) anvendelsen ad den rette viden – et studie af byggeriets kulturelle organisering Published Ph.D. Thesis, Byg.DTU, Technical University of Denmark.
Thuesen, C. and Jonsson, C. C. (2009) The Long Tail and innovation of new construction practices - Learning points from two case studies. In A.S. Kazi, M. Hanus and S. Boujabeur, (eds.) Open Building Manufacturing: Key Technologies, Applications, and Industrial Cases, Manubuild
Tseng, M. and Jiao, J. (2001) Mass Customisation, In G. Salvendy, Handbook of Industrial Engineering: Technology and Operation Management (3rd ed.), Wiley-Interscience.