Purpose–A comprehensive intervention test platform, Valla Coach, including quantitative and qualitativemethods to measure and improve workflows on site and promote coaching and collective learning has beendeveloped jointly by researchers and practitioner. The study aims to describe the methodologicalunderpinning of the platform, and discusses the preliminary results and implications.

Design/Methodology/Approach–Expansive Learning Theory grounded in a cultural–historicalperspective underpins the conceptual realisation of the test platform. The viability of the platform was testedin four contextually different construction sites (and contractors), combining established and newmeasurement tools, qualitative intervention approaches and coaching according to the production challengesat hand.

Findings–Valla Coach created a space on site where researchers-as-coaches and operatives converged toco-construct (new) knowledge and learn together. The knowledge that emerged from the interactions gained legitimacy through its situatedness and practical value for the operatives.

Research Limitations/Implications–Valla Coach provides opportunities for researchers andpractitioners to probe the taken-for-granted. Moreover, a variety of methods and tools are tested in different contexts. The interventions prompt questioning of assumptions and make contradictions visible. Valla Coachremains work-in-progress and needs further evaluation and validation.

Practical Implications–We contribute insights from negotiating socio-technical complexities, evaluating digital measurement tools and technologies and experiences of operatives. Tensions at the interface between the organisation and project are rendered visible.

Originality/Value–A bottom–up approach that is a combination of practice-based tools and methods and of theories of learning and sustainable and continuous improvements where the operators are the main actors that enable productive activity.

Research Question: How do different flow dimensions and their interrelations appear in Swedish construction settings?

Purpose: To contribute to the ongoing discussion on flow in construction by providing empirical data to a proposed flow model and widening the current understanding within Lean Construction with theory from industrialized construction and operations management.

Research Design: Transcriptions of nine in-depth interviews with managers at different Swedish contractors were utilized to identify different flow dimensions.

Findings: Results show different patterns which describe contractors’ focus on different flow dimensions.

Limitations: The study is performed in Swedish construction companies with limited generalizability to construction in general. Data collection based on interviews might struggle with objectivity and multi-case studies do not coincide with in-depth research in each single case.

Implications: Different flow dimensions are relevant within construction contractors and should be addressed by either management activities or an operations strategy.

Value for practitioners: Increased understanding of flow in construction based on empirical data enables management of different flow dimensions to evolve contractors’ operations strategies towards Lean Construction or industrialized construction.

Operations strategies focus on how a firm delivers value, while business strategies focus on what to deliver and where. Lean is an operations strategy prioritizing flow efficiency. In construction, empirical underpinning of operations strategies has been limited. The aim is to capture how perceptions of operations strategy in construction practice aligns with existing theories of operations strategy organized in decision categories. Nine in-depth interviews with contractor middle managers were transcribed and analyzed to capture their perceptions of operations strategies. Results show: (1) decision categories in construction differ from manufacturing, and (2) differences between resource and flow efficient operations strategies exist. A resource efficient strategy focuses cost and delivery as competitive criteria, while customer value is targeted in a flow efficient strategy. Proposed structural decision categories are standardization, organization and production planning, supply chain, and infrastructural decision categories are human resources, continuous improvement, long-term perspective, process vs. project, and performance measurements. Infrastructural categories are more difficult to replicate and render competitive advantage if successfully aligned with business strategy. An operations strategy strictly focused on project delivery, such as lean construction, is not automatically aligned with the business strategy, but can achieve satisfactory project performance.

All companies have an operations strategy; a pattern of decisions made in operations with the purpose to support the business strategy. Lean Construction can be seen as an operations strategy. The aim of this research is to present the generic decision categories in an operations strategy and discuss their characteristics in contrast to the Lean Construction framework. A literature study identified ten decision categories: process technology, capacity, facilities, vertical integration, human resources, organization, quality, production control, product development, and performance measurement. Data was collected through in-depth interviews with managers on the tactical level at three construction companies with a Lean implementation. The results indicate that Lean construction companies emphasize quality, production planning, and vertical integration in their operations strategy. Facilities, process technology, capacity, and organization receive less attention. Quality, production planning, and vertical integration are keywords also in Lean Construction, while it is intriguing that organization receives little attention. Facilities, process technology, and capacity are ever changing between construction projects and are candidates for decision categories that could be less relevant for formulating an operations strategy in construction.

All firms have an operations strategy, but it is not always explicit. The operations strategies of construction firms are poorly described as they receive less attention than those of project management, although operations strategies (and operations management) are important actions and processes on the permanent firm level. Within many construction contractors, there is a gap between the tactical and operational levels which, for example, is resulting in business strategies being poorly executed on the project level. In this paper, the operations strategies of construction contractors are compared with those reported in business school literature in terms of the prioritisation of decision categories. The findings based on the semi-structured interviews with the tactical level managers inside the three construction contractors clearly indicate that the priorities when forming an operations strategy in construction differ from patterns commonly specified in business school literature. It is initially recommended that construction contractors should plan their operations strategies with a focus on organisation, quality, human resources and planning.

Lean is about finding a flow efficient way to deliver value to the client. To do so reducing variation is vital. The construction industry is project-based and variation in project deliveries is more the rule than the exception. Being able to predict economic variation in projects is important for contractors and other project-oriented firms since it affects the total turnover for the firm. The aim of this research is to capture the variation in economic profit in a project, estimate the effect this variation has on the aggregated firm level, and discuss the implications for flow efficient operational strategies to adhere. Economic reports were collected from 1000 projects, throughout 2 years at a large Swedish contractor. The data contains quarterly economic prognoses and results per project. From the data, the variation in profit was deducted. The variation was used in a statistical model of the firm, reflecting five levels of financially liable units. The results show that variations in the economic results on the project level are evened out on the firm level. Thus, the reduction of variation sought in Lean implementation does not emerge as positive in accounting. Measuring economic results on the project level drives a focus on resources in the value chain. This is a hindrance for implementation of a flow efficient operational strategy as Lean. Therefore, key performance indicators capturing flow efficient strategies for control on project and firm levels need to be developed.